frenchyd said:
Stampie (FS) said:
Just to throw this out there. An engine build really is the root test. Either of us can then use said engine build in whatever way we want afterwards. Why not do a dyno if we have a no nitrous rule? It simplifies everything and the budget limit would prevent exotic stuff that would make it a dyno queen.
Putting an engine on a dyno isn't going to prove my basic statement. That a Jaguar V12 is an excellent engine for road racing. While being very affordable.
No, your basic statement (argument), it can be hard to tell, was that 454's didn't make power and that it was basically manipulation of SAE/DIN dyno numbers. And that the Jag v12 could make more or better power for similar or less money, therefore there is no point in doing a BBC swap in an XJS. We know and agree with the V12 being a great engine for racing, affordability is a lot more subjective.
From there, you bounced around your point and went from one thing to another and kept moving the needle of the debate basically making it hard to truly determine what Frenchy is really arguing about.
03Panther asked if you could make 500-600hp cheaper with the Jag v12 than a LS or BBC in another car (not XJS). You kinda said he's right but you also contradicted the whole GM engine > V12 in regards to making X-amount of power at Y-cost point we were trying to make.
frenchyd said:
In reply to 03Panther :
That's correct. But somehow people seem to think the reason to not take advantage of the cheap cost of a V12 is it's cheaper to make X amount of power With whatever.
You were asked by Stampie an engine vs engine question in regards to power at a cost. Basically, is it easier and cheaper to make X amount of power with an LS or BBC than with a Jag v12? Every time you answered that question you kept tossing in swap prices. But, Stampie didn't include "in an XJS" you kept throwing that in there.
So is this going to end on a minimum weight? Minimum weight rules are for guys that whine because others build better race cars.
My SBC or BBC in whatever car vs your Jag V12 in whatever car.
In reply to Stampie (FS) :
I think if you accept the idea for both the Challenge and a road race, you will have to deal with the minimum weight AND safety requirements during the road race component.
But you will get to play by Challenge rules in your sandbox.
I don't really care about the weight. Just weigh them, so we know what they weigh.
If you guys run both the Challenge and a road course, it would be pretty easy for most of us to calculate the weight/power ratio.
In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
He said an SCCA test and tune night and that for that the car just had to be road legal. I can live with those rules.
If you both start building now, by the time COVID is less of an issue (not trying to turn this into one of those threads, just go with it) and people could get more involved and attend The Race, I think this could be a real thing.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
The Jag V12 and the BBC both have the same bell housing bolt pattern. So theoretically both engines could be tested in the same vehicle with relatively minor modifications (for such a versatile group). So why not use one test car, one skilled driver, at whatever type venues you want to compare. This would eliminate a LOT of the issues concerning weights, suspensions, blah, blah, driver skill, blah, blah, tires, and show how the engines compare by limiting other variables.
In the interest of easily swapping engines (and less driver input variables) use a T-400 trans but allow different torque convertors to match the expected power curves of the engines if both competitors feel the power curves are different enough to warrant the additional expense.
In reply to NOT A TA :
I think that the bellhousing is a little different but Frenchy would never agree to that because it's too much like a dyno and doesn't let him hide his engine shortcomings with other factors.
I support this because it probably means somebody has to build another big block Jag. The world needs more big block Jags.
Stampie (FS) said:
In reply to NOT A TA :
I think that the bellhousing is a little different but Frenchy would never agree to that because it's too much like a dyno and doesn't let him hide his engine shortcomings with other factors.
Bellhousing is different.
Stampie (FS) said:
So is this going to end on a minimum weight? Minimum weight rules are for guys that whine because others build better race cars.
My SBC or BBC in whatever car vs your Jag V12 in whatever car. I
So you want to race a light lotus with a Chevy against a big sedan? Gee, I just fell off the turnip truck.
Of course I can build a light small car and throw a big engine in it. It's called a Can Am car. Can I do it on a thousand dollar budget? Well if you sell me your Lotus for the few hundred you're going to claim.
NOT A TA said:
Correct me if I'm wrong.
The Jag V12 and the BBC both have the same bell housing bolt pattern. So theoretically both engines could be tested in the same vehicle with relatively minor modifications (for such a versatile group). So why not use one test car, one skilled driver, at whatever type venues you want to compare. This would eliminate a LOT of the issues concerning weights, suspensions, blah, blah, driver skill, blah, blah, tires, and show how the engines compare by limiting other variables.
In the interest of easily swapping engines (and less driver input variables) use a T-400 trans but allow different torque convertors to match the expected power curves of the engines if both competitors feel the power curves are different enough to warrant the additional expense.
No they are different. Just like a Turbo 400 has a different casting for Cadillac, Buick, and Chevy. The Jaguar Turbo 400 has its own unique bellhousing pattern.
Stampie (FS) said:
In reply to NOT A TA :
I think that the bellhousing is a little different but Frenchy would never agree to that because it's too much like a dyno and doesn't let him hide his engine shortcomings with other factors.
I'll agree to that! Just give me enough length (36 inches will do.). I'll allow you the additional width you'll need. I'll need 1 &1/2 PSI fuel pressure with sufficient volume. and a 12 volt source for the ignition. The starter works similar.
I'll even provide the transmission, a Turbo 400 with a stock converter. With a cable shifter. The drive shaft on the Jaguar trans is flanged. Most GM's are slip yokes. That will need to be sorted.
4 exhaust pipes 2 &1/2 inches each.
frenchyd said:
NOT A TA said:
Correct me if I'm wrong.
The Jag V12 and the BBC both have the same bell housing bolt pattern. So theoretically both engines could be tested in the same vehicle with relatively minor modifications (for such a versatile group). So why not use one test car, one skilled driver, at whatever type venues you want to compare. This would eliminate a LOT of the issues concerning weights, suspensions, blah, blah, driver skill, blah, blah, tires, and show how the engines compare by limiting other variables.
In the interest of easily swapping engines (and less driver input variables) use a T-400 trans but allow different torque convertors to match the expected power curves of the engines if both competitors feel the power curves are different enough to warrant the additional expense.
No they are different. Just like a Turbo 400 has a different casting for Cadillac, Buick, and Chevy. The Jaguar Turbo 400 has its own unique bellhousing pattern.
OK, so maybe they can both use T-400's for the particular engines? Slight increase in costs but still better than building two different cars with many variables. If you guys were closer I'd offer up a T-400 to use for the BBC since I've got a couple ready to go. And as mentioned Frenchy has at least one T-400 kicking around. Might need different driveshafts to make the swap quicker. My objectives in recommending the single car approach was to simplify, reduce expenses for both parties, and reduce variables.
I'll bet if Stampie goes up to visit, wrench with, and compete with Frenchy, they come away both having learned something new and become friends.
frenchyd said:
Stampie (FS) said:
So is this going to end on a minimum weight? Minimum weight rules are for guys that whine because others build better race cars.
My SBC or BBC in whatever car vs your Jag V12 in whatever car. I
So you want to race a light lotus with a Chevy against a big sedan? Gee, I just fell off the turnip truck.
Of course I can build a light small car and throw a big engine in it. It's called a Can Am car. Can I do it on a thousand dollar budget? Well if you sell me your Lotus for the few hundred you're going to claim.
Deal. I'll give you all of my Lotus stuff for free but you claim it as $150 in your budget. I was going to build the 350z anyway. Now remember I don't have Raced Sterling Moss street cred. I have I beat a bunch of cheap asses with a $1000 car street cred.
Anyone wanna donate an LS or 1.8t for my 924?
In reply to yupididit :
If I had one I would. Well no ... I have two LS's but they are in vehicles. If I had a spare one I would. You need to come to Jax and we'll go pull you an LS out of the yard. And drink whiskey. You might not want to go back to TX.
In reply to Stampie (FS) :
I can watch you drink whisky lmao
Wait how did a 924 with anything in it get into this mix?
I still like the idea of them using the same kind of car to try and show how they would accomplish this. Jag V12 / TH-400 350Z sounds interesting.
NOT A TA said:
OK, so maybe they can both use T-400's for the particular engines? Slight increase in costs but still better than building two different cars with many variables. If you guys were closer I'd offer up a T-400 to use for the BBC since I've got a couple ready to go. And as mentioned Frenchy has at least one T-400 kicking around. Might need different driveshafts to make the swap quicker. My objectives in recommending the single car approach was to simplify, reduce expenses for both parties, and reduce variables.
I'll bet if Stampie goes up to visit, wrench with, and compete with Frenchy, they come away both having learned something new and become friends.
I think 2 cars, both raced at the Challenge and at a road course would be the most fun for us spectators / readers!
But the single car with just an engine swap (limit on engine cost) raced at a drag strip AND a road course (with each engine) would meet the discussion/argument that always comes up. Split the costs of the car / trans. difference / travel expenses up between both and us readers?
Think Stampie and frenchyd can agree on what one car to build?
I don't think either of them like the idea and I can understand it from the racer's perspective but from the cheap seats I think it's a great idea.
NOT A TA said:
frenchyd said:
NOT A TA said:
Correct me if I'm wrong.
The Jag V12 and the BBC both have the same bell housing bolt pattern. So theoretically both engines could be tested in the same vehicle with relatively minor modifications (for such a versatile group). So why not use one test car, one skilled driver, at whatever type venues you want to compare. This would eliminate a LOT of the issues concerning weights, suspensions, blah, blah, driver skill, blah, blah, tires, and show how the engines compare by limiting other variables.
In the interest of easily swapping engines (and less driver input variables) use a T-400 trans but allow different torque convertors to match the expected power curves of the engines if both competitors feel the power curves are different enough to warrant the additional expense.
No they are different. Just like a Turbo 400 has a different casting for Cadillac, Buick, and Chevy. The Jaguar Turbo 400 has its own unique bellhousing pattern.
OK, so maybe they can both use T-400's for the particular engines? Slight increase in costs but still better than building two different cars with many variables. If you guys were closer I'd offer up a T-400 to use for the BBC since I've got a couple ready to go. And as mentioned Frenchy has at least one T-400 kicking around. Might need different driveshafts to make the swap quicker. My objectives in recommending the single car approach was to simplify, reduce expenses for both parties, and reduce variables.
I'll bet if Stampie goes up to visit, wrench with, and compete with Frenchy, they come away both having learned something new and become friends.
I've got a couple of Turbo 400's. One problem, The driver will need to manually shift it , 'cause carbs. Instead of injection.
I think Stampie and I can both gain. I've never raced anyone without a great feeling of comradery. I'll give a competitor due respect, if he passes me He'll get the same friendly nod and wave I give if I pass him. Racing wheel to wheel there comes times when you have to count on the competitor to be predictable. Share the track. To do that you need to be fair. Be a gentleman. It's still racing with the goal of winning. Watch the greats. Even NASCAR you could tell when Dale was going to lean on someone laps before it occurred. Al Unser treated competitors with a nod of respect or finger warning depending on how they were driving. Bobby Rahal would give others a break right up to 10 to go.
I raced one autocross. I didn't enjoy it because too much finesse was required. Too much delicate throttle control. Light gentle almost delicate braking.
While I beat Sir Stirling Moss and won the event. There was no sense of charge. No Mano un Mano No stalking followed by the attack.
Maybe Stampie can show me that?
I'm worried that we might conflict on engine building. I'm a careful, even obsessive about cleanliness and preparation. Order, structure, right down to white butcher paper on the parts counter. Days spent cleaning, calibrating, tools and instruments. Lighting exactly right. Equipment readily at hand.
Maybe because of my age I'm too slow for Stampie? I know I used to be massively quicker. I could work 48 hours straight without losing focus or letting my attention drift. Now I cannot work for over 15 minutes without resting.
03Panther said:
NOT A TA said:
OK, so maybe they can both use T-400's for the particular engines? Slight increase in costs but still better than building two different cars with many variables. If you guys were closer I'd offer up a T-400 to use for the BBC since I've got a couple ready to go. And as mentioned Frenchy has at least one T-400 kicking around. Might need different driveshafts to make the swap quicker. My objectives in recommending the single car approach was to simplify, reduce expenses for both parties, and reduce variables.
I'll bet if Stampie goes up to visit, wrench with, and compete with Frenchy, they come away both having learned something new and become friends.
I think 2 cars, both raced at the Challenge and at a road course would be the most fun for us spectators / readers!
But the single car with just an engine swap (limit on engine cost) raced at a drag strip AND a road course (with each engine) would meet the discussion/argument that always comes up. Split the costs of the car / trans. difference / travel expenses up between both and us readers?
Think Stampie and frenchyd can agree on what one car to build?
I'll suggest a Monte Carlo. Black with the #3 ?!? The engine compartment is plenty big enough. And hey who wouldn't want to see a Chevy with a Jaguar in it? The great part is if the Jag wins the Chevy guys can still claim victory.
pres589 (djronnebaum) said:
Wait how did a 924 with anything in it get into this mix?
I still like the idea of them using the same kind of car to try and show how they would accomplish this. Jag V12 / TH-400 350Z sounds interesting.
Not sure a Z car has a long enough engine compartment. Isn't it originally set up for a V6?
Really should be something with an in line 6 originally if you want a Datsun , a 240-260-280 Z ? Is the rear end up to the torque?
I'd like to suggest we limit the engine/ trans cost to $500. Or maybe even $300? Keep things more original. Closer to stock?
