|
Throatwarbler posted:The C6R has coil over shock suspension, which means the suspension mounting points and load bearing structures are going to be completely different from the regular street car I don't think it has to be that drastically different. I don't recall that coilover retrofit kits for C6s require much hardpoint modification, if any.
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 08:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:37 |
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I don't think it has to be that drastically different. I don't recall that coilover retrofit kits for C6s require much hardpoint modification, if any. ...and I kind of don't really want to be sitting in a Corvette with a retrofit kit under any sort of hard driving. The whole point of the transverse leaf springs is to have the weight of the car be transmitted from wheels, to springs, to the center backbone. The body of the car was never meant to be load bearing in that way. That would be akin to taking a leaf spring truck and modifying it with coil springs that just sit straight on the bottom of the bed since there are no shock towers. EDIT: I mean I don't know anything about Corvettes but that still sounds sketchy as gently caress. Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 09:00 on Dec 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 08:56
|
|
|
I don't know how strong the upper mount points are, but the Corvette already has shocks, not... nothing. Callaway's kit specifically avoids putting full force through those points: http://www.corvetteonline.com/tech-stories/brakes-suspension/c5c6-corvette-suspension-tech-coilovers-vs-leafs/
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 09:24
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I don't know how strong the upper mount points are, but the Corvette already has shocks, not... nothing. Callaway's kit specifically avoids putting full force through those points: Maybe I've misunderstood what these kits actually do. It says in the article that the Callaway kit actually leaves the leaf springs in place and just add coils on top? Correct me if I'm wrong since you're an engineer and all but shocks and springs are not the same thing in terms of energy. The shocks only need to dampen the compression and rebound, the springs are actually where all of the weight/energy gets transferred and stored and thus a spring mount is going to need much more reinforcement than a damper.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 09:34
|
|
|
travisray2004 posted:As much as we all love horsepower, I think this power race is getting out of hand. 550+hp is insane for a regular person off of the street to be able to handle. Do these vehicles require some high performance driving classes prior to purchase or can anyone just with enough cash just wrap one around a tree?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 13:28
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Maybe I've misunderstood what these kits actually do. It says in the article that the Callaway kit actually leaves the leaf springs in place and just add coils on top? I believe that the shocks transmit higher peak loads to the chassis than the springs. The shocks take care of all the high-velocity, high energy suspension movement while the springs only deal with the low velocity, low frequency motion that was not counteracted by the shocks. It is the high amplitude, high frequency loads that are most likely to cause metal fatigue and thus they are the most important factor for the integrity of the chassis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 13:56
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:...and I kind of don't really want to be sitting in a Corvette with a retrofit kit under any sort of hard driving. The whole point of the transverse leaf springs is to have the weight of the car be transmitted from wheels, to springs, to the center backbone. The body of the car was never meant to be load bearing in that way. That would be akin to taking a leaf spring truck and modifying it with coil springs that just sit straight on the bottom of the bed since there are no shock towers. Most serious track and race corvettes run coilovers without any special mods to the mounting points. The C6R is also far from a tube frame car and uses a regular c6 chassis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 17:21
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Man, I forgot how long ago it was that the Grand Cherokee (presumably that's what you mean) came out. I think it's all right though since they did pretty much update everything else and the exterior of the GC was pretty nice to begin with. If anything the new headlights are a step back. No, I mean the new Jeep Cherokee. It was reported in the papers that the weird bulbous design is because it's taken off another Fiat family car and that this was done to save money and development time. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324103504578372742834883124 OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Dec 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Oh what planet is selling a 550 hp 5.0 v8 and a supercharged 662 hp v8 (with assurances the next gen will have incrementally more power) chasing economy over power? Also, they're called ecoboost, but it's pretty clear that Ford's new round of turbo engines has power as a top priority. And on the flip side of that, the base Corvette has 460hp and can get 30mpg on the highway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:No, I mean the new Jeep Cherokee. It was reported in the papers that the weird bulbous design is because it's taken off another Fiat family car and that this was done to save money and development time. The new 200 should be a home run.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 22:10
|
|
|
Tekne posted:This was the response by Jeep's head designer, Mark Allen, to that WSJ report: "It's absolutely false. It was done completely in Detroit, 100 percent." He would've probably given the same answer if that were true, but I think we can take the man at his word. Fortunately, the styling appears to have had no affect on the Cherokee's desirability, as Chrysler's best November in decades is due to this strange looking vehicle. I personally like the Trailhawk trim in dark colors. There was an ad for the new Cherokee on right after I read this, and honestly, it's not as horrible as it was when I first saw it. I wouldn't say it's growing on me as much as I'm just getting used to it. Compared to the RAV4 or CR-V, it's definitely more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
kill me now posted:Most serious track and race corvettes run coilovers without any special mods to the mounting points. The C6R is also far from a tube frame car and uses a regular c6 chassis. Well it sure looks like the C6R has significantly less trunk storage space than the regular street car.    
