vectorsolid

SCCA A-mod cars look like this, CRAZY, and I like it. Or the look of those awesome open wheeled Pikes peak cars. I am just wondering if anybody has done, or has seen a car like that built out of front wheel drive parts? Just "resemble" these cars shown, built from our beloved little front wheel drive cars for donor parts.

If I made something like this, it's just my personal go-kart with the common sense idea that I already have EVERY spare part for the car, and the build (other than time) will be FREE! And I would take it to a local SCCA event for some cone smashing action at least once.

parameters:
a) Doesn't have to be legal for any class of racing.
b) Doesn't have to work well.
c) Doesn't have to look good or be safe.
d) (just need pics)
e) It's okay for it to be utterly inferior to rwd.
g) I'm running FWD now, enjoy it, have spares.
h) it's okay if it's not as fast as something else I could build "instead". I don't want to build something else instead.
i) I'm not trying to race other cars in a class, only trying to go faster than my other FWD car.

I've got 2 roached out EF's and, well, it's gonna be a long winter... And something about an open wheel car with THAT MUCH WING, gives me crazy ideas... I'm of the opinion that it wouldn't be all that difficult to knock out a frame and hang wings on it. Yes, I've built race cars from scratch before. Before I make this any harder than it needs to be, I thought I'd run it by a few of you folks that may have seen some things. I've got a good base line worked out on how I would do it, but I'm hoping there is somebody else down the same path with a few easier solutions. No sense re-inventing the wheel. I Appreciate all that make the effort.

solo-x

Likely not. The front uprights are unusable in a formula car style chassis, and the engine/trans are much too heavy for their power output to be used in favor of a bike motor/trans or sled motor/cvt. Everything else is equally as pointless. Sure, it could be modified to work possibly, but you might as well start out with a lightweight magnesium or Al upright.

Stinkycheezmonky

Additionally, I'm not sure why you'd need that much rear wing if you're trying to put power down on the front end of the car. You can keep the rear in check with WAY less than that.

The better option would be to use the engine you have in the rear of a chassis. It would still suck, because as Nate said the power:weight ratio is terrible, but whatever. You were a little unclear about it in the first post, so maybe that's what you meant anyway. If so, see what this guy did: http://www.kimini.com/ He used to be on here, but I haven't seen him in years. To my knowledge, he moved on to smaller and better things.

Edit: Looks like he just sold it in the last week. Interesting.

vectorsolid

It's possible that the idea is pointless to everybody but the dreamer behind the project. I intend to simply "do it", and if it works at all I'll be quite pleased, and it will "work". Work and win, are not the same thing, and I know that.

Probably don't need the wing. It's the coolest part of the build (to me), gotta have it.


Probably not by the time I "over" wing the front. at which time, I'm going to need some areodynamic grip in the rear. Wings are easy to change. Or at least mine would be.

But then I wouldn't have a front wheel drive car. I know they don't work as good as RWD, but it's what I have, and It'll still be fun!. (see "b" in first post)

120whp in what I'm going to guess is a 1200 pound car with driver would run in the 12's in the 1/4 (10:1 power to weight). It would feel plenty snappy. The Civic I play with the SCCA guys with weighs 1975 and has 152whp (13:1 power to weight), and I have found myself doing surprisingly well with it (to me). I put down 4th fastest RAW time out of 25 cars behind a Lotus Elise last time we played. We've only done the SCCA thing 3 times, but it was a lot of fun (and we're getting more seat time than drag racing). We're just doing local SCCA stuff. No grand illusions here, just to far for us to drive to hit them all (275 miles one way).

By building the frame from scratch and keeping things light and lean, I'll technically end up with a car that has 30% better power to weight, a lower CG, wider track width, more roll center adjustment in the suspension, and about triple the down force. In my minds eye, it has to work better than what I have. And how fun is THAT!!!

It's not about winning, it's about using existing FREE parts to see if I can build a car that's capable of being run faster than what I have, and not because I bought it. I'm a fabricator, I like this kind of thing. I'd rather build than drive in most situations. I know it's hard to believe

Here's what I would most look forward to making, in order. It's about the build for me. just wondering if you've seen anything like it?

(a) the wings
(b) the header
(c) the chassis
(d) rear suspension

Stinkycheezmonky

I only know of one "real" racecar that was FWD, and it was back in the...70's? And sucked. A lot. I certainly have never seen anything here that would be like that. I think Scott (the Coyote) posted it here a long time ago. The reason you won't find many (if any) examples or development is because FWD has serious limitations based on physics. You can make a FWD car fast, but you can always make a RWD one faster. Especially when design is completely open, like in A-mod. No reason to limit your potential from the get-go with an inherently inferior design.

