Technical query
Author
Discussion

thewave

Original Poster:

14,858 posts

238 months

Friday 10th August 2007
quotequote all
Not too hot on engine matters, so forgive my lazyness.

If I were to replace the very heavy prop shaft of a 1968 MG with a carbon fibre one (custom) what sort of differences would I expect, and would the differences be worth say £900?

Am I right in thinking, there would be less loss of HP through transmission to the wheels, and therefore acceleration would be improved? Would it be noticeable?

Any thoughts?

Or would a steel balanced crankshaft be more worthwhile for the cost?

Ideas welcome to someone who knows the square root of feck all about engines etc getmecoat

MrKipling43

5,788 posts

245 months

Friday 10th August 2007
quotequote all
My advice would be to spend £900 on race instruction - it'll make a much bigger difference to your lap times.

thewave

Original Poster:

14,858 posts

238 months

Friday 10th August 2007
quotequote all
MrKipling43 said:
My advice would be to spend £900 on race instruction - it'll make a much bigger difference to your lap times.
That's a fair enough comment, but that's already been taken into account biggrin (plenty of track time and tuition coming up )

Was just thinking about what's the most effective single modification that can now be made. Basically, the only thing on the car which hasn't been modified is the crankshaft (although it's been re-ground and polished - it's cast iron, not the much better steel one) and prop shaft, and I was wondering what would be the best option, as both are pretty expensive.



Edited by thewave on Friday 10th August 11:06

kenthardy

143 posts

234 months

Friday 10th August 2007
quotequote all
thewave said:
MrKipling43 said:
My advice would be to spend £900 on race instruction - it'll make a much bigger difference to your lap times.
That's a fair enough comment, but that's already been taken into account biggrin (plenty of track time and tuition coming up )

Was just thinking about what's the most effective single modification that can now be made. Basically, the only thing on the car which hasn't been modified is the crankshaft (although it's been re-ground and polished - it's cast iron, not the much better steel one) and prop shaft, and I was wondering what would be the best option, as both are pretty expensive.



Edited by thewave on Friday 10th August 11:06
If you're a racer this all may be a waste of money as your regulations may prohibit it!

Graham

16,381 posts

313 months

Friday 10th August 2007
quotequote all
MrKipling43 said:
My advice would be to spend £900 on race instruction - it'll make a much bigger difference to your lap times.
yes if your just starting out you'll not even notice the difference in 900 quids worth of carbon, and i strongly expect your regs wouldnt allow it.

If you loking at prepping an MG for racing you could do a lot worse than talk to

DOM at http://www.midlandclassicrestorations.co.uk/

he's also the 2006 MG Midget championship winner, and does a fair bit of work on my Tuscan racer
so what he doesnt know about restoring/ race prepping an MG isnt worth knowing

G

rustybin

1,769 posts

267 months

Friday 10th August 2007
quotequote all
The effect would be much the same as lightening your fly wheel. The engine will rev up quicker with less power going into spinning up the prop shaft. You wont end up with less losses in the transmission at constant revs so top end will remain the same. The main advanatge is a few less pounds of metal to turn, brake etc.

FWDRacer

3,565 posts

253 months

Friday 10th August 2007
quotequote all
Check your race regulations first, but modifying the crank would seem to be the direction. Check out www.shengineering.co.uk.

thewave

Original Poster:

14,858 posts

238 months

Friday 10th August 2007
quotequote all
Thanks for the responses guys, didn't think about regs!! paperbag

mat205125

17,790 posts

242 months

Sunday 12th August 2007
quotequote all
Paint it black so the material is hidden to the scruits ..... but only if you are a cheater smile

GreenV8S

31,014 posts

313 months

Sunday 12th August 2007
quotequote all
Since the diameter is very small I'd expect the change in rotational inertia to be negligeable. Hence the effect of the weight saving will be no different to saving the equivalent weight from any other stationary component. I'm sure there must be far more cost effective ways to save weight.

Scuffers

20,887 posts

303 months

Sunday 12th August 2007
quotequote all
GreenV8S said:
Since the diameter is very small I'd expect the change in rotational inertia to be negligeable. Hence the effect of the weight saving will be no different to saving the equivalent weight from any other stationary component. I'm sure there must be far more cost effective ways to save weight.
What he said...

CF is for people that are looking for ways to spend money.


jpivey

572 posts

247 months

Sunday 12th August 2007
quotequote all
What MG are we talking about MG B C Midget?