jon_haggerty
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 02:22 PM |
|
|
Mc Sorley design
Is there anything inherently wrong with this? I dont want opinions on this vs de dion! Also would standard locost bodywork go round the back? And
would there be room for a sizeable fuel tank? Any one here actually done it? Jon
|
|
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 02:25 PM |
|
|
Might help if you specified which one! There are three McSorley drawings AFAIK, the corrected book design, a +4" design, and a +4" design
which tapers to a standard sized front (the "442" .
|
|
|
James
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 03:13 PM |
|
|
Jon,
Is there a McSorley IRS? I haven't been on the site recently and too lazy to look now! 
Cheers,
James
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The fight is won or lost far away from witnesses, behind the lines, in the gym and out there on the road, long before I dance under those lights."
- Muhammad Ali
|
|
|
CommanderAce
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 03:17 PM |
|
|
I can't see one, just the corrected book, +4 and +442.
Roads? Where we're going we don't need roads!
|
|
|
kreb
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 03:39 PM |
|
|
No IRS. I've heard that otherwise the plans are pretty spot on.
Plenty of room for fuel in any seven design that I've seen. My problem with it is the safety compromise when you've got a fuel cell scant
inches (cms for you euros ), away from where a rear impact will nail you.
I'm considering the Donkevoort fuel tank design for that reason (dual tanks right behind your bum)
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1966_FiatAbarth_1000SP1.jpg
|
|
|
jon_haggerty
|
| posted on 25/10/05 at 09:15 PM |
|
|
From what i have just looked at they are very similar to the design on the george crushing website. But i did find some Mc Sorley designs for IRS.
Will have to find em.....
|
|
|
scotty g
|
| posted on 26/10/05 at 09:06 AM |
|
|
jon, the standart locost bodywork won't fit the +4 (4 inches wider) or the 442 (4 inches wider, 4 inches longer and 2 inches taller) for obvious
reasons but i know that GTS do bodywork for the +4 as well as someone else, i think maybe MK?
|
|
|
daffy
|
| posted on 18/11/05 at 12:14 PM |
|
|
i know that rorty's dedion design plans are designed to fit straight into the book chassis. i'm guessing that means the corrected book
dimensions (i.e mcsorley plans) right???
Smile..........it makes others worry
|
|
|
James
|
| posted on 18/11/05 at 12:28 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by daffy
i know that rorty's dedion design plans are designed to fit straight into the book chassis. i'm guessing that means the corrected book
dimensions (i.e mcsorley plans) right???
Of course.
But then, the book isn't that wrong! The main structural/shape dimensions are correct. It's just a few other tubes that are out.
Cheers,
James
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The fight is won or lost far away from witnesses, behind the lines, in the gym and out there on the road, long before I dance under those lights."
- Muhammad Ali
|
|
|
daffy
|
| posted on 18/11/05 at 12:45 PM |
|
|
great. thanks for that james.
Smile..........it makes others worry
|
|
|
