carsonp
|
| posted on 9/8/06 at 08:03 PM |
|
|
Planning a chassis to fit V8
Let me start out by saying this is my first post and i dont know what im doing (no books yet, a little bit of research, etc.)
All i know is i want to fab my own locost (chassis and all) and i have a end goal in mind. What i dont know is how to get there with designing the
chassis. So im hoping someone here has put an american V8 in a locost and/or knows a bit about modifying the stock locost chassis specs.
1) The end goal is to use a LS1/T-56 with a undetermined rear end (not sure weither solid, or IRS and if IRS which)
2) Im 6'3" so id like to widen the frame to fit me and the V8 semi comfortably and stretch it a bit as well. Probably to the caterham SV
specs maybe?
3) like in the other thread, id like a donkervoortish look which will include some slightly taller rims and a larger overall wheel diamiter. This
means altering the suspension and again, i dont know where to put things (keeping standard ride height)
This also means a narrow nose, but i want to wides the chassis, so... is this even an option without it looking goofy?
Im not ready to build it yet, so I want to plan everything out (mainly the chassis) down to a T so when the time comes i can jump in knowing
everything is correct and well thought out.
|
|
|
|
|
DIY Si
|
| posted on 9/8/06 at 08:09 PM |
|
|
Firstly welcome!
There are soem plans available for a wider chassis. It's 4"wider, longer and 2" taller. Hence why it's known as the +442
version. Do you have a weight for the engine as if it's too heavy it may be unwise to use it as it'll unbalance the car. I'm not
saying don't do it, but look before you leap kind of thing.
“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/
|
|
|
carsonp
|
| posted on 9/8/06 at 08:19 PM |
|
|
I believe its somwhere around 500lbs fully dressed with a t56 (aluminum block/heads and composite intage, etc.)
I wondered that as well. Them i figured with a IRS it might even it out a bit. Or with a C5 transaxle that would even it out even more.
Also, with all the extra bracing/roll bars it going to be a few hundred lbs more then a standard 4cyl/solid rear, but with the added power it should
still be a blast!
Some LS1 size specs
The engine is 20" wide from cylinder head exhaust flange to cylinder head exhaust flange. The ehxaust manifolds stick out roughly 3" more
on each side.
Cylinder heads are 19 1/2" long
Block is 20 1/2" long from the bell housing flange to the front face of the block.
Water pump is about 6 3/4" from front face of block to front face of pulley.
The engine is roughly 25 3/4" from the bottom of the oil pan to the top of the valve covers.
The motor mount centerline is 12 1/2" forward of the bell housing flange and 8" rear ward of the front face of the engine.
The oil pan is 8 1/2" at the deepest point and about 8" wide from front to back.
The block is roughly 10" wide at the oil pan.
[Edited on 9/8/06 by carsonp]
[Edited on 9/8/06 by carsonp]
|
|
|
AdamR
|
| posted on 9/8/06 at 09:45 PM |
|
|
Hi & welcome...
I don't know how the LS1 compares weight-wise to the RV8 that I and others are using, but they are a similar size. The LS1 is very slightly
bigger I think, but don't quote me on that.
Chassis wise you'll be wanting to go +4" wider. I've gone for an extra inch in hight by using 2x1 RHS for some of the rails, which
is a good way of adding some stiffness to cope with the extra weight. I added 2 inches in length in the seat area.
Personally I'm not a fan of the McSorley +442 plans as I think the proportions look wrong (it is +4 in the cockpit area but narrows to standard
width at the front to allow the use of a standard nosecone). I based my design on the
McSorley +4 plans, and got some ideas for stiffening mods from
cymtriks' analysis. So far, so good. 
[Edited on 9/8/06 by AdamR]
|
|
|
carsonp
|
| posted on 9/8/06 at 10:16 PM |
|
|
so that +4 plan your using is wider in the nose as well?
And are all the other added things (2" seat length, 1" height, etc.) in those plans as well?
|
|
|
AdamR
|
| posted on 9/8/06 at 10:36 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by carsonp
so that +4 plan your using is wider in the nose as well?
And are all the other added things (2" seat length, 1" height, etc.) in those plans as well?
The McSorley +4 plans are +4" wider throughout, so yes, the nose is wider too. Until recently this meant that you had to make your own
fibreglass nosecone or modify a standard one, but now GTS Tuning in the UK are selling off the shelf +4 bodywork.
The extra height and length are my own mods, so are not in the McSorley plans. As mentioned the height was added by using the 2x1 steel for the top
rails. The length was added in the seating area where everything is straight and parallel, so there was no new angles to work out or anything
complicated like that.
HTH
[Edited on 9/8/06 by AdamR]
|
|
|
locostv8
|
| posted on 10/8/06 at 03:46 AM |
|
|
This is a +4 chassis 302 with a 302 T5, According to the builder it is 1250 and 50/50.
I'm building 2 LC7s the first using basicly a V8 Mustang 2 as a donor and prety much all stock MII parts, this will be my wife's put
around town economy car (named Put-Put). The chassis is a +4 and if additional height is needed it will be made up in the body work, the wheelbase is
94". I am replacing 1x1.5x11ga(.125) where 1x1x16ga is called for and 1x1x14ga where .75x.75x16ga. The sheet metal will be replaced with
various ga steel. The car will be a bit heavier but is intenden as a street car for a non car person. This is being built with things onhand and for
maximum CHEAP, I should have between 1000 & 1500 in it.
The second (Shagnasty) is a bit more over the top. The chassis will be very similar but possibly backing off the 11ga. The specs are 392(351) roller
engine with aluminum heads, dry sump, EFI, Twin disk clutch with aluminum flywheel, scattershield, T5, MN12 front spindles (with Cobra 13"
brakes), MK VIII/Explorer/Cobra based IRS using Rorty plans (kinda), and 17x9 with 245 45 17s front 17x10.5 with 315 354 17s rear 95 Cobra Rs. I have
most parts on hand and am finalizing the specs.
If you squint real hard at a Lincoln MK VII and section it down the middle a bit it looks much like a 7 with a bit more shape to the hood. I will be
using pieces of a MK VII co create a plug to create the body pieces myself which will wind up on both cars.
If all goes well my hope is to offer pieces for sale after sorting both cars out.
 
http://wrangler.rutgers.edu/gallery2/v/7slotgrille/hssss/
|
|
|
carsonp
|
| posted on 10/8/06 at 03:50 AM |
|
|
So that one pictured is a standard +4 spec chassis?
do you know if its any taller or anything?
[Edited on 10/8/06 by carsonp]
|
|
|
locostv8
|
| posted on 10/8/06 at 04:00 AM |
|
|
As far as I know from what he said it is McSorley +4. We exchanged Emails a couple of times and I think he took offense to my response to whether he
could use the engine as a stressed member, pretty sure from that he did no reinforcement (that and the weight). My response was with the 302s habit
of splitting in two I wouldn't put any more stress on it than needed. Stopped writing, guess he didn't think my response was very funny
(I was serious).
[Edited on 10/8/06 by locostv8] BTW you might want to check out http://locostusa.com/forums/index.php as well
[Edited on 10/8/06 by locostv8]
http://wrangler.rutgers.edu/gallery2/v/7slotgrille/hssss/
|
|
|
ERP
|
| posted on 10/8/06 at 06:51 AM |
|
|
Your going to want to build the chasis around the engine.
A chevy V8 is bigger than a Ford 302 or a Rover V8 by enough to be inconvenient.
I have a ford 302 in what amounts to a standard locost chassis with extra bracing but it isn't an easy fit (I still don't know how exactly
I'm going to mount the alternator).
A chevy V8 is significantly wider and would require at least modification of the tunnel area.
|
|
|
locostv8
|
| posted on 10/8/06 at 07:44 AM |
|
|
350 chevy in a Westy
Some clues. Figure out what axle you are coing to use, then the wheels (particularly the backset) This will tell you how wide a chassis you can
build. Build the perimeter and lower rail cross tubes then set the engine in the chassis as far back as you can and still have enough space for you
in it. Then build the transmission tunnel and tie down where the firewall will be. One trick is to offset the engine an inch or so to gain a bit
more room.
If you go with a solid axle find a 9" out of a Torino/Tbird (they are amazingly heavy) If going IRS use the Tbird/MK VIII setup. Both of these
are a bit over 63" and if the wheels have much backset you still don't have a lot of space to work with (the 315s on the 10.5s have a
7" backset). The assumption based on the engine choice will be that you will want WIDE tires and at times liberal application of the happy
pedal so don't scrimp in the rear axle setup. The Camaro axles are strained in thier normal application and if I remember correctly the
Corvette that you would be able to use is a Dana 44, the 8.8 is 30% stronger.
[Edited on 10/8/06 by locostv8]
http://wrangler.rutgers.edu/gallery2/v/7slotgrille/hssss/
|
|
|
AdamR
|
| posted on 10/8/06 at 09:59 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by locostv8
I'm building 2 LC7s the first using basicly a V8 ....... this will be my wife's put around town economy car (named Put-Put).
God Bless America! 
[Edited on 10/8/06 by AdamR]
|
|
|
carsonp
|
| posted on 10/8/06 at 10:07 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by locostv8
350 chevy in a Westy
Some clues. Figure out what axle you are coing to use, then the wheels (particularly the backset) This will tell you how wide a chassis you can
build. Build the perimeter and lower rail cross tubes then set the engine in the chassis as far back as you can and still have enough space for you
in it. Then build the transmission tunnel and tie down where the firewall will be. One trick is to offset the engine an inch or so to gain a bit
more room.
If you go with a solid axle find a 9" out of a Torino/Tbird (they are amazingly heavy) If going IRS use the Tbird/MK VIII setup. Both of these
are a bit over 63" and if the wheels have much backset you still don't have a lot of space to work with (the 315s on the 10.5s have a
7" backset). The assumption based on the engine choice will be that you will want WIDE tires and at times liberal application of the happy
pedal so don't scrimp in the rear axle setup. The Camaro axles are strained in thier normal application and if I remember correctly the
Corvette that you would be able to use is a Dana 44, the 8.8 is 30% stronger.
[Edited on 10/8/06 by locostv8]
yeah the corvette uses a D44 and are strong enough stock for a stock LS1. If i ever upgrade the motor *cough* 436ci plus *cough* you can build a
D44 to be pretty strong.
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 07:02 AM |
|
|
I seem to remember that in real fitting terms the LS1 engine actually ends up more compact than a Rover V8. I think width wise its similar but with
any sort of exhaust manifold the LS1 ends up narrower. I'm pretty sure its no longer.
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
locostv8
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 07:13 AM |
|
|
Wessy with a blower Rover. Actually I believe it is the Rover and the Ford that share similar dimensions.
[Edited on 11/8/06 by locostv8]
http://wrangler.rutgers.edu/gallery2/v/7slotgrille/hssss/
|
|
|
Tobynine9
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 01:39 PM |
|
|
The Corvette Rear
AFA Corvette rears go, if you're on a budget, the Dana 44 from the C4 is expensive. It was only used on the lesser optioned M6 cars and has
gotten rare and, therefore, pricey. The Dana 36 from the slush-box Vettes is much more common but won't hold as much torque. Not sure if
it's true, but I've read the Dana 36 will start to frag above 350 lb/ft of torque. But that's also when used in a heavy street car
application. Perhaps it won't matter as much when pushing half the weight.
C5 rears are still expensive as most of those cars are still getting ragged on and haven't been hung up wet yet.
[Edited on 11/8/06 by Tobynine9]
|
|
|
kb58
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 01:47 PM |
|
|
Anyone know what these cars weigh complete, and their weight distribution?
