Jump to content
  • Welcome to 205GTIDrivers.com!

    Hello dear visitor! Feel free to browse but we invite you to register completely free of charge in order to enjoy the full functionality of the website.

Sign in to follow this  
Cameron

[project] The Ultimate Track 205

Recommended Posts

Cameron

Haha that sounds like a challenge!

 

I accept!

 

slap.jpg

 

:lol:

 

Yeah come round and criticise whenever, you can combine the visit with picking up some parts. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alexcrosse

game on!

 

Slap-Monkey.jpg

 

some time this week probably, ill make sure im in a work shirt so I cant help you move anything around you garage/cupboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

Cool, I could do with a hand actually, got a whole load of scrap metal and engines I need to weigh in! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alexcrosse

like that blue shell you keep uploading photos of? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

Oh no he didn't!

 

Anywho.. some more work today, though I spent most of the day ferrying all sorts of junk from my garden to the local dump so I just had a little nibble in the afternoon attacking some of the brackets that aren't needed.

 

Seat mounts, dash mounts and steering column mounts were the first victims:

 

DSC02287.jpg

 

This time around I have a nice spot weld drill so it was a hell of a lot quicker and easier than cutting them out on my black shell! :lol:

 

DSC02292.jpg

 

Handbrake mount is surplus to requirements, so it's gone.

 

DSC02293.jpg

 

Nice little pile of scrap.. there's way more to come off though!

 

DSC02296.jpg

Edited by Cameron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

There hasn't been much in the way of interesting progress recently, hence the lack of updates. I've been busy stripping it back to the bare shell and it's now pretty much there, just the fuel tank to come off then it's job done. Some pics of how it's looking..

 

DSC02303.jpg

 

DSC02304.jpg

 

And my box of metal scrap, which has got a little full! Once I've emptied it I think I'll start weighing all the bits I cut off and keep a little tally of it somewhere to see just how much weight can be saved by removing the silly little brackets etc.

 

DSC02305.jpg

 

I'll start fab'ing the false floor this weekend, need to sort out a bit more lighting in my garage first as it gets a bit too dark in the evenings. Oh and some sort of heating would be very nice too! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bas

Cameron what do you think of this rear axle setup?

 

P1010983.jpg

 

 

 

P1010982.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rich_p

To me it looks like a standard set up but with additional bracing to stop any twisting of geometry movement.

 

I may be very wrong though!

 

Edit - Just noticed the additional arb and mounts!

Edited by Rich_p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

still relies on the poor rear damper ratio :(

 

looks like a 309 gti16 crossmember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

Just looks like a stiffened standard beam, so will be prone to the same shortfalls.. I'm sure it's an improvement in terms of toe stiffness, but the standard beam is very heavy and all the extra bracing isn't going to improve that! As WP says you're also still stuck with the low damper ratio and torsion bars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cRaig

Very thorough job of stripping the shell :) You dont happen to have the rear most heatsheild (above the backbox) in that box of scrap do you? Im currently after one :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

Yes and no, i have one but one of the holes got mullered by a corroded nut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bas

still relies on the poor rear damper ratio :(

 

looks like a 309 gti16 crossmember.

 

Sorry for my ignorance but can you please explain "poor rear damper ratio".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bas

Just looks like a stiffened standard beam, so will be prone to the same shortfalls.. I'm sure it's an improvement in terms of toe stiffness, but the standard beam is very heavy and all the extra bracing isn't going to improve that! As WP says you're also still stuck with the low damper ratio and torsion bars.

 

 

Must agree that it's just a stiffened standard beam. But why did he put a subframe underneath the car? (attached to the roll cage if you look closely)

 

As posted before I don't understand "low damper ratio."

 

For sure the original beam is heavy and this setup ads more weight BUT the 205 can use some extra weigth on the rear wheels, no?

 

BTW looking forward to your double wishbone 205 rear axle setup!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

the standard wheel to damper ratio is quite high, something like 2.5-1 meaning such a small damper has to work very hard to control the wheel.

 

Moving to a vertical damper mounted from the rear of the stub axle and fixed to welded in turrets in the wheel arches is ideal as it gives a much lower damper to wheel ratio, also dampers work better when upright.

 

however the main issue is that the regulations for many forms of motorsport will not allow this, but there are ways around it still to improve the damper ratio without any shell modifications, Colin Satchell has done a lot of work on this kind of arrangement (user name of eeyore on here)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EdCherry

the standard wheel to damper ratio is quite high, something like 2.5-1 meaning such a small damper has to work very hard to control the wheel.

 

Moving to a vertical damper mounted from the rear of the stub axle and fixed to welded in turrets in the wheel arches is ideal as it gives a much lower damper to wheel ratio, also dampers work better when upright.

 

however the main issue is that the regulations for many forms of motorsport will not allow this, but there are ways around it still to improve the damper ratio without any shell modifications, Colin Satchell has done a lot of work on this kind of arrangement (user name of eeyore on here)

 

Dampers work better when upright? when there s*it dampers sure.

 

Still not convinced that all this damper ratio modifications is needed, it just makes it simpler. Yes there are other reasons but at the end of the day why not make what you've got work better than try to re invent the wheel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
allanallen

Cameron what do you think of this rear axle setup?

 

P1010983.jpg

 

 

 

P1010982.jpg

 

How's that set-up sprung then? It's certainly missing at least 1 torsion bar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

I have a feeling it uses 2 shorter torsion bars, through that central downward-angled blue bit.

 

As for damper ratios, yeah you can make what you have work, or you can fit something better. Having a high installation ratio (wheel moves a lot, damper moves a little) means you have to work the damper very hard (very high resistance) to get the damping rates you need to control the springs. If you have a low installation ratio (wheel moves a little, damper moves a lot) then you have low resistance and a lot less stress and heat build-up. It's good to aim for an IR of about 1:1 to get the best out of everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Batfink

Dampers work better when upright? when there s*it dampers sure.

 

Still not convinced that all this damper ratio modifications is needed, it just makes it simpler. Yes there are other reasons but at the end of the day why not make what you've got work better than try to re invent the wheel.

 

Its not about the damper angle but the 1:1 ratio. Certainly controls the rear better over bumps and curbs from experience. Basic performance value is negligible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

you can control the wheel better with a cheap damper on a 1-1 ratio than you can with an expensive one at 2.5-1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bas

 

As for damper ratios, yeah you can make what you have work, or you can fit something better. Having a high installation ratio (wheel moves a lot, damper moves a little) means you have to work the damper very hard (very high resistance) to get the damping rates you need to control the springs. If you have a low installation ratio (wheel moves a little, damper moves a lot) then you have low resistance and a lot less stress and heat build-up. It's good to aim for an IR of about 1:1 to get the best out of everything.

 

Thanks for the explanation. All clear now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rippthrough

I reckon that beam would work a lot better if the arms weren't bent myself Mei. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

just noticed that :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron

Woop! Petrol tank is off! Managed to do it without pouring petrol everywhere and setting myself on fire, too! :lol:

 

I have a strong feeling I'll be either ditching or extensively modifying the Dimma kit, as the side skirts don't come anywhere as far down as I'd want them to for a flat floor. Oh, and tomorrow I pick up my first batch of machined parts - my rear subframe mounting bosses. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×