Changed picks see new ones below------------------
Stock 85 GT Bracket Racer
My record so far is 1W 1L
Fastest time 16.54

[This message has been edited by red85gt (edited 10-03-2002).]

quote Originally posted by Nashco: Just wanting to keep this floating near the top. I have a few things I'd like to talk about, but I'm tired as hell... So, perk...what's the "gameplan"? What I mean is, what are your priorities...engine, trans, frame, suspension, etc. Are you picking an engine and trans and designing around it? P.S. I'll be out of town for a few days, but I'll check back to this thread when I get back.

Ok Bryce, you're back right? So let it fly! Want to hear what you have to say!

Did you see my question about the techno shifting stuff?

Did you see my game plan? (93.4"/transverse car first then a stretched one later) I think I am going to build a 383 smallblock for my first motor. I can "pour" the bottom of my 4-bolt main block, fit billet caps, get a 3.75" steel crank and rods, and JE forged pistons I'll have a strong bottom that can handle as much NOS as I care to dump on it (a lot!). still have some research to do on the best head for a NOS motor. Need smallish intake ports and valves, and big exhaust - weird combo. Good clutch, the cage, and I can start the development phase (read - pulling holeshots and making passes)! Plan to start off running the 4spd until I finally break it - then it'll be HD guts for it or get the 6spd - depends on how long it stays together before it breaks and how it works when it's together. Suspension is to be 2" drop spindles up front with adjustable shocks, and coilover kits and adjustables in the back. I plan to have tubular a-arms on the front and a new crossmember when I can get it in the budget.

------------------

http://phitown.com" TARGET=_blank rel="nofollow">http://phitown.com

Hey Perkidelic long time on post, on my par. I had relatives over for a while so I have not been around the computer much. Looks like you got things rolling quite well so far, as I have been getting caught up on your post here. I have a few books that you might be interested in that could help in your project, if you are going to be at Chilie's this Sat. I will bring them for you to look through, sorry I need them for my own projects, but I will bring all info that is needed so that you may obtain a copy for yourself if you are interested in any of them. Either e-mail me or just post here if you will be there, and let me know how to find you. I am easy to find, since I shaved my head, I get told, on a regular basis by many people I have never seen before in my life, that I look like the westler Stonecold Steve Austin. If you are there, see you Sat.

quote Originally posted by OH10fiero: Hey Perkidelic long time on post, on my par. I had relatives over for a while so I have not been around the computer much. Looks like you got things rolling quite well so far, as I have been getting caught up on your post here. I have a few books that you might be interested in that could help in your project, if you are going to be at Chilie's this Sat. I will bring them for you to look through, sorry I need them for my own projects, but I will bring all info that is needed so that you may obtain a copy for yourself if you are interested in any of them. Either e-mail me or just post here if you will be there, and let me know how to find you. I am easy to find, since I shaved my head, I get told, on a regular basis by many people I have never seen before in my life, that I look like the westler Stonecold Steve Austin. If you are there, see you Sat.

Sounds great OH10! Can't wait to see the materials. I should definitely be there Saturday. If Kameo goes just find his car. If not, look for a short (5'4") black guy, real low hair cut, with a cell phone stuffed in his right front pocket, walking around studying the cars, wishing his was there! I'll look for ya.

------------------

http://phitown.com" TARGET=_blank rel="nofollow">http://phitown.com

Ok here are my slips what do you think of my times?

My first round race was against the black firebird in my pics and the
2nd round was against the yellow olds in the second pic.
Ok soory i dident know they would be that big.oops to small hang in there. Ok finally sorry but I'm new at this posting pictures I finally got it right. So are these good times for a stock motor?
------------------
Stock 85 GT Bracket Racer
My record so far is 1W 1L
Fastest time 16.54

[This message has been edited by red85gt (edited 10-03-2002).]

[This message has been edited by red85gt (edited 10-03-2002).]

Will you PLEASE make your pictures smaller, or post a link instead of the actual picture? Those pictures are much bigger than necessary, especially the time slips.

Bryce
88 GT

quote Originally posted by Nashco: Will you PLEASE make your pictures smaller, or post a link instead of the actual picture? Those pictures are much bigger than necessary, especially the time slips. Bryce 88 GT

Yeah Red, a little smaller! After you scan, you should be able to go to the edit menu and resample it to get a smaller pic. I usually go down to about 10-15% on mine for posting them on the 'net. You can go to the view menu and select "actual view" to see what you're getting ready to put out here before you save it. If your software is different there should still be a similar way to resize the pic.

p.s. - if you figure it out, could you edit your post and replace the pics on this page with smaller ones? It's pretty BIG! I feel like an ant sitting on your desk reading your time slips!
------------------

http://phitown.com[/b]]http://phitown.com

[This message has been edited by perkidelic (edited 10-03-2002).]

Ok here are the resized and zoomed pics of my first race experience

And here is some thing really cool Alcohol funny cars!!

Ok thats enough pics I had lots of fun and I look forward to next year!

------------------
Stock 85 GT Bracket Racer

quote Originally posted by red85gt: Ok here are the resized and zoomed pics of my first race experience...

gracias

------------------

http://phitown.com" TARGET=_blank rel="nofollow">http://phitown.com

quote Originally posted by perkidelic: Sounds great OH10! Can't wait to see the materials. I should definitely be there Saturday. If Kameo goes just find his car. If not, look for a short (5'4") black guy, real low hair cut, with a cell phone stuffed in his right front pocket, walking around studying the cars, wishing his was there! I'll look for ya.

Hehe I do the same thing, but I think that most of my wishing is that I owned most of the cars that show up, I still drool every time I see those Judges parked side by side. I have the books set aside now as I type and will put them in my car so I do not forget, see ya Sat.

Well, I have been researching, listening, studying, and mulling for countless hours over this project. Now I find myself reconsidering the stretch. I can't shake my desire to go really fast, and pull nasty holeshots! There are some street-legal racers in my area that are really serious, and I want to be out there mixing it up with them. Gotta do some new drawings, more research, and see what I can come up with.

------------------

http://phitown.com[/b]]http://phitown.com

[This message has been edited by perkidelic (edited 10-07-2002).]

Perkidelic, I was good meeting you and your wife, now I have a face to go with the name. If you need any of the books that I brought let me know and I will drop them off, since you gave me your card with a phone # on it, I could call you and pick them up if I should need them. Also if you need a second set of hands on your project let me know, I usually have a lot of projects of my own, but from time to time I could always break away and help out. As far as the tranny that you have, I know on the fire wall side of the tranny there is a VIN #, I believe they are stamped on the case itself, if you post it on here I'm sure someone will be able to tell you what the final drive ratio is, like I said at the show, that will play a big part in how you will want to builed you engine. If its a 4.10 you will have a strong pull off the line and have low top end speed, but not much will be able to catch you untill you run out of RPM's on that tranny, and you don't really need an engine that needs to rev above 5500 rpm to move. But if you have a 3.32 final gear you will definitely need a rev happy engine to take advantage of the tall gears that it has in order to pull off what you want to do. Talk to you later, I might be there next week, so let me know on the books

quote Originally posted by OH10fiero: Perkidelic, I was good meeting you and your wife...

Likewise, we had fun. As far as the tranny goes... I am building the motor I want and will match a tranny to it later, if the Muncie I have is not the best choice. I'll check this tranny out when I pull the cradle out and start on the conversion. Actually, I plan to go through a few different transmission options over the course of the car's development.

I'll let you know if I need to use any of the books you have, before next Saturday. Right now I am researching some other areas. Not doing any real building on the car yet, mainly stuff to support the design work, but if I need any help I'll let you know. Hope to start the building process this winter with the cage and motor install.

------------------

http://phitown.com" TARGET=_blank rel="nofollow">http://phitown.com

Nixed the stretch idea again (at least for now). I really like the challenge of making the original 93.4" chassis insanely quick and fast - in every direction! I have decided on a 383 smallblock built specifically for NOS. I still want it to have 300-400hp "on the motor". That will make for a nice driving experience on the street - and pure madness at the track when the bottle is loaded! I want the full wet curb weight under 2K. Tranny will be the Muncie to begin and maybe the VW 6spd later (still gotta talk to them). Can't wait until the design process is over and the building begins! Can't wait to post pics!

------------------

http://phitown.com" TARGET=_blank rel="nofollow">http://phitown.com

<imho> go with an aluminum (Donnovan) block 377 motor (400 block with 350 crank I belive. It's a revver monster, and you can fit BIG heads!)

Go for a cammed up 500 or so hp n/a, a 2,000lb car will better use torque at rpm than off idle.

Best!
Ben.

------------------

Ben Cannon
88 Formula, T-top, Metalic Red. (2:13.138 at Sears Point) "Every Man Dies, not every man really Lives"
88 Formula, Northstar, Silver, In-Progreess. -Mel Gibson, "Braveheart"

quote Originally posted by artherd: <imho> go with an aluminum (Donnovan) block 377 motor (400 block with 350 crank I belive. It's a revver monster, and you can fit BIG heads!) Go for a cammed up 500 or so hp n/a, a 2,000lb car will better use torque at rpm than off idle. Best! Ben.

I would have to agree with Ben on that one. I feel that the big misconception with installing a V8 in these cars, and using a stock tranny is that everyone wants to add more HP to them. With the way they are geared you are better off putting in a high rever to that tranny to take advantage of how they are geared. Now install a high reving V8 on NOZ and you have one killer combo that will be hard to beat, and if you do have the 4.10 4 speed, trust me you wont need the bottle. I have a friend with a reworked V6 and the 4.10, if I remember correctly the only thing to beat him were a 2001 trans am on NOZ and a mustang on NOZ, all other V8's could not keep up with him from red light to red light, and thats with a reworked 2.8.

quote Originally posted by perkidelic: Ok Bryce, you're back right? So let it fly! Want to hear what you have to say!

Well, I don't have much time to talk, as I only get to use the internet at work for a few months.

I think sticking with the shorter chassis sounds much easier, but limits your overall goal. If you really want to build the "ultimate" car, it's going to need a longer wheelbase or it's going to need to be a hell of a lot lighter (like a lotus).

On the SBC...I don't know how well this will fit into your handling AND drag racing goal. Obviously you'll have all the power you'll need to fly down the drag strip, but will it handle like you want it to? Unless you go with an aluminum block ($$$$!), the SBC is a pretty heavy pig; if you put all that weight over the rear axle with a standard fiero trans, to maintain a good balance for handling you're going to be too heavy overall. It's been said that if you get all aluminum stuff (heads, water pump, etc.) the SBC weighs about the same as a stock 2.8. So, in order to maintain a 40/60 or better (45/55ish) with all that weight, you can't really remove much weight from the vehicle. Even if you do remove a lot of weight overall and relocate it over the front to get that weight balance better, you still end up having sub-par handling because of how far out the weight gets from the center of the car (greater inertia through the turns). As you know, the closer you can get the weight to the center of the vehicle the easier it is to handle, but in order to offset a lot of weight over the rear axle you're hard pressed to achieve that.

If you're serious about getting into the 600 hp range (400+nitrous), you're talking extremely short lived transmissions ESPECIALLY if you actually have good enough tires and clutch to hook up at the strip. I think perhaps you ought to consider what others have said about high RPM power rather than low end power/torque. A lighter motor that makes the same horsepower but with a little less torque will be just as fast down the quarter, with much better part longevity.

