Alfalfameister
|
| posted on 19/5/06 at 05:42 AM |
|
|
+442 or "book" chassis?
Trying to decide whether to make the +442 or stick to book.
After reading some threads, I know I won't have a problem fitting in the "book" chassis. But am thinking if going +442 would be
better.
Right now, I will be sticking a Toyota 4AGE engine in it. But in "flights-of-fancy daydreaming", sometimes I'm thinking of putting a
3SGE or 3SG-variant under the hood.
I know Bill Sherwood managed to fit a 3SGE engine in -- but barely. I figured a +442 might just make it a tad easier.
Body parts/nosecones/etc are not a problem, because where I'm from, none of them are available, so they will all be done from scratch anyway
(and labour is cheap in my country).
Any disadvantages of the +442?
|
|
|
|
|
zetec7
|
| posted on 19/5/06 at 05:48 AM |
|
|
+442 will make life easier in a lot of ways...room for your feet, any trans you want to use, room for a wider ranbe of rear axles, etc. etc. I used
+222, wish I'd gone for the +442 now that I'm trying to fit everything in. It's like trying to push a greased buffalo through a cat
door...
|
|
|
pucksaver
|
| posted on 19/5/06 at 07:30 AM |
|
|
I am interested in this as well. I understand that the +442 will make things easier but what are the consequences in terms of handling, weight,
performance etc..
Also, would the bits from a miata (including the rear IRS subframe) fit into a standard book chassis without problem?
PS Sorry for the hijack 
|
|
|
Alfalfameister
|
| posted on 19/5/06 at 10:11 AM |
|
|
Yes, your concerns about consequences in terms of handling and performance are valid, and pretty much a concern for me as well.
Another reason I'm looking at the +442 is the scarcity of Toyota T50 trannies. I know K40s and K50 are okay, but I'm not sure how well
they'll handle the power of the 4AGE at full song. With that in mind, there are W55s available, and since they came from Supras, should be able
to handle 180bhp (not that I plan to use all them horses). Problem is, they are a tad bigger. And for me, not much heavier (T50 about 25 kilos, W55
about 35 kilos).
It's the availability, people, the availability! Honest!
While the W55 is closer to reality, the 3SGE is more the daydream. But sometimes dreams come true...
|
|
|
DavidM
|
| posted on 19/5/06 at 11:56 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by zetec7
It's like trying to push a greased buffalo through a cat door...
Ahhhh, you can't beat a decent sex life!
David
Proportion is Everything
|
|
|
Alfalfameister
|
| posted on 21/5/06 at 10:46 AM |
|
|
Toyota W55 Transmission
Does anyone know the measurements/dimensions of a Toyota W55 transmission?
Will the book chassis fit with just minor modifications in the transmission tunnel if the W55 is a big beast? Or would it take too much space that the
driver area suffers enough as to make the car undriveable?
Or should I really just go for the +442?
If anyone has done a build with a W55 transmission, would greatly appreciate any advice.
[Edited on 21/5/06 by Alfalfameister]
|
|
|
DIY Si
|
| posted on 21/5/06 at 11:11 AM |
|
|
Whilst I have no idea how big the tranny you're after is, I'd build a wider chassis anyway. Either way,you'll have more space for
just about everything, and in these cars that's always a good thing. It will also make the car slightly stiffer and give your feet much needed
space at the pedals. I can sit in my chassis with steel toe boots on and still have spare space! Oh, but it will also allow you to carry fat(er)
passengers around. Which may/may not be a good thing.
|
|
|
omega 24 v6
|
| posted on 21/5/06 at 11:37 AM |
|
|
I'm building a 442 and so is RichardK and ecosse(ithink). Check our posts for problems relating to steering and suspension issues.
If I was going to do another build I'd combine the +4 and +442 mc soreley drawings and make from the scuttle forwards to the +4 sizes I
think.
Good luck as ever.
|
|
|
DIY Si
|
| posted on 21/5/06 at 11:41 AM |
|
|
This is what I've done, the chassis is +4 all the way down and +4 in the passenger bay length wise. Didn't do the +2 height though, as it
meant the side rail was a bit to high to rest my elbow on!
|
|
|
omega 24 v6
|
| posted on 21/5/06 at 03:11 PM |
|
|
quote:
as it meant the side rail was a bit to high to rest my elbow on!
LOL YOU POSER
|
|
|
