Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I find it hard to believe that you've been able to do so much, basically like rebuild an entire car, in what seems to be a very short time frame.

Car projects seem to take forever, so this must have been very well researched and managed.

Fantastic effort all round, and thanks Mark for sharing.

Good luck next week, and I'm looking forward to seeing it in the flesh.

My son will be out there in an STi in the clubsprint class, but you're in another league.

Should be a great event, and hopefully a big crowd.

Brian

Hello Brian. When is Jim back and are you going to start some mods on yours yet?

Cheers

Marty

  • Replies 743
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Anyone else notice that it hits 242km/h on the straight!

Yeah I took note of the 220km/h across the line (a good reference point for me).

Regarding the understeer issues - looks to me like it could run a fair chunk more front track under those big guards. But you've prob thought of that. I imagine there is no track width restrictions on WTAC ?

Edited by simpletool

I find it hard to believe that you've been able to do so much, basically like rebuild an entire car, in what seems to be a very short time frame.

Car projects seem to take forever, so this must have been very well researched and managed.

Fantastic effort all round, and thanks Mark for sharing.

Good luck next week, and I'm looking forward to seeing it in the flesh.

My son will be out there in an STi in the clubsprint class, but you're in another league.

Should be a great event, and hopefully a big crowd.

Brian

We have only spent 4 months on the car, used over 1200 man hours and many many late nights and weekends to get the car to where it is now. I think the whole Mercury Motorsport team is looking forward to WTAC, so we can have a break from working on Mark's R35! :P

It has been a massive effort and I am extremely proud of the team, including our external contractors, who have pulled of what I think is an amazing build in such a short period of time.

We have only spent 4 months on the car, used over 1200 man hours and many many late nights and weekends to get the car to where it is now. I think the whole Mercury Motorsport team is looking forward to WTAC, so we can have a break from working on Mark's R35! :P

It has been a massive effort and I am extremely proud of the team, including our external contractors, who have pulled of what I think is an amazing build in such a short period of time.

100k on labour......ouch.

Just thought of something with such wild bodywork, how will you be bringing it down here? Getting it on most normal car trailers would surely be out of the question unless the front and rear bars/aero is designed to come off for transport?

SPECIAL THANKS TO DBA (Disc Brakes Australia) FOR SUPPLYING THEIR VERY LATEST R35 GTR ROTORS JUST IN TIME FOR WTAC!! Check these puppies out!!

post-3999-0-63819800-1312274712_thumb.jpg

A Few Other shots of the car....

post-3999-0-44069100-1312274828_thumb.jpg

post-3999-0-70086800-1312274951_thumb.jpg

post-3999-0-50673700-1312275082_thumb.jpg

Edited by MercuryMotorsport

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • So, if the headlights' cutoff behaviour (angles, heights, etc) are not as per 6.2.6.1.1 without automatic levelling, then you have to have to have automatic** levelling. Also, if the headlight does not have the required markings, then neither automatic nor manual adjusters are going to be acceptable. That's because the base headlight itself does not meet the minimum requirement (which is the marking). ** with the option of manual levelling, if the headlight otherwise meets the same requirements as for the automatic case AND can be set to the "base" alignment at the headlight itself. So that's an additional requirement for the manual case. So, provided that the marking is on the headlight and there is a local manual adjustment back to "base" on the headlight, then yes, you could argue that they are code compliant. But if you are missing any single one of these things, then they are not. And unlike certain other standards that I work with, there does not seem to be scope to prepare a "fitness for purpose" report. Well, I guess there actually is. You might engage an automotive engineer to write a report stating that the lights meet the performance requirements of the standard even if they are missing, for example, the markings.  
    • Vertical orientation   6.2.6.1.1. The initial downward inclination of the cut off of the dipped-beam to be set in the unladen vehicle state with one person in the driver's seat shall be specified within an accuracy of 0.1 per cent by the manufacturer and indicated in a clearly legible and indelible manner on each vehicle close to either headlamp or the manufacturer's plate by the symbol shown in Annex 7.   The value of this indicated downward inclination shall be defined in accordance with paragraph 6.2.6.1.2.   6.2.6.1.2. Depending on the mounting height in metres (h) of the lower edge of the apparent surface in the direction of the reference axis of the dipped beam headlamp, measured on the unladen vehicles, the vertical inclination of the cut off of the dipped- beam shall, under all the static conditions of Annex 5, remain between the following limits and the initial aiming shall have the following values:   h < 0.8   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   0.8 < h < 1.0   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   Or, at the discretion of the manufacturer,   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The application for the vehicle type approval shall, in this case, contain information as to which of the two alternatives is to be used.   h > 1.0   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The above limits and the initial aiming values are summarized in the diagram below.   For category N3G (off-road) vehicles where the headlamps exceed a height of 1,200 mm, the limits for the vertical inclination of the cut-off shall be between: -1.5 per cent and -3.5 per cent.   The initial aim shall be set between: -2 per cent and -2.5 per cent.
×
×
  • Create New...