rally design
|
| posted on 9/3/06 at 05:58 PM |
|
|
Quick Rack with long track rods,which ratio?
Hi guys...we are in the process of ordering another batch of quick steering racks and could make the rack with extended track rod threads,avoiding the
necessity for track rod extensions.These racks would need to be ordered within our normal rack order and am uncertain whether you would prefer racks
with long track rods in 2.4 or 2.9 ratio.Would welcome locost opinion before we proceed with order. These racks are likely to cost only slightly more
than std length and will have threads overlong so that you can cut back to prefered length.
2.4 ratio or 2.9 ratio?
|
|
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 9/3/06 at 06:05 PM |
|
|
me too, if i needed another, id get a 2.4 one.
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 9/3/06 at 06:06 PM |
|
|
I for one already have a competely standard (non quick) escort rack and as such have sourced rack extensions to make it up to sierra track width.
My personal opinion is that most people who would be upgrading to a quickrack on an existing car would already have rack extensions to suit, so there
would be no need for the rack to be supplied with longer arms.
I suppose the arguements for could potentially be that those building from scratch and requiring a quick rack might save money if the extra cost of
the rack with longer arms is less than buying the rack extensions and possibly that there are less sharp edges to cover for sva. I personally think
the latter point is quite insignificant as you have to cover so much of the front suspension for sva that it's kind of irrelevant, but thought
it was worth mentioning as some may think it desirable I suppose.
Just my opinion of course.
I will be ordering a 2.4 rack at some point for my own car.
Thanks,
Ned.
[Edited on 9/3/06 by ned]
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
ecosse
|
| posted on 9/3/06 at 06:09 PM |
|
|
I was due ordering one of these from you anyway  but if you can do them with extra width I will have one of them for sure
Cheers
Alex
Oh yeh, 2.4 preferred 
|
|
|
Bob C
|
| posted on 9/3/06 at 08:07 PM |
|
|
I'd expect most builders these days to be buying a 'new' escort rack rather than doing up an old one - so selling longer track rods
on it makes sense. Could you extend the threaded section so folks wanting standard could achieve it with a hacksaw???
How big is the locost market? 'cos if you're doing specials, racks with the middle bit shorter would improve most folk's bump
steer.....
cheers
Bob
|
|
|
big_wasa
|
| posted on 9/3/06 at 10:03 PM |
|
|
I had one of your 2.9 racks a couple of months ago. 2.9 should be fine for the road and was cheaper than the 2.4
|
|
|
procomp
|
| posted on 10/3/06 at 01:45 PM |
|
|
Trickey one this is but i think that with more of the kits going over to sieera racks the biggest user of your product will be for mortorsport use
where most of us usually need one a year. Obviously for this use 2.4 is the better option and is also prety good for road use as most of the people
building locost are driving them (at the maximum speed limit) asually so wouldent be a bad thing.
as has been sujested they can allways shorten the length to suit ie all the standard track cars or even escorts.
cheers matt
procomp motorsprt
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 14/3/06 at 03:24 PM |
|
|
I got one of your racks and went for the QR; fir the extra that cost, you might as well get the QR.
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 14/3/06 at 04:46 PM |
|
|
Definately the 2.4 turn rack, and I think the extra long track rods are a great idea, they will save new builders a load of grief.
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 15/3/06 at 03:21 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
Definately the 2.4 turn rack, and I think the extra long track rods are a great idea, they will save new builders a load of grief.
ofcourse it is a brillian idea - would have save me lots of effing about - very likely I will get one of these racks rather than fit the extensions I
had made up.
How soon?!?!?!?
|
|
|
