FAQ Search Usergroups Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

[KN]

Further thoughts from Neil.

"I do like Paul Gethins solution, but might consider a different solution to the sway bar - though it definately seems to work for him.
Some time ago I stiffened the original sway bar mounts by installing two 50mm x 40mm balsa spars/cores, running from the outer/bottom corner of the steel subframe to the sway bar mount and the laminating the whole thing in with 4 layers of CSM. The radiator ducting was then filled top and bottom with expanding foam (which also distorted the ducting a bit) to also try to stiffen the nose some more. All of this was in an effort to stiffen the nose to allow the sway bar to work properly. These modifications were not done without prior testing of the structure, as the front end was assembled and then the torsion bar disconnected and the suspension moved from (predicted) full droop to full bump. In doing so it was noticed that the sway bar mount appreciably moved as the suspension arm pulled on the sway bar mount...hence the efforts to stiffen it. I had thought of creating a virtual A arm, by placing a link working in the same plane as the lower arm...but how much time do you spend on such things? The additional arm will be of very modest diameter and mounted to the subframe, if it is required at all.
Current rear springs are 225lb/in, which works out to 160lb/in at the wheel, same as that man Paul Gethin again! I think I may go slightly stiffer, as I am no doubt heavier than Paul and I have far too much preload for the suspension to work properly. The accepted theory is that there should be no preload (more than 5lbs to keep it in place) on the spring at all at full droop. I'll see if that is possible. Traction out of corners is hurt by the lack of droop travel, as the AVO dampers are too short at the current ride height of 200mm unladen at the rear. You can hear the car overcome the traction in corners in the video. Of course damping of the rear suspension is somewhat complex in a pure view as there are really three springs in series: Suspension bushes, tyres and suspension springs and only the latter is damped. The tyres run at quite a modest pressure due to the light weight of the Olympic and thus have a considerable 'spring' contribution. I cannot tell what effect this will have on the handling as there are so many other handling issues at present! However a move in the future to a proper motorsport tyre may assist as they will have considerably stiffer sidewalls. The suspension bush compliance can be eliminated by the use of spherical bearings or deralin etc, but given the age of the cars structure I feel this would be an unwise move in anything other than a dedicated track car - so bush compliance stays. Getting the springs and dampers right will make a great difference and will instill a lot of confidence that is sorely missing.
It is also difficult to get a perspective on performance...it seemed MUCH faster in the car than in the video! However to help with the performance compare the Olympic with this Bugeye racecar http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6kGksdVCT4&feature=related
Regards, Neil"
_________________
Olympic Phase 2r ESU816

[KN]

What Neil was competing against at Mt Cootha.
SPORTS CARS – Under 2.0 litre
138 Joe Wilson 1921 Amilcar 903 Blue/Silver
139 Andrew Wilson 1924 Alvis 12/50 Ducks Back 1700 Green
140 Ross Kelly 1935 MG NB/K3 1271 Green
141 Doug Rath / Rel. Chris Rath 1951 Jowett Jupiter 1500 White
142 Don Biggar 1958 Lotus Seven S1 1460 Silver
143 Les Whelan / Rel. John Townsend 1959 Fairthorpe Electron Minor 1300 Dark Green
144 Stuart Everett 1959 Karmann Ghia GT 1916 Green
145 John Barram 1962 Lotus Seven 1498 Green
146 Neil Roshier 1964 Rochdale Olympic 1995 Yellow
147 Ron Woodbridge 1966 Lotus 23 Replica 1500 White/Red
148 John Lungren 1967 Lotus Seven 1575 Red/Aluminum
149 Ray Chappelow / Rel. Ian Bone 1967 MGB 1800 Red
150 Shane Brown 1969 Alfa Romeo GT Junior 2000 White/Yellow
151 Greg Bray 1970 Lotus Europa 1650 Green
152 Michael Goodfellow 1972 Lotus Elan Plus 2 1558 White/Silver
153 Frank Liu 1999 Westfield Clubman 1587 Yellow/Black
154 Adam Krueger 2000 PRB Clubman 1600 Grey
155 Geoff Noble 2004 Lotus Elise 1998 Silver
156 Neil Roshier / Dvr. Bill Sherwood 1964 Rochdale Olympic 1995 Yellow

Regards Keith
_________________
Olympic Phase 2r ESU816

[Dave-M]

To give us an idea how well it went, can you tell us which of the above were quicker than the Olympic?
Dave
_________________
Ph.2 Ford 1500 GT
GT with Rochdale Chassis

[TonyS]

Further thoughts for Neil.

Neil you may not have taken in to consideration that you have a Phase 2R Olympic, so a Phase 2 bodyshell with Phase 2 rear suspension and Phase 1 front suspension,
and Pauls car is a Phase 1. I think a well-set up Phase I rear suspension is better than a well set up Phase 2 and there may be differences in the strengths, stresses and weight
of the Phase 1, Phase 2R and the Phase 2 bodyshells? (and the build quality of any Rochdale bodyshell?)

Regards
Tony
_________________
Rochdale Olympic History Archive

[KN]

Hi
Neils' co-driver Bill had a run of approx 63.5sec which put him 4th in class overall. Therefore only 3 cars were faster than the unsorted Rochdale.
Which cars they were maybe Neil can tell us, but we could guess from some of the entries a few candidates which may have been quicker.
Regards Keith
_________________
Olympic Phase 2r ESU816

[Paul Gething]

[KN]

results for the class Neils Rochdale competed in.
I must apologise to all as it seems Bill and I underestimated the competition! I can honestly say that we did not really pay the results much attention, as out game plan was just to complete as many runs as we started and to end with an undamaged car. When we left the final results were not up and we both slipped a bit from the lunch time results.
Sports Cars - Under 2.0 litre
1 155 Geoff Noble Geoff Noble 2004 Lotus Elise 1998 BB 3 3 0:51.5717*
2 153 Frank Lui Frank Lui 1999 Westfield Clubm 1587 BB 3 3 0:57.6164 0:06.0447
3 150 Shane Brown S.Brown/L.Brown 1969 Alfa Romeo GT J 2000 BB 3 3 1:00.1210 0:08.5493
4 145 John Barram John Barram 1962 Lotus Seven 1498 BB 3 3 1:01.3628 0:09.7911
5 151 Greg Bray Greg Bray 1970 Lotus Europa 1650 BB 3 1 1:01.8162 0:10.2445
6 147 Ron Woodbridge Ron Woodbridge 1966 Lotus 23 Replic 1500 BB 3 2 1:01.8353 0:10.2636
7 156 Neil Roshier Bill Sherwood 1964 Rochdale Olympi 1995 BB 3 2 1:02.4668 0:10.8951
8 154 Adam Krueger Adam Krueger 2000 PRB Clubman 1600 BB 3 3 1:03.3010 0:11.7293
9 144 Stuart Everett Stuart Everett 1959 Karmann Ghia GT 1916 BB 3 2 1:05.3356 0:13.7639
10 148 John Lungren John Lungren 1967 Lotus Seven 1575 BB 3 3 1:05.6632 0:14.0915
11 146 Neil Roshier Neil Roshier 1964 Rochdale Olympi 1995 BB 3 2 1:08.3021 0:16.7304
12 142 Don Biggar Don Biggar 1958 Lotus Seven S1 1460 BB 3 3 1:09.0326 0:17.4609
13 152 Michael GoodfelMichael Goodfellow1972 Lotus Elan Plus 1558 BB 3 2 1:11.0727 0:19.5010
14 149 Ray Chappelow R.Chappelow/I.Bone1967 MGB 1800 BB 3 1 1:14.1534 0:22.581
15 139 Andrew Wilson Andrew Wilson 1924 Alvis 12/50 Duc 1700 BB 3 2 1:15.1451 0:23.5734
16 143 Les Whelan Les Whelan 1959 Fairthorpe Elec 1300 BB 3 3 1:17.1387 0:25.5670
17 141 Doug Rath D.Rath/C.Rath 1951 Jowett Jupiter 1500 BB 2 2 1:19.0744 0:27.5027
18 140 Ross Kelly R.Kelly/J.Townsend1935 MG NB/K3 1271 BB 3 3 1:21.2551 0:29.6834
19 138 Joe Wilson Joe Wilson 1921 Amilcar 903 BB 3 3 1:52.2351 1:00.6634
_________________
Olympic Phase 2r ESU816

