IM:6 for sale...

Ray.  That is our friend from Hawaii's IM6.

HOW can YOU TELL?????

@IaM-Ray there is no kamehameha highway in SF 😎😇🤙

check for body rust:}

Banzai surprise, Salt on the bottom (  Just kidding 

Hawaii plate on the rear

I'm close to SF if anybody with $78k to burn wants me to check it out for them

You have to fly to Hawaii  

Curious if THIS speedster REALLY WEIGHS 2300lbs?  (Sorry, couldn't refuse to alternate b/t the caps).....which seems a bit heavy.

I have seen curb weights posted on various speedsters between 1,660lb - 2,000lb; with most falling around 1,750lb-1850lbs.  

I understand the 2.7 engine weighs about 180lbs more than a Type I, where does the additional increase in weight come from on this car?

I'm not trying to throw shade on this Speedster, as I think it's quite amazing.  

It is a full frame of box steel and even heavier than a standard frame IM, and has full 911 suspension brakes etc.  Not sure how heavy Banzai's car is but Bob's IM-6 could be 2300lbs if I remember.

My Full Subie I think is 2100 but that is a guesstimate only with the extra plumbing for the rads and engine and 911 front end. 

2300 lbs sounds about right for an IM6.  Lots of frame strengthening needed for that six cylinder engine and all 911 mechanicals.

Even at that weight, these cars move along quite nicely...

IM-6 Frame in process:

To that, add a big honkin engine and a big honkin transaxle like this:

And then add substantial stopping power from a 993 on all four corners:

Then a roll cage, a fuel cell up front and a few other goodies and the weight adds up.  2300# seems more than reasonable - Hell, my puny little 4-cylinder CMC is an even 2000# (but she's admittedly a little chunky in the rear).

Mine is just as chunky, with a Corvair 6 turbo, but I never bothered to weigh her.

love those turbo corvairs..its just that fanbelt keeps flying off

barncobob posted:

love those turbo corvairs..its just that fanbelt keeps flying off

Mine hasn't fallen off in 3 years.  We designed additional guides and trensioner for the reverse rotation motor.  Works like a charm!

Does 2300 lbs seem heavy?  A Porsche 993 weighs 3186 lbs. 

An IM6 with the same engine at approximately 850 lbs less isn't bad.

Bob: IM S6 posted:

Does 2300 lbs seem heavy?  A Porsche 993 weighs 3186 lbs. 

An IM6 with the same engine at approximately 850 lbs less isn't bad.

True, but I was looking at the power to weight ratios of some Type I speedsters, against a flat 6 speedster.

Perhaps it's a naive comparison; logically it would seem that the 2.7 engine is the all-out king in this comparison, until you start running numbers.

That said, I haven't driven a flat-6 speedster, so it's a bit unfair to make a paper analysis.

A 993 has a 3.6 engine.  A little more oomph.

Kevin - Bay Area posted:

Bob: IM S6 posted:

Does 2300 lbs seem heavy?  A Porsche 993 weighs 3186 lbs. 

An IM6 with the same engine at approximately 850 lbs less isn't bad.

True, but I was looking at the power to weight ratios of some Type I speedsters, against a flat 6 speedster.

Perhaps it's a naive comparison; logically it would seem that the 2.7 engine is the all-out king in this comparison, until you start running numbers.

That said, I haven't driven a flat-6 speedster, so it's a bit unfair to make a paper analysis.

2320 pounds is ACCURATE....car is a ROCKET: first gear a waste....3rd, 4th, 5th tons of torque/power. Absolutely NO RUST anywhere although "slight oxidation" chrome on ONE fog and BOTH side view mirrors(cheap fix/replacement).

GREAT car, an amazing build, a true IM sensation...The leather, the upholstered trunk, all of it just fine workmanship and imagination....has generated a lot of interest but nobody yet buying...turned down offers for 40/50/60K. A young "drug dealer" type in a fully BLACKED OUT G500 AMG showed up with 60K in GREEN....first of all, I was NOT sure the paper was real and I would NOT carry 60K green to my bank and deal with IRS venture....but was fun! His offer stands(NOT selling for 60K).

As BOB IM6 can attest to....these cars are a totally different animal and he has 80 more horsies than mine. The roar and power passing a 911 at 90 in 5th is a kick!.

BE SAFE FOLKS!

Doing 2 SKYPE inspections tomorrow...

Kevin - Bay Area posted:

True, but I was looking at the power to weight ratios of some Type I speedsters, against a flat 6 speedster.

Perhaps it's a naive comparison; logically it would seem that the 2.7 engine is the all-out king in this comparison, until you start running numbers.

That said, I haven't driven a flat-6 speedster, so it's a bit unfair to make a paper analysis.

I understand, Kevin.

I wondered what all the fuss was about... until 2012 when I drove Rick Davis's 2.7/PMO/Wevo 915 car. I found that the fuss is understated. I love my car, and will likely never get rid of it - but if I owned one of these, I can easily see my car sitting up on jackstands for decades at a time while I drove the wheels off of the 6-cyl car.

Aside from the shape (which deceptively makes us think we are distinguishing among varieties of apples), there's almost nothing comparable between the 6 cylinder cars and the ones we know and love. It's not just apples and oranges, it's apples and smoked ribs. The IM6 cars are really an order of magnitude better than my Type 1 beam IM.

They are automobiles - without any of that homemade vibe we tell ourselves is retro.

This car is all motor! But wonder how much to ship from Hawaii? That can’t be cheap. 

Stan Galat posted:

Kevin - Bay Area posted:

True, but I was looking at the power to weight ratios of some Type I speedsters, against a flat 6 speedster.

Perhaps it's a naive comparison; logically it would seem that the 2.7 engine is the all-out king in this comparison, until you start running numbers.

That said, I haven't driven a flat-6 speedster, so it's a bit unfair to make a paper analysis.

I understand, Kevin.

I wondered what all the fuss was about... until 2012 when I drove Rick Davis's 2.7/PMO/Wevo 915 car. I found that the fuss is understated. I love my car, and will likely never get rid of it - but if I owned one of these, I can easily see my car sitting up on jackstands for decades at a time while I drove the wheels off of the 6-cyl car.

Aside from the shape (which deceptively makes us think we are distinguishing among varieties of apples), there's almost nothing comparable between the 6 cylinder cars and the ones we know and love. It's not just apples and oranges, it's apples and smoked ribs. The IM6 cars are really an order of magnitude better than my Type 1 beam IM.

They are automobiles - without any of that homemade vibe we tell ourselves is retro.

Indeed.....it's a different animal...the apples/oranges/ribs analogy is appropriate.

But we can all enjoy our toys and the glass is half full...always.

It would be interesting to compare a full 911 front end IM with subie turbo with sway bars etc to an IM-6.  

I wonder how different they would feel with comparable power. 

The rear wheels are moved back a bit and the body is a bit longer in the IM-6 but it does get heavy back there with a 3.6L 

I think the balance with a 4 cyl being a bit lighter might be a bit more stable but I am only supposing.  In any case the 911 front suspension is a completely different car, Punta. 

Blake posted:

This car is all motor! But wonder how much to ship from Hawaii? That can’t be cheap. 

$1500 to either LA/OAKLAND-SFO/SEATTLE

IaM-Ray posted:

It would be interesting to compare a full 911 front end IM with subie turbo with sway bars etc to an IM-6.  

I wonder how different they would feel with comparable power. 

The rear wheels are moved back a bit and the body is a bit longer in the IM-6 but it does get heavy back there with a 3.6L 

I think the balance with a 4 cyl being a bit lighter might be a bit more stable but I am only supposing.  In any case the 911 front suspension is a completely different car, Punta. 

I've always thought my ultimate would be a big Raby Type 4 IM, set up like the 6 cylinder cars with the longer wheelbase.

IaM-Ray posted:

It would be interesting to compare a full 911 front end IM with subie turbo with sway bars etc to an IM-6.  

I wonder how different they would feel with comparable power. 

The rear wheels are moved back a bit and the body is a bit longer in the IM-6 but it does get heavy back there with a 3.6L 

I think the balance with a 4 cyl being a bit lighter might be a bit more stable but I am only supposing.  In any case the 911 front suspension is a completely different car, Punta. 

I have driven an IM Roadster with a TYPE 4(2270) and it was quick and very stable but did not handle nor have the power/torque close to an IM6. When I bought the IM6, I had it inspected by a master LAMBO/FERRARI/PORSCHE mechanic who apparently(?) knew his stuff($600 worth, 6 pages, over 100 pictures: he was shocked at the power and handling of the car along with how well the execution of the build was.....every handle/latch/crispness of door thud, etc....he considered it well OVERBUILT with the all 911/930 suspension, BREMBOS, BILTstines, etc). He also thought it was a bargain although it was one of only 3 replicas he had driven but was pleasantly surprised......of course I wired the money immediately. I myself think it handles better than the new 911 that I bought back in 1987(speed yellow Targa)....not quite the power, but the IM handles better. Just an opinion....

That is interesting, but the extra is only in the rear wheels being placed more to the rear about 2 inch and a bigger frame and one extra brace making it harder for us little guys to get in and out.  Hard on CV boots.

BTW, I tried to get IM to stretch the car when I could not fit in it but IM would not do it and suggested other alterations to the seat location and seat selection. 

Another idea was going with a H6 from subie N/A it would give you 245hp and it weighs in at 58lbs greater than a H4 Subie and with gobs of torque. 

It's the torque that really makes the Sub engines shine. 

Anyway, maybe there is another build in the future but I don't think so.

Banzai did it have a 911 front end or beam?

IaM-Ray posted:

That is interesting, but the extra is only in the rear wheels being placed more to the rear about 2 inch and a bigger frame and one extra brace making it harder for us little guys to get in and out.  Hard on CV boots.

BTW, I tried to get IM to stretch the car when I could not fit in it but IM would not do it and suggested other alterations to the seat location and seat selection. 

Another idea was going with a H6 from subie N/A it would give you 245hp and it weighs in at 58lbs greater than a H4 Subie and with gobs of torque. 

It's the torque that really makes the Sub engines shine. 

Anyway, maybe there is another build in the future but I don't think so.

This very well may sound silly...and I have a MINOR in PHYSICS(40 years ago)  but I assume TORQUE is TORQUE(theoretically).....but, does/is FLAT SIX German torque feel any different than SUBIE(TURBO) torque? Is it the HP/TORQUE curve or TURBO torque that might feel differently? Probably plain ZUFFENHAUSEN mental illness.

What do I know but I am not surprised that Henry did NOT want to alter his process.

IaM-Ray posted:

Banzai did it have a 911 front end or beam?

NO IDEA on the specifics of the ROADSTER build other than the TYPE 4.

Torque is torque whether you measure it in one system or another but the power band HP and Torque are different with different engines from what I know. 

I think the real issue was that IM was comfortable in 2013-2014 building Subie 4H and had not gone into doing H6 Subies.  Plus they had much more experience with IM-6 2.78 and 3.6L hence the unwillingness to go into uncharted water for what he felt was little gain.  

If you want a 6 lets do a Porsche 6. 

Remembering that an H4 turbo can get you over 300hp and IM was doing those so my choices were narrowing down. 

But in reality, my issue in building my car is that I really like N/A power band and I do not enjoy the turbo switch.  Also I know the P tax on a first hand basis, and I prefer not to have to be exposed to that tax it just feels like extortion most times.

Thank you very much. 

IaM-Ray posted:

Banzai did it have a 911 front end or beam?

It's a 911 front. 

I was asking Banzai if the type 4 he drove had 911 front end ... he did not know. 

IaM-Ray posted:

I was asking Banzai if the type 4 he drove had 911 front end ... he did not know. 

My mistake. Off to bed I go.

I have a Raby 2180 type four in a custom CMC ,  it was awesome ~

IaM-Ray posted:

That is interesting, but the extra is only in the rear wheels being placed more to the rear about 2 inch and a bigger frame and one extra brace making it harder for us little guys to get in and out.  Hard on CV boots.

 

Ray: Some changes to the body for a 6 cylinder IM (beyond changes to IM's propriety frame to fit a larger engine, etc.):

Rear wheel wells moved back to accommodate longer 911 suspension;

Front wheel wells moved forward for ditto;

Rear fenders sculpted out for more width for ditto (as you said above);

Extra body brace in door opening for frame strength (as above).

The changes aren't that noticeable, as the original body flow is maintained.

Whatever, they are great cars to drive, and I'm happy with mine.

Dead horse now flogged...

Dead horse now flogged...    LMAO Bob !

Alan Merklin posted:

Dead horse now flogged...    LMAO Bob !

 

AIN"T over until FAT FERDINAND SINGS