Mid-engine Locost - http://www.midlana.com
And the book - http://www.lulu.com/shop/kurt-bilinski/midlana/paperback/product-21330662.html
Kimini - a tube-frame, carbon shell, Honda Prelude VTEC mid-engine Mini: http://www.kimini.com
And its book -
http://www.lulu.com/shop/kurt-bilinski/kimini-how-to-design-and-build-a-mid-engine-sports-car-from-scratch/paperback/product-4858803.html
|
|
|
carsonp
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 02:20 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tobynine9
AFA Corvette rears go, if you're on a budget, the Dana 44 from the C4 is expensive. It was only used on the lesser optioned M6 cars and has
gotten rare and, therefore, pricey. The Dana 36 from the slush-box Vettes is much more common but won't hold as much torque. Not sure if
it's true, but I've read the Dana 36 will start to frag above 350 lb/ft of torque. But that's also when used in a heavy street car
application. Perhaps it won't matter as much when pushing half the weight.
C5 rears are still expensive as most of those cars are still getting ragged on and haven't been hung up wet yet.
[Edited on 11/8/06 by Tobynine9]
Ill ask on a corvette board and see what they think.
(1500lbs, 350ft lbs, and some pretty sticky tires)
If that would work with a stock LS1/6 or LS2 that might be the way to go. Then upgrade if/when needed.
|
|
|
carsonp
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 02:31 PM |
|
|
Here are ford 302 size specs
Width - Length - Height - Weight
24 - 29 - 27 1/2 - 460
Im not sure if the weight is fully dressed or not??????????
Compared to the LSX
The engine is 20" wide from cylinder head exhaust flange to cylinder head exhaust flange. The ehxaust manifolds stick out roughly 3" more
on each side.
Cylinder heads are 19 1/2" long
Block is 20 1/2" long from the bell housing flange to the front face of the block.
Water pump is about 6 3/4" from front face of block to front face of pulley.
The engine is roughly 25 3/4" from the bottom of the oil pan to the top of the valve covers.
The motor mount centerline is 12 1/2" forward of the bell housing flange and 8" rear ward of the front face of the engine.
The oil pan is 8 1/2" at the deepest point and about 8" wide from front to back.
The block is roughly 10" wide at the oil pan.
|
|
|
ERP
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 04:35 PM |
|
|
I've only looked at the blocks of a 302 and a SB Chevy side by side. After I had my first 302 block ultrasounded I seriously considered the
Chevy, but it was just too wide for my application.
The Chevy does have a height advantage fully dressed if you go EFI.
Chevy parts are also cheaper and it's a LOT cheaper to build one if you want >300 hp.
Weight distribution, shouldn't be far from 50/50, the engine sits pretty far back just to make it fit, and standard locosts probably have a
small rear weight bias.
Weight of the engine, I still haven't weighed mine, but a standard cast 302 block is under 50lbs (based on my ability to man handle it), the
aftermarket one I'm using is more like 90. A cast Chevy block is in the middle, and an Ally one probably lighter. Most of the other parts will
have comparable weight for the same material.
I'd certainly believe 500lbs dressed.
The biggest issue with these engines is making them fit, you'll need custom exhaust manifolds, custom steering linkage. I also had to relocate
my oil filter since it interfered with the front suspension, and I still need to figure out how to mount an alternator in the remaining space.
If you are going with a wider chassis, a lot of these may be much easier problems to solve.
|
|
|
carsonp
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 05:45 PM |
|
|
yeah ill definitly be doing a +4 maybe more depending on the rear end.
I found that most D44s go for no less then $1500, which is pretty spendy, but... maybe its worth it, i dont know.
Whats the other option for IRS? The supercoupe? how much do those run?
|
|
|
kb58
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 08:04 PM |
|
|
Just be aware what the car will weigh before deciding if it's right for you.
The most common remarks I see is where someone touts the V8 weighing practically nothing more than the old 4-cylinder engine it's replacing.
Other than not believing that myself, that's far from the end of it.
Let's assume for fun the engine weighs the same as the iron 4cyl, but to go along with that switch are these: a larger heavier frame to handle
the torque, a bigger heavier transmission, larger heavier radiator, bigger battery, stronger driveshaft, heavier differential, bigger heavier wheels
and tires, and don't forget big heavy brakes. Expect to have a much higher operating cost replacing expensive wide tires and of course low
mileage.
OTOH I agree, to each his own, and if you want a V8, great. Just don't expect it to weigh "only 50lbs" more than the equivalent
4-cyl car. I feel that's not being fair to potential builders.
Mid-engine Locost - http://www.midlana.com
And the book - http://www.lulu.com/shop/kurt-bilinski/midlana/paperback/product-21330662.html
Kimini - a tube-frame, carbon shell, Honda Prelude VTEC mid-engine Mini: http://www.kimini.com
And its book -
http://www.lulu.com/shop/kurt-bilinski/kimini-how-to-design-and-build-a-mid-engine-sports-car-from-scratch/paperback/product-4858803.html
|
|
|
carsonp
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 09:34 PM |
|
|
I know it will weigh a good bit more tehn a standard 4cyl
Im guessing around 1600lbs or so when its all said and done with the beefier chassis, IRS, T56 trans and LSX motor
How much does a iron 4cyl weigh?
|
|
|
ERP
|
| posted on 11/8/06 at 10:14 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kb58
Just be aware what the car will weigh before deciding if it's right for you.
The most common remarks I see is where someone touts the V8 weighing practically nothing more than the old 4-cylinder engine it's replacing.
Other than not believing that myself, that's far from the end of it.
Let's assume for fun the engine weighs the same as the iron 4cyl, but to go along with that switch are these: a larger heavier frame to handle
the torque, a bigger heavier transmission, larger heavier radiator, bigger battery, stronger driveshaft, heavier differential, bigger heavier wheels
and tires, and don't forget big heavy brakes. Expect to have a much higher operating cost replacing expensive wide tires and of course low
mileage.
OTOH I agree, to each his own, and if you want a V8, great. Just don't expect it to weigh "only 50lbs" more than the equivalent
4-cyl car. I feel that's not being fair to potential builders.
I doubt even an all Aluminum V8 weighs within 50lbs of any 4cy when dressed and wet. And that's before counting the rest of the additional
weight.
And one thing V8's certainly aren't is cheap.
Having said that weight is all relative, a well done V8 locost is still going to be lighter than an Elise for example.
As you say to each his own.
|
|
|
locostv8
|
| posted on 12/8/06 at 12:26 AM |
|
|
is a couple of steps at a time.
This is the Deman BEC LC7 http://www.deman-motorsport.com/widespecs.htm
I believe it is considered state of the art in BEC LC7s.
Deman front suspension. Tbird MN12 spindle & Brakes
Deman rear suspension. Tbird spindles/brakes, half shafts, and diff (it looks like the iron Tbird painted silver)
Total weight for the car is from 980 so far the only change that would be a good idea is up one size in tube size and gauge to handle the V8.
At least in the US it seems a fairly standard transmission to use is the T5, this will weigh the same whether behind a 3/4/5/6/8 cyl engine. The BEC
uses a long two piece driveshaft which has to be heavy. A car engine uses a much shorter 1 piece driveshaft and if sourced from a MK VIII it is
aluminum. A Turbo coupe 2.3 weighs 450 lbs, that seems to be an acceptable LC7 engine though a bit tall. A 302 weighs 460 lbs in stock configuration
with a 351 weighing about 50 lbs more. Using aluminum heads, waterpump, intake, and tube headers you should be able to shed at least 50 lbs. Because
of the much greater torque there is no need to use a heavy steel flywheel so the use of an aluminum dual disk flywheel/clutch setup should shed at
least another 25 lbs. Most late model bell housings are aluminum though I choose to use a scatter shield given the location of a potential
grenade.
Put-Put is being built using a Mustang 2 that I paid $200 for it and a Comet Grabber (302 with 60k on it). It will be a bit heavier because I
won't be using aluminum heads and will be using a C4 and a Lincoln Versailles 9" but the cost should be sub $1500 for the whole car.
Shagnasty should be lighter even with a 351 since it will be basically the Deman with probably 50 lbs more steel in the chassis, a T5, and a Cobra
aluminum diff. I have 2 351s at this time the first one with 1k miles on it from a wrecked truck that cost 125 with EFI on it, the second is a roller
cam with a broken piston I bought for core charge $125.
http://wrangler.rutgers.edu/gallery2/v/7slotgrille/hssss/
|
|
|
