sylva mojo any good on a track? or choose something else?
Discussion
I am looking for a kit car that will be used as a daily driver (needs a front window) and will kick ass on the track.....
I am leaning towards the sylva mojo at the moment. What would you all think in this price category?? It has to be made for tall people (2meter) and a rear engine ia a pro (I have already got a civic type r engine).
I know a striker is very good but I don't fit inside...(+it "needs" a different engine) and i figured that a mojo is build by the same guy so?
Does anybody use it on the track on regular basis?
thanks!
I am leaning towards the sylva mojo at the moment. What would you all think in this price category?? It has to be made for tall people (2meter) and a rear engine ia a pro (I have already got a civic type r engine).
I know a striker is very good but I don't fit inside...(+it "needs" a different engine) and i figured that a mojo is build by the same guy so?
Does anybody use it on the track on regular basis?
thanks!
Hi,
I own a Mojo 2 Zetec 2Ltr that I use for both road and track use.
As a track car its light and if you use the honda engine it will be very fast. Handling I have alway found to be exellent. But I am bias and also not the greatest of driver so someone else on here may disagree. If you are looking for a new build the suspension has been revised to have inboard suspension which is suppose to dial out the understeer (although Ive never had a problem with understeer - maybe im just not pushing hard enough
)
For what its worth when ever we've had driving instruction in it on track the instructor has always said how impressed they are with the car- although they may always say that about every car
Im 6ft and find it very comfortable to drive, my Dads 6ft3 and has no problem either.
I live Oxford way, dont know where you are but if you want to come round and have a look/ride your quite welcome to.
Cheers
Andy
I own a Mojo 2 Zetec 2Ltr that I use for both road and track use.
As a track car its light and if you use the honda engine it will be very fast. Handling I have alway found to be exellent. But I am bias and also not the greatest of driver so someone else on here may disagree. If you are looking for a new build the suspension has been revised to have inboard suspension which is suppose to dial out the understeer (although Ive never had a problem with understeer - maybe im just not pushing hard enough
)For what its worth when ever we've had driving instruction in it on track the instructor has always said how impressed they are with the car- although they may always say that about every car
Im 6ft and find it very comfortable to drive, my Dads 6ft3 and has no problem either.
I live Oxford way, dont know where you are but if you want to come round and have a look/ride your quite welcome to.
Cheers
Andy
a couple raced in the 750 mc kit car champs recently and intially seemed to struggle. the problem appeared to be the mid engine in such a short chassis meant it was very tricky to jude the limit. having said that, certainly one of them did seem to get better following development over time.
custardtart said:
a couple raced in the 750 mc kit car champs recently and intially seemed to struggle. the problem appeared to be the mid engine in such a short chassis meant it was very tricky to judge the limit.
Yes, they aren't quite as manageable as track cars as the front engined Striker/Fury generation of cars.Transverse mid-engined arrangements tend to put quite a lot of the weight (engine and upper half of driver's body) quite far back and high up, which doesn't help weight transfer in cornering.
The arrangement gives great traction, balance and steering feel at 7/10ths on public roads, but at 10/10ths on a circuit they tend to be quite edgy by nature.
It's not just the Mojo that suffers this problem; the Elise, GTM and even the old Lancia Stratos have similar characteristics for the same reasons.
I think its just mid-engined cars...my Mk1 AW11 MR2 Supercharged does it to.
Its got quite a few mods so its cornering speeds can be quite silly but this also brings with it the problem that the higher the cars limits the less predictable they become...need to be on the ball with my car when you overstep them to
Its got quite a few mods so its cornering speeds can be quite silly but this also brings with it the problem that the higher the cars limits the less predictable they become...need to be on the ball with my car when you overstep them to
lost my mojo: thanks for the reply and the offer but I live in the netherlands so I Don't think I will have the time soon...
To the rest: Do you all think that it can give a striker some competition? or is it imposible with a rear engined car? Every track car nowadays seems to be rearengined. There must be a reason for this? Cars like the atom are surely not based on a low budget....
To the rest: Do you all think that it can give a striker some competition? or is it imposible with a rear engined car? Every track car nowadays seems to be rearengined. There must be a reason for this? Cars like the atom are surely not based on a low budget....
dnbruut said:
To the rest: Do you all think that it can give a striker some competition? or is it imposible with a rear engined car? Every track car nowadays seems to be rear engined. There must be a reason for this? Cars like the atom are surely not based on a low budget....
You will struggle to find a transverse mid-engined car that will be anything like as predictable at the limits as a front engine, rear wheel drive car.a) Every purpose built race car these days a longitudinal mid engine (or a bike engine in the case of stuff like Radicals, set well forward of the diff and giving very similar weight distribution to a longitudinal installation).
b) At the higher levels of competition, you can count on drivers having the necessary skills and reactions to be able to cope with cars that are very edgy. You don't necessarily want anything that nervous as a track day car.
Cars like the Atom are transverse mid-engined very much for budgetary reasons. The new Noble has just made the move from the M12's transverse engine/gearbox to a longitudinal installation, because the readily available Ford transverse gearbox couldn't take the planned increase in power. The new longitudinal gearbox accounts for a big chunk of the increase in cost that will take the price from TVR/Lotus Exige territory into contention with the Porshe 911.
Sam_68 said:
dnbruut said:
To the rest: Do you all think that it can give a striker some competition? or is it imposible with a rear engined car? Every track car nowadays seems to be rear engined. There must be a reason for this? Cars like the atom are surely not based on a low budget....
You will struggle to find a transverse mid-engined car that will be anything like as predictable at the limits as a front engine, rear wheel drive car.a) Every purpose built race car these days a longitudinal mid engine (or a bike engine in the case of stuff like Radicals, set well forward of the diff and giving very similar weight distribution to a longitudinal installation).
b) At the higher levels of competition, you can count on drivers having the necessary skills and reactions to be able to cope with cars that are very edgy. You don't necessarily want anything that nervous as a track day car.
Cars like the Atom are transverse mid-engined very much for budgetary reasons. The new Noble has just made the move from the M12's transverse engine/gearbox to a longitudinal installation, because the readily available Ford transverse gearbox couldn't take the planned increase in power. The new longitudinal gearbox accounts for a big chunk of the increase in cost that will take the price from TVR/Lotus Exige territory into contention with the Porshe 911.
but very few manufacturers still build these engines, only Porsche, Subaru and the old Alfa and Vw......
fuoriserie said:
....but maybe a mid-engine track day [car] with a boxer engine is a little better at the limit.
Having owned an Alfa Boxer engined Raffo Tipo 12, I can confirm that it did indeed have much more progressive on-the-limit handling than any of the transverse mid-engined cars I've driven.It's a longitudinal installation, again, so despite the fact that the boxer engines are quite short, the weight distribution isn't as rear-biased as a typical transverse mid-engine arrangement. And, of course, the CG of the engine/drivetrain is considerably lower than a typical inline 4.
Sam_68 said:
fuoriserie said:
....but maybe a mid-engine track day [car] with a boxer engine is a little better at the limit.
Having owned an Alfa Boxer engined Raffo Tipo 12, I can confirm that it did indeed have much more progressive on-the-limit handling than any of the transverse mid-engined cars I've driven.Edited by fuoriserie on Wednesday 19th December 14:30
weird how my mojo question turned into an alfa answer...
1 Want it to be pretty fast and 2 Iwant it to be reliable...
Thats 2 good reasons not to go with some old italian piece of (sorry for my opinion)
A longitudele engine setup will to much space that I will need. So it will be a mojo (or simular car) with a civic type-r engine with a nice turbo-charger to make up for the ''slow'' cornering and a helmet for those moments my heavy ass wont corner the way it should.
Do you guys agree with me that weight is more important than weight distribution? Or would you all advice to add weight in front for better balance?
1 Want it to be pretty fast and 2 Iwant it to be reliable...
Thats 2 good reasons not to go with some old italian piece of (sorry for my opinion)
A longitudele engine setup will to much space that I will need. So it will be a mojo (or simular car) with a civic type-r engine with a nice turbo-charger to make up for the ''slow'' cornering and a helmet for those moments my heavy ass wont corner the way it should.
Do you guys agree with me that weight is more important than weight distribution? Or would you all advice to add weight in front for better balance?
Sorry dnbruut! Not suggesting for a minute that you should consider an Alfa Boxer engine, simply trying to explain why you shouldn't expect a Mojo to be the hottest ticket as a track car (though it will still be pretty good in absolute terms). Having said which, John Raffo's personal Tipo 12 is up for sale at the moment (admittedly at a stupid price) and is crying out for a Scooby engine conversion...
Yes, weight is more important than weight distribution, within broad limits. You certainly shouldn't be adding ballast to the nose of the car simply to get it back in trim, but if there are heavy items that can be relocated (ie. battery and fuel tank), then it is worth considering. If you know what you are doing, you can also improve things by playing around with spring rates and adjustable anti-roll bars manage the diagonal weight transfer when cornering.
Have you considered a Lotus Elise? The Honda V-TEC conversion is well established and relatively cheap, if you already have the engine sitting in your garage. They have a slightly longer wheelbase than the Mojo and, of course, have benefitted from rather more development, so the handling has been better tamed.
Yes, weight is more important than weight distribution, within broad limits. You certainly shouldn't be adding ballast to the nose of the car simply to get it back in trim, but if there are heavy items that can be relocated (ie. battery and fuel tank), then it is worth considering. If you know what you are doing, you can also improve things by playing around with spring rates and adjustable anti-roll bars manage the diagonal weight transfer when cornering.
Have you considered a Lotus Elise? The Honda V-TEC conversion is well established and relatively cheap, if you already have the engine sitting in your garage. They have a slightly longer wheelbase than the Mojo and, of course, have benefitted from rather more development, so the handling has been better tamed.
dnbruut said:
and please use the term vtec or ivtec and no v-tec or vtech.... nobody seems to know how to write vtec. even companies that claim to work with these engines daily advertise with the name v-tec in total kit car mag........
I don't understand the point ? what do you mean ? custardtart said:
hmmm fuel tank in the front of a car without much frontal crash protection anyway and likely to be driven on a track(?)! not my idea of fun...
actually, while we're at it, go and look at one, i'm sure they'r great but i really wouldn't fancy an off in one, everything's just so close!
Not claiming to know much about crash protection, but I would of thought frontal protection was reasonably good - its side impact with another car that scares me. Dont most 7type cars have the fuel tank in the back? I can't see that being much better than the Mojo. actually, while we're at it, go and look at one, i'm sure they'r great but i really wouldn't fancy an off in one, everything's just so close!
dnbruut said:
No sorry but an elise is verry high prised in the entherlands+ I want to build myself a car.
Fair enough if you want to build a car yourself. Another alternative you might wish to consider is the Mamba Lotus 23 replica. They have ditched the V-TEC engine in favour of the Ford Duratec as the standard installation, but I'm sure they'd still you a kit for the Honda if you asked nicely. Ituses the engine in a longitudinal installation that gives rather better handling potential, and has much better aerodynamics than the Mojo, too.fuoriserie said:
dnbruut said:
and please use the term vtec or ivtec and no v-tec or vtech.... nobody seems to know how to write vtec. even companies that claim to work with these engines daily advertise with the name v-tec in total kit car mag........
I don't understand the point ? what do you mean ? Crucial stuff, obviously. It knocks at least 30 horsepower off the power output if you out the "-" in.
The "-" is not verry highly prised in the entherlands
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff