Having just been presented with Ron Champions book at xmas, and currently finishing a mini resto. I have decided now is a good time to think about the next project.

I want a hotrod 20's style pickup, having checked out the loco-blades on various websites the idea to combine this with my pickup idea was a no brainer, power to weight ratio' are god.

I'd like to hear from anybody who has modified the basic Ron Champion chassis design.

My thoughts so far have been to make the driving position a bit more upright and move it forward. This makes room for the "load bed". The space required to move the front bulkhaed forward I think could be provided by utilising a bike, or tuned quad bike powerplant.

Those are my thoughts, they revolve around the desire to keep the weight of the vehicle on or around the 600-750kg weight bracket. So, anybody who has experience with building a locost with a bike engine and or modified the Ron Champion designed chassis I need to hear form you.

Regards

Neil

P.S. I've attached a quick sketch of what I'm talking about.
Rescued attachment pickup_sketch.jpg

Hi there Neil,

looks like an interesting project you've got there!

I don't have any experience in modifying the book plans but you could check out the McSorley plans just for a bit of variation.

If you are going to build the car around 700Kilos, then it might be pushing it for an older blade engine (if thats what you were thinking of), but there are plenty of other bike engines out there that will do fine!

all the best, and welcome to the forum!

Steve

No input on the chassis w/o more details, but you may be able to use a front end front a "legends" race car if you build it small enough.
Little BECs with pre-war styling.
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&tab=wi&q=legends%20race%20car

Cheers.

Hi Neil,
There are plenty of bec (bike engined cars) on here to give you all the advice you need, and plenty of people have built Ron based cars with modified chassis.
If i were you i would buy the new book (haynes roadster). It has plans for bec's.

Finding 14" wide seats could be tricky.
Then you have the problem of getting your butt to fit the seat.

I would think this would be a good project to create a middy using the entire eng/trans/suspension under/inside the bed.

Thanks for the feedback, I was unaware of a new book ! That's a bonus. I terms of the bike engine, the 900cc blade would be a minimum spec. Taking a build weight of 750kg the power to weight ratio is around 240bhp/ton.

Which is nice, however the 900 is less than 100lb/ft. I want something torquey, I had a discussion with a locoblade builder in Ulster called. My thoughts then were to go down the quad bike route. But getting one at around 1000+cc isn't easy. Nor is tuning anything smaller.

Right now I'm thinking that the Suzuki 1300cc would be the best, it's torquey and disgustingly powerful.

I'll post more chassis at a later date once I check out the other stuff suggested, I've seen the Legends at knockhill before. By god they're quick !!

Neil

P.S. Is it just me or is it normal to want a car with a power to weight ratio of around 300bhp/ton ?

only a few thoughts on the subject. Blade engines ive heard of on rolling roads tend to produce around 120bhp, hence per tonne is only 150, not 240. Once you add 2 people, you have one over worked engine.

If you can afford the gsxr1300 then all good, however, i cant stress enough how much becs need to be light to feel the benefit. 'Good' becs are as low as 400kgs, 750 is ridiculous IMHO. You would be as well to use a cheap 200bhp car engine.

Imagine the comparison:

You spend 3k fitting a busa, have a 180bhp car that weights 750kgs.

Or you spend a few hundred on a 2 litre turbo or a v8, your choice. Weight would be around 850kgs.

180/0.75ton = 240
200/0.85ton = 235

Ie, nearly the same ratios for a fraction of the price, with an engine that is designed to move large weights.

Add 200kgs of human flesh:

180/0.95 = 190ish
200/1.05 = 198

suddenly the cec is faster.

This is the book you really wanted then. If you want a hot rod, build one on the traditional lines or stick with the Mini. Sticking all that suerstucture on a Locost type chassis is a non starter for aerodynamics, already bad enough. You'll need torque to drag it along not rev the blocks off it all the time.

JoelP, a few words by way of reply.

Testing power output on a rolling road gives you a different reading from the flywheel. 900 blades are good for 160 at the flywheel. If the application of the engine in a "bec" is showing only 120bhp at the wheels I'd be thinking something' right wrong. 25% power loss through the transmission is excessive to say the least. Unless the engine is pumped of course.

Still and all, a car weighing in under a ton with 120bhp at the wheels is still going to be mighty quick my friend.

750kg is my maximum weight, and even at that, around 160ish at the flywheel will provide near enough 240 per ton. a 1999 model hayabusa chucks out 175 and I can get one of them for a lot less than 3k.

I can get a low mileage 900cc blade for £700 from a local scrappie, mildly twatted yes, but engine' still good.

Peteff, there's not actually a lot of superstructure being added to the basic design. The back end may look substantial but believe me an aluminium tub with some decorative wooden framing will weigh next to bugger all. And the Studebaker-esque screen I'd say is likely to be a bit more aerodynamic than the standard flat screen.

Cheers for the input guys, that book could be interesting from a styling point of view. But I think my bank manager would have kittens over me driving something that does 12mpg, and tuning the bike engines is a bit cheaper and whole lot easier to do by yourself, so I'll stick to the "bec" idea.

What do you think a Hayabusa or Blade engine is going to do in what you are proposing? I think you are in for a rude awakening

[Edited on 5/6/07 by Peteff]

Peteff, check the figures these guys are quoting.....

http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=68017&page=3

Now, are you honestly trying to say that even the 1300 Suzi engine is going to drink like a 2ltr turbo ford ? or a 4ltr rover v8 ?

Come on pal, be realistic.

[Edited on 5/6/07 by Daon151dh]

We'll see when you've built it eh? If you think you are going to be in the twenties all the time you are sadly deluded unless you drive like a trilby. I'll be happy to see it on the road but I'm having difficulty getting my head round the concept

[Edited on 5/6/07 by Peteff]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Daon151dh
Testing power output on a rolling road gives you a different reading from the flywheel. 900 blades are good for 160 at the flywheel. If the application of the engine in a "bec" is showing only 120bhp at the wheels I'd be thinking something' right wrong. 25% power loss through the transmission is excessive to say the least. Unless the engine is pumped of course.

---

quote:

---

Still and all, a car weighing in under a ton with 120bhp at the wheels is still going to be mighty quick my friend.

---

With a weight of 750kg we start to get into the HP against Torque arguement. With 120ish hp at the wheels, 750 kg plus two people, your bike engine is always in the higher rev range in order to shift the weight. This is before you ask it to accelerate. Your fuel consumption will be more for the same reason.
If you could shave 100+ kg off the weight - well you are into a different ball game!!

good luck - I'm not going to slate you for having a go but some of these guys really do know what they are talking about.

regards

Steve

gottabedone, my error I suppose... the 2003 model 900cc blades I've looked at in scrappies are actually only 151bhp... still rather tasty mind you. And I bet I could easily find another 10% without trying to hard.

In all honesty I can't see my weight getting to be 750kg, most of the build weights I've seen so far have hovered around 500kg. And I'm not adding too much extra bodywork

As for fuel economy I would expect to see at worst a 25% decrease in economy. Now I just went and had a look at the economy figures for the blade 1000, suzi 1000 and the bmw 1200'. The suzi is the thirstiest at 39mpg average... then it's the blade at 41mpg. Both are chucking out over 160bhp. The best bit is the BMW which has 163bhp and an average mileage of 48mpg.

An economical locost based hotrod that just happens to be right quick is not infeasible. I tell you one other thing that could be a hoot, a replica of something a Bugatti type 35 or one of the pre war alfa's !!

Check this out...
Rescued attachment pb12.jpg

Bet you could build that at around 450-500kg or less

if you built the hotrod pickup with lightweight as a priority, rather than ruggedness, you could achieve a quite low target. If the rear bed is for looks only then simple corrugated ally sheet would suffice. The box frame itself would add little weight.

If this were my project id pick r1 or zx10, and aim for a weight of 550kgs, allowing maybe 50kgs of that for any extra bodywork, and 50kgs max in the frame.

I'd also be tempted to pick a shorter diff than normal to spare clutch wear at the lights - maybe a 3.89 live axle?

Still sounds cool, a sort of retro Chevy Stepside.

[img] http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/photos.php?action=showphoto&photo=stepside.jpg[/img]

You wouldn't have much weight in the rear with the back being mostly for show

regards

Steve

Blx! bloody images mad:- it's in my foty's archive

Steve

Guys,

The back end will be purely for show, I reckon there will be just enough room for the spare wheel, jack etc and a small storage space. And the fuel tank over the axle, just behind the cab bulkhead.

In terms of construction of the back, I was thinking that a box made of marine ply with a skin of thin ally sheet. The load bed will not be open either. As somebody was thinking it is just for show, so there will be a lid made of ply with an ally skin.

The thoughts behind the front screen come from various Chevy, Studebaker et al vehicles. Also, thinking exotic here, the Bugatti Atlantique.

Some smart cookie had a batman moment earlier in this topic.... he suggested a mid engine.

There's a mob down south who do a kit for mini'. essentially it's a frame for a blade or suzi engine. This frame also holds all the suspension pickups and a quaife diff that has a solenoid operated reverse mechanism.

This could be an option, this is their website... it's fecking demented !!!!
http://www.zcars.org.uk/mini/index.htm

£5200 for the full kit, I'll need to see if I could just get the frame, suspension and brakes.

Food for thought.

that is quit an interesting edsign you got here. look great tome
red wheels and white walls would set it up great.

if i can introduced my 2 cents, since you'll have a smaller that the already tight passenger compartment, i think that a mid engine would be better, since it will give you some width you'll probably need.

a bike engine can be fit in the rear or maybe a subaru engine if the shaft output is close to the the front of the engine, would have to check this ( i can get you the measuement, since my friend have an sti in his garage)

the later idea i have may not be the ceapest, but it is great, an harley vtein in the front with a flipped vw beetle in the rear ( or a porsche 914) it even gives you the reverse gear. and take verry little space in the front.

you can search for twin tech to see what drive train i mean

here is there site

http://www.twintechcars.com/

sure, it can be costly, and notso fast.. but certainly diferent