body design ?'s for Dave

[D2W]

Dave I have a couple of questions about your vision of the final body configuration. Based on the design goals stated I'm envisioning a lightweight, spartan design. No doors, side windows, ect. I know a lot of people are hoping for these things, but I'm questioning whether the weight goals can be met if they are included. To get a better idea of the body design goals beyond "it's a blank sheet of paper" could you tell us what you are thinking the final design will include so I/we can plan for it now.
DP

[John Buzoianu]

I personally am curious why the distance between the two rear wheels is less than the front, at first I thought I misread the template (top view) but now im wondering if this might be to accomodate thicker (larger) rear wheels/tires?
-John

[BrandonDrums]

I bet the donor parts stipulate having a narrower track in the rear. Since they will probably be using the OEM half-shafts, the distance from the "front" drive outputs from the transmission and the reduced width (I think) of the rear hubs dictate the need for 1.5'' less in the rear track vs. the front. Otherwise the half-shafts might not fit all the way in the hub which isn't good.

I just hope designers leave enough room in the wheel-well for some aggressive offset wheels to widen that track after the fact. The wheel mounts might be closer together but you better believe that Fubaru owners will fix that with spacers and such....

[Justen]

So does this mean a donor that was in a front end wreck where one of the front wheels was damaged might not be a good choice because we are using the half shafts from the front wheels on the back?

[PhyrraM]

So does this mean a donor that was in a front end wreck where one of the front wheels was damaged might not be a good choice because we are using the half shafts from the front wheels on the back?

We are not yet sure what components FFR is going to re-use. They might use the rear hubs/knuckles with a custom CV shaft.

IN GENERAL, if a Subaru is hit in the front, the radiator is toast for sure. But one common item that must be checked is the timing covers and timing belt assembly. A hard hit has the tendency to push everything into the timing cover, which is plastic. The timing gears are very vunerable and MUST be checked for breakage/slippage because it's not always obvious from a quick inspection. If the timing components are damaged the possibility of valves hitting pistons is very real. Adjust your purchase offers accordingly. 2.5 liter turbos have variable timng on the intake cams, so those pullies can be expensive.

Other than that, Subarus are generally a bit tougher than most other cars. Aside from a direct hit to a wheel, most components survive very well. Also the control arms (non-STI models) are known to give up before the hubs/knuckles/struts/mounting points. So, if FFR is going to use fabricated control arms, even a wheel-hit car is likely still OK.

[Gollum]

1800 pounds is still a realistic goal for a car with doors, glass, etc. It just isn't a realistic goal if we want to include a million creature comforts.

If people can get most cars that start at 2500 pounds or less down to 1800 pounds or less with SCCA legal cages.... I think we can have a car that's livable on the street that meets the target weight.

One of the big reasons I don't like the lotus 7 kits, the arial atom and the likes is BECAUSE there isn't the ability to drive the car in adverse weather. That fact alone kind of makes it a "toy" in my eyes. Which can be great! No doubt even! It's just hard to justify for some people.

[GS guy]

I personally am curious why the distance between the two rear wheels is less than the front, at first I thought I misread the template (top view) but now im wondering if this might be to accomodate thicker (larger) rear wheels/tires?
-John

From reading a few books on general performance car suspension design - it seems pretty well agreed upon that a wider front track provides better handling. The Subaru was likely designed this way. A good starting point for the new design.
Jeff

[subyrod]

^2002 wrx track width=
Track F/R : 58.5/58.3 in. (sedan) 57.7/57.3 in. (wagon)

You see time attack machines in Japan go for wider front track widths by using lower offset wheels up front and even a staggered wheel setup (same tire size since these are on awd machines). Like for example an 18x9.5 f and 18x8.5 r