legacycentral bbs

After seeing the spot in Grassroots Motorsports (awesome mag btw) about "la bala" (www.grabercars.com) it inspired me to consider other alternatives to an engine/drivetrain that would work in a MR format. To save you time, some guy is using a MR2 engine and trans with a di dion rear axle (imagine a solid rear axle with the diff not mounted to it) to power a tube frame car that will weigh ~1400lbs.

There are a few things I personally don't like about it; with 112hp, i think he could do better with a different engine, although a di dion isn't bad, independant rear suspension is better on rougher roads and it can adjust alignment as the car shifts weight, and the engine sits way back on the rear axle, lending itself to making the car swap ends.

Well, why not a fwd legacy trans and engine? You could keep the suspension geometry the same and use the rear axles (possibly some welding required) like the awd leg would.

I'm just trying to generate a conversation.

THe problem I see with it is the way the tranny is shaped. It's going to stick back real far into the rear, too far maybe. It would probably be better to have it as a rear engine rwd. With the engine behind the rear axle and the tranny facing the front, basically how a fwd legacy is but backwards.

I have always wanted to just stick another FWD motor and tranny into the rear of another FWD wagon. Should be fairly easy, just a tad bit of welding! Then tack on a little nitrous to both engines and you have 400 hp!

why would you want nitrous in the first place?

the idea of twin engine cars has always intrigued me, which is why I like the pikes peak escudo so much

Cause nitrous = much faster! And two engines with nitrous = super faster.

While nitrous is more exspensive in the long run, when a $500 or so mod (in my case $250) takes almost 2 seconds off your 1.4 mile time and only takes a few hours to install, man you just got to want it! And if I was running two engines, pushing out over 400 hp, that would just be scary fun!

If you had everything working right, with just 2 N/A engines AND running nitrous to both engines, you would be pulling 12.5 second ets and about 105 to 110 mph traps. Cant say I would walk away from that!

Yeah there is give and take, but I would take!

Even better would be to put two 2.2 engines with nitrous into the 1975-1979 wagons for a max weight of 2500 lbs. This would probably be into the low 11's and 120 trap! Shaming STI's with the OLD SCHOOL! Christ, if you had a pre-80 suby that beat most sti's your car would probably be older than the drivers of the sti's!!!!
Too bad my wife got rid of both my 70's rigs! I am still looking thoug!

Its all good in a fast car! Even better in a slow car driven fast! Even better in a slow car driven faster than a fast car driven slower than a fast car driven slower than a fast car driven fast. OK, stop reading now! I have lost track of the squirrels in my brain.

There was a car called the OSCA 2500GT (resurrected old name) that was to use the 2.5 engine and transmission in a mid-mounted sports car.

I like twin engine cars, too. I have one I want to build with two front-mid mounted V8s on a truck chassis with one driving the front wheels and reconfigured to rotate counter to the other engine driving the rear wheels.

Steve

douglas vincent wrote:Cause nitrous = much faster! And two engines with nitrous = super faster.

While nitrous is more exspensive in the long run, when a $500 or so mod (in my case $250) takes almost 2 seconds off your 1.4 mile time and only takes a few hours to install, man you just got to want it! And if I was running two engines, pushing out over 400 hp, that would just be scary fun!

and how long do you get to enjoy this 250 bucks? A couple seconds? Sounds like a waste to me. You realize that twin ej22t's would be infinately better than nitrous. Why you ask, because the power is there ALL THE TIME. Also 1/4 mile races are pretty lame. Who wants to drive in a straight line? Go get an american car for that.

First off Thawa, no ill feelings going out here.,

Secondl, yes twin ejtty's would be nicer than NA's. I just was thinking cheapskate mode since you can pick up NA's a dime a dozen and dont have to worry about any problems such as engine management and so forth.

Third. You can run nitrous as long as you want as long as you are not pushing the actual limits of you engine. Small amounts of nitrous could be run as long as you want but that would be the same as running 2 pounds of boost, not worth it. So just like running more pounds of boost, running a big shot of nitrous can only be done for so long. I can run a 70-80 shot of nitrous for about 15 seconds straight, which by this time I am doing way over 100 if started at at 30 mph.


How often do you actually get on full boost? About as often as I would actually get on full "nitrous", not very often. And you can use it in the curves if you want, its just the same as running full boost in the curves.

And I have to respectfully disagree about the power being there all the time. Doesnt turbo power correlate to rpm? When I have the supercharger running I will have it set to run at about 5 lbs of boost. This should give me a NA that has the same power of a stock 2.2 turbo. Then tack on the nitrous and I can push into the 230 crank hp range with no major engine management problems.

I am not saying this is foolproof, nor cheap, but for the short term it is cheaper and easier (timewise) than swapping over a turbo motor and all the mechanics and wiring.

And finally, I dont want an American car, I want to BEAT american cars! And Hondas, and whatever!

Cheers

If you could do it for under $2k in parts and car you could enter the Grassroots Motorsports $2005 Challenge.

Don't expect longevity though as my N/A just blew a piston with no warning and I've never hit nitrous.

Steve

Here's my take on NO2: I wouldn't put in on any car without doing serious fuel upgrades. Nitrous oxide is its namesake: a form of oxygen. Introducing a bunch of oxygen into your engine without compensating with the proper amount of fuel will cause you to lean out, and bad. Of course, if you were to put it on a stock car, the ECU would notice the abrupt change in A/F ratios at the O2 sensor, and start dumping more fuel in. But it can only do as much as the fuel pump, rails, and injectors can handle.

I'm not bashing nitrous in anyway, it's a quick power-maker. But most people don't understand what needs to be done to make the best use of it.

Thats just the basic wet versus dry. When running wet you introduce more fuel with the nitrous, instead of relying upon the computer to realize this.

scottzg wrote:I'm just trying to generate a conversation.

Yeah, about nitrous it seems

My, my. Wive's tales abound. The first thing to understand is that horsepower is very simply related to cylinder pressure. More pressure more horsepower.

Nitrous increases cylinder pressure...
Turbocharging increases cylinder pressure...
Supercharging increases cylinder pressure...
Advanced timing increases cylinder pressure...

They are all the same and end up with the same result... more horsepower. Each and everyone has to be used properly... there are idiots that slap dry shot systems on any engine and there are also idiots that advance their timing on old distributors until their engine grenades and then you have to classic idiots that up the boost until they reach the same end. Each system has advantages/disadvantages related to heat, time of productivity, etc...

Quit writing stuff off because there are a lot of people that do it wrong and mess their stuff up. One isn't more likely than the other to blow your engine up if done correctly. Very key phrase in there... if done correctly

!correctomundo!