Some of these things had a stroke barely long enough to qualify for the name, 48mm. I mean, I think I've seem some bigass aftermarket camshafts with more lift than that. #1960s
My first car, a '71 Pinto, had a 1.6L with FOB (Ford of Britain) cast on it. POS burned #4 piston after a year of abuse. I did a quickie rebuild on it. A year later it burned #4 piston. I rebuilt it again by the book. Bored, new pistons, new valves and surfaced every gasket surface I could including the manifolds. A year and a HALF later it puked reverse and burned #4 piston within a week of each other. Tossed that hateful beast in the weeds and installed an FOG (Ford of Germany) marked 2.0 engine and trans and never had a single problem after that.
Is it because I didn't use Whitworth wrenches? Or did the non-paraffin oil I used damage the British alyoominium in the pistons?
Novaload promoted this comment
Edited by joneez wants the clunkers he paid for at 11/01/09 8:04 PM
joneez wants the clunkers he paid for was starred
joneez wants the clunkers he paid for was unstarred
Ford Racing recently announced that they would be selling a reengineered Kent crate engine to meet the needs of the thousands of Formula Ford racers who are starting to have trouble finding replacement parts. #1960s
@Novaload: The Consul Capri was actually sold by Ford in the US in the early '60s. The scarcity today reflects what Americans thought of it then. After all, for the price of this thing, you could buy a Falcon Sprint. Oh, and it did 0-60 mph in 22.6 seconds according to Motor magazine. That alone made the Sprint more compelling of a buy.
The twin fender mirrors on this car were not normal fittings. They look more like the mirrors once seen on Japanese home-market cars. Wonder if this Capri lived in Japan?
It's interesting, and impressive in it's own way. But there's a lot wrong here, too.
That wing on top: in a corner, it'll add downforce to aid traction, but it will also add a push to the outside of the corner, largely negating the added traction. The sharper the corner, the more it'll lean, the more of the aerodynamic force will be directed in the wrong direction. It'd be more effective being mounted on the running gear.
The leaning mechanism: it's mechanically linked to the steering, meaning that for a given turning circle the angle of lean appears to be determined, independent of the speed. Make a tight slow turn, as in a u-turn, and it'll lean the full 45 degrees. So, the full benefit of leaning will only be realized at a certain speed. Faster, and you'll want it leaning further (you'll still be pressed to the outside). Slower, and you'll want it to lean less (you'll be falling down to the inside).
To the extent that the batteries counterbalance the passenger pod, the center of gravity won't move as it leans. So, the leaning won't decrease the tendency for the inside wheels to lift, for the thing to flip.
And this:"Each differential is connected to two motors, one for each wheel" just doesn't make any sense. It's no clearer on his own site ("Each pinto rear-end has 2 computer sync motors with chain drive.") unless he's removed the differentials.
Just the same, I'm sure it's a blast and I'm sure he had a blast making it, and what the hell have I ever done, anyway? Some things are worth doing just 'cause you can, not because it's objectively a good solution.
@cgarison: I was just thinking, "what happens when it goes over a bump?" I imagine that if one wheel goes into a pothole you might have some unintentional steering going on.
As an engineer, I find this absolutely ingenious. He designed and built a [virtually] new car for less than most used cars sell for.
As a consumer, this makes me a little peeved that new cars cost so much. However, I then realize that this was one man designing it and not a team of engineers, he built it at non-union wages, and it didn't have to be tested for reliability, crash-worthiness, and the host of other regulations automakers have to prove their cars meet now.
I guess the bottom line is, this shows that there is still a healthy dose of ingenuity out there, but that's about all you can take from it. Well, that and a quirky little car that all of us Jalops should be looking at with a little dragon-envy.
That's pretty incredible, and for $500... it's worth half that if it's only scrap metal. I'm curious how that handles; short wheelbase, skateboard steering, lateral weight transfer in corners... It has the potential to be really scary. Unique idea, well executed, and the price of parts just pushes this over the top.
If a retiree can build an electric car this interesting and intriguing for $500, why can't Tesla build the Roadster for, well, less than what they are selling it now?
Oh, and LeMons! (Probably will spend most of the time charging though :P)
11/02/09
Official engine of the Anadol, Turkey's first mass-production car. #1960s
11/02/09
11/01/09
11/01/09
Is it because I didn't use Whitworth wrenches? Or did the non-paraffin oil I used damage the British alyoominium in the pistons?
11/01/09
11/01/09
Oh, Ford. If only you'd shared this with the US. (I believe this Capri also packed the Kent.) #1960s
11/01/09
@Novaload: Or as seen here in later production form. #1960s
11/01/09
11/01/09
11/01/09
The twin fender mirrors on this car were not normal fittings. They look more like the mirrors once seen on Japanese home-market cars. Wonder if this Capri lived in Japan?
11/01/09
08/27/09
That wing on top: in a corner, it'll add downforce to aid traction, but it will also add a push to the outside of the corner, largely negating the added traction. The sharper the corner, the more it'll lean, the more of the aerodynamic force will be directed in the wrong direction. It'd be more effective being mounted on the running gear.
The leaning mechanism: it's mechanically linked to the steering, meaning that for a given turning circle the angle of lean appears to be determined, independent of the speed. Make a tight slow turn, as in a u-turn, and it'll lean the full 45 degrees. So, the full benefit of leaning will only be realized at a certain speed. Faster, and you'll want it leaning further (you'll still be pressed to the outside). Slower, and you'll want it to lean less (you'll be falling down to the inside).
To the extent that the batteries counterbalance the passenger pod, the center of gravity won't move as it leans. So, the leaning won't decrease the tendency for the inside wheels to lift, for the thing to flip.
And this:"Each differential is connected to two motors, one for each wheel" just doesn't make any sense. It's no clearer on his own site ("Each pinto rear-end has 2 computer sync motors with chain drive.") unless he's removed the differentials.
Just the same, I'm sure it's a blast and I'm sure he had a blast making it, and what the hell have I ever done, anyway? Some things are worth doing just 'cause you can, not because it's objectively a good solution.
Hat's off to the guy.
(Edit: Why does Gawker hate linefeeds?)
08/24/09
08/24/09
Always loved that show.
08/24/09
08/24/09
08/24/09
As a consumer, this makes me a little peeved that new cars cost so much. However, I then realize that this was one man designing it and not a team of engineers, he built it at non-union wages, and it didn't have to be tested for reliability, crash-worthiness, and the host of other regulations automakers have to prove their cars meet now.
I guess the bottom line is, this shows that there is still a healthy dose of ingenuity out there, but that's about all you can take from it. Well, that and a quirky little car that all of us Jalops should be looking at with a little dragon-envy.
08/24/09
08/24/09
08/24/09
Hello, junkyard?
Yeah?
Do you guys have a copter in stock?
Uh, no........
08/24/09
Oh, and LeMons! (Probably will spend most of the time charging though :P)
08/24/09
08/24/09
:)