Jump to content


Photo

What do you think Guys?


  • Please log in to reply
466 replies to this topic

#301 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 23 September 2011 - 04:28

How about in true Oz language - the "Mongrel Bastard" or the "Real Mongrel Bastard"?


Well of course Mongrel came from being Australian and my favorite motorcycle, the Rickman Metisse (Metisse is French for Mongrel).

Pretty sure the name is going to be a bit boring ie; "Mongrel GSR" (Grass Roots Racer)


Advertisement

#302 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 23 September 2011 - 05:39

Mongrel GRrrrrrrrrrr!

#303 DrProzac

DrProzac
  • Member

  • 1,882 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 23 September 2011 - 08:05

If you want to impress the average Chinese buyer, how about advertising slogans like "Beloved Sales Leader", "Rev Limit: 6000 Cultural Revolutions Per Minute", "Wouldn't you rather have a Short Drive than a Long March?", or "Number one in Forbidden City mileage ratings".

It's all about marketing baby!

:lol: Good ideas :)

Well, for some reason I thought it will be mainly for the international market :)

#304 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 23 September 2011 - 12:32





Mongrel GRrrrrrrrrrr!


Clever  ;)

Well, for some reason I thought it will be mainly for the international market :)


Anybody who wants one,


#305 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 23 September 2011 - 12:33

It's all about marketing baby!


The Honorable Leaders Enterprise.


#306 Defiant00

Defiant00
  • New Member

  • 21 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 01 October 2011 - 22:07

So how's it coming along now with the Australians?

#307 packapoo

packapoo
  • Member

  • 731 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 02 October 2011 - 20:43

So how's it coming along now with the Australians?


You can see how they're going here

If that doesn't work try You Tube search Mitre 10 sandpit :wave:

#308 carlt

carlt
  • Member

  • 1,043 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 03 October 2011 - 20:06


Saw a 'Bog in a Bag' on Dragons Den the other day

Where does 'packapoo' come from ? :up:

#309 packapoo

packapoo
  • Member

  • 731 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 04 October 2011 - 06:17

Shortened old term packapooticka.

#310 Spoofski

Spoofski
  • Member

  • 262 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 04 October 2011 - 09:44

If you name the brand Photon, any chance naming the model Torpedo?

'We don't serve neutrinos' said the barman.

A neutrino walks into a pub.

#311 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 04 October 2011 - 14:33

So how's it coming along now with the Australians?


Bar burnt down, 3 in hospital with broken noses, 56 terrified Chinese females have locked themselves indoors and 2 cows pregnant. Oh and no beer left in the town.

About normal I'd say.

#312 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 04 October 2011 - 14:45

'We don't serve neutrinos' said the barman.

A neutrino walks into a pub.


:lol:

Does remind me of .... I walked into a shop the other day and this strange looking dude was in there staring at me. After on went to the post office and there he was again. That night went to a new restaurant on the spur of the moment and behold there he was eating. After dinner I went for a walk along the riverside and bugger me there he was walking but 50 meters in front of me - it was then I realized I was being stalked by a psychic.


#313 Defiant00

Defiant00
  • New Member

  • 21 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 04 November 2011 - 15:53

And a month later...anything yet?

#314 bigleagueslider

bigleagueslider
  • Member

  • 838 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 05 November 2011 - 02:21

'We don't serve neutrinos' said the barman.
A neutrino walks into a pub.


Cripes! Subatomic particle drinking jokes.

If you're ever in a bar drinking with a neutron, an electron, a proton, and a photon, and the subatomic particles challenge you to a drinking contest, for God's sake don't agree to the photon's bet to drink your body mass in beer. It's a sucker's bet. Everyone knows the photon has no mass!

And even if by some strange twist in the laws of quantum physics and binge drinking you manage to beat the photon in your bet, you'll probably never collect. Because that photon will be out the bar's back door at 186,000 miles/second.

Just some friendly advice.

slider

#315 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 06 November 2011 - 06:39

And a month later...anything yet?


Have started on the first run of chassis, Yay!



#316 Paolo

Paolo
  • Member

  • 1,673 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 08 November 2011 - 12:16

I really like "Mongrel Sideways" as a name.

#317 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 08 November 2011 - 13:16

In which case, Paolo, you will be known hence forth as Mongrel Sideways. Don't forget to change your avatar...

#318 Paolo

Paolo
  • Member

  • 1,673 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 08 November 2011 - 13:35

In which case, Paolo, you will be known hence forth as Mongrel Sideways. Don't forget to change your avatar...



I am known in much worse ways already on these Forums... go check my star rating...

#319 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 08 November 2011 - 13:40

The star rating is decided by people who do not know what they are talking about...

Advertisement

#320 Canuck

Canuck
  • Member

  • 1,638 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 08 November 2011 - 19:04

The star rating is decided by people who do not know what they are talking about...

That deserves a 5-star rating...

#321 Paolo

Paolo
  • Member

  • 1,673 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 08 November 2011 - 20:19

The star rating is decided by people who do not know what they are talking about...


It is actually decided by Islamofeminists.

#322 desmo

desmo
  • Tech Forum Host

  • 12,856 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 08 November 2011 - 21:34

Man, those Islamofeminists spoil everything! Star rating? I should probably have heard of that.

#323 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 09 November 2011 - 01:59

Probably maybe possibly decided the name will be the Mongrel GSR - grassroots racer.

#324 Defiant00

Defiant00
  • New Member

  • 21 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 28 November 2011 - 15:33

Any new pictures or info?

#325 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 29 November 2011 - 11:53

Currently doing some 3D renders, these are taken from the actual proto and are 90% correct...

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Edited by cheapracer, 01 December 2011 - 11:37.


#326 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 834 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 29 November 2011 - 12:10

[quote name='cheapracer' date='Nov 29 2011, 22:53' post='5428454']

The front and rear suspensions both look a bit unusual - what are they?





#327 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 29 November 2011 - 14:07

The front and rear suspensions both look a bit unusual - what are they?


Well they aren't well depicted there but the rear is a DeDion outlay but has single arms with single front pivots (4 arms are in those drawings at the moment) with a pivot in the middle of the main beam to allow twist. It is like this to allow the quick adaption of various front wheel drive uprights to the arms to suit various FWD drivetrains.

The front is highly unusual semi independent beam and I have never seen the design before and a bit hard to explain clearly.
Take a standard double ball joint upright and connect them together between the lower ball joints with a beam and run 2 radius rods forward (or rearwards) to the chassis for longitudal location.
From the upper ball joints also take 2 radius rods forward to the chassis also for longitudal location - you can see these 4 radius rods minus pivots in the renders.
From the upper ball joints short, adjustable (for static camber) lateral location rods run direct to the beam (imagine a typical wishbone but the rear pivot meets the beam not the chassis).
Lateral location of the beam can be the usual suspects, Watts, Panhard rod etc, but I am using a trailing reversed A-arm (single pivot under the beam) which makes front roll center changes a 5 minute job.

Sounds complicated but it's actually very simple in layout and surprisingly light in weight. It gives me a 2 tyre beam flat footprint while allowing independent action of caster and caster induced camber in steer/pitch.




#328 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 29 November 2011 - 15:06

From the upper ball joints also take 2 radius rods forward to the chassis also for longitudal location - you can see these 4 radius rods minus pivots in the renders.
From the upper ball joints short, adjustable (for static camber) lateral location rods run direct to the beam (imagine a typical wishbone but the rear pivot meets the beam not the chassis).

So the top ball-joints have the radius rods and the lateral location rods from the same point?

#329 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 29 November 2011 - 17:32

So the top ball-joints have the radius rods and the lateral location rods from the same point?


From the upright yes ..

Black = uprights
Red = radius rods
Yellow = ball joints
Orange = beam
Blue = lateral link
Green = chassis

All the red and blue links are adjustable for length ie; lengthen the upper red rods for increased caster or decrease the blue rods for more neg camber.

Posted Image

Edited by cheapracer, 29 November 2011 - 17:52.


#330 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 29 November 2011 - 22:07

I asked because I was doing a sketch to see how it went together. What about springs? I like the adjustable lateral links.

#331 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,477 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 29 November 2011 - 22:08

I'm guessing the rack is high up?


#332 desmo

desmo
  • Tech Forum Host

  • 12,856 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 29 November 2011 - 22:23

I'm usually disappointed when I make that assumption.

#333 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 29 November 2011 - 22:24

You get full droop?

#334 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 30 November 2011 - 07:25

I'm guessing the rack is high up?


I don't look at anything under 30 these days.


I have resolved clearance issues (for a rack) and I have a couple of other choices still that I'm playing with.

Those renders above look different in (height and width ratio) on 3 different computers I have been on since I posted them.

Edited by cheapracer, 30 November 2011 - 07:27.


#335 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,359 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 30 November 2011 - 16:54

I am sure that , based on the above, innuendo can be read into this comment (!) but how do resolve the bending moments in your beam axle the two lateral links loading it in mid length.

#336 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 30 November 2011 - 18:22

how to resolve the the bending moments in your beam axle


It's called 42 x 2.5 tubing.

Can't see it being an issue but I will strain guage it to make sure and it's easily braced or up to 48mm tube if there is a problem.

#337 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,359 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 30 November 2011 - 20:30

Cheapy I am sure you will have figured this out but I once did a Clubmans car ( 400kg) with a A frame to locate the rear axle. It worked fine but the lateral loads on the ball joint were very close to the design limits what was then available at an affordable price so there was a risk of the insert popping out sideways.

Our " fix" was to have the brackets such that if the insert failed the mountings would contain things with some sideways "slop".

I don't know how much you may load the joint sideways in your design but anyway....

#338 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,477 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 30 November 2011 - 21:32


That's a good point, you want at least 28mm dia spherical joint I think. Despite the MAD LATERAL g this car will be pulling its light weight brings the suspension loads down to those of an SUV.

#339 24gerrard

24gerrard
  • Member

  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 30 November 2011 - 22:09

It needs bigger side pods for the batteries IMO. ;)

Advertisement

#340 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 01 December 2011 - 02:32

That's a good point, you want at least 28mm dia spherical joint I think. Despite the MAD LATERAL g this car will be pulling its light weight brings the suspension loads down to those of an SUV.


I actually have a 20mm spherical joint there and believed that was overkill. I went bigger because the angles of the radius rods also transfers some longitudal load laterally. If it breaks the axle can't actually flop very far. I would be more worried about the rear, should one of the 2 pivots break all hell would let loose (imagine a large motorcycle swingarm) - may invest in tie cables.

There is 200kgs over the front wheels and should pull 1 "geez" with just the driver and 2 "geez" with a passenger.

Greg, you would appreciate that the rear coilovers mount direct to the uprights taking a majority of that load off of the swingarms.


#341 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,477 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 01 December 2011 - 04:32

Greg, you would appreciate that the rear coilovers mount direct to the uprights taking a majority of that load off of the swingarms.

I think it is the overloads that kill ball joints, kerbs and potholes, rather than the general cornering loads. Admittedly there is no easy way of quantifying this stuff. Even measurements are a bit suss, repeatbility is of the order of +/- 30% on a good day.

#342 Johan Lekas

Johan Lekas
  • Member

  • 45 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 01 December 2011 - 08:19

... insert popping out sideways.

Why not rotate 90 degrees and avoid loading the spherical in that direction?


#343 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 01 December 2011 - 09:31

Why not rotate 90 degrees and avoid loading the spherical in that direction?


It already is (ie; the bolt through the ball is perpendicular to the ground).

I always try to avoid sideways loads on spherical joints.

Edited by cheapracer, 01 December 2011 - 10:54.


#344 24gerrard

24gerrard
  • Member

  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 01 December 2011 - 10:34

Interesting way to transfer the bump on one side to a downward force on the other.
Wouldnt it be better to do it hydraulicaly and free up the geometry a bit for adjustments?

I like it though, always enjoyed playing with beam axles especialy ones that had variable geometry.

#345 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 834 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 01 December 2011 - 10:53

I don't look at anything under 30 these days.


I have resolved clearance issues (for a rack) and I have a couple of other choices still that I'm playing with.

Those renders above look different in (height and width ratio) on 3 different computers I have been on since I posted them.


On the subject of steering rack placement - some of the racing clubman-type cars from the 1970s had the steering rack actually mounted on a front beam axle.
This adds a little to the unsprung weight but minimises unwanted steering inputs with suspension movement.

#346 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 01 December 2011 - 11:55

This adds a little to the unsprung weight but minimises unwanted steering inputs with suspension movement.


There's more than 2 ways to do it and when I think I've tried them all then I think of another one...

2 problems with the rack on the beam, besides unsprung weight, is getting a good slip yoke steering shaft unit (which adds to the unsprung weight) and lightweight racing racks are expensive and that's not what I am about - a common rack here is about $60 new.

Posted Image


#347 carlt

carlt
  • Member

  • 1,043 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 01 December 2011 - 21:21

There's more than 2 ways to do it and when I think I've tried them all then I think of another one...

2 problems with the rack on the beam, besides unsprung weight, is getting a good slip yoke steering shaft unit (which adds to the unsprung weight) and lightweight racing racks are expensive and that's not what I am about - a common rack here is about $60 new.

Posted Image


If you mount the column with the uj's in the correct place then there is very little movement and the slip yoke can be replaced with a flexi coupling [dont know the correct term - rubber laminate disc with 4 offset bolts ]
I have a front beam axle on my trials special which has about 0.5M articulation on each side - [ I set it up as if setting up for bump steer on a normal double wishbone -ie the steering column and its uj's considered the same as a steering rack trackrod ] this has less than 10mm movement in the column at the coupling .
you can prob. get this down to a couple of mm at the most with fast road/race type suspension movements

#348 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,477 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 01 December 2011 - 21:33

I think this is a significant downside to a beam axle. If you mount the rack on the beam then the steering coumn becomes part of the suspension linkage, not ideal, and if you mount to the body then you are in some danger of weird toe in roll problems.

Having said that your kinematics are heaps better than the usual front beam axle and there may be a sweet spot for the rack.... I just don't know where.

#349 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,359 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 01 December 2011 - 22:32

In terms of your rack location problem there MAY be a solution in the design used in the Lotus 63 FWD GP car of 1970/71.

Because of the front diff. unit there wa no space to mount the rack in the usual place. So Lotus made up two bellcrank things pivoted vertically just ahead of the front wheels. A short rack was fixed to the chassis at one end and to one of the pyramids at the other. So when you turned the steering wheel the pyramid swung left or right on its verticdl axis. a simple link across the chassis moved the other pyramid in unison.


Then long steering arms ran back at about 45 degrees to the car centre line to the normal steering arms on the hubs.

You can see it in this image

http://img196.images...tus63frana1.jpg

Now the Lotus 63 was not a great success so be warned but I do not recall reading any big issues with the setering set up.

Why might it help?

- the rack is sprung weight

- the steering column does move slightly in and out but this is minimal and no joint of any kind is needed.

- The required rack is very short but this is exactly what some FWD racks look like ( e.g Citreon AX).

- Importantly the conflict of steering arm length to axle movement is transfered partially to a conflict betwen your longtitudinal radius arm lengths and the steering arm length

- So if you were to mount the two bellcranks near the inboard ends of your radius arms the conflict of arcs would be minimal or nil.

As your radius arms go forward this might be possble.

I am sorry the description is so poor MAYBE Tony Matthews has one of his master cutaways to hand which make it all much clearer.


#350 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 02 December 2011 - 02:50

Mariner, shortening/lengthening a rack isn't a problem, 5 minutes work and I have examples less than 10 inches long sitting around (body length, rack is obviously longer).

The Lotus 63 is a mess around the front but you are right, quadrants are quite usable and I have a current option for it. Problem with a setup like the Lotus is every link and change in direction loses feel and gains in movement regardless of how good your links and joints are.

Just for those interested in the system and I didn't mention it above, the lower red radius rods are shorter in length than the upper ones which gains caster in bump, easy to look at my drawing and think it's just 4 parallel equal length links ..

Posted Image

Carlt, by chance do you have a picture of your setup?


Edited by cheapracer, 02 December 2011 - 02:56.