caber
|
| posted on 10/12/05 at 10:10 PM |
|
|
Twin engines
Thanks to ebay and various members of the forum I now have 2 1600 Pintos, 4 webber DCOE 40s and manifolds. Given the interest in twin bike engined
cars I was just wondering about sticking both these engines in one car.
There seem to be a couple of options. I could make the car a bit longer and put them line astern making a straight 8 I could dump the front engine
flywheel and back engine belts and water pump and make up a piece to join the front engine crankshaft output to the woodruff key pulley bit of the
back engine crank shaft.
Option 2 is to make a wider car with the engines side by side remove flywheels and replace with motorbike drive sprokets the engines would be offset
front to back by one chain width or more if I need more offset to clear manifolds. The chains would drive two more sprockets connected to a flywheel I
guess there would be a couple of bearing plates with spacers one between the blocks the other over the open face of the bell housing.
Now the big question is will the power be OK through a single type 9 gearbox and capri back axle?
If this is not going to work how about two back axles one driven through the other like some 6X 6 landrovers? many of these use Salisbury axles so
there must be a way to do this?
I know I was aiming for a simple build but I have been set thinking by hanging out with JoelP this afternoon.
Caber
[Edited on 12/10/2005 by caber]
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Paterson
|
| posted on 10/12/05 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
A New V8 project
Rather than the inline straight Eight idea, I suspect it would make more sense to create our own Ford based V8 by machining a new sump and crankcase
package. Theres Billet ali for the sump on the rack, having a think about the crank talk to u more later in the week when I have snagged it with
Steve
Shug.
|
|
|
UncleFista
|
| posted on 10/12/05 at 10:23 PM |
|
|
Have you worked out what the power to weight ratio would be ?......
Tony Bond / UncleFista
Love is like a snowmobile, speeding across the frozen tundra.
Which suddenly flips, pinning you underneath.
At night the ice-weasels come...
|
|
|
caber
|
| posted on 10/12/05 at 10:30 PM |
|
|
Must be better than a single 1600 pinto as I would be junking one flywheel and one set of ancilliaries no?
Caber
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 10/12/05 at 10:35 PM |
|
|
no good i'm afraid
I am up for the wackiest ideas, and I have seen a few, but that won't work.
I knew of a twin Vauxhall XE 16v powered vauxhall nova autograss car a few years ago (mounted side by side, mid engined rwd), but even in that, with
over 220hp per engine, the power to weight was not really competitive.
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 10/12/05 at 10:37 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by caber
I know I was aiming for a simple build but I have been set thinking by hanging out with JoelP this afternoon.
Caber
nowt good ever came from hanging around with that idle bastard!  lol.
|
|
|
Metal Hippy
|
| posted on 10/12/05 at 10:37 PM |
|
|
I've got a 1600 Pinto from a Capri in pieces if you want another.. or any spares.
Personally I think you should attempt a straight 12 configuration.
The weight distribution would be interesting, but get the thing going with triple turbos and the straight line speed would be nice..
Cock off or cock on. You choose.
|
|
|
owelly
|
| posted on 10/12/05 at 10:38 PM |
|
|
Am I allowed to ask why? And would I get a plausable reply?
http://www.ppcmag.co.uk
|
|
|
caber
|
| posted on 10/12/05 at 11:00 PM |
|
|
Metal Hippy:
interesting, would need a very wide "transmission tunnel" I think the Capri axle would be no good as the gearbox is going to have to bolt
straight to diff so a Sierra Set up might work. I think a heafty subframe will be required to keep it all rigid that might upset total weight a bit. I
think the design would no longer look very 7 ish , maybe something more like the record cars that had a cockpit off to one side obviously i would have
one either side of the engine tunnel, good car for couples who are not talking! Will the type 9 gearbox take it? I am not a suspension designer but I
guess weight distribution won't be too bad pretty much a mid engine set up init?
Owelly:
I think it is more why not? There are a lot of unloved and unwanted Pinto 1600s around all looking for something to do!
Shug:
You may have something there after all the cossy V8 is basically two lotus cortina twincams stuck together:-) We can keep the crank just need to
figure out how to make half width con rods that won't snap. I am sure your big angle grinder will get through the blocks and I have lots of
faith in your big TIG machine and your welding skills to put it back together. There is an ad on Men and Motors at the moment for an evolution rage
circular saw that will cut through anything if your angle grinder would leave to ragged a cut maybe we have to get one of these to cut the blocks?
Caber
|
|
|
zzrpowerd-locost
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 10:31 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by caber
Thanks to ebay and various members of the forum I now have 2 1600 Pintos, 4 webber DCOE 40s and manifolds. Given the interest in twin bike engined
cars I was just wondering about sticking both these engines in one car.
