Can anybody help?
I've just got a copy of "Build your own Sports car". After reading about the chassis it only gives plans for a "fixed axle".Since I'm using a Sierra and not a Mk2 Escort,I would like to use the IRS from the Sierra! Does anybody know where to get the plans for a IRS chassis.Thanks for any help or advice..

[Edited on 2/7/03 by Beeker]

Beeker,

There are plans in existance, can't remember where, but they are on the web somewhere. I'm sure someone will be along soon with the address....

Welcome to the madness....

Ned.

... is full of lies ...

Hi Beeker,

Good luck with your build. Can I suggest that before you start you visit Jim McSorley's fantastic site: http://www.mcsorley.net/locost/

from where you can download an accurate (as opposed to The Book's very innaccurate) chassis cutting list and set of plans.
It's live axle (as opposed to IRS) but atleast the front 2/3 will be correct!

Can I also suggest you think very carefully before going down the IRS route- it's a pain to design your own system and the whole thing will take you much longer.

HTH,

James

seconded

a live axle will be faster to build and simpler with less risk of getting it wrong.

dosent the (tiger avon?) book describe the building of an irs car?

atb

steve

Thanks for the help. I was just wondering how easy would it be to squeeze a few more inches into the seating area as I'm a bit on the stocky side??

Beeker

I've gone IRS route using Sierra diff/driveshafts and homemade wishbones/uprights.

If I was starting again, and from what I now know, I'd go live axle.

If you insist on IRS, get a copy of Jim Dudley Avon book and follow the design for the IRS and graft to RC chassis.

That's my suggestion for the day!!

ATB

Simon

Yes, it does, and is what I have done, and haven't had any major problems (so far). It does take a little longer, but it's in my view a far nicer system, potentially more tunable, a good range of diffs that are easy to swap in and out, including LSDs, rear discs (unneccesary, but look much better behind your alloys.... the list goes on. I've not mentioned performance or comfort, as this always a controvercial point, although I think most people consider IRS to be more comfortable. Surfice to say that both types are rarely found wanting in performance, or are particularly comfortable for that matter, but then that's not what it's all about.

Kingr

dammit, go to reply to steve, and before I've finished writing to other post have gone up!!

Kingr

Hi,

some months ago some people was talking about the imminent 3d edition of the RC's book with the IRS option.

Any news about it?

-P

quote:

---

Originally posted by Simon
Beeker


If you insist on IRS, get a copy of Jim Dudley Avon book and follow the design for the IRS and graft to RC chassis.

That's my suggestion for the day!!

ATB

Simon

---

If you do decide on live axle and want a few extra inches in the width area,get yourself a complete mk3/4/5 cortina or an old capri mk2/3 as a donor.

or buy an mk or luego,dont work out too much more money and a lot less agg,bin there got the t shirt

Hi,
Nobody has mentioned it so I will:

The third option is de-dion which is widely regarded (by me anyway) as a very good half way house between Live and IRS. It is renouned for exceptional traction and has reduced unsprung weight compared with live axle and so handles the bumps better. It also uses a standard Sierra diff along with a virtually standard book chassis so I think it is the best option.

I have some detailed plans on how to make the de-dion axle or you can buy a ready made axle from Dax as used on the Dax Rush. Stu16V has used this Dax kit and swears by it (Stu?)

Check out my website (www button below) for a look at what it looks like but disregard the fact that my trailing arms are inboard of the seat back. This is because the de-dion kit I got was designed for a standard width chassis and mine is a McSorely 7+4. You can fit the de-dion to a book chassis albeit ideally with a minor mod to the back end to give more room for axle articulation (very easy mod)

Drop me an email (email button below) if you want more details.
Cheers,
Craig.


[Edited on 2/7/2003 by craig1410]

*waves hand* I'm here!

Everything Craig says is right, although the only minus point is making one yourself. Although not a big problem, an inaccurately made dedion tube will be there for life, unless you are able to make the bearing mountings adjustable (not impossible, thats what Caterham do IIRC). With IRS, you make it adjustable as it is fabricated, and with a live axle, all you have to do is weld the brackets for the trailing arms on as accurately as possible. This is why I persuaded DAx to make me a tube minus their suspension brackets. That way I knew that both wheels were pointing the same direction, it was just up to me to put my brackets on straight......
In fact, in some ways, the dedion in conjunction with an LSD on my car makes it a little boring. Even with a healthy 16v Vauxhall motor in it, smacking the loud pedal to the floor just makes the car go forwards, not sideways, even mid roundabout (off road, of course)
No wonder they fit this axle setup to Cozzy and V8 powered Dax's.....

HTH Stu.

I've gone for good old fashioned live axle (capri), but my trailing arms are the rear radius arms from a Nissan Bluebird (£10 for 4 adjustable and one set length from a scrappy near you). these could be used on a DeDion setup and give you all the adjustabiltiy you could want. Use the set length as a datum and the 3 adjustable ones attached to the axle, the last adjustable is extended with 19mm seamless to make the panhard rod (again adjustable) It save a load of bother making you own trailing arms and gives you a fully adjustable rear end. Simple really

Hi Stu, I knew you'd back me up

Yes the alignment is quite critical but I think I managed it quite easily by making a couple of "railway tracks" which were held exactly parallel by clamping them either side of a piece of 2"x2" SHS tubing. I then laid my large tubes (the ones the driveshafts go through) on these tracks at the correct spacing and lowered the de-dion/ears assembly onto the top. I then made sure that everything was plum/parallel/centered as appropriate before packing the inboard ends of the large tubes up by the width of two hacksaw blades to give me some toe-in. I calculated using trig. that this was the required amount to give me 1 degree of toe-in on each side (2 deg total). I would be happy with zero toe but in case my alignment was off I introduced 2 degrees so that I am relatively certain not to get any toe-out which would tend to make the back end twitchy under power.

Once everything was aligned and triple checked I put in some tack welds carefully making sure that nothing was moving between welds. Oh yes, the other thing I did was to make sure that the hub carrier mounting plates were exactly square to the ends of the large tubes before tacking them separately. My intention is to seam weld the rest of the chassis but leave the "sturdy" tack welds on the de-dion setup until I can get it on a wheel alignment jig where I can check my handywork. If it's wrong then I can adjust before final welding (or just buy a Dax setup if it would suit a wider chassis okay)

If you have access to a proper building table with a solid metal top and V blocks etc then alignment would be easy.

HTH,
Craig.

Well done to one and all. That's a good array of helpful information for a newbie. Really good thread.

Thanks for all the advice.It's good to know there are other people out there that been in the same situation and are willing to help out.Thanks again

Yes we have our moments. There are in fact very few questions which have not been asked and it is always tempting to just say to a Newbie to go search the forum but having been a Newbie myself not that long ago (maybe I still am...) it was always better to get direct help rather than try to find and filter out good information from bad. There are older threads which provide information which is simply not in line with currect thinking and techniques and this can be very bad for any newbies who come across it.

I'd like to see a facility on this website for us to create "maintained" articles detailing current techniques where newbies can go for a databurst before starting anything. A bit like an FAQ but more detailed and structured. The documents themselves wouldn't need to be all that complex but they should be a distillation of the most commonly held opinions based upon the best information available and would change over time as new ideas are born. Someone would be assigned as the editor for each topic and would be responsible for filtering out good ideas from bad and would have the final say on what goes in and what doesn't. Obviously our webmaster would govern at a higher level to ensure that nobody goes off on a power trip. Suggestions could be provided to the editor by anyone and potentially added to the distillation if constructive.

Topics that I would suggest as examples would be: Chassis design, Front suspension, Rear suspension; Chassis Protection (paint/powder/galv); Steering; Braking; Drivetrain; Electrics; Bodywork; Interior; Engine (Various - RV8, Ford xflow, etc etc). There are many more that I can think of but you get the idea.

I think it would be important that personal preferences be ruled out of the documents. We should just state the facts and figures and pro's and con's of any choices to keep it balanced. If someone doesn't want to maintain the document any more then it could be passed on to someone else.

What do you guys think?
I'd be happy to handle something like rear suspension or RV8 engine for starters to get the ball rolling. There is so much good (and some bad/outdated) information on this forum that it seems a shame not to "wrap it up" into a more accessible package.

Cheers,
Craig.

sounds good, this has been mentioned before. eg sections for which uprights & balljoints etc, which engine/gearbox combo's, sump mods, steering rack & column mods, what radiator to fit (polo, micro etc) etc etc.

Perhaps we should drop this into anything else / website probs as another thread?

Ned.

OH boy Chris is gonna love you two for that suggestion

we aim to please!!

that said, I'd be quite happy to build the pages if supplied enough access details to templates/server.. & content obviously!

Ned.

If there are interested editors out there I could look into setting up a wiki or somesuch. though I don't have a snazzy locosty domain name like this one.

give me a shout if you need some hosting though, this sounds like a good idea, I'll host it for nowt

Glad you all see it as a good idea, I'm not surprised that it's been mentioned before to be honest.

Let's see what Chris has to say on the matter. I don't know if this is something which can easily be incorporated into the existing website design or not. I'd be happy to help on the technical side as well if required as I am an IT consultant and perhaps more importantly I have website relevant skills. (Not that you'd know it from looking at my site... )

It would be best I think if we could keep it all under the LB forum blanket so hopefully Chris has some aces up his sleeve and can set things up to host some content. At the simplest each editor could just maintain a specially created forum message/thread within a separate "How To" section of the website. Each thread would have a name such as "Rear Suspension Design" and within the thread would be purely messages by the editor detailing all that there is to know about that topic. Only the editor (and webmaster) would be allowed to post to these controlled threads. Thinking about it, isn't there a "moderator" facility available (Chris?) where the editor could just be the moderator of that thread and thus block (or accept) any replies as appropriate.

I dunno. This may be a load of unwanted hassle for Chris but let's wait to hear from him. I'll drop him an email to point him to this thread and see what he says.

Cheers,
Craig.

That is assuming the editor/moderator of that section new what he was talking about and not just pushing his opinions..

Sounds like a fair idea to me.

When somebody builds a section about using a blatently large lump of BMW M30 engine let me know...

Viper,
That's always going to be the BIG killer of such a scheme but I think there are enough of us on here (such as yourself) who will let the said editor know if he/she is talking nonsense and/or not representing the majority correctly.

Perhaps we can vote for a shortlist of candidates for each editor's job? Maybe that's going too far - it's got to be simple and easy to administer or it's not going to have a chance IMHO.

I've emailed Chris by the way so hopefully we'll get his opinions shortly.

Cheers,
Craig.

well i think before this goes any further Chris should be enlightened, i mean it is his site after all.

I've neve rseen two locosts the same,every one has there ideas of how it should be done or how they like it to be.

I think its best left as it is otherwise new builders will never ask a question,i thought that was the idea of the site IMO

Sorry just wouldnt want to dictate to people that this is the choice and thats that,best left as it is i say.

Ah bob, well put, changing the subject slightly, do yo uknow conrods real name, i am meeting him tommorow and i can hardly ask for the conrod kid can i...

I take your point Bob but I still think that there are a lot of bits of information which are essentially common which would benefit from being brought together into one place. I'm not talking about what colour you should paint it or whether it should have carpets or not. I'm talking about having a short document which states the available options for a given topic and the pro's and con's of each in an unbiased manner. I don't think that takes anything away from the forum and people will still ask lots of questions I'm sure!

As I said in a previous email, a "Distillation" of our combined knowledge. I think this sums up my vision quite well.

Anyway, as Viper says it's Chris's site so I'll be happy to accept his decision either way.

Cheers,
Craig.

I THINK THIS IS A REALLY BAD BAD BAD IDEA!!!!!!!!!!


just look at TOL.

its fragmented into lots of different groups, which is why its dying on its feet.

seperating info from this site will only make it weaker.

If you have really interesting details, then put a link to it in your own web site. It doesnt need a spin off.


A 'knowledge base' might work for some people, but for me i wouldnt trust it. There is no interaction or balance, contradicting bad advice or adding extra guidance on the fly.


An exception to this rule is the excellent document on the XJ-S. Search for the author, kirby palm, and you will find it. 400 pages of distilled knowledge, but a poo loada work to undertake!

dont self distruct this list with too much specialisation. These days almost anyone with a PC can write a web site - this one does fine for me.

atb

steve

[Edited on 3/7/03 by stephen_gusterson]

quote:

---

Originally posted by stephen_gusterson

seperating info from this site will only make it weaker.

If you have really interesting details, then put a link to it in your own web site. It doesnt need a spin off.

---

Lists of what gearboxes mate up with what engines and the like...?

Stuff like that will make a very useful source to guide people in their choices. Would have helped me when I was still doing a sane version of a Locost, I know that much.

hi craig

what i was not saying at all well, was if Chris didnt host such a document, and people decided to host them elsewhere, it would detract from the list.

new information comes about due to discussion on here. If people think they can just pick up a document with all they need to know in it, there wont be discussion. As a result of that there will be a lack of info coming in of which to add to the original list.

its the discussion that make the info flow. no discussion, stagnant info and stagnant list.

did that make more sense?

atb

steve

Steve,
Yes I get what you're meaning now but if it was a forum format FAQ/HOWTO and not a "document" per se then it couldn't so easily be removed from the list. I wasn't really meaning that we all create MS Word documents or anything like that.

Obviously we don't want to try to produce another Haynes "How to build...£250" book or a Tiger Avon book because that has been done just about as well as it can be done.

I've seen other forums using "sticky posts" which always stay at the top of each forum folder. Look at www.adslguide.org in the forum section for some examples if you like. Maybe that would be sufficient?

Cheers,
Craig.

at least some kind of "things it's worth knowing" list with useful stuff like "the book wishbone measurements are off" and "have you heard of dedion suspension?" would be appreciated.

I have picked up all kinds of useful info from this site but it's taken a lot of trundling around and a fair bit of wasted effort on the part of other people telling me the same old thing again that they must have told lots of people.

lively discussion does have useful spin-offs though, and maybe while the "community" isn't too huge it's worth keeping any kind of FAQ/tips list fairly concise.

Yeah ok i'm warming to it a bit now,especially difinitive book chassis measurments.(which incidently is why i bought a chassis)

Maybe a leaf is to be taken from the robin hood owners site http://www.rhocar.org.uk/
They have a section called build tipz which is good,we are thinking of applying this on the MK owners site too

quote:

---

Originally posted by craig1410 - Wouldn't it be useful to have a complete list of "book" errors, ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by craig1410 - Wouldn't it be useful to have a complete list of "book" errors, ...

---

Dick,
Yes I saw this errata list before but I think it applies to edition 1 and thus all the page numbers and references are different in edition 2. It also completely misses the issue of FU1 and FU2 and how they are located which is tied in to the issue of castor and top wishbone design/ bracket positioning.

Useful but not complete IMHO.
Cheers,
Craig.

Exactly what i mean.

Yes we should have a list of difinitive chassis measurements,but they have to be for book 1 and 2.

We need this translated into both books,even though i've bought an indy chassis i'm still interested in the pukka book measurements.

forgive my stupidity but aren't McSorleys and others plans the work around to the inaccuracies in the book?

[prepares to get head bitten off]

Ned.

Jim has a selection of plans available for download

including a book chassis without the inaccuracies. but bear in mind they tend not to include the diagonals eg tr1,2

as Jim's approach is 'cut to fit' on these items but the main layout is there and very accurate but use the imperial measurements.
available at
http://www.mcsorley.net/locost/
click on drawings


Tim

[Edited on 10/7/03 by timf]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ned
forgive my stupidity but aren't McSorleys and others plans the work around to the inaccuracies in the book?

[prepares to get head bitten off]

Ned.

---

we could ask nicely to host their material or have an official loco-builders links page!!

.....or am i just creating more silly ideas for people to beat me up about



Ned.