LocostUSA.com

Learning how to build Lotus Seven replicas...together!
It is currently May 14, 2024, 6:19 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 514 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 35  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: July 26, 2012, 5:57 pm 
Offline
The voice of reason
User avatar

Joined: January 10, 2008, 4:47 pm
Posts: 7652
Location: Massachusetts
I also think the Tunderbird based stuff makes sense. MaxLessca and Gonzo went that way so you'll have help on the geometry. The parts are available new from Ford or salvage yards. I will probably also use those parts on Car9 this fall.

Do you have any pictures of the Lincoln rear subframes?

_________________
Marcus Barrow - Car9 an open design community supported sports car for home builders!
SketchUp collection for LocostUSA: "Dream it, Build it, Drive it!"
Car9 Roadster information - models, drawings, resources etc.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 26, 2012, 7:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: January 31, 2012, 12:49 pm
Posts: 1713
Location: Louisville KY
From what I'm reading, the track of the LS and the MN12 are both 60.1".

As I look at the respective assemblies, the MN12 has a traditional double wishbone construction, but man, are those parts sooo massive! And then there is the air suspension, etc. Obviously I'd just love the pumpkin, maybe half shafts, and the knuckles?

With the LS1, the setup almost lends itself to a coilover replacing the OEM shock. However, the twin wishbones are "Trailing" arms, set at something like a 45 degree angle (dang, I am sure I have the terminology wrong?). But the whole assembly is modular, and I was thinking of bolting in the entire thing. Or maybe replacing the carrier w/ a lighter carrier and bolting in the entire thing. Dunno, haven't seen one in person.

Then again, haven't seen a MN12 in person either.

Here are some LS 1 rear end pics:


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
***************
Geek49203 aka
Tim Wohlford
Louisville, KY
Hayes front, S10 +2 rear, Lalo body.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 26, 2012, 10:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: April 26, 2008, 6:06 pm
Posts: 3269
Location: Under the weather. (Seattle)
I came up with the rear track on the LS being 0.6"" wider (60.2 vs 60.8 ) plus it has an extra 21mm wheel offset on each side. So it looks to be pushing ~2.25 wider. I will agree though that the control arms, and possibly the subframe itself, do appear to be at least somewhat better suited for direct bolt-in use in a Locost type car. I would probably prefer not to try using an MN-12 subassembly in its entirety, regardless of whether it used the Thunderbird/Cougar (iron diff, iron lower control arms, coil springs) or Mk. VIII (aluminum diff, aluminum lower control arms, air bags) components.

As far as width goes, if you end up mounting tubular control arms to the frame there is an option for getting the MN-12 narrower without expensive custom axles. Supposedly it's pretty common for the V8 Miata guys use Factory Five Roadster IRS axles, such that it seems they might provide a Locost with track width similar to that of a Miata as well. Since the standard axles that come with the FFR kit are similar in strength to the stock MN-12 axles, they are considered relatively weak and less than desirable by the guys building high output V8's such that they come up for sale from time to time for a rather reasonable price. I'll be able to provide more detailed information on the exact outcome of such madness when I finally start taking my MN-12 rear end apart and fit up my FFR axles.

_________________
-Justin

"Orville Wright did not have a pilots license." - Gordon MacKenzie


Last edited by Driven5 on September 10, 2012, 1:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 26, 2012, 11:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: November 12, 2008, 6:29 am
Posts: 3567
carguy123 wrote:
Until one day we sawed off the rear of the factory built car and replaced it with a very expensive IRS from the factory 1999 Mustang Cobra R model track car.
I personally see no reason to settle for a live axle,


So you cut of an amateur effort and put on a factory setup and had an improvement .....

The current Mustang with return to live rear axle is the fastest track car in the history of Mustangs and universally loved by all testers ...
http://barrysacks5.com/mustang_liveaxle.htm

Then there's the Group 4 Mk11 Escort ....


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 26, 2012, 11:12 pm 
Offline
Toyotaphobe
User avatar

Joined: April 5, 2008, 2:25 am
Posts: 4829
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
cheapracer wrote:
carguy123 wrote:
Until one day we sawed off the rear of the factory built car and replaced it with a very expensive IRS from the factory 1999 Mustang Cobra R model track car.
I personally see no reason to settle for a live axle,


So you cut of an amateur effort and put on a factory setup and had an improvement .....



No we cut off the FACTORY set up and put on a different factory's set up (Ford's).

There's a ton of difference in the feel of an IRS Cobra vs a live axle Cobra.

I've had 3 and have had friends with at least 5 others so I've had quite a bit of experience with the Cobras in all states of tune, motors and suspensions.

_________________
mobilito ergo sum
I drive therefore I am

I can explain it to you,
but I can't understand it for you.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 27, 2012, 12:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: April 26, 2008, 6:06 pm
Posts: 3269
Location: Under the weather. (Seattle)
I believe the "amateurs" comment was specifically in reference to the Factory Five engineers.

In other words it's just the beginning of a non-productive argument, and would probably be best to just let it go. Another thread could easily be started outside of this personal build log if people really want to have another one of 'those' discussions.

_________________
-Justin

"Orville Wright did not have a pilots license." - Gordon MacKenzie


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 27, 2012, 1:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: November 12, 2008, 6:29 am
Posts: 3567
Driven5 wrote:
contribute positively to the discussion with a rational and balanced discussion with a focus on actually helping the person.


Actually I am counter arguing the suggestion that a live axle is below par and fit an IRS then all will be rosy, I provided evidence - all quite relevant information that is required for choices for these builds.

I would prefer to fit a live axle over IRS for this type of build, I am doing it right now as a matter of fact (just got back from the junkyard having ordered a Toyota Previa axle assembly to be removed) and made that choice over IRS as well as recently choosing DeDion over IRS for the Mongrel GSR and will also be re-engineering that back to the Exo (removing the current IRS along the way).

Otherwise try the ignore function if my posts give you discomfort of sorts.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 27, 2012, 1:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: April 26, 2008, 6:06 pm
Posts: 3269
Location: Under the weather. (Seattle)
geek49203 wrote:
Here are some LS rear end pics:
An interesting thing I came across when researching a little bit on the LS rear suspension was a few pictures where the upper wishbone and ball joint, as shown in your attachments, appeared to be used in converting a strut based front suspension to double wishbone with a bolt-on ball joint adapter...It's probably a little short to use on most Locosts, but also almost makes me want to get my hands on one just to take a closer look at it and any way it might be able to be used for these purposes. Sorry for the tangent, but since you're one of the few people who have considered these suspension components, I thought it might be at least mildly interesting to you as well.

_________________
-Justin

"Orville Wright did not have a pilots license." - Gordon MacKenzie


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 27, 2012, 5:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: November 12, 2008, 6:29 am
Posts: 3567
geek49203 wrote:
- Rear end is still up for grabs (uh, the car's, not mine). I mean, all of those Stalkers can't be wrong... right?
On the other hand... that solid axle design would save me some money and would probably be a bit simpler to build.


horizenjob wrote:
I think it is influenced by the lack of lightweight solid rear axles available to us. At least the common ones from USA sedans after the Pinto are too heavy.


For mine I have decided on a Toyota Previa axle because it has the strength for a V8, discs with drum park brake, wide 62" track and a 3.7 ratio available from the supercharged version (or fit a 3.7 diff center from a Hi Lux/Surf/4Runner etc.).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 27, 2012, 8:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: January 31, 2012, 12:49 pm
Posts: 1713
Location: Louisville KY
Driven5 wrote:
geek49203 wrote:
Here are some LS rear end pics:
An interesting thing I came across when researching a little bit on the LS rear suspension was a few pictures where the upper wishbone and ball joint, as shown in your attachments, appeared to be used in converting a strut based front suspension to double wishbone with a bolt-on ball joint adapter...It's probably a little short to use on most Locosts, but also almost makes me want to get my hands on one just to take a closer look at it and any way it might be able to be used for these purposes. Sorry for the tangent, but since you're one of the few people who have considered these suspension components, I thought it might be at least mildly interesting to you as well.


Wasn't that in some sort of Mustang show car?

Another thing that occurred to me last night (I often can't sleep at night 'cause my mind is pondering this car) -- the bearings are the same part for the LS as well as the Mark VIII platform. I assume the mounting flanges on the diff are the same as well. I see that the half shafts for the early LS, the later LS, as well as the Mark VIII are different. Could we now have 3 half shafts of varying length to use in fabrication?

If only A-1 CARDONE or one of the other half shaft manufacturers would have a chart w/ measurements....

_________________
***************
Geek49203 aka
Tim Wohlford
Louisville, KY
Hayes front, S10 +2 rear, Lalo body.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 27, 2012, 8:48 am 
Offline
We are Slotus!
User avatar

Joined: October 6, 2009, 9:29 am
Posts: 7651
Location: Tallahassee, FL (The Center of the Known Universe)
Quote:
I assume the mounting flanges on the diff are the same as well.


Yo, G03-
In the Ford 8.8 IRS diff and axle set-up, the ends of the axles are splined and fit into splined "holes" in the sides of the diff. I believe there are different splines on some systems, like maybe :?: the Explorer and the Mustang won't cross over? :?: Not 100% sure on that, but I do know that axles from the T-Bird will fit a diff from a Mustang and vice-versa.

I used the T-Bird uprights and axles. Well, I'm still in the process, but that's the parts I have. In my particular build, the drivetrain is offset to the right of the chassis, and I'm going to have to shorten one axle about an inch. I'll get a machine shop to do that, so as to keep things nice and straight. If I get there before you do, I'll be sure to post pricing for reference. I also used 1-inch tubing to build the control arms, which mount in bushings on the outboard end and heims inboard. Right now, the lowers are an A-arm of sorts (more of an H or a Z shape, actually) and the uppers are a single tube. That might change, or more accurately, I might add a trailing arm to locate the upper and help prevent "twisting" at the upright under torque or braking.

Totally confused now? Good... I'm off to another build log, spreading chaos and good cheer... Tra-La, LaLaLa...
:cheers:
JD Kemp

_________________
JD, father of Quinn, Son of a... Build Log
Quinn the Slotus:Ford 302 Powered, Mallock-Inspired, Tube Frame, Hillclimb Special
"Gonzo and friends: Last night must have been quite a night. Camelot moments, mechanical marvels, Rustoleum launches, flying squirrels, fru-fru tea cuppers, V8 envy, Ensure catch cans -- and it wasn't even a full moon." -- SeattleTom


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 27, 2012, 10:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: January 31, 2012, 12:49 pm
Posts: 1713
Location: Louisville KY
And on the other hand, I can save $300 or more by going with a low-mileage, disc brake'd, LSD rear end out of a S-10. 'Cause that LS rear assembly is going for $450 or so (for the later series, with the 8.8, cause the cheaper earlier ones have the 8" rear that has precious few parts, including LSD options), and you still need to add LSD.

I understand that *some* of the MN12's rear ends have the LSD from the factory, which then takes us back to using the MN12's parts and fabbing up the control arms, etc.

Oh dear...

_________________
***************
Geek49203 aka
Tim Wohlford
Louisville, KY
Hayes front, S10 +2 rear, Lalo body.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 27, 2012, 11:34 am 
Offline
We are Slotus!
User avatar

Joined: October 6, 2009, 9:29 am
Posts: 7651
Location: Tallahassee, FL (The Center of the Known Universe)
Quote:
And on the other hand, I can save $300 or more by going with a low-mileage, disc brake'd, LSD rear end out of a S-10.


Hard to argue with that... Properly set up, that arrangement will do anything you're likely to need it to do. (I offer Stalkers as an example.)

Mustang Cobras with IRS had 8.8 diffs with limited-slip, IIRC. Not sure about the T-Bird/Cougar units. Lincoln? Who knows???

_________________
JD, father of Quinn, Son of a... Build Log
Quinn the Slotus:Ford 302 Powered, Mallock-Inspired, Tube Frame, Hillclimb Special
"Gonzo and friends: Last night must have been quite a night. Camelot moments, mechanical marvels, Rustoleum launches, flying squirrels, fru-fru tea cuppers, V8 envy, Ensure catch cans -- and it wasn't even a full moon." -- SeattleTom


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 27, 2012, 3:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: April 26, 2008, 6:06 pm
Posts: 3269
Location: Under the weather. (Seattle)
geek49203 wrote:
Wasn't that in some sort of Mustang show car?
Yeah, after researching it a little further it was the 1999 FR500 Mustang concept that Ford Racing brought to SEMA that year.


