James
|
 posted on 22/1/02 at 04:48 PM |
|
|
Increasing your size
Ooh Sir! :-)
Quite a lot of people seem to have increased the size of their chassis from the plans in the book- be this for reasons of donor track or maybe
they're just used to driving Mercs. :-) Most people seem to widen by four inches and maybe lengthen proportionally aswell.
What I am wondering is where do people tend to increase the length. Is it just in the driver/passenger area- ie. lengthening tubes N1+N2 or in the
engine bay (tubes J1+J2) or a mixture over the two?
And for those that have built their Locost to the extent where they can sit in it and test the size- is there enough room for you? I'm not
exceptionally tall- 6'3" (190cm) but when I do finally coincide a working car with a summer day and a long drive (hey! I can dream) the last thing I
want is to be too cramped but I've got to balance luxury of space against having a large engine bay and it being easy to work in.
You info' and thoughts would be very welcome!
Thanks,
James
|
|
|
|
|
Metal Hippy™
|
 posted on 22/1/02 at 09:42 PM |
|
|
On a similar note, but a bit of a dubious link...
Chassis as per book dimension wise...
Rear axle Capri width...
Comments..?
Rich.
President of the Non-conformist Locost Builders Club. E-mail for details...
|
|
|
jim@mcsorley.net
|
 posted on 9/2/02 at 03:53 PM |
|
|
I put together full CAD drawings for the book chassis, +4" width, and what I call the 442... increased width, length and height.
http://mcsorley.net/locost
The +4 puts the extra four inches across the entire frame. The 442 width is also throughout, but the increased length is split between the foot well
and the engine bay (2"/2").
I'm currently working on a 442E with all 4" extra inches in the engine bay (for our straight six friends) and a 442C that put's all 4 addition
inches of length in the cockpit... for our long legged, big foot friends.
Let me know if you plan to build to these drawings because I'd like to know how they work and how to make them better.
Enjoy!
-Jim M.
|
|
|
Dunc
|
| posted on 9/2/02 at 04:05 PM |
|
|
Jim,
what are you using for your CAD, I've got a pukka copy of Pro Engineer on my home setup.
Dunc
|
|
|
jbmcsorley
|
| posted on 29/3/02 at 01:34 AM |
|
|
Hi Dunc,
sorry for the delayed reply... I haven't been checking the board lately.
I'm using SolidWorks 2001... developed by a bunch of spin-off Pro-E guys. I can import pro/e files directly and retain the feature tree, but going
from S/W to Pro/e results in a part with only one feature (the part itself)... makes changine the part a real bugger.
Oh, and S/W will export to the cool Viewpoint format that I use to make the real-time 3D rendering on my site.
cheers,
Jim M.
|
|
|
