jollygreengiant
|
| posted on 29/12/04 at 03:50 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Simon
Buy a Viento and be on the road two years ago!!!!!!!!
Does that mean that come 22nd Jan, I will then be on the road for 2003? 
Beware of the Goldfish in the tulip mines. The ONLY defence against them is smoking peanut butter sandwiches.
|
|
|
|
|
Simon
|
| posted on 29/12/04 at 07:47 PM |
|
|
"Does that mean that come 22nd Jan, I will then be on the road for 2003?"
Pass
I do know that on boxing day it was a year since I first started my engine, and I've been mucking around with bodywork since! Still, hoping to
have it ready for spraying within a couple of weeks, then one or two more minor jobs (plumbing brakes and engine) and finally the 'kin
hazards
I really, really, really want to be ready for the 1st March!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Which would be 2.66 years build approx
ATB
Simon
[Edited on 29/12/04 by Simon]
|
|
|
carnut
|
| posted on 29/12/04 at 10:33 PM |
|
|
Worst thing I did was fit a dodgy plastic fuel tank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Mansfield
|
| posted on 30/12/04 at 07:44 PM |
|
|
After looking at the advice you have kindly offerred +4/De-Dion/2.0 Sierra looks realistic. The devil side of me wonders if a V6 Granada lump would
be too heavy or too awkward or maybe too powerful! My sensible side does not like this idea at all. Or a 3.0 Carlton.
Thank you for all your advice, if there are any other problems you can help me avoid - please dont be shy. Heard a quote once 'wise is a man
who learns from the mistakes of others' or something like that.....
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 30/12/04 at 08:02 PM |
|
|
if you feel that 4 pot sierra power isnt enough (roughly 120 bhp and 500 kgs, so 240bpt), the next step towards more power is to decide if you want
bike power (weight good, sequential box can be annoying, apparently, for everyday use), or a more modern 4 pot, maybe zetec or vauxhall (200bhp on
carb? not sure. either way, around 400bpt depending on money spent). Bigger engines can be used, maybe rover v8 for instance, or a turbo'd
engine, but the use of old ford v6s is rarer, due to the fact that they arent actually that powerful, and weigh craploads.
me, id choose a bike engine next, but i can also see where people are coming from when they say they want a proper engine with proper torque.
personal choice, dont ya just love it!
a new r1 is 175bhp apparently, and a good 50kgs lighter than a similar power car engine.
[Edited on 30/12/04 by JoelP]
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 30/12/04 at 08:14 PM |
|
|
wots all this Talk about Torque, i don't recall having to go up n down box to keep a car with a bike engine in it moving and even if you did
gear changes are effortless anyhow.
£ for £ its gota be bike engine every time, yup i'm biased i know. The V6 ford mentioned above would never get near a bike engined (zero torque)
car, it might be able to pull tree stumps up but keep up with a BEC, never.
|
|
|
billy
|
| posted on 30/12/04 at 10:07 PM |
|
|
well i think what i would do differant is not build my own kit, and go straight to caterham and buy one of there cars, a real
seven...........lol........sorry i must of been hanging out on blat chat to long, sorry if i swore
luego-lo-cost finished,vauxhall 16v 2.0,twin 45s de-dion rear set up
|
|
|
