|
Johns
|
 |
« Reply #20 on: September 17, 2012, 04:49:25 PM » |
+1
|
Guys,
Can we please lose the discussion about changing engine numbers. This is a public forum, please exhibit some common sense.
Rules, no matter how inconvenient, are rules. If you want to modify a car you have to accept the umpires decision, otherwise don't. Remember no one is sitting down thinking how terrific it is that Joe Bloggs somewhere is going to triple the power in his structurally weak, dynamically incompetent 52 years old, plus, Holden.
Thats why car manufacturers spend $millions upgrading the whole car for maybe a 20% increase.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Now that I've got the beige with the grey, I'm looking for the cream, the bone, the ivory and the off white
|
|
|
|
NES304
|
|
« Reply #21 on: September 17, 2012, 08:55:25 PM » |
0
|
So changing the direction here, in NSW do you need a Chassis kit for a 304?
I think it'd be wise to do so but wonder what the engineering side is wanting for approval.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
waynos
Senior Member
 Offline
Model: FC
Posts: 787
patience grasshopper
|
|
« Reply #22 on: September 17, 2012, 11:46:14 PM » |
0
|
johns,
well said
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The grinder is mightier than the sword.
|
|
|
waynos
Senior Member
Offline
Model: FC
Posts: 787
patience grasshopper
|
|
« Reply #23 on: September 18, 2012, 12:00:36 AM » |
0
|
i dont want people thinkin i might do that after all the trouble im goin through puttin my dads 186 in
he didnt even want me to have it!
thanks dad!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The grinder is mightier than the sword.
|
|
|
|
zl296
|
|
« Reply #24 on: September 18, 2012, 07:06:10 PM » |
0
|
the 52 year old holden,is a safe driving all steel car....  no plastic and air bags...  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
die young and leave a good looking corpse...
|
|
|
Iso007
Junior Member
Offline
Model: FC
Posts: 50
|
|
« Reply #25 on: September 18, 2012, 09:30:31 PM » |
0
|
hey guru, the engineer i spoke to told me he would definitely not approve any fb without a chassis kit if it had an engine bigger than 186. i cant speak for any other model or any other engineer but this guy was straight with me and that was all i wanted to hear.
best regards
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
NES304
|
|
« Reply #26 on: September 18, 2012, 10:01:12 PM » |
0
|
hey guru, the engineer i spoke to told me he would definitely not approve any fb without a chassis kit if it had an engine bigger than 186. i cant speak for any other model or any other engineer but this guy was straight with me and that was all i wanted to hear.
best regards
Ian
Wow, I didnt require a chassis kit for a V6 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FCRB26
|
|
« Reply #27 on: September 19, 2012, 04:47:14 AM » |
0
|
Yet an engineer up our way approved an LS1 in an EH with no chassis kit as long as it had a Pat gardener front end  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Harv
|
|
« Reply #28 on: September 19, 2012, 06:37:16 AM » |
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ed
|
|
« Reply #29 on: September 19, 2012, 03:34:54 PM » |
0
|
As Harv said, interpretations vary, so find an engineer who shares your interpretation of the rules.
I was told I could not air bag, chassis notch, or run a late model engine in my '42... a chop top as well and the engineer ran a mile... he was the guy who certified the V8 wagon as well.
so I found another engineer who said it was ok within his interpretation of the rules.. he even asked me if I wanted to suicide the doors.. he sees my build as quite straight forward and mild.
As far as chassis kits go, I would install one, just because it makes good engineering sense to reduce body twist... but that's just me. Try jacking up a non strengthened body at one point compared to one with a chassis kit.. the benefits are immediately obvious.
Cheers
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
in the shed
|
|
|
|
NES304
|
|
« Reply #30 on: September 19, 2012, 04:08:37 PM » |
0
|
Yet an engineer up our way approved an LS1 in an EH with no chassis kit as long as it had a Pat gardener front end Whoa, where was that? can he approve an LS1 in an FC??? I can chuck another dummy spit and go that direction |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FCRB26
|
|
« Reply #31 on: September 19, 2012, 04:46:21 PM » |
0
|
you actually can.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
waynos
Senior Member
Offline
Model: FC
Posts: 787
patience grasshopper
|
|
« Reply #32 on: September 19, 2012, 10:44:46 PM » |
0
|
its amazing how its up to the engineer to follow the guidelines ...loopholes everywhere.....some are stricter than others i guess
.my engineer in nowra is super cool.......
guess these dudes in sydney are all gettin scared of losing their licenses huh??
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The grinder is mightier than the sword.
|
|
|
|
NES304
|
|
« Reply #33 on: September 19, 2012, 11:38:44 PM » |
0
|
you actually can.
goddamit |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FCRB26
|
|
« Reply #34 on: September 20, 2012, 04:30:28 AM » |
0
|
Im using an engineer in sydney over one in newcastle and he is happy for the Air bag suspension, tubs, tubular front end, ect ect
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
NES304
|
|
« Reply #35 on: September 20, 2012, 08:54:39 AM » |
0
|
Can you send his number mate as I am getting a bit of a dickaround. Heard Athol got his licence back too
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ratbox
|
|
« Reply #36 on: October 03, 2012, 02:22:29 PM » |
0
|
yes i'de say not a bad idea not to talk about changing engine No's as for the other stuff there wouldn't be that great a differance in power from a 186 to a 202 many people actually prefer the 186 so i don't know where the structual integrity thing comes into it  last i knew the only extra stuff required by an engineer from a 186 to a 202 were collapsable collum and dual circuit brakes nothing that increases the structual integrity, i'de even go as far as saying there'de be nearly as many originally grey powered cars fitted with red motors now as there is grey powered cars most of which don't have chassis kits or anything else increasing there structure and they're as safe as they ever were as for chassis kits in V8 cars there used to be a couple of (NSW) engineers that didn't ask for them, i don't know anymore as i've had no contact with any engineers since the change, i did a 308 powered EK ute with a reasonably healthy engine over 10 years ago it had no chassis kit (engineer didn't require it) and that car is still on the road and as good as the day it was done as the engineer said, they are basically the same structure as H/KTG holdens and they're fine with 350 chevs also not saying they're not a good idea |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
NO NAME
|
|
« Reply #37 on: January 21, 2013, 10:30:51 PM » |
0
|
yeah its not a big difference between 186 and 202,years ago i blew my grey and put a stock 202 in my car with a 350 holley and extractors and took it to eastern creek and did 18.8, i then rebuilt a 179 bored to 192 with a hot head and 30 70 cam, same carb and exhuast and did 17.0, it was pretty slow but 1.8 seconds quicker is a bit of a change and the 192 was legal, the 202 wasnt and if you want the longer stroke how does anyone know what crank you have in a 179 or 186, your 179 could be a 206! also if you use a post 76 202 you have to run the pollution stuff, the black block would be the best of the bunch if you didnt have to run the pollution stuff. id go for a 179-186, 202 makes more power but in a lighter car the longer stroke isnt as important as it would be in something like a HQ.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
2door350
Full Member
Offline
Model: FE
Posts: 150
RAT 059
|
|
« Reply #38 on: January 22, 2013, 10:24:20 AM » |
0
|
202 crank machined down to fit in a 186 block is your best way around it if you want the extra cubes
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
