4 rotor FC ?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-04-02 | 08:45 PM
  #76  
protlewski's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
From: Lakeland FL
What about a 26B drag rail. light weight maybe about 1400-1600lbs. Put one of the turbos off of the turbonetics celica on it. Yeah we are talking 6's baby maybe even high 5's!!!!
Old 09-04-02 | 10:34 PM
  #77  
peejay's Avatar
Old [Sch|F]ool
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,627
Likes: 463
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
uh, no.

going from 6s to 5s is like going from 17s to 12s... it takes a BIG horsepower jump.
Old 09-05-02 | 09:31 AM
  #78  
Attila the Fun's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
From: Apex, NC, USA
Originally posted by j9fd3s
actually the tr3 idea keeps coming back, maybe it is the way to go. i dont know anyone who makes a kit, nice drivers like mine are still under 10k. probably something like this one http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=1854839138
or worse cause you wouldn't end up with much stock triumph , i was also thinking 13bt, its a small car

mike
The one problem with using a real TR3 (I think) is that the frames were a little "rubbery". Putting a high torque motor in one would require some careful re-engineering and bracing.

The issue of the stock Triumph is worth considering. There aren't that many good, original cars left. I'd hate to reduce that number.

The 13BT would work nicely in the Triumph, since it weighs less than an RX-7 (that's why the frame is so flexible). With substantially less torque, it would require less additional bracing. Depending on engine placement, it might require some ballast, since the 13BT is probably lighter than the original Triumph tractor motor.
Old 09-05-02 | 11:53 AM
  #79  
j9fd3s's Avatar
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 31,168
Likes: 2,812
From: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Originally posted by Attila the Fun
The issue of the stock Triumph is worth considering. There aren't that many good, original cars left. I'd hate to reduce that number.
.
yes, that would be bad, i would prefer to start with a bare body, all i need is the outer sheetmetal anyways.
something less complete would be better. i guess i could take moulds off of mine too

mike
Old 09-05-02 | 01:31 PM
  #80  
peejay's Avatar
Old [Sch|F]ool
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,627
Likes: 463
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
and so the monster grows...

"well the chassis would need to be redone ANYWAY, so might as well just make a tube frame... then all i'd need is a decent body skin. Hell, might as well just make a fiberglass skin"

Went from "engine swap" to "hardcore monster" in three sentences... nice
Old 09-05-02 | 01:48 PM
  #81  
Attila the Fun's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
From: Apex, NC, USA
Originally posted by peejay
and so the monster grows...

"well the chassis would need to be redone ANYWAY, so might as well just make a tube frame... then all i'd need is a decent body skin. Hell, might as well just make a fiberglass skin"

Went from "engine swap" to "hardcore monster" in three sentences... nice
The path to ultimate truth is often short, but rarely easy.
Old 09-05-02 | 03:18 PM
  #82  
j9fd3s's Avatar
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 31,168
Likes: 2,812
From: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
i have one (1958 tr-3a), the stock frame and suspension are barely good enough for stock, let alone triple the power (ok maybe 2.5...)

mike
Old 09-06-02 | 01:28 AM
  #83  
Barwick's Avatar
SCCA Rookie
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,936
Likes: 0
From: Sterling Heights, MI
How about doing something like the new corvettes do? Have a transaxle.

Get rid of the stock oiling system, set up a dry-sump system. Hopefully that'll buy some space with the oil pan, and the engine can be mounted a little lower in the vehicle. Doing this will allow you to mount it farther back (where the transmission USED to be) without cutting the firewall.

Then I suppose it might be possible to use something like, oh.. I dunno how they're setup, but maybe a Porsche transmission? Or heck, maybe even a racing transmission for the Z06, since it's already a transaxle, that should be able to handle torque.

Really there's no reason why custom motor mounts can't be fabricated allow maybe a front-plate mount similar to the first gens, then maybe two side mounts, similar to the drivers side on the TurboII's, and finally a custom rear housing allowing a final (fourth) motor mounting point.

It's a lot of custom work to do sure, but come on, how sweet would that be? It'd need a full tube-frame chassis reinforcement setup to not twist itself into a pretzel, but that's ok, and can be done (anyone actually see the engine bay of a 360 Modena? That's what I'm talking about).
Old 09-06-02 | 07:25 AM
  #84  
turboren's Avatar
Rotary Freak
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,340
Likes: 0
From: Hampton Roads, VA
Both the Porsche and Corvette rear transaxle setup still have the clutch setup at the rear of the engine, so you won't gain much space by doing that. Plus, then you have to have carrier bearings and a torque tube for the driveshaft, which now spins at ENGINE (i.e. higher)speed, instead of tranny output speed.

On top of that, on the 924/944 at least, you have to remove most of the rear subframe and the transaxle to replace the clutch (which tends not to last that long on the turbo cars). Nightmare of a job that is billable for 10 hours minumum.

But, hey, it would be cool!

As for the mounting, if you're basically bolting two engines together, you have four mounting points by default, two per side.

Ren
Old 09-06-02 | 02:30 PM
  #85  
Barwick's Avatar
SCCA Rookie
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,936
Likes: 0
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Originally posted by turboren

On top of that, on the 924/944 at least, you have to remove most of the rear subframe and the transaxle to replace the clutch (which tends not to last that long on the turbo cars). Nightmare of a job that is billable for 10 hours minumum.
hey.. nobody said it would be cheap
Old 09-06-02 | 04:44 PM
  #86  
turboren's Avatar
Rotary Freak
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,340
Likes: 0
From: Hampton Roads, VA
As I said:

But, hey, it would be cool!
Ren
Old 09-06-02 | 05:10 PM
  #87  
Jeff20B's Avatar
Lapping = Fapping
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 15,725
Likes: 83
From: Near Seattle
If you work on it yourself, that is.
Old 09-25-02 | 10:27 PM
  #88  
sbertolone's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
From: Denver, CO
for traction your gonna need a tubbed out backhalved car. and someone said running 6s do you know how insanly fast that is, i know i would not want to go that fast cause only bad things can happen. Pro 5.0 mustangs run low 6s at over 220 mph can you even fathom getting over 220 mph in 6 seconds most cars are barely getting to 60. you know what kind of tires it takes to get traction like that. bigg *** gumball slicks like 33+ and 14+ wide with those if you break traction and start sliding well its not really sliding the sidewall grabs and your car flips 10 times
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jase03
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
26
09-29-15 10:36 AM
stickmantijuana
20B Forum
9
09-22-15 07:39 PM
ZacMan
Build Threads
4
09-19-15 09:20 PM
Ian_D
New Member RX-7 Technical
6
09-06-15 10:38 PM



Quick Reply: 4 rotor FC ?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:33 PM.