New challenge truck. 90 or 110?

[calle-fas]

I'm in need of advice regarding my next build.

Up until now I've used my 110 CSW for challenge comps as well as daily drive. Even if Swedish challenge is not exactly as British it has not been a winning concept. Mostly due to the enormous body, but wheel base and weight do their part.

Now I have been quite ambivalent regarding the wheel base so when I got the opportunity I bought a Td5 110 HCPU with plans to cut the chassis at the spring mounts, trayback, and move axles, hydraulic system from the CSW.

After the last comp I realized that 90 is probably a better compromise than a 110.

So what to do? Build on the HCPU, or sell it and get a 90 truck cab (very rare in Sweden so I'll probably have to import it myself)?

What about rear Salisbury (ARB'd) on a 90, is it doable or just plain stupid?

[zardos]

How about a 100 inch from a disco with a spaceframe/roll cage body?

Disco 1's might be easier to source in Sweden?

[ToyRoverlander]

I'd stick with a 110 and shorten the rear overhang... I LOVE a nice long wheelbase... nice and stable offroad.

[GBMUD]

Suzuki Vitara 2.0 diesel (or a Jimny?) with Landrover axles, a big alternator and big winches. Very light weight, small and nimble, not enough power to break itself but huge winch power:weight ratio.

Chris

[mark-d]

So what to do? Build on the HCPU, or sell it and get a 90 truck cab (very rare in Sweden so I'll probably have to import it myself)?

It is easy enough to convert it to a truck cab. they seam to be quite rare here also, did they actually sell them in sweden as a truck cab?

[calle-fas]

It is easy enough to convert it to a truck cab. they seam to be quite rare here also, did they actually sell them in sweden as a truck cab?

I might have gotten things wrong here. Truck cab is the short one with round corners in the rear right? Just as my HCPU? What I'm after is a pickup, so that I can have an external cage that complies with comp. rules.

Trayback is no must at this stage.

Maybe I should look into getting a new, galvanized, 100" chassis.

I want it to be a Land Rover.

But I do like the concept of a lightweight car.

Thankful for all ideas. I take it all in even if I don't reply to every suggestion.

[Team Idris]

I run 87" which would be considered very short in America. They like 100"+ so they don't flip over backward on rock (as far as I can tell). But most of what I drive on is so slippy I might not climb 40 degrees. The 80" does very well in the UK for the same reason, and has a small turning circle. So wheelbase is a complomise between stability on climbs and turning circle. If its tight forrest I'd say 90". If its open steep climbs I'd say 100" or maybe even 110".

My 87" is the odd one out in a field of 100" trucks though.

Unless the budget is low I wouldn't let the rear axel be the decider. With so many 90/disco/rangy aftermarket parts.

[DiscoDino]

If I were you I would keep the hicap 110 and do the following:

Ditch the hicap pic-up bed,

Maintain the 110" wheelbase

Cut off anything past the rear sling perches

Build challenge front wings, external cage, and a minimal tray-bar tube frame around the main 1/2 cabin

IF you want more manouvrability, look at getting a good rear steer axle (101 front, Rover front with Longfield CVs, etc..)

The idea I am proposing is to focus the simple/economic tasks on the metal work (if you want to label it as suck), and then focus the innovative/costly tasks on the mechanics so you can enjoy the stability of the 110" wheelbase, but also have the manouvrability (obviously not sure if this can clear the comp rules?)

[calle-fas]

If I were you I would keep the hicap 110 and do the following:

Ditch the hicap pic-up bed,

Maintain the 110" wheelbase

Cut off anything past the rear sling perches

Build challenge front wings, external cage, and a minimal tray-bar tube frame around the main 1/2 cabin

IF you want more manouvrability, look at getting a good rear steer axle (101 front, Rover front with Longfield CVs, etc..)

The idea I am proposing is to focus the simple/economic tasks on the metal work (if you want to label it as suck), and then focus the innovative/costly tasks on the mechanics so you can enjoy the stability of the 110" wheelbase, but also have the manouvrability (obviously not sure if this can clear the comp rules?)

That was my original plan as I personally like a little longer wheelbase. Problem is it probably won't win comps here as we have it all: tight sections, steep hills, deep bogs and rocks. I would say that the main problems I've had with the 110 CSW has been maneuvering between boulders and trees. It can go anywhere. Just not fast.

It could be a good place to start though and then cut or replace the chassis if needed.

Rear steer is unfortunately not an option as it has to be road legal.

I won't choose model after my axles, but it should be possible to put a Salisbury rear on a 90, shouldn't it?

[mark-d]

I might have gotten things wrong here. Truck cab is the short one with round corners in the rear right? Just as my HCPU? What I'm after is a pickup, so that I can have an external cage that complies with comp. rules.

yes but a 90, I am not aware there is anything else, 90 pick up/truck cab was the same thing as far as i was aware?

like this?

[calle-fas]

Yep that's what I meant.

Thanks for all the inputs.

[markyb]

buy one already nearly done save some money in the long run, depending what sort of comps your doing

[calle-fas]

buy one already nearly done save some money in the long run, depending what sort of comps your doing

Pricewise that is the reasonable way to go. Problem is that since I'm situated outside UK having a proper look at the car will be expensive and time consuming.

Where I stand right now I'm looking at shortening the chassis of the hi-cap to 100" wheelbase and also behind the rear spring mounts. It has to be MOT'd so there's some paperwork involved too, but its doable.

A little more work than building on a 90, but in the end an even more competitive vehicle. :-)

Thanks for all the inputs.

[simonr]

Suzuki Vitara 2.0 diesel (or a Jimny?) with Landrover axles, a big alternator and big winches. Very light weight, small and nimble, not enough power to break itself but huge winch power:weight ratio.

Chris, that's a rubbish idea ! Everyone knows that Land Rovers are unbeatable!

<appologies for the less than totally Land Rover content>

This is 100" Wheelbase, currently weighs 910kg (so may just squeeze in under a ton with winches) with Toyota FJ80 Axles. 3 Link rear, single link front.

Back on topic - 100" seems to be a 'golden' wheelbase as a compromise between turn circle and stability. I think on the whole it works better than a 93" - though obviously there will be occasions where a 90 or 110 will be better.

Si

[simon_s]

Damn that looks good Si! *Off to BigJimny to find the build thread again..*

[simonr]

http://www.bigjimny.com/index.php?option=com_kunena&func=view&catid=7&id=19368&Itemid=75

In case you are interested.

Si

[stuck]

That level of articulation is impressive, your still though!

[calle-fas]

Chris, that's a rubbish idea ! Everyone knows that Land Rovers are unbeatable!

<appologies for the less than totally Land Rover content>

This is 100" Wheelbase, currently weighs 910kg (so