I'm not quite sure what the proper choice would be...that's something to think about. The northstar is a common thought for that (high rpm power with a smoothly rising torque curve), but you are limited in how much power you can build affordably. For the cost of a 400 hp SBC you can almost get a 375 hp northstar, really just depends on your flavor of motor. The northstar should weigh a fair bit less than an iron block sbc with aluminum parts....but I don't have the numbers to support that.

Perhaps you should put more thought into how much you really expect for handling and quarter mile times, and what you're willing to sacrifice. Sticking with the shorter wheelbase and working with a little smaller budget (building one toy and one REAL car later...the toy just shouldn't be a moneypit) you're going to have to make a sacrifice with one or the other, drag times or lap times. Which leads me to the question that's been digging into me this entire time...

What's the point of building one pretty good car NOW if you're going to be building the ultimate car SOON? Why waste the money/time/resources/etc. when as soon as car number 2 is finished you'll rarely drive number 1? No offense to anybody, but any schmoe can buy a bunch of parts and bolt them all together (v8archie, summit, and a few websites have everything I need for that) to build a pretty cool toy. If you want to show what you can do with some real engineering, fabrication, research, and imagination (particularly if you're trying to use this to bring in business)...why do what anybody with a garage can do, instead of showing your full potential with something that nobody has done?

My 2 cents...gotta get back to work!

Bryce
88 GT

[This message has been edited by Nashco (edited 10-08-2002).]

It's no more expensive to build a 450 HP N* than it is to build a 375 HP N*. Both are built using CHRFab heads & cams packages, all of which cost the same, whether stage 1 or stage 5.

quote Originally posted by Nashco: On the SBC...I don't know how well this will fit into your handling AND drag racing goal. Obviously you'll have all the power you'll need to fly down the drag strip, but will it handle like you want it to? Unless you go with an aluminum block ($$$$!), the SBC is a pretty heavy pig; if you put all that weight over the rear axle with a standard fiero trans, to maintain a good balance for handling you're going to be too heavy overall. It's been said that if you get all aluminum stuff (heads, water pump, etc.) the SBC weighs about the same as a stock 2.8. So, in order to maintain a 40/60 or better (45/55ish) with all that weight, you can't really remove much weight from the vehicle. Even if you do remove a lot of weight overall and relocate it over the front to get that weight balance better, you still end up having sub-par handling because of how far out the weight gets from the center of the car (greater inertia through the turns). As you know, the closer you can get the weight to the center of the vehicle the easier it is to handle, but in order to offset a lot of weight over the rear axle you're hard pressed to achieve that.

I am actually much more organized and focused with all of this than I may seem to be in my ramblings - hehehe! I sometimes use the forum as a sounding board to try ideas that float through the middle of my planning, so sometimes I may seem a little scattered and disoriented.

About my choice of motorvation...

I actually have three motors that I like.

1. SBC - cons = weight, but it can be solved with enough cash.
   pros = proven, cost efficient, compact, relatively unlimited potential, experienced help around every corner.

2. LS1/6 - cons = cost, it's coming along but still somewhat unproven at the extremes, largely unknown.
   pros = lightweight, technologically superior to 1st gen, compact, 21st century sbc, serious potential.

3. N* - cons = cost, girth, unproven at the outer edges, largely unknown.
   pros = it's a caddy!, it's powerful, it's light.

Just to be clear - when I say "unknown" I mean the average engine builder or racer has almost or no experience with it. When I say "unproven" I don't mean that the engine hasn't been there it just hasn't been done enough to prove (TO ME) that it is comfortable there.

Maybe if I lived in a place where there were lots of people building one of the other types of motors I would be more inclined to use one of 'em. Here SBC & BBC rule! I have a friend with an LS1 and he is spending way too much for what he's getting - that's my opinion, and he agrees with it but he wants to do it in a C5 - so he has to pay the piper. No one that I have heard of around here is building the N*. I think it's a beautiful motor but for dumping the kind of NOS on it that I plan to do I would want to know what's going to happen - the less expensive way (someone else's experience)!!! Wouldn't mind having one in a driver though.

I plan to run alum heads, intake, water pump, etc, which will help. Plus, I planned to eliminate all of the factory metal in back ('cept for the main frame rails) and replace them with the rear bars of the cage. This includes the trunk so I should be back to the original weight, or lighter, even with an iron SBC. Later I would go to either an alum SBC or LS1/6 and lose even more. My handling should be as good as a "normal" modded chassis Fiero. One advantage to my plan is that I will be moving weight from the rear of the car, from behind the motor. I appreciate your insight Bryce - good points on where the weight is located in the chassis - I will be sure to pay very close attention to what I am doing. I may have to invest in a set of scales.

quote Originally posted by Nashco: If you're serious about getting into the 600 hp range (400+nitrous), you're talking extremely short lived transmissions ESPECIALLY if you actually have good enough tires and clutch to hook up at the strip. I think perhaps you ought to consider what others have said about high RPM power rather than low end power/torque. A lighter motor that makes the same horsepower but with a little less torque will be just as fast down the quarter, with much better part longevity.

