Really Mr 2.0 revvy engine with a 6 speed webmaster? Care to elaborate?

 

i rarely get above 5k these days

 

with regards to the weight loss programme, why talk about FRP doors etc and then plan to bolt more plastic parts to the car? Do these splitters etc actually improve the aerodynamic performance of the vehicle (downforce etc) to allow a higher cornering speed - or are they for show?

I appreciate they give the race car 'look' - but are they really functional

Do you have a lightweight battery as part of the plan?

Another Neil

 

the main reason for putting the front splitter on is indeed for aerodynamic purposes, the front end feels very light which i dont like, it felt more composed at higher speeds/cornering when i had a splitter on there before. So thats my reasoning.

I already have a battery that is under half the size of the OEM one, and consequently at least half the weight, so thats ok.

So far on my list is the front bumper beam coming off being replaced with a JDM one (which is less than half the size) and potentially removing the air con, which shoudl save around 30-40 if memory serves me correctly.

 

A front splitter will certainly work. If you want some rudimentary evidence, look out for the footage of the Fensport Celica on the TOTB DVD, dragging it's splitter along the ground!

 

and Marks car was also doing the same.....

so yeah, it has to make a difference

 

my aircon when removed only weighed 12Kg, unless of course the newage stuff is really, really heavy

nice spec list btw

 

I wouldn't remove the aircon if I didn't absolutely have to!

 

I made that mistake 3 years ago because the pump clutch/bearing rumbled, miss it!
(but kept it all safe)

 

never missed mine once!

 

maybe ill rethink then, i was under the impression that the system weighed in at around 35kgs...which is obviously significant....if it isnt anywhere near that, then ill think again

 

that 12Kg was the front rad, compressor, pipework & rad in the car, unless the classic aircon is vastly different to yours...

 

12kg here and 12 kg there - before you know it you'll be saving 24kg

 

Is another idea to go with a fuel cell rather than the standard tank? Should be savings in weight (?) and better location I would have thought.

Also removing all hi-fi wiring etc (assuming you haven't) may save a small amount

Neil

 

I would be more concerned with fuel surge, but Terry knows that anyway.
Best thing about the stock tank/location is it is fully approved and (crash) tested.
A swirl pot in or outside the tank would be good.
Graham

(must stop reading about TA)

 

Terry might, but i dont MY THREAD, MINE!

ill be the first to admit that i know bugger all about swirl pots, where to get them or anything. What i do know is that i wont be changing my fuel tank though. I actually had no problems with fuel surge last year, however i do realise that i will be raising the game a little somewhat this year.

Updates engine wise:

Going rotated, (and yes, on a standard UK box!!) i have what we believe is a GT3540 en route, although it may yet be a full GT40! This is more than overkill for what most parts will take and agree that its not the "ideal" choice, however, once i have gone rotated it makes reverting back down to a smaller turbo far easier IMO.

 

I will be very interested to see this in action in April

 

Cheers, i look forward to "piloting" it

 

being a passenger more like

 

That was what i was getting at Kev yes

hang the f**k on, mind that bend! what bend?, smash.

well, hopefully not.

 

Keep it steady lads!

A swirl pot is little more than a small alloy tank of about 2 liters capacity, fed from the stock tank by the stock/Walbro pump.
There is a high pressure pupm fed from the swirl (usually connected/in the swirl pot) that feeds the engine.
Thus there is always 2 ltres of fuel available in most normal race conditions except upside down...

Graham

 

Paul,
What do you mean by that?!?

Neilo,
Any reason why your going rotated? Is it because of power required?

As I believe it.... up to around 450bhp (with suitable turbo) clocking is not required and the standard position with appropriately spec'd turbo will give much better response.

I have the same dilema, but think I am going to stick with standard mount for now.

 

Shaun, simple really.....opportunity. Wouldnt be doing it otherwise.

 

Furry Muff.

 

and you are correct, if i had the cash for an MD321T i would have one. 450 is perfectly doable in a stock position. Will be interested to see what youve come up with regarding yours this year if your staying stock position (assuming its being changed at all)

 

I have 3 options....

1)Further development work on the 2ltr Twin Scroll
2)New engine, larger capacity standard position
3)New engine, larger capacity rotated position

2 & 3 are going to set me back some serious money, so I need to think long and hard. Unfortunately time is running out and April/May is only around the corner, so I need to start moving.

 

yep, that was my issue too, the time factor, i wanted everything in place by the end of feb so i had a month to get used to it and maybe take it on track for a shakedown. Im still on target to do that hopefully!

 

yup - me too. My shakedown is feb 28th at snetterton

wont be going quite as drastic as you guys... but some subtle mods to give a bit of fun in the TA clubman comp

 

Don't forget the SIDC trackday at Donno on 5th March - ideal preparation for R1 Time Attack

 

i'd ideally like my car done for then but it's cutting it fine