Go Back   Team-BHP > Under the Hood > Modifications & Accessories


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 9th April 2010, 09:40   #76
BHPian
 
Ford Rocam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Mumbai-India
Posts: 880
Thanked: 16 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pranavt View Post
Can you give more details about that? Or some reading material on what you've done? What tools were used and how were the camber plates cut? Can it be done with stock dampers? I'm planning on going with better suspension, though it's still a way off, so I'll read about it until then.
There was a thread started by me somewhere here which had w.i.p pics & making.
This was made specifically for my DMS suspension setup, but designed in such a way that it was backward compatible to OEM Strut mount.
have a look.
Name:  DSC05585p.JPG
Views: 491
Size:  89.3 KB
Name:  DSC05586P.JPG
Views: 508
Size:  72.0 KB

I hope we are not deviating from original topic.
Ford Rocam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2010, 09:47   #77
BHPian
 
Ford Rocam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Mumbai-India
Posts: 880
Thanked: 16 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrous View Post
^^ +1.

But solid strut mounts/ camber plates stress the struts, I feel.
No nitrous it does not.
Ford Rocam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2010, 13:22   #78
Senior - BHPian
 
pranavt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 1,628
Thanked: 272 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ford Rocam View Post
There was a thread started by me somewhere here which had w.i.p pics & making.
This was made specifically for my DMS suspension setup, but designed in such a way that it was backward compatible to OEM Strut mount.
have a look.
Attachment 325605
Attachment 325606

I hope we are not deviating from original topic.
Was the upper mount done using CNC or machining/grinding? Don't know the technical words, but I assume the red cylinder thing was done on a lathe machine, right? Can you share dimensions since it's too time-consuming to remove the struts to get the dimensions. I can design the stuff myself if you can help me out. Thanks.
pranavt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2010, 15:15   #79
Senior - BHPian
 
Shan2nu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hubli - Karnata
Posts: 5,525
Thanked: 87 Times
Default

Quote:
When i was working on suspension setup on my honda, what i observed is that OHC stock suspension setup is not optimum, especially the rubber components used in top section of strut, it tends to flex a lot.

now with different suspension & with custom camber plates, there are no rubber components on top section & with 2 deg negative camber its totally on a different level. The handling is rock solid on turns, i remember i have tested it on bandra reclamation turn with w.o.t on that bend, It was like running on rails. So i would say if we replace the rubber top section with some solid alternative you will see a huge improvement in handling even in stock suspension setup.
Interesting..... I wonder why Honda put the rubber part in the first place? Prob to reduce the twisting force on the strut/strut-bolts?

Shan2nu
Shan2nu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2010, 17:05   #80
CPH
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 577
Thanked: 33 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan2nu View Post
Interesting..... I wonder why Honda put the rubber part in the first place? Prob to reduce the twisting force on the strut/strut-bolts?

Shan2nu
More likely to soften the strain on the chassis, which is not an unknown problem in the industries.
CPH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2010, 18:39   #81
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NOIDA
Posts: 6
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

Hi Guys,
Had the time so went over the thread. Very good read....

The thread started with weight reduction which is undoubtedly very important probably more than Horsepower.
However, as you guys have already mentioned, it is not only the the weight reduction, but also the weight distribution that matters.
The best guys to advise us on this is are the Gurus that prepare the cars for the Super saloons class. That is actually the pinnacle of performance and handling.

What we have not discussed so far is Sealing the rear doors, making them out of Fibre and replacing all windows except the windscreen with Plexiglass. This also gets rid of the window winding mechanism which is replaced with a velcro strip. This has the dual effect of weight reduction and lowering of CG

let me know further ideas
Captain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2010, 01:26   #82
BHPian
 
Ford Rocam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Mumbai-India
Posts: 880
Thanked: 16 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pranavt View Post
Was the upper mount done using CNC or machining/grinding? Don't know the technical words, but I assume the red cylinder thing was done on a lathe machine, right? Can you share dimensions since it's too time-consuming to remove the struts to get the dimensions. I can design the stuff myself if you can help me out. Thanks.
The Aluminum plates are 6061 T6 grade, the top was done on CNC & bottom on lathe machine, i haven't saved the dimensions as it was on off project. You can redesign it in autocad or whatever software you use, for any help i am just a Ph call away.
F.Y.I the pics posted were of initial stages, after testing that for few months there was a slight change in design which is not posted here & you will need that info while designing..
Ford Rocam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2010, 04:48   #83
Senior - BHPian
 
nitrous's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UAE/Lon/Madras
Posts: 6,966
Thanked: 282 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by captain
The best guys to advise us on this is are the Gurus that prepare the cars for the Super saloons class. That is actually the pinnacle of performance and handling.
These super esteems weigh 650 kgs.
nitrous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th April 2010, 08:55   #84
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NOIDA
Posts: 6
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

Exactly, These super esteems weigh so less.
There will be several things out of these that the weekend racer/Dragger could do and then undo again for his work week.
Let us try to identify these.
Captain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th April 2010, 13:08   #85
Senior - BHPian
 
headers's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Greater Chennai
Posts: 4,589
Thanked: 454 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mi10 View Post
A swanky 1.5 tonne of steel giving 100 bhp is going to be a lot slower than a 0.8 tonne car giving 75 bhp.
@Mi10: You've forgotten a important point. Its not the power alone, its the torque as well as final drive that determines how fast a vehicle accelerates / goes.

Cheers
headers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th April 2010, 15:52   #86
Senior - BHPian
 
Shan2nu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hubli - Karnata
Posts: 5,525
Thanked: 87 Times
Default

Quote:
@Mi10: You've forgotten a important point. Its not the power alone, its the torque as well as final drive that determines how fast a vehicle accelerates / goes.
True, the 1500kg car could be running a 1500cc turbo engine putting out 100bhp and 250nm while the 800kg car could be running a 800cc NA engine doing 75bhp and 80nm.

But you only see :

1500kgs-100bhp-66.66bhp/ton vs 800kgs-75bhp-93bhp/ton, which can be misleading.

So unless all specs are known, it doesn't make sense trying to estimate the performance of a car.

Shan2nu

Last edited by Shan2nu : 11th April 2010 at 15:56.
Shan2nu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2010, 09:56   #87
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NOIDA
Posts: 6
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrous View Post
These super esteems weigh 650 kgs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by headers View Post
@Mi10: You've forgotten a important point. Its not the power alone, its the torque as well as final drive that determines how fast a vehicle accelerates / goes.

Cheers
Guys, these are numbers. And even though numbers may not be accurate, they do give us a reference point. In any case, your Horsepower is related to your torque. When you go for power output in an engine without increasing the rev range, you are by default increasing the torque as well.
We cannot tell exact horsepower without a brake dyno. However weight and 0-100 time or 1/4 mile time is something that can be accurately measured on a weighbridge and by a V-Box. This will give a pretty accurate prediction of torque and HP as well.
A good tuner uses "all" tools that he has "available" to him, as well as keeps scientific records of performance changes after each sequential mod to the engine / transmission.
Captain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2010, 12:58   #88
Senior - BHPian
 
Shan2nu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hubli - Karnata
Posts: 5,525
Thanked: 87 Times
Default

Quote:
We cannot tell exact horsepower without a brake dyno. However weight and 0-100 time or 1/4 mile time is something that can be accurately measured on a weighbridge and by a V-Box. This will give a pretty accurate prediction of torque and HP as well.
But different cars with identical weight and 1/4 mile time need not have the same power/torque output.

If you take a 1000kg FWD, 1000 kg RWD and a 1000kg AWD, all covering the 1/4 mile in 14 secs, they can't possibly have similar power and torque output, since the traction levels on these cars vary.

The FWD would suffer the most while launching and would need to be much more powerful in order to be able to catch up with the AWD by the 400m mark.

Then there is also the question of tyre size and compound :

Take a car that is 2000kgs, 200bhp/200nm, running 195mm economy tyres, which does the 1/4 mile in 17 secs. Now replace the stock tyres with 225mm drag slicks. The 1/4 mile time will drastically improve even though the power and torque of the vehicle hasn't increased.

Then come the various frictional and aerodynamic losses and the figures get even more hazy. So i wouldn't take these calculations seriously unless all factors are taken into account.

Shan2nu

Last edited by Shan2nu : 12th April 2010 at 13:11.
Shan2nu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2010, 17:29   #89
CPH
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 577
Thanked: 33 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan2nu View Post
But different cars with identical weight and 1/4 mile time need not have the same power/torque output.

If you take a 1000kg FWD, 1000 kg RWD and a 1000kg AWD, all covering the 1/4 mile in 14 secs, they can't possibly have similar power and torque output, since the traction levels on these cars vary.

The FWD would suffer the most while launching and would need to be much more powerful in order to be able to catch up with the AWD by the 400m mark.

Then there is also the question of tyre size and compound :

Take a car that is 2000kgs, 200bhp/200nm, running 195mm economy tyres, which does the 1/4 mile in 17 secs. Now replace the stock tyres with 225mm drag slicks. The 1/4 mile time will drastically improve even though the power and torque of the vehicle hasn't increased.

Then come the various frictional and aerodynamic losses and the figures get even more hazy. So i wouldn't take these calculations seriously unless all factors are taken into account.

Shan2nu
The wheel power can be quite exactly calculated when you know weight of the car, ET and TS.

The TS is the more important factor, which compensates for wheelspin etc.

Cars with different drive trains will have different loss factors. Front wheel, drives, mid engine cars and rear engined without live axle have the lowest drive train losses.

Front or rear whel drive cars with live axle have a much bigger drive train loss.

AWD vehicles have the highest loss.

The poster you quoted did not claim what is stated you (highlighted in bold by).
CPH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2010, 18:42   #90
Senior - BHPian
 
Shan2nu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hubli - Karnata
Posts: 5,525
Thanked: 87 Times
Default

Quote:
The wheel power can be quite exactly calculated when you know weight of the car, ET and TS.

The TS is the more important factor, which compensates for wheelspin etc.

Cars with different drive trains will have different loss factors. Front wheel, drives, mid engine cars and rear engined without live axle have the lowest drive train losses.

Front or rear whel drive cars with live axle have a much bigger drive train loss.

AWD vehicles have the highest loss.
"So i wouldn't take these calculations seriously unless all factors are taken into account."


I never said it can't be done but, calculations made based on just weight and ET wont be conclusive enough.

Quote:
The poster you quoted did not claim what is stated you (highlighted in bold by).
Yes he did. He was claiming that by weighing a car on a weighbridge and testing its 1/4 mile time on a vbox, the power and torque of the vehicle can be pretty acurately calculated.

Which is why i used the FWD vs RWD vs AWD example, where all cars weigh the same and have identical 1/4 mile times but that doesn't mean all 3 cars have the same power/torque.

Shan2nu

Last edited by Shan2nu : 12th April 2010 at 18:46.
Shan2nu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does ABS result in much faster Worn-Out Disc pads ? kri$hna Technical Stuff 47 9th September 2011 16:22
Spending a day with Panamera, 911 930, A6 Supercharged, A8 TDi and E 350 sidindica Test-Drives & Initial Ownership Reports 16 8th October 2009 00:35
Souping up a 2001 Lancer. Is it worth spending? wanderlustindia Modifications & Accessories 0 17th December 2008 17:32
Is Baleno Vxi worth spending 80K extra premanshu Sedans 54 25th April 2006 19:26


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 14:54.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks