RobManta
|
| posted on 24/6/04 at 10:20 AM |
|
|
quarter miler
Hi, I'm new to the kit car scene, and want to build the cheapest car possible to run (initially) sub 12 second quarter miles
i was thinking about mk indy type chassis and running a rover v8 (relatively light weight) with a few hundred horses worth of nitrous
it has to be road legal (so no slicks although yoki 32r cut slicks are ok)
question is: how easy / difficult is it to fit either a vitesse sd1 or mustang2 back axle onto a sierra-based kit car? the other option of course is a
rwd sierra cossie back axle - anyone know how much they go for?
to begin with I'd like to be running around 300-350 bhp on the button, eventually pushing 500 if I end up swapping for small block chevy
thanks in advance
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 24/6/04 at 10:36 AM |
|
|
I would have guessed for a sprint or 1/4 mile car you'd be better off keeping the weight as low as posible and going for a turbo'd
hayabusa...
A dedion or live axle rear end would probably give most traction in a straight line..
Ned.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
RobManta
|
| posted on 24/6/04 at 10:51 AM |
|
|
ned - thanks for the reply
i would normaly agree with you, however cost is a factor (competition between me and a mate) and a rover v8 can be had for a few hundred with nitrous
kit for about 7-800, whereas I'm looking at 5-6k for a turbod hyabusa lump
even chevy smallblocks can be found for under 500 notes if you look hard enough
|
|
|
locoboy
|
| posted on 24/6/04 at 10:52 AM |
|
|
quote:
want to build the cheapest car possible
Turbo'd busa will weigh in at the best part of 5K surely with dry sumping etc etc. - if not more! 
RobManta, you just beat me to it 
[Edited on 24/6/04 by colmaccoll]
ATB
Locoboy
|
|
|
Dale
|
| posted on 24/6/04 at 11:30 AM |
|
|
If cost/ bang for buck is the prime factor whatever the English name fore the xr4ti 2.3l turbo engine is damn near bulit proof on the bottom end and
and can be made to push 400hp plus before the internals have to be redone. I would bet stock with the boost pushed up and and heavy shot of nitros
would hold together pretty good for little $.
Dale
|
|
|
James
|
| posted on 24/6/04 at 03:11 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dale
If cost/ bang for buck is the prime factor whatever the English name fore the xr4ti 2.3l turbo engine .
Dale
There isn't an English name- primarily because they didn't sell it here! 
James
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 24/6/04 at 04:05 PM |
|
|
the xr4i was a v6 2.3 i think, no turbo's, around 150/160bhp i think. there is/was a turbo technics conversion about for this engine, but i
don't know anything at all about it!
Ned.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
macspeedy
|
| posted on 24/6/04 at 04:11 PM |
|
|
the pinto was about a bit bigger than here could be that, i would go for a cossie turbo engine lots of tuning potential and not a bad price if you
look about
ebay, find it, rally sites and dealers, i have aquired quite a few sites to browse i can email if you like just send me a u2u
|
|
|
Noodle
|
| posted on 24/6/04 at 04:59 PM |
|
|
One saw a MK1 Escort with the 2.3l Pinto Turbo in it.
Many moons ago.
Your sort make me sick
|
|
|
Dale
|
| posted on 24/6/04 at 11:44 PM |
|
|
Sorry I thought it was availible there. Its a Lima built engine made in the states but if not availible there my apologies for confusing the
issue.
Dale
|
|
|
zetec
|
| posted on 25/6/04 at 04:37 AM |
|
|
The trouble you will have with any "7" style car is that after 80-90 mph the aero dynamics are very poor giving you a poor terminal speed.
Something like a Fisher Fury is better suited to higher speed as it has an enclosed body.
[Edited on 25/6/04 by zetec]
|
|
|
RobManta
|
| posted on 28/6/04 at 10:03 AM |
|
|
thanks for the info guys - I've been looking at the 2.3 v6 with turbo, but isn't it a cast iron block? the rover/buick v8 is all-ally
I hadn't considered the aero-dynamics issue - is there anything thast can be done to compensate? i was planning on running a stubby windscreen
anyway as i figured it reduced the forward surface area by 25-30%
would those sweeping ("clamshell"?) wings be better than cycle type wings for aerodynamics?
I was also starting to think about air pressure under the wheel arches causing a problem at higher speeds - anyone had any experience of this?
I'll have a look at the fury site if i an find it
cheers again
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 28/6/04 at 10:13 AM |
|
|
Rob,
there was a thread a while back about aerodynamic improvements to a seven.
the clamshell wings are not good for aerodynamics. they'll give more drag and give a bit of lift (as they're vaguely shaped like an
aircraft's wing)
Cycle wings are ok as long as the brackets are sturdy, making the cycle wing long so it covers more of the tyre is supposed to help. i imagine these
things would give very minimal gain imho.
Ned.
edit: try:
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=4997&page=1
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=11663
[Edited on 28/6/04 by ned]
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
RobManta
|
| posted on 28/6/04 at 02:02 PM |
|
|
thanks ned - will check out those links
|
|
|
DavidM
|
| posted on 30/6/04 at 11:04 PM |
|
|
Triton used to have pictures of a 1/4 miler locost they were building on their website. Don't know what happened to it. V8 and 2 speed rings a
bell.
I bet Mark@triton knows something about it.
|
|
|
