I'll post here...it's more relevant

[SVXRide]

Originally Posted by b3lha

One way to achieve this might be to get the front rack from a 4WS SVX (if you can find one).

The "Vehicle Speed Sensitive" rack is 16.2:1
The "RPM Speed Sensitive" rack is 17.1:1
The "4 Wheel Steer" rack is 14.2:1

Phil.

Very cool! Okay, so who can dig up the part number for the 4 wheel steer rack?? Sounds like a job for one of our JDM-hounds to sniff this out and get a crate-load shipped States-side
-Bill (calling "dibs" on one of the first 4WS racks found )

[dynomatt]

Bill,

Now that the new camera is online, I'll get some soon.

Roughly, this is what the spec of the car will be:

• Increased compression and high lift (10-12mm) cams, longish duration (aiming for 350hp)
• JDM 6 speed
• STi brakes
• DMS 50mm shocks (www.dmshocks.com)
• Comprehensive FIA spec roll cage
• All up prepared weight hopefully under 1400kg

Tony and I are making this a bit of a joint project and if it all works we should do pretty well. Won't be beating Spec C's or Evo IX's I don't think, but should be pretty competitive.

MAtt

[JoAnn merkur]

Matt are you keeping the aircon? I still haven't been able to get mine fixed and we need a switch for it. I also need a window down button for my drivers side, as only one has broken I don't wish to replace the full panel.
Live on coast so can come upto you.
u can email me j4joann@bigpond.net.au

JoAnn

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by b3lha

One way to achieve this might be to get the front rack from a 4WS SVX (if you can find one).

The "Vehicle Speed Sensitive" rack is 16.2:1
The "RPM Speed Sensitive" rack is 17.1:1
The "4 Wheel Steer" rack is 14.2:1

Phil.

Phil you have information it would appear previously quite secret. My SVX is vehicle speed sensitive. Why would the higher ratio be used with four wheel steer I wonder? Could it be that there is provision for greater lock? One would expect the steering as a result, to be even of more of a danger to those with a heavy hand.

This could improve things by a little more than 12% and I wonder if this would make enough difference. I will look at the turns lock to lock and think on it.

I can put my hands on a 4WS rack, but wish to be confident that specifications are fact as it were. Are you working from a parts book? Be sure, I am sure, that you have this information, but could you expand a little more. This is all very interesting.

Again I am in your debt, Trevor,

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by dynomatt

Bill,

Now that the new camera is online, I'll get some soon.

Roughly, this is what the spec of the car will be:

• Increased compression and high lift (10-12mm) cams, longish duration (aiming for 350hp)
• JDM 6 speed
• STi brakes
• DMS 50mm shocks (www.dmshocks.com)
• Comprehensive FIA spec roll cage
• All up prepared weight hopefully under 1400kg

Tony and I are making this a bit of a joint project and if it all works we should do pretty well. Won't be beating Spec C's or Evo IX's I don't think, but should be pretty competitive.

MAtt

Looks good Matt, but --- please do not stress the valve gear with that amount of lift. However do go as far as you wish with overlap.

You will be using the upper rev range and shutting off the Iris system would a simple and worthwhile experiment. There will no doubt be theory to the contrary shouted. Mine is that for what is involved and with nothing to lose, it is well worth a shot. With the radical change in valve timing you appear to envisage, there very well could be advantages. An ounce of the practical exceeds a ton of theory and in this instance would cost nothing.

Edit P.S. Talking of the ton, even after throwing out all you can, you will still have a very hefty beast in your hands. Of course I know that you accept this problem. There could be commercial aspects in favour of running something different.

I hope you are enjoying the project, Trevor.

[b3lha]

Originally Posted by Trevor

Phil you have information it would appear previously quite secret. My SVX is vehicle speed sensitive. Why would the higher ratio be used with four wheel steer I wonder? Could it be that there is provision for greater lock? One would expect the steering as a result, to be even of more of a danger to those with a heavy hand.

This could improve things by a little more than 12% and I wonder if this would make enough difference. I will look at the turns lock to lock and think on it.

I can put my hands on a 4WS rack, but wish to be confident that specifications are fact as it were. Are you working from a parts book? Be sure, I am sure, that you have this information, but could you expand a little more. This is all very interesting.

Again I am in your debt, Trevor,

I found the information on a Japanese website some time ago showing the differences between the JDM models. The VL model has 4WS, the VE has Vehicle Speed Sensitive and the S3 has RPM Speed Sensitive (which is a marketing term for NOT speed sensitive: the pressure in the pipe is relative to the speed that the pump is rotating ).

[Edit]: My earlier figure of 2.16 turns lock to lock was incorrect. I have just taken some new measurements:
My 4WS car is just over 2.5 turns lock to lock. I marked the position of the front wheels at each lock and measured the angle between the marks as approx 58 degrees.
My VSS car is just over 3 turns and the steering is noticably lighter. I was prevented from measuring the lock angle on the VSS car by a sudden heavy thunderstorm.

[dynomatt]

Trevor,

I respect your opinions, and would be interested to understand more why you think the valve gear will be stressed? We may have to replace the valves with longer ones in order to get the lift required and will definitely have to replace valve springs as they bind at 8mm apparently.

Remember, this may not be what we end up doing (as the heads are yet to be properly tested), but in practical terms, maximum power exists where maximum flow occurs...based on VTSuby's head work a while back, his claim was that max flow existed at about 10mm lift. That's consistent with past experience I have with multivalve engines.

Having said that, combining the above with accurate measurements of the factory cams will ensure Subaru's R&D work is not lost, and it may be that in order to provide an improvement in power, but not losing some of engines flexibility, we may go lower lift and muck with durations. I want max power for the engine to be around the 7500rpm mark, so we want (given the 6 speed) a pretty flat torque curve between about 4000rpm up to 7500rpm in order to keep it on song.

We will hopefully test the entire engine setup for flow...ie manifolds etc, in an effort to get the total picture. That will happen too, but in the early stages, we'll just test cylinder head flow.

Remember, this is a competition vehicle...daily driveability, and even some of the torque the current setup has will be sacrificed to deliver a good package.

As to the weight, I think you'll be surprised just how much we can strip out of the car, whilst staying within the rules. There's a lot of weight in the interior of the car. I also agree though, that it will never weigh the same as a WRX because simple things like crossmembers, and even the engine, just simply weigh more.

By example though, the bumper bar weighs something like about 10kg. Removing most of the crash protection (not required) can get that down to about 5kg.

Dimension wise, it's not a big car...yes there's lots of glass, a big bonnet and big doors, but physically it's roughly the same dimensions as a current WRX...just lower. They can't really jam much more metal into it than those cars, so my weight target of 1400kg (which is about 100kg more than a properly prepared current model WRX) is reasonable.

Matt
Matt

[-JJ-]

So are you still selling stuff, or is this thread past that now??? if not, Matt does your sunroof and interior lights roof mounted controlls all work... how much do you want for them???? are you selling the switches for the power windows, i would be interested in those too, also the drivers side woodgrain piece on the door

Cheers
JAke

[nutshell]

Originally Posted by b3lha

One way to achieve this might be to get the front rack from a 4WS SVX (if you can find one).

The "Vehicle Speed Sensitive" rack is 16.2:1
The "RPM Speed Sensitive" rack is 17.1:1
The "4 Wheel Steer" rack is 14.2:1

Phil.

Waiuku Subaru wreckers in South Auckland have a 4ws model. May still have the rack. Phone: +649 235 7166

[dynomatt]

Jake...Berger has first dibs, but I'm holding off pending a few things which should be resolved this week.

I'm expecting to get really started by later this week.

M

[SVXRide]

Matt,
Thanks for the feedback! Looking forward to see the pics of your progress.
-Bill (feeling very cheated that 4WS steering racks never made it to the States )

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by b3lha

I found the information on a Japanese website some time ago showing the differences between the JDM models. The VL model has 4WS, the VE has Vehicle Speed Sensitive and the S3 has RPM Speed Sensitive (which is a marketing term for NOT speed sensitive: the pressure in the pipe is relative to the speed that the pump is rotating ).

[Edit]: My earlier figure of 2.16 turns lock to lock was incorrect. I have just taken some new measurements:
My 4WS car is just over 2.5 turns lock to lock. I marked the position of the front wheels at each lock and measured the angle between the marks as approx 58 degrees.
My VSS car is just over 3 turns and the steering is noticably lighter. I was prevented from measuring the lock angle on the VSS car by a sudden heavy thunderstorm.

Phil,

Sorry, sorry for the late reply. i have been US with a virus like so many about me.

Your further research is much appreciated. Actually this was subject matter for the brain box during my confinement. (Gender sensitive terminology ) I had wondered if the improvement would be cost/labour effective. My car has the speed sensitive option.

Interesting that you have been taking steering angle into account, the particular which had been on my mind. Unfortunately it would now appear that any improvement would not be of the order I had in mind. What a bummer.

To be honest, I have not properly researched the subject as I should have. We have top rally experts here specialising in Subaru and they may know what alternative quick racks might be adaptable.

Cheers and thanks, Trevor.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by dynomatt

Trevor,

I respect your opinions, and would be interested to understand more why you think the valve gear will be stressed? We may have to replace the valves with longer ones in order to get the lift required and will definitely have to replace valve springs as they bind at 8mm apparently.

Remember, this may not be what we end up doing (as the heads are yet to be properly tested), but in practical terms, maximum power exists where maximum flow occurs...based on VTSuby's head work a while back, his claim was that max flow existed at about 10mm lift. That's consistent with past experience I have with multivalve engines.

Having said that, combining the above with accurate measurements of the factory cams will ensure Subaru's R&D work is not lost, and it may be that in order to provide an improvement in power, but not losing some of engines flexibility, we may go lower lift and muck with durations. I want max power for the engine to be around the 7500rpm mark, so we want (given the 6 speed) a pretty flat torque curve between about 4000rpm up to 7500rpm in order to keep it on song.

We will hopefully test the entire engine setup for flow...ie manifolds etc, in an effort to get the total picture. That will happen too, but in the early stages, we'll just test cylinder head flow.

Remember, this is a competition vehicle...daily driveability, and even some of the torque the current setup has will be sacrificed to deliver a good package.

As to the weight, I think you'll be surprised just how much we can strip out of the car, whilst staying within the rules. There's a lot of weight in the interior of the car. I also agree though, that it will never weigh the same as a WRX because simple things like crossmembers, and even the engine, just simply weigh more.

By example though, the bumper bar weighs something like about 10kg. Removing most of the crash protection (not required) can get that down to about 5kg.

Dimension wise, it's not a big car...yes there's lots of glass, a big bonnet and big doors, but physically it's roughly the same dimensions as a current WRX...just lower. They can't really jam much more metal into it than those cars, so my weight target of 1400kg (which is about 100kg more than a properly prepared current model WRX) is reasonable.

Matt
Matt

So sorry Matt as your lengthy advice is much appreciated. I have been laid low with a virus.

My comments regarding valve lift have largely centred on cost/effectiveness. There in effect no limits other than a cost/work ceiling. You have demonstrated that you have the ability to choose. You most certainly should aim for power at 7.500 +RPM, otherwise you are wasting your time.

All increased stresses are relative and increases must be considered within the risk factors/advantages applicable to the application. You are the ONLY ONE who can make decisions in this respect. I am sure that you are capable.

I note your comments regarding weight and do not disagree. You are entering an area of rules/regulations/interpretation and exploitation is the name of the game. Make sure you are up with the play. Problem is having done so and having got there, the rules may change. Been there, done that. A bush lawyer on the team is a must.

Cheers, Trevor.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by nutshell

Waiuku Subaru wreckers in South Auckland have a 4ws model. May still have the rack. Phone: +649 235 7166

Thanks, I had that one in mind as a possible. The proprietor is a good guy. If you ever wish to make contact with me, 820 8553.

[-JJ-]

sti 6spd landed from japan $7500 - $7800 AUD, selling fast, if your interested let me know matt