Quote:
Another thing that occurred to me last night (I often can't sleep at night 'cause my mind is pondering this car) -- the bearings are the same part for the LS as well as the Mark VIII platform.
While the part numbers aren't actually the same, 513058 for the MN-12 and 511032 for the LS, the bore on both is 1.6535. However the width of the 513058 is 1.5354 and the width of the 511032 is 1.8110, which could potentially be problematic for playing hub bingo, which could in turn be problematic for playing axle bingo. Unfortunately the only way we'll probably ever know for sure is if somebody goes out and tries all the possible mix-n-match options.


Quote:
I assume the mounting flanges on the diff are the same as well. I see that the half shafts for the early LS, the later LS, as well as the Mark VIII are different. Could we now have 3 half shafts of varying length to use in fabrication?
All MN-12 (7.5" and 8.8" diff) and early Mustang Cobra IRS use the same 28 spline inboard and the same 28 spline outboard, each using a slightly different length. The later 2001+ Mustang Cobra IRS switched to a 31 spline inboard, which I believe is also what the Exploder uses. It would appear that the Lincoln LS also uses a 28 spline inboard and 28 spline outboard, and my intuition says it's the same spline but not necessarily interchangable due to the possible different fittment design for the different hub designs. Again, there is going to be only one way to find out for certain. While there is a little difference in axle length across the various alternatives, I don't recall it being more than ~.5" per side.


Quote:
If only A-1 CARDONE or one of the other half shaft manufacturers would have a chart w/ measurements....
The two best sites I've found for this type of dimensional data on specific parts, depending on what specifically you need, are Autozone and Rock Auto. Amazon also does a pretty good parts interchange list.


geek49203 wrote:
And on the other hand, I can save $300 or more by going with a low-mileage, disc brake'd, LSD rear end out of a S-10.
An affordable, readily available, and well equipped stick axle that's been proven to work pretty well a number of these cars...Not sure how much they weigh, but that doesn't sound like a terrible option at all!


Quote:
'Cause that LS rear assembly is going for $450 or so (for the later series, with the 8.8, cause the cheaper earlier ones have the 8" rear that has precious few parts, including LSD options), and you still need to add LSD.
Keep an eye out on Craigslist for people parting cars out, for whatever vehicle (IRS or not) that you want the rear end out of. Occasionally it pays off. I lucked out and picked up my Mk. VIII complete rear end for $100, and hope to get $50 or so back out of it when I sell the aluminum lower control arms to somebody with a Thunderbird. Of course while I got the aluminum diff case with it, I do need a LSD too. You can find Thunderbirds with the Trac-Lok in their iron 8.8, which probably would have been a nice starting point too, but I'm planning to spend the extra on upgrading to a helical unit eventually anyways. If you plan to go helical, another option would be the the 7.5 thunderbird diff, which while having less parts support than the 8.8, still has the essential bits available, is lighter than the iron 8.8 (similar to the aluminum 8.8 ), has a little less parasitic loss than the 8.8, and is a little narrower than the 8.8 if you're looking to shave the width down any way possible...Shortest axles plus narrowest diff could save an extra incho or so. Of course the Mustang Cobra units with the included LSD and aluminum case are the most difficult to find, and are correspondingly more expensive.

Final 8.8IRS thought: The rear cover on the Exploder 8.8 uses a different, and somewhat improved looking, mounting style to the frame and should be capable of use with the other 8.8's too...Just another little thing to consider if you decided to go that way.


Sorry to ramble on so much about the details of the MN-12 bits...Not trying to specifically push you that way over any other, as all of the options have both pros and cons, but that's just the specific parts that I am most familiar with at the detailed level and I figure at least some of what I've learned about them is relevant to the decision you're trying to make.

_________________
-Justin

"Orville Wright did not have a pilots license." - Gordon MacKenzie


Last edited by Driven5 on August 13, 2012, 4:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: July 29, 2012, 9:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: January 31, 2012, 12:49 pm
Posts: 1713
Location: Louisville KY
We have a small issue here. I have started to think about buying seats.

My girlfriend didn't quite understand how small this car would be, and is skeptical that 2 people can fit in this car. I mentioned that I do have some choice in how wide the seats will be... but I might wanna measure.

Yup, for some reason, that didn't go over well... measuring for seats.

_________________
***************
Geek49203 aka
Tim Wohlford
Louisville, KY
Hayes front, S10 +2 rear, Lalo body.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 514 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 35  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
POWERED_BY