There seem to be a couple of options. I could make the car a bit longer and put them line astern making a straight 8 I could dump the front engine
flywheel and back engine belts and water pump and make up a piece to join the front engine crankshaft output to the woodruff key pulley bit of the
back engine crank shaft.
Option 2 is to make a wider car with the engines side by side remove flywheels and replace with motorbike drive sprokets the engines would be offset
front to back by one chain width or more if I need more offset to clear manifolds. The chains would drive two more sprockets connected to a flywheel I
guess there would be a couple of bearing plates with spacers one between the blocks the other over the open face of the bell housing.
Now the big question is will the power be OK through a single type 9 gearbox and capri back axle?
If this is not going to work how about two back axles one driven through the other like some 6X 6 landrovers? many of these use Salisbury axles so
there must be a way to do this?
I know I was aiming for a simple build but I have been set thinking by hanging out with JoelP this afternoon.
Caber
[Edited on 12/10/2005 by caber]
IMHO the flywheels have to stay on the engine??
And if every one on here in the last few days has been doing everything to put me off using two bike engines cos of extra weight, unrealiability,
cost, ect, ect, Just think of the extra weight of another pinto under the bonnet
And as for the cost of making a V8 out of 2 Straight 4's
And you will never get a block made of two pieces welded together, anywhere near as strong as a cast block!
But hey if you want to try it GO FOR IT!!!
[Edited on 11-12-05 by zzrpowerd-locost]
|
|
|
SixedUp
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 10:58 AM |
|
|
Seems to me that it would be a lot cheaper and easier just to go buy a cheap small block Ford V8 ... you see them come up for reasonable money, and
you know its going to work. Very tunable too. You also get 5litres rather than 3.2, and avoid all that cutting, shutting of engines etc (unless thats
what you actually want to do?)
A Type 9 isnt going to take the grunt though, and you'll have similar problems with most diffs...
Cheers
Richard
|
|
|
Cita
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 01:52 PM |
|
|
Looking for a wacky idea:
Find another Capri axle and take out the angle grinder!
Cut from one axle the left part next to the housing and from the other axle the right part next to the housing.
Put a new shaft between the two housings so the prop ends of the housing match the wide between the two engine prop's.
Shorten the shaft on the wheel side of each diff housing so you have a reasonable track
Now you have a back axle with two diff's
Have no clue if this can work but it surely would surprise the SVA man
|
|
|
Trev Borg
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 02:06 PM |
|
|
I like all the ideas above.
Without crazy people trying different and rediculus ideas, the world would not progress.
How about mounting them one on top of the other, with two rear axles, like a tyrrell..
Yipp Yipp, I'm a lobster
NURSE!!!!!
more medication please
[Edited on 11/12/2005 by Trev Borg]
Before you judge a man, walk a mile in his shoes.
By that time, who cares.
You're a mile away, and you've got his shoes
|
|
|
froggy
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 02:16 PM |
|
|
no,no no far too mild !how about 4 engines with the wheel bolted directly to the flywheel weld a large brake disc to the front pulley and create the
first quad engined skid steered locost . two engines mounted on each sprung beam axle, unsprung weight would be a bit high though
|
|
|
Cita
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 02:33 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by froggy
no,no no far too mild !how about 4 engines with the wheel bolted directly to the flywheel weld a large brake disc to the front pulley and create the
first quad engined skid steered locost . two engines mounted on each sprung beam axle, unsprung weight would be a bit high though
That's childish!
Put one wheel on the engine and let this thing decides where the ride will go to
Cheers Cita
|
|
|
froggy
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 02:55 PM |
|
|
yes i think skid steer could be too complicated so i suggest putting a pivot in the middle of the front axle so it could be foot steered possibly by
the driver and passenger
|
|
|
Cita
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 03:29 PM |
|
|
Make that one foot from the driver and one foot from the passenger
Cheers Cita
|
|
|
jon_boy
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 05:19 PM |
|
|
There was a nove running two xe turbo vauxhall lumps, one front one rear (search for boost beast in goolge it may find it) and that was very rapid if
a wee bit hard to set up
|
|
|
tks
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 06:15 PM |
|
|
2 PINTO'S?
Wy?
2 busa's ok..
2 ZX12R ok..
but 2 pinto's?
First you have the room problem to solve then you need to solve the transmission isue, because using belts i hope you know you cant transfer
100Bhp..
sow that would
be an longitudual mounting...
and that would increase the lenght of the car with 1 meter wich would result in an almost straight 8 engine but with still conection problems to solve
between one end of the engine and the other....
in my opinion it won't make much sence, Only you will be the only one with suchs a
car..
Tks
if you want to build something special, than i would build an double engined car but with 1 engine driveing the front axle...
and another the rear...
sow in fact you get 2 front engine settups from an vauxhall astra...
and mount both in..locking on the rear the hubs from steering....
then you could have something special and 4WD....
but the mass bhp figures won't be much special if you don't have 180Bhp from each engine i guess...
carr will weight 800Kgs?