[KN]

More from Neil,
Bill is an experienced racer and felt that he would get down to a .59 with a sorted car, which is an ambitious goal for sure. FWIW the Elise is powered by a Honda K20A engine, a popular conversion in Australia...gives another 150bhp over std!
I've read some of the views on the website on the P2 rear in other threads. Not sure I agree with all of the issues raised as written and I am not much of a fan of 'anti's' in suspension. Kinematic binding in response to a particular force seems a strange thing to design in, but I would also add that I am not really very adept at such issues and defer to those with more experience. However I have had the dampers out of my car and have moved the rear axle to full range of movement in roll both sides and also full bump/droop. There is no binding that I have noticed, though given the vagaries of RMP constuction this may not be indicative of anything on anyone elses' cars. I am tempted to replace the axle end bushes with spherical bearings to reduce the torsional loads on the inner mounts/bushes. I have also invesigated replacing the inner mounts with a modern suspension bush that is much more compliant in roll and vertical mvt, but very stiff longitudinally. However I will not touch this for a long time, as it is just time to enjoy the car as the mid-engined project will take over the workshop.
The P1 rear suspension does seem better for a competition car, the panhard ron in particular is much better, whereas the P2 induces roll steer.
The rear roll hoop bolts tot he shell using the same bolts as the rear damper mounts. There are two rearward tubes running back down to either side of the spare wheel. THe floor here was stiffened with 4mm coremat and 3 layers of CSM. The forward legs of the 6pt cage run alongside the original roof bars and down beside the A pillar tubes to a L shaped floor mount tube. There is a side intrusion bar of limited worth, as it has to run down quite low to allow my big self into the car. Side intrusion is my biggest fear in the Olympic and hence my decision to replace the doors and create some box sections that will be filled with foam. Such things would make a mild/moderate bump a surviviable thing. I replaced the original door locks with MB ones from a 230S...and they are so much better that what was originally fitted. Curiously they are not bolted to the car, but glued with polyurethane. This one change, use of polyurethane, has made my car so much more enjoyable - things no longer rattle themselves to death or constantly fall off!
Paul, I have a Trans-X Salisbury 45/45 unit sitting in a box in the garage, so that is sorted. Due to the limited droop the car does pick up the inside rear. This results in a sharp rear slip, which is easily caught with some opposite lock. Tyres all round are 185/60/14 Pirelli P600's. More rear droop will be good and perhaps some more rear spring rate. Front spring rate will be upped a little with the internal pressure of the bilsteins. I will also be adopting some long progressive bumpstops on the dampers all around.

Regards, Neil
Via KN
_________________
Olympic Phase 2r ESU816

[calex_fr]

Interesting, but I haven't understand all.

It will be possible to have some pictures ?
_________________
Alexandre Contat

from France

[Paul Gething]

Here are some poor photo's of the modified rear suspension......

[KN]

Neils engine bay
[img][/img]
_________________
Olympic Phase 2r ESU816

[KN]

Rather than load you up with a lot of images, I have simply added them to my folder on photobucket with some comments.
Perhaps you can just add the image links in a cut and paste way onto the ROC site?











Regards Neil
Via Kn
_________________
Olympic Phase 2r ESU816

[calex_fr]

humumummmmmmmm !

impatient for front and rear axles pictures



mine :

_________________
Alexandre Contat

from France

[Paul Narramore]

I recall chatting to Neil when he was over in the UK, about what colour he should paint his car. I suggested the dark green with a gold stripe ala early Australian Brabham F1 cars. I see he prefers primrose yellow

[TonyS]

Found 2 more photos





Regards
Tony
_________________
Rochdale Olympic History Archive