P4 Kit Car coming soon

Race car Replicas is developing a P4 Kit Car thingy ... hmmm, wonder if a Dino (Fiat) engine will fit?

http://www.race-car-replicas.com/

Best wishes

 

Hmmm ... I'm guessing this thread will be moved soon

Anyway, I wonder if they are going to use 'their' alloy monocoque? Not sure by the photo whether she's accurate or not, Paul will tell us

I must say I'd go for the XJ13, that is one sexy car.

Pete

 

Why would you say that Pete? Hasn't there been another P4 kit car that has had plenty of vintage "air time" during the past year or so?

 

LOL ... maybe ... heck, I don't know

I guess the other car was atleast built before this post
Pete
ps: Ah ... it's been moved

 

No.


That P4 replica body in GRP is originally a Noble, from the shape.

BTW, PS's P4 replica website is still 'under construction', as it has been for 3 years. I'd like to see it finished, because I feel we need to have all the available data marshalled in one place and regularly updated.


Paul M

 

What is it about that chassis that says Eww to me?

 

I'm no expert but I think this monocoque chassis is ok
http://www.race-car-replicas.com/Chassis.html

I guess it is similar (in concept) to this Canadian 962 replica:
http://www3.telus.net/962/p2.html

 

Looks interesting. Does anybody know where they're based?

 

Macca, I received an e-mail that indicated that the P4 replica was not a Noble, but a Foreman Mk4 Berlinetta fiberglass bodywork.

Also received this info:
http://www.p4replicabb.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl
It IS now all in one place and VERY regularly updated ! 40 members and growing !

Hope this helps.

 

Yup, by invitation only.

 

And very good it is too!!
PS phoned Neil Foreman and confirms that this bodywork is one of his.
Nathan

 

Not quite the 962 is a spaceframe reinforced by rivetted alloy sheet.

What I find strange about the monocoque chassis is the fully welded construction. That is most unusual, normally alloy monocoque chassis' are rivetted together.

I worry about stress induced by all that welding myself ... and those (I think) suspension pick up points unreinforced just poking up there ... hmmm, what about sideways loads, etc., and thus some triangulation?

Pete

 

Good evening Gents.
My name is Fran Hall...owner and designer of Race Car Replicas...
I have just noticed that my company has been discussed...

Thanks for your comments..
Indeed the body pictured was purchased from Neil as an exercise..my moulds are not taken from his body....although similar.

My credentials are thus ..
I work full time for GM on the IRL programme and as such have good access to some smart people..

My chassis has been tested to have 8300lbs/deg/inch deflection in three axis tests with out any of the billet add on strengtheners or full roll cage being added.
The chassis weights 300lbs
The suspension is attached to the chassis through billet CNC machined mounts that are suspended in two planes.so there are no "just bolt it onto a panel and go" situations here..

The materials and techniques used have been tested thoroughly and have exhibited ZERO stress fracturing....this is the third chassis design and has taken 6 years of research to perfect...

Please direct any questions or thoughts to me through the website and dont be afraid to ask anything as I will answer promptly and honestly..

www.racecarreplicas.com

We are in the Metro Detroit area and welcome visitors to our assembly shop anytime...

Our cars come assembled as a roller package(no drivetrain or paint) for under $40,000 and use only the best components available zero donor parts except for the wheel bearings..
Look forward to hearing more from you guys

regards Fran

 

300 lb? I would have never guessed it that light, or strong!

 

I have a continuation chassis for my Lola T-70 Mk3b and it is built as per original spec with T4 solid buck rivets etc etc etc and it weighs 115lbs and has 4800lbs/deg torsional rigidity....but the originals were only meant to last a few races ...the RCR chassis is designed to be a track/street car but also be totally reliable and have great longevity in a street application...

Regards

 

Fran:

Welcome!

Thank you for sharing the information with us.

Best wishes

 

Thanks...
one of the engine packages I have worked on for the P4 style car is a Alfa V6 with a Porsche trans...so a Dino engine would fit beautifully...just in case you have a spare one laying around.....

 

Those weight and stiffness figures are totally believable for a monocoque as is the statement that there is no stress fracturing as TIG welds like the ones he uses are very strong. I'm salivating over the pics on the site as everything looks like pure tastiness.

 

To Fran

Will the P4 replica be based on a tube chassis or your monocoque chassis? What engine/transaxle combinations do you expect to work?

(dreaming of a 400i V12 and ???)

Thanks
T

 

(dreaming of a 400i V12 and $$$)


Pete

 

Tillman and Pete $$$..

The car is being built on a monocoque chassis...the only car I have with a tube chassis is the 917 short tail and it has a perfectly correct chassis thats under development for 2006.
A 12 cylinder Ferrari engine will fit with mods to the bulkhead.
A simpler fit is the 348 engine/trans pakage.
I have been working on three packages
Alfa V6 and Porsche transaxle
LS1 Chevrolet and Porsche transaxle
Ferrari V8 with original or Porsche transaxle.

As listed previously the roller package is under $40k...
that comes complete with steering and suspension
gauges, wiring, engine/trans adapter plate
body with windscreen etc etc etc ..a very complete package.

The parts not included but available as options are the exhaust and driveshafts..and obviously your choice of powertrain..

I hope this helps...

 

Sounds all great! Welcome to FChat by the way.

Keep us posted please. I have always been highly interested in P4 replicas, but didn't want to go through the hassle of importing one from the UK. Engine IMHO has to be Ferrari though.

How did you address the height of cabin issue? The UK replicas have a roof line that is too high and looks odd, but without that drivers are not very comfy in there.

 

Thus the body and hence roof line are British and thus too high.

Fran,

Why the modern monocoque?

What I find very interesting about this replica market is the constant attempt to improve the cars and really make them just look alikes. The whole charm of old cars is the fact that the drive like old cars ... after all if we wanted a modern race car there are plenty out there to buy.

Thus Fran, why are you not using your obvious talents in building a modern car? ... again is it just what you can sell?

Impressed and all, but I'd buy a replica to replicate the driving experience NOT just the looks.
Pete

 

Evening fellas..

In the world of replicas it has been my experience that most consumers that purchase the car of their dreams actually want it to perform like a modern car ..as they would be really dissappointed in the driving experience of a true accurate depiction of their dream car....take for instance the GT40...the original cars were built over 40 years ago and were driven on bias ply tires...not our current radials,they were driven around long tracks and raced in endurance races...they were not particularly good on the tighter circuits ..they had some real rear steer characteristics when driven at the limit....(the GT40's and the Lolas were mono cars originally and very intricate ones too I might add...see pricey!!!)
People would be very unhappy to spend their hard earned on a replica and be blown away by a Mitsubishi Eclipse on a road course.

Another issue is that well over 60% of replicas never get finished due to one reason or another.

I dont want this to happen to my customers and as such the monocoque chassis enables a significantly faster build time as a side effect of having a stronger safer car for modern road conditions...not to say that tube frame would not be suitable but I have chosen my path and from a quality and production viewpoint I am happy with my decision.

I have been tempted to build a modern interpretation but I would then have to find likeminded customers that appreciate exactly what I had designed...not an easy task as many custom car builders have found out to their financial ruin.....

I build what I like and from a styling standpoint the great GT cars of the 60's are nirvana for me.....

I also made the monocoque larger internally so as to be able to comfortably fit someone 6'5" and 280lbs with room to spare in the GT40 ....our population has grown in girth and height over the last 40 years and I wanted to be able to broaden my demographic...a tube frame loses a lot of interior space just from the material properties....the new Ford GT is paving the way form modern technology but vintage looks and judging by the sales response to the RCR monocoque cars and pricing ....it appears to be working well....

Hope this answers some of your questions,obviously its just my opinion and I welcome any and all feedback..good or bad.

Thanks for listening/reading my rantings

 

Fran provides a very good explanation in my opinion.

Many of us who might consider a kit car would like to drive it and enjoy it … for me, air conditioning is a necessity! I’m beyond the point of racing much of anything so anything that I might buy would just be built up as a pleasure cruiser.

I believe that I remember Dan Gurney having to have the GT40 modified in order to drive it in races forty years ago. The GT40 was something like 40” high and, if I remember correctly and he was a bit tall for that particular package even in the “good old days.”

Fran is also correct about Americans getting more rotund … my bucket (a$$) no longer fit’s the buckets that came in cars such as the Lotus Europa or the Lotus Seven so my vote is: Bigger is truly better. The newest Mazda Miata … it is getting larger I believe and there are a number of “Cobra 427” kits that have increased the wheelbase by several inches to meet the market.

I lived through the 1960’s and as far as automobiles go, I’m not sure I would want to go that far back for a street car. The Lotus Cortina Series 1 was one heck of a small rocket in its day and makes a wonderful vintage racer today, however; I suspect that most of today’s loaded 18 wheelers are capable of out braking it from 70 mph and most modern Japanese “buzz bombs,” the Toyota MR2 or the Honda 2000, will eat its lunch on acceleration and top speed. So, I believe that any kit that provides a more modern version might be more usable for me in this more modern world.

To make a car “more like the original” one might consider a 365BB engine and transaxle or a 512M set either of which would propel the RCR P4 into the stratosphere with a blip of the accelerator, but it would do the same to the initial price of the car and, for me, would surely make the whole package somewhat less usable.

But, that is the one of the fun parts of such vehicles: each buyer can chose how to fit the vehicle out.

Best wishes,