MR2 Owners Club Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Another UK V8 MR2 Conversion

31K views 100 replies 21 participants last post by  widebodystarlet 
#1 ·
V8 ... The Beginning!

Some of you may know me from over on MR2OC.co.uk and TwoBrutal. I've spent the past year building my V6 MR2 which after many a setback is in the final stages of having a TRD Scion Supercharger fitted. I have designed the bracket to fit it to the block myself and am nearly there with that. By all means take a look :)

This car is all but done, fully resprayed, polybushed, HSD's, full leather retrim, Speedhuts, Enkei's etc.



I've suffered con-rod bearing failure, then in prep for the SC i fitted Copper headgaskets that Boostedcamry helped me with (Gabe) .... big mistake!! They're notoriously difficult to seal and lasted 600 mile before leaking - that's with ARP's....! I now have 3vz MLS gaskets ready to fit supplied to me from Rogue Motorsport - if you're interested in a set, contact Patrick :thumbup

http://www.mr2oc.co.uk/forums/125/118180.html

Anyway i had been doing a complete nut and bolt rebuild on my 93 JDM turbo also but due to personal problems my heart is no longer in the car. Just before it fell off axle stands it looked something like this...




and the engine detailed to this standard



The turbo engine will be sold off to part pay for this build but have started parts collection already.

Justinswidebody's progress has spurred me on to make a start.

So far i have bought a Link G4 Extreme ECU - supremely good bit of kit which i hope 2BarTuning will help with

Just waiting on delivery of my gearbox, flywheel, clutch and driveshafts from an Audi 2.5tdi 6-speed
 
See less See more
3
#83 · (Edited)
AndyA said:
The flex plate on your engine in one of the pics. I was wondering also.
Oh I see! :thumbup

Right-e-ho! ;)

Take a look just above the flex plate on the crank, directly in the middle of the V. You will see the pinion for the starter motor. Seems a shame to lose all that functionality ;) ... I will be making a custom alloy flywheel to bolt to the flex-plate a la Fidanza style with a bolted on steel friction face. This will mate up to the Audi diesel clutch (which i already have too). I've got the old dual mass flywheel here (which will not be used) so I can copy all the pertinent dimensions I need from it.

Saying that.. Auto would be a pretty cool and lazy GT cruiser. Especially mated to a set of Goldy's paddle-shift arrangement. AFAIK, I did all the fabrication for the only MR2 V6 Auto in existence too. That's no slouch and is probably the ultimate GT style MR2, has won quite a few honours in the UK for S&S too....

Now supercharged.....



 
#86 ·
I'll dig out some more later and not got the high res sorry, i just robbed them from his project page on MR2OC.co.uk. He had a 7 page feature in Banzai last year. I'll find some more and stick them in a new thread.

Pictures do not do it justice in any way; it's far better in the flesh. Plus believe me; i did nothing in terms of finishing and polishing, that was all the owner (mr2big), I simply did the fabrication of custom engine mounts and a minor chassis alteration to get the Camry Auto box in.
 
#93 ·
You might consider using Solidworks or Autodesk Inventor. These are both parametric solid modelers (history based). I use them both at work (my day job as an engineer) and for my 3D printer side business.

Unlike AutoCAD (i used to use that a long time ago), you start with a 3D model and then create drawings and the drawings are tied to the solid model-- update/change the model and the drawings auto-update.

Both have sheet metal tools. You design the sheet metal part in its final form. The software can then layout the sheet metal pattern in a flat form for you.

This is just a suggestion. The cardboard method is cheaper and easier to learn than 3D solid modeling software.
 
#94 ·
Yeah ... I've been using AutoCAD for 18 odd years now (day job) .. We are in the process of converting all our standard parts over to Inventor - which is quite time consuming if you want to get all the relationships and constraints right. Even though I'm pretty good on Inventor now I still maintain I'll always be quicker on AutoCAD.. ;)
 
#97 ·
yes, back in the early 90's seemed like the stone ages. I learned to draft with paper (vellum) pencil and a "drafting machine" which was just a fancy square on a articulating parallel arm, oh and don't forget the large angled desk (drafting table). When I learned 2D cad (Cadkey, then later AutoCAD), I liked it a whole lot more. Easier to make changes to drawings, and to get exact measurements off the drawing.

I really like the 3D modelers, especially because I can 3D print a lot of smaller parts.

But the real benefit of 3D modelers is putting parts into assemblies and doing FEA analysis and tolerance (and interference of parts fits) analysis.
 
#98 ·
dgh938peg said:
This was the subframe after the 'budget' CAD work ;)

You cut out a lot of support in the middle.. Are you going to make a horse shoe mount that goes over the transmission and bolts to both sides of the cross member to give it back some support since you removed most of it?
 
#99 ·
I'm not sure on that one eazy. I cut down to the seam line of the subframe so there's about 30mm of meat left. When I cut that thing it did not move a single millimetre; which was pleasing to see! However I agree that removing half of the thickness will make it considerable weaker. I will be having some form of box section hoop over the gearbox so there would be plenty of stiffness to tie back into there..... From an engineers standpoint, it would make more sense to do it than not to!

Seems like I have talked myself into that one :D
 
#101 ·
dgh938peg said:
I'm not sure on that one eazy. I cut down to the seam line of the subframe so there's about 30mm of meat left. When I cut that thing it did not move a single millimetre; which was pleasing to see! However I agree that removing half of the thickness will make it considerable weaker. I will be having some form of box section hoop over the gearbox so there would be plenty of stiffness to tie back into there..... From an engineers standpoint, it would make more sense to do it than not to!

Seems like I have talked myself into that one :D
I did mine the same way, cut down just to the top of the seam. Then reinforced the bottom of it from below the seam with some thick steel, and then did something similar to yours on top. I think with it built the way you have it, there should be enough strength, but a little extra is always nice too :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top