View Full Version : WANTED: i need performence parts
im looking for a set of alum. heads, and an alum. intake. pistons, rods, etc. im also looking for an intake for a supercharger, or may consider a blower. i have a 74 out of a hearse, but im not sure if its a 500 or 472. im also looking for sponsors, this motor is going in my race car, and it will be like nothing you've ever seen before. hoping to make 1200HP+ any thing helps. even if its just your advice.
Nashalac
08-26-2008, 07:24 AM
Unless the engine has been changed it is a 472
1200 HP is attainable but it will require DEEP DEEP pockets
Ted in Olympia WA
08-26-2008, 06:23 PM
But you can sponsor him Nash? LOL
But you can sponsor him Nash? LOL
YES, THAT WOULD BE GREAT! my pockets are varry, varry shallow, in fact, i dont think you can even call them pockets. there more like hem lines that serve no perpose. LOL! i would love to find some sponsors, and would consider just about any thing. i will be racing from callie, to pensilvania, so theres plunty of advertising for you. most of the races are in the 4 corners area, and have TV, and tons of mag. coverage.
Nashalac
08-30-2008, 11:01 AM
There's your chance Ted
Ted in Olympia WA
08-30-2008, 01:21 PM
Sounds like a great opportunity to put "Eldo Butcher" on the side of a race car.
I know for a fact that people with "varry, varry shallow pockets" always get the best TV, and tons of mag. cover.
I sure I will kick myself latter but I think I need to pass on this wonderful opportunity at this time.
TED
GTOBLADE
09-03-2008, 02:47 PM
Damn, there goes my shallow pockets too, and wanting sponsors for my hearse!!! LOL:D
maybe this will change your mind?
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u300/chelseyrock/92d0_1.jpg
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u300/chelseyrock/8c0a_1.jpg
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u300/chelseyrock/pic090508_113.jpg
"like nothing you've ever seen before!"
can you say "5 ton!" planitaries, got-ta love um. 19.5:1 final drive! :D
maybe this will change your mind?
About what?
What exactly are those pics of?
the pics are just a little tease. my chassis(see the caddy?), and my new 5 ton planitary axles. the axles come out of 4 wheel steer front loaders. most of the cars i run aginst have dana 60s. there one ton axles, and dont even compare to what i will be using. look under your 4x4 truck, and see how big the axle is. then find a front loader and compair. indistructable!
...most of the cars i run aginst have dana 60s...
:confused: What kind of cars are these & what was your previous combination? I'm having a tough time trying to figure this out.
...look under your 4x4 truck, and see how big the axle is. then find a front loader and compair. indistructable!
What exactly makes these axles so indestructible & how much do they weigh?
the axles are heavy, about 1145lbs each. i know thats a lot, but what you get in return is well worth it. most of your weight will be un-sprung, witch means it is bellow the "springs". what makes them so indestructable is the fact that they come out of tractors. i mean, how much stronger can you get then a 10,000lb load rating? not to mention the 19.5:1 final drive ratio. compared to a dana 60's 1,000lb load rating, and the fact that the lowest gear you can get is a 5:83, i see no contest!
check out my web site for some pics of what i run. http://getlostrockracing.com look under "rock racing pics" just scrool down and look. i build rock crawlers/racers.
the axles are heavy, about 1145lbs each. i know thats a lot, but what you get in return is well worth it. most of your weight will be un-sprung, witch means it is bellow the "springs". what makes them so indestructable is the fact that they come out of tractors. i mean, how much stronger can you get then a 10,000lb load rating? not to mention the 19.5:1 final drive ratio. compared to a dana 60's 1,000lb load rating, and the fact that the lowest gear you can get is a 5:83, i see no contest!
check out my web site for some pics of what i run. http://getlostrockracing.com look under "rock racing pics" just scrool down and look. i build rock crawlers/racers.
I am familiar with sprung vs. unsprung weight. I'm also of the opinion that the majority of Rock Crawlers beliefs that huge amounts of unsprung weight being beneficial are disillusioned. (To the best of my knowledge. This is the only vehicle performance group that has this belief) They are using large amounts of weight below the C of G to lower the C of G & to provide for a more stable base. I suppose if you never exceed 1 or 2 mph it doesn't matter. Once that excess weight crosses that C of G... Not so good. Chances of recovery become very slim.
I do believe that any reduction in unsprung weight would benefit a Rock Crawler, by providing a faster reacting suspension, as it does in all the other forms of motor-sports. Look at the trend towards the newer fly-weight rigs. Also the trend of throwing a bit of Desert Racing in between the rock piles. All of a sudden that huge amount of unsprung weight has turned your rig into a slug that is beating you & itself to death.
Big heavy axle housings does not necessarily guarantee bulletproof axles. Just load carrying capacity. Rockwells are a perfect example.
The true measure of strength is... What is the actual axle shaft material, O.D. & spline count at the narrowest section of the axle?
I looked at your site. I'm curious about what you are calling a "One Link Suspension?" I'm not familiar with that term.
Thanks
being that as it may, i know what im doing. i know that heavier is not better. i would love to have a feather weight car, but thats just not me. i have built several rigs in my time, and have used a ton of diferent axles. i have a set of rockwells now, and may end up using them, but you still have to upgrade parts as not to break things. do you know that a fully dressed dana 60 is around 750lbs? compair that to the 975lbs of a rockwell, VS. strength. the little extra weight is well worth what you gain.
im building a racer, so i know all about the desert racing aspect of the sport. im doing some things with my car that have never been done in the rock racing world. i know that it hasnt been done, because i know most of the racers, and there cars.
as far as the sprung/unsprung thing goes, thats a matter of openion. i have wheeled several rigs with different lay outs, and have all wayse prefered more unsprung weight. a good driver can keep that weight were it belongs, and not get in situations were theres a chance of going over.
i wheeled a chevy blazer once that started out with dana 60s. it weighed around 6,000lbs. it was top heavy, and tiped more then any thing else i ever wheeled. it was soon converted to rockwells, and the problem was solved.
a one link is vary simple. it is 1 triangular link mounted on 1 joint at the chassis. the link is made of squair tubing, and welded solid to the axle. this allows for far better articulation because there is only 1 joint to move. also, there is no binding between links because, again, there is only 1. i included a pic of one thats out of the Jeep so you can get a better idea(i know its a mess, i dont have a lot of space in my garage). the only draw back to a one link is the panhadr rod. if you dont use one, the rear end will never center, and the vehicle is basicly worthless. the suspension on the bronco on my site used quarter eliptical springs in place of the panhard rod. this allowed it to have its full range of motion, and was only limited by the springs. unfortunatly i dont have pics of that, my camera got smashed so i lost a ton of pics.
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u300/chelseyrock/pic101408_112.jpg
...a one link is vary simple. it is 1 triangular link mounted on 1 joint at the chassis. the link is made of squair tubing, and welded solid to the axle. this allows for far better articulation because there is only 1 joint to move. also, there is no binding between links because, again, there is only 1....
...the only draw back to a one link is the panhadr rod. if you dont use one, the rear end will never center, and the vehicle is basicly worthless. the suspension on the bronco on my site used quarter eliptical springs in place of the panhard rod...
Hmmm... Sounds like there are at least 3 links in your "one link" suspension.
I'm thinking you need to do a bit more homework.
STDog
10-16-2008, 10:48 PM
Hmmm... Sounds like there are at least 3 links in your "one link" suspension.
The way they are normally counted, it's only one.
the typical parallel 4 link has 2 upper arms and 2 lower arms (that the 4 links) and a pan hard bar (or something else to control lateral motion)
STDog
10-16-2008, 10:54 PM
the suspension on the bronco on my site used quarter eliptical springs in place of the panhard rod. this allowed it to have its full range of motion, and was only limited by the springs. unfortunatly i dont have pics of that, my camera got smashed so i lost a ton of pics.
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u300/chelseyrock/pic101408_112.jpg
The picture is really dark. I tried to make it a bit easier to see.
I'd love to see pick of the Bronco. When you get a new camera.
The way they are normally counted, it's only one.
the typical parallel 4 link has 2 upper arms and 2 lower arms (that the 4 links) and a pan hard bar (or something else to control lateral motion)
Aw... I see. Maybe I'm the one that needs to do more homework. :oops:
So the links associated with the pan hard bar or tracking bar are usually not included in the count? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense now does it? It's usually not a part of the system that can be ignored or removed. Hmmmm...
I would also like to see Bronco pics. Is it an EB or one of the larger bodied rigs?
the panhadr, or track bar is not counted in the # of links. its a given that you have to have one, unless you triangulate. in a typical 4 link, like on a drag car, all 4 links are straight. but as you can see in this pic, all 4 links are triangulated. at the proper angle, spred, and ditch, you no longer need a track bar. the links become "self centering" thus eliminating the need for any thing additional.
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u300/chelseyrock/DSCN0054.jpg
i have a couple pics of the bronco, its an eirly bodyed rig, and it sat on unimog axles. unfortunatly i dont have any shots of the front suspension close up. it didnt have a track bar, because the quarter eliptical springs kept the front end centered. they are solid mounted to the frame, so theres no side to side movement.
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u300/chelseyrock/BRIAN7.jpg
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u300/chelseyrock/BRIAN4.jpg
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u300/chelseyrock/BRIAN2.jpg
Nice EB!
I am familiar with the triangulated four link. It is a great system if set up correctly. It's only weakness that I am aware of, is lower link vulnerability.
Nice EB!
I am familiar with the triangulated four link. It is a great system if set up correctly. It's only weakness that I am aware of, is lower link vulnerability.
the lower links are a little vuluernable, but if done corectly you wont have any problems. mine are centered at the chassis, and are made of 2"OD 1/4" wall chromolly tubing. im useing 1-1/4"X1" hyme joints that have a 107,000lb radial load rating so theres no strength isue. only real problem with them is the cost, $120ea! well worth it though. oh, and all of my brackets will be laser cut out of 3/8" plate.
im smarter them most people, i know were the week links are and i know how to fix them. i have seen so many tabs made from 3/16" plate tare out its not even funny any more. i use to laugh at people for doing it, but now i just amaze them when i pull out my keyed brackets and fix there screw up. i design all my own tabs, and have come up with some trick ideas for link mounts. my latest is made of 5 pieces, and is all keyed so it welds on as one unit. it includes a link mount, the lower shock mount, and a bump stop plate all in one. cant post pics of it, my patent is still in the works.
...im smarter them most people....
Pretty bold statement there. :p
When you feel it is safe to show off your design, I'd like to see it.
Pretty bold statement there. :p
you know, its kind of funny. im a mechinical engineer, but i cant spell. most people see that, and think im a moron.
Well.... People do judge books by their cover. It's just human nature. If the spelling is what they see first... Plus with spell check so easily available, it may give the impression that you don't care, or pay attention to detail.
Spell check could be your best friend.:p
I've been fortunate in the spelling department. Proper sentence structure & punctuation has always been my weakness.
STDog
10-22-2008, 05:47 PM
Spell check could be your best friend.:p
"them" was spelled correctly ;)
Spell check cannot help when you pick the wrong word.
Luckily I usually misspell the wrong word and when I go to correct the spelling I notice I have the wrong word.
spell checker is ok, but im lazy. + i dont have one that works in forums. i have to copy and paste from word. i dont have time for that.
Ted in Olympia WA
10-23-2008, 08:56 PM
I use Google Toolbar, works great.
http://toolbar.google.com/T5/intl/en/index_ha.html?tracking=1&utm_campaign=en&utm_source=en-ha-na-us-bk&utm_medium=ha&utm_term=google%20toolbar&tbbrand=GZAZ
TED
STDog
10-24-2008, 06:25 AM
The one built in to Firefox works well.
www.GetFirefox.com (http://www.getfirefox.com)
OK, so at the risk of selling out, i downloaded a spell checker. now i just have to remember to use it. i used the one from fire fox once and it sucked. this google one works pretty good. thanx ted.
STDog
10-26-2008, 09:52 PM
now i just have to remember to use it. i used the one from fire fox once and it sucked.
Depending on when you tried it, the one in Firefox has improved.
And it works in the text box as you type, so no remembering to use it.
I's just always there and highlights any errors. Right click an it'll offer corrections.
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.