Mid Engine SVX concept. - Page 10

Dessertrunner · #**136** 11-13-2012, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'E'

no i just happen to have a set of 05+ hubs that i weighed

What was with the hub did it have the bearings in it and the hub to bolt wheel to or just the outer.

'E' · #**137** 11-13-2012, 02:03 AM

another option for rear hubs would be to use the hubs off a ba gt falcon, handbrake mechanism is the same, stud pattern is the same and shafts? well a little bit of measuring could be required. you could even use the suspension arms maybe even cannibalise the subframe

be better then chopping up or machining a subaru hub

'E' · #**138** 11-13-2012, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dessertrunner

What was with the hub did it have the bearings in it and the hub to bolt wheel to or just the outer.

that was the hub with the bearing pack bolted to it

'E' · #**139** 11-13-2012, 02:05 AM

by the way i have a gt rear end i dint really want any more and was going to sell on ebay

'E' · #**140** 11-13-2012, 02:13 AM

the ford shafts and bearing come out of the factory with 335kw and weigh over 1800kg so they should handle anything you through at it

Dessertrunner · #**141** 11-15-2012, 03:08 AM

Here is a PDF of the rough suspension layout bottom laterial arm has to come from the front of the subframe so as to clear the exhaust on the heads.
Have designed up new uprights that have a number of advantages, they take a bigger bearing 4 times stronger then our existing units, are 3kg lighter then the existing unit, enable me to us the front drive shaft and privide point to attach the laterial arms. They are made from steel as the the cost of just the Alum would have been $500 a side, also not sure my design skills are good enough to reduce the safety factor that far.

As alway the PDF are 3d
Tony

SVXRide · #**142** 11-15-2012, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dessertrunner

Here is a PDF of the rough suspension layout bottom laterial arm has to come from the front of the subframe so as to clear the exhaust on the heads.
Have designed up new uprights that have a number of advantages, they take a bigger bearing 4 times stronger then our existing units, are 3kg lighter then the existing unit, enable me to us the front drive shaft and privide point to attach the laterial arms. They are made from steel as the the cost of just the Alum would have been $500 a side, also not sure my design skills are good enough to reduce the safety factor that far.

As alway the PDF are 3d
Tony

Tony,

Looks good! What are you using as your FS in this design, 2x? 3x?

Bill

oab_au · #**143** 11-16-2012, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dessertrunner

Here is a PDF of the rough suspension layout bottom laterial arm has to come from the front of the subframe so as to clear the exhaust on the heads.
Have designed up new uprights that have a number of advantages, they take a bigger bearing 4 times stronger then our existing units, are 3kg lighter then the existing unit, enable me to us the front drive shaft and privide point to attach the laterial arms. They are made from steel as the the cost of just the Alum would have been $500 a side, also not sure my design skills are good enough to reduce the safety factor that far.

As alway the PDF are 3d
Tony

I guess you have changed the concept of the suspension from the original strut, to top and bottom A arms. This places all the drive and braking forces on the lower A arms, as you can't use a training link to take those forces.

Where are you going to mount the spring/damper units?

Harvey.

Dessertrunner · #**144** 11-16-2012, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SVXRide

Tony,

Looks good! What are you using as your FS in this design, 2x? 3x?

Bill

Bill not sure what you ment by "FS".

So guys the design has evolved, I have been searching for just the right bearing/bush/rod end for the arm pivot points, also got up this morning thinking the easist thing was to stick with the current suspemsion. When I looked at it stuffing around with the trailing arm seemed a waste of time, also I am conviniced that its there to help with the inherant understeer of our cars. The mid engine car won't have that issue, also I need to be able to advance the suspenion design over time so I need flexiability.
I crossed off rubber bush for the arms early in the project and have looked at what everyone else is using.

It seems the most comon is spherical bearings are the go, I have used these at work and they just can't stand a lot of load, I am sure they would be okay short term but long term forget it. Looked at rod ends and they just won't last, so I moved onto double row angular contact ball bearing, drama there is the ID options were 12mm or 17mm also while good would require 2 per pivot point.

So were am I at I found a AG bearing that is double row roller but 44mm wide in the centre 39 outter has build in seals to protect from dirt 16ID & 40OD. Its just perfect for the job. Its the largest in the photo.

Quote:

I guess you have changed the concept of the suspension from the original strut, to top and bottom A arms. This places all the drive and braking forces on the lower A arms, as you can't use a training link to take those forces.

Where are you going to mount the spring/damper units?

Harvey

Well Harvey I have moved on as I say above, now its a rigid arm like the front suspension only the inboard pivot points are 480mm apart as opposed to 220mm. In the short term the hub stays the same just need to make sure I can mod it to install the larger bearing. The mcpherson strut stays, later as I get more time I will remove the strut and go to a laterial top arm. For now this is the quickest option. When I go to the top arm the spring damper will be inboard with a 90 degree leaver system.
Haven't redone the cad but will and then repost it.
Have a great day all.

Tony

crazyhorse · #**145** 11-16-2012, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dessertrunner

Bill not sure what you ment by "FS".

So guys the design has evolved, I have been searching for just the right bearing/bush/rod end for the arm pivot points, also got up this morning thinking the easist thing was to stick with the current suspemsion. When I looked at it stuffing around with the trailing arm seemed a waste of time, also I am conviniced that its there to help with the inherant understeer of our cars. The mid engine car won't have that issue, also I need to be able to advance the suspenion design over time so I need flexiability.
I crossed off rubber bush for the arms early in the project and have looked at what everyone else is using.

It seems the most comon is spherical bearings are the go, I have used these at work and they just can't stand a lot of load, I am sure they would be okay short term but long term forget it. Looked at rod ends and they just won't last, so I moved onto double row angular contact ball bearing, drama there is the ID options were 12mm or 17mm also while good would require 2 per pivot point.

So were am I at I found a AG bearing that is double row roller but 44mm wide in the centre 39 outter has build in seals to protect from dirt 16ID & 40OD. Its just perfect for the job. Its the largest in the photo.

Well Harvey I have moved on as I say above, now its a rigid arm like the front suspension only the inboard pivot points are 480mm apart as opposed to 220mm. In the short term the hub stays the same just need to make sure I can mod it to install the larger bearing. The mcpherson strut stays, later as I get more time I will remove the strut and go to a laterial top arm. For now this is the quickest option. When I go to the top arm the spring damper will be inboard with a 90 degree leaver system.

have a great day all.
Tony
Haven't redone the cad but will and then repost it.

Tony

When you get away from the struts, a good solution may be to use a longitudinal setup with the pushrods, like current f1 practice. This leaves room around the engine for maintenance.

smc · #**146** 11-17-2012, 02:25 AM

Check out this video on that factory five car that was mentioned earlier. One of the first things I noticed was how they converted the stock sti uprights to a double wishbone suspension with a bolt on adapter.

http://youtu.be/uN_jVWlSPmk

Might be worth considering.

SVXRide · #**147** 11-17-2012, 09:24 PM

Tony,

FS = Factor of Safety

Cheers,

Bill

Dessertrunner · #**148** 11-19-2012, 02:03 PM

Sorry Bill missed the reply,

Your point is correct, I will tell you what has happened to my rear suspension on the SVX then I need to take on board your suggestion and my past experiance and find a happy point to the two of them.

2 years ago I jumped the SVX over a channel/bridge, in other words was driving so fast that instead of just going over and down the bridge the car left the ground and we maybe went 30metre through the air before hitting the ground. Okay no big deal we do it pretty regularly. This time we had a slight problem, the bolt in the trailing arm on the back either broke or fell out so when we landed the wheel was floating forward and back. Now this was a bit of a pain but there was not sharp things in the wheel well so the tyre just hit the back and made a lot of noise. We were able to drive the next 10k carfully but we got there.

Even more years back we were in the centre of Australia and I had rebushed the back laterial arms a couple of years before but didn't realize that this had weaked the link. Were were flogging the absoluate hell on a dirt road when suddenly the handling went nuts. Anyway found we broke the inside bush holder of the laterial link. THe fun part was that we then had to drive 700k to get it fixed. It moved around a lot but still did stop me.

So your point is correct I need the new suspension design to be able to brake something and not kill me. So I will have to give this a bit more thought.

Tony

Dessertrunner · #**149** 11-19-2012, 03:08 PM

Harvey why did you ask about Trailing link are youc concerned the suspenion won't be strong enough as I suggest it should be?
Tony

SVXRide · #**150** 11-19-2012, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dessertrunner

Sorry Bill missed the reply,

Your point is correct, I will tell you what has happened to my rear suspension on the SVX then I need to take on board your suggestion and my past experiance and find a happy point to the two of them.

2 years ago I jumped the SVX over a channel/bridge, in other words was driving so fast that instead of just going over and down the bridge the car left the ground and we maybe went 30metre through the air before hitting the ground. Okay no big deal we do it pretty regularly. This time we had a slight problem, the bolt in the trailing arm on the back either broke or fell out so when we landed the wheel was floating forward and back. Now this was a bit of a pain but there was not sharp things in the wheel well so the tyre just hit the back and made a lot of noise. We were able to drive the next 10k carfully but we got there.

Even more years back we were in the centre of Australia and I had rebushed the back laterial arms a couple of years before but didn't realize that this had weaked the link. Were were flogging the absoluate hell on a dirt road when suddenly the handling went nuts. Anyway found we broke the inside bush holder of the laterial link. THe fun part was that we then had to drive 700k to get it fixed. It moved around a lot but still did stop me.

So your point is correct I need the new suspension design to be able to brake something and not kill me. So I will have to give this a bit more thought.

Tony

Tony,

You must be the Australian version of the Dukes of Hazard!!

Bill