I dont have pic on this computer of our flares.. if I get home before Midnight.. I'll post from home.

You will end up needing larger shifter U-joints. Those are too small. They work well in a small lightweight open wheeled car.. but dont seem to work very well in our tub cars.

Looks good Eric. I spoke with Ron Wicker today. His dad died a few weeks back. I wondered why I hadnt heard from him.


B

Good to see it coming together finally Erik!
(You need to adjust the aspect ratio on your avatar.)

Thorshammer, what’s your plan on headers?

I just noticed Erik,
Your cage looks different than last time I saw it.
Good for you!

Erik (got the speeling correct this time)

Do you like the OBerg filters ?? I have used them in the past. I thought it was a good idea.. easy to inspect/take apart.


B

My rule book is a couple of seasons old but the last time I checked the Suspension prep for the 914-6 is Restricted. There is no moving of the suspension mounting points. Are you ready to drop the six and make it a four cylinder car?

I have a hard time believing the Six can make the HP to be competetive at the weight, that is why I choes not to do the six route. I don't have as much latitude with the restricted suspension prep and IT engine prep.

The Oberg is fantastic! It definitely saves your oil cooler. I lunch a motor earlier this year, BTW don’t buy a used race motor, and I had a pile of titanium from the valves sitting on the screen but nothing got through

Yep. I was a little concerned about the 3 inch raising myself, but I havent read a rule book in over a year now. Foley.. give us the scoop.


B

They lifted the restricted suspension rules and the IT head prep this year. Weight was also lowered

I normally run the Canton Mecca setup with the paper filter. Easy to cut open. I have had problems with the Oberg sealing (but I still like them)


B

nein 14... (first give me your name so I dont feel stupid...LOL)

I can get together EVERY 914 racer you have ever seen to help on rule changes IF you think it will help.


B

So what is the six stuck with right now? Any restrictions other than the carb size?

Lets see,

Brad, They are 5/8 in every place except the shift tower, where they are 1/2. Remember I am shifting a Hewland, not a porsche trans. Plus the centerline of the linkage is completely parralel and only deviates 3 inches. I hope it will be okay. Will be good to see the flares and pricing too.

914-6 used to be Limited prep, so maybe your GCR is out of date but has been a full prep car for 1 year. So anything goes, and it is that is going.

Chris,

Yeah, had to change the cage a bit. Thanks for the splendid work you did for me. Anyone wanting to build a racecar really should contact Chris for the rear suspension mod, it really is done well. Oh, and is reasonably priced.

Headers; The headers on the car are from Mark Eschucie, they will get burns stainless collectors on the ends and then come together under the Hewland then exit Right and left through two Yoshimura Stainless Steel Exhaust cannisters 2 1/2 inches inlet and outlet.

As for the rest of the car. I am looking for a couple things.
-Really good Spark plug wires for an electromotive. I know I will have to make them, but an unsure of where to get the pieces reasonable and also with the seals to seal up the air shroud.
- Who has really good info on cannon plugs, where to get them, how to size them, I need a couple, one for the motor, and one for the Data system.


This is the biggest thing of all.

A few months back someone had used CATIA or IDEAS or PRO E to model a 914 suspension along with the rear suspension. It would be worth some information swapping as to what was found and what their intentions were. I would like to change the front suspension on my car next winter, and have some a good idea of what I am going to do, does anyone remember who was doing that?

Thanks,


Erik

Sorry, my name is Rob Gordon

I think SCCA needs to see more of these cars run before they can make additional changes. Besides, Steve Limbert finished mid-pack this year at the runoffs in his 914-6

The restrictions are 34mm chokes, stock 914-6 valves (42 and 38mm, I think??), 12:1 cr, single plug, 1mm over bore on 2.0L. That’s about it.

Thanks Rob,


Just trying to keep track of all the EP/FP/GT2/GT3 guy's around the USA.

5/8 is plenty big enough. I commented about them knowing that you had a Hewland (the Hewlands are harder on the joints than the Porsche box...so I have found..)



B

Mark Eschucie makes great headers and builds fast motors, good choice! It looks like everyone is going the way of Burns lately as well

What Rob said.

You guys key so fast I can't even take a crap without missing something.

Brad I use the oberg copy, but have known them to leak especially when the oil is cold and thick.

The restriction for the six is Production trim for the motor Full prep, rods cams any compression ratio, used to be 12:1 but now it is open. 1950 lbs, and 1 inch more track than the FP car 40mm weber type carbs with 34 mm chokes, yes can we say restrictor plate racing

Drawbacks so far, Carbs don't flow as much as the heads do, 36 mm choke produce 4-7 more hp above 6500 rpm it revs to 8750. Safe to 9,000.

On 46mm carbs with 42mm chokes it makes 14 more HP which on the dyno I use is just about 202 hp at the crank. This is of course a dyno, and none of them can be trusted. But I'd say in this trim the car makes 185-188 just how it has been developed so far. I have dynoed other builders 100 hp per liter, and once the carbs are on, the HP is in the shitter.

So what does it need you ask.

46mm carbs 42mm chokes, "S" heads 46mmint 42mm exhaust and "S" brakes with 3.5 inch caliper spacing. This would run with a Miata, but I will only be able to prove this when I run and Limbert runs and other decide they want to run this configuration, Until then, its sucking Miata or Rx7 exhaust.

Erik

Erik,
can you make minimum weight with your car?

Don't know yet, But I don't see why not, I don't weigh much so thats a plus. LOL

Erik

Lets get a few cars running before we really try to change things a lot. The RX7 aren't making more than about 210hp (13B) at 2300-2450, The Miatas can't be making much more than 200 (1.8 and 1.6), yes their weight is down a little but that can be over come with good foundation design. Stiff chassis, correct suspension geometry, etc. Not sure what the Z cars are making but they are heavy also. An EP National Championship will be hard but do able if you have the desire to make it happen.

Yes I am running on a set of 2002 rules. I am too cheap to buy the 04 rules and then Have to turn around and buy another set in Feb. I can take that 25$ and get some steel tubing to build a frame jig.

Good luck guys.

Eric,

I was the one modelling the front suspension. I incorporated the alterations into my car. But, it's only my work, so no guarantees (unlike on Chris's rear suspension mods ). I have discussed the analysis with some of Ford's best suspension engineers and they agree it's the right way to go. And you should see the look on their face when they see what I did........

The toughest part of the fabrication was the struts.

At best these mods will only make the car a little easier to drive by allowing you to use less spring/bar up front to counter roll. This is accomplished by locating the roll center in a better spot and controlling it's movement much better than the stock setup. The simple analysis shows under extreme jounce and roll conditions the roll center on this suspension only moves about in a 3" circle... and all above ground. Compare that to the stock setup, or worse yet, a lowered setup.

Now, with all those caveats... I'll share my analysis, and even post pictures, if you want. I haven't yet to avoid the debates.

I suggest that one prove to themselves what they want to do with their suspension. I did the analysis and judged that the rear suspension mods are not worth the effort based on the amount of toe change and camber gain over the range of motion. But that's my assessment and can easily be argued. And that's why we build are own car's, right? So, we can do what we want to them......

Yes please post pictures, you will get no negative feedback from me!

Let’s talk shocks, what brand are you guys using? I have the Cheapo Carrera shocks as they were the only thing I could afford at the time. Local racers here say they are crap, they have been great to me though, I can’t complain about them one bit.

I am going to be running my suspension points in Susprog 3D as soon as I find a tape measure monkey to help me re-measure the points. Susprog wants to locate from each axel as opposed to the vehicle center point so I have to remeasure.

I will probalby go with Carrera since I have a set for the rear already and they are revalvable. Plus they are pretty local. AS I understand the guys at Carrera know there stuff about shocks. They can help out with you setup.

Come on Kevin show them the front suspension. I bet you get the exact responses you figured you would get.

Kevin and i disagree about the rear suspension mounting points but he has done the analysis and I have not so I can't back up my arguement. YET.

Does your local Carrera dealer rebuild? I'm looking at getting my redone. Factory has change ownership and they don't do it any more.

I don't have pics here at work. Brett-you can post the one I sent you if you want. It's not the best picture. I may have to take a few more.

But, not tonight, because I've got to stuff a new clutch and re-install the powertrain. I'm hoping to make a double at Nelson Ledges next weekend.

Oh, yeah... Koni.

That's what I thought after actually setting up a trailing arm and measuring changes through the range of motion for both arrangements.
Apparently the value of the mod isn't to improve toe or camber characteristics.
There are other subtle changes. For instance, raising the pickup also lowers the shock attachment point, thereby increasing available shock travel. Also, when the trailing arm rotates upward it no longer moves forward at the same time. This influences the way the tire rolls over surface changes on the pavement.
I don't know how significant these effects are, but I am inclined to think they are as valuable some other major suspension mods, especially after having a season of experience with the change. I did lower the car further than it was before.
I am really interested in seeing how you did the front a-arms Kevin, especially regarding the attachment to the chassis. The track width on the FP car doesn't accomodate coilovers, so I have to continue using torsion bars. I would like to raise the attachment points and maybe even increase the length of the a-arms a bit though.

I looked into the track change with the rear suspension, too, and concluded it was not significant in my case.

But, you're absolutely right about the rear shocks. Personally, I believe there are serious problems with the rear shocks, unless some important modifications are made.

Specifically, if one retains the rubber bushing at the lower end of the shock it puts a bending load on the shock, which eventually will ruin the shock, but certainly doesn't allow the shock absorber to do it's job.... since it's binding up.

My solution (not yet implemented) is to use some Koni 28s.

BTW... I've heard that about the track difference between FP and EP before, but PCS has the 914-4 track as the same in EP and FP. 56.5f/58.2r for both.

The track for the 914-6 is wider in the front and narrower in the rear? Don't know why....

Anyway, the point is, the front track width is easily adjustable. I actually installed camber plates to reduce the camber . It will all make sense with some pictures.

Eric,

The dry sump cover is awesome. Are you going to run the accusump and the dry sump at the same time?

Oh, yeah. Eric, your dry sump mounting location is fine (as you probably already know). There's an allowance for the top of a dry sump tank/enclosure to be no higher than the cowl.

Overhead view... sorry about the shadows

jbvnm

The two rod ends are held to the strut with a 3/4" bolt that threads into the strut (that took some work). I have to remvove that bolt to adjust bump (that sucks). The bolt in wire tied to prevent back out.

The plate on the vertical wall is used to provide stucture and mounting for the steering rack.

This is the forward "a-arm" mount to the body. With this setup any cornering loads are transmitted into the cage and throughout the car.

Again, your mileage may vary.

Interesting work Kevin.


The rear suspension mods as Chris stated are not for Camber/Toe changes but to get the swinging arm at a better location. When you get the car stiff enough at the rear without this mod, it can become "bound up" because the arm angle is at an upslope (the rear is higher than the front) the compression of the arm can be very odd, and the force of a bump is almost a tension force on the pivot due to the angle. This is not good, also when the pivot remains in the standard location, the shock and spring are in a somewhat cantivlever action, so the spring and compresion valving is somewhat digressive, some tuners compensate this with VERY heavy spring rates, and then the bump compliance is very poor. By moving the points, we can get good bump compliance and proper "movement geometry" for the arm, the result is better tracking of the wheel over bumps, especially on the brakes when the rear is lighter.

I am running an accusump as well as the dry sump, Just something about prelubricating engines before they are started. It's like warming tires prior to use, it's just plain better for you and the tire.

As far as shocks go, I have Bilsteins right now, but have Ohlins for the rear uninstalled and will be getting the Kanna Motorsports front struts with Ohlins Internals. I know what the Bilsteins are all about, so I wanted to tune the chassis using them as a base line, then sell them and develop the Ohlins around the package I have.

As for the front end, I have been looking at several Grand am cars front suspension, as well as some development work I have been doing on my own. I may not have quite as long of front a-arms that you have, but I will be moving the rack and the front a arms up 45-50mm in the chassis and lengthening them 105-125 mm This will not be done until next year when the car gets stripped and rebuilt. I have a couple more cage changes to make for stiffness, but need to see where I am on weight first.

HP:::: I like you! So don't take any offense, You are on HP crack. No way no how. Miata, 230 HP, no bullshit, RX7 well over 210 at the wheels, don't have any crank numbers for that one. But if you factor in the 15 % dyno correction for power at the crank that would leave us at 241.5 , and I think the RX7 13B is all of that and then some. Of course these are peak numbers , but the cars seem to make enough power under the curve as well. The real winner in EP is the Rebello built 240sx and 240z, the Z makes well into 255-260hp and the sx makes better than 250. When they go, gear for gear with the Miata and weigh 350 pounds more, theres more under the hood.

As for me, EP must make 9.25 LBs/hp, So to do that, I will need 210 for 1950 lbs. Now everyone will tell you they have done it, but have they really, or did they build a "cookbook" motor and call it 220 because it had 906 sized parts in the motor. Or a legal to EP specs,using the small carbs, with the small heads ...etc No material addition is the one that kills me, if not I would have already welded and reshaped the combustion chambers to actually burn completely.

What the SCCA does not realize is once that weight is moving, and aero takes over, its only motor pushing from there baby.

My car needs to be clean, mean, well sorted and well driven to have any chance they will change the spec line for me. On a regional level, it should win, on a national level, it won't. But I have hopes the SCCA will come around and make some adjustments. Brakes "S" caliper please, 46 mm carbs with 42 venturis please, "s" 2.0 liter heads with 46mm intake and 42 mm exhaust please, Thats all I ask?



Erik Madsen in search of a Runoffs Birth in 2005

I am "dong it" as we speak.

Kevin WILL do it in EP in 2005.....

Kevins style pushes the envelope. As soon as I saw that I knew he and I had to work together.

He could have ran in FP and with 1/2 the money he is spending he could have been a front runner very easily. He is not taking the easy way out and because of that I am soaking up tons of time into this project that he isn't paying me a dime for.

Hell, I only have 5 parts for the engine at my shop and already have 40 hours of labor in it- the first wrench hasn't even been turned yet!

No "cookbook" engine on this end(those don't exist). It would take an entire dictionary to record this project.

BTW, it will see atleast 5 camshaft changes before it ever leaves my test cell. Maybe 3-4 differnt carb arrangements, and a couple of different exhaust systems. I won't be a bit suprised if it doesn't need a "freshening up" before it even gets shipped. (thats okay because it will give us an idea of how the engine is wearing so we can predict scheduled maintenance more accurately)

Every area that is "open" in the rulebook will be maximized- its the only way we'll make it happen and keep it together.

"when I have fully decided that a result is worth getting, I go ahead of it and make trial after trial till it comes"
Edison

Jake,

I hope you did not think I was talking about you. The "cookbook" that I am talking about is the guys claiming they have 220hp for a 2.0 liter six because they have the 906 pistons,cams.carbs etc...

My only experience with the 2.0 liter four in prod was years ago, and with Dave Finch doing the engines to the rules at that time, 195 hp was on tap, but not for long, based on the weight Kevin needs to carry, 195hp in his car should do very well, at his weight, if you make 195 at the crank, and I think you may do a little better than that, but at 195hp his lbs per hp is 9.5, so it will take just over 200hp to be able to run with the Miatas, but don't kid yourself, the top running guys all are somewhere near 9.0-9.25 lbs per hp, anything under that and it is time to pack up and run with the small dogs, and none of us is interested in that.

Make that kind of Hp and maybe I will convert, the four cylinder car has better weight distribution anyway.

Erik Madsen

also

Nicely done Kevin.
It looks very simple.
What did you do to cover up the relocated pickup points per PCS D.5.d.2 ?

Chris, I was thinking the same thing about the relocated pickup points??

Chris,

Does'nt that apply only if the relocation enters into the drivers compartment, or am I wrong.

Erik

Post Script:

Chris, what do you think of Jims car??? Finally finished.

Thank God.

"If such points are relocated to the driver/passenger/trunk compartments such points and attendant suspension components shall be covered with metal panels."

That's what my GCR says.

Jim's car looks very nice. I thought you delivered it to him a while ago already.

The 240sx guys are running the K24 motor right? If that is the case then there is no way in hell they are making that kind of power. The GT3 240SX gets 50mm venturies and unrestricted engine prep. They are having a hell of a time getting over 230-250. So I know some one is feeding you a line on that one. If the Miata is running unrestricted head prep maybe, but I would have to see it to beleive it. The RX7, maybe in Runoff trim, turning 10,500 rpm. Maybe. I have a friend that is running a 13b rotary, peripherial port in GT2 and makes about 325 flywheel with 51mm venturies. His last 12A made about 275 with 48mm vents (peripherial port). I just don't see a street port motor that in street trim makes at best 175 flywheel HP (12A), making 76% more power in race trim.

As far as rotaries go you will be able to pull him out of the corners as the rotaries just don't make the torque like piston engines do. I definitely see the Challengers they are fast and getting faster, but they are by no means unbeatable.


I gotta shrink the pics first, Kevin

Kevin,


If I thought they were unbeatable, I would not be doing this exercise, thats for sure. But the 240 SX is faster than the Miata and so is the 240 Z and so is the GEN 1 and GEN 2 RX7, in a straight line, but the Miata goes throught the turns better, and when you consider the Miata DOES have 225-230 HP, and weighs 2100 then what kind of hp does the sx have to have to be faster than it and weigh 2450lbs???? In calculation this calculates out to better than 265hp, so yes it has a bigger stroke and should'nt be as peaky, but there is no way on this earth that a EP 240 does not make at least 255 hp. BTW I got the HP numbers for the Miata from an old EP Miata competitor that I know very well. The 240SX and Z are extrapulated, but the Miata and the RX7 GEn 2 are for real on the same dyno as I had my 944, yes I had a dark side once too.

Bottomline, you can be competitive with a four cylinder car especially at the current weight, but can the motor make the HP you will need to win, and will it stay together and if it does, for how long. As for me I will have some more development work to do to make the kind of HP necessary to win EP with the six. BTW anyone have any triple throat solexes with manifolds for sale cheap, I have a science project I want to do.

Erik Madsen

I agree about the potential of the 4 cyl 914 in EP... or else I wouldn't be doing it. But, I also know it will take a while to get there. Let's not forget these top competitors have already sorted their cars and know how to extract the most out of them. It's going to be fun (and not easy), no question.

About covering the front suspension points. I was going to do that before the first SCCA race, but ran out of time. The tech inspectors didn't seem to care. But, I still wonder about that phrase "the driver/passenger/trunk compartments." Is it an all inclusive statement like "driver, passenger, or trunk compartments" or is the word trunk there to make sure hatchback driver cover their points from the driver?

Another debatable rule.

Anyway, I can make covers for them pretty easily.

I, personally, hate getting into a horsepower discussion. I'd rather Jake discuss it. He's better at that anyway.

BTW, Eric, I think you're attributing some of Brent's horsepower statements to me, since I haven't made any .

But, here's some data from the production website.

http://www.coloradoscca.org/prodcar/viewto...opic.php?t=3539

Sorry K,


Yeah I think I have!. Anyway, the EP guys are very fast at the National level, I am lucky to have John Weisberg and Jrry Hinkle in my area, both are very good drivers and have very fast cars. So it is a good thumb check to know how fast I really will be. Can't do any worse than some. Made some more progress this weekend, Oil system plumbed and fuel system plumbed. Some very small fab work left, and then it will be time to install the drivetrain. Maybe I'll test it plowing snow.

Anyone have that snowplow installation number for 914's, Brad???, Mueller?


LOL

Erik

I may need that snowplow, too.

I threw in a new clutch over the weekend so I can make this weekend's race at Nelson. I hope it's not too cold. All this to keep my National license..... I miss California!!!!

Last race on the weak engine. I can't wait for next year!!!

Since you brought up the Production website....
The word is that if they bring back "DP" we will be allowed to run 2.5l sixes, that would be a fast class