Norfolkluegojnr
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 08:04 PM |
|
|
Sylva Striker owners and or knowledge mongers.... Assitance please
Need to tap the ultimate fountain of knowledge that is LCB.
Off to have a look at a Striker tomorrow with Norfolkluego Snr - Anything we should be aware of to look out for? I know his Luego inside out now, but
have no knowledge of Strikers.
Any help greatfully received...
[Edited on 29/9/10 by Norfolkluegojnr]
[Edited on 29/9/10 by Norfolkluegojnr]
|
|
|
|
|
TimC
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 08:35 PM |
|
|
Hmm, generally cracking little cars - I had a live axle X-Flow powered car for a while and enjoyed it very much; very light indeed.
Not too much to say as a warning. The usual kit car checks for condition and construction should be applied.
Avoid the low-rent MKIII with outboard shocks. I also prefer the cut-down Escort or Capri uprights to the Sierra alternatives. I'm not a huge
fan of Sylva's live axle design (bounce bounce bounce) but it's good enough on smooth surfaces.
How old is the kit/car?
Edit: fairly critical typo there....
[Edited on 29/9/10 by TimC]
|
|
|
JimSpencer
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 08:39 PM |
|
|
Hi
Big subject that..
There's basically three different variants, but all on the same basic theme.
Mk2 - inboard front shocks, live axle
Mk2 - inboard front shocks, IRS.
Mk3 - outboard front shocks, live axle.
The Mk2's are by far the most common, both variants have been built be Jeremy (Sylva) and RAW (current owners of the design)
The MK3's are quite rare (about half a dozen known to exist - one of which I co-own with my brother)
Theoretically there is a striker Mk4, which had full bodywork - but this is normally known as the Pheonix, and folk with them normally refer to them
as such.
So assuming you'll end up looking at a Mk2..
Build quality.
Chassis corrosion.
Quality of the components.
(i.e. just like any other spaceframe built car!)
My preference would be for a pre 2000 (so no cat rqd for motorsport), preferably a live axle (if you're still going to tackle speed events) and
if was 4age powered better still.
If it's a 5 speed, ask who's box - as the words Quaife or BGH are nice to hear, check on gearing too..
Back axle ratio handy to know as often overgeared so haggle a bit if it's a 3.9..
Bodwork comes in a couple of variants the earlier cars have a one piece nose and bonnet moulding - which is a bit of a pain in the behind.
Later ones seperate nose and bonnet.
The rear tub and arch's likewise can come in either one piece or with seperate wings - though this was a much later change.
Also the later bodywork is available in different weights, but the thin race spec stuff would get trashed on the road really quick!
New bodywork (and all the other bits) available from RAW though.
Should have a rear roll hoop c/w diagonal brace and the later ones are rear braced, earlier ones not - but easily fixed (Cougar Engineering, Redditch,
also does an ace full cage)
In short there's nothing really that different where a Striker is concerned other that they're smaller and lighter than most of their
rivals - the build quality of individual cars is then very much down to the bloke who nailed it together and you'll have to take that into
consideration when looking at it.
If you've got a link to the add it might give me a bit more to go on?
|
|
|
JimSpencer
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 08:43 PM |
|
|
quote:
Avoid the low-rent MKII with outboard shocks.
There you are very much mistaken..
A) it's the Mk3 with outboard front suspension..
b) They're very rare indeed.
c) They go very well..
[Edited on 29/9/10 by JimSpencer]
|
|
|
TimC
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 08:54 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JimSpencer
A) it's the Mk3 with outboard front suspension.
Quite - typo on my part..
quote:
Originally posted by JimSpencer
b) They're very rare indeed.
So are Maestro Turbos - I still don't want one.
quote:
Originally posted by JimSpencer
c) They go very well..
So do most lightweight sportscars, but they are still inferior to the MkII IMHO.
|
|
|
JimSpencer
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:09 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by TimC
[So do most lightweight sportscars, but they are still inferior to the MkII IMHO.
Well we're all entitled to our opinions arn't we, I quite like Maestro Turbo's 
The difference in the front end (and the space it free's up) makes quite a difference, especially as the vauxhall uprights are light, though
agree being limited to 1.9 shocks is a bit of a pain.
The Mk3 chassis is structurally basically the same as the Mk2 (though it's rumoured that one or two vary here) but one thing that is known is
that the Mk3 is lighter gauge - or the ones that are left are
So far not finished behind a Mk2 this year at any venue, and we've done a few..
A Mk3 holds the 2A class records at Anglesey, 3 Sisters and Silverstone Stowe..
So 'inferior' to a Mk2 is a very subjective statement, a little bit different yes - inferior not so sure..
Think there's probably actually very little difference, a well set of Striker of any type will £ for £ and BHP for BHP be quicker than pretty
much anything else in the 'locaterfield' classes
|
|
|
bigfoot4616
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:17 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JimSpencer
The MK3's are quite rare (about half a dozen known to exist - one of which I co-own with my brother)
according to the original paperwork that came with my car, mine started out as a MK3. at some time it has been converted to inboard suspension
|
|
|
Norfolkluegojnr
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:21 PM |
|
|
Thanks guys.
Pretty sure going on your info its a MKII, definately inboard suspension, seperate nose cone and body, and a braced rear roll hoop (i assume you mean
the diagonals going to the rear of the chassis?
linky for ad, although pics are poor.
linky
i'm not that knowledgeable about the CVH, but we did a zetec conversion on the Luego, so happy enough to change if necessary.
I'm 6ft though, will i fit ok?
P.S. Maestro turbo - so wrong but so right.
|
|
|
matt_gsxr
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:25 PM |
|
|
Make sure you can fit in a striker. They are pretty small and there is nothing clever about buying a car in which you don't fit!
The windscreen design is very different, and either you will love it or hate it.
Regarding the off topic question of when is a Phoenix a Mk4 Striker. I think mk4 striker came first, and have always assumed that once the project
went to STM (stuart taylor motorsport) that it became phoenix (possibly same time are the back end of the bodywork was rounded off).
I hope the weather is good for you,
Matt
|
|
|
bigfoot4616
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:25 PM |
|
|
i'm a good 6ft and fit no problems, infact my seat could go back an inch or so if needed.
its the width that could be the problem if you are on the large side. saying that, i took a 18 stone passenger out in mine and although it was a
squeeze he fitted in
|
|
|
JimSpencer
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:26 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by bigfoot4616according to the original paperwork that came with my car, mine started out as a MK3. at some time it
has been converted to inboard suspension
I can believe that, it wouldn't be hard to do and especially if somebody had damaged a wishbone, as we had to have some made as they were
unobtainable.
The Mk2's look much neater too
It was interesting to chat to Mat @ Procomp a couple of years ago on the vica versa's of inboard versus outboard suspension, there's lots
of good reasons for both solutions, so IMHO it probably comes down to half of nowt either way in reality.
|
|
|
Norfolkluegojnr
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:28 PM |
|
|
im only 13st so hopefully, weight not an issue.
ok. totally different subject, but opinions on the CVH?
|
|
|
JimSpencer
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:34 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Norfolkluegojnr
Thanks guys.
Pretty sure going on your info its a MKII, definately inboard suspension, seperate nose cone and body, and a braced rear roll hoop (i assume you mean
the diagonals going to the rear of the chassis?
linky for ad, although pics are poor.
linky
i'm not that knowledgeable about the CVH, but we did a zetec conversion on the Luego, so happy enough to change if necessary.
I'm 6ft though, will i fit ok?
P.S. Maestro turbo - so wrong but so right.
Hi
Yup definatly a Mk2 (the Mk3 was 88/89 only) and you've got the scruitineer friendly, rear braced, roll hoop, which is handy - you are planning
on speed eventing this arn't you?
Dunno about a CVH, can't think why not - but not a normal Zetec as that would put you in 2B.. you'll be wanting a Zetec SE surely
6ft tall = fine, 6ft wide = 
I'm of the 'slightly wide in the beam' dimensions, as long as i've nothing in my pockets (and race boots, or small trainers on
as small footwell) no problem!
|
|
|
norfolkluego
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:41 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Norfolkluegojnr
Thanks guys.
Pretty sure going on your info its a MKII, definately inboard suspension, seperate nose cone and body, and a braced rear roll hoop (i assume you mean
the diagonals going to the rear of the chassis?
linky for ad, although pics are poor.
linky
i'm not that knowledgeable about the CVH, but we did a zetec conversion on the Luego, so happy enough to change if necessary.
I'm 6ft though, will i fit ok?
P.S. Maestro turbo - so wrong but so right.
I'm 5-7, I'll fit fine, just buy the damn thing
|
|
|
Norfolkluegojnr
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:45 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by norfolkluego
quote:
Originally posted by Norfolkluegojnr
Thanks guys.
Pretty sure going on your info its a MKII, definately inboard suspension, seperate nose cone and body, and a braced rear roll hoop (i assume you mean
the diagonals going to the rear of the chassis?
linky for ad, although pics are poor.
linky
i'm not that knowledgeable about the CVH, but we did a zetec conversion on the Luego, so happy enough to change if necessary.
I'm 6ft though, will i fit ok?
P.S. Maestro turbo - so wrong but so right.
I'm 5-7, I'll fit fine, just buy the damn thing
Not sure if you can be trusted as a team driver yet......
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:47 PM |
|
|
The Striker was pretty much designed for the CVH. Here's the original page from Sylva on the engine.
http://web.archive.org/web/20020824000500/www.sylva.co.uk/cvh.html
The 4age is a common engine for newer Strikers.
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
Norfolkluegojnr
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:48 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JimSpencer
quote:
Originally posted by Norfolkluegojnr
Thanks guys.
Pretty sure going on your info its a MKII, definately inboard suspension, seperate nose cone and body, and a braced rear roll hoop (i assume you mean
the diagonals going to the rear of the chassis?
linky for ad, although pics are poor.
linky
i'm not that knowledgeable about the CVH, but we did a zetec conversion on the Luego, so happy enough to change if necessary.
I'm 6ft though, will i fit ok?
P.S. Maestro turbo - so wrong but so right.
Hi
Yup definatly a Mk2 (the Mk3 was 88/89 only) and you've got the scruitineer friendly, rear braced, roll hoop, which is handy - you are planning
on speed eventing this arn't you?
Dunno about a CVH, can't think why not - but not a normal Zetec as that would put you in 2B.. you'll be wanting a Zetec SE surely
6ft tall = fine, 6ft wide =
I'm of the 'slightly wide in the beam' dimensions, as long as i've nothing in my pockets (and race boots, or small trainers on
as small footwell) no problem!
thankfully im 6ft tall, not wide, but i'm working on it!
Sprinting is the plan, i'm trying to think of a team name for me and Snr. something like 'Team Bodge' springs to mind.....
|
|
|
bi22le
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:51 PM |
|
|
Hi,
Good luck with viewing the Striker.
Regarding things to check.
The Fibreglass cracks often around the roll loop. This often looks taty (as on mine) if it has not happened yet, expect it to. There is a photo on the
ad but I cant see it properly.
Also the inboard upper wishbones on the front. The preferred type are the roller bearing typ not rubber bush. The rollers offer a better more positive
set up.
My limited experience of the CVH is they are a well loved engine that has a lot of support and spares available although I do feel that the Striker
has a very capable chassis and the car may feel underpowered slightly. Im certainly starting to feel that with my 150BHP 4age.
Good luck and that seems a very good price for a Striker, I searched for a while for one and bought the first one I looked at!
HTH
Track days ARE the best thing since sliced bread, until I get a supercharger that is!
Please read my ring story:
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/forum/13/viewthread.php?tid=139152&page=1
Me doing a sub 56sec lap around Brands Indy. I need a geo set up! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHksfvIGB3I
|
|
|
Norfolkluegojnr
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 09:51 PM |
|
|
thanks ian, useful link.
|
|
|
perksy
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 10:12 PM |
|
|
as far as the CVH goes it needs regular oil changes with good quality oil as they seem to 'gum up' pretty quickly
Cracking car the Striker i really like them, just abit too small for me...
|
|
|
pekwah1
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
i'm 6'3 and 14 stone and i fit in mine!
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 29/9/10 at 11:10 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JimSpencer
Hi
Big subject that..
There's basically three different variants, but all on the same basic theme.
Mk2 - inboard front shocks, live axle
Mk2 - inboard front shocks, IRS.
Mk3 - outboard front shocks, live axle.
Sylva never made an IRS Striker did they? I thought Raw Engineering were the ones that designed the IRS when they took over development?
|
|
|
jeffw
|
| posted on 30/9/10 at 05:18 AM |
|
|
quote:
Regarding the off topic question of when is a Phoenix a Mk4 Striker. I think mk4 striker came first, and have always assumed that once the project
went to STM (stuart taylor motorsport) that it became phoenix (possibly same time are the back end of the bodywork was rounded off).
The Phoenix, with the rounded rear end, is neither a Mk4 Striker or a STM invention. The bodywork was done by Sylva and was called a Phoenix by them.
I have a Sylva Phoenix (which started life as a Striker but that doesn't really matter).
[Edited on 30/9/10 by jeffw]
|
|
|
JimSpencer
|
| posted on 30/9/10 at 08:39 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
quote:
Originally posted by JimSpencer
Hi
Big subject that..
There's basically three different variants, but all on the same basic theme.
Mk2 - inboard front shocks, live axle
Mk2 - inboard front shocks, IRS.
Mk3 - outboard front shocks, live axle.
Sylva never made an IRS Striker did they? I thought Raw Engineering were the ones that designed the IRS when they took over development?
It's a good question..
Not 100% sure to be quite honest, RAW have factory built both and there's earlier Sylva cars that are IRS - who did it and was it first built
like that? - is another, very good, question..
That's the fun of these things though isn't it? What they've ended up as now and what they were first built as can be poles apart!
|
|
|
TimC
|
| posted on 30/9/10 at 10:36 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by jeffw
The Phoenix, with the rounded rear end, is neither a Mk4 Striker or a STM invention. The bodywork was done by Sylva and was called a Phoenix by them.
I have a Sylva Phoenix (which started life as a Striker but that doesn't really matter).
Yes, the MkIV was originally referred to as the Clubman. I did have an original Sylva brochure from the mid-90s - the clubman body isn't as
timeless as the Phoenix but I do really like it.
I'm starting to wonder though if the brochure stated that the MkIV used outboard front suspension - I seem to remember that it did. It's
all good fun though...
|
|
|
