Fredrik Jönsson
|
| posted on 11/11/06 at 09:56 PM |
|
|
Propshaft connection question...what have I bought?
Building a MK Indy with R1 and ordered the "adaptor flange"
from MK thinking it would fit some part on the Sierra prop shaft but now with all donator parts all over the floor in the garage I see that thats not
the case. What should I bolt on the flange?
Could I please see some pictures of your propshaft/engine-interface?
When I am here writing I could just as well countinue.
In sweden we have to have reverse gear to get it through SVA. In addition I have been thinking if the 3,64 lsd I have will be plesant for highway use.
These two issues could be solved by using the typ9 gearbox from the donator
 . If I mount it I will first of all have reverse but also fifth gear witch will give me a overdrive like using a app. 3,00 diff.
The only negative thing is of course the weight. Some extra 30kg. But besides the reverse rule we also have to pass the weight/horsepower for SVA. My
car would have to weigh about 640kg at SVA in order to get pass. With this in mind an extra 30 would not be so bad. Nothing says I will keep the
gearbox as long as the thing with SVA is done. I could always put a straight propshaft in there later if the gearbox cause problems or slow me down to
much.
Now to the question:
How should I solve the ingoing shaft problem? The ingoing shaft of the gearbox is normaly resting in a bearing in the flywheel witch it will not in my
application. I need a support bearing of some kind. Maybe replacing the part that the clutch bearing slides on and but a machined bracket on there
instead. Could I use the splines for the bearing?
I was also thinking to either machine a adaptor flange for the clutch splines or just build something out of the clutch....(what do you call
it?)..clutch friction plate?
What do you think?
I am also looking for pictures of the steering column extension. I am building my car RHD and have never seen how it is done since everyone elso
drives LHD here. Anyone using the MK part?
Greatful for any help...
[Edited on 11/11/06 by Fredrik Jönsson]
[Edited on 11/11/06 by Fredrik Jönsson]
Fredrik, Sweden
|
|
|
|
|
hillbillyracer
|
| posted on 11/11/06 at 10:29 PM |
|
|
How will the gearbox cope with the torque load in the lower gears? It's nothing to worry about if it's only gonna be to get through the
SVA test.
Nice idea though.
|
|
|
ReMan
|
| posted on 11/11/06 at 10:29 PM |
|
|
Oh dear! I think you need some help from fellow swedes as to how to deal with SVA, but fitting a sierra gearbox in this way would be a ridiculous
waste of time and effort, you may as well junk the bike engine idea and fit the whole donor set up, all things that should probably have been
explored in more depth before purchase maybe? 
MK can extend the steering column and the propshaft you have needs modifying with a suitable flange to meet the adaptor you have. You can fit electric
reverse or a reverse gearbox, but power to weight still an issue.
Maybe you get SVA in the UK?
I'm sure all these questions and the pictures you want can be found on here with a search of the forum and the photo archives.
(Have a look in Hellfire's, pics of everything in there and on the super website)
Best regards
|
|
|
Fredrik Jönsson
|
| posted on 11/11/06 at 10:54 PM |
|
|
Thanks.
No the SVA will not be an problem and the rules were known before ordering.
I still want to use a bike engine.
The alternative to my crazy idea is to use electric reverse witch is allowed for SVA. We have the weight/horsepower rule in sweden but on the other
hand we do not have any rules for emissions like you have in UK. We do not need to cover every sharp edge either...
Torque in lower gears is interesting. The R! has a max of app. 110 Nm. Does not the Sierra got more?
Fredrik, Sweden
|
|
|
ReMan
|
| posted on 11/11/06 at 11:08 PM |
|
|
My MK was 495kgs so your nowhere near even with an extra 30 kgs of gearbox and adaptor, unless you pour lead into th chassis tubes and fill your tyres
with water 
|
|
|
Fredrik Jönsson
|
| posted on 11/11/06 at 11:31 PM |
|
|
The plan is steelplates in the floor under the seats and an heavy fueltank +battery. Maybe I replace the alu floor with steel instead...
Tools and jack are also allowed when weighing. And a spare tire. There are BEC registrated in sweden...
Fredrik, Sweden
|
|
|
ReMan
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 12:09 AM |
|
|
Similar post.......
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=31386
|
|
|
Fredrik Jönsson
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 12:19 AM |
|
|
Yes. Thats it. Dont know this Lozec but I sent him a messege.
It should be ebough with 120kg or something. Another way is to use realy heavy wheels. Scorpio wheels...
Fredrik, Sweden
|
|
|
paulf
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 12:20 PM |
|
|
Its not actually that silly an idea. I have considered the same thing as if I fit a bike engine I will need reverse as my drive is on a slope. A
stripped out type 9 would only weigh about 30kg which would have a negligible impact on the performance as bike powerd cars still perform well
carrying a passenger of 80kg or more a starter motor and ring gear plus bigger battery etc would also be quite heavy.