360Bhp
and 4WD!
i think this is an better idea for an project..
The above comments are always meant to be from the above persons perspective.
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 06:16 PM |
|
|
Jings, cribbins, help ma'bob.
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 06:30 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by tks
Wy?
2 busa's ok..
2 ZX12R ok..
but 2 pinto's?
First you have the room problem to solve then you need to solve the transmission isue, because using belts i hope you know you cant transfer
100Bhp..
sow that would
be an longitudual mounting...
and that would increase the lenght of the car with 1 meter wich would result in an almost straight 8 engine but with still conection problems to solve
between one end of the engine and the other....
in my opinion it won't make much sence, Only you will be the only one with suchs a
car..
Tks
if you want to build something special, than i would build an double engined car but with 1 engine driveing the front axle...
and another the rear...
sow in fact you get 2 front engine settups from an vauxhall astra...
and mount both in..locking on the rear the hubs from steering....
then you could have something special and 4WD....
but the mass bhp figures won't be much special if you don't have 180Bhp from each engine i guess...
carr will weight 800Kgs?
360Bhp
and 4WD!
i think this is an better idea for an project..
belts cannot transmit 100hp???????????
I'd better hurry to work and check the Meer cold reducers then!!! The best drives on those transmit 800hp quite easily...................the
main drive on the newholland self propelled forage harvesters that I used to drive transmitted over 500hp quite adequately too!
Not saying it's a good idea in a car, but power transmission by belt is no problem!
|
|
|
tks
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 07:52 PM |
|
|
wait...
with a belt i mean...
a normal 10/13mm car belt...
and how do you know if the belt you mentioned is transmitting 500Bhp?
atleast i think you will have an couple of belts...
a belt driven waterpump on a car only want 5Bhp take another for the dynamo 5Bhp and another for the Airco..
sow in fact an belt will do upto 50Bhp..
anyway...
i wouldn't use 2 pinto's neither i would rely on a belt engagement..
anyway if it has to be done he could use a bike chain...
TKs
[Edited on 11/12/05 by tks]
The above comments are always meant to be from the above persons perspective.
|
|
|
caber
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 08:56 PM |
|
|
I never said belt drive! I said chain drive!!
I am so keen to get this project moving I've already booked SVA for 1/4/06!
Caber
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 11/12/05 at 11:20 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by tks
with a belt i mean...
a normal 10/13mm car belt...
and how do you know if the belt you mentioned is transmitting 500Bhp?
atleast i think you will have an couple of belts...
a belt driven waterpump on a car only want 5Bhp take another for the dynamo 5Bhp and another for the Airco..
sow in fact an belt will do upto 50Bhp..
anyway...
i wouldn't use 2 pinto's neither i would rely on a belt engagement..
anyway if it has to be done he could use a bike chain...
TKs
[Edited on 11/12/05 by tks]
It's ok, I was only being silly, I know you meant "normal" belts.
Our cold reducing machines use 400mm wide flat belts, and the newholland forage harvester uses 8 vee belts, but yes, it does certainly transmit 500+
horsepower, that is the full engine power and the belt drive is all that attaches it to everything else on the machine. The main drive to the chopping
head is by belts and shafts (this uses at least 400hp of the engine power) and the remainder is hydrostatic drive` (hydraulic pump again belt drive)
to the hydraulic wheel motors for the ground speed drive.
|
|
|
zzrpowerd-locost
|
| posted on 12/12/05 at 11:32 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by NS Dev
quote:
Originally posted by tks
with a belt i mean...
a normal 10/13mm car belt...
and how do you know if the belt you mentioned is transmitting 500Bhp?
atleast i think you will have an couple of belts...
a belt driven waterpump on a car only want 5Bhp take another for the dynamo 5Bhp and another for the Airco..
sow in fact an belt will do upto 50Bhp..
anyway...
i wouldn't use 2 pinto's neither i would rely on a belt engagement..
anyway if it has to be done he could use a bike chain...
TKs
[Edited on 11/12/05 by tks]
It's ok, I was only being silly, I know you meant "normal" belts.
Our cold reducing machines use 400mm wide flat belts, and the newholland forage harvester uses 8 vee belts, but yes, it does certainly transmit 500+
horsepower, that is the full engine power and the belt drive is all that attaches it to everything else on the machine. The main drive to the chopping
head is by belts and shafts (this uses at least 400hp of the engine power) and the remainder is hydrostatic drive` (hydraulic pump again belt drive)
to the hydraulic wheel motors for the ground speed drive.
I can back you up! Did my appentiship on New Holland stuff, mainly combines, but forage harvester aswell
|
|
|
