General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > General [M]ayhem > Automotive [M]ayhem
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
SamFarber
 
SamFarber's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex Arcana View Post
Yeah, my bad; but that rear end looks like it bolts straight to stock locating points.

Just throw that in the back and you get 4 wheel drive.
Old 02-19-2013, 07:33 PM SamFarber is offline  
Reply With Quote
#16  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Tex Arcana
I am a mean disrespectful person hiding anonymously and need an attitude adjustment.
 
Tex Arcana's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamFarber View Post
Just throw that in the back and you get 4 wheel drive.

With a bit more work. Iirc, the fiestas have an AWD version.
__________________
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.--V


Men heap together the mistakes of their lives, and create a monster they call destiny.
--John Hobbs


~~~ ~~~ Tea[m] Pyratex ~~~ ~~~
Old 02-19-2013, 07:36 PM Tex Arcana is offline  
Reply With Quote
#17  

mekilljoydammit
[H]Cars refugee and rotary whore at large
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex Arcana View Post
Yes, and it's been massaged; but it's still 1.6L and the stock block and heads, and even trans case.

Well no, not the trans case, those are made entirely by Xtrac or Sadev, and I don't think the heads are exactly stock castings anymore with the new rules; saw a writeup on the Ford engine.

As for everyone suggesting people race stock cars, are you people high? I mean I realize we have to deal with standard keyboard warrior shit from people with no idea what they're talking about these days, but it would suck. It would suck because stuff would putter around at low speeds with drivers not trying to break the cars, everything overheating, and not able to go very fast until they broke anyway because every manufacturer is trying to cut costs and shit isn't built very strongly... or it would suck because one manufacturer would have something that kinda works, and no other car company would bother to make a special run of cars that could compete so they'd just not bother racing at all. I mean shit, Ford dropped out of rally even with the rules as is.
__________________
Everything is a gag...

We thought it must be possible to make an interesting living messing about with racing cars and engines." -Keith Duckworth

Driving: A nice practical sedate car... '03 WRX
Shooting: Canon P, Zorki 6, Nikon D5100, 1911, FAL
Old 02-20-2013, 02:56 AM mekilljoydammit is offline  
Reply With Quote
#18  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex Arcana View Post
Yes, and it's been massaged; but it's still 1.6L and the stock block and heads, and even trans case.

Also, where in the "stock trans case" is the center differential located? Seems to me that in an AWD car, there ought to be 1 or 3 holes for output - 1 to go to the center diff, or 2 to the front wheels and 1 to the rear diff.

Even claiming that these share the same unibody as the stock cars is a stretch.
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-20-2013, 06:47 AM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#19  

Tex Arcana
I am a mean disrespectful person hiding anonymously and need an attitude adjustment.
 
Tex Arcana's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mekilljoydammit View Post
Well no, not the trans case, those are made entirely by Xtrac or Sadev, and I don't think the heads are exactly stock castings anymore with the new rules; saw a writeup on the Ford engine.

As for everyone suggesting people race stock cars, are you people high? I mean I realize we have to deal with standard keyboard warrior shit from people with no idea what they're talking about these days, but it would suck. It would suck because stuff would putter around at low speeds with drivers not trying to break the cars, everything overheating, and not able to go very fast until they broke anyway because every manufacturer is trying to cut costs and shit isn't built very strongly... or it would suck because one manufacturer would have something that kinda works, and no other car company would bother to make a special run of cars that could compete so they'd just not bother racing at all. I mean shit, Ford dropped out of rally even with the rules as is.

where have you been hiding, boudreax? Do you read ANYTHING from here, or are your mad powers of retention compromised by the syphillic holes in your brain.

For the record: STOCK BASED CARS. You know, like they did in the old days (this is the closest to "nostalgia" you'll ever see me get). And in truth, BTCC is a good and popular series, and they use stock cars to makeup the fields, without a bunch of exotic and expensive materials. SCCAs miata series does the same thing, and they have great racing too. And there's a bunch of series within SCCA that are made up of stock vehicles as well, and that racing is pretty good, too.

What I was saying, and have been saying for decades now, is that ASSCAR needs to go back to its roots, and base the cars off their stock versions, with engines, chassis, everything. It can be done, and should be. And we've already seen plenty of series with cars made either for that series or as a result of that series. "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday" still works.

I do stand corrected on the trans/motor, tho.
__________________
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.--V


Men heap together the mistakes of their lives, and create a monster they call destiny.
--John Hobbs


~~~ ~~~ Tea[m] Pyratex ~~~ ~~~
Old 02-20-2013, 10:49 AM Tex Arcana is offline  
Reply With Quote
#20  

Tex Arcana
I am a mean disrespectful person hiding anonymously and need an attitude adjustment.
 
Tex Arcana's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehannum View Post
Also, where in the "stock trans case" is the center differential located? Seems to me that in an AWD car, there ought to be 1 or 3 holes for output - 1 to go to the center diff, or 2 to the front wheels and 1 to the rear diff.

Even claiming that these share the same unibody as the stock cars is a stretch.

Your Highness, did you even watch the fucking video??
__________________
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.--V


Men heap together the mistakes of their lives, and create a monster they call destiny.
--John Hobbs


~~~ ~~~ Tea[m] Pyratex ~~~ ~~~
Old 02-20-2013, 10:49 AM Tex Arcana is offline  
Reply With Quote
#21  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex Arcana View Post
Your Highness, did you even watch the fucking video??

I did watch the video, your lordship. Nowhere in there did they make the claim that the stock transmission "case" was used. That was your particular drivel.
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-20-2013, 11:06 AM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#22  

Tex Arcana
I am a mean disrespectful person hiding anonymously and need an attitude adjustment.
 
Tex Arcana's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehannum View Post
I did watch the video, your lordship. Nowhere in there did they make the claim that the stock transmission "case" was used. That was your particular drivel.

Yes, it was, and I've already corrected myself, Ye Lord of I Didn't Read The Entire Thread. It was your statement about the chassis that I was disputing, Sir CrankyPants
__________________
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.--V


Men heap together the mistakes of their lives, and create a monster they call destiny.
--John Hobbs


~~~ ~~~ Tea[m] Pyratex ~~~ ~~~
Old 02-20-2013, 11:18 AM Tex Arcana is offline  
Reply With Quote
#23  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex Arcana View Post
Yes, it was, and I've already corrected myself, Ye Lord of I Didn't Read The Entire Thread. It was your statement about the chassis that I was disputing, Sir CrankyPants

Oh, you mean to say that the teams don't widen, reinforce, and otherwise change the unibody?

Well, in that case: have you even watched the video?
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-20-2013, 11:43 AM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#24  

mekilljoydammit
[H]Cars refugee and rotary whore at large
 
Can't reply very comprehensively on my phone, but BTCC as an example of stock cars is hilarious. The current rules have far more hacking done to the unibody than WRC does; there's a spec front and rear subframe with a spec suspension, ffs.

Seriously, what do you mean by "stock based"? It seems like the goalposts keep moving around.
__________________
Everything is a gag...

We thought it must be possible to make an interesting living messing about with racing cars and engines." -Keith Duckworth

Driving: A nice practical sedate car... '03 WRX
Shooting: Canon P, Zorki 6, Nikon D5100, 1911, FAL
Old 02-20-2013, 12:14 PM mekilljoydammit is offline  
Reply With Quote
#25  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mekilljoydammit View Post
Seriously, what do you mean by "stock based"? It seems like the goalposts keep moving around.

If Tex were to invent a programming language, it would only have 1 instruction: DWIM (do what I mean).
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-20-2013, 12:49 PM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#26  

mekilljoydammit
[H]Cars refugee and rotary whore at large
 
Okay. Tube chassis based stuff is popular because it's cheap to fix if it gets knocked around and you don't have to fuck with all the cost cutting production based shit. NASCAR is never going to go away from tube chassis stuff for that reason, and because the extent of cage they need to survive impacts on superspeedways would make any unibody in addition to that pretty superfluous.

I was responding to lollersk8s and whatnot with the bitching about idiots suggesting racing bone stock cars. The WRC cars are stock based - even the old ones were pretty much all stock unibody, albeit with a bunch of stuff added and some suspension stuff moved around. BTCC is stock based, or at least the unibody is there in a lot of places, except where it's cut away and the spec front and rear subframes (with pushrod actuated Penske shocks and double wishbones) bolt directly to the cage, which totally isn't practically a tube chassis, nope. Take a look at this and this for some illustrations of a car built to the current rules set; totally stock, amirite?

And you know why the rules have spec subframes that everyone shoehorns into cars by practically turning them into tube chassis cars? (okay yes, the unibody is there, but when the subframes containing the suspension are tied to the cage, let's be realistic about what's happening) Because it's cheaper, and easier to do, and doesn't require the manufacturer making some low production thing so they can win.

Oh, and as a final note, due to FIA fuckery, WRC cars don't have center differentials anymore. Rally cars now have less advanced drivetrains than production cars, yay!
__________________
Everything is a gag...

We thought it must be possible to make an interesting living messing about with racing cars and engines." -Keith Duckworth

Driving: A nice practical sedate car... '03 WRX
Shooting: Canon P, Zorki 6, Nikon D5100, 1911, FAL
Old 02-20-2013, 03:37 PM mekilljoydammit is offline  
Reply With Quote
#27  

Tex Arcana
I am a mean disrespectful person hiding anonymously and need an attitude adjustment.
 
Tex Arcana's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehannum View Post
Oh, you mean to say that the teams don't widen, reinforce, and otherwise change the unibody?

Well, in that case: have you even watched the video?

It depends on the series--Australian Supercars require certain significant changes to the unibody, for instance. And I watched the vid, both in glorious 58" plasma goodness, and in 8" iPad mehness. And tho the cars had roll cages and subframes and such, the actual unibody was not altered from the factory dimensions. in fact, they were taking production line cars to do the job--how stock is that, oh Master and Commander of all things ?
__________________
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.--V


Men heap together the mistakes of their lives, and create a monster they call destiny.
--John Hobbs


~~~ ~~~ Tea[m] Pyratex ~~~ ~~~
Old 02-20-2013, 06:38 PM Tex Arcana is offline  
Reply With Quote
#28  

Tex Arcana
I am a mean disrespectful person hiding anonymously and need an attitude adjustment.
 
Tex Arcana's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mekilljoydammit View Post
Okay. Tube chassis based stuff is popular because it's cheap to fix if it gets knocked around and you don't have to fuck with all the cost cutting production based shit. NASCAR is never going to go away from tube chassis stuff for that reason, and because the extent of cage they need to survive impacts on superspeedways would make any unibody in addition to that pretty superfluous.

I was responding to lollersk8s and whatnot with the bitching about idiots suggesting racing bone stock cars. The WRC cars are stock based - even the old ones were pretty much all stock unibody, albeit with a bunch of stuff added and some suspension stuff moved around. BTCC is stock based, or at least the unibody is there in a lot of places, except where it's cut away and the spec front and rear subframes (with pushrod actuated Penske shocks and double wishbones) bolt directly to the cage, which totally isn't practically a tube chassis, nope. Take a look at this and this for some illustrations of a car built to the current rules set; totally stock, amirite?

And you know why the rules have spec subframes that everyone shoehorns into cars by practically turning them into tube chassis cars? (okay yes, the unibody is there, but when the subframes containing the suspension are tied to the cage, let's be realistic about what's happening) Because it's cheaper, and easier to do, and doesn't require the manufacturer making some low production thing so they can win.

Oh, and as a final note, due to FIA fuckery, WRC cars don't have center differentials anymore. Rally cars now have less advanced drivetrains than production cars, yay!

Good stuffs, thanks.
__________________
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.--V


Men heap together the mistakes of their lives, and create a monster they call destiny.
--John Hobbs


~~~ ~~~ Tea[m] Pyratex ~~~ ~~~
Old 02-20-2013, 06:42 PM Tex Arcana is offline  
Reply With Quote
#29  

lollersk8s
HOLY FUCK I AM RETARDED
 
lollersk8s's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mekilljoydammit View Post
Well no, not the trans case, those are made entirely by Xtrac or Sadev, and I don't think the heads are exactly stock castings anymore with the new rules; saw a writeup on the Ford engine.

As for everyone suggesting people race stock cars, are you people high? I mean I realize we have to deal with standard keyboard warrior shit from people with no idea what they're talking about these days, but it would suck. It would suck because stuff would putter around at low speeds with drivers not trying to break the cars, everything overheating, and not able to go very fast until they broke anyway because every manufacturer is trying to cut costs and shit isn't built very strongly... or it would suck because one manufacturer would have something that kinda works, and no other car company would bother to make a special run of cars that could compete so they'd just not bother racing at all. I mean shit, Ford dropped out of rally even with the rules as is.


They will overheat or break? Well then I guess that team would lose, sweet lord it's not that difficult. Why shouldn't breaking the car be more of a concern during an off-road race? Or any race for that matter? The company that makes the best product and has the best driver wins.

In some capacity or another they had races like this, just rally stuff has become a lot more fancy than was originally intended. And therefore more boring. All the cars are identical purpose built one-offs, with no connection to the real world besides having four wheels.


Ps: I like how you always insist that you're more than just another forum user - that's precious. Your two cents is worth two whole dollars. Nobody else can possibly understand racing quite like you - you've watched a lot of rally videos and helped your dad get some old rusty mazda running. Why aren't you the commissioner of WRC yet

Last edited by lollersk8s; 02-21-2013 at 01:56 AM..
Old 02-21-2013, 01:48 AM lollersk8s is offline  
Reply With Quote
#30  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:42 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.