Continuning Suspension Upgrades...Why doesn't the ice maker work?

Try to modify that ice maker for the upcoming wild party and you're out of luck though.

If you go in looking for lowest cost Speedster - those options and attention to detail will be bypassed for sure. 

I'd avoid the lead - you want to reduce weight for performance not add dead weight.  A larger gas tank maybe - gas is about 8#/gallon.  A small jack, can of tire Slime and tools will complete the weight needed.

A few makers do produce finished cars, where no fiddling is required after delivery, except for the new owners' personal choices.  However, you pay upfront for this, and pay more than the usual build.  I was fortunate enough to be able to buy (have built, that is) an Intermeccanica, and I've done really absolutely nothing to it, except enjoy it.

Jim Gilbert - Madison, Mississippi posted:

I wonder whether these cars are all kit cars regardless of the company who actually built them? There is so much knowledge about how to fix the problems I've been experiencing on this list. Do all of you have to rebuild the cars in order to make them usable? When I buy a refrigerator I expect the ice maker to work.

Since buying my Speedster in July I've:

• turned the carburetors around so that the adjustment screws could be accessed
• rebuilt the carburetor linkage
• installed new shocks (the ones on the car were worn out at 11k miles)
• disassembled rear torsion bar and plates to insure they were set to specification)
• added caster shims to the front end
• and yesterday installed the camber compensator.

My car had an anti-sway bar installed; that was not an issue.  Everything I have done, with the guidance of folks on the list, has made a marked improvement to the handling or ease of service.

Why has all this been necessary? Why did the builder not do these things before my car left his "factory"? The handling problems are safety issues. You could be killed going home.

Are there some builders that include who include these modifications in their base cars?

Some of you have had your cars many years and have gone through this process. Some have had several cars and some built kits. I suspect most of us came to the Speedster because of the looks and not having $300,000 for an original and are blindsided by the faults in the cars.

At issue is not the cost of the upgrades, but the fact that they should not have to be done at all. The ice maker ought to work! You can argue that the changes to the carburetors did not have to be done, but everything that has to do with handling should have been installed at the "factory".

I've owned Porsche's and kit cars. When building my own kit (35 years ago) I had to take care of these things during the build. A knowledgeable prospective owner (I was not) will asked the questions and have the handling problems addressed before taking delivery.

Caveat emptor!

After all of that, I'm edging up on proper handling. Stan suggested that I need about 40lbs added to the front. The lack of a spare, jack and tools would be about that. I really don't think that I have enough room up front for even a small emergency spare and any luggage. Guess I'll be adding lead.

I'll keep you posted.

 

 

 

 

I’ll ask the obvious question- who built your car? 

JPS

Jim---if that's your Speedster---the blue one-- I have to say it is gorgeous.  Too bad these cars are so beautiful otherwise we wouldn't take the time and trouble to sort and upgrade them.  I'm interested to see that answer to Blake's question.  I know that the IMs come pre sorted---same as the ones Alan and Troy sell  but the two or three "value" brands most often did not---although I read about improvements being made in construction and features.  In line with your list of upgrades I'll list mine and I won't say "so far" because It's perfect for my needs now. It would have been nice to pay the $25k or so that my Speedster cost me and for that end up with Marty's car but it doesn't work that way as we all know.  To get my Vintage Speedster  where it is today it has taken a lot of time and more money than I'd admit to make these improvements;

1.  New Type IV engine to replace the 1915                                                                               

2. Camber compensator

3. Anti sway bar

4.  Beam braces

5. Paint floor with truck bed liner

6. Dynomat everywhere incl. doors

7. New interior

8. Window leak fix

9. Floor leak fix (Hopefully!)

10. Add spare tire (Donut)

11. New emerg. brake cover (no holes like a Bug)

12. Wolo loud air horn

13. Espar heater

14 replace EMPI carbs  with Dellortos.

15. Color sanded paint

I'm finished with this project now and just drive it.  Lots.   It and so many Speedster friends have  added so much to my life these past 13 years it's owned me!  Calling this adventure "The Madness" is a perfect description.  

@Jack Crosby- You've done a lot of really great improvements to your car. Where did you get the beam braces from?

Jack, most of what you have done has been done. I don't have the beam braces. Dynamat everywhere. My car has a  FOCAL stereo with a base reflex box where the rear seat should be. It was there when I bought it and takes up most of the usable storage behind the seats. Something I ddin't need.

How does it handle?

I love a project, but don't want it to go on indefinitely and I am not as unhappy with the car as my post might sound. It probably gets more attention than I'd really like. I do want it to be safe. I want it to handle like a 356 and there is no reason that it should not. The platforms are so similar.

The curb weight of a VW Beetle convertible was 1808lbs. The curb weight of a REAL Porsche Speedster was 1676lbs. I haven't weighted my car but I would expect we're pretty close.

Has anyone weighted their car?

The weight will be a lot closer to the Beetle than the Speedster.

Stan,

That's what I'm thinking. Be interesting to know what the corner weights are.

@Jim Gilbert - Madison, Mississippi- Maybe the earlier cars, with the VW 25 or 36hp based engines weighed under 1700 lbs, but the weight of a factory 1957(?) 4 cam GT Speedster was listed at 1780 lbs (dry) and 1907 lbs (empty) while the GS weighed in at a portly 1880 (dry) and 1950 lbs (empty).

Does anyone know when Porsche started casting it's own engine cases, or what year they started showing up in cars?

@DannyP has a set of scales. He’d be the guy to ask about the average speedster’s corner and total weight.

Just a minor point of clarification— I may have advocated putting more weight in the front at some point in the past, but for the last few years that would not be my recommendation. Adding weight to a car is not the way to make it handle better. You’re going to need to soften up the front, which means pulling leaves out unless you can do it with the Avis adjusters.

If you want your speedster to handle like a sports car, you’re going to find yourself limited by the swing axle. If you just want to cruise around, you’ll probably never noticed the difference. 

From a 2016 post:

A bunch of us weighed our cars at Carlisle one year.  If you search on carlisle car weights or corner weights you'll get some hits to follow.

My CMC was heavier than most at almost 2,000 pounds, full tank, "Space-saver" spare tire, bunch of spare parts and tools, no driver, full tank, beer cooler on the back seat  and maybe 20 pounds of soundproofing all over the place.  I believe that CMCs are heavier, in general, because los Amigos who manned the chopper gun at CMC when the bodies were being made worked slowly, making the fiberglass thicker than other cars.  For example, the glass above the dash where the center windshield strut goes through is over 3/8" thick on my car and the tops of the front fenders where the mirrors mount are 3/8" (left) and 7/16" (right).  That's thick!

IIRC, the CMC's tended to be heavier than VS and Beck by 40-50 pounds and most of the CMCs were around 1,850 or so and up, so I guess you're in the ballpark.

So now about your questions:

A "Beam Brace" is a piece of pipe with one ended bolted to the front beam and the other end bolted to the forward corners of the pan where cockpit ends (just before your feet).  It is intended to impede any lateral movement of the beam during very hard cornering and/or bump negotiation.  If you have a pan made after 1965 or so the need decreases because VW changed the beam head mount then to make it stiffer.  If you are considering racing your car on the track, I might recommend a pair of beam braces, otherwise you might not ever notice a need for them.  John Steele recommended them heavily right after we all had a discussion about them on here so that's why some of his car builds had them  - the customers requested them after they saw them on here.  Here's one I like because it can be duplicated by a competent shop for about $50 per side, welding and shaping included - Please note that CSP shows them "out of stock" but, again, they're easy to make.

http://www2.cip1.com/ProductDe...1%2D498%2D001%2D111A

There are others, just google "VW Beam Brace" for hits.  Do many of us have them?  I dunno - I think there is a handful of cars on here with them - that's about it.

I probably should note that Porsche did not install Camber Compensators (or Beam Braces) at the factory.  The factory did not feel them necessary for road cars - they were all installed by customers or their dealerships, just like outside mirrors.  IIRC, the designer of the most successful camber compensator was a guy on the West Coast who was an avid racer, figured out what was happening back there and found a cheap way to overcome the weakness.  Most people buying original 356's did not then, nor have they now installed camber compensators, simply because they were "gentlemen racers", meaning that they drove their 356 to the track to watch other people race other cars on the track.  Besides, the original cars had 1/2 the horsepower of our cars or less, no disk brakes until 1960 and they couldn't be driven as hard.  The way most of us drive on here, anyone with a swing-arm suspension needs a camber compensator to avoid wheel tuck-under and a potential roll-over on extreme hard cornering.

So apart from the camber compensator, the only thing you really needed to do was get a good alignment and add caster shims - something that all of us have done.  The rest of the stuff, like front anti-sway bars, shocks, re-setting ride height, etc., a lot of us have done (myself included) either because we felt a need (like you did) or we read about something on here and thought "Hey!  I need to do that, too!"

So, along with Jack, I have front and rear anti-sway bars (my car is an IRS), a Kafer Brace, front disks, Koni shocks (a mixed blessing - nice handling but harsher ride), wider wheels/bigger tires, MUCH better seats and an Eberspaecher gas heater (since with my 2,110 I have no heater boxes).  The interior now looks more like a Cabriolet than a Speedster but it feels good.  Meh...

Lastly, many of us have bemoaned the poor quality coming out of some of the "Kit Car Shops" over the years so I won't go there.  Yes, it would be relatively easy for them to complete and bug-proof the cars leaving their shops for a few bucks more, but they simply do not do so.  They have a waiting list of customers for their cars so why would they?  If you read about them on here and think, "That was then but this is now and I'm sure they've gotten better", well, some have, some haven't, but continued research on here should point that out.  It should also point out who the good builders are so maybe you could direct your spare cash to them, instead?

Anyway, sorry for the long post, but you were looking for answers........

Post Script:  Stan wrote: "If you want your speedster to handle like a sports car, you’re going to find yourself limited by the swing axle. If you just want to cruise around, you’ll probably never noticed the difference. "

That's the absolute truth.  I drove a local VS this past summer, in a hilly part of the state with delightful back roads.  I quickly became a sedate "cruiser" compared to how I drove my IRS car, simply because the body lean and squirriliness of the rear end on even moderately hard cornering didn't feel safe to me.  Remember, this was not my car so I wasn't about to push it, but compared to my car the handling was night and day different.

Here's a diagram of the front beam supports. They can block the front grease nipples, the front bumper support mounting braces, and where a VW beam tow bar would mount.  The CSP ones are costly at $270 but the EMPI ones look remarkably similar for only $40!   

• 

  SKU: AC413151 Empi 3842 Front Lower Axle Beam Support Tubes For Vw Baja Bug, Pair 

   

Couple of things...

I owned a 356SC in about 1980. Curb weight for the coupe or convertible was 2061lbs, handled like a sports car and had swing axles.

The numbers I quoted are taken from "Porsche Technical Manual" by Henry Elfrink. I have no data on the 4 cam cars.

My car is based on a 1964 VW convertible  floor pan and has the factory modification to the front pan negating straighteners. Convertibles may have been different from sedans. They weigh more for a reason. The sedan weighted 1720lbs.

The quote about adding 40lbs to the front was incorrectly attributed to Stan, It was from ALB and sounds reasonable since I have no spare, jack and tools.

@Jim Gilbert - Madison, Mississippi- I forgot to add- when you get the ice maker working please let me know  Al

"The quote about adding 40lbs to the front was incorrectly attributed to Stan, It was from ALB and sounds reasonable since I have no spare, jack and tools."

That, in itself, is remarkable since Al seems to want to drill holes in just about everything to reduce weight in the car.  

I had to delete the spare in my CMC when I added the gas heater in the nose of the car.  In doing so I feel that I've lost about 15 pounds out there but haven't noticed any difference in handling on the road.  I haven't been on the track since the heater install so no data points there (yet!)

I did go with the CSP beam braces. Wolfgang is right about blocking the beam lube nipples.  On my car, only one nipple on the left side is blocked and loosening a couple of bolts to move the beam brace a little to get the grease gun onto the nipple  adds just a few minutes to lubing the beam.  My car always rode like a dream before the braces were added but  I definitely have a more solid feeling after installing them.  Especially going over bumps or RR tracks.  

The CSP braces were higher priced but seemed a lot more solid than the EMPI ones.  I don't skimp at all on the Speedster---part of the madness, I know.  

When Jake installed the Type IV he did add a Kafer brace that is welded in to prevent engine twist on hard acceleration. ---It's a big triangle, I think of stainless steel.  Another reason was that the  engine  is 35-40 pounds heavier than the Type I was.  But for 35-40 pounds of weight I got as much power as the Porsche 4 cam racing engine produces.

Jim, Danny P. Weighed my car at 1,763 pounds with the front being 46% and the rear, 54%.

Gordon Nichols posted:

"The quote about adding 40lbs to the front was incorrectly attributed to Stan, It was from ALB and sounds reasonable since I have no spare, jack and tools."

That, in itself, is remarkable since Al seems to want to drill holes in just about everything to reduce weight in the car.  

I had to delete the spare in my CMC when I added the gas heater in the nose of the car.  In doing so I feel that I've lost about 15 pounds out there but haven't noticed any difference in handling on the road.  I haven't been on the track since the heater install so no data points there (yet!)

In the front, Gordon, there's no reason to reduce sprung weight (the car) as it's more than light enough already with the front/rear weight bias as it is with a typical Speedster. If you can pare down unsprung weight (wheels, tires, suspension, brakes) that's always going to benefit. 

BTW- I've finished drilling my type 3 rear brake backing plates- pics to come later...

1. (rare) correction to Stan: You can't "soften" front suspension with the adjusters. They raise and lower it only. To soften--decrease--the spring rate, remove some of the small leaves. It's a greasy job but not very difficult. 

2. re Jack's statement "But for 35-40 pounds of weight I got as much power as the Porsche 4 cam racing engine produces."  I believe you got WAY MORE POWER than the legendary 4-cam, which started at 110 hp (and a whopping 90 ft-lbs of torque at about 5000 rpm) and ended up in the (help me out guys?) 160 hp range?

I think the Raby Type 4 engines have at minimum more horses than the best-tuned Type 547 engines. And my standard-heat Raby Type 1 1914 has about 35 percent more torque than the 547/1. 

Thanks for the correction, Ed. 

Regarding Jack's Type 4, and the comparative 4-cam power-- Jack was just being the modest gentlemen he always is.

Any hand built car needs sorting and the higher end builders try to add 200 miles on the car to sort it out.  I still recommend a week visit at the initial car pickup so that you make fina adjustments and further testing. 

You never know what you’ll find and the builder is close at that moment.

support from far away is hard no matter who the higher end builder is if you have an issue.

Hey even VW in 2012 forgot the whole back seat ducts for heating on the right side of our car... go figure

Jim:  

Back a few years, three people on here bought new Speedsters from one of the known, 3-letter builders on the west coast and another place that is (thankfully) no longer building cars (that I know of).  When they were delivered to the East Coast, one of them had a loose steering coupler, another had some other suspension issues and the other one had some other safety issue that I can't remember (but all of this stuff was documented on here).  All of them needed a good 4-wheel alignment - they weren't even in the ballpark, IIRC, but they all looked great, even if they weren't safe.

Much typing and gum-gnashing ensued and while the builders (often, but not always) attempted to rectify things, they were 3,000 miles away and sending the car back (buyer paying the freight at least one-way) was cost-prohibitive so the buyers got things fixed where they were and sometimes the builder paid for the fixes.  Not a great solution, but a solution nonetheless.

About that time, I wrote an article that is up in the Resource/knowledge section on here, that was my pass at a checklist for all new owners (whether they bought their car from a builder or private party) just to make sure everything was checked and found to be OK from a safety aspect.  I see that you are not a supporting member so you may not be able to see it here:

https://www.speedsterowners.co...acceptance-checklist

So, since I wrote it, here it is to give you a few more things to check out that you might not have thought of:

Excellent list, Gordon.  

Gordon,

An excellent list. All should be done. I'm afraid that those of us that are a continent away won't usually be able to avail ourselves to the builder. This is where a reputation for quality is most needed.

I'm already done but it would be great if some of you California and Arizona folks would offer a pre-shipping inspection service for a fee. Posted prominently here would be a big help to outher buyers.

I personally wouldn't pay $30k+ for a car and not spend $600 to fly across the country to check it out before making final payment and having it shipped.  

Gordon's checklist is amazing and if builders used such a list to check their finished cars there would be a lot of time and money saved for both buyer and seller.  I have used Gordon's list to go over my own car before a big trip and always find something that could stand some attention attention.   Thanks to Gordon for such a valuable addition to the knowledge base.  I love Jim's suggestion that someone should offer a pre delivery  service using this check list --I see great value for the buyer and a few hundred quid for an inspector.  I'd gladly spend something like $300 for such a service.  Sort of like a home inspector.  Who buys a house without having an inspection done?  Same thing for a car we almost can guarantee several issues will be present.  What if Tom DeWalt had this service available for the green disaster back in the day?   

@Jim Gilbert - Madison, Mississippi

You could get lucky, Jim.

Only about half the things on Gordon’s list needed fixing on my VS.

Gordon Nichols posted:

"The quote about adding 40lbs to the front was incorrectly attributed to Stan, It was from ALB and sounds reasonable since I have no spare, jack and tools."

That, in itself, is remarkable since Al seems to want to drill holes in just about everything to reduce weight in the car.  

I had to delete the spare in my CMC when I added the gas heater in the nose of the car.  In doing so I feel that I've lost about 15 pounds out there but haven't noticed any difference in handling on the road.  I haven't been on the track since the heater install so no data points there (yet!)

(Just a little thread drift) Gordon-

Yes, I've been drilling holes in lots of stuff! Although my car is irs I went to the shorter swingaxle torsion bars and (originally) Sway-a-Way adjustable spring plates (which bridged the gap between the swing torsion bars and irs trailing arms). 3 issues with the aftermarket spring plates- they're HEAVY! (2550 grams- that's over 5 1/2 lbs each! and they're sprung weight), the adjuster block takes up room that could be used for wider tires and (when I really thought of it) once I set the rear ride height I will probably never change it, so keeping them really didn't make much sense. At the urging of my friend Bruce I took some swingaxle spring plates, shortened and narrowed them, cut the slots for the bolts, drilled a few holes and voila!- 

here we are- irs spring plates for the shorter torsion bars. This example weighs 997 grams (a 1553 g or 3 lb, 6 3/4 oz reduction! per side!! and I haven't figured out the weight savings with the shorter torsion bars yet!!!), and when I weigh stock single and double irs spring plates I'll let you all know what I find...

With a pair of my late 6" Fuchs worked into 7" 911R configuration (widened 1" to the inside) it looks like the wheels with 205's (on the type 1 drums) clear the inner stuff by about 1/8" or so (the top snubber stop thingy still has to be trimmed a little more as well) and even clears the fender (on the right side- I haven't assembled the left yet- this week). I'd probably see about using a 1/8" spacer on each drum (for a little more spring plate clearance) if this was my end goal, but since I plan on running type 3 rear brakes (which will add 5/8" track to each side) the trailing arms will need to be narrowed a little anyway, so I can build in the spacing then.

 The trailing arms haven't been done yet, but I have been modifying the type 3 backing plates a little and drilled a few holes

(about 360) in each backing plate. And yes, it took one heck of a long time (I was at it off and on for 4 months). The backing plates originally weighed 1284 and 1285 grams and when I first started I was hoping to remove 100 grams on each. I thought I was doing really well when I had them down to 1070 g. and felt like I was pretty much finished (you have no idea how many hours are into these things!) when after showing the latest result of my work to Bruce one evening and he casually said (while we were partaking of a beverage in his garage), "I wonder what a type 1 backing plate weighs?". Oh boy... Well, we dug 1 up, stripped it, cleaned it a up (a little), put it on the scale and it weighed in at 1020 g. Bruce looks at me and says "yours isn't even as light as the type 1- there's lots of weight you can still take off! Are you really going to put it on the car like that?". And back to the drill press I went (this was all done at home on a small bench sized drill press or in a bench vice, btw). Each of the backing plates now weighs 852 grams- that's over 430 grams (15oz) lighter for each backing plate! This is the set up for drilling the holes on the outside edge- 

I know, a little crude, but it actually worked quite well! You just couldn't push on the plywood very hard. I really would love to own a rotary table. And the sad part is- every time I look at these things I see more places to remove weight...

One last pic- the flywheel started out lightened from GBE at 5241 grams (11 1/2 lbs), and after 6 or 7 hours at a friend's shop (this couldn't have been done without the accuracy of the milling and rotary tables), it

weighed in afterward at 4370 g. I removed 870 grams (1lb, 14.6 oz) so the flywheel now weighs just over 9 1/2 lbs. As a machinist I'm not very fast, but I did it all myself... Al

Al,

You're out of your freaking mind, and I mean that in the best possible way.

Stupid-cool.

ALB posted:

Gordon Nichols posted:

"The quote about adding 40lbs to the front was incorrectly attributed to Stan, It was from ALB and sounds reasonable since I have no spare, jack and tools."

That, in itself, is remarkable since Al seems to want to drill holes in just about everything to reduce weight in the car.  

I had to delete the spare in my CMC when I added the gas heater in the nose of the car.  In doing so I feel that I've lost about 15 pounds out there but haven't noticed any difference in handling on the road.  I haven't been on the track since the heater install so no data points there (yet!)

(Just a little thread drift) Gordon-

Yes, I've been drilling holes in lots of stuff! Although my car is irs I went to the shorter swingaxle torsion bars and (originally) Sway-a-Way adjustable spring plates (which bridged the gap between the swing torsion bars and irs trailing arms). 3 issues with the aftermarket spring plates- they're HEAVY! (2550 grams- that's over 5 1/2 lbs each! and they're sprung weight), the adjuster block takes up room that could be used for wider tires and (when I really thought of it) once I set the rear ride height I will probably never change it, so keeping them really didn't make much sense. At the urging of my friend Bruce I took some swingaxle spring plates, shortened and narrowed them, cut the slots for the bolts, drilled a few holes and voila!- 

here we are- irs spring plates for the shorter torsion bars. This example weighs 997 grams (a 1553 g or 3 lb, 6 3/4 oz reduction! per side!! and I haven't figured out the weight savings with the shorter torsion bars yet!!!), and when I weigh stock single and double irs spring plates I'll let you all know what I find...

With a pair of my late 6" Fuchs worked into 7" 911R configuration (widened 1" to the inside) it looks like the wheels with 205's (on the type 1 drums) clear the inner stuff by about 1/8" or so (the top snubber stop thingy still has to be trimmed a little more as well) and even clears the fender (on the right side- I haven't assembled the left yet- this week). I'd probably see about using a 1/8" spacer on each drum (for a little more spring plate clearance) if this was my end goal, but since I plan on running type 3 rear brakes (which will add 5/8" track to each side) the trailing arms will need to be narrowed a little anyway, so I can build in the spacing then.

 The trailing arms haven't been done yet, but I have been modifying the type 3 backing plates a little and drilled a few holes

(about 360) in each backing plate. And yes, it took one heck of a long time (I was at it off and on for 4 months). The backing plates originally weighed 1284 and 1285 grams and when I first started I was hoping to remove 100 grams on each. I thought I was doing really well when I had them down to 1070 g. and felt like I was pretty much finished (you have no idea how many hours are into these things!) when after showing the latest result of my work to Bruce one evening and he casually said (while we were partaking of a beverage in his garage), "I wonder what a type 1 backing plate weighs?". Oh boy... Well, we dug 1 up, stripped it, cleaned it a up (a little), put it on the scale and it weighed in at 1020 g. Bruce looks at me and says "yours isn't even as light as the type 1- there's lots of weight you can still take off! Are you really going to put it on the car like that?". And back to the drill press I went (this was all done at home on a small bench sized drill press or in a bench vice, btw). Each of the backing plates now weighs 852 grams- that's over 430 grams (15oz) lighter for each backing plate! This is the set up for drilling the holes on the outside edge- 

 

I know, a little crude, but it actually worked quite well! You just couldn't push on the plywood very hard. I really would love to own a rotary table. And the sad part is- every time I look at these things I see more places to remove weight...

One last pic- the flywheel started out lightened from GBE at 5241 grams (11 1/2 lbs), and after 6 or 7 hours at a friend's shop (this couldn't have been done without the accuracy of the milling and rotary tables), it

 

weighed in afterward at 4370 g. I removed 870 grams (1lb, 14.6 oz) so the flywheel now weighs just over 9 1/2 lbs. As a machinist I'm not very fast, but I did it all myself... Al

Al, would you not be concerned about the amount of debris ( road grime, water etc. ) that would enter the brake system through all the holes in the backing plate ? 

I have thought about that, David, but as this is (at this time) meant to be strictly a fair-weather car and I'm thinking about a screened scoop into the front half of the backing plate for ventilation/cooling (a la some 356's and 550's), we'll see how it goes. Have I gone too far? It's possible. I've even seen pics of 356 drums drilled in the contact face (3 rows of very small holes, I'm guessing for cooling). I got the type 3 rear drum assemblies pretty cheap (iIrc $160?) and I've used them with success on both a Cal Look and a baja bug, so I want to see how far I can take it. If it doesn't work as well as I hope I can always go to rear discs...

Stan Galat posted:

Al,

You're out of your freaking mind, and I mean that in the best possible way.

Stupid-cool.

Thank you Stan. It means a lot coming from you. It also gave me a good laugh right before bed!

ALB posted:

 

...It also gave me a good laugh right before bed!...

Hope you're not trying to save weight there, too, Al:

Sacto Mitch posted:

@Jim Gilbert - Madison, Mississippi

You could get lucky, Jim.

Only about half the things on Gordon’s list needed fixing on my VS.

 

I've done much of what Gordon indicated. I've found wires not anchored, a few leaks, missing dash light bulbs; things like that. What I was complaining about was all related to the poor handling, which, with the help of the folks on this list is near corrected. I've spent $200 on parts to remedy that problem. Looks like JPS would have included that in their build. If all manufacturers omit caster shims, camber compensators and a proper alignment they should be open to suite. Maybe you have to sign a disclaimer, you know, like at the doctor. If they kill you it's your fault.

Gotta get that 40lbs.

Winter is short in Mississippi but there is some. It's 33 here this morning and promises to be 29 tonight. We used to get some 0 temps and I've seen 6" of snow. That hasn't happened since I was a kid. All because of Al Gore. I'm wiring the car for my electric motorcycle jackets and seats. We'll be warm and drive when it's not raining down here in the good ole South.

Ya'll come see us.

Yeah, the builder could certainly have included all that stuff and made it right when it shipped, but that would have been highly out of character for him.

As for ALB "Yoda" and his penchant for hole drilling.........

The Force/Madness is strong in this one....

So sayeth "Darth Tater"

Kinda reminds me of my Sugino Bicycle crankset - just enough metal to give it torsional strength:

Gordon Nichols posted:

"The quote about adding 40lbs to the front was incorrectly attributed to Stan, It was from ALB and sounds reasonable since I have no spare, jack and tools."

That, in itself, is remarkable since Al seems to want to drill holes in just about everything to reduce weight in the car.  

I had to delete the spare in my CMC when I added the gas heater in the nose of the car.  In doing so I feel that I've lost about 15 pounds out there but haven't noticed any difference in handling on the road.  I haven't been on the track since the heater install so no data points there (yet!)

A seasoned driver might feel it on the track, but I don't think you're going to feel a 15 lb difference in the front end on the street unless you're pushing the car to it's limits all the time, every time you take it out of the garage. It would be interesting though (when spring comes), to throw 20 or 30 lbs in the front, drive it for a while and see what you think. I know you're running a lot of caster- is the camber on the front negative or positive? Do you remember how much toe-in there is? And iIrc the car has 205's (50's? 55's? 60's?) on 7" rims all around?

I know 40 lbs doesn't sound like much, but it changes the front weight bias by 2% on a 2,000 lb car (and more of course on a lighter car). You may need to adjust for it. If one is looking for his car to handle optimally, I think that's (a little bit of) a big deal.

Sacto Mitch posted:

 

ALB posted:

 

...It also gave me a good laugh right before bed!...

 

Hope you're not trying to save weight there, too, Al:

 

You funny man, Mitch!

@Jim Gilbert - Madison, Mississippi- Glad you're getting it sorted out. I would love to see your car (and of course meet you) in the near future. Are you planning a trip to Carlisle this coming spring?

PS- Does anybody have a 5 1/2 or 6" steel rim they can weigh? Knowing both 4x130 and 5x205 weights would be nice.

Yoda out _{(for now, but back you know I will be!)}

 Another PS- And yeah, @Stan Galat, if I ever get the opportunity to use Barry's milling table again the flywheel will lose another pound. I already have plans...(insert big, evil laugh here!)

@Gordon Nichols- That bell crank's a perfect example- why carry it around if it's not needed?

Another PS- And yeah, @Stan Galat, if I ever get the opportunity to use Barry's milling table again the flywheel will lose another pound. I already have plans..._{(insert big, evil laugh here!)}

@Gordon Nichols- That bell crank's a perfect example- why carry it around if it's not needed? You of all people should understand...

_{Now back to our regularly scheduled programming...}

ALB posted:

Stan Galat posted:

Al,

You're out of your freaking mind, and I mean that in the best possible way.

Stupid-cool.

Thank you Stan. It means a lot coming from you. It also gave me a good laugh right before bed!

Al:  And don't forget to drill lots of holes in the tires.  There's that big one right in the middle, but more around the sides would help...

I hate it when Al gets around a wheel rim with his drill press - the wind whistling thru the holes must be deafening!  It does make the grazing deer along the roadway look up though.

@Bob: IM S6 , @WOLFGANG-

  Very funny, both of you! What a great pic, Greg! And no worries, I won't be drilling any holes in the original Fuchs on the car. Although carving holes in the spokes like the wheels that long haired Englishman in L.A. builds would be interesting- hmm...