DTSFab.com (Desert, Trail and Sand)
Automotive Powered Off Road (AKA: Buggys, Jeeps, Trucks, Etc,Etc. ) => Motor and Drivetrain => Topic started by: Nutz4sand on August 16, 2010, 06:13:21 PM
-
Playing with some new ideas as of late.
Looking for any and all input on inline car transmissions.
What I am seeking is any info you may have on small and lightweight manual AND Automatic trannies from cars with a front engine and a rear drive pig/punkin.
For instance:
I know a Mazda Miata is tiny and light and pretty quick. But I wonder what kind of power its tranny could handle? How much does its tranny weigh?
Now I KNOW there are a million factors including car weight and rear gear ratio and tire size and on and on.
So lets say roughly a 1000-1100 pound car with at least 1300 Padla tracs tires. A rear end near a 3.55 or possible deeper ratio maybe.
What I am looking at is making a miniature sand rocket type car. Instead of a honking V-8 up there (while fun they are HEAVY) I want to look at placing say a Hayabusa or ZX-14 engine sideways and feed it through a driveshaft back into a diff and out to the wheels.
Now thats easy enough. But looking for options on adding a inline car tranny to have multplie ranges and reverse. The manual is self explanitory. But I am also looking at the possabilites of feeding a big bike motor into a Chevy Powerglide then to the rear end. Having two ranges that could be shifted on the fly under load (and reverse) just might justify the 95 pounds of a Powerglide tranny. Plus not to many (as in zero) electronics to mess with in a Powerglide. But still a newer tranny that had relatively simple electronics could be something I would still mess with.
So what have you seen over time that you might think might work in this application/abuse??
(side note: I am also thinking that a BIG newer four stroke sled engine with a reverse gearcase feeding into the driveshaft would be the best and lightest and not to bad on cost when you really add it up.)
But the bike motor with ranges does have its appeal.
So what do you think?
-
Mount that busa mid ship and you got a plan.
-
Define midship and why you think its important?
-
Midship to avoid the weight being way forward. In other words somewhere between passengers if 2 seater. BTW,anything you want to know PG specifically I can help. Done MANY of them. Strong as hell in a fairly light package. Problem is they are HP robbers even if much less than most automatics.
-
I do not think the forward weight issue is going to be near as much of a problem as most think. If the motors a lil farther forward and the people a lil farther back it will be close enough to a mid mounted buggy to not matter and may compliment a certain driving style.
I also am aware the automatics (heck even the manuals some) are gonna sap a lil power but what doesn't? Some do a lot and some fairly little. Your gonna pay for the weight. The parasitic drag. And the rotating mass.
A price I may be willing to pay. To be able to shift ranges. Especially with the auto on the go. Maybe better than downshifting or upshifting a gear on the bike motor in many conditions.
Reverse with it is a bonus.
-
Not to argue with the rev bonus. +=+++++. I don't even dislike the idea that you are proposing. IMO no reason it won't work but just like my setup there will be a need for upping the power level IMO to be "competitive" with similar powerplants using an RPM/Jeffco/in a conventional 2 seater/bike power. I also really like the variable final drive ratio but I'm thinking when you go to calculating road speeds you will find the ratios unacceptable. I may be very wrong about that tho.
-
Unless you run the bike motor in 5th or 6th and I doubt the bike clutch will hold up to that usage. Again maybe wrong but,IMO, that's the case.
-
Yah gots yer gerz bakwerds... lol The clutch sees MORE load in the higher gears. ;D
But as for the loads I do not think it will be any harder than some ofthese guys making heavy buggies and flailing on them.
In fact if the bike motor was spinning a torque convertor it would have a hell of a "cush drive" right there.
I have seen a lot of different bike motors turned sideways in dwarf cars with but a shaft straight to the rearend. So the reduction ratios in the tranny would only benefit for more weight and hill climbing and bigger off road tires etc.
Other than the added weight and drag to me its win win win. Plus the cost is gonna blow an RPM or Jeffco out of the water.
I do also not like the loss of power in the 90 degree of the ring and pinion. But again any VW tranny is seeing this some. You do not loose THAT in an RPM or Jeffco but with this you will save a lot in cost.
We will call it a budget approach!
(EDIT: I should say any VW Bug or Beetle or Bus tranny from yesteryear. (Not the new front drive only setups) loose thru the ring and pinion at 90 degrees)
-
Yah gots yer gerz bakwerds... lol The clutch sees MORE load in the higher gears. ;D
But as for the loads I do not think it will be any harder than some ofthese guys making heavy buggies and flailing on them.
In fact if the bike motor was spinning a torque convertor it would have a hell of a "cush drive" right there.
I have seen a lot of different bike motors turned sideways in dwarf cars with but a shaft straight to the rearend. So the reduction ratios in the tranny would only benefit for more weight and hill climbing and bigger off road tires etc.
Other than the added weight and drag to me its win win win. Plus the cost is gonna blow an RPM or Jeffco out of the water.
I do also not like the loss of power in the 90 degree of the ring and pinion. But again any VW tranny is seeing this some. You do not loose THAT in an RPM or Jeffco but with this you will save a lot in cost.
We will call it a budget approach!
(EDIT: I should say any VW Bug or Beetle or Bus tranny from yesteryear. (Not the new front drive only setups) loose thru the ring and pinion at 90 degrees)
No,I don't. We agree on the loads and that's why I said it won't work to use the bike tranny in just 5th or 6th so the countershaft rpm's will be similar to a standard car engine. Remember that all busa and zx's have an internal primary reduction that brings countershaft rpms down to usable levels before the tranny input shaft. When you do your math though I think you will find what i found out. Way too much for me to type out but you will soon see what I'm saying when you go to the math.
-
As for a torque concerter I don't know but I'm thinking it is doable and the bike clutch would have no issues but also I think the parasitic torque loss percentages would be huge. Most busas make what?less than 100 pounds tq?Badass turbo ones 175? Compare that to any decent car engine.
-
I have been toying with the ratios.
But I AM right about it being harder on the clutch in the higher gears.
The ratios bit is what got me to thinking about this with the manual tranny.
In high gear most manual trannies are one to one (unless overdriven) So a tiny STRONG lightweight manual would have only minor drag issues feeding power thru itself in high gear and low weight. Lower gears as needed (if wished) and the beloved reverse (but face it drag in reverse should not be an issue!)
The auto gear ratios would need to be looked at as I know there IS a slew of them but again with a taller rear gear ratio it could likely be easily dealt with.
-
As for a torque concerter I don't know but I'm thinking it is doable and the bike clutch would have no issues but also I think the parasitic torque losses would be huge. Most busas make what?less than 100 pounds tq?Badass turbo ones 175? Compare that to any decent car engine.
Yah but is that crank or output shaft on the tranny??
-
I have been toying with the ratios.
But I AM right about it being harder on the clutch in the higher gears.
The ratios bit is what got me to thinking about this with the manual tranny.
In high gear most manual trannies are one to one (unless overdriven) So a tiny STRONG lightweight manual would have only minor drag issues feeding power thru itself in high gear and low weight. Lower gears as needed (if wished) and the beloved reverse (but face it drag in reverse should not be an issue!)
The auto gear ratios would need to be looked at as I know there IS a slew of them but again with a taller rear gear ratio it could likely be easily dealt with.
I SAID I agree with you/read WTF I said.
-
Yah but is that crank or output shaft on the tranny??
I'm NOT getting into that again.
-
No,I don't. We agree on the loads and that's why I said it won't work to use the bike tranny in just 5th or 6th so the countershaft rpm's will be similar to a standard car engine. Remember that all busa and zx's have an internal primary reduction that brings countershaft rpms down to usable levels before the tranny input shaft. When you do your math though I think you will find what i found out. Way too much for me to type out but you will soon see what I'm saying when you go to the math.
I read what you said but I also read this.No,I don't.
From where you said:
Unless you run the bike motor in 5th or 6th and I doubt the bike clutch will hold up to that usage. Again maybe wrong but,IMO, that's the case.
In the lower gears the bikes clutch sees less load so its got it easier.
-
BTW,in effect you are suggesting just what I have done with my car. Only difference is a driveshaft. Now the autbox tranny is an intriguing new idea. I'm concerned aout the torque needed to run it is all.
-
Ok and I do have to stand corrected as I missed the "AND" in your one statement. So I fooked up there and you were correct.
-
I read what you said but I also read this.
From where you said:
In the lower gears the bikes clutch sees less load so its got it easier.
either we're on completely different pages or you haven't thought this throuh.
-
Unless you run the bike motor in 5th or 6th and I doubt the bike clutch will hold up to that usage. Again maybe wrong but,IMO, that's the case.
Theres the AND I missed that made what you said right.
I know this is the same kind of idea as yours Fabr with a different layout but Its more doable for those of use who do not have the menas to do all that.
Most of the custom pieces in my idea are cut from flat plate and you could do it with a jigsaw if you NEEDED too!
Plus I am liking the front engine setup more each time I see that Sandrocket at the dunes here kicking tail. It seesm to run the dunes and drag race and even jump as good as anything out there.
-
either we're on completely different pages or you haven't thought this throuh.
No I figured out what I missed you were talking about and agreed you DID have it spot on and I was wrong.
So we were on diff pages but on the same now. I do agree with your origianl statements about the loads as you stated it.
-
I LIKE the idea and again I agree with you. I just think that an automatic will be too parasitic. But,as I said,I could be wrong. I also think that the closer you keep the car balanced similar to a full size car F/R ratios the better. Therefore I think you will want the engine as far back as possible. Just my 2 cents.
-
And YES,I've had a bad day and feel like my avatar tonite. LOL!!! Sorry if I was a bit gruff.
-
What about something like this. V8 with tranny running to jag rearend. I saw this at the buugy show in Lansing. He said it is smooth as hell but darts on jumps.
-
Jag rears are too wide for long travel. It's small wonder it darts. I'm betting more than 50% weight up front.
-
That pic you posted Lupus1 is either a sand rocket or a clone of one and not unlike my idea except with a bike or sled motor feeding a smaller (narrower) rear end than the Jag uses. Many good prospectable rear ends to potentially use.
Cars do not lawn dart unless the driver backs off on the jump just before the launch.
I can make a Honda Pilot lawn dart if I back off of it. Or keep the front high if I stay in it. Nearly all its weight is in the rear.
The motor up front DOES NOT make the nose dive. That is a misconception. One most people have. Rear engines really only help make a wheelie machine. It can help traction but it can also hinder acceleration if the car cannot keep the front end down and to much rear weight/not enough front makes for piss poor steering.
I have seen more rear engine cars land on the nose (mostly cause there are more rear engined cars) but more due to driver backing off the gas right before the jump lip or actually due to the engines weight out the back casues poorly set up shocks to kick the rear end high.
Weight does not determine which end of the car falls fastest. Its how the car last reacted to the ground as it left it that does.
-
50% correct. 50% bs1
-
;D ;D
-
50% correct. 50% bs1
An explanation of what you think is 50% right and 50% wrong would be preferred!
-
Why bike engine?
-
Why bike engine?
The right bike engine in a light machine makes for a faster machine than a larger heavier car engine. Well maybe not faster but quicker. But usually both.
I am a bigger guy but I still prefer a lighter more nimble machine usually when I am in the drivers seat.
Other the lack of reverse a good bike or sled engine make for a much better mini sand car most of the time in my eyes. Thus why I am looking at this idea.
-
Not to say I would not use a car engine if I found a killer deal on a stellar engine setup. But it would have to be a deal upon a deal of all time for a remarkable engine setup that lent itself sooooooooooo well.
-
Something like the drivetrain out of a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Silvia#S14 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Silvia#S14) might do the trick.
The five-speed gearboxes are pretty tough, the R200 LSD IRS diffs are real tough, and the all-alloy motors can be tuned from the stock 200 or so horsepower up to 320-350 and still retain close-as-damnit to stock driveability. Motor's all alloy and VVT, and there are almost infinite options for upgrading and customisation.
-
First thing that popped into my mind was a honda engine and tranny with a spool spinning the driveshaft rather than an axle.
B16 with trans weighs about 300 lbs. 160hp 111 ft lbs totally stock.
Busa about 175-200 lbs plus 125lb tranny = about 300 lbs. 170ish hp and <100 ft lbs totally stock.
-
I cannot say I have even seen a Nissian Sylvia but will have to pay more attention.
One thing I am aiming for is something thats popular and plentiful so if you do need spare its not to hard to locate.
I would also like it to not be too over in demand.
As for the Honda motor setups there are a couple Honda powered machines hear at Silver lake and they are impressive.
But they do have a tough time trying to hang with the big bike motored machines as they do not have the RPM range or "envelope" the bike motors do that gives the bike motored units such an advantage.
-
But they do have a tough time trying to hang with the big bike motored machines as they do not have the RPM range or "envelope" the bike motors do that gives the bike motored units such an advantage.
That advantage may or may not go away when you go to a front engine setup and feed the power through a tranny in addition to the bike tranny. I think as far as packaging goes, the honda would have the advantage compared to a bike engine coupled to an automotive tranny. Don't forget the reduction of the rear end when you figure it up. Bike tranny + automotive tranny + rear end = stump puller with limited top end. I suppose all the extra reduction goes away when in top gear+ overdrive, but how many shifts does it take to get there? Honda trans + rear end = enough torque to run some massive tires and still have a respectable top end.
Just my thoughts without crunching the numbers. Honda b series engines are quite common and there are many specific models. Some of which, people are just trying to get rid of so they can swap a hotter one into their car.
-
I cannot say I have even seen a Nissian Sylvia but will have to pay more attention.
One thing I am aiming for is something thats popular and plentiful so if you do need spare its not to hard to locate.
I would also like it to not be too over in demand.
As for the Honda motor setups there are a couple Honda powered machines hear at Silver lake and they are impressive.
But they do have a tough time trying to hang with the big bike motored machines as they do not have the RPM range or "envelope" the bike motors do that gives the bike motored units such an advantage.
I don 't really agree . Bike motors AFTER the primary internal reduction will have approx an 8000rpm countershaft rpm which is in line with most small hi revving auto engines. Very similar rpm input to the tranny as an automotive engine. Countershaft rpm is all that can be used in calcs. Engine rpm is irrelevant.
-
The Silva is known as 240SX here in the States, I think. How about front engine rear tranny, cant remember which vehicle it was from. Have to do some search.
-
Imma not quote all three as it would make this post to long so I will try to be a tad brief.
Agreed that with the car tranny and the bike tranny and the rear end gears you could make it geared way to deep. But as you said boost in high gear in the tranny (usually a one to one straight thru) it would not be an issue if all else was right I believe. But one or two gear drops might give you an edge on a hill climb if you needed a tad more power. (Close ratio sport car tranny)
As for Fabr not agreeing with the power range that does strike me as a tad funny coming from a guy who knows and adores the mighty Hayabusa. A motor thats known to tractor lug down low if needed and will still rev to the moon! Plus these bike motors can run at higher RPMS than most car motors can for a longer time. I would NOT say a revver like a 600 has a greater rpm range. But the larger motors do seem to enjoy one.
I will admit I am not up on the most current "Fast and Furious" car engines or what RPM they can hold together at for any length of time. But I doubt its for any length of time that a bike motor can. Stock anyways.
As for the front engine rear tranny I am aware of a couple. The Porsche 944 had a front engine rear tranny setup as did the Chrysler Prowler and the later (newest) Corvettes. I am sure there are others.
I occasionaly see a 944 tranny and for not to bad of a price (if it was any good) But never really saw a Prowler tranny for sale and the Vette suff will drop in price over time but not a lot.
But I would not rule out a "transaxle" if I found one that was "right"
For that matter I have thought of a buggy with the motor slightly offset and a chain from the front to the rear and just using a front wheel drive Honda tranny (Like Arrowhead did over on MBN). With the chain from the front to the back it would stay cool and it WOULD NEED a VERY strudy chain guard to protect you if it ever broke. But you would eliminate the 90 degree pig which IS a power eater.
-
Imma not quote all three as it would make this post to long so I will try to be a tad brief.
Agreed that with the car tranny and the bike tranny and the rear end gears you could make it geared way to deep. But as you said boost in high gear in the tranny (usually a one to one straight thru) it would not be an issue if all else was right I believe. But one or two gear drops might give you an edge on a hill climb if you needed a tad more power. (Close ratio sport car tranny)
As for Fabr not agreeing with the power range that does strike me as a tad funny coming from a guy who knows and adores the mighty Hayabusa. A motor thats known to tractor lug down low if needed and will still rev to the moon! Plus these bike motors can run at higher RPMS than most car motors can for a longer time. I would NOT say a revver like a 600 has a greater rpm range. But the larger motors do seem to enjoy one.
I will admit I am not up on the most current "Fast and Furious" car engines or what RPM they can hold together at for any length of time. But I doubt its for any length of time that a bike motor can. Stock anyways.
As for the front engine rear tranny I am aware of a couple. The Porsche 944 had a front engine rear tranny setup as did the Chrysler Prowler and the later (newest) Corvettes. I am sure there are others.
I occasionaly see a 944 tranny and for not to bad of a price (if it was any good) But never really saw a Prowler tranny for sale and the Vette suff will drop in price over time but not a lot.
But I would not rule out a "transaxle" if I found one that was "right"
For that matter I have thought of a buggy with the motor slightly offset and a chain from the front to the rear and just using a front wheel drive Honda tranny (Like Arrowhead did over on MBN). With the chain from the front to the back it would stay cool and it WOULD NEED a VERY strudy chain guard to protect you if it ever broke. But you would eliminate the 90 degree pig which IS a power eater.
I also know their limitations is all
It's damn sure stay cool. Might have to figure out how to control the chain "whip" on one that long running at high speeds but you'd figure that out easy enough.
Just slightly higher ,at the countershaft, rpms.
100% agree. But a well built v-8 will run at same as bike countershaft rpms all day long also. Think NASCAR.Yes pricey but OH! SO MUCH RELIABLE POWER. Guess what my next buggy is gonna be.
-
WTF? my colors are all effed up. Well ,figure out what comment goes where. LOL!!!! I ain't doing it over. LOL!!!!
-
-
Pics! Pics! Pics!!!!!!!!
-
Nissan Skyline GT-R. Front engine, aluminum. Rear tran. AWD would be unique on a buggy 3.2-3.8 sec 0-60 depends on dyno sheet.
-
WOW,KILLER car,but how wide is the rear tranny in the diff area?
-
I say 12-14"
-
Hmmmmmmmm..........................The thing about all of these though,IMO, is that in a 3/4 sacal or larger car the ring and pinions are going to take a beating especially with some torque spinning them. I just don't know. I LOVE the idea od AWD but I also wonder if it would be like quads and AWD. If it's not full 4WD they might not climb worth a shit. killer in mud/snow tho.
-
Ecotek and a good 5 speed car tranny? Both aluminum and the Eco has got pleny of potential! Could even be b olted to your PG trans? I'd think it would be a great combo. Even the Honda could work...depending on rotation, maybe with the S2000 trans?
-
The Ecotech has not escaped my thoughts.
I have also entertained the idea of locating a hell of a good deal on a AWD Subaru with the most powerful car they ever made with an automatic. Either making it with a power transmission to the front so the motors back SOME or putting the motor behind you with the rear diff even behind that. Have four drive wheels out back with two too steer in front of you. A bit of weight over a common buggy but still very light compared to the car it was in and should fly.
With the Subee I also considered a future concept car having the motor behind you with the cars actual rear diff in front of you and have a shaft transmit power up the side of the car and have a chain at each end of it take power off the rear end to the shaft then from the shaft back to the diff.
I think I have even seen this done before.
The more I think about my Idea that this page/thread is a topic about the more I am thinking just locate and pay for the BIG sled engines (four stroke) and make sure to find one with reverse from the factory. Then jsut connecting the lower shaft to the driveshaft and make sure you had a rear end that you could tailor the gear ratio too. It adds to the cost but quick change rear is always cool. But I would rather have really quick change gears before that.
But a sealed box with the sleds output shaft and a shaft that held the front of the driveshaft would be pretty easy to put an oil bath chain in.
Or One could look into using a big trannsmission off a bike?? Feed the sled into it and the sled gearcase handles reverse? Would the bike tranny spin backwards with not troupble to hande backing up?
A dwarf car adaptor off the bike tranny would be easy to hold the driveshaft and shifitng the bike motor for different ratios would be easy. You would not need or want all six speeds though.... Likely not anyways.
Question there is how much for a big bike tranny then to pull the gears you would use out. Then the mods to have it accept power in from the snowmobile chain case.
-
I saw this somewhere,I don't remember where. "Genius has its limits...."..........................Just kiddin' ;D ;D I gotta admit you've come up with some really doable ideas but one is FUBAR.
-
Iffin yah aint gonna say what you think is FUBAR don't say anything about it!
If you THINK it is "FB" state why! Otherwise its pointless to mention it.
-
"A dwarf car adaptor off the bike tranny would be easy to hold the driveshaft and shifitng the bike motor for different ratios would be easy. You would not need or want all six speeds though.... Likely not anyways."
I thought we went over the shortcomings of this last nite. Am I missing something?
??? ??? ??? ??? If not THIS is fubar because the bike clutch will hate you. IMO.......
I may just be fuzzy today also.
-
Pics I seen of yah your face is always fuzzy......
The above statement was used above as a reduction tranny only AFTER the sled gearcase with reverse. Its not the same thing we werre talking about last night. It was just a way to have a gear reduction after the sleds reverse chain case and before the rear pig tht could be shifted up or down easy.
But like everything in the buggy world that seems to be a potentially great assest perhaps it requires a good bit of add on to do. Almost making one ask if its worth it. But a bike tranny would be lighter than a car tranny. Shift easier. But power into it would be a lil trickier to set up. Not impossible in any way. Just not easy-peasy.
I will go look at what we talked about last night and see if I can see what you are refferring too about the speeds there. That was using the bike motor itself for power and a tranny you drive while having a car tranny behind it for reverse and ranges.
Above was using the sleds gearcase for reverse and the bike motor for a light tranny that could deal with some power. But I am not sure how a bike tranny would deal with reverse. No issues I an think of. But I have never tried to spin one backwards much.
-
Oh,I see. You bring up some good questions also. All I can say,from personal experience,is that it is very easy to get Rube Goldberg-ish in a hurry.
-
I also find it desirable to appear fuzzy as much as possible. People leave ya alone then. LOL!!!!
-
I think things are starting to get complicated. I thought the idea was to keep cost and size reasonable while still meeting the goal. What the hell was the goal again?
-
Agreed it has gotten off on a couple wild tangents but I am always hoping that leads to an idea that may be gold!
I do agree that simple can be best but my stuff does tend to get a Lil Rubish as Master points out things can get that way in a hurry.
But if they work that don't make em bad!
-
+1
-
How about a FZ1 (sled motor?) with a PG or stick? Could make an adapter to hook trans to bell housing....flywheel or flexplate. I'm guessing that motor has to have 150hp?
-
Its been suggested above. The trick is to be able to get the motors power to the wheels without to much loss (parasitic drag) and without adding too much weight.
While I know it woukld work via a common stick tranny or a Power glide the issue is how much would be lost with such large units.
Thus the looking for ultra small car units that are tough. Like maybe the Mazda Miata?
-
What kinda got me thinking of this whole idea again was seeing a manual chevy tranny.
I once bought a old chevy pickup off a buddy with a busted manual tranny. The truck had a 250 straight six. The three speed manual tranny was not really all that heavy and it was cast iron.
It also spun pretty dang freely. If there was a tranny like it that was aluminum... It would fit the bill quite well I think. In high gear it had little drag. I would live with its drag to get its reverse and lower ratios. Of course there is the weight of the rear pig and its drag too. Nothings perfect... But a aluminum rear pig can be pretty light.
I know the tranny was tough as I put it through hell. I also know how my buddy broke the first one.
-
Still curious what the goal is here and why a front wheel drive car engine and trans is still being passed up. Same horsepower as other options mentioned, clutch and gears all in one small package. And cheap.
From what I read, PG's are about 125 lbs. Not sure about other makes, but I can lift, maybe even curl, my honda tranny with one arm. I'm 'bout 5'6" and 145 lbs now (runnin low on food money and workin my ass off all day). So either I'm superman or it ain't that heavy.
-
I have a honda tranny here to and yup I can curl it. Its why in an earlier post I put I may consider the motor up front and a LONG chain back to the Honda tranny. No over heating of the chain that long. But the long chain WILL need a great guard around it and as Fabr mentioned a way to control the chain from getting to off track/wild.
Not really looking for the clutch part so much.
I have also considerd the Honda type front drive tranny turned sideways but its total drive reduction along with rear IRS pig WOULD likely be to great. Even in high gear you still have the ring and pinion reduction in the Honda Car tranny.
In a nutshell I am trying to imitate a Dwarf car driveline. But instead of a bike motor feeding right into a rear straight axle like they usually do I want reverse. (and IRS. But the driveshaft does not care what it hooks to!)
Instead of the crazy price for an inline reverser gearbox I am looking for a small weight penalty for a LARGE dollar savings. A lil drag I will have to deal with. The added ranges of the other gears would not be bad either.
But no one makes a two speed reversing light weight (and strong) manual tranny I know of...
-
I have also considerd the Honda type front drive tranny turned sideways but its total drive reduction along with rear IRS pig WOULD likely be to great. Even in high gear you still have the ring and pinion reduction in the Honda Car tranny.
I see what you are sayin, but remember the honda trans is geared for smaller tires. If you go with a lower ratio in the rear end and taller tires, where does that put you? Without runnin the #'s, I'd say it prolly gives you plenty of lower end grunt and a reasonable top end. I know my car will do 125+ (indicated) with rpms to spare on 13" tires.
-
I have a honda tranny here to and yup I can curl it. Its why in an earlier post I put I may consider the motor up front and a LONG chain back to the Honda tranny. No over heating of the chain that long. But the long chain WILL need a great guard around it and as Fabr mentioned a way to control the chain from getting to off track/wild.
Not really looking for the clutch part so much.
I have also considerd the Honda type front drive tranny turned sideways but its total drive reduction along with rear IRS pig WOULD likely be to great. Even in high gear you still have the ring and pinion reduction in the Honda Car tranny.
In a nutshell I am trying to imitate a Dwarf car driveline. But instead of a bike motor feeding right into a rear straight axle like they usually do I want reverse. (and IRS. But the driveshaft does not care what it hooks to!)
Instead of the crazy price for an inline reverser gearbox I am looking for a small weight penalty for a LARGE dollar savings. A lil drag I will have to deal with. The added ranges of the other gears would not be bad either.
But no one makes a two speed reversing light weight (and strong) manual tranny I know of...
If you'll think about it a PG CAN be run without any hydraulics. I KNOW I designed one.
-
IMO tho,you don't want to do it.
-
I have never had a lot of automatic tranny trouble (excpet with Dodges. Those trannies are made from frozen butter)
I have never been inside one really other than messing with ones at the scrap yard tore apart. Only had one rebuilt in my life and it might not have needed it.
I do totally understand the concept of the torque convertor and how it transmits power via fluid against its internal vanes and I do understand how the trannies valve body controls the brake bands on the planetary gearsets to do what it does.
I am not sure what you mean on how to make one work without Hydraulics as I thought they were hydraulic in nature.
I also stated above how the torque convertor can be used as a cush drive but I have also seen Automatics setup with a mannual clutch setup in front of them with a special device/adaptor to drive the pump.
That has also crossed my mind as it would elimate the weight of the torque convertor and it has pros and cons as most things do.
-
The hydraulics only control the planetaries. That can be done mechanically accomplishing what you were suggesting. Goin g to lunch now and will try to let you in on more later.
-
The Silva is known as 240SX here in the States, I think. How about front engine rear tranny, cant remember which vehicle it was from. Have to do some search.
Different drivetrain mate. Horrible 2.4 litre N/A motor that doesn't rev for shit, and barely makes enough power to spin the a/c compressor. Boostin's idea with the Honda donk is also a good 'un, but I'd go with something a touch meatier than the B16 for a sand car. The B16 does make good torque for its capacity, but it's pretty high up the rev range.
Now, lotsa people are getting the block out of a Honda CRV softroader (2.4 litre) and putting the head out of an S2000 on it. Torque out your arse, and plenty of horsepower too. We're starting to get into an expensive area here though...