Good luck with it. I really don't see it working out quite the way you're expecting, but I hope you have a good time in the process. If there are any worthwhile Red Green moments I expect to see video posted here

Edit: One constructive thing I will add: I'd plan on a higher weight than what you have there if you're limiting yourself to existing Honda parts. The engine, trans, uprights, etc. are much heavier compared to what you'll see in the cars you posted above. You could maybe just cut the **** out of an EF tub until you get down to the BARE bones, then reinforce it? Your suspension geometry would be at an ok starting point that way.

vectorsolid

Boy howdy, like every time you give it the onion all the weight comes off the drive wheels during acceleration! ... good times.

Well, FREE was a pretty good motivator. I'm just racing myself on this project. Can I make it faster than my other car? Some people are Corvette or Subaru guys. At this point in my life, seems like I'm a front wheel drive guy.

Thanks man, It'll work out. Just got to be faster than my other car, not faster than anybody elses. You know, even if it's NOT faster (technically impossible), I'll have made it myself, and I'll race it with great pride to last place. It's not about winning. I truly feel I can make this faster than my other car, and do it for FREE. that's a cool challenge to me.

Jaker

Kimini sold that Mini a couple years ago. He's currently building his next project: the Midlana. It's a mid-engined version of a Lowcost. His powerplant of choice is a turbocharged K series. It's been on the dyno, and with some wastegate troubles, made a little over 400whp at about 8 lbs of boost.

It's nearly done, and a book will follow.

www.midlana.com

johnjw

^^^ whoa!!^^ YES Please!

btw OP good luck from a fellow MT'n. If it turns out I might have to come see it! But I agree if your fabricating from scratch I think a mid engine rwd with your existing parts would be a better setup. not just because of the end "performance" result but because setting up a front end on such a light vehicle would be difficult. One time we had this 88 crx that was totally rusted through and through. So we started cutting everything off that was not neccesary to drive. We ended up around 1100lbs and it was pretty damn quick. Dangerous though. I got the vid around here somewhere lol.

Ponyboy

That guy was on HT a few years ago. Good guy too.

IMHO, his book should be required reading for anyone modifying their cars.

solo-x

You realize that many of the wings you see on AM cars will make the car drag limited at around 65mph and 300hp, right?

solo-x

And Stinky's point on weight is spot on. You aren't getting that thing down to 1200lbs with an engine and trans combo that around 300lbs. The AM guys are working with engine/trans combo's under 100lbs.

I can understand the desire to do something "different", but at least make it make sense. There are way too many "wow, that's cool. why would you do that on purpose though?" projects out there already. I'm far more interested in the "ooh, that's a neat way to solve that problem!" projects. The only problem this project would solves is "what do I do with all this free time I have on my hands?".

Stinkycheezmonky

Question for you: do you actually want any constructive criticism here, or just pictures/info on other cars? If you're just going to do it how you want one way or the other, I think we can save ourselves a lot of time in discussion.

vectorsolid

You could be right, I might not be able to hit 1200 pounds (I'm still going to try and enjoy the journey). The car I'm AX'ing now weighs 1725 +-. And it's an entire car, all glass, all steel. I think there's a LOT of room for weight reduction. in a bare bones moly tube car. Can it get close to 1200#'s? I really don't know, I haven't done that yet. It will be as light as I can make it though. And that will be fun.

I see your point. I'm simply contemplating making a faster version of my existing FWD race car. and doing the last bit of ground work (this thread) before I finalize which engine I'm going to use. Makes good sense to me, I'm building a faster race car than what I have.

I was just looking for pics, correct. We can discuss as well, it's all good. I appreciate your concern, and understand that I might be making a race car that could be faster if built as RWD instead of FWD. But that's not where my heart is, nor what interests me.

Absolutely, love constructive criticism. I get tons of great ideas on here, and hopefully I provide a few of my own in build and fab threads I post up. If you've got some ideas on how to make a FWD car as successful as it's capable of being, I'd love to read it. Anything you have to make a FWD car better, I'm all ears and eager to learn new things.

When in doubt, just glance at the parameters in the first post.

vectorsolid

They're obscure, found a pic though.

Stinkycheezmonky

I don't think that's FWD Front-engine, yes, but...

As for theory: one important thing with making a FWD vehicle do more than go fast in a straight line is the front-to-rear weight distribution. If you have essentially NO weight in the rear, especially in what will definitely be a very short wheelbase, you're going to have issues keeping it under control. Maybe you can overcome that with the static weight of the enormous wing, I don't know, but its something to keep in mind. That also doesn't address any suspension dynamics which are just as if not more important than the distribution. On a course with turns, you're going to have to consider a whole lot more than just overal power:weight ratio for what will be "fast".

One other big thing to consider with this whole scheme is "where will my feet and the pedals go?" The nose will have to be really long to fit all that engine/trans/axles/engine bracing and still have room for your feet, the pedals and associated gizmos (master cylinders). Not to mention a radiator (although there are ways around this).

night

ya, my first thought was have a FWD with the axles in front of the motor, would help a lot with weight distribution. and dry sump mounted as low as possible. But with Honda stuff not gonna happen. Unless there is some freaky custom thing out there I haven't scene yet.

Egezzy

iTrader: (2)

also halfshafts and tire sizes. as stated that would be a handful to get up the hill. you could probably get the best endo award for sure! lol.

Bertamus

Thats a photoshop of the first photo in the OP's thread....

night

he knows that

CivicSiRacer

That 1st pic isn't that the Dragon that shows up every other year? Maybe I'm thinking of another Amod.

As everyone else have said it can be done but it's not the most practical. As Nate pointed out FWD does have it's limitations whereas RWD is basically limitless. If you are going in a straightline like the guys ventured into back when no one thought FWD could go faster than 10s, then 9s, then 8s. But this is the autocross/track forum and turning FWD versus RWD becomes the handicap. Poor front tires will be toast after all the braking, turning and accelerating.

ddipre11

I can see that vectorsolid has a strong affection for smileys... Photoshop too

I'm highly interested in this build. Really anxious to see what comes out of it! Keep us updated.

vectorsolid

What's Photoshop?

I use smileys to help set tone. It's just light conversation. This thread hasn't gone the way I thought, "Pics", but I'm happy to talk some theory instead.

solo-x

You're mixing your AM cars. The Dragon is an east coast car, bike motor, never runs hill climbs. That looks like maybe the Vancouver Special maybe? Sled motor with a CVT.

Still haven't figured out why nobody has done a turbo charged sled motor with CVT...

vectorsolid

Here's where we start losing people. nobody cares to read book long posts or other peoples theorys. ...lulz... but here we go. This project excites me, and I enjoy talking about it.

That depends on where you are in the corner. Accelerating out, more. Braking going in, less. I suspect that there is an exponential curve where you'd lose rear weight bias as you lose aerodynamic grip under braking. I don't know that I'd call essentially 58/42 "no weight" though. mind you, the beauty of that (to me) is the rear of the car is less stuck and more compliant to turning input the slower you get. Get sideways entering? Give it more gas and it pulls through. It's a fun drive, I enjoy it.

A stock CRX has about a 64/36 weight split. A lot of that has to do with driver location. Simply moving 120 pounds off the front, to the back, creates a 58/42. These are reasonable numbers. I used stock CRX, as that's likely the wheelbase I'm shooting for, around 90-91". I'm not against pushing that to 80" if the driver has room in front of the rear suspension.

We're keeping it relatively under control now. And that's with more weight, higher CG, no aerodynamic advantages and less tire. I'm not sure that's an issue at all. We're already driving, and racing, version 1.0 of this car. Last SCCA event we went to, I put this car 4th out of 25 for FTD. That's a VERY reasonable outcome in a sea of AWD and RWD cars.

Likely car will end up a 2 seater as it's the best way to handle the mechanical shift linkage. no issues with feet and pedals. Radiator goes up front, nice and tidy

Will it be long in the nose? it's not to long now in the stock car. I just measured a few things. It's a 1991 Honda Civic, nothing new there. the front of the valve cover will be about 12" in front of the axle center line. About flush with the front of the tire, and the engine leans forward. The brunt of the mass is probably 6-8" in front of the axle center line. It worked in the Civic that way. and no geometry changes.

I think you guys are overly complicating a "relatively" simple build. I'm not re-inventing the wheel here. and I'm already racing a FWD car. It's that SAME car, same suspension pickup points, track width, etc. Except the plan is to be 500 pounds lighter (from 1700 pounds down to 1200 pounds) on a moly tube chassis with wings on it. It will work "better" than what I have. I cannot conceive of even one reason it won't be faster considering it has the same suspension pickup points. It will be lower, leaner, more agile and with more traction.

Will it be better than what some of you have? probably not. But I'm not trying to beat your car, or build a car for you. I'm just trying to beat my car. and do it with things I have and chassis parts I already own. This build is FREE to me, as I have all the parts.

Here's the existing car I'm trying to beat with this new version. I'm racing this car now. I'm only trying to go faster than this car. Just throwing this cars bits on a new tube chassis with wings. "plug and play" so to speak. This new car ONLY need be superior, in lap times, to the car shown below. Nothing more grand than that.

tazeat

You lost me.