Jump to content

Jimbonic

OSF Contributor
  • Content Count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Jimbonic last won the day on March 1

Jimbonic had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

11 Good

About Jimbonic

  • Rank
    Old Skool Regular

Profile Information

  • Location
    Surrey

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi Katana, Thanks. Yes, an egg can be strong. But, only when it is whole. What happens when you cut a shell in half...? As you say, you'd need to brace it. I was suggesting bracing at the strut tops, as this would be relatively easy - could use a nice simple bar. I've attached a really (crap) simple drawing to show what I mean (I didn't draw the engine). Of course, I may have missed something - someone please point out the obvious! Anyway, you're right about movement. I'm pretty sure the struts will be fairly vertical, maybe a few degrees off, so there shouldn't be too much horizontal force at the strut tops (hence most cars don't come with a brace as standard...).
  2. I still haven't looked properly at how the forces work, but I don't think strengthening/gussetting the tops of the towers (under the strut top) will really work. Basically, what you've got is a force at the top of the strut that is trying to push inward. That is only restrained by the inner wing. You can see that there are beams running vertically either side of the strut. I guess you could beef these up to try and stop them bending so much. That might take quite a lot of beefing, and you might need to keep the extra beams in the engine bay depending what clearance you have in the wheel arch. The reason a strut brace works is because it ties one strut top to the other and takes the load in buckling. This is why you need the strut brace to be straight. Eccentric forces will increase the risk of buckling. Think about a straw. If you push the ends of a straight straw, it resists quite a lot of pushing. If you bend it slightly and push the ends, it just buckles or folds. Sorry if I'm teaching you or your grandmother to suck eggs.
  3. Surely, it would be easier (from an install and maintenance) point of view to build tower extensions and go over the top. If you use triangulated tower extensions, you should get a good transfer of the forces into a bar between the two tower tops. You're just trying to stop the tops of the struts moving. Of course, that all pre-supposes you've enough clearance to go over the top....
  4. The GT380 was a triple, GT250 was a twin. The Kwacker KHs were insane. I never had one, but by all accounts they took the flexible frame concept to a new level! I can't imagine what a 2-stroke triple 750 must have been like. And, it was hard enough keeping the front wheel down on my X7!
  5. Actually, that plastic is just a cover. Before it wore this disguise, it looked (or should have looked) like this: Which is definitely cool! Anyway, we might be getting a little off topic......... I think I could post pretty much any vehicle from my early 90s collection in this thread!
  6. Yes. Under all that lovely bodywork lurks an X7! They were lethal - loved them! It didn't stay like that. Not sure whether this stays "plain wrong", but it ended up like this (except with exhausts!)....
  7. Wrong isn't restricted to four wheels (have we had bikes on here yet?). I actually owned this.........!
  8. Ed Roth's Druid Princess show car. If you think this is wild you should see his other stuff. OK, I didn't realise this was an Ed Roth creation. His stuff is a bit hit and miss with me. Didn't he create the Mysteron or some such, spaceship-style rod? That was cool. And, his art work was always awesome - just loved his rod rats/monsters. But, I'm afraid, for me, he missed with this one.
  9. Theirs wasn't quite so tasteful! What gets me is the amount of effort (And cash) that goes into these. This stuff was all the rage in the 70s. It was either the drugs or The Munsters - or both! I just noticed that the "T" and the "F" have melted off the hillside in the background........
  10. Here you go :http://mikpicl.pw/Mad-Max-Miata-t.html Someone's done all the hard work for you! With a few exceptions, they're just all wrong!!
  11. Hi eeb, It has 681F6015HA cast into the block
  12. Thanks, Al. I'll have a closer look. I thought I'd seen the ring in there, but it might have just "looked" like it was there, if you know what I mean.