Who said 600hp? I said 300-400hp on the motor, and a 500hp Pro-style NOS kit!!! Sounds crazy but I'm dead serious! In street car style racing the trick is to always have enough to "roll on" in the last half of the race to nudge the opponent out. My NOS will build gradually over 3 to 8 secs, via NOS' Progressive Controller. The trick for me will be to figure out precisely what I need before I run the opponent, so I never have to "show my hand". In other words - know thy enemy!

quote Originally posted by Nashco: I think sticking with the shorter chassis sounds much easier, but limits your overall goal. If you really want to build the "ultimate" car, it's going to need a longer wheelbase or it's going to need to be a hell of a lot lighter (like a lotus)...Perhaps you should put more thought into how much you really expect for handling and quarter mile times, and what you're willing to sacrifice. Sticking with the shorter wheelbase and working with a little smaller budget (building one toy and one REAL car later...the toy just shouldn't be a moneypit) you're going to have to make a sacrifice with one or the other, drag times or lap times. Which leads me to the question that's been digging into me this entire time...What's the point of building one pretty good car NOW if you're going to be building the ultimate car SOON? Why waste the money/time/resources/etc. when as soon as car number 2 is finished you'll rarely drive number 1? No offense to anybody, but any schmoe can buy a bunch of parts and bolt them all together (v8archie, summit, and a few websites have everything I need for that) to build a pretty cool toy. If you want to show what you can do with some real engineering, fabrication, research, and imagination (particularly if you're trying to use this to bring in business)...why do what anybody with a garage can do, instead of showing your full potential with something that nobody has done?

I'm not ruling out the stretch on the first car, I just want to see how far the 93.4"wb can go first. Then if the chassis becomes a limiting factor I may stretch it. The car is definitely going to be radically lighter than a stock Fiero. One thing that I like about the stock wb car is it would be a serious sleeper if it works! No self-respecting Pro Streeter would sleep very well at night after being challenged and beaten by a short, stubby, little Fiero!!!

I never meant to imply that the first car was going to be anything short of an ultimate car. It definetely won't be something that the average Joe can accomplish in his garage! It will be a fully engineered, technological masterpiece, street-legal racecar, that will serve as my businesses flagship marketing tool - until number two comes along.

Why build "one" in the first place, and not just get right into "two"? Same reason Saleen cut his teeth tuning 'Stangs for years, before ever tacking the S7. The second car should be a culmination of all the knowledge, experience, and wisdom, gained from the first. Plus, many of the parts developed with the first will be applicable to the Fiero masses; the second will be a pure race-bred machine that is only of interest (purchase-wise) to the extreme performance junkie )with deep pockets). It won't even require a Fiero to begin.

quote Originally posted by Nashco: My 2 cents...gotta get back to work! Bryce 88 GT

Thanks for 'em! You feel free to drop those pennies in the slot anytime you please!

perk

------------------

http://phitown.com

[This message has been edited by perkidelic (edited 10-08-2002).]

I posted this in the tech forum, had to put it here too!

"I believe there is really serious potential in the Fiero for street-legal drag racing. The main battle a front/rear car has is to get enough traction. They spend thousands to obtain what our cars have naturally! The two big challenges for us will be to find the weak links, and resolve them; and to control wheelstanding (for the real power junkies!).

In a manual car you can control wheelstanding with your left foot (clutch) but that can be costly. In an auto you can control it with trick "soft hit" convertors (initially costly but cheaper in the long run). The other thing is suspension tuning. I am considering using an externally adjustable coilover at each corner. I think our approach may be just the opposite of the f/r cars. We may have to limit weight transfer, as the front-drivers try to do - only we'll have ten times the traction. I am thinking that by stiffening the rear shocks and/or raising the rear ride height, we may be able to control the tendency of the front to lift.

All-in-all if you add it up it makes perfect sense. Why spend five to ten grand for a f/r chassis to get what a $1000 dollar Fiero already has! In time, there will be transmissions, axles, and whatever else is needed to make 'em fly! If we start flying in our cars I'll bet on the MR2 people wanting to do the same! That would draw more companies into making m/r specific drag racing products. Fiero vs. MR2 battles would fun too!"

Though this should be shared here too:

quote Originally posted by Will (in "how to build a 10 second V8 fiero" / Tech): The VW 6 speed commonly suggested is a 6 speed conversion on a 5 speed TRANSVERSE VW tansaxle. It is a kit from a British shop installed by www.eiptuning.com with a Peloquin differential. It is used behind 500+ HP turbo VR6's with outstanding reliability, but it is still transverse. It is several inches longer than a Getrag, so it would require a large chunk to be removed from the left frame rail, but it shouldn't be any more difficult than what's required for an LT1 swap. What's been the obstacle thus far is that the transaxle is $5000+ by the time it hits your doorstep. And it needs a new adapter plate designed, and clutch mechanism sorted out, and custom axles, and shift linkage, and mounts, and... and... and...

------------------

http://phitown.com" TARGET=_blank rel="nofollow">http://phitown.com

Thought this thread was awfully low on the totem pole...any recent revelations? I've been thinking a lot on that shifter setup lately, but haven't found what the best solution is yet.

Bryce
88 GT

quote Originally posted by Nashco: Thought this thread was awfully low on the totem pole...any recent revelations? I've been thinking a lot on that shifter setup lately, but haven't found what the best solution is yet. Bryce 88 GT

Just been doing a LOT of research. Reading anything that seems to be even remotely related (on and off the forum), thoroughly examining every option I can imagine, etc. I have started drawings of my chassis, which I hope to post here as soon as I get 'em far enough along. It's gonna be pretty sweet! The bodywork is going to be fastback GT style.

Planning on going to a nationally-known local racing transmission shop soon to discuss possibilities. I hate to admit it but I think I'm gonna "wimp" out with an automatic. Sorry guys but predictable fast ET's are my number one priority. To partially compensate, I plan to have it built as a full manual auto, and have devised a slick, behind the steering wheel, paddle shifting system for it. Hope my design can pass tech at the strip, or I'll have to pop in a "normal" race shifter when there. If I must have an auto it must look and feel like a proper sports car! Still interested in your system for my other Fiero though

I have a design in mind for virtually unbreakable axles that I have been toying with. I would try to get a few sets of them together and start selling them, but I want to be in a better position to back up what I sell. I plan to develop a few beta sets eventually and give them to a few guys who are beating the crap out of their cars at the dragstrip. If they do succeed in breaking one, they send it back, I send a new one and dissect the broken one to make improvements, until they're ready for mass "consumption".

