Folding the channels in stainless if that's what you are going to use is not a problem if you have access to a good folder but how do you put the shape into the channel to match the roof profile? When Mark made a batch, I think he might have done it using some special tooling on an Ekhold. I'm interested because I shall be faced with the same problem with the frames for my car.
As the originals did not follow the roof line not sure I have much to worry about - Yes, getting the stainless to take that top curve will be an issue to overcome.
I might take the easy way out and use aluminium window channel from Woolies. People bend it for Locost windscreen frames so putting a gentle curve into it shouldn't be too much of a problem.
I might take the easy way out and use aluminium window channel from Woolies. People bend it for Locost windscreen frames so putting a gentle curve into it shouldn't be too much of a problem.
The issue I found with that, when exploring options on the G21 for frames, is that there is not a huge range of options in section when looking for something that has the correct width inside the channel to take the window and the retaining seal - Locost types just having the 5mm glass bonded in - when you want the glass to move in a channel with seals as well it can get a bit "Chunky"
I might take the easy way out and use aluminium window channel from Woolies. People bend it for Locost windscreen frames so putting a gentle curve into it shouldn't be too much of a problem.
The issue I found with that, when exploring options on the G21 for frames, is that there is not a huge range of options in section when looking for something that has the correct width inside the channel to take the window and the retaining seal - Locost types just having the 5mm glass bonded in - when you want the glass to move in a channel with seals as well it can get a bit "Chunky"
Yes, that's right. I shall be using single piece of Lexan which will have a sliding opening piece similar to rally cars. This will keep the weight to a minimum and avoid the complication of a window winder.
A day on the G15 wishbones today - The third and final set given the works. The full on stage rally mods are not really required for a fast road / hills and sprint car as the idea would be to make them lighter not heavier. Lighter is not really an option as they are not strong enough stock - May have to look out for some alloy drums - alloy shockers and weight saving elsewhere.
That was probably a total of 12 hours work that went into those.
The support blocks and girdle is probably overkill in a road car that is not going to see much sustained high RPM running. They are there to hold it all together when the engine is constantly running around at around 9000.
As you can tell revs are not the thing to keep an eye on
The support blocks and girdle is probably overkill in a road car that is not going to see much sustained high RPM running. They are there to hold it all together when the engine is constantly running around at around 9000.
As you can tell revs are not the thing to keep an eye on
I'm exhausted watching that. Fantastic racing, cleanly fought and great car control.
Is it a rite of passage to get a Ginette logo branded on your ass? Or is that only for those who have 3 or more project cars?
There was a few times when welding that it got to glowing like a branding iron. If I make more I may well put the stem on the right side for branding and scorch some wooden engine support boxes or some such.
When I go and collect the engine I will pick up a few cylinder heads to put on the flow bench. I have never seen any flow figures for the Imp engine so it will be interesting work. For me anyway.
When I go and collect the engine I will pick up a few cylinder heads to put on the flow bench. I have never seen any flow figures for the Imp engine so it will be interesting work. For me anyway.
IIRC Gareth Thomas referenced some cheesman head flow data.
Can't find it at the moment must be on my laptop. Dan
My 998 had a flat alloy plate + centre bearing block "girdle". I discovered that to fit the sump you needed a supply (ex-scrappy!!) of cam retaining studs = long enough to go through the extra plate thickness 😉.
Nice to see a bit of 998 modding... Rather than Clarks BMW 'easy street' trouser browner 🤣
Lovely job
OVIMOR
Knowledge is to know a Tomato is a 'fruit' - Wisdom, on the other hand, is knowing not to put it in a 'fruit salad'!
With the head test work going on in the flowbench thread I figured it would be a good time to complete building the Chesman 998 fast road engine that is destined for road going duties - The Full race engine and close ratio box with the straight cut 3rd and 4th will not be used for going on runs to the coast etc.
This head is a development from Chesman to provide a good fast road engine with good torque as well as decent power - What Chesman did was to leave the intake valve sport std. and only slightly enlarge and clean up the port - with the exhaust the valve is increased to the big valve 1.125 and the port taken out considerably.
Full article on this head type can be found here when fitted to an 875 - I will note one error in that reproduction - The original article (which is also bore out by the photo and its caption)states that they tested 1-1/4 SU's not 1-1/2" - the photo's show 1-1/4 SU's on the CT manifold that was available at the time for those carbs.
We have seen in bench testing that the SU's flow a little more than the equivalent Stromberg - and that's mainly due to the SU having a slightly larger internal bore. Power graph bears this out but they may also be down to the standard CD125 sport manifold as the Imp CD125 is the restriction not the carb or the head.
With my engine its a 998 on Wills rings and an R17 - It will run a Janspeed big bore competition exhaust and CD150's on a fully ported manifold - It should get near to 80BHP with decent torque.
Swapped over the pressed steel front pulley - seen above in a rather fetching shade of "not on my engine mate" Red, for a deep groove alloy pulley - trouble is that the alloy pulleys because of how they are made end up heavier than the steel one ! 600g against 558g for the original - I therefore took steps to address that...
As there was not a before weigh-in I have no idea if I have broken even or not. But as I am not taking any more out of it that will have to do.
- Yes, getting the stainless to take that top curve will be an issue to overcome.
