Quote:
Originally Posted by ACE HIGH
Commonsense means that Colin Chapman's original 7 started off with less than 40 HP and during his lifetime reached around 125hp with the twin cam.Yachts and power boats have a hull displacement speed which is not easy to excede no matter how much power or sail area is applied to the boat.So it is with a Clubman 7,As the style of the car has to remain basically unchanged then the limiting factor is the aerodynamics which is about the worst on the road,and no amount of HP after about 150/180 is going to do much good as the steering gets a bit light from 140km on and approaching 180km plus then a certain amount of danger is present.The Clubman 7 has a few failings which would be better to spend time and money on,namely,the butt ugly exhaust that exits by the drivers ear sending exhaust gases into the cockpit,the 45 degree coil over shocks that give a bad uncomfortable ride,it really needs torsion bars all round with vertical shocks,or perhaps Mcpherson struts at the rear.For ultimate performance it seems that a motorcycle engine is the best idea,has anyone thought of a big 1340/1500 cc Harley?that would give a very good engine to use once cooling was worked out and a high torque Harley around 85 hp plus,unstressed with a lightweight Roadster would be better performing than some of the big engined vehicles.Lightweight is the way to go in my opinion.That should get you all going,stir/stir!!!David  |
You don't seem to have addressed my question about why you felt that commonsense dictated a chassis made from thicker steel at higher horsepower levels, "
Using commonsense about 120/150 hp,180 hp maximum,if you want to use higher power use 32x32 x1.6 or larger.". Do I take it that you have now dropped that?
If wanting to use a strut suspension at the rear, it would be better to use the Chapman strut, such as was originally used on the Lotus Elan. That, combined with the inboard brakes you suggest, would certainly reduce the rear unsprung weight.