My goal is to have this beast running next summer - probably nowhere near my real goals at first though.

------------------

http://phitown.com

[This message has been edited by perkidelic (edited 10-15-2002).]

Just wondering where things have been led on this project lately. I've been getting along with my shifter idea, noticed X made it into the 11s...thought we're about due for more discussion. So, how's it going?

Bryce
88 GT

There aren't any secrets involved in making a fast Fiero.

Start with a 3800SC and 4T65EHD in an '88. Dump the supercharger, heads and intake. Bolt on 3800 NA heads and intake, and put a great big hair dryer next to it. An air water intercooler will finish the job nicely.

Alternatively, just dump the supercharger, bolt an intercooler designed for the SC to the intake manifold and fabricate a custom "upper plenum" to bolt on top of the intercooler and use an LS1 TB and MAF.

Either way, there are no secrets or suprises.

quote Originally posted by Nashco: Just wondering where things have been led on this project lately. I've been getting along with my shifter idea, noticed X made it into the 11s...thought we're about due for more discussion. So, how's it going? Bryce 88 GT

Hey Bryce! Man I thought this sucker may have been headed for the archives! Still been up to my armpits in research. Since my vehicle is a marketing tool for my business I have been working on the exterior design while I sort out the other stuff. I am impressed with Fiero X's accomplishments and it gives me hope for the future of mine, though my goals are a bit loftier. I have a little collection of vehicles and everything has to make sense for me to not go bananas, so I have also been working the Fiero plan into the collective.

Back to the subject. Until you get that clutchless manual system worked out I plan to run the 4T60E (is that right?) tranny. I am trying to get time in one of my too busy days to go to this transmission shop and see what they can do with it. If that's the tranny in a '93 Cutlass Supreme with a 3100V6 (4spd auto), then I have one that was just rebuilt a matter of months before the car was wrecked. What I would like is a full race manual automatic. Controlling it will be a B&M or Hurst ratchet shifter. The motor plan is still for a 355 or 383 (probably the 383).

As soon as I get the exterior design nailed down I am going to start the building process. The top is most likely going to be chopped so that will the the first step. Then the custom bodywork. Somewhere in the midst of that will be the 12pt cage. Once the body and chassis are roughed in and the car is operational (not finished) again I will start working on the motor.

I am seriously considering fabbing a whole new cradle when the motor goes in. I can make a lighter and stronger unit than the factory deal, plus one that is already set up for V8's.

I also have this idea that you may be able to help me with. I want to develop an active hydraulic system that will help control wheelstanding. My idea is for small, very fast, hydraulic cylinders connected to the rear suspension. When the front end rises too fast or too high, a pitch sensor would trigger the cylinders to counteract by hiking the rear, then settling it back down when the front falls. I got the idea from reading about the new active suspension systems on the new luxury cars, which counteract body roll by stiffening hydraulic cylinders at the appropriate corner. This system would be just for launching the car hard off the line.

I got more, but I'll let you respond to that first!

perk

------------------

phitown.com

* 85 Fiero concept/race car - in the works!
* 84 R&D mule - 84 parts car
* 79 Camaro - 88 Chevy custom truck - 91 & 89 Accords

quote Originally posted by perkidelic: Back to the subject. Until you get that clutchless manual system worked out I plan to run the 4T60E (is that right?) tranny. <snip> I am seriously considering fabbing a whole new cradle when the motor goes in. I can make a lighter and stronger unit than the factory deal, plus one that is already set up for V8's. I also have this idea that you may be able to help me with. I want to develop an active hydraulic system that will help control wheelstanding. My idea is for small, very fast, hydraulic cylinders connected to the rear suspension. When the front end rises too fast or too high, a pitch sensor would trigger the cylinders to counteract by hiking the rear, then settling it back down when the front falls. I got the idea from reading about the new active suspension systems on the new luxury cars, which counteract body roll by stiffening hydraulic cylinders at the appropriate corner. This system would be just for launching the car hard off the line. I got more, but I'll let you respond to that first! perk

Sorry for the slow response...things have been extremely busy for me lately.

First of all, I'm not building a clutchless system by any means...I'm building a setup that operates the clutch for you. You could call it a clutch-pedalless system, I suppose. Like I said, work's been keeping me very busy, so development is slow, but steady.

I would completely agree with you building a custom cradle, I wouldn't consider anything else if you've got the resources. The stock cradle has some inadequacies, and with a custom project it's just as much work to build a new cradle as it is to adapt to fit the old one, just costs a little bit more in materials. I don't think that building your own cradle is a hard thing to do, just takes some very good planning. You need to be sure the engine/tranny you've got are for sure though, as it would be pointless to design a custom cradle then have to adapt it to a different engine/tranny. Also, I do know that an affordable stock-chassis length cradle is desired by several people out there concerned with high power or light weight with better strength vs. the stock cradle. If you put the time into building a cradle instead of adapting to fit the stock one, you may be able to get more return on the investment by marketing that than you would some brackets (as you know, that market is pretty much dominated for one person in the SBC world).

As far as your wheelstand idea goes...some of my feedback:

I'm confused by what you mean by "hiking the rear", first of all. If you're talking modifying the suspension characteristics, I think that is more complex and heavy than what would be necessary to do what you're talking about. I think the easiest way to do it would be to use the same principle as ABS and traction systems...just use the brakes to do it. You could adapt a pre-existing setup for ABS (consisting of valves, hydraulic solenoids, pump, reservoirs, and circuitry) and use your own controller instead of their built-in unit. I just happened to have done a lot of research on ABS system specs lately, so if the following interests you, let me know and I could pass on some of what I figured out.

Anyway, here's how it'd work...for an off the top of my head idea. You use a gyro (measures tilt by means of changes in acceleration in one direction) to measure your pitch angle and acceleration rate just like any data acquisition system would. Like is done with ABS systems, you have a pre-determined table that references several inputs like vehicle speed and probably RPM also to be used to calculate a gear (or if you wanted, have a switch input that verifies mechanically what gear you're in, which is far more reliable to get the correct gear in all situations). Using a microcontroller, you can modify this table as necessary to control the rear brakes via the ABS system. When the vehicle is changing pitch too fast you moderate the brakes via the ABS to slow the acceleration, if necessary, even decelerate the pitch angle. Based on pitch angle you can also determine when it is required to slow the rear wheel output enough to stay in the safe range. With this setup you only have the ABS system added to vehicle weight (about 20-25 pounds MAX I'd guess), with no additional actuator weight or plumbing, as you already have the calipers and brake lines or that.

Without going into more detail for sake of time, that's my feeling on the easiest, cheapest, and most effective way of controlling wheelstand. The concept is basic, the only hard part would be selecting a microcontroller to control the ABS system with the correct circuitry, and to do the actual tuning of the unit, as it would require either lots of testing, or some well thought out data acquisition in the testing.

I don't know how the heck that would fit into the rules for drag racing, but I'm assuming any kind of automatically adaptive equipment isn't legal.

Ok, chew on that and tell me how it tastes. I'm off to get some food and some sleep!

Bryce
88 GT

quote Originally posted by Nashco: First of all, I'm not building a clutchless system by any means...I'm building a setup that operates the clutch for you. You could call it a clutch-pedalless system, I suppose. Like I said, work's been keeping me very busy, so development is slow, but steady... As far as your wheelstand idea goes...some of my feedback: I'm confused by what you mean by "hiking the rear", first of all. If you're talking modifying the suspension characteristics, I think that is more complex and heavy than what would be necessary to do what you're talking about. I think the easiest way to do it would be to use the same principle as ABS and traction systems...just use the brakes to do it... I don't know how the heck that would fit into the rules for drag racing, but I'm assuming any kind of automatically adaptive equipment isn't legal. Ok, chew on that and tell me how it tastes. I'm off to get some food and some sleep! Bryce 88 GT

Clutch pedal-less - ok, I got it!!! That would definitely work! Would it be just for launching or for shifting too. I would love to have the Quaife sequential 6spd tranny in conjunction with your system!

Ok, for my high-tech, active, training wheel system. I was not talking about modifying the suspension characteristics, but counteracting the rearward rotation of the vehicle upon launching. My proposed method of accomplishing this is to have a hydraulic cylinder force the rear of the chassis upward by pushing on a rocker arm. The idea is that it would interrupt the inertial forces at work and cause the front end to fall, or at least not rise anymore.

My first course of action will be to use fully tunable suspension components at each corner and run full stiff in the rear compression damping, to make the car resist the natural rotation. The active system is actually my vision of the ultimate extension of this philosophy. Instead of passive resistance, active force would be exerted in essence shoving the rear wheels into the ground, and simultaneously counteracting the rearward rotation of the body. I guess you could call it an active traction assist/anti-wheelstand system!

Here is a rough two dimensional illustration of the system:

perk - phitown

Interesting concept...seems like it would be very difficult to control. In order to counteract the inertia of the car it would have to act fast, but if it acts too fast it would be really harsh and possibly add a torque steer with the greater momentary traction. I got to thinking last night, the setup I explained could also use a wheel speed sensor on each wheel instead of one from the tranny and used to create a limited slip type effect like traction control systems do. This isn't a big deal for normal launching on the Fiero, BUT when your front two wheels are in the air it could be used to keep the car going straight. Hell, if you wanted you could even add a couple of sensors/switches to steer the car with the rear brakes when the front wheels are up!

Your idea wouldn't weigh as much as I had originally thought. I wonder if it would be better to use compressed gas instead of hydraulics simply to save the weight of a hydraulic pump. Have you considered what you would use to keep the strut located in the frame (maintain proper alignment) through the ram travel? It seems like that would take a beefy design to withstand those kinds of forces and hold the strut rigidly. Also, what happens when you run out of ram travel...better let up in a hurry!

As far as my shifter, it would be extremely easy to do on a sequential transmission. My biggest design challenge currently is that I've got to control two different directions of motion accurately to get to the proper gear. The setup in its final stage, my final goal, will control the clutch, shifter, and throttle for launch, shift, and downshift. The first goal is just to control shifting gears, next adding clutch control to shift gears, then clutch control for launch and stopping, and finally throttle control for all conditions.

Bryce
88 GT

Before you get enamored of hydraulic suspension tweaking like the BMW 745i and Merc SL500 have, remember that both of those cars weigh well over 4000 lbs. What you're talking about is not compatible with the idea of having a reasonably light car.

I think you need to do more research into building an effective suspension geometry before you go tech crazy with active components. It's quite possible to build a rear suspension design with >100% anti-squat, and if what I just wrote is even in the slightest bit hard to grasp, you have a lot more research to do.
Consider the possibilities of using a 5 link formula style suspension...

I did consider using air or gas to control the cylinders, but it seems that they would become a suspension component and alter the spring and damping rates. Hydraulic cylinders would be seem to be the closest thing to a solid upper mount. I also considered designing a way to lock the whole deal when not at the track. The rocker arm/upper strut mount would indeed have to be very stout to handle the normal and additional forces. I figure a large, but well designed, 6061 alloy piece would do the trick (light and strong). In all, I am guessing that the entire system with specifically designed cradle would weigh less than the factory set up. The factory has upper frame rails, plus massive strut towers/inner fenders. I know from experience (cutting up my other project car) that Fieros have a LOT of metal in that space frame! My trunk is history too.

I was also thinking that, on my car with the full 12pt cage, I may even be able to eliminate the lower frame rails. I know they are probably pretty heavy. If I make the rear of the cradle bolt to the back of the cage, and then bring a strut bar down off the main hoops inside to each front cradle mounting point, it seems it would be as rigid as the factory set up. We're talking major weight reduction there! Not planning on doing this right now, just looking at all the possibilities.

You're right about running out of ram travel - you'd better start thinking about running out of gas pedal too!!!

I do recognize the benefits of your ABS-based system. It would probably be much lighter, and work as just well, if not better. Mine came from a hard-core drag racers' mentality though - something that keeps me moving forward as fast as possible! Back when I first started racing street bikes the fast guys used to use the rear brakes to keep the front wheel down. When the new generation of "all-or-nothing" minded racers (which I was a part of) came along, they came to the conclusion that too much time was lost when the brakes were applied, and started sliding the clutch. A bike is really lightweight so we can get away with this for a long time on a single clutch pack. In addition to this the clutch is a snap to change. I think I mentioned this before, but one friend who is still at it has run 1.6 (maybe high 1.5) sixty foot times with no bar and a short wheelbase sport bike!

The ultimate system to me would seem to be yours. If you can get that thing to the point where it can actively control the clutch upon launch the problem would be solved. If it worked I wouldn't mind replacing clutches all season long for the best numbers possible without those nasty training wheels Using the gyro it could put more "slide" in the clutch and keep the front end close to the ground. Normally after about thirty to sixty feet, inertia begins to subside and gravity takes over, so you just have to keep the front from reaching a critical point.

We were talking about the same thing. When I said "clutchless" manual I didn't mean there actually wasn't a clutch, but more that there doesn't appear to be one. It's a bit of a misnomer, but I got it from the systems on some of the new cars out now. Don't know if the manufacturer or the mag editor created it. Anyway, your system is what I thought you meant - full computer control of shifting (eventually). I would put my money on yours before mine - I just like dreaming up stuff. Sometimes it comes into play elsewhere.

I am seriously thinking about that sequential six-speed one day. If some of my current investments pay off I might go for it. My goal, after all, is to build a Fiero supercar!

Until your system is ready, as I mentioned, I am going to run a (YUK) automatic. It will be a full-manual one though. I wanted the four-speed, but the tranny guy wants to build the TH125. One option I have to control wheelstanding with the auto, works on the same principle as sliding the clutch - a "soft-hit" convertor. In some cars it will cause the loss of a couple tenths, but in a car that has traction problems (too much or too little) it can be a plus. It basically does the same as a slider clutch by bringing the torque in gradually. The biggest drawback is that it can't be adjusted. Once it's built, it's locked in until and unless you have it rebuilt.

perk - phitown

Well, it's been *much* too long since I was a regular at PFF. Fortunately, I'm back on the web! Anyway, I've been doing a lot of brainstorming for my own projects, and thought this needed bumped.

Any progress on the project lately?

Bryce
88 GT

quote Originally posted by Nashco: Well, it's been *much* too long since I was a regular at PFF. Fortunately, I'm back on the web! Anyway, I've been doing a lot of brainstorming for my own projects, and thought this needed bumped. Any progress on the project lately? Bryce 88 GT

Glad to see you're back. What are you up to with your projects? Any progress on the computerized shifting setup yet?

I have been busy as a bee, but unfortunately it's still all two-dimensional design work and hours and hours of research. Can't see myself getting to do any cutting and welding until late spring early summer. I have to get my Camaro ready to go cruising first, and I have customer projects up to my ear lobes. Don't know if you've seen the art I had in the other thread so I'll put it here:

Now that you're back let's dig into something fun! Your ball...

perk

------------------

phitown.com

* Supercar (Fiero) - in the works!
* 85 Fiero 2M4 - 84 parts car
* 79 Camaro - 88 Chevy custom truck - 91 & 89 Accords

Well, I don't have any fancy drawings, but I have made a lot of progress on my project.

I finally got my the porsche trans bolted into my VW (while visiting home for the holidays), so I could find what kind of clearances I've got for the mechanisms. I've decided to go with one pneumatic actuator and one DC motor. The pneumatic actuator was something I wanted to avoid, as it requires an air supply which many cars might not have, but for my baja bug I will have it anyway (small canister coupled with the A/C compressor to pump air for tires). So, I've already got several actuators, and I'll be getting the valves very soon. Of course cash is always tight for those in the midst of college, so I can only purchase parts as the money is available. The most challenging and fun part of the whole project will be building the controls to work quickly and precisely with the PLC. I've got all the groundwork laid, just a matter of getting those parts. Right now I'm estimating about 300 in parts, maybe 350 with the PLC software and accessories.

I've come up with...well, what I think to be...a very easy to use method for the actual person controls.

So, the bad news is that this first design won't be directly applicable to the Fiero without an air supply...but it will be fairly easy to adapt mechanically, little software changes necessary. The good news is the Fiero will be much easier to do than my VW because it has a more basic linkage and more space to work with. Additionally, I think the hardware will be much cheaper for the Fiero, and I guess it'll be in the 200 dollar range for parts. Of course, this is all for the basic control of gear selection; implementing clutch control will be another 100 bucks or so, give or take. I think I've also come up with an easy way to effectively control the clutch, but as we all know things like that are hard to be sure of until you actually use them, and then will always be revised some anyway.

I wish I wasn't so broke, I'd already be tuning the controls by now if I could afford the parts! All in good time...

Bryce
88 GT

When I finally get started actually building this car I would be REALLY interested in a clutch control system for drag launches. I was planning on building the automatic but if I could have a tuneable system to allow consistent launches I would start looking more seriously at a manual that could handle the hp & torque I plan to have.

What I am trying to say is that when I get to that point I would be willing to throw some $$$ your way for you to develop it. What I am thinking is a computer-controlled system that would "slide" the clutch and control traction and wheelstanding through it. Is that feasible??

I don't know when my "when" is yet, but it will come eventually.

perk - phitown

[This message has been edited by perkidelic (edited 01-18-2003).]

Hmm..well, feasibility is all in the eye of the beholder. It'd take a ton of time, and a very consistent clutch to accomplish what you're talking about. The inconsistency of the clutch could be overcome with very fast processing, but the control speed associated probably wouldn't be able to keep up with what I imagine you want to accomplish. Limiting wheelspin is easy, controlling wheelstand is not. Also, as I explained before, doing it by moderating power transferred to the wheels(via clutch) rather than by moderating wheel speed (via brakes) is much trickier.

Also, with the more "consistent" you want things to be, the less control you give to the driver. The fewer controls the driver has, the more the machine needs to do for itself. If too many conditions must be factored, it can make the software extremely complex and you'll find excessive loopholes in logic. From a quick glance standpoint, I see it being much more effective to control throttle position and/or brake modulation than to slip the clutch. I'll have to think about the logic involved some more.

I'll put some real thought into it, see if I can't think of a good way to do the wheelstand idea and what would be involved. I'll let you know if I come up with anything good; in the meantime...my bed is calling.

Bryce
88 GT

I appreciate the fact that you're putting thought into it. In the meantime I will keep firing info your way.

The reason for my desire to control wheelstanding with the clutch is to obtain maximum acceleration. I am against anything that limits actual power delivery, but all for anything that seeks to apply maximum twist with maximum effectiveness.

Ideally I would like to have a system that would be stricty for the launch. In other words it would override the clutch pedal (there would still be one) upon launch and passive allowing the driver to fully control shifting. As far as losing control, it is a given that the driver loses that amount of control at the starting line, in exchange for consistency in the most critical phase of the race. Amateur and Sportsman competitors use race-prepped automatics. The torque converter controls the launch, but they usually select the shift points. Pro cars usually have a very elaborate centrifugal slider clutch that can be tuned for race conditions. Once underway, again, most do the shifting themselves.

If I get toooo far out there just reel me back in. I like to explore the possibilities and am not hurt when my great ideas are deemed foolishness

perk - phitown

[This message has been edited by perkidelic (edited 01-18-2003).]

With the fiero, to many forget that unless you buy a high priced, custom, bullet proof trans from Quafie for 20K, your choice for gearing is VERY limited. With Front engine/Rear drive you can have low gear ratios and not have to worry about the drive line, and in this situation torque is GOOD. This being said, what the fiero will most benefit from is to have a high reving Motor(7k-9K). Usually a high reving motor will lack high amounts of torque, which is the #1 killer of Fiero 282/284 trans. Now, it won't launch quite like a SmBlChevy, but in a quarter mile, there is plenty of room to wind those gears out!!and with a double-plate clutch, your can launch almost as well. Add some nos and watch those Q.T times Drop! An engine like a N* or Aurora Tuned could be ideal for this, Or even a Short star could work.

------------------
1987 GT
Many Mods Comming Soon
(need more money)
FieroGTR@Excite.com

I agree with your post pretty much all the way. Just a couple points though.

One misconception I seem to see a lot is that the SBC is not a good choice because it's a torque motor. That's the beauty of the smallblock - it can be built and tuned to make power anywhere you want it. A 355 (.030 overbored 350) with a good roller cam and valvetrain, and good heads intake etc., will rev to 9000!!! That's not hearsay - I know people who have done it. I believe that the same holds true for the LS1/6 motors too.

On the transmission issue - if I have a manual tranny I plan to run something stronger than the original Fiero piece. While it MIGHT be able to cope with a high revving/relatively low torque horsepower motor I plan to run the socks off this car and don't want a borderline tranny. That's one reason I was looking at a full manual race automatic. For a manual the VW trans seems to be the best.

The Quaife may actually be in my long range plans. Over 15K is pretty steep but it is worth it for a sequential 6spd, that will stand the test of time.

perk - phitown

quote Originally posted by California Kid: Reason: No aftermarket super duty transmissions that have been proven, no super duty CV Joints available off shelf that are direct replacements (even if you can fabricate better parts to work, trans is still an issue). Limited available final drive ratio of transmission, not very well suited for 1/4 mile.

Ever heard of a company called Moser Engineering? A friend of mine at Mosler introduced me to them. They make completely custom CV axles to your specifications, and yes they are built for road racing, and certain ones can handle the torque of a top fuel dragster. Moser sells custom 28 to 35 spline axles for $295 a pair, very, very good price if you ask me.

Given the drive ratios supplied by Orief, and inputing a 750 ft-lbs of torque as a good stand point. Even with the highest of gears, a 35 spline is all you will need, without having to worry about breaking an axle. The calculated torque from the equation above came out to 7,735 ft-lbs, a 31 spline holds up to 7,000 ft-lbs per axle, and a 33 spline holds up to 8,200 ft-lbs and a 35 spline holds up to 9,600 ft-lbs per axle.

Can you say 8-second Fiero?
www.moserengineering.com

quote Originally posted by Jake_Dragon: Here is a mid engine drag car.

Hemi Under Glass, 1966 Plymouth Baracuda, built by Hurst, driven by Bob Riggle. Plymouth 426 Hemi V8 right behind the seats. When it launches, it does a constant wheelie down the strip, still managing 10 to 11 second quarter miles on 2 wheels, sometimes less than that.

------------------
1985 Pontiac Fiero 2M4
Soon to become the LT-5 powered Pontiac Fiero ZR