| Home  Blogs Help Search Login Register  
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 12 Print
Author Topic: Bagheera Roll Cage wanted  (Read 67581 times)
JL
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 234



« Reply #75 on: July 21, 2009, 02:01:52 pm »

Andy
Practical classics are running an article on how to fit a blower onto an A series engine, whilst not directly applicable the technology will be similar. The first part of the article has been dealing with checking over the engine they real nitty gritty starts next month.
Regards
John
Logged
andyowl
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 456


New exhaust "straight through" - good sound!


« Reply #76 on: July 22, 2009, 07:02:10 pm »

I'm starting to work on the Supercharger project for our Baggy Joe. After an exchange of emails with Lennart I am going to start an additional thread for supercharger discussions. Murena 1.6 owners, not to mention Simca enthusiasts who have supercharger experience, may also be interested in this topic and the extra "Subject" may make it easier for others to find and contribute to the development.

I suggest we keep this "...roll cage wanted..." thread for suspension and non-engine tuning e.g. lowering, stiffening, adjusting and tyres etc.

I'll load some supercharger pics onto the new "Subject" shortly.

Andy Owler
Logged

Back in business for fun!
JV
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 124


« Reply #77 on: July 22, 2009, 09:54:23 pm »

Interesting topic, I expect.
Logged

Jan Verdam
andyowl
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 456


New exhaust "straight through" - good sound!


« Reply #78 on: July 28, 2009, 09:37:40 am »

For the moment I have decided to concentrate on improving the suspension. Looking at the professional pictures taken at the Longcross Sprint (a "National B" status event 10 days ago) see... 

http://www.rallygallery.com/2009_SCORPION2.aspx?Page=12

...it is clear that Baggy Joe is rolling far too much. More power is needed but the ability to go round corners quickly is just as important and I think more power should come after going around corners quickly, if I have to set priorities!

Possible changes include:
- Lowered suspension (I have made some progress on the leftside rear, more work needed. Front should be easier)
- Stiffer anti roll bars, front and rear (we already have the 19mm rear ARB)
- stiffer suspension bushes all round (change to Superflex/Proflex Polyurethane bushes)
- adjustable shock absorbers (although I don't think the rolling is caused by poor shock absorbers)
- wider wheels and tyres (I bought 7J x 15" rims from a forum member last week)
- or wheel spacers and the existing wheels and tyres (which already feel superb with good control and powerful braking)

If you have any thoughts or experience on any of the above please let me know. Especially alternative anti roll bar supliers. I have found EPM Ltd in UK who can make "special" ARBs.

Andy
Logged

Back in business for fun!
Spyros
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 323

I'm a real donkey!


WWW
« Reply #79 on: July 28, 2009, 10:47:42 pm »

2 additional things for the suspension.

a) Front antiroll bar still. After June 78, another shape of the end of the torsion bar is adopted and this allowed shorter vertical links (7mm) without interference.
It is possible to reshape the ends andthen play with the lenght of the vertical links. I cannot say what the effect will be, nor if you need shorters or longers links. The lenght is  determined by a piece of tube.

b) Torsion bars.
No need to look at the rear. Your bagheera being a serie 2 has slightly ticker rear torsion bar than the serie 1
But, if the rears are Bagheera specifics, thefront where shared with other models of Simca.
First, within the Bagheera range, the diameter was higher on the serie 1 ( 17,5 mm versus 17,2)
But if you then expand the range, if I'm not wrong, the suspension is identical to the simca 1100. (not the later 130X models)
Then there were other models
1100 & Rancho had 18 mm diameters torsion bar.
But even better, there was ( hope to find this...) a heavy duty suspension for the 1100, with 20,3 mm diameter torsion bar.

My hypothesis is that the torsion bar has more effect than the shock absorbers.
Logged
andyowl
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 456


New exhaust "straight through" - good sound!


« Reply #80 on: July 29, 2009, 08:11:49 am »

Spyros, thank you for that info! Very helpful.

I have joined the UK Simca Club but have not yet asked for their help! Sounds like a good time to start.

Andy
Logged

Back in business for fun!
JL
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 234



« Reply #81 on: July 29, 2009, 10:01:23 am »

Andy

Rather than obtaining different OE roll bars I would make up an additional adjustable bar, this will be far easier to experiment with.

On the subject of supercharging unless you are dead set on the pain of developing a system you can easily gain sensible power from conventional tuning; one other thing to consider is the strength of the clutch and gearbox. Rear and mid engined cars can be very unforgiving off the line with the weight over the rear wheels giving superior traction.

Regards
John
Logged
andyowl
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 456


New exhaust "straight through" - good sound!


« Reply #82 on: July 29, 2009, 11:27:56 am »

An additional ARB rather than a stronger single ARB is a new idea and a very good one at that! Thanks very much! I'm away to the garage to think!

I am pretty convinced of my ability to make the supercharger work in general although I share your worry about the strength of the clutch, gearbox and final drive. People say that the Bagheera transmission is "bomb-proof" but that is in the context of a 1442 or 1.6litre engine and not one equivalent to 2,200cc. I have spare gearboxes and transmissions so the only way to find out is by letting off a bomb! I also have several spare engines and they might as well get used up in a good cause.

Thanks for your comments.

Andy Owler
Logged

Back in business for fun!
andyowl
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 456


New exhaust "straight through" - good sound!


