My RF-94 F1000 Project

[RussMcB]

I thought I'd chronicle bits & pieces of my conversion project in case anyone found it interesting. Surely someone will benefit from my mistakes. :-).

I bought a '05 ZX-10 engine on ebay for $1250 (+ $150 shipping). I went with Kawasaki primarily because I have a ZRX1100 street bike.

I originally hoped a wet sump and Accusump would suffice, but have since changed my mind for several reasons. The dry sump will obviously provide more reliable oil pressure, and will let the engine sit lower in the car. The Accusump procedures and disadvantages sounded like a pain (opening, closing valves, variable oil level, etc.).

Regarding the chassis modifications, I'd love to work with someone like Pat Prince because he's got experience and a great reputation, but I'm hoping to save money and time by doing as much as I can locally, and getting help when the tasks exceed my skills. It's REALLY nice having Sean's RF-96 F1000 nearby to check out.

You'd be surprised (or maybe you wouldn't) about the differing opinions regarding differentials. Some people think an open diff is sufficient, others think an LSD is needed. Some people think a locked spool is okay. These are opinions from people I respect. I'm leary of the handling characteristics of a locked rear, but that would be the cheapest. The most common LSD's seem to be $3,000 - $3,500. That seems like a lot, especially considering my whole engine was less than half of that.

The front runner is Richard Pare's open diff. He's busy with CART/Indy Car parts, but hopes to have something available by January.

Bill Gendron (Small Fortune Racing) and Larry Kropp also offer interesting differentials. Quaife America has an odd looking, but maybe interesting unit. It's got a reduction drive that might allow a smaller rear sprocket and solve the issue of interferance with the lower left rear wishbone.

Dave Gomberg has a ZX-10 Cheetah DSR and he introduced me to Larry Kropp. Larry has designed a dry sump system for the ZX-10 that retains the stock water pump. Sounds good to me.

That's probably enough for the initial post. My next post will show the jig I've created to capture all of the mounting points I'll lose when the LD200 transaxle goes away.

[Wren]

the guys from Taylor Race showed us a new diff they have that came out of a Honda(I think) for chain drive applications, it is light and looks pretty good. You have to machine up a housing, but that's not too bad.

I've now done two 600cc cars with a Quaife and I just can't make myself like it. It seems overly heavy for what you get, we had one do something weird inside that Scotty could not explain either. I would look to anything by ICP, those guys know their stuff.

You could also locate a Torsen and make a housing for it. Those are nice little diffs that can be done light and inexpensive.

Or- you could design and build your own diff. I've seen it done, not too hard.

[RussMcB]

Here is a picture of the bare chassis with transaxle. I've circled the visable mounting points that I hope to preserve when I build the new subframe for differential, rear suspension and rear wing mount.

[RussMcB]

I kept welding pieces together and ended up with this. I know - not pretty, but I think it will serve it's purpose.

[RussMcB]

Jig final product. Now that this piece is done, I can tell how much room within it I have to work with, and I can start thinking about how to position the engine, diff and suspension pick up points.

[Stan Clayton]

Very cool, Russ!

[Tom Sprecher]

And paint it, huh? Looks good! Keeping the rear cover in the jig was a good idea.

Have a Merry Christmas.

[Mike Devins]

Russ,

No one can appreciate the amount of work that goes into what you are trying to do until they have done it themselves. When I did the rear sub-frame for the RF98+ for Mike Sirianni’s car I went through about 5-10 iterations before settling on the final version.[/

I worked with Taylor on the Honda/Taylor Quaiffe - It allowed me to move the sprocket closer to the center (3-4 degree engine twist) to get the sprocket and chain out of the suspension pickup points. The down side is that it does not have the same width as the Hewland output flanges so I had to make special drive shafts







Since I was not building a complete CAD model of the assembly I mocked up the frame with wood and a hot glue gun. It looks crude but is a fast and effective (cheep) way to build / rebuild and then make changes to verify clearance

Good luck with your project

Mike Devins

Hurley Racing Products

[RussMcB]

Thanks, Mike. That is a great looking car. If mine turns out half as nice I'll be thrilled.

Your suggestions and pictures are very helpful and appreciated.

Did you use the area between the engine and differential for things like the oil tank? In my non-sports racer (without big areas aunder the bodywork), I'm wondering where I'll put the oil tank. Easiest is in front of the engine, but that's a hot area, and I'd rather use that space to get the weight of the engine as far forward as possible.

[carnut169]

Looks great Russ.

Remember: Engine mounts, diff carrier mounts- and the relationship between them. Shifter, overflow tank...

I was happy to see the ld came out of your jig!

[RussMcB]

Looks great Russ.

Remember: Engine mounts, diff carrier mounts- and the relationship between them. Shifter, overflow tank...

My current task is to crate my Pinto engine, bellhousing and transaxle (there is a buyer for the whole package). After that, I'm looking forward to getting a diff in my hands to start the process of figuring out what will go where. I'm leaning towards a spar-like structure to go between the engine & diff housing. I don't know yet how far apart they will be from each other. I also don't know yet which existing bars need to come out to make room for the engine install.

I was happy to see the ld came out of your jig!

LOL. I actually planned ahead for that, surprisingly enough. The jig is two pieces - right and left.

I think you already know this (I've said it several times before to different people), I doubt I'd be doing this project if I wasn't familiar with the success of your car and Scott Woodruff's (Formula Super's) conversions. They are both impressive and got me excited about bike power in a good formula chassis.

[Mike Devins]

Russ,

Mike has currently opt'd for a wet sump which is what he ran on this LSR so we do not have a oil tank to deal with (yet) but there is room. We currently have the catch tank for the breather there and there is more room available.

I would suggest that you move the engine as far forward as possible an put the lighter pieces behind the motor.

If you send me your Email address I will send you some detail shots of the motor installation.

Mike HRP-LLC at comcast dot net

[RussMcB]

Holy smokes. The engine actually fits in the engine bay. Barely. It took some maneuvering (twisting & turning), but it went into place and may fit in there without major changes.

I removed the three bars at the top of the engine bay (bars with white tape in picture below). Then the engine dropped in from the top. It was tight and not easy, but it went eventually.

I plan to remove the two bars marked with blue tape. Those bars are a little odd, anyway, since they were to accomodate the location of the Pinto carb. With them gone, I'll have more room, but, of course, I'll need to put something in their places.

It's too early to know for sure what changes I'll need, but it's good to reach a milestone in the project.

[carnut169]

Looks great Russ!

That airbox sure is (or looks) smaller than the Suzuki box. Whole engine must be smaller if it fits in your chassis (unless the 94-95 is wider?).

Looks like you might make Sebring after-all.

[RussMcB]

Jig #2. This red jig is a crude structure to mount suspension in the right places. It will help me determine clearances, engine angle and diff location, plus I can use it to play with lengthening the wheel base and widening the rear track. It was also more good practice with the welder.

[RobLav]

Looks familiar Russ. A lot is similar to my RF96 Hayabusa.

BTW, what are you going to do about roll hoop bracing? Weld two new tubes forward to the frame rails?

[RussMcB]

Rob, I haven't made a final decision about that yet.

There are already two, small forward hoop braces on my RF94. Based on previous F1000 homologations, those are sufficient by themselves. In other words, I may not "have" to do anything.

However, if I can do something that will add safety and chassis rigidity without adding too much weight or problems, I'd like to do that.

My original plan was to retain all three of the top bars. I may still try, but the two lower bars interfere with the air box. Not much, though. The two lower bars had body fastener locations, so I left 4" "stubs" with those points retained.

My tentative plan now is to build the car with as much rigidity as I can without those three "high" bars, and then build something that can be bolted on and unbolted when needed. I pretty much have to have that open top space to get the engine in and out, unless I make other big changes. Currently, the very back part of the chassis is too narrow to fit the engine through. I might change that, but I'm trying to change as little as possible from original.

I waffle back and forth about keeping existing tubes and attachment points. There are a few advantages to keeping them, such as retaining unmodified bodywork. On the other hand, it's tempting to whack it all off at the main roll hoop and start from scratch and give me more room that I will appreciate down the road.

As you can tell, I haven't planned the whole project out beforehand. That would be smarter, I'm sure, but this "plan as I go" process works best for me. I am, of course, thinking and planning ahead, but I've put off a lot of things to think about later, with some confidence that I wont hit any show stoppers.

[RobLav]

Russ,
I empathize (cool word eh?) with everything you are doing and what is going through your head. Your plan-as-you-go approach is exactly the same as what I went through in 2001/2002.

Even if previous F1000 conversions have been homologated with those two little roll hoop braces, I interpreted the GCR wording that it would not be legal - because those braces are not attached at a decent strong stuctural node. I ran additional tubes down to the junction node on the top frame rail about 1 foot forward of the roll hoop since I didn't see it as very safe.

I also ran tubes from the roll hoop rearwards, angled to the head attachment nodes for rigididity. I'm not sure I'd do that again. My plan was that in any major hit in the rear, the engine would stay put (not yanking the rollbar with it) and the rear box would shear off.

On the VD, the top frame rail height at the roll bar is quite a bit higher than the height of the head mount. If you cut those side tubes aft of the rollbar, you'd have to angle downwards new tubes to meet the head mount height. It would work, but not optimally. One of those conversion compromises.

Before you start cutting and welding new tubes, make sure you know exactly where the exhaust is going to go. If I were to do it again, I would place the engine quite a bit farther aft than I did. In my view, you don't want a 50/50 weight distribution. You'll need more on the rear like the original FC configuration. I'd also use a wheelbase somewhere around 101" or so - perhaps up to 103". This will require even more aft placement of the engine. Opinions only... and that is the direction we're going in the new Citation.

[RussMcB]

I got a new toy in the mail today. Larry Kropp sent a dry sump oil pan. It's one of the parts I've been anxious to get so I can determine engine position in the chassis.

[Mike Devins]

How about a picture of the top

[RussMcB]

I've just lowered the engine back in place (temporarily), so I'll need to take that picture for you later.

However, here is a picture that might show something.

The pan is made up of two main pieces. There is a plate that is bolted to the engine (pictured below). The cast part (with AN fittings) is bolted to the plate.

The plate also has the tube that connects the oil pump to the input fitting.

I haven't gotten the scavenge pump from Larry yet, so I don't know exactly what it looks like or how it connects.

The picture below shows the plate bolted to the engine, without the cast part bolted to the plate.

[Mike Devins]

Russ,

The reason that I was asking is because I only saw one scavenging point and it is near the center of the pan, The system must rely on the extra oil that is in the tank during extended cornering and only use a single stage pump.

[Dave Gomberg]

As I recall, the stock internal pumps are retained and an additional scavenging section is put in place (the stock pump shaft is modified for the extra section). The scavenge sections are siamesed so there is only one return line. Trust me, it works.

Dave

[RussMcB]

A couple of weeks ago Scott and I were standing there, looking at my conversion project. At that time I was planning to have an angled engine (like Speads) so the rear sprocket could be closer to the center of the car, which would allow me to keep the original suspension pick up points and wishbones. But, the rear diff (with big 45 tooth sprocket) still took up a lot of room and was still a tight fit. Scott came up with the jack shaft idea and it was like an epiphany. The more we thought about it, the more problems it solved.

A few off the top of my head:
- Everything could be straight (not angled).
- With two more sprockets, rear sprocket could be smaller diameter (i.e., 40T).
- No suspension needed to be moved or modified.
- I didn't need to widen track or extend WB if I didn't want to.
- Less need for body work changes.

Of course, what we didn't know was if there would be brand new problems. Here is the list we've come up with since then:
- Shorter chains have less time to cool between sprockets.
- The strength and reliability of the jack shaft and its mounts.
- Rather than small front sprocket, now we want largest that can fit in the physical area.

As I've mentioned several times here recently, Mike Devins has been great to work with. He had, in fact, considered a jack shaft arrangement in the past, but decided against it primarily because it adds weight and that's a very big issue in DSR. For me and my F1000 project, I'm less concerned about weight and ultimate performance. I'm mostly interested in reliability. The jack shaft adds new challenges, but it makes other design and fabrication aspects much simpler.

Mike has been in contact with the DID Chain folks, Sprocket Specialists and others, and we think we've gotten enough feedback to decide a jack shaft will work without problems. For instance, the people at DID Chain didn't say, Sure, no problem.". It was more like, "It will probably be okay."

Mike is designing the jack shaft and bearings, mounts, etc. for me. The distance between the front sprocket and the centerline of the car is 5.25".

I think the only significant consideration will be that I will need to watch my chain closely so I can change it as soon as it shows signs of wear or O-rings starting to go bad. Needless to say, I will be running the best quality chains, and we've gone up to the 530 size.

I'm excited. I think it's going to work out well. At my current rate of progress, maybe my car will be finished by early Summer. There are so many little details to work out (fuel, oiling, clutch, shift, cooling, exhaust, etc., etc...). I haven't even started thinking about spring rates, shock revalving, etc.

[RussMcB]

Just a quickie update. My main frame has been blasted & painted, & a new floor pan added.

A big "thank you" to Scott Woodruff, Tom Sprecher & Mark Hatheway for their recent assistance. With their help and some great tools, the floor pan project went much smoother than without them.

[Mark H]

So thats what a RF-95 looks like without all the expensive stuff hooked to it?
You did all the work, are your arm still sore from the rivets?

[RussMcB]

Now that the floor pan is done, I've finally started the next big step in the conversion - the subframe.

These pictures show the diff/sprocket mount, and the beginning of suspension mounts.

The jackshaft design has given me two big plusses: The jackshaft will have it's own sprockets and redution factor, which allows me to run a smaller rear sprocket (40T). It also allows center mounting of the rear sprocket, so it clears all of the stock VD pieces.

I should have the jack shaft in a week or two, thanks to Mike Devin's help.

[RussMcB]

I got my new custom jack shaft from Mike Devins today. I took it down to the garage, laid the major pieces in place and spent the rest of the night pondering next steps.

It's looking good. The jack shaft arrangement really does help solve a lot of the packaging problems. I'll be increasing the wheel base by 4", and that is helping, too.

I hesitate to post a picture because my garage is a wreck, but here it is. More cutting and welding to follow soon. I figure I'm about 80% done. :-).

[Wren]

I like the jackshaft arrangement. Looks good. Whats the diff again?

[RussMcB]

Wren,

Mike Devins assembled an open diff for me using a Honda B16 unit, Taylor stub axles, custom sprockets and Mike's custom mounts. It has the ability to change to LSD if desired in the future.

See here for pictures and discussion: http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20952

[RussMcB]

The jack shaft is in place (with tack welds and temporary tubes). After I get all of the major points finalized, I will be redoing a lot of the bars in the pics, adding triangulation, etc.

[Sean Maisey]

Russ,

Really nice looking stuff. Despite our political differences , I wish you the best with this conversion, and hope others follow in your path.

I hope to race with you at the ARRC this Fall.

Sean M. (The guiltless white affulent libertarian)

[RussMcB]

Thanks, Sean. Best of luck to you, too.

These early F1000 days are exciting. I imagine it's like DSR has been with its home builts and variety.

[formulasuper]

Very clever idea, using a jackshaft! You must be a very innovative type guy.

[RussMcB]

Here's a picture, just to let people know I'm still plugging along.

In it, you can see the rear sub frame (95% done), oil tank location, removable chassis bar (for clutch changes) and new wood floors.

Still to do: fuel system, oil & coolant lines, rear wing mount, wiring, engine cover, all cables, side panels, anti-intrusion bars, etc. ad nauseum ...

[RussMcB]

I've been dreading the task of creating a header, but I started it tonight and it has gone well.

I purchased a 4-1 collector that had a 90 degree bend, plus a box of bent tubes. I'm also using a stock bike header for the first few inches coming from the engine.

Those components are working great, because each step slips into the next step. When I get done, the four primary tubes will slip into the collector.

Here's a pic of the header thus far. The blue stuff is just padding so I don't scrape the frame, and it's helping me maintain clearance through that tight exit.

[carnut169]

Looks great Russ but you might want to do a bit of research... I remember reading that 4 into 2, 2 into one was the way to go. Looks like you have a 4 into 1 design.

Maybe it does not make a difference?

[Mike Devins]

It would be nice if George Dean would respond on this but the investigation we did before building the SSR-1 showed that the preference was toward 4 into 1. We used a burns stainless merge collector and it seams to make great power but we do not have any dyno results to report.

[RussMcB]

Performance is important, of course, but to be perfectly honest, I was just looking for the best and fastest way to create a header within that tight space.

That collector cost $30 new! I was thrilled to find that particular shape at a very reasonable price.

http://www.speedwaymotors.com/p/3567...ollectors.html

I'm sure my header will not be optimized for performance, but I was able to do it myself without much cost and it fits great - much better than I expected. An improved header can be something I'll consider in the future. My short term goal is to get the car together and be reliable, then think about lap times later. I just need to get this thing to the track!

[RobLav]

Good progress Russ. Hope to see you at the ARRC.