|
|
|
It's kind of odd, but a lot of car/bike guys seem to like old cars and new bikes. A mate of mine is rebuilding an old 1970s 2-door Range Rover, but he rides a near new KTM Superduke and says he would never even consider riding an old bike.
I've only just got my first bike, which is 'retro' enough being from 1985, but I am strongly considering upgrading to a near-new or possibly even brand-new bike when I can afford it. Something I'm not likely to do with a car. I think it's because modern bikes haven't lost the direct connection to their rider like cars have. Modern cars have multiple layers of sound deadening and electric power everything, but on a bike it's still more or less you, the engine and the road. While cars have generally gotten bigger and gained more and more weight, bikes have mostly improved through light weight materials, better brakes and suspension and more power. For example, over the 20 years from 1992-2012, the Suzuki GSX-R 600 has gained 30% more power (80hp to 103hp) and lost 20% of its weight (235kg to 188kg wet). If that's not an improvement then I don't know what is!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting car. The engine is astonishing and the car certainly makes an impact. It's a bit of a poser's car though. The builder seems to have done a lot of stupid things for no other reason than 'to be different'. Like having no brake pedal, and moving the throttle to the opposite side of the transmission so you have to straddle the gearbox uncomfortably, with the shifter between your legs. Why? Not to mention the solid-mounted suspension. It's not surprising that he trailered it there. I know it's a forum rule not to be negative and all, but I just don't see the point of building a 1000hp hemi hot-rod, trailering it to Bonneville speed week and NOT running down the salt! The engine is amazing and a chopped steel early Ford is always nice, but the car could have been so much more impressive if he either made it practical enough to drive it to the salt, or put in enough safety gear to race it. Trailering your car over 1200km behind an RV just to do cruise laps up and down the pit lane is just ridiculous in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nice. That's the same hall as they had the Melbourne Hot Rod Show in recently, if I'm not mistaken. Very flash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's legendary. 11 seconds out of a street-driven van is definitely moving as well! 500hp with the nitrous on is an heroic effort from that 2-litre.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is simply amazing! Absolutely love it. Keep up the good work!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that an outboard engine could work very well for that purpose. They're designed to operate for long times at a fixed rpm and are very reliable. All modern outboards in a 20-30hp range will be water-cooled, it would just be a matter of rigging up your own plumbing and heat exchangers. Be careful about the water pumps though, they are sometimes a bit weak. However, they are fairly expensive compared to car engines, and a lot of the older (cheaper) ones in that size range will be 2-stroke. If you're looking for the cheapest possible purchase cost, with plenty of power left in reserve, then I'd be looking at any old cheap hatchback engine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You might be surprised at how little difference there is between an old and new Toyota chassis. I've heard of a bloke doing up a 40 series Land Cruiser who wanted to swap it onto a newer chassis, I can't remember whether it was a 60 series or a 75 series. When he did a bit of research he found out that the chassis were nearly identical, despite being built about 30 years apart.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18, 2012 10:21:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 14, 2012 10:22:04 GMT
|
Awesome. I want it as my daily driver.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2012 11:14:29 GMT
|
Surely that makes it crowdsourced or something, rather than open-source. As far as I'm concerned, anything which is open source must be free. The power of internet communities is great and everything, but I'm more focused on results than buzzwords. I know buzzwords when I see them. The Mission Statement on their website says, under the heading of Environmental Sustainability, "Reduce harmful particulate and carbon emissions. Clean up the face of main street by doing away with the oceans of unsold cars baking in sun. Reduce engine noise inside and outside the vehicle for the sake of serenity." That is all just rubbish. They're building a low-volume monster off-roader with a V8 crate motor. They are not doing anything to 'clean up the face of main street'. In terms of real results, what we have is a company that's obviously making pretty decent profits out of building $74,900 kit cars. It's a fairly conventional welded steel spaceframe, with live axle and a thumping V8. Great fun for sure, but hardly a world-changing revolution. Also note, in the US, big V8 pickups are cheap. The Rally Fighter may be a lot lighter, but the basic suspension layout is the same as a pickup truck. You can get the Ford F-150 SVT Raptor brand-new with four-wheel-drive and a 411hp V8 for $42,500, which would go offroad almost as fast as the Rally Fighter, and would probably be even better offroad over slow tough stuff, but still be practical enough to be your daily driver. Dodge and Chevy also have roughly comparable trucks with big V8s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For more than four times the price, you would certainly hope so!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can understand that, but it would be a shame to see it go when it's so close to being finished.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hoping that this doesn't get ditched in favour of a Jag XJ6!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
found a perfect donor car, time to get rid of the Simca to make room OMG please don't sacrifice the Simca for a boring old Jag! The Simca is something rare and special. What stage did you get up to on the driveline conversion?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, there are several good reasons for doing the Chevy small block swap, not least of which is that they're actually a lighter engine and move the weight further back in the car. The main reason though is that you can buy a complete V8 for a lot less money than the cost of rebuilding a Jag six.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nice! I've always liked these. Raise it by 100mm and I'll take it! ;D
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The original economy car: The Model T wasn't actually that bad on fuel either, supposedly they did 25mpg (US), which I believe is actually better than the current US vehicle fleet average. And of course there's the quintessential British economy car: Supposedly the Austin 7 could achieve 40-50mpg, which is still good even by today's standards. It's hard to go wrong with an ultra-light car and a small engine. Also, let's not forget that versions of the Austin 7 were responsible for kick-starting car production by both BMW and Nissan/Datsun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 12, 2012 23:59:02 GMT
|
Apart from the boot install and painted dash, it looks like a stock interior, which is a bit unusual for a lowrider. My favourite part is how lost the small-block Chevy looks in that huge engine bay. They weren't available with a bigger engine either, so basically the nose could have been about 6" shorter if not for aesthetic proportions. That's something you don't see on many modern cars!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 12, 2012 23:18:17 GMT
|
Clearly that's just a kit car with lots of wanky management-speak! You pay them for the base kit and then finish it yourself. I don't see anything open-source about it. They may give out a few CAD files for free download, but that doesn't mean that you could realistically make the body at home. You need the moulds which they will have at the factory. It would also be a big job to try and fabricate steel tube structures from an IGS file, you really need cutting lists and 2D drawings. You could produce the drawings yourself from the 3D files, but it would take hours.
If any car is open-source, then it's the Locost, and that thing's been about for decades. Paper books of plans may not be trendy, but they are accessible to the average individual, even if you don't have CAD software and a machine to run it. To me, that makes it more open-source than the Rally Fighter, even if you do have to pay for the book of plans.
|
|
|
|