Metal Hippy
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 09:09 PM |
|
|
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...
Cock off or cock on. You choose.
|
|
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 09:34 PM |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
Viper
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 09:37 PM |
|
|
well i think before this goes any further Chris should be enlightened, i mean it is his site after all.
|
|
|
bob
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 09:51 PM |
|
|
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 .
|
|
|
Viper
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 10:03 PM |
|
|
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...
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 10:03 PM |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 10:07 PM |
|
|
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]
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 10:24 PM |
|
|
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.
Steve,
You lost me there mate, I wasn't suggesting a spin off at all, quite the reverse in fact if you read my posts. Most sites have FAQ's and
HOWTO's in my experience which is basically what I'm suggesting. Wouldn't it be useful to have a complete list of "book"
errors, for example, listed here rather than bits and pieces scattered throughout the site?
Anyway, 'nuff said from me.
Cheers,
Craig.
|
|
|
Metal Hippy
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 10:33 PM |
|
|
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.
Cock off or cock on. You choose.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 11:19 PM |
|
|
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
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 3/7/03 at 11:33 PM |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
blueshift
|
| posted on 4/7/03 at 02:17 AM |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
bob
|
| posted on 4/7/03 at 06:20 PM |
|
|
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
|
|
|
Dick Axtell
|
| posted on 7/7/03 at 07:48 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by craig1410 - Wouldn't it be useful to have a complete list of "book" errors, ...
Didn't Darren Ponton already provide this, on TOL? I'm sure its's stashed in a file somewhere. I'll check thru my bins.
Dick
|
|
|
Dick Axtell
|
| posted on 9/7/03 at 02:02 PM |
|
|
Book Corrections
quote:
Originally posted by craig1410 - Wouldn't it be useful to have a complete list of "book" errors, ...
Here's the list referred to in my previous message.
Darren Ponton's errata list:-
Depending on how you build, there are a number of errors in the book, although everything you do should be checked before you cut or weld a tube.
However, I have collected come of the errata pointed out by others on the OneList, and present them here. Please bear in mind that these corrections
may not suit your build too.
Page 41: - Second section of diagram should show K3 and K4 set in 1"
Page 42: - LC 13.25", O3 38", Y 32" plus two 3", k 2 pc 8.5, 2pc 8.25,a and b 25",c and d 24"
Page 47: - Build a simple wooden fixture for this assembly - makes construction easier and more accurate.
Page 51: - W2 shown 3/4-use 1", starting at "now separately tack weld RU1 and RU2 to V------" should indicate that these are to be
welded 3" in from each end of V and with ends angled 10 degrees to get the necessary 4 1/2" rise.
Page 51: - "the next tube to weld is Y (42" -----". Incorrect. It is 32" long to fit between RU1 and RU2 with two pcs.
3" long to join two pcs. 7 1/2" long that make up box ends of assembly.
Page 56: - TR5 and TR6 shown as 3/4"-1" is better
Page 61: - Slight difference in spacing of trailing arms-front is .55" closer together than rear
Page 67: - "Drill two 7/16"(11mm) diameter holes and a semi-circle" - Holes should be 3/8" to suit the bolts through the
bushes.
Page 85: - Panhard Rod shown here will not fit the axle as given - one end must be rotated to suit the angles on the car.
When you get to page 86, mount your engine (pages 113-115) and come back to page 87 after - the build will make sense then.
My thanks to Ken Walton for some of the information on this page.
[Edited on 9/7/03 by Dick Axtell]
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 9/7/03 at 08:05 PM |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
bob
|
| posted on 9/7/03 at 10:45 PM |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 10/7/03 at 08:46 AM |
|
|
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.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
timf
|
| posted on 10/7/03 at 09:07 AM |
|
|
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]
|
|
|
bob
|
| posted on 10/7/03 at 01:42 PM |
|
|
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.
NED
Yes your right there are measurements of the chassis on the web,but not on locostbuilders site which i believe is what people were asking for earlier
in the thread.
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 10/7/03 at 01:47 PM |
|
|
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.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
