Tony: IMHO I must agree with Joe. Build them as they were, but, option the
later geometry. I am one person that did the modification of a "3" chassis to
"6" lower mounts. It's an easy, measure three times weld once (okay, twice on
the first side I did) mod. Randy Williams' TR3 has the lower TR6 mounts with
later uprights, upper "A" arms, lower trunnion's, and Jaguar upper ball joints.
With the Jag upper BJ's it is more adjustable than the stock set-up. But, the
purist's will still want it as it was, and a racer will pay the extra cost if
he wants the mod. Don't close the door to either market. Thanks - Ed
N197TR4@cs.com wrote: Tony!
important question....a few of my humble thoughts
of course, commonality of frame components is a plus for you.
originality and source of parts might be an issue for others.
i'd guess you will also get the plea to set your TR3 frames up for the R & P.
generally speaking, engineering changes seem to lead to other unplanned
engineering changes.
you might consider remaining stock, but offering custom specs on the frame
that starts with 'delete options' that allows customer to modify components
himself.
sidebar comment: my own preference, if I were building a "TR4 race car or a
kit car, would be the TR4A frame with solid axle. The TR4A has a lot of
features that make it desirable, including caster, and adjustable camber.
you have an amazing program going on...best wishes.
Joe (A)
> HELLO KAS,
> Congrats on your new book. I'll be sending a check and an address in
> the next few days. Hope you do well with your writing.
> I have a question for you and the FOT gang. As you know I am building
> new frames for all the TR series cars under the RATCO trademark. I'm in the
> process of building the first TR2/3 frame for which we have four orders in
> house. It does not take long to notice, and a very short time if your
> designing a replica, that the front end of a TR2/3 has no adjustability
> except
> for toe in. After much thought and research, I have come to the conclusion
> that if I were to change the lower wishbone mounts to the style of the
> TR250/6
> series cars but leave everything in the same geometrical location, I would
> have accomplished what the Triumph engineers did with the TR250/6 cars and
> offer adjustability for caster and camber. Is this correct? Am I missing
> something? Will I create a problem by adding this adjustability? Its probably
> been done before but I am just not aware of the attempt or the results.
> My experience stops me right here and so I turn to the people who
> know. Can you help me with this in the form of advice. I would appreciate it
> and I'm sure future users of the new frame will be very happy.
>
> Best Regards,
> Tony Vigliotti
> RATCO Inc.
> 631-205-2426
=== Help keep Team.Net on the air
=== http://www.team.net/donate.html
|