« Reply #83 on: August 02, 2009, 09:12:09 am »

Suspension changes...
I have changed the links that join the ends of the ARB to the trailing arm to use all metal Rose joints. The hope is that they will eliminate most of the "slop" present in the original setup (about 8mm without trying too hard!). They LOOK good but I have yet to try them on the road. Cost about GBP 45. Parts from RS Components or Demon Tweeks.  Harder plastic ARB bushes to replace the rubber Matra ones have yet to be fitted and I have just fitted better rubber ones for the moment. I wanted to see what difference the Rose Joints made. Pictures below..

Twin ARBs...
I am working on the idea of using two ARBs rather than trying to find a thicker one. Putting two ARBs in the saddle intended for the standard set up will not work as they will rotate and rub against each other. I think I need to have separate mountings for ARB#2. I took pictures of the "two in one saddle" to show you how they look.

Ride height...
I have now lowered the right side a little with more to come after use on the road (hopefully). Although the leftside trailing arm has grease nipples fitted the rightside does not! Bizzare. Photo is from the Series 1 of Greg Dalgleish.

Wheel spacers...
I purchased a set of 25mm wheel spacers (the maximum that the MSA regulations allow) and 80mm x M12 x 1.5 pitch wheel studs. They fitted easily enough and my only concern is the possibility of the tyres rubbing on the bodywork. Time will tell and an angle grinder should cure the problem(s). Pictures...

Now to try the front ride height adjusters...

Andy

Logged

Back in business for fun!
Anders Dinsen
Administrator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2822



WWW
« Reply #84 on: August 02, 2009, 03:18:30 pm »

Interesting photos, Andy.

Rather than two anti roll bars, how about cutting a metal plate with threaded holes in different places, and welding this on the trailing arms? With your adjustable length joints, you will then be able to move the attachment point upper joint on the trailing arm, thereby adjusting the effect of the anti roll bar.

This is just a random idea, and I don't know if it will give you the stiffness you need, but I'm afraid the double arms will be too much... after all, you probably don't need much more grip at the front to cure your bit of understeer.

/Anders
Logged

'82 Murena 2.2 prep 142
'01 Grand Espace 24v
'08 Smart Fortwo 0,8 cdi
andyowl
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 456


New exhaust "straight through" - good sound!


« Reply #85 on: August 02, 2009, 07:45:36 pm »

Anders Dinsen wrote...

....I'm afraid the double arms will be too much... after all, you probably don't need much more grip at the front to cure your bit of understeer....

I'm a beginner here and I have not yet read my new book on suspension design for competition cars. Are you saying that adding stiffness at the back will increase rear grip to the point that we will produce more understeer at the front? Not a good idea!

I have been looking at lowering the front of the car and I have a theory as to why it is so high. I have read that if you take the front suspension apart you must wait until the weight is back on the front wheels before you tighten up the various bolts. I wonder if someone in the past has not done this and the rubber bushes in the upper or lower wishbones are holding the car artificially high?

Lossening off the front bolts might be interesting!

Andy Owler


Logged

Back in business for fun!
Spyros
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 323

I'm a real donkey!


WWW
« Reply #86 on: August 02, 2009, 08:01:45 pm »

You can change the lenght of the links with this rose joint set up.
This should be enough to see the effect. I don't believe you'll need the plate with holes.
Longer links = more effect. Isn't it ?
Logged
andyowl
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 456


New exhaust "straight through" - good sound!


« Reply #87 on: August 02, 2009, 08:12:36 pm »

I don't think the length of the vertical links will affect the stiffness. Surely it is the front to rear side arm length that affect the leverage on the trailing arm and it is this that affects the stiffness?

Ultimately, if the ARB was very very stiff, it would be like having a solid rear axle and we would lose the "independant" rear suspension?

If I could mount ARB#2 forward of the vacuum tube and extend the horizontal side arms backwards to reach the vertical links that would give me some more stiffness but not double the stiffness. Comment??

Andy
Logged

Back in business for fun!
Anders Dinsen
Administrator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2822



WWW
« Reply #88 on: August 02, 2009, 09:57:44 pm »

I'm a beginner here and I have not yet read my new book on suspension design for competition cars. Are you saying that adding stiffness at the back will increase rear grip to the point that we will produce more understeer at the front? Not a good idea!

No, it's the other way 'round. Adding stiffness at the rear roll bar increases grip at the front. But you only want it to a certain point - since stiffening the rear roll bar will transfer load from the rear to the front, you will loose a little grip on the rear. In the extreme case, the unloaded rear wheel will loose contact with the road, which - unless you have a limited slip differential - is a bad thing in a rear wheel drive car.

@Spyros: No longer links won't change anything.

Quote
If I could mount ARB#2 forward of the vacuum tube and extend the horizontal side arms backwards to reach the vertical links that would give me some more stiffness but not double the stiffness. Comment??

No, since it will still act on the same place on the trailing arm, the effect of the anti roll bar on the wheels will be the same. You have to move the connection point on the trailing arm forward to reduce the effect. . Move it towards the rear, and you'll increase it.

/Anders

Logged

'82 Murena 2.2 prep 142
'01 Grand Espace 24v
'08 Smart Fortwo 0,8 cdi
andyowl
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 456


New exhaust "straight through" - good sound!


« Reply #89 on: August 03, 2009, 08:15:51 am »

What a lot I don't know!

I'm at the University of MatraSport!

Andy
Logged

Back in business for fun!
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 12 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to: