stoopid yeah?
Turbo Mini Forums

I see nothing ground breaking, well, nothing to rave about at least, not yet.

There's folk in this country that race similar lightweight spaceframes with two of those engines in the back, in a wet muddy field nearly every weekend. It's called Grasstrack

The bike engine thing is nothing new either, infact, it's starting to die a death now that people are coming to their senses. It's not power that accellerates you, it's torque, and bike engines don't have much of that. the fact that the final drive ratio is so high proves this. Bike engines for bikes, car engines for cars

Then there's the Caterham/ Lotus 7/ Locost folk. Tubular chassis with a veriety of engine configurations (you think of it and some one has done it, mad mad folk that should be locked away lol).

I'm not knocking the fun aspect since thats what its about in the end, and I'm glad your taking advantage of life, tough as it has been for you :)

Paul at M&M's says hello by the way

yeah well, it wasn`t really meant to be anything ground-breaking,,, it was just meant to be a competitive, cost effective club-race toy.

objective achieved i reckon

we built & raced plenty of these types of buggys with mini engines in them years & years ago,,, we also built twinny-minis & helped others build some too... they`re just not as good as this thing in hillclimbs, street-sprints & autocross

it`s more about the "Package" than torque or any other one thing.

Go-karts don`t have enough grip/rubber... nor do they have enough suspension,,, & most of em don`t have enough power,,, but they are lightweight... not a complete package hey?

In my eyes-->any of the caterham type cars & most of the open-wheeler cars are simply too heavy & too pushy & not very well balanced because they can`t get enough heat into their front tyres to be able to go deep into corners, nor can they hold any decent mid-corner speed,,, they seem to be twitchy & pushy then snapping into over-steer ,,, again they`re not a complete package either hey?

i think this little "Package" is Very fast, it`s very stable,,, it`s particularly light,,, it handles really really well... it inspires confidence,,, & it`s really really easy to drive very very fast

& it cost diddly-squat

i`ll see what it`s like once we have it running again , but i reckon with 160hp we`ll be able to stay within the top 3 outright, wherever we go

it`s a pretty good $6000 "Package"
considering that most of the top 20 cars cost well in excess of $30K plus,,, the faster cars cost more than $100K

& What did Paul tell you Colin??? i may have been a little naughty when i was there last

i`m trying to be a good boy & not drink so much now

www.miniman.com.au

"""LazyGoodForNothingSmartArseKnowItAllBackYardMiniMechanic"""

I have to agree with Sprocket.

You might have a good racer and one of the best on a £££ point of view but it's not even a car.

It's always easier to build a purpose built object.
Building cars is always a compromise so race car can not have the edge over purpose built objects.
That's why we have so many different series.

So you guys are just not talking about the same thing, one on each side of the coin.

Your racer looks like fun but would you jump in it were you to go to for a hundred miles trip ?
Motorbikes engine are efficient at what they are designed for wich is not hauling 600 kgs (say a lightened Mini with an average petrol head) without making its driver deaf or crazy ...

On the other hand, motorbike engines do have plenty of torque regarding their capacity but the peak torque rpm is ridiculously high and it is not torque that makes you win races, it is sheer power.
A torque monster is harder to drive at the limit than a high power unit (I quote Godier-Genoud, famous french Kawasaki chassis tuner)

Rusty by nature

bhp sells engines torque wins races

Speeding is like masturbating, everyone does it, but not all of us film it and put it on the internet

[quote=fab,8th Oct, 2010]fuck off