richard
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 02:19 PM |
|
|
Another Good SVA Fail
Just back from my first SVA test
( Mitcham ) on our book chassis locost and failed on a few things below. The day started well when he said it looked well built and presented, better
than he saw earlier in the week, but then went a bit down hill from there.
Front indicators a bit too low, read the book and still got it min and max wrong. Suggestet I paint the bottom part of the lense black and will be
okay.
Need longer bolts in the horizontal piece of roll bar that harness bolts to.
Leak from brake master cylinder brake pipe union that could not be stopped, dispite 15 miles shakedow last month with no probelms, it leaked today of
all days
Low brake pressure reading on rear wheel cylinder, that will need replacing which will probably cause the front / rear brake bias ratios to fail and I
will be fittinga manual bias valve as the sirrra one obviously not good enough and / or not set at big enough angle and I am am not prepaired to
remount that and try it again.
Axle weight to low on back needs to be raised by 50 kg and overall one to match.Could have been a lot worse
Overall test took 1 3/4 hrs, might have been a bit helped by the rain, run hand over all radius and no need to use sphere.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 02:36 PM |
|
|
very good, as pass for sure next time. Though I don't get this - 'Axle weight to low on back needs to be raised by 50kg', they are
asking you to add weight!?
|
|
|
Humbug
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 02:50 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
very good, as pass for sure next time. Though I don't get this - 'Axle weight to low on back needs to be raised by 50kg', they are
asking you to add weight!?
Presumably this means Design Weight, not actual weight on the scales?
|
|
|
Johneturbo
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 02:52 PM |
|
|
well done, nothing too serious to worry about. apart from the leaky brakes
curious about that rear axel weight thingy ma jiggy
|
|
|
Johneturbo
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 02:54 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Humbug
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
very good, as pass for sure next time. Though I don't get this - 'Axle weight to low on back needs to be raised by 50kg', they are
asking you to add weight!?
Presumably this means Design Weight, not actual weight on the scales?
is that something to do with the axel weights you put on the sva form?
|
|
|
bob
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 03:03 PM |
|
|
Thats pretty good really, well done.
Who was your examiner ? is it still michael or ian ? I found mitcham to be very user friendly and very helpfull.
|
|
|
richard
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 03:08 PM |
|
|
Hold tight !
The paperwork i got back shows what i put down after much searching on here for the Design Weight axle 1 and 2, I put 500 for number 1 and 400 for
number two and the the design gross weights of 900
The results he got back say it was 424.09 on number axle and 485.91 on number 2 axle and a gross calcultated weight of 910.00.
We did put on a rear roll cage on the car and added thicker metal in the sides by the arches, so maybe she is a bit of a salad dodger.
I as the manufactor I have to submit a headed letter stating what they are and presumably say why i got it wrong the first time ( might have to ring
up about that bit ).Wish it was all that easy, but will not be long , might even risk driving it next time.
|
|
|
richard
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 03:23 PM |
|
|
Did not get this tall chaps name, but reacons he is the only one there that does sva, s. Was very helpful and as you can see made a few helpful
suggestions and answered our questions.
Obviously he has been doing this a while as he can tell if he needs to get his gauges out or not.
I must admit at the start I felt more like an expectant dad wiating for his first to be born.
|
|
|
Schrodinger
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 07:55 PM |
|
|
If the adjustment of the indicators is that small you could try adding a few pound in the tyres of the the retest this should raise them a bit.
But congrats .... nearly there
Keith
Aviemore
|
|
|
PaulBuz
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 08:45 PM |
|
|
Nearly there.
Just been looking through your archive.
A very tidy looking car!
ATB
Paul
|
|
|
richard
|
| posted on 29/3/08 at 04:46 PM |
|
|
Cheers guys, already replaced today, both rear wheel cylinders and the brake pipe union in to the master cylinder, now looking for a decent
proportioning valve. Does it just need to be within the engine bay out of drivers way or capiable of adjustment with tools only or drilled and pinned.
Any one any ideas ?
Richard.
|
|
|
bob
|
| posted on 29/3/08 at 07:37 PM |
|
|
Tall chap looks like a young ian botham ?
If so he's a top bloke and will try his best to help, th eother guy (michael) is pretty good too.
hope it goes well for the retest 
|
|
|
Schrodinger
|
| posted on 29/3/08 at 08:29 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by richard
Cheers guys, already replaced today, both rear wheel cylinders and the brake pipe union in to the master cylinder, now looking for a decent
proportioning valve. Does it just need to be within the engine bay out of drivers way or capiable of adjustment with tools only or drilled and pinned.
Any one any ideas ?
Richard.
It does seem to be one of the areas where there is a little doubt, try ringing the test station and ask them what they will accept.
Keith
Aviemore
|
|
|
.jpg)
