20b?
03-22-2005, 09:00 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Disclaimer: posts made after 11AM are most likely alcohol induced. Please disregard unless very funn
Posts: 2,436
[quote name='Il RX8 lI' date='Mar 22 2005, 07:20 PM']Even though it's a full blown race car, the RE-Amemiya FD with the 20b seems to handle pretty well...Of course they have a bigger budget than most anyone dealing with a rotary.
[/quote]
that car is most likely a full tube chassis car.. You can't even consider it an FD anymore.
[snapback]689396[/snapback]
[/quote]
that car is most likely a full tube chassis car.. You can't even consider it an FD anymore.
03-22-2005, 09:26 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: California
Posts: 22,465
[quote name='pushnlacs' date='Mar 21 2005, 05:01 PM']you had a 20b and went back to a 13b? can i ask why? was it for handleing?
i am suprised the 20b only weighs 60 lbs more than the 13b, that really isnt to bad and i wouldnt think 60lbs would throw off the handleing to bad.
hey the RE gt300 uses a 3 rotor and jgtc cars need to handle real good.
[/quote]
i had computer problems, it left me stranded one too many times.
it does handle better with the 13b, but thats cause i have a front swaybar again.
the re car isnt really much of an fd anymore, the engine is way low and far back.
i am suprised the 20b only weighs 60 lbs more than the 13b, that really isnt to bad and i wouldnt think 60lbs would throw off the handleing to bad.
hey the RE gt300 uses a 3 rotor and jgtc cars need to handle real good.
[snapback]688886[/snapback]
[/quote]
i had computer problems, it left me stranded one too many times.
it does handle better with the 13b, but thats cause i have a front swaybar again.
the re car isnt really much of an fd anymore, the engine is way low and far back.
03-23-2005, 03:51 AM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 907
[quote name='GreyGT-C' date='Mar 23 2005, 12:29 AM']You'll still have the bump steer problem though..... the only real solution to that from what i've seen is moving the engine/tranny rearward....
[/quote]
I'm not looking for an arguement, but that really sounds like a backwards way of eliminating bumpsteer - I'd love to see some decent pics of a 20b install with this problem.
Mark
[snapback]689364[/snapback]
[/quote]
I'm not looking for an arguement, but that really sounds like a backwards way of eliminating bumpsteer - I'd love to see some decent pics of a 20b install with this problem.
Mark
03-23-2005, 08:23 PM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: California
Posts: 22,465
[quote name='inanimate_object' date='Mar 23 2005, 01:50 AM']I'm not looking for an arguement, but that really sounds like a backwards way of eliminating bumpsteer - I'd love to see some decent pics of a 20b install with this problem.
Mark
[/quote]
well on the fd the front rotor on a 20b and the steering rack would share the same space, so you can either move the rack, and get bumpsteer, or move the engine back and refabricate the trans tunnel and ppf. option 3 would be to just raise the front of the engine up, but then it would be poking thru the hood.
mazda had 20b fc's running around in 88-89, motor trend tested one, they knew they didnt want the 20b to fit in the fd so they made it harder.
Mark
[snapback]689590[/snapback]
[/quote]
well on the fd the front rotor on a 20b and the steering rack would share the same space, so you can either move the rack, and get bumpsteer, or move the engine back and refabricate the trans tunnel and ppf. option 3 would be to just raise the front of the engine up, but then it would be poking thru the hood.
mazda had 20b fc's running around in 88-89, motor trend tested one, they knew they didnt want the 20b to fit in the fd so they made it harder.
03-24-2005, 05:56 AM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 907
[quote name='j9fd3s' date='Mar 24 2005, 03:22 AM']well on the fd the front rotor on a 20b and the steering rack would share the same space, so you can either move the rack, and get bumpsteer, or move the engine back and refabricate the trans tunnel and ppf. option 3 would be to just raise the front of the engine up, but then it would be poking thru the hood.
mazda had 20b fc's running around in 88-89, motor trend tested one, they knew they didnt want the 20b to fit in the fd so they made it harder.
[/quote]
Why can't you leave the engine there, move the rack forward and replace it with one that's the right length to get rid of the bumpsteer?
Mark
mazda had 20b fc's running around in 88-89, motor trend tested one, they knew they didnt want the 20b to fit in the fd so they made it harder.
[snapback]689938[/snapback]
[/quote]
Why can't you leave the engine there, move the rack forward and replace it with one that's the right length to get rid of the bumpsteer?
Mark
03-24-2005, 10:46 PM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: California
Posts: 22,465
[quote name='inanimate_object' date='Mar 24 2005, 03:56 AM']Why can't you leave the engine there, move the rack forward and replace it with one that's the right length to get rid of the bumpsteer?
Mark
[/quote]
um i dunno? i used an fc, which doesnt have that issue
Mark
[snapback]690115[/snapback]
[/quote]
um i dunno? i used an fc, which doesnt have that issue
03-27-2005, 07:31 PM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 524
Originally Posted by inanimate_object' date='Mar 24 2005, 03:56 AM
Why can't you leave the engine there, move the rack forward and replace it with one that's the right length to get rid of the bumpsteer?
You'd be replacing bumpsteer with other, even more insidious steering issues.
Instead of moving the engine rearwards, I'd move the whole subframe forwards. This would require new inner and outer fenders and a new steering column, and handling wouldn't be as snappy due to the longer wheelbase, but you could always just relocate the rear axle as well.
"I never liked to do things simple when I could do them ***-backwards". Bonus points for ID-ing that quote.