![]() |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Rate Thread |
Registered
|
adequate suspension/brake setup for my 68 911 with 930 turbo engine
what would be an adequate (read as safe!) suspention setup for my 1968 911 when ive installed the 3.3 turbo engine that im planning on fitting? i havn't seen the car yet but i think it may be a short wheelbase car. do i have to install aluminium rear arms or is that just a nice mod that people generally like to do? my mate is trying to put ally sc arms on his s/w/base car and its looking like he's going to have problems with the pivot point bracket on the torsion tube being in the wrong position and i dont want to go through all of that if standard long wheelbase arms will do. any views?
andy, essex, uk |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 893
|
swb
All 911 and 912 cars from 65-68 had the short wheelbase. The
pickup points on the torsion tube are different than cars 69 and later. If you attempt to bolt on trailing arms from cars later than 68, they will not match up properly to the swingplates. That includes turbo trailing arms. The only real and proper way to make a swb car to a long wheelbase car is to cut out the torsion tube and weld in one from a 69 or later. I am in the process of doing this and can provide you pics on how it is done. Believe me, it's not as bad as it sounds. The other issue is that when you do convert your car to lwb, it essentially moves the wheels back 2 inches, and requires you to weld on turbo flares to correct the look. 76 911s 66 912 v8 68 912 2.2 with nitrous ![]() ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Planet Eugene
Posts: 4,346
|
I would never put a turbo in a SWB car...
After it crashes, maybe the insurance co. will spring for the new trosion tube... |
||
![]() |
|
PRO Motorsports
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 4,580
|
Hmmmm.... short wheelbase car with Turbo engine. Let's see, if you use the '78 and later 930 trans with that, it will move the engine another 2 inches back. This will enable you to eliminate the front torsion bars altogether, since the front wheels will no longer be making contact with the ground.
Ever riden a unicycle? I suggest using two e-brake handles that independently operate each rear e-brake, so you can actually get the car to turn by pulling on the appropriate lever. ![]()
__________________
'69 911E coupe' RSR clone-in-progress (retired 911-Spec racer) '72 911T Targa MFI 2.4E spec(Formerly "Scruffy") 2004 GT3 |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: City of Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,374
|
BUMP because tyson is funny.
Any news, adomakin?
__________________
Andy |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Montana
Posts: 83
|
The shock towers won't work either.
|
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
Registered
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Laguna Beach, CA
Posts: 1,405
|
For braking a parachute should be adequate.
__________________
68 911L |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
|
Update.
Ive basically been throwing thousands at the engine (hence no move on the other bits) and have come to the conclusion that a later shell would be the best option. better brakes, adequate suspension (to start with!) galvanised shell, less rot, etc etc etc. So im now in the process of finding a nice straight sc/930/carrera/964 shell to throw lots more money (that i haven't got) at. Up the 'ammers. Andy, UK
__________________
Andy 1980 SC soon to be big hp 3.3t powered 73RSR Replica (well, I'm keeping the engine but everything else is going ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: City of Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,374
|
Thanks, Andy.
__________________
Andy |
||
![]() |
|