| Author | Message | ||
     Peter Matusov (Pmatusov) Senior Member Username: Pmatusov Post Number: 1295 Registered: 09-2002 |
I've spent s couple hours last weekend watching the last year's TTC on the DVD, and a few thoughts crossed my mind. Here's the most breakage: - driveshafts - broken t-case (due to driveshaft being too long) - two broken steering boxes - tie rods - one hydrolocked 454, many other suffering from water immersion - lots of problems with carburetted rigs. - the only rig that did not have any damage was a custom-built "Sniper" rock buggy, with Rockwells on both ends. Also, all runs except for acceleration/braking test were performed in low range. Since custom rigs are allowed on TTC, I thought of, say, the combination like this: - Ford 4.0V6/manual transmission located behind the driver, transversely. Say, the transmission output shaft is pointed to starboard. - [Whatever axle] centersection with a locker or spooled, placed with pinion facing the starboard, parallel to the transmission output shaft, located right under it. - the dual-range function can be accomplished with using two sprockets, different by 50% in tooth count, linked by a Morse chain or big-a$$ rubber belt. The sprockets can be easily taken off and swapped around, resulting in change from 1:1.5 over- to 1:5:1 underdrive. - high-pinion or portal axles on both ends. - choice of driveshafts depends on the suspension geometry, can be any. - ram-assisted steering. The centered and high placement of the engine lends itself to an easy waterproofing; the engine has aluminum block and heads, so it won't add too much to c.g. height. PTO options abound for hydraulic winches etc. The final gearing ratio is split between the axle centersection used as center diff and axles, so large contact tooth-count R&Ps could be used in the axles. And the only high-cost items would be the axles. I'm tempted... | ||
| Jeff Mclaird (Granitedisco) Member Username: Granitedisco Post Number: 198 Registered: 08-2003 |
Hell - V8 Unimog - No contest  | ||
| Peter Matusov (Pmatusov) Senior Member Username: Pmatusov Post Number: 1296 Registered: 09-2002 |
Nope. They had a loose hillclimb which the 'Mog would never climb, tight and twisted canyon that a big Mog is too wide for, and some other stuff that's just not too suited for a heavy and underpowered rig. | ||
| Ron L (Ronl) Senior Member Username: Ronl Post Number: 264 Registered: 11-2002 |
Stay away from the blue oval 4.0. Crappy head design that is guaranteed to crack and dump coolant into a cylinder. We won�t even discuss the intake manifold. | ||
| Peter Matusov (Pmatusov) Senior Member Username: Pmatusov Post Number: 1297 Registered: 09-2002 |
it was just an example - could be any aluminum V6 or V8 that comes with a RWD manual transmission. BTW, I've had an Aerostar with a 4.0V6 that didn't have a single engine problem until 133kmi (when I sold it). | ||
| Ron L (Ronl) Senior Member Username: Ronl Post Number: 265 Registered: 11-2002 |
consider yourself lucky | ||
| Ryan Graham (Ryangraham) New Member Username: Ryangraham Post Number: 17 Registered: 01-2004 |
Shouldn't admit you had an aerostar. Let alone for a 133k miles. | ||
| Peter Matusov (Pmatusov) Senior Member Username: Pmatusov Post Number: 1300 Registered: 09-2002 |
Why is that? It was a four-wheel-drive Aerostar, too! One of the better vehicles I've owned. BTW, the combination of engine torque with gearing was way better than that on a Disco (given with the same displacement and curb weight). | ||
| Tyler kinghorn (Flippedrover) New Member Username: Flippedrover Post Number: 30 Registered: 12-2003 |
4L 6 in my ranger. Has 148k+ even hydrolocked the thing. No problems with it. | ||
| Peter Matusov (Pmatusov) Senior Member Username: Pmatusov Post Number: 1305 Registered: 09-2002 |
same as the one in the Aerostar. Between 66 and 133kmi, the only thing I've changed (besides oil) was the serpentine belt. On one trip, around 72kmi on the clock, it lost the oil drain plug at 90mph. No damage whatsoever. | ||
| thom mathie (Muskyman) Senior Member Username: Muskyman Post Number: 591 Registered: 11-2002 |
I have a friend with a 4.0 ford ranger with 250k+ and has been turning 33" tires for about 90% of that time still runs strong. Peter...you would fit in well with the mud runners here in the midwest. Many of them do not run TC's. They run what is called a "farmer john" simply a multi row sprocket down to a shaft with a driveshaft yoke on each end. need more gear?...change the sprockets Not only are they strong they are cheap and allow any 2WD ford pickup to be turned into a mud runner on 44" tires Thom | ||
| Peter Matusov (Pmatusov) Senior Member Username: Pmatusov Post Number: 1343 Registered: 09-2002 |
Thom, I got thinking about this setup after someone mentioned a complete Olds Toronado drivetrain stuffed transversely behind the front seats. I am not a big fan of one-off dedicated trail rigs, but, since they are allowed on TTC, why doesn't anyone go this route? All I've ever seen participating in TTC, had traditional drivetrain layout. | ||
| thom mathie (Muskyman) Senior Member Username: Muskyman Post Number: 592 Registered: 11-2002 |
Peter 2 guys I know went to TTC a number of years back...its all a set up . the one who wins is who they want to see win. They change the rules as they see fit ,including in during a event. after my friend hydroplanned across the trap test at 70mph they said that it had to be crawled. then after 4 trucks ruined there motors and the rest of the event was at stake they allowed the scorpion to drive off camber down the side. Its all just a set up Thom |
