RE: MGB GT V8: You Know You Want To
Discussion
''Not an issue with the car per se, but that top hose was the first thing my eye went to in the engine bay photo. Coloured hoses are not my favourite thing on any car but they definitely don't suit this and it's made from far too many pieces.
But does the owner care what I think? Thought not. laugh''...................Yes. That's the first thing I noticed too. Looks like a yucky bodge. Better to call out a plumber !!
But does the owner care what I think? Thought not. laugh''...................Yes. That's the first thing I noticed too. Looks like a yucky bodge. Better to call out a plumber !!
unpc]Now this is proper MGB V8 except for the over stuffed seats and blingy wheels. [pic] http://www.britishv8.org/MG/DanMasters/DanMasters-... [/pic said:
wibble... that is lovely! The only thing I could draw issue with is the door-card. AWESOMEMC Bodge said:
The suspension and handling of the 1.8 BGT are surprisingly good, especially when lowered to chrome bumper height with associated negative camber.
I don't know what a 200bhp V8 one would be like though
I don't know what a 200bhp V8 one would be like though
Andrews 230 brake 3.9 kit does a fair job. Almost standard 3.9 with a sorted chassis. Blows lots of bigger bros from the European tracks.
daytona365 said:
V8250.....Hi, a gorgeous project, but how do you counter what I'd imagine is pretty substantial body flex with a roadster like this ?
Hi David, I gave this is some thought to before project start. I've done four things to counteract any theoretical additional body flex without installing a full cage. First, I wanted to maximize engine stability ensuring engine 'drive' was retained within the driveline :. have installed a simple adjustable engine stabilizer bar. Next, if you look closely at the under body pics' you'll see two additional support outriggers towards the front of the car; an MGB has a lot of body movement in this area. Following this is the twin roll hoop [it's now powder coated black, not the scary metallic blue!] this provides good lateral rigidity behind the seat area into the mid section of inner and outer chassis rails/sills and importantly, before the rear suspension area. Lastly, the rear suspension/drive area. One of the good technical advantages with the John Hoyle design is that the rear suspension is mounted within a cage. This means it's the cage that retains torque arc movement[transfer] within the suspension geometry/the cage without transferring this directly to the rear chassis suspension mounts and, importantly, the rear chassis rails. It's not unknown for some conversions to have ripped out their rear suspension mounts due to torque transfer and I didn't want this to happen. If one retains a live rear axle one would logically beef up the front rear suspension mounts and add anti-tramp bars. The car will never be a fire breathing dragon of a project just a fast road car; the engine now puts out around 250bhp. There are some very good GT conversions out there with over 300bhp+ but these guys use full cages. The car will have good road manners as there's bucket loads of torque with good clean acceleration and top end when needed. 0-60 circa' 4.3secs and a calculated top speed of 165mph...though I won't be testing the last figure too often!Edited by v8250 on Friday 31st October 10:28
irocfan said:
rogerhudson said:
motco said:
I am entirely sure - it looks like an amateur effort.
That's why the air scoop is on back to front.I do like this but £22k is a bit silly IMO.
jason61c said:
If it had a decent v8 fitted instead of a crappy rover one maybe.
Oh yes, that awful crappy Rover V8 engine, only one of the longest-lived and biggest-produced engines in the history of car production... my P6 with the same engine was mechanically bombproof (well, apart from the time I broke a layshaft on reverse gear... but this MGBGT has the stronger 5-speed LT77 box) and made a lovely noise.YankeePorker said:
Didn't these have a reputation for chassis flex due to the torque of the motor relative to the structural rigidity of the car? It would still be fun, I remember with pleasure driving a tuned B with the four pot, and it could be hung out at will in slower corners!
Vaguely recall hearing the same. I'd imagine a modern Heritage shell will be stronger.RoverP6B said:
YankeePorker said:
Didn't these have a reputation for chassis flex due to the torque of the motor relative to the structural rigidity of the car? It would still be fun, I remember with pleasure driving a tuned B with the four pot, and it could be hung out at will in slower corners!
Vaguely recall hearing the same. I'd imagine a modern Heritage shell will be stronger.£22k
That's a good chunk to stick in the gravel/armco/hedge....add obstacle where applicable.
Track day car? With that ride height, I think not. Best stick to the MG Owners day and impress your peers.
And on the subject of leaf spring rear suspension, This set up is known as the Hochkiss drive, it twists the axle, flexing the leaf springs (axle tramp) and subsequentially tightens the line during cornering with the torque reaction of the drive but will run wide when decelerating which can be ok until you have to back off the power mid bend !!!
That's a good chunk to stick in the gravel/armco/hedge....add obstacle where applicable.
Track day car? With that ride height, I think not. Best stick to the MG Owners day and impress your peers.
And on the subject of leaf spring rear suspension, This set up is known as the Hochkiss drive, it twists the axle, flexing the leaf springs (axle tramp) and subsequentially tightens the line during cornering with the torque reaction of the drive but will run wide when decelerating which can be ok until you have to back off the power mid bend !!!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff