richardm6994

this is one of those things where the more i think about it, the more it confuses me!! Sorry if im being thick, but in simplistic terms the load on the wheel bearing is determined by the distance between it's width-centre and the width-centre of the wheel (so how much the wheel is trying to pivot on the bearing). As such, if we fit shallower discs, this brings the calipers forward, and as such the wheel would need to be offset to clear the caliper....thus having the same effect on the bearing as if i was using the deeper discs with a disc spacer.. my rubbish drawing below shows on the left, the spacer set-up and on the right the shallower disc set-up with increased wheel offset.....and on both the distance between the centre of the bearing and centre of the wheel is the same, meaning the pivot force applied to the bearing is the same?

Thanks for the input guys. I'll try and get some new photos of the problem itself in the next day or so.........but to try and describe the problem I'm having with old / googled images; The cast ally hub carrier has the wheel bearing press fitted through the centre With the bearing and drive flange fitted into the hub, when the the discs are fitted, they clash with the hub (red arrow) because they sit over the drive flange the rear of the disc and sit too far back by about 15mm. I can't bring the drive flange forward as too much of it would be out of the bearing and I can't bring the bearing forward as too much would be out of the cast ally hub carrier. I also can't build up the front of the hub carrier to allow the flange and bearing to sit further forward at it would cause problems at the other side of the hub carrier with the splined cv joint then not being long enough to fit into the drive flange. So what I was thinking is with the bearing and drive flange fitted as far foward as possible within the carrier as possible, would be to fit a 15-20mm disc spacer between the drive flange and inside face of the disc. regards the brake carriers etc.....these are all going to be bespoke made to suit wherever the disc ends up.

ideally the disc and wheel has to move forward but the hub has to stay where it is......

On the lotus 23 project, everything so far is having to be made bespoke to the car and the rear hubs / drive train is no different. Just wondering, can anyone think of any issues with a 20mm spacer plate being placed between the outside face of the hub-flange and the inside face of the brake disc in order to push the brake disc (and wheel) out? I don't think it's a problem, but I've not come across it before and wondered if there was a reason why I'm thinking along the lines of machining something similar to PCD adaptor, so the spacer will be bolted to the hub-flange (using the existing studs in the flange) and would have new studs for the wheel... a bit like this...

Engine mounts not a problem.....another bellhousing on the other hand

Kirsty (pending babysitter) and I will be there for def

Yeah, from crank c/l to top of engine it’s about 4 inches shorter so should fit under tub without mods. It’s up to you mate

Christmas has come early for me this year. Treated myself to this new toy (VX220) which Ive always wanted from being a spotty faced teenager. Ive driven her quite a bit this weekend; Pros; Ive love the looks Handles brilliant Cons; Underpowered Bugger to get in and out of. Ive always one of these and Ive been wanting to do a charger project for myself for a while now. After much consideration I decide against charging the exmo - yes it would be great to have a charged v8 but there were too many reasons preventing this (chassis and gearbox being be main ones). So the underpowered engine in my new toy will be sorted out with a charger at some point. There are a few other areas on the car with Ill be bringing up to my standard, but shes in good condition for a 14year old car. As for getting in and out the car, Im just going to have to get used to it and find the nack.

So it’s near the end of the month and time for a bit of an update. The first thing I realise is the zetec / Quaife combination is a lot longer than whatever was intended for this chassis. So mr.angry grinder has visited the chassis, and with the engine as far forward as I dare, I pinned it down so I could then turn my attention to the mounts. Fist up was the gearbox mount. The Quiafe has 2 M8 threaded holes on a mounting flange topside and bottom side of the gearbox. During acceleration or braking, the rear end of the gearbox is going to be trying to lift or drop. So I’ve fabricated a little mounting frame that bolts to the top and bottom mounting flange on the gearbox. Next I’ve fabricated a removable (for ease of getting engine in / out) rear subframe that the gearbox attaches to. With the gearbox mounted, then next was the engine mounts. Good old landrover defender rubbers bolted to the chassis and then box section with flanged at each end for the engine mounts. This bit I’ve left out of this is how many times I measured, adjusted, checked, measured again etc……I did to ensure the engine and gearbox sat central in the chassis, square and true.

Is it a mild steel or stainless version? The stainless is the more susceptible to chassis cracks but a few easy mods can prevent cracks. Mines the mild steel version which I’ve modified it slightly over the years....love it!!

they are great to watch - makes my build threads look v.boring indeed!! those 2 eyeballs painted on your garage wall......you should gradually paint a bit more of the picture before each new episode

definitely getting grumpy(er) in his old age.....

A few of my machines have been converted to single phase by changing the motor. You can pick up cheap 3phase machines and new single phase motors are pretty cheap as well. This is my old drill. 32mm twist drill through 1” steel plate without breaking a sweat (this is where the gearbox comes into its own);

As said above, old is better even if you have to change the motor from 3phase to single. Look for one with a gearbox between the motor and head (normally hi/low range) as the problem with most ‘cheap’ drills is that when you want to drill a decent sized hole, either the motor stalls or the belt slips - the gearbox takes away this problem.

Hopefully someone can correct me if I’m thinking about this all wrong. The half shaft will have 2 cv joints and the angles of both will be equal as the ends of the half shaft need to be parallel. The inner CV will be the plunging type to allow the shaft to grow / shrink with suspension travel. The outer cv will be a fixed type. The outer fixes type cv can operate through 47degrees, which I assume is needed on fwd cars for steering. The inner plunge type cv operates through 26 degrees - presumably because it only has the suspension travel to deal with. As such, my angular limit is the inner CV joint with 26degrees movement. I’ve used 10degrees (horz) by pushing the gearbox froward, so I’ve got to work out what up/down angular movement will be left and make sure it’s enough for the suspension travel. I’ll be doing some more accurate measuring tomorrow but I think it will be fine.

The drive shafts are going to be bespoke made for the car so no specs for those at the mo. Doing a bit of measuring shows the cv joints will be at 10degrees with the gearbox pushed forward.

I think I know the answer to this, but Im going to put the question to RHOCaR massive as you guys always come up trumps. So on the lotus 23, the when the centreline of the gearbox drive shaft flanges is lined up with the centere line of the rear hubs, the gearbox is about 2or3 inches too long to fit under the rear fibreglass tub. So Im pounding on this question; Can I push the gearbox forward a couple of inches? The driveshafts wouldnt line up with the hubs by about 2inch when viewed from above, but does this matter and would the cv joints would take these additional angles on top of the suspension movement? I could then modify the rear gear linkage to give myself another inch and it would then all fit under the rear fibreglass tub? If I cant do this, then the only other thing is to cut and lengthen the tub by a couple of inches which isnt ideal, but doable. Here are some photos and a rubbish sketch;

So I've completed my first ever fabricated bellhousing. 2 thick plates and some slightly thinner plates welded around in a 50pence peice fashion. The main points was clamping everything square whilst welding and then machining after welding to true is all up. Some real deep penetrating welds gone on here (not often I trip the thermal cut out on the welder) and it's all been welded from both sides https://s19.postimg.org/5ap6yo7kj/IMG_2440.jpg https://s19.postimg.org/t86uxm6ab/IMG_2441.jpg

mr2 springs to mind for that budget

Kerry - unfortunately when I told Keith I was picking up petrol for the genys he failed to mention that they are bl00dy diesel genys!!!

3 different beers for this weekend ready to go

Cheers Andy...... I've got a pair of carbon fibre half door to donate

I wonder if their 'other' controller is the one I have? When I was looking at the ewp's at the start of this problem, I noticed that their controllers have been greatly updated (digital displays etc...) since I bought mine 5 years ago.....I was even tempted to buy one just for the bling factor

Venue is happy with the powder as long as it stays outside and non of it ends up inside