|
|
|
|
|
Go back and vote on this image.
|
Picture
Information
|
| URL:
http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=53737 |
|
| Comments: 11 (Read/Post) Favorites: 1 (View) |
Submitted
on: 07-03-2006
|
 View Stats |
Category:
Car |
|
|
Description:
One of those Cobra powered Focus hatchbacks |
Showing page: 1 of 1
[ 1 ]
 |
| #1 |
7-04-2006 @ 08:29:49 AM |
| Posted By : LS2 Terror |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I hear these things drive like crap and compromise on a lot of things just to use a V8. Makes no sense to me, even though it's nice to see a V8 stuffed into something. Just put in a V6 or a supercharged 4-cylinder and keep the rwd, and I'll be happy.
|
|
| #2 |
7-04-2006 @ 09:26:14 AM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Ever stop to think that they drive like crap partly because they're RWD? A Ford 8.8" or 9" solid rear (which is what I believe most of these kits use) adds a lot of unsprung weight, and it wouldn't surprise me if there were packaging problems that impair the geometry.
|
|
| #3 |
7-04-2006 @ 09:43:24 AM |
| Posted By : LS2 Terror |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Yeah, sounds about right. Plus they just can't get traction, and it's supposedly impossible to get to some things in the engine bay.
|
|
| #4 |
7-04-2006 @ 10:12:48 AM |
| Posted By : Subourbon187 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I really don't see the point of adding all that extra weight and detracting from it's handling and traction characteristics just to cram a V8 in the engine bay. I've heard of PT Cruisers utilizing Chrysler small block crate engines but they were primarily drag cars
|
|
| #6 |
7-04-2006 @ 11:03:22 AM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I'd argue that the biggest compromise is the converging four link in the rear. From what I can tell (I haven't seen an installed picture to be sure) it appears that the Kugel V8 Focus kit is designed for a similar converging four link, installed in a chassis that really wasn't designed for it. Brilliant!
I obviously have my own opinions, but I'll leave you with this little nugget of truth--I have a four link with parallel uppers and a Panhard bar, and I'm running springs that are close to twice as stiff as stock back there. I have vastly better suspension articulation than stock. Even with all the chassis reinforcement, I cannot get a rear wheel to even begin to leave the ground by jacking a front corner--I'll just get over a foot of wheel gap in the rear. :p The car's handling is surprisingly much better, too; gee, I wonder why.
|
|
| #8 |
7-04-2006 @ 11:09:43 AM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I have better rear axle articulation than some off-road trucks. ;)
I need to do something more about the front suspension, though--we didn't put the spring isolators back in when we put the 850# springs in there, and it sits too low. It's not really too much of a problem, but the outside edges of my front tires are feathering. If the next pair does the same, that means that I'm not getting enough negative camber up there. :p
Don't let the redneck yokels on stangnet tell you that the correct way to make a solid axle car handle is to remove compliance and travel from the suspension. The correct way is to actually address the geometry issues while maintaining as much travel as possible--it improves ride quality and grip.
[Edited by Lemming on 7-04-2006 @ 11:11:08 AM]
|
|
| #9 |
7-04-2006 @ 11:14:44 AM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Oh, and now that I managed to actually find some photos of the Kugel rear suspension setup, it's basically a Mustang-style 4-link (with spherical bushings) with coilovers mounted on the trailing side of the rear axle. Probably rides like a dump truck.
|
Showing page: 1 of 1
[ 1 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
