RT rebuild thread

[stylussprinter]

Check out the '' Build manual '' on this forum , it's all there to see SSC's independant as shown at Exeter Kit Show .

[Antnicuk]

thanks for that rob, its interesting to see they have an upper leading arm to the rear (live axle) leading arm mounting point rather than the dual wishbone that most irs 7's have. Its also interesting that the chassis is the same with just a spreader plate at the rear outside base of the seat tub and then ust 2 mounts from the centre tunnel.

[stylussprinter]

I thought it was very clever the instant I saw it . No squat problems either , not using wishbones I think CHILL had a good deal to do with that design while working with Tim , also Tim ran it passed our friendly Mclaren Stylus builder , regarding the effects of travel on the limitations of this design . Answer was no problem with the envisaged travel in our cars . It's this design that Tim intends using for his proposed race car , although I'm not sure how advanced he is with that plan If I get up to Anglesey with him for some track time this summer , I'll ask .

[Antnicuk]

if you do speak to him, i would be interested to see if has any of the IRS parts for sale or at least the plans and instructions so i could make them. I wonder how different it would be to the conventional 'locost' IRS set up in terms of performance?

[stylussprinter]

Giving away the IRS plans ----- highly unlikely Tony , it's a unique idea . As I've said , CHILL had a lot to do with it so I'd watch out for his posts later this year(as he indicated in his post) Regarding it's performance compaired with a locost set up ----- I can't comment , not having seen it but if it's double wishbone , I'd expect ssc's setup to out perform it on track . For me it's not about ride although for most it probably would be .

[Antnicuk]

sorry, i didnt notice the link between chill and the original designs. when i say plans, i mean measurements so i could make my own bits if tim doesnt have any parts on the 'shelf'. which is no different to having the original items in relation to secrecy,

[kevp]

Im currently changing my axle, but havent made my mind up yet. I would go IRS if the bits are available. At the moment though I am half way through changing from the english to the atlas axle.

But Im not sure if its worth it.
Atlas is stronger & wider (dont know if thats an advantage on the rear), with bigger drums, but is heavier.
Fitting an LSD into the english may be just as good.

Has anyone driven/got experience of narrow against wide rear axle's?

If someone is going the IRS route then I'll join my name to the list (if its going to be available) & just stick with the standard axle till the time comes.

[stylussprinter]

[quote="kevp"]Im currently changing my axle, but havent made my mind up yet. I would go IRS if the bits are available. At the moment though I am half way through changing from the english to the atlas axle.

But Im not sure if its worth it.
Atlas is stronger & wider (dont know if thats an advantage on the rear), with bigger drums, but is heavier.
Fitting an LSD into the english may be just as good.

Has anyone driven/got experience of narrow against wide rear axle's?

If someone is going the IRS route then I'll join my name to the list (if its going to be available) & just stick with the standard axle till the time comes.[/quote

If you did choose to fit the Atlas wide axle without cutting\shutting to keep the same width THEN the car would tend to be unbalanced without ' some ' modifications to the setup . ie. more rear grip = tendancy to understeer . If you planned for 250 bhp plus then the Atlas would be a sound choice but if not ----- an ATB and Quaife shafts into your English is plenty strong enough. If you fancy the SSC independant , even if available , it wont be ready for 2011 anyway . CHILL is hinting at supplying bits which could be SSC IRS. We don't yet know and not till later in the year as he says

[Antnicuk]

i am happy with the atlas and it certainly seems to take the power. I would have destroyed several english axles by now.

I fitted the atlas because it was the easiest, cheapest and quickest one for me to fit when i got the car as it no axle at all. The problem is i have nothing to compare it to. I suppose the best thing would be a track day that we all (stylus owners) attend as all of our cars a little different. We could then passenger and see what we thought. I think i need my power and brakes with Robs handling and driving skills

I may not like the IRS, especially if it makes the car twitchy or snappy, as at the moment it is so predictable and controllable, i just dont know how 'quick' it is. The IRS is certainly more tunable though which is why i want to try it.

[stylussprinter]

I think the IRS is more about marketing on a kit car than real track ability . With the live axle there's nothing to sort other than adjusting the front end to get the best out of it. With IRS almost every adjustment you'd make would upset the adjustments on the rear. (the rear having camber,toe -- also adjusting chassis height to gain or lose wedge will alter camber) It would take longer to find the set-up sweet spot --- it took me years on track before I fully had a grasp of my set-up . I haven't altered mine now since 2006 / 2007. Jeremy Phillips reckoned many years ago that there was no advantage ON TRACK over a live axle . OK , I'm ready to get shot down now guys

[Antnicuk]

i agree rob, and the general concensus seems to be the same, if its a nice flat track. I still use mine on the road and also, i need wider tyres on the back which means making some serious alterations so i thought if it wasnt too much grief i would try the irs route at the same time to compare.

[stylussprinter]

i agree rob, and the general concensus seems to be the same, if its a nice flat track. I still use mine on the road and also, i need wider tyres on the back which means making some serious alterations so i thought if it wasnt too much grief i would try the irs route at the same time to compare.

I take your point regarding alterations but modifying the arches to accomadate width or wider wheels\tyres isn't nearly as tricky as it seems before making the attempt. I've done mine several times over the last 6 yrs and have developed a tried and tested approach . Hand paint finishing barely shows unless you're a concours man either . Phone me or email if you want to chat about it Tony

[DH2]

Still collecting some parts for the rebuild - got unused bias pedal box and some quad headlights for half price a few weeks ago.
But a big purchase last week...

It's an '06 Zetec SE with 22k (allegedly) on it, from a rear-ended Focus. As you can see it still has an IB5 gearbox and various un-required ancilliaries attached to it, so need to strip those bits off and sell them back on the 'Bay. The downside is that it has the 'wrong' head on it, as it is a variable cam timing head, but the price was good. I have bought (but not yet got my hands on) an earlier head to swap onto it, and as this is the closed-deck block, it's a straight swap, so again I can sell the head from this one.

The Stylus is slowly getting filled up with parts I have bought for the rebuild... don't think there's anywhere to put the engine though!



I'm still making slow but steady progress on the MG, which I hope to get finished before too long, and I can start on the Stylus...

DH2

[Pete&Matt]

why not use the variable valve head? The OMEX systems will now run it and control it i believe.

[kevp]

I would keep with the variable valve. I think all management systems will control it. Otherwise just put a switch somewhere to operate it. You need the variable part switched on most of the time, its only off on idling. But if you're upgrading the cams it may be best to remove it.