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 02:25
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Well it sure looks like the C6R has significantly less trunk storage space than the regular street car. This is honestly the first time in a long while I wish I had the cash to just buy a car right now. Absolute car porn
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 03:37
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:
Nope, definitely not a tube framed car in the slightest. Even when they were racing in GT1 there were limits on where you could move the suspension mount points; that's much more restricted in GTE. quote:Type and method of operation http://www.24h-lemans.com/wpphpFichiers/1/1/ressources/Pdf/2013/24-heures-du-mans/regulations/2013-technical-regulations-lm-gte.pdf I've had a poke around numerous GTE cars in the last year, they are still closely related to the road-going versions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 15:46
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:Nope, definitely not a tube framed car in the slightest. Even when they were racing in GT1 there were limits on where you could move the suspension mount points; that's much more restricted in GTE. I mean that covers location, but nothing about reinforcement right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Well it sure looks like the C6R has significantly less trunk storage space than the regular street car. holllly poo poo
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Well it sure looks like the C6R has significantly less trunk storage space than the regular street car. Looks like one hell of a ride. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGoB_o6q7-U
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 03:08
|
|
|
That is an exceedingly generous interpretation of "opening doors".
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
Aurune posted:Looks like one hell of a ride. Best sounding car on the grid, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 06:41
|
|
|
So, Holden (and by extension I guess GM) is bailing on Australian based production. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-11/holden/5150034 I think that means after 2017 there will be no Australian built cars and only one or maybe two Aussie assembled cars? probably toyotas?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 04:25
|
|
|
tobu posted:So, Holden (and by extension I guess GM) is bailing on Australian based production. See that smoking crater? That's South Australia's economy after 2017. This is going to be very bad for a whooooooole lotta people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 04:34
|
|
|
Cat Terrist posted:See that smoking crater? That's South Australia's economy after 2017. This is going to be very bad for a whooooooole lotta people. nah, they can all get jobs digging up rocks and selling them to the Chinese. -edit- ooh South Australia... well, good luck with that. Finger Prince fucked around with this message at 06:02 on Dec 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 05:58
|
|
|
So this will probably mean the Chevrolet SS will only last a couple of years on the market. That is if it is successful anyway
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 06:04
|
|
|
Think now. Think Tomorrow. Think Holden I can't see how the SS could have ever lasted more than a couple of years anyway - that platform has to be due for a refresh anyway
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 06:16
|
|
|
Yeah the announcement is in line with the replacement after the VF / SS / Zeta? Platform. Going to be a big blow to Australian manufacturing though, though if you believe the idiots in government there's only a couple of thousand affected.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 06:25
|
|
|
Aargh posted:though if you believe the idiots in government there's only a couple of thousand affected. Is there anyone stupid enough in AI to believe a word Abbott and Co says? This is obviously going to affect many, many more - and for anyone not in Australia, yes this is THE headline in Australia right now. Holden shuttering is Very loving Big News.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 06:35
|
|
|
tobu posted:I think that means after 2017 there will be no Australian built cars and only one or maybe two Aussie assembled cars? probably toyotas? Hell Ford has gone so far as to say they won't even develop new cars in Australia after 2016.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 06:37
|
|
|
Cat Terrist posted:Is there anyone stupid enough in AI to believe a word Abbott and Co says? This is obviously going to affect many, many more - and for anyone not in Australia, yes this is THE headline in Australia right now. Holden shuttering is Very loving Big News. Don't quote me, I'm only paraphrasing the tele (need to know what the other side think)
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 12:15
|
|
|
Not to Auspol this but I'm not sure what you guys think anyone in Aussie government could do about this. They could try to bribe the carcos to stay, which would cost Aussies a fortune. They could crank up tariffs, which would raise the price of all cars, and cost Aussies a fortune (and risk retribution). They could try some half-assed measures to reduce the (labor, environmental) costs of building cars in Aus, which would piss off tons of people and probably still not work. This has been coming for, what, years? Decades?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 13:20
|
|
|
nationalise the car plants, lease them to international manufacturers to build their popular models here. government then subsidises those models to promote their purchase. aussies get cheaper cars (haha yeah right), people keep their jobs!
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 14:01
|
|
|
There usually aren't too many interesting cars coming out of Chinese companies, but recently it seems that Great Wall will be launching a range topping version of their Haval H8.  Unibody construction with double wishbone suspension.   The regular model with a 2.0 turbo 4 and a 6AT sells locally for about the same price as a Chinese built CR-V or RAV4. It is a larger (about the size of a Highlander), better equipped vehicle with more power so that's about right for a car from one of the better Chinese marques. Styling is a bit derivative as you might expect but fairly inoffensive. I can certainly think of plenty of uglier vehicles from developed country marques. The interesting thing is that they are going to be putting in a 3.0l twin turbo inline 6 engine with about 320hp, developed in-house. It will sit in front of a ZF 8 speed auto. I took some photos of a cutaway of this engine from the Beijing auto show last year.  Now supposing they can keep the pricing around the same or even slightly above a CR-V/RAV4? That really doesn't sound half bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 14:16
|
|
|
That's actually a pretty good looking SUV, and I normally loathe SUVs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:That's actually a pretty good looking SUV, and I normally loathe SUVs. Just buy a VW then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 20:48
|
|
|
That's an impressive design. I'm sure the designers spent all day shrinking the GL550 and rounding it off slightly to look somewhat like an Audi.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 21:50
|
|
|
Q_res posted:Hell Ford has gone so far as to say they won't even develop new cars in Australia after 2016.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 22:33
|
|
|
Cyrezar posted:That's an impressive design. I'm sure the designers spent all day shrinking the GL550 and rounding it off slightly to look somewhat like an Audi. Those sure are two SUVs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
Great Wall counts as one of Chinas best local manufacturers? They must have improve dramatically as the current X200/X240 ranks as the one of the worst vehicles I've ever driven (no redeeming points at all)
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
You Am I posted:Ford is keeping the Australian engineering team running, especially with the huge amount of money they have pumped into the You Yangs test facility. I expect new cars to be developed here, but for Asian markets That's what I expected, but Motor Trend ran a quote from a Ford official stating that they wouldn't develop new cars there. Perhaps they meant chassis/platforms?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
Cyrezar posted:That's an impressive design. I'm sure the designers spent all day shrinking the GL550 and rounding it off slightly to look somewhat like an Audi. The grill seems a lot more GMC to me, actually. And the headlights look vaguely Mopar-ish, though I can't find anything that really matches.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2013 00:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:37 |
|
|
Q_res posted:That's what I expected, but Motor Trend ran a quote from a Ford official stating that they wouldn't develop new cars there. Yeah, they probably mean designing and building cars like the Falcon and Territory.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2013 01:21
|
|