New York

[Ron Earp]

Hey Paul and Helen,

How did you guys like NY and New Years? Nice to have met you folks over at Malcolms, you can come visit me anytime you like down here in North Carolina (not really in the North).

Ron

I have a question - you saw one of the CAV monos right? And you know the one Roy has in his garage? Are they identical? I'm thinking they are, or damn close, which would indicate where CAV sourced the basic design of the mono.

Ron

[ January 04, 2003: Message edited by: Ron Earp ]

 

[Guest]

Hi Ron
I'm over at Roy's at the moment and after comparing the two - there is much similarity.

It is likely that a lot of the features were derived from the GTD Mono, such as front suspension and adjustment are identical (ball joints different).

The water pipes run outside the tub at the front which is a bit unsightly and the brakes are different in that they have only one servo and are balanced with a proportioning valve.

The rear suspension is similar as are the uprights but the driveshafts run at an angle in plan due to use og the Audi gearbox.

Body moulds appear to be different to GTD and are more like the original GT40.

Much of the detail fittings appear to be identical.

All in all a very nice build.

regards....

 

[Ron Earp]

Hi Roy/Paul,

Thanks for the info on the chassis. I thought the body work was different, but the CAV chassis is almost exactly like the one you are looking at.

The steering rack is on the outside of the chassis and the water pipes are on the outside as you mention, a la the GTD mono.

Seems I remember though someone from CAV saying that CAV had designed the mono completely from scratch, but I don't think that is the case.

Please pass my regards to Roy, I really liked him a lot and he is a great guy to spend time with. Now, how big is that motor?

Ron

[ January 05, 2003: Message edited by: Ron Earp ]

 

[Paul Thompson 'Hooligan']

Hi Ron,
Back home again after a day at Roy's - deciding 'what to do next' and a fairly extensive plan of work has been established.

Roy's monocoque has the waterpipes straight down the middle and I would have to ask to remind myself as to whether this was the intended route or one of Roy's modifications. We have the water pipes straight down the middle of the GTD in a tunnel that allows the seats to be pushed apart slightly, the standard GTD has pipes running alongside the LH fuel tank. The lagging Roy used is very effective and no heat escapes to the cabin.

Thanks for the invite re visit, Helen & I enjoyed NYC and are sure to visit the States again. So many things to do, so many places to visit... (so many V8's to listen to!)

Just a thought, we were talking compression ratios today and what would your (or anyone reading) recommendation be as the highest safe ratio for a stroked 302 with all alloy block, fully ported TFS heads, running Motec management and min 97Ron or 98Ron Super unleaded (to which we usually add Aldon Octane Boost as a precaution)??

You asked about Roy's engine and I know Malc thought it was a 351 but its not. It is a 'Joe Fontana' ALLOY 302 that has been bored to 4.125" and stroked to 3.25" - The block will go to 3.5" but requires additional major internal work to achieve this (~376ci or 6134cc). Therefore I make it a 347 ish (5686cc). The block is referred to as a Clevor I believe in that the bottom end takes a Cleveland 351 sump but the top takes 302 Windsor heads. (if that makes any sense)

best regards

Paul Thompson

[ January 05, 2003: Message edited by: Paul Thompson ]

 

[Ron Earp]

Hey Paul,

Thanks for the info! I saw the motor and couldn't figure out what was going on. I recognized the TFS heads, but I recognized the other bits as 351C material. I've never seen one up close, good concept.

My own engine is a 342, similar to what he has in displacement. As for compression ratio if you have aluminum heads I have run 11:1 with our 93 pump gas - our calculations are slightly different but it corresponds to your 98 I think. I would be hesitant to go over 11:1, but consider that or 10.5:1 a safe bet as long as your timing is right and you aren't lean. I know some will disagree, but I've had great luck (and not just guesses but actually measured these compression ratios).

The motor I am getting ready to fire up is a 342 with CNC ported AFR heads running about 10.5:1 CR. And I am almost certain I could go a little more. I've had great luck with SB Fords, aluminum heads, and compression. When I switched over from iron performance heads on Fords in the late 80s to aluminum I was amazed at what I could get away with in initial timing, compression, or both. I think you and Roy will be too.

For your stroking all you are going to need (I think) is the crank and releif on the block with a die grinder for the rods. Pretty easy. And, if Roy needs a crank tell him to find what he wants, I'll get it for him, and send it personal and "used" to avoid UK prices. That motor is already strong, you can tell in the videos on the acceleration, a 377 would be nice.
Best
Ron

[ January 05, 2003: Message edited by: Ron Earp ]

 

[Guest]

Ron, SHUT UP! A 377 would not be nice. I think Roy and Paul should revert back to a bog standard 302. Like mine! Give the rest of us a chance.
Malcolm.