ibakes
|
| posted on 10/10/08 at 01:17 PM |
|
|
I emailed z cars about this a while ago, it was 2k +vat to have a transfer box which use some sort of bike clutch mechanism to control the final
output and to have 2 engines driving each axle was 10k+vat due to the control of the engines had to be done with electronics.
|
|
|
|
|
Fred W B
|
| posted on 11/10/08 at 09:02 AM |
|
|
Here you go!
Cheers
Fred W B
[Edited on 11/10/08 by Fred W B]
You can do it quickly. You can do it cheap. You can do it right. – Pick any two.
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 11/10/08 at 09:42 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
"how can the gearboxes be controlled in such a way as to ensure that the gear changing can be synchronised when the engines are both required,
but allow one to be set in neutral while still controlling the other?"
A local acquaintance built a 4WD twin engined Metro using 2x Metro turbo engines many years ago. The front gearbox was controlled through the
standard remote linkage, the rear was controlled via microswitches and windscreen wiper motors, so it tracked the movement of the gearlever. A more
sophisticated proportional system might be a better idea however (e.g. like giant RC servos).
|
|
|
C10CoryM
|
| posted on 12/10/08 at 12:01 AM |
|
|
One more here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yofZIcTkCiw
One thing of note is the front engine will blaze the wheels on launch if it is the same power as the rear. Weight transfer and all that.
"Our watchword evermore shall be: The Maple Leaf Forever!"
|
|
|
akumabito
|
| posted on 13/10/08 at 06:07 PM |
|
|
Boost beast: http://www.eds-motorsport.de/Boost-Beast/boost-beast-DE/index.htm
|
|
|
