962 recreation with a GT3 Heart...
Discussion
David Hype said:
Clive, this is a really great thread... Do you intend to model each section/piece up in CAD as you design it? So in the end will you end up with a complete model of the finished car? 
Body no, but where I need to get things right the first time before I make them (Suspension Geometry, Effective Swing arm lengths, Camber gain, bump steer, Roll Centers) etc. yes Cad is the way to go. Also If I need to machine anything from Billet It needs to be in Cad first so I can convert it to GCode for my cnc mill.Edited by GTRCLIVE on Saturday 9th August 16:50
Don't need to do both sides like I have here nor do I need to do all the components, just when I have something that needs allot of adjusting to get right maybe..
Here's my car still playing with the turbo positioning etc and a few other things...
Cad is invaluable as far as doing all the accessory drive stuff on my LSX...
Here's my car still playing with the turbo positioning etc and a few other things...
Cad is invaluable as far as doing all the accessory drive stuff on my LSX...
unfortunately for my next little project we had to Sacrifice a whole XK8 Jaguar 
next step how do I put them together.... 
A project of huge substance.
The most fascinating and enlightening time for me in motorsport was as a driver for Ray formula cars. A single seat racing car manufacturer ( Burt Ray RIP ). I had absolutely no conception of the complexity of chassis design. Not only the chassis itself but the suspension design, geometry, damping and springing tuning, thier pick up points on the chassis and how thier resultant loads were spread and absorbed etc.. The positioning of the steering rack and it's relationship with the front suspension geometry to counter bumpsteer. The list is practically endless.
I addition to that, Key to the 962 was it's aero performance and the chassis ability to accommodate the underbody ground effect components.
To produce a car with similar performance to the 962 and to engineer a chassis with a similar balance is a truly massive project.
I wish you the very best of luck with it and am fascinated to see the final result.
The most fascinating and enlightening time for me in motorsport was as a driver for Ray formula cars. A single seat racing car manufacturer ( Burt Ray RIP ). I had absolutely no conception of the complexity of chassis design. Not only the chassis itself but the suspension design, geometry, damping and springing tuning, thier pick up points on the chassis and how thier resultant loads were spread and absorbed etc.. The positioning of the steering rack and it's relationship with the front suspension geometry to counter bumpsteer. The list is practically endless.
I addition to that, Key to the 962 was it's aero performance and the chassis ability to accommodate the underbody ground effect components.
To produce a car with similar performance to the 962 and to engineer a chassis with a similar balance is a truly massive project.
I wish you the very best of luck with it and am fascinated to see the final result.
We had a 962 on the road,your cage looks better than the porsche one,sadly my hero bellof died at spa in one,the front wheel was inside the car,consider as much safety as possible.
Will you be fitting a honey combe ali carbon floor for extra rigidty and crash protection etc.
Good project,careful on the jaguar parts;)
Good luck with it.
Will you be fitting a honey combe ali carbon floor for extra rigidty and crash protection etc.
Good project,careful on the jaguar parts;)
Good luck with it.
GTRCLIVE said:
Yes Spoke to DC for my project so going to order 2 Ecu's at the same time, glad to here another guy using them with good feedback... Did you keep the stock torque sensor on the column or fit DC's sensor ??
I used the stock torque sensor, which means you have to accept a bit of play in the column as the top is not directly connected to the bottom. If you use the DC sensor you can weld up the column and remove the play...Out of interest Clive, what I've read on the 962s and the way they drive is that they were very much a case of "get it round the corner as best you can and then flat out in-between". This would seem at odds to the benefit of a GT3 engine which allows instant adjustability across the rev range, better suited to a car with high cornering speeds.
I love the way the GT3 sounds and can appreciate this would make it more of my kind of car to live with but are there any practical reasons for going GT3 engine rather than 6T?
I love the way the GT3 sounds and can appreciate this would make it more of my kind of car to live with but are there any practical reasons for going GT3 engine rather than 6T?
OlberJ said:
Out of interest Clive, what I've read on the 962s and the way they drive is that they were very much a case of "get it round the corner as best you can and then flat out in-between". This would seem at odds to the benefit of a GT3 engine which allows instant adjustability across the rev range, better suited to a car with high cornering speeds.
I love the way the GT3 sounds and can appreciate this would make it more of my kind of car to live with but are there any practical reasons for going GT3 engine rather than 6T?
Wasnt that the single turbo ones imsa etc? Or single turbo 935s. Thought the twin turbo 962s must of cornered good with all the downforce and ground effects. Some say they stuck to the road like sI love the way the GT3 sounds and can appreciate this would make it more of my kind of car to live with but are there any practical reasons for going GT3 engine rather than 6T?
t tova blanket! Only 850 Kgs with 12" slicks on the front and 15" on the back and 860 Kgs downforce at 200 ish mph ... " get it round the corner ". I think Chris Harris said that, but it seemed a odd comment to me ..... Still holds the Ring record with Mr belloff, oh yes because the ring had no corners ???
Oh well compared to a Audi R15 maybe, but I'm guessing it would wipe the floor with a R8 GT3 ... Compared to an original 962 of course
Oh well compared to a Audi R15 maybe, but I'm guessing it would wipe the floor with a R8 GT3 ... Compared to an original 962 of course
Yellow491 said:
We had a 962 on the road,your cage looks better than the porsche one,sadly my hero bellof died at spa in one,the front wheel was inside the car,consider as much safety as possible.
Will you be fitting a honey combe ali carbon floor for extra rigidty and crash protection etc.
Good project,careful on the jaguar parts;)
Good luck with it.
I know what your saying bud, these kind of cars are never going to be as safe in a crush kind of accident as an Encap5, but with the cage and the fact that there's allot of crush structure around you (Car is 78" wide) Will you be fitting a honey combe ali carbon floor for extra rigidty and crash protection etc.
Good project,careful on the jaguar parts;)
Good luck with it.
lets just say its probably no different to allot of other similar base cars...
Due to its very low ground clearance I have made the decision to not just fit 2mm steel under the seats as In my normal cars. I'm doing it from the front bulkhead to the rear... Yes its going add some weight but it will be only 3" off the ground....
teamHOLDENracing said:
I used the stock torque sensor, which means you have to accept a bit of play in the column as the top is not directly connected to the bottom. If you use the DC sensor you can weld up the column and remove the play...
This is going to be very much a road car so I might keep the std sensor. My car I'm leaning towards making a new shaft for it and using a DC sensor, I suppose really just because I can. Even though DC did say the difference is very small and hardly even worth it even for a race car. Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff