[project] Sarty Evo II - Phase 2 Of Project Sarty

[kyepan 291]

The welded in strut brace will mean you have to drop the engine and lift the shell whenever the engine has to come out. the better solid bolted in braces should offer enough stiffness, but with much more practicality. also it will get in the way of cam belt changes, taking the cam belt covers off, rocker cover removal, etc etc etc...

 

In simple terms turreted rear suspension is a half way house to the ultimate, it will improve the dynamic response of the rear because simply put the shock is compressing at a 1:1 ratio (and i'm sure there is alot alot more to it than that, but that's sandy and eyore's development work, which they can choose to share or protect), moving to a double wishbone setup would give you ultimate dynamic stability. the 4x4 on sale here a while back had a full double wishbone setup, if you really do want the ultimate be prepared to pay the ultimate price. most modern front wheel drive use some sort of mcpherson strut and tie rod assembly, or trailing arm.

 

Why not ask sandy and eyore how they would go about producing a full double wishbone setup including adjustment for the rear.

 

this might be a bit of a red herring, but worth investigating.

 

Glad you've popped for the c5 alloys, these are silly light, they are also still available from citroen for 65 each... barg. and look best in matt IMHO.

 

The alcon setup is probably lightest brakewise however i have no experience of them, Willwoods polymatrix pads are renownd for eating discs buy their calipers bells and discs but source pads elsewhere, and also the calipers are not the best for dust ingression, they need to be kept clean to operate well.

 

i would say keep the interior, it's less conspicuous, less look at me, more practical.. find other ways to improve it, would also agree with kev over any cookie cuttering, make sure it either can't be seen or is covered with trim.. stealthy is better.

Edited May 13, 2009 by kyepan

[Sandy 191]

Strut brace will be on welded brackets, not permanently welded in.

 

Double wishbone on the rear would be an utter waste of money in our opinion. We're always evaluating new ideas, but everything we've tried has pointed back to the trailing arm and coilover set up Colin settled on for his hillclimber nearly ten years ago now, after a period of intense development and numerous more popular set ups. There's no point making to suspension any more complex than it needs to be and the apparent lack of sophistication in the trailing arm/coilover set up, does not detract from the fact, that if the geometry is correct, it performs exactly how it needs to through the transient conditions the chassis goes through, to create good handling and as much grip as is required to compliment the front end. The front end geometry is the weak link on most FWD chassis in terms of grip.

 

The motor media has become a bit snobbish about rear suspension set ups post Focus Mk1. Ford made much of the set up on that car and other manufacturers have jumped on the bandwagon to seem on the game. The fact that simple trailing arms or even simpler torsion beams (as on the original Golf GTI) can be made to work very well in handling terms, has kind of been painted over by journalists who only know enough about suspension to make sweeping generalisations! Autocar for example have absolutely slammed the new Civic for having an H-beam, despite the ride quality, IMO, being better than the "multilink" current A3.

[Batfink 201]

 

how much of this will you be getting Rich?

 

Justin. I looked at double wishbones but i think it works out too heavy and expensive compared to what you can do with a simplified trailing arm solution. I think you can save about 30kg or more with a custom trailing arm. The issue if you go this route is its 100% custom so any issues with the setup will not be an easy fix if it breaks at the roadside

[kyepan 291]

Strut brace will be on welded brackets, not permanently welded in.

ahh cool! easy access.

 

thought the double wishbone might be overkill.

[James_R 3]

I know this a stupid comment, but at the same time I'd like to ask it, why does it have to be a 205? over a 309 or even a 306 given they're inherently better wheel base/chassis dimensions, and a 306 (devils advocate) can be a very good GT car with non wobbly front suspension, I can only imagine with your power it woudl be more than fun!!)

[hexhamstu 9]

I know this a stupid comment, but at the same time I'd like to ask it, why does it have to be a 205? over a 309 or even a 306 given they're inherently better wheel base/chassis dimensions, and a 306 (devils advocate) can be a very good GT car with non wobbly front suspension, I can only imagine with your power it woudl be more than fun!!)

goin on that line of thought "why a pug, why not a old beemer with a saab engine?" because 205s look nicer and are generally cooler.

[gti_al 1]

I know this a stupid comment, but at the same time I'd like to ask it, why does it have to be a 205? over a 309 or even a 306 given they're inherently better wheel base/chassis dimensions, and a 306 (devils advocate) can be a very good GT car with non wobbly front suspension, I can only imagine with your power it woudl be more than fun!!)

 

There is always something more capible though. If it is going to be a 306, why not just make it a 911? I think the fun comes from the fact it does have flaws, so there is real satisfaction in overcoming them. If it was about competency, i don't think there would be many 205s left. How many people are here because the 205 is the ultimate performer in any area?

 

I think the project forum exists because it isn't the ultimate in any area, but seeking that has a huge appeal. The 205 is pretty good, and has the history and image... so with some focusing will surprise people and be unique. If it was already the best, what would we do at work instead of think about ways to make it better? That is the appeal for me - it is a hobby, and escapism. I can't think of too many 205 people who would take it more seriously than that.

 

This project will be really interesting though. It isn't too hard to make something functional, but for it to be nice/comfortable/quiet and fast is a challenge. It is good to see people open minded though, and advancing things (aka - doing the hard yards so everyone else can copy it!). Good luck

[kyepan 291]

it's worth bearing in mind that there are quite a few track and sprint 205's that have similar setup's to what is being proposed here. Tweaked front and rear geometry, + turreted rear, and proper weld in cage with some lightening.

 

the trick will be getting the balance of comfort in the ride, things like standard bushes with lighter unsprung weight should help with that, even if spring rates are increased.

 

Just out interest rich, how come you didn't pop for thicker torsion bars and zx rear arms... neggy camber front set up, it's nearly off the shelf, a fraction of the cost and probably going to give you 90% of what your looking for, especially with a stiffer lighter chassis.

[GLPoomobile 958]

Are you looking to end up with a distillation of all that is good about the 205 GTI, or are you aiming to produce a car that's as quick and/or as fun and/or as refined and/or as safe as the RS?

 

IMO there are 3 things that make a 205 GTI good - the styling, the steering feel, and the cheeky handling. As long as these 3 ingredients are preserved, then I don't think Rich's project should end up too far from still being a proper 205 GTI.

 

But this is the problem with the modifying game, and it's a line we all walk as enthusiasts. Some cars start out mediocre (or crap) and can only be improved, whereas some cars are legendary for good reasons, and any modification might improve aspects of the car but will also rob it of it's purity. And I'm not sure there are many truely pure 205 GTIs left! (as a side note, I've often thought how I'd love to own a really mint and 100% standard 1.6, as this is what a proper 205 GTI should be IMO. But the reality is, I'd still want to change certain things, like junking the Jetronic in favour of some decent management, and fitting Miles' gear rods and shifter bushes etc. So then it's no longer a 'pure' GTI as Peugeot intended. The dilema is being able to accept something warts and all, when improvements are so easily accessable!).

 

Personally, I love what Rich is setting out to achieve. He is, I'm sure, not the first enthusiast to wonder what improvements can be made in sophistication, and in bringing the 205 GTI up to date. I certainly have.

 

So the trick here is to make a 205 that is still an absolute hooligan, a hoot to drive, lightweight and nimble, whilst being capable of thrashing the most potent of modern hot hatches both in a straight line and through the corners, and pissing on everybody's bonfire It's going to be a delicate balancing act to get this right, I reckon, but Rich is tenacious in his research and knows what he wants.

 

Rich, one bit of input from me on the aspect of weight saving. It seems clear that you are not setting out to produce a stupidly light weight stripped out track beast, but rather balancing all the areas so try and keep weight within it's current standard. Add some weight here, lose some weight there etc. I noticed you mentioned about re-using the bonnet, but why not replace it with a carbon bonnet instead? With the weight you save, you could minimise (or even forget about) the holes being cut in the shell. It'd be shame to attack another 205 GTI shell with the cookie cutter

Edited May 13, 2009 by GLPoomobile

[large 33]

Can you road rally any car with any modifications you like??

 

No.

If the car has 16v must be running the original inlet manifold. Car can only have 4 cylinders max, no forced induction and a load of other stuff. .

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Your comments are fascinating.

 

(Incidentally I'm now sat at McDonald's in Dubai airport on my way back to Kabul...then Kandahar, then Helmand province).

 

This project is NOT a money saving exercise, whilst at the same time NOT being a money burner.

 

Justin>

I did state earlier that the front strut brace was welded BUT bolt-in/removable - let's not let this become a Swahili thread please.

 

I have placed my faith in Colin and Sandy simply because they know and are passionate about what they do. We all know there are many ways to skin a cat, but when you've skinned enough cats, you learn which methods are most efficient.

 

If Colin & Sandy suggest ZX trailing arms then that's what we'll have. Ultimately I have the confidence that they'll look after the customer; why else would I go to them?

 

I am passionate about the 205 on so many levels. It simply cannot be a 306, 309 or anything else as I don't share this (strange) devotion. THIS 205 will be something extraordinary. It won't necessarily be the best, but it will be one that generates interest and passion across the community I have become part of. It's for me, but it's also for you. Why the f*ck not eh?

 

I kind of want it to have imperfections; isn't that what attracts us to someone/something? However I'm raising the bar for a 205 as if it were built now, with the additional 25 years' experience of it being hooned and people learning what makes it so good. Remember I've owned 1.6, 1.9, Mi16 and 2.2 16v versions, so I understand all of the different levels of appreciation.

 

One of the main reasons for doing this is that my 2.2 engine is so monstrous, that I don't want to compromise the enjoyment of a 205 by not having a chassis capable of coping with the power. And I'm also throwing in the additional complication/challenge of keeping it perfectly comfortable on the road in everyday use.

 

I seek the holy grail of the 205. This is not an odd pursuit, as I believe the major manufacturers seek to do the same revising such models as the Focus, Civic & Golf amongst others to create this all round performer. I just want to pick up where Peugeot left off as I personally feel they left the race.

Edited May 13, 2009 by DrSarty

[SimonJ 2]

If you are trying to visualise the red piping on the wheels, the Autocar website main page has pics of a Fiesta with black wheels with yellow piping. Not as nice as the white RFXs I have for sale of course but better than I thought it would look :-)

[maxi 36 1 Cars]

We have my TSW'd car to rob from, so yes Maxi, one dies to make another live. This is because I want - and possibly have access already to - a white, sunroofed rolling shell.

 

 

What the f*** is that all about Rich?

[maxi 36 1 Cars]

Also, moving on from that comment youve made Rich, (which to be honest has really f***ed me off) this seems to me is killing the whole original theme of the DR Sarty Project, it seems like cheque book tuning as opposed to your own work where you learn as you go. When you started the last project, lets be honest, you were very in the dark! The fact you researched and put things together yourself showed to me your love for yor hobby. I really feel you are starting to lose your original principles here.

 

Crack on and whatever floats your boat but in my time on the forum I have seen members at the top of this slippery slope before, lets hope it dosent go the same way as the others.

 

Maxi

[Batfink 201]

surely at some point you have to accept there is someone with more skill than you who can do a better job.

Thats certainly why I trust Colin to build my racecar and i'm sure why Rich is using him too.

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Alright Adam: where's this come from too? It wasn't a dig what I said.

 

(Mods: please don't remove this and surrounding posts as it adds to the adventure)

 

So two replies then. First off, I respect you Maxi for what you've done and how you feel about 205s. So much so that I remember a lot of what you said, and when I said that above that you've quoted (in page 4), it was picking up on something you said not so long ago about how you didn't like to see 205 shells being sacrificed by being cut up etc to make track cars (and ruined on occasion) never to be put on the road again.

 

I was anticipating a possible reply from you and justifying what I was doing..in effect to please or pacify you. The shell I possibly have access to is currently in a barn being used as a shed for engine parts. In other words, one on the road 205 just swaps places with one that isn't. Surely you see this as me trying to keep the peace and satisfy as many people as possible; which is no easy feat.

 

Secondly, I have always been involved in every step of my project knowing and wanting to understand everything that's going on. Kev's right: I cannot weld (certainly not from Afghanistan), and I am entering a new world of what is currently black magic to me, suspension and chassis design and geometry. This is just how I was with engines and ECUs etc with the first Sarty project, so I suspect I'll come out the other side of this evolution knowing more and being more useful to the forum just like last time (I hope).

 

I have always wanted a fast, challenging road car. The plan hasn't changed it's just evolved to now include rolling chassis work which means I can get more from the engine. Not the best engine granted, but certainly a stonking road muncher, and I've already come over to your approach of wringing the thing's neck. It loves it and so do I.

 

But I have a 21st century engine in a 20th century car now full of old components. If I'm ever going to capitalise on this engine and what I want from the car I'm going to have to upgrade other areas, which frankly I'm at the bottom of a learning curve on, just like last time.

 

So I disagree: the objective, plan, desire and rewards haven't changed at all. The way I get the work done has I agree, but I can't do it period, either because of where I am or what it involves. But you can be damn sure that I'll understand everything as it happens and why, so I can ask questions and learn. That's the whole point surely?

 

Fly me back to the UK and teach me welding, prop customizing or give me a dust mask and a sanding block and I'll get busy. In the meantime, this is the best (and only) way I can do what I intend to do.

Edited May 20, 2009 by DrSarty

[James_R 3]

Full wide track and a 6 box should go on the list I think

[kyepan 291]

it seems like cheque book tuning as opposed to your own work where you learn as you go.

 

One mans cheque book tuning is another mans bread and butter, it's all relative, and subjective too. Time is money after all, he could spend the next three years doing a motorsport engineering degree and learning to weld in his spare time.... then do it Himself.

 

kev and i were discussing this at the weekend, we think that one of the proven benifit's rich has is being able to progress quickly with things, if he has some money to throw at it, all the better, as it will get done right, and done quickly. Too many builds get started, and either not finished because of fundd, feature creep, or the person looses interest or circumstances change over time. Why should he put up a bunch of invisible and insurmountable practical barriers when he can just get it done.

 

Whilst i don't completly agree with his approach (and that's more down to my interpretation of what a revision of the 205 might be) , i think his commitment and drive will yeild results, good results, quickly. We should support him in this.

Edited May 20, 2009 by kyepan

[GLPoomobile 958]

Another thing that Rich has proven with the first stage of his project (and this is probably just common sense really), is that with all the best intentions in the world, if you try to take on too much DIY without the benefit of years worth of experience and bloody good skills, your end result will usually be compromised. Or to to coin a couple of simpler phrases "buy cheap, buy twice" and "throwing good money after bad". He made the mistake of trying to use Megasquirt (think that was a faulty 2nd hand system though, wasnt it Rich?), before shelling out again to use Emerald, and whilst he achieved great results with the original homebrew ITB set up, it took the Sandy/Colin setup and final mapping at Emerald to really release the full potential of the engine. Had he done that in the first place, he'd have saved a lot of money.

 

So what I'm saying a round about way, probably already said much better by Kyepan, Batfink and of course Rich himself, is that it's great to do as much of it yourself as you can, and it helps the learning process, but you need to know your limits otherwise the mistakes you learn by can be costly and compromise the end result. There'd be a hell of a lot of very interesting and desirable cars that simply wouldn't exist if the owners had an aversion to employing the superior skills of experts.

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

One reason I wouldn't rush to have a widened track is that I'd have to start playing with different arches potentially, changing the look.

 

I've actually always liked BlackMi16's orange, white and black 2.3 16v beasty. In fact it was one of my original inspirations, and he did practically all of it, including the sandblasting himself in his cold garage (respek). I was considering going this way but I'd like to try and retain original look at all costs, even having the rad not quite as low as mine is now to avoid the need for a splitter. I don't want to put those big square arches on as I love the look of a totally orginal white 1.9 GTI.

 

Having said that I prefer the look of the stance with the 309 rear beam, and will discuss with Colin whether this actually is advantageous in terms of handling. If it isn't I won't use it, and we will also adapt the front trackwidth to compliment the rear without meaning any cosmetic changes are required.

 

I'm also not sure about the '6 box. It murders your turning circle IIRC and I'm not convinced it's actually a good move anyway. I will however seek Colin's advice on fitting a Xsara steering rack, as I've heard from 2 sources now it's close to a straight fit. Jackherer's car has one I think and the lock-lock is incredible.

 

The only thing that'll make this car non-standard in appearance, is the rallye type grilles in the front valance, the larger exhaust, the lack of arial mount on the roof, a heated front screen and the lack of rear seats. The caging will be low profile in the rear and the wheels will be C5s. Otherwise it's staying original externally.

 

The engine bay will house the 2.2 thumper and be a lot more OE, clean and tidy and the leather interior will still look like Peugeot interior.

 

All I'd like to collect from Colin & Sandy's gaff is a pristine white, empty (treated) shell, sitting on C5 steelies, with its new steering rack, driveshafts and wishbones, rear turrets, internal braided lines and shell/chassis lightening and strengthening done. All of the reinstall, including sound deadening, looms, carpets, interior, external trims & bumpers, dash, engine, exhaust and ancilliaries I'll do myself. I simply can't wait.

Edited May 20, 2009 by DrSarty

[kyepan 291]

I will however seek Colin's advice on fitting a Xsara steering rack, as I've heard from 2 sources now it's close to a straight fit. Jackherer's car has one I think and the lock-lock is incredible.

 

 

this i would be interested in hearing more about, as moving from the mx5 to the pug, it shows up how slow the rack is, what would be an unflustered twitch of the wheel, involves all sorts of hand over hand action... Was planning to put a pas rack in, but if the xara is quicker that would be an excellent alternative. As i feel the slowness of the rack really lets the car down.

 

kev, you'll need to do some more push ups before you can drive it.

 

 

J

Edited May 20, 2009 by kyepan

[Batfink 201]

shurrup JB

I can do 20 now... cant be as heavy as a gokart on a full throttle corner...

 

Sarty I know its more advantagous to have a wider front than rear as this helps give a more oversteer characteristic. The wider rear will stabilise the rear and dial in understeer (which is why you get a less surprising setup). I dont know what the perfect balance/ratio would be.

I believe colin told me he ran a 309 rear beam on his hillclimb car but then he was running a wider front track.

 

oh and whats a bloody Swahili thread???

[welshpug 1,657]

106's are pretty oversteery as standard, well the sport spec ones are anyway.

 

The front track of them are near identical to the MM with a 205 gti, but the rear end is 40mm narrower, you don't tend to see people trying to go wider on them, and when they do, they'll be going a fair bit wider on the front at the same time.

 

 

I'm intrigued to see how yours will be packaged, shell mods or a more unobtrusive setup that's unseen apart from underneath, or in the extra grip and balance gained

 

I guess you have no restrictions at all with regards to the location of mounting points unlike many race cars with yours being a road car, so some neat turrets welded in I presume?

Edited May 20, 2009 by welshpug

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Now we're talking. This is the whole goal perhaps of a forum; and project threads like this get ideas thrown together - however random they may seem - and often something exciting and experimental comes out of it.

 

The good thing about that is you can play with my money!

 

When I say Swahili (Kev), it's when I say something clear as day and yet someone seems to misunderstand/misinterpret/overlook or ignore something I/already said. The example here was Justin saying how hard it would be to remove an engine if I welded in a strutbrace, when I did say it would be removable. That's Swahili.

 

I've spoken with Colin tonight and the white shell he has is possibly usable. We're going to keep costs down by him doing prep work and me doing installation of things like braided line; although he'll do the measuring and route plan based on experience.

 

We're not going PAS (in fact it's something I've never wanted as I like the non-PAS feel of my 205 as is), and to that end we just stick with a standard rack. The Xsara rack - or whatever it was Jackherer told me about - is something I need to do more research on.

 

I doubt I'll have much of your engine bay 'caging' Kev, although I'll take guidance on getting bang for buck whilst the fabrication is being done. I've decided to get the custom downpipe, in fact perhaps a whole exhaust made to do away with bulkhead mods, as I think the Maniflow is getting a little tired. Good pattern to work from and will be for sale if it still has life in it.

 

It's really excellent that people say what they feel; I genuinely welcome all comments, from everyone.

[James_R 3]

I'd be going 306 width and using GTi-6 hollow shafts the top mounts would be special though :s