My 205 4X4 Cosworth
Discussion
seabod91 said:
THIS is right up my street. Light weight, silly power, and AWD. Absolutely brilliant.
Glad you like it. I am quite tempted to bung the bigger turbo on as it will be 630hp and 550 ftlb torque which would be mad and up there with some of the hyper cars on power to weight ratio. Even at 470 hp on the last engine it gathered speed in a way that was hard to compute at times….a bit like a big bike on full song.Caddyshack said:
seabod91 said:
THIS is right up my street. Light weight, silly power, and AWD. Absolutely brilliant.
Glad you like it. I am quite tempted to bung the bigger turbo on as it will be 630hp and 550 ftlb torque which would be mad and up there with some of the hyper cars on power to weight ratio. Even at 470 hp on the last engine it gathered speed in a way that was hard to compute at times….a bit like a big bike on full song.seabod91 said:
Caddyshack said:
seabod91 said:
THIS is right up my street. Light weight, silly power, and AWD. Absolutely brilliant.
Glad you like it. I am quite tempted to bung the bigger turbo on as it will be 630hp and 550 ftlb torque which would be mad and up there with some of the hyper cars on power to weight ratio. Even at 470 hp on the last engine it gathered speed in a way that was hard to compute at times….a bit like a big bike on full song.When the car is finished I would love to give it to Harry Metcalf (Harry’s garage) M4SER on here and see what he thinks, he may think it an abomination or may find that the dynamics etc are right. I know Flemke is in touch (Mac F1) so I can make contact that way as Flemke and I share a very close friend.
Caddyshack said:
The only down side I have really found so far is hard to explain. My 2.0 16v 205 had 168 hp and was around 850kilos, it was as fast down a country road as my friends Cayman S and he is a good driver, the car just flowed. This Cassie powered 205 is harder to flow with as you can’t use full throttle for too long as it gathers speed too quickly and with front and rear locking diffs plus the updated viscous coupling it feels more “bound up” on twisty stuff. It is something I will explore when I get all the geometry set up. I guess any turbo car will have some lag to deal with so I will also focus on drivability when we re-map it as opposed to aiming for numbers. I believe these stroker engines produce more torque lower down and spin up the turbo more quickly. The twin scroll turbo is very good. If you Rev the engine and then turn it off you can still hear the turbo spinning for a while after the engine is off.
One, albeit expensive, option would be to compound charge it if you're chasing big HP numbers. It restores the on / off on /off throttle driveability you need down a twisty b road. A few hill climb cars have gone this route...as did the end of Grp B in the S4s.
take-good-care-of-the-forest-dewey said:
Caddyshack said:
The only down side I have really found so far is hard to explain. My 2.0 16v 205 had 168 hp and was around 850kilos, it was as fast down a country road as my friends Cayman S and he is a good driver, the car just flowed. This Cassie powered 205 is harder to flow with as you can’t use full throttle for too long as it gathers speed too quickly and with front and rear locking diffs plus the updated viscous coupling it feels more “bound up” on twisty stuff. It is something I will explore when I get all the geometry set up. I guess any turbo car will have some lag to deal with so I will also focus on drivability when we re-map it as opposed to aiming for numbers. I believe these stroker engines produce more torque lower down and spin up the turbo more quickly. The twin scroll turbo is very good. If you Rev the engine and then turn it off you can still hear the turbo spinning for a while after the engine is off.
One, albeit expensive, option would be to compound charge it if you're chasing big HP numbers. It restores the on / off on /off throttle driveability you need down a twisty b road. A few hill climb cars have gone this route...as did the end of Grp B in the S4s.
Edited by Caddyshack on Saturday 23 April 17:31
I have a lot of welding to do on the car. I have the car on a scissor lift and also a rotisserie (spit) I wanted to reduce the room taken up by the spit so I reduced the length of the legs on one side which gave me more room front and back.
I also want to be able to slide the engine and box out through the front for mock up, I have been adapting the spit at the front so that it has an easily removable section.
I have also added some tube to make the lock off location better.
Below is how it was:
Now it has 2 of these plates each end so I can whip out the centre:
There is a lug at the top to hold the bar in the correct location whilst I do up the 4 bolts each end.
The 4 bolts are all cut off flush now and I welded captive nuts on the rear so you don’t have to mess around with 2 spanners.
This picture is before I actually welded the plates to the square bar.
I also want to be able to slide the engine and box out through the front for mock up, I have been adapting the spit at the front so that it has an easily removable section.
I have also added some tube to make the lock off location better.
Below is how it was:
Now it has 2 of these plates each end so I can whip out the centre:
There is a lug at the top to hold the bar in the correct location whilst I do up the 4 bolts each end.
The 4 bolts are all cut off flush now and I welded captive nuts on the rear so you don’t have to mess around with 2 spanners.
This picture is before I actually welded the plates to the square bar.
Edited by Caddyshack on Saturday 23 April 17:19
The turrets looked very nice but the builder had forgotten to allow room for the remote reservoirs and damping adjustment to go up and down.
I have removed the offending metal and will re-box them in with more room, as you can see below the welding at the bottom had not been completed anyway so I can now sort that and then plate it all up to make it neat.
The whole underside of the shell will be bare metalled at the end and then painted as per the rest of the car.
The bar I am pointing to is too far forward, look how much room is left behind the seat at the base, I cannot fully stretch my legs out in the car even without the pedals in. It’s a shame as the welds on the cage are lovely. I am going to have to move the "harness bar" back and then deal with the uprights…shame to lose them so may have to re-angle them.
Does anyone know if it is better to wrap the harnesses round the bar or fit the drilled and tapped hook eyes? Is there a critical height for the bar? I think the angles of the harnesses need to be right?
rdodger said:
The harness should have a straight route from the bar over your shoulder.The harness bar should be higher to allow this.
Harness bar is definitely way too low. From memory the FIA recommend a maximum of a 15 degree drop from the seat the the harness fixing.Wrapping the harness around the bar is fine
Mikeeb said:
rdodger said:
The harness should have a straight route from the bar over your shoulder.The harness bar should be higher to allow this.
Harness bar is definitely way too low. From memory the FIA recommend a maximum of a 15 degree drop from the seat the the harness fixing.Wrapping the harness around the bar is fine
Caddyshack said:
Mikeeb said:
rdodger said:
The harness should have a straight route from the bar over your shoulder.The harness bar should be higher to allow this.
Harness bar is definitely way too low. From memory the FIA recommend a maximum of a 15 degree drop from the seat the the harness fixing.Wrapping the harness around the bar is fine
Caddyshack said:
Thanks for that. I will have a read up. Such a waste to have to chop it out.
The ‘secret’ is not to have any more than a 45 degree angle - otherwise a crash will break the back of the seat (I’ve seen it) and potentially your back. Eye bolts are fine if you don’t want a harness bar, our (historic) race saloons are mounted horizontally like that, but my modern (non FIA) race saloon has the belts wrapped round a harness bar at around 15 degrees. Preferably as close to horizontal as possible, hence previous poster quoting the FIA 15 degree stipulation. I think you’re being very sensible in this regard. Lovely car by the way.ChevronB19 said:
Caddyshack said:
Thanks for that. I will have a read up. Such a waste to have to chop it out.
The ‘secret’ is not to have any more than a 45 degree angle - otherwise a crash will break the back of the seat (I’ve seen it) and potentially your back. Eye bolts are fine if you don’t want a harness bar, our (historic) race saloons are mounted horizontally like that, but my modern (non FIA) race saloon has the belts wrapped round a harness bar at around 15 degrees. Preferably as close to horizontal as possible, hence previous poster quoting the FIA 15 degree stipulation. I think you’re being very sensible in this regard. Lovely car by the way.Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff