Project "Marginal gains..."
Turbo Mini Forums

Looks like a hood scoop

I run a supercharger and I don't care the TB is on the wrong side.
VEMS + 12 PSI + Liquid Intercooler = Small Bore FUN!

Some time ago these were made:




With the recent mods to the subframe tower bolt area it makes sense to try and tie these areas together, the main problem with adding any tubes just like adding a roll cage is gaining access in order to weld the whole intersection of any tubes and not just the areas which you can see as it makes a big difference to the strength and stiffness of a joint if it is only half welded.

Cheers

Edited by Aubrey_Boy on 17th Oct, 2017.

Token weight savings...

I have been lightening and remaking various parts to try and offset the boat anchor and the various other choices which have added weight.

As shown previously the crankcase breather was remade to eliminate the rubber hose, improve clearance and try and save a little weight, including the Wiggins versus jubilee clips / rubber hose it saves about 200g.





The original plan with the bulkhead blanking plate was to remake it exactly as standard but in ally, but the triangular shape indentation interferes with the wiring from the Speedo and would likely rub through. So it was just remade in ally but with dimple to help stiffen it.

Std


Ally


This is some ally I got bent / curved in order to remake the brake pedal pad which saves about 100g over the stupidly heavy std Wilwood pads.
[url=https://flic.kr/p/WrbTcZ]

And the SC rear hubs, I don't have a reliable weight for the std built up part so I can't quote the weight saving but it's here for reference if it's of use to anyone else.





Cheers

Edited by Aubrey_Boy on 11th Jul, 2017.

I just have to see this car in the flesh, so to speak !

Me too!

At the moment it just feels like an assortment of parts, I'm sure when I stop dicking with stuff and get it on it's wheels it will feel more like a Mini again

Cheers

I cannot remember, do you have a total weight of the car goal in mind ?

Edited by robert on 18th Oct, 2017.

Medusa + injection = too much torque for the dyno ..https://youtu.be/qg5o0_tJxYM

New avatar reminds me of my first remote control car from Tandy.

In the 13's at last!.. Just

Mr Lizard :)

The 962, Merc C9/C11, Mazda 787B Group 'C' era was an awesome time, I had a 787B Tamiya RC car, but my driving skills saw it smashed to bits

Robert...

apologies as I am seemingly incapable of writing concise answers...

But if I'd just said I want it to be as light as possible without qualifying anything it wouldn't make much sense

OK, so I want it to be as light as possible but with some sort of 'rules', these being;

Appearance:

An MOT'd 'ordinary' looking road car (A typical Mini on 13")

So for me 'ordinary' rules out riveted / screwed in poly windows, polys OK but with seals etc to hold it in place

Should have bumpers / grille / door handles / boot lock etc...

No fibre glass panels - especially doors (possibly FG bootlid not sure, depends I what I can find weight / fit wise)

Cost:

KAD rear discs are an example of what is just too rich for what I am willing to spend vs weight saving / gain.

Lots of what has been made so far is from T45 / S514 / Ally we have or have easy access to so hasn't really cost that much material wise


Function:

Must have a heater / demist - front / side

Front windows must open (I have the MK1 sliding poly kit)

Handling:

No worse but preferably better than a std road car, so the big area yet unclear is the rear subframe / trailing arms / coilovers - potential weight saving but at what cost - hence the ugly bar tests as not willing to make it worse.

Minimised front hub level offset - which dictates that 13" wheels and very little in the way of easy weight saving possible, no easy ally calipers / hub / knuckle available without spending $$$

Interior:

No obvious lightening holes to be on view, steering column and handbrake OK they are hiddenish away
Still undecided but probably at least partial if not full 'looking' interior, carpet, door / side trim cards.

So to finally answer your question, in any of the above guises (i.e. having to use a pretty well std rear suspension and complete looking interior) I would be disappointed not to get below 600kg (prepared to be disappointed)

I think within these limits with a minimal interior and lightweight rear suspension - 575 kg at best?

The XE / Turbo / Gearbox / 13" wheels must add up to 75kg over a lightweight A / K series engined car on 10s?

Edited by Aubrey_Boy on 3rd Dec, 2014.

Based on the above I would expect it to be heavier than 600kg.

But it sounds like it will be a very useable road car, something I'm hoping to achieve in my own build.

Sounds like it will be an awesome mini, dont think it will get near or under 600kg tho

thanks, I think it was john kimmens had a steel mini around the 500 kg mark ,the gold one ..from specialist components .so must be doable .keep at it !

Edited by robert on 18th Oct, 2017.

Medusa + injection = too much torque for the dyno ..https://youtu.be/qg5o0_tJxYM

Yeah I guess reading it back it sounds like a long list of what I am not willing to compromise on and with the weight added it's difficult to see where the significant weight loss can come from.

I'll just keep plugging away and see where I get, when it's back on its wheels I want to try and weigh it again and try and account for everything that needs to be added

Cheers

im very interested in what you make for the back arms and mounts etc.

Medusa + injection = too much torque for the dyno ..https://youtu.be/qg5o0_tJxYM

I know exactly how you feel about it just being an assortment of parts! My project feels exactly the same at the moment haha.

On 2nd Sep, 2014 Aubrey_Boy said:
Me too!

At the moment it just feels like an assortment of parts, I'm sure when I stop dicking with stuff and get it on it's wheels it will feel more like a Mini again

Cheers

If you're not set on originality, maybe find an alternative for heater/demist that weighs less?
There was a thread on this some time ago.

Dazed and Confused....

Hi Yo-Han,

Yes I have a lighter heater, not the lightest but still trying to make it capable of demisting as much as anything



The exact weight depends on the size and number of outlets but the weight shown is within about 20g of this

The standard heater I took out was 3.6 kg

Cheers

Edited by Aubrey_Boy on 11th Jul, 2017.

Why not an electric windscreen?

Yeah I have a heated front screen too, unfortunately it is a fully paid up member of the making your car heavier club as well. It's 1 - 1.2 kg heavier than the OEM one I took out. It's not the fact that it's heated that makes it heavy as I have weighed a few replacement / aftermarket front screens now and they are circa 1 kg heavier than OEM.

The heater will also help try and clear the side windows as I originally planned to run 'eyeball' dash vents to do this, but might just duct to them. If I keep the heated screen I might use the heater just for the side windows.

Fogging up is a pet hate, especially on wet / damp track days

I applaud your aim of keeping the car looking "normal", sir.

With the power output that you are likely to have it will be a proper street sleeper.

Cheers Tadge,

In a (my) perfect world it would be an archless MK3 on 10s...

I guess 'ordinary' is open to interpretation but I want to keep as much as possible standard, the biggest obstacle is the 13" front wheel with a 185/60 R13 tyre. It looks like I will have to cut a reasonable amount of front wing away for it to clear at full bump / full lock to lock and in doing so something like the Mini special (My ideal 'ordinary' Mini arch choice) arch doesn't want to fit on a cut up wing.

I am really undecided which arch extensions are the most subtle (but allow fitment to a cut up wing), I think it's the Grp2/5 type (in body colour?) but they are more 60's than MK3.

Sportspack where intended for 13" but then it would have to be a sort of MK5 look then and again I am not sure how much wing cutting they can be made tolerate.

175/50 R13 solves most of this but is worse for gearing and smaller contact patch (250 hp) and ride quality / 'nervousness' of lower profile tyres over uneven surfaces which I think is the area that road Minis suffer most. Plus I think it is the 60% - 70% aspect ratio that a 165/70 R10 and a 185/60 R13 has which best suits the Mini or any 'classic car'.

185/55 R13 is another compromise but has crap tyre availability, Avon ZZR being the only high performance option but has pretty well zero water clearance capability (Road use).

So my hope is ordinary / subtle but in practice may prove a challenge.

Cheers

On 3rd Sep, 2014 Aubrey_Boy said:
Hi Yo-Han,

Yes I have a lighter heater, not the lightest but still trying to make it capable of demisting as much as anything



The exact weight depends on the size and number of outlets but the weight shown is within about 20g of this

The standard heater I took out was 3.6 kg

Cheers

Dazed and Confused....

Some real science going into this build! None of that will do attitude!

Looks great can't wait to see it in the flesh.

I run a supercharger and I don't care the TB is on the wrong side.
VEMS + 12 PSI + Liquid Intercooler = Small Bore FUN!

185 60 on the back may induce a bit of unauthorised tread trimmage ,a chance to make some slightly longer new arms ?

or make the heel board into a box section by filling in the open side of the u shape produced by the seat floor heel board ,and bolt straight through the heel board with rose joints?

Medusa + injection = too much torque for the dyno ..https://youtu.be/qg5o0_tJxYM

Hi Yo-Han,

Thank you very much for your comments

No I didn't know about the vent angle thingy so I will make sure I pay attention to that, because my dash top rail is no longer standard I am using MK1 demister vents and I am remaking the escutcheon plates which fix on top and will probably build the air deflector angle piece into these so I will check the angle then, cheers

Thanks Graham,

I know sometimes the detail and verbosity can get on peoples t1ts and I probably need to get out more :)


Robert shushhhh.... :)

Have you been reading my mind again...

But seriously, In this specific instance (FWD, no rear passengers or luggage requirement, heavy front weight bias etc...) there is no load / safety / handling / dynamics reason why the rear tyre size / wheel size needs to be the same as the front. But then again 185/60 R13 Front - 165/70 R10 rear ain't gonna cut it as the appearance of an 'ordinary' Mini. Plus it's an extreme example, but no I haven't decided yet about rear tyre size. In terms of things like aquaplaning smaller (narrower) rear would be safer! (Assuming similar tread pattern Fr to Rr)

The whole rear suspension still hinges on the ugly bar tests, as with all suspension systems we have collection of springs in series:

Wheel > Hub (contribution from drum/spacer?) > Bearings > Trailing arm (stub axle) > Subframe > Mounting bushes > Body mount stiffnesses

And because of the maths of springs in series the whole suspension system compliance/stiffness can only be as stiff as the 'softest' component.

So as an example if the hub is an order of magnitude higher (x10) stiffer than all the other components there is no point spending any time or money making it stiffer as even if you double it again the overall suspension system stiffness will hardly change.

So, say our heelboard area is a higher stiffness to the lowest stiffness in the 'system' and then with a minimal amount of added weight as you suggested making it a closed box section or similar and you actually increase the stiffness with a minor weight increase we get a big weight saving and no detectable loss in stiffness > the car handles the same but is lighter. > Perfect!

On the other hand say the trailing arm is the lowest or one of the lowest stiffness's in the system the last thing you would want to do is replace it with a material with a modulus which is a third of the original

This is my dilemma, without knowing the relative stiffness's I can't be sure what I can do, but if the stiffness's allowed it, I would do exactly as you suggest, utilise / adapt the heelboard into the direct trailing arm mounts, longer (side view) fabricated trailing arms (maybe 'slightly' semi-trailing arm behaviour?)

The only caveat being that a std subframe assembly must still be able to be mounted as the baseline comparison.

A few more weight comparisons;

The std hub, bearings and wheel studs as reference for the SC hub

[/url]

And the rear brake drums



[/url]

Cheers

Edited by Aubrey_Boy on 11th Jul, 2017.