It would give an option of 1/1 direct .85 overdrive in 5th and reverse, the main worry is if it could cope with the torque in the lower gears from the
bike engine. I belive a bike engine is geared 1.5 - 1 or similiar on the primary drive so the engine torque would be increased to this plus the
gearbox reduction.
The input could be arranged by making a new front bearing housing to replace the sleeve that the release bearing runs on and maybe a clutch plate
centre could be used to transfer the drive to the existing spline if strong enough.
Paul.
quote:
Originally posted by ReMan
Oh dear! I think you need some help from fellow swedes as to how to deal with SVA, but fitting a sierra gearbox in this way would be a ridiculous
waste of time and effort, you may as well junk the bike engine idea and fit the whole donor set up, all things that should probably have been
explored in more depth before purchase maybe?
MK can extend the steering column and the propshaft you have needs modifying with a suitable flange to meet the adaptor you have. You can fit electric
reverse or a reverse gearbox, but power to weight still an issue.
Maybe you get SVA in the UK?
I'm sure all these questions and the pictures you want can be found on here with a search of the forum and the photo archives.
(Have a look in Hellfire's, pics of everything in there and on the super website)
Best regards
|
|
|
stevebubs
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 03:04 PM |
|
|
I think one of Ned's mates fitted a standard ford 4 speed box to a hayabusa Fury to do exactly this. Apparently worked ok but the box had to be
solidly mounted..
NED?
|
|
|
Fredrik Jönsson
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 03:24 PM |
|
|
Yes, I has to be bolted to the frame. The type9 is perfect since it has a removable clutch cover and can easy be bolted to a flat, vertical
surface.
Stripped type9 sound interesting. What can be taken away and still have fourth, fifth and reverse?
Is really the torque at low gears a problem? The strain on the transmission should be a highest before the car is start moving. As soon as it moves
the kenetic energy should make it easier on the gearbox.
If you put at trailer behind a Sierra it could be about 3000 kg car to move with a engine that gives 160-190Nm. Since the weight of a BEC is 1/4 of
that it should be ok. After all the R1 is only producing max 110 Nm...
I think the weight of the car is the factor that really makes the differens to the gearbox. It will be easier to build up kinetic energy...
When I was to the Newark festival this summer I got a ride in the white "demo car". Ok, it was a blackbird engine but on the other hand we
where two in it and I think it really had enough of speed. As Paulf is pointing out the Sierra starter that I fist planed to use weigh 4kg. Then I
need a ring gear and a car battery. On top of that I will loose some weight on the propshaft. I think we are looking at 15kg extra weight...
On the other hand the transmission will steal some power...
Some comments from NED would be appriciated. And ofcourse from others too.
Fredrik, Sweden
|
|
|
hillbillyracer
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 05:33 PM |
|
|
The thing that I & I presume the others who have posted here are concered about is that although the torque out put of your engine is within the
limits of the type 9 gearbox, that torque figure is then multiplied by the bike gearbox to a level that the type 9 would never see from a car
engine.
It may well work ok though if you kept the type 9 in 4th (it is 4th thats a direct drive in a type 9?) whilst having fun, leave 5th for cruising
& reverse for, well you work it out!
|
|
|
Fredrik Jönsson
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 05:41 PM |
|
|
Thats the plan. 4th is 1:1. The torque produced from the motorcycle engine/gearbox is for sure higher then the one coming out of the carengine but the
weight of the Indy should compensate. How much Nm is required before the locost start moving comperedto the 1500kg car (or 3000 if with trailer)?
Anyone who got any information regarding the second issue about the steering column?
Fredrik, Sweden
|
|
|
ReMan
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 05:50 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by paulf
Its not actually that silly an idea. I have considered the same thing as if I fit a bike engine I will need reverse as my drive is on a slope.
I didn't say I thought it was a silly idea and I'm sorry if that was how it was read.
I do think it would involve a lot of unnessesary engineering for a result that can be achieved in other lighter ways. (even though for swedish SVA
this seems to not be an issue!!!!)
In fact as a way of achieving an overdrive effect, it's a good idea, but 30kg is a big weight to carry, when the ethos of a BEC is light weight,
is it not?
kind regards
Col
|
|
|
Fredrik Jönsson
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 06:16 PM |
|
|
No problem. Did not take like that. I'am glad to get your point of view.
30kg is alot but on the other handwe also see 30kg differance from driver to driver...
Fredrik, Sweden
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 06:34 PM |
|
|
I will need reverse as my drive is on a slope.
Drive in forward and roll out backwards What you need is a turntable at the top.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
hillbillyracer
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 08:29 PM |
|
|
The weight (mass) of the car has no effect on the torque load on the gearbox. Less mass means you go faster for the same force & all of that
same force has to come through the gearbox.
The torque limit of a gearbox has got to be high on a direct 1:1 drive straight through the box. What kind of gears are used in these reversing
boxes?
It mabye doesnt matter to you but your reverse is going to be very low unless you change up through the bike gears when you use reverse & then
back down again to go forward, which would be a pain.
|
|
|
Fredrik Jönsson
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 08:49 PM |
|
|
Are you sure? If you put your car against a wall, rev it up to the rpm where you have your max torque and release the clutch the gearbox is loaded
with the max torque (if the wheels have the grip). If you just drive away you will not use the max torque especially if the car is light.
Will it not be a differance in load to the gearbox if the car weighs 100kg or 2000kg?
Would I brake the gearbox if I released the clutch with 1st gear on the mc-engine, fifth gear on the Sierrabox and the car on a jack with the wheels
in the air?
When it comes to reverase speed it usually is not that fast with electric reverse either....
[Edited on 12/11/06 by Fredrik Jönsson]
Fredrik, Sweden
|
|
|
hillbillyracer
|
| posted on 12/11/06 at 11:07 PM |
|
|
Yes I'm pretty sure the torque load doesnt vary with the weight of the car, but there are plenty folks on here with more brains than I have! So
come on you boffins & put us straight on this one.
Please dont think I'm being negative about your idea, I like it & would likely try it myself given your circumstances. I'm all for
doing something myself rather than just buying all the bits in.
There's only one way to know for sure, build it & try it. Tractor pullers often put 1000hp through a transmission designed for 100 but some
times they go bang in a big way!
|
|
|
Fredrik Jönsson
|
| posted on 13/11/06 at 07:59 AM |
|
|
I got an advise to use the gearbox from a 70ies Volvo instead of the type 9. It is much smaller and has electric overdrive. The ingoing shaft also has
the same splines as the outgoing witch simplify the connection to the engine. Just have to figure out the ratios in that box...
Reports will follow...
Fredrik, Sweden
|
|
|
CairB
|
| posted on 13/11/06 at 01:08 PM |
|
|
The gearbox input will experience the torque applied to the input shaft, i'e. full crank torque modified (usually increased) by the gearing from
the crank, slightly reduced by inefficiencies.
The reduced weight of the vehicle will allow it to accelerate quicker, so it may spend less time with the peak torque being applied.
At the limit of traction the surplus torque is used to accelerate the rotational inertia , mainly the wheels, until we back off or hit rev limiter.
This ignores any of the torque ripples caused by the fact that the engine provides an impulsive drive accentuated by our desire to fit lightened
flywheels. It also ignores ripples due to the response of the effective multiple mass spring assembly that is the drivetrain to the impulsive load as
we tend to remove the torsional dampers, and shock loads due to backlash in driveline components
HTH
Cheers,
Colin
|
|
|
ReMan
|
| posted on 13/11/06 at 09:15 PM |
|
|
"This ignores any of the torque ripples caused by the fact that the engine provides an impulsive drive accentuated by our desire to fit
lightened flywheels. It also ignores ripples due to the response of the effective multiple mass spring assembly that is the drivetrain to the
impulsive load as we tend to remove the torsional dampers, and shock loads due to backlash in driveline components"
Bloody 'ell!
|
|
|
paulf
|
| posted on 13/11/06 at 10:29 PM |
|
|
That would be a god idea if it was an uphill slope , unfortunately it slopes down to my garage. Maybe i will just have to move house.
Paul
quote:
Originally posted by Peteff
Drive in forward and roll out backwards What you need is a turntable at the top.
|
|
|
paulf
|
| posted on 13/11/06 at 10:34 PM |
|
|
What model would that be ? a 240 maybe ?.
Paul.
quote:
Originally posted by Fredrik Jönsson
I got an advise to use the gearbox from a 70ies Volvo instead of the type 9. It is much smaller and has electric overdrive. The ingoing shaft also has
the same splines as the outgoing witch simplify the connection to the engine. Just have to figure out the ratios in that box...
Reports will follow...
|
|
|
Fredrik Jönsson
|
| posted on 14/11/06 at 06:54 AM |
|
|
The basic design is present all the way up to a 240 -93 (last year) even if evolution made it 5-speed.
The 4-speed was used in 140/240 from -67 to early 80ths. After that they fitted a electrical activated overdrive that is not that relaiable. It is
also an addon overdrive so it will steal power...
The special feature of the early m40 boxes is that it has the same splines configuration on the ingoing shaft as on the outgoing witch make it
possible to use standard prop shaft parts from the gearbox to the bike-engine...
The 1,2,3-gears can also be stripped. I do not know how and if it is easy...
Fredrik, Sweden
|
|
|
.jpg)
