Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bugat5speed
Hi Wally,
if it only was a joke then sorry for over-reacting.
|
Yes, really it just put a smile to my face when I read it, because I knew where you were coming from and that's what made it funny to me, but surely not at your expense
Glad we got this out of the way, as I like your work and the quality of your products very much.
Also you have chosen the exact wheels for your 1303 project car, as I have now for half a year or so on my 1303
:
Quote:
|
The installation looks nice. Found out now, why you did not have any space problems. 1st is, that the bellhousing is sitting 5-6 mm to the rear of the car (compared to a standard 1303 tranny bellhousing). 2nd is, that it seems to me, that your gearbox is sitting lower than the original one. Thought so when I saw the size of the clearance between the chassis arms and the axle flanges. I think the tranny is sitting 6-8 mm lower than originally. Seems that you made the holes in the traverse a little oval and by this lowered the whole unit.
|
I think you have a very keen eye and are probably right about your assumptions.
Also: The gearbox I used can sit lower a bit more than most 915's because this one uses the slightly smaller diameter CV's (100mm instead of 110mm), which give more clearence at the tranny forks.
Thanks,
Walter
PS Martin, what do you usually advise with regard to clutch cable or hydraulic operated clutch action when using a 915?
I am still not totally satisfied with the current set-up since the clutch master doesn't seem to be a very quality part. The slave cylinder is nice, but since you will have to shorten the clutch arm of the 915 trans to get the total travel needed, the pedal force is still too high for my taste, even with the hydraulic set-up.
I have seen cable operated 915's, but always wondered if that was not even more heavy and how they managed the longer travel that the 915 needs...
