Alez
|
| posted on 10/9/06 at 11:07 AM |
|
|
Zcars Mini Montecarlo
Hi chaps,
I've been searching this forum re this little car:
http://www.zcars.org.uk/montecarlo/index.htm
Spec says 464 kg with good weight distribution, is that not absolutely awesome for a car with a full cabin and doorish doors??? I'm surprised
that nobody seems to have comented on it.
I was wondering if the Hayabusa version of this car can have a reverse fitted? (I like the idea of a road legal one, and you need a reverse for that
in Spain.) I assume this car must be chain driven but I haven't seen any pics unfortunately.
Cheers,
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
DIY Si
|
| posted on 10/9/06 at 11:13 AM |
|
|
They're supposed to be a bit of a sod to fit in. The head's pretty much against the seat! Looks really good fun, but not for every day
use. Unless you have a big box of ear plugs! Might just be being a bit biased as I'm 6'3"!
Oh, and it is chain driven, and a reverse is available I think from Z Cars, but even they don't tend to use it! It's difficult to get a
usable reverse as they tend to be really clunky.
“Let your plans be dark and as impenetratable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt.”
Sun Tzu, The Art of War
My new blog: http://spritecave.blogspot.co.uk/
|
|
|
Minicooper
|
| posted on 10/9/06 at 11:14 AM |
|
|
One of the pictures in your own link shows it's chain drive
They normally fit electric reversing system to there bike minis, I'm sure this is exactly the same
Found a picture, this is a hayabusa powered monte carlo with electric reverse chain drive
I agree with DIY Si, the space is very tight, I'm just below 6ft and really struggled to get in, the main problem for me though was the head
height, I was virtually touching the roof without a helmet, although Chris at ZCars said they could modify it to give an extra 2 inches
Cheers
David
[Edited on 10/9/06 by Minicooper]
 
|
|
|
rayward
|
| posted on 10/9/06 at 11:14 AM |
|
|
z cars use a chain driven diff, with a ring gear fitted and starter motor for electric reverse.
Ray
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 10/9/06 at 11:28 AM |
|
|
I'm rather small 
And my interest in the reverse is just SVA here in Spain.. I would probably take the reverse away after that.. I've been pushing my BEC Locost
for long now and I even find it a fun thing to do to be honest 
But then again, I don't have the money for one of these..
The picture looks great btw, looks like a very proper chassis.. I'm very surprised about the weight.
[Edited on 10/9/06 by Alez]
|
|
|
rayward
|
| posted on 10/9/06 at 12:01 PM |
|
|
thats a space framed one with full f'glass shell,
the more common conversion is to use the steel bodyshell, cut the back end floor/boot area away, and then fit a cage that the engine etc is fixed
to.
Ray
|
|
|
donut
|
| posted on 10/9/06 at 12:02 PM |
|
|
Can be built 'from' £15,000 
Andy
When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andywest1/
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 11/9/06 at 07:34 AM |
|
|
I'm wondering about the height of the driver's seat..
I mean, if the driver is sitting at similar height from the floor than in the original Mini, that's not optimum for COG is it?
And if the driver is sitting lower that that, how did they manage to keep the same proportions and apearance of the Mini? Surely the driver needs to
see through the windscreen!
|
|
|
Minicooper
|
| posted on 11/9/06 at 08:31 AM |
|
|
The Monte Carlo has been roof chopped but also you've lost some height in the floor area, normally the seats are sitting in a flattened out U
shape, the flat floor rising at the outer sill edge to the body side edge, on the Monte it's flat accross the car at just below the level of the
sill edge meaning you've lost say 2.5 ~3 inches
It may have had some removed through the seam of the body to keep the proportions right
Many people don't mount seats that low in a mini anyway but it's a combination of losing top and bottom in a small car that can cause a
problem
The roof edge on the steel boodied rear is about 47~48 inches, on the Monte the roof edge is I'm sure Chris said was 40", some of this
comes from the fact the car is lower but a lot doesn't
Cheers
David
[Edited on 11/9/06 by Minicooper]
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 12/9/06 at 11:18 AM |
|
|
Very interesting, thank you.
I think 40" is fine for a sports car (surely you know the story about the Ford engineers pushing every limit to get a 40" high GT40, which
is where the name of car came from, although the GT40 has comfy seats maybe?)..
And they made it look much like the original Mini, I think they did a great job in that respect, keeping in mind that the original 48" is a good
20% more.
Cheers,
Alex
[Edited on 12/9/06 by Alez]
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 23/9/06 at 09:29 PM |
|
|
I have just realized something nasty in the spec:
Weight 464 kilos
Front Axle 264 kilos
Rear Axle 300 kilos
What's going on? 
Do you know any weight figures from alternative sources? 564 kg sounds a lot less appealing than 464 kg (close to a BEC Locost), to be honest 
Cheers,
Alex
|
|
|
Minicooper
|
| posted on 23/9/06 at 10:17 PM |
|
|
460~480 for the Monte Carlo, 570 ish for the steel bodied R1 mini, 600 ish for the hayabusa, can be lighter/heavier depending on spec
Cheers
David
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 23/9/06 at 10:51 PM |
|
|
It's not a Mini.
It looks a bit like one from the outside, that's all. It's got stupid big wheels and the drive is at the wrong end for a Mini. Stick the
engine in a Suzuki van with big flared arches and it will do exactly the same and be an easier swap.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
scotty g
|
| posted on 24/9/06 at 07:12 AM |
|
|
There is an article about this very car in Which KitCar mag, its surprisingly good for that mag which is usually just full of stuff saying
"oooh, look at all our own lovely cars".
The classifieds are a joke, its full of Filby's old projects.
Sorry, i digress, the Monty Carlo article is quite good.
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 24/9/06 at 09:42 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peteff
It looks a bit like one from the outside, that's all. It's got stupid big wheels and the drive is at the wrong end for a Mini. Stick the
engine in a Suzuki van with big flared arches and it will do exactly the same and be an easier swap.
Marklar,
Right, not a Mini, so what? The Mini has tin body / chassis, it is too high and too heavy, and it has the engine and drive at the wrong end of a
sports car (despite having them at the right side of a Mini). The only good thing about it is its looks!
That's what replicas are all about. Look at the Gardner Douglas' replicas of the Lola T70 or the Cobra, they're much better than the
original cars (the original cars are now precious classics but that's another story), the chassis of an original Cobra is old crap and replicas
like GD, DAX Tojeiro and so on are nice space frames..
The Mini Monte Carlo is neither a Mini nor a classic.. but I still want one 
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 24/9/06 at 11:57 PM |
|
|
GD, DAX Tojeiro and so on are nice space frames..
Sorry Alex, they aren't spaceframes. The Mini can't have been that wrong, it won enough rallies with it's outdated technology and if
you drove an original on 10" wheels with a decent engine you wouldn't think it was too high or heavy and the roadholding would probably
have kept you out of trouble on roundabouts 
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 25/9/06 at 07:16 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peteff
Sorry Alex, they aren't spaceframes.
Oops.. are they not?
|
|
|