  13. Hi eeb, I listened to what you were saying regarding the engine and thought it would be a good idea to do some more checking. From what I understand, all xflows have the same bore ~81 mm. Is that right? So, I thought I'd check the stroke. Now, I will admit it wasn't the most scientific approach, but it should give something pretty close. I took No 1 plug out, stuck a pencil in the hole and pushed/pulled the car (in gear) to find top and bottom dead centres. Using a ruler across from the top of the head, I marked the pencil in both positions, then measured the distance between them with my calipers. I got a stroke of 64 mm. The 1300 has a stroke of 63 mm, so I'm guessing that's what it actually is. So, my question, particularly given how certain you were, is what the **** have I got? You'll see below that I've had a problem with the exhaust manifold not mating up to the (genuine - from a manual saloon, not an auto) 1300 Mk2 Cortina exhaust. Plus, the carb is not a Mk2 Cortina one - it's a Weber 34 ICH. Plus, the water pump was longer than the new one I've fitted, which is purportedly for a Mk2 'Tina. I'm starting to lose what little remains of my hair! So, any advice or thoughts would be most gratefully received. Thanks, Col. The 1/4" UNCs worked a treat! 😊 What I didn't expect was that the new water pump is shorter than the old one! I may try and make a spacer of some description, but at the moment, four washers on each bolt (between pulley and water pump) gets all the pulleys lined up. Also unexpected was the amount the system leaked when I filled it up with coolant. Without even running it, there was water out of the thermostat housing (well, the join between housing and head) and the radiator core in a couple of places. Looks like the 2nd hand rad was not such a bargain! Thermostat housing is most likely old, mating surfaces. I'll pull it apart and have a look. Having been disappointed with the cooling system, I turned my attention on my nemesis - the exhaust. Last attempt ended in a lot of swearing and nicely bruised finger. This time, I got the car up higher (once I'd worked out why my 2 tonne jack couldn't lift my 850 kg car!) and attacked it with greater vigour - and more kicking! Hurrah! The exhaust is now attached to the car and my loved ones are no longer tripping over it in the hallway. Not so hurrah, it doesn't fit up to the manifold. It's long enough and in the right place. It's just the exhaust seems to be bigger than the manifold connection (see photo). Bum! So, I gave up on that to re-group and think of an alternative plan. It's entirely possible that I have an Escort engine masquerading as a Cortina one (the radiator I took out has the word "Escort" written on masking tape down the side....). Is the 1300 Cortina manifold larger than the corresponding Escort version? Do I have an 1100 head with 1100 manifold? Do I have an 1100 manifold on 1300 head? I can't tell from the manuals I have or interweb searching I've done. Any ideas? There seem to be a lot of knowledgeable sorts on here. I had a couple of hours spare, so I thought I might as well see if I could fit the inertia reel seat belts front and rear. I started at the rear, as that is where my most precious people will be travelling. This actually went remarkably smoothly (once I'd located the bolts holding the seat back in place). OK, I am missing the threaded fittings for the bolts to, erm, bolt into. But, there were holes in the chassis in all the right places. So, a few quid on the right fittings for underneath and Bob's your mother's brother. The fronts didn't go quite so well. I got the inertia reel bits fitted to the B pillars no problem. But trying to get the old bolts out of the transmission tunnel for the clippy inny bits is proving a bit more troublesome. They just won't move. I had a quick look underneath and wonder whether they've been undersealed in place. I've liberally doused them in WD40 from both sides. So, I'll leave them for a bit of a soak and come back to them next weekend - maybe with the bastard bar! All in all a bit of a mixed bag this weekend - same as the weather so there must be something in that. The confusion with the engine (and the gearbox) is my main concern. I'm slightly worried that I could spend 'kin ages and shed loads of cash chasing the problem / incompatibility through the car. I don't have much in the way of spare cash. So, I think I need to have a listen to any info / advice on what I've actually got in there and decide whether it's really worth it.
  14. Probably just looks like it doesn't fit as it has no seals. The top of the boot is a similar amount lower than the tops of the wings. So, looking more and more Mk4.....?!
×
×
  • Create New...