Jump to content
SAU Community

Vic Wasteland Thread - 15.0


R31Nismoid
 Share

Recommended Posts

being british you won't have to go to much effort to give it the rusted patina look??

 

and you want something more efame than a barra....I'm thinking a tesla Model S P1billion drivetrain swap.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Leroy Peterson said:

I should make my triumph project go public for sourcing funds. Anyone want a share?

Sorry mate I don't dabble in penny stocks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so lets run some numbers on this...

the base weight on a 97 Failane was: 1642 KG
standard Engine was 162KW and 361Nm of torque 
which we get a 9.8s  0-100

 

Great. now they replaced the 162kw with a 3.5l Mitsubishi motor, which we can gather was the magna one.
Magna 3.5 147kw and 300Nm 

hmm not a good move..

now add in a second rear axle and suspension.. there has to be a good 250kg there for everything (axle, suspension, brakes, wheels)
add in an extra 6 front passenger seats (so it appears) circa 40 kg each for those so there 240kg 

so we have ditched 10% power and 20% torque and we are 30% heavier  hmm getting worse.

now the big one that stretch, to keep that from bowing and adding 2 extra doors there is some serious metal involved here lets be generous and call it 800kg

 

so we are now at approx 3000kg 

now a quick google says the GMV of a magna was 1884kg and had a tow weight of 1500kg so 3384kg

so would this do 100 and cruise yes.

 

but wait you idiot I hear you screaming..you forgot the passengers....

so call it 1 driver and 8 in the back

average au person weighs in at 78.5kg from ABS

 

so lets add in that extra 709.5kg in

 

so we at 3641.5kg... best case

 

using a online calculator:

http://www.060calculator.com/

 

gives us a theoretical best time of 14.8sec 0-100
assuming the engine/transmission does not explode as it is now past it's duty level..


yes I am bored today

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it states 3.5L and pre 2000 (the build date) my only finds were the magna engine, (same engine was in the pajero but makes more sense to use the magna one as no transfer case and such to stress about.)

cannot think of any drive by wire cars from that era as well so yeah that would be all cable operated, the gear box mech would have to be weird as well unless you built an actuator on top and had it as push button 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so lets run some numbers on this...
the base weight on a 97 Failane was: 1642 KG
standard Engine was 162KW and 361Nm of torque 
which we get a 9.8s  0-100
 
Great. now they replaced the 162kw with a 3.5l Mitsubishi motor, which we can gather was the magna one.
Magna 3.5 147kw and 300Nm 
hmm not a good move..
now add in a second rear axle and suspension.. there has to be a good 250kg there for everything (axle, suspension, brakes, wheels)
add in an extra 6 front passenger seats (so it appears) circa 40 kg each for those so there 240kg 

so we have ditched 10% power and 20% torque and we are 30% heavier  hmm getting worse.
now the big one that stretch, to keep that from bowing and adding 2 extra doors there is some serious metal involved here lets be generous and call it 800kg
 
so we are now at approx 3000kg 
now a quick google says the GMV of a magna was 1884kg and had a tow weight of 1500kg so 3384kg
so would this do 100 and cruise yes.
 
but wait you idiot I hear you screaming..you forgot the passengers....
so call it 1 driver and 8 in the back
average au person weighs in at 78.5kg from ABS
 
so lets add in that extra 709.5kg in
 
so we at 3641.5kg... best case
 
using a online calculator:
http://www.060calculator.com/
 
gives us a theoretical best time of 14.8sec 0-100
assuming the engine/transmission does not explode as it is now past it's duty level..


yes I am bored today
 


In the description it clearly states 12 + driver so there's a heap more seats and people you aren't accounting for.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share




  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For sure, bromance with common shit box interests.
    • People like Johnny Dose Bro might be laughing at my post because I accidentally added 100mm to my numbers. 350-355 is indeed the lower limit. 450 is off-road Skyline spec.
    • What is the "compromise" that you think will happen? Are you thinking that something will get damaged? The only things you have to be concerned about with spherical jointed suspension arms are; Arguments with the constabulary wrt their legality (they are likely to be illegal for road use without an engineering certificatation, and that may not be possible to obtain). A lot more NVH transmitted through to the passengers (which is hardly a concern for those with a preference for good handling, anyway). Greatly increased inspection and maintenance requirements (see above points, both).   It is extremely necessary to ask what car you are talking about. Your discussion on strut tops, for example, would be completely wrong for an R chassis, but be correct for an S chassis. R32s have specific problems that R33/4 do not have. Etc. I have hardened rubber bushes on upper rear control arms and traction rods. Adjustable length so as to be able to set both camber and bump steer. You cannot contemplate doing just the control arms and not the traction arms. And whatever bushing you have in one you should have in the other so that they have similar characteristics. Otherwise you can get increased oddness of behaviour as one bushing flexes and the other doesn't, changing the alignment between them. I have stock lower rear arms with urethane bushes. I may make changes here, these are are driven by the R32's geometry problems, so I won't discuss them here unless it proves necessary. I have spherical joints in the front caster rods. I have experienced absolutely no negatives and only positives from doing so. They are massively better than any other option. I have sphericals in the FUCAs, but this is driven largely by the (again) R32 specific problems with the motion of those arms. I just have to deal with the increased maintenance required. Given how much better the front end behaves with the sphericals in there.....I'd probably be tempted to go away from my preference (which is not to have sphericals on a road car, for 2 of the 3 reasons in the bulleted list above), just to gain those improvements. And so my preference for not using sphericals (in general) on a road car should be obvious. I use them judiciously, though, as required to solve particular problems.
    • Aren't we already on one? SAU unforgettable bromance.
    • Easiest way to know is to break out the multimeter and measure it when cold, then measure all the resistances again once it gets hot enough to misfire. Both the original ignitor and the J Replace version. Factory service manual will have the spec for the terminal measurements.
×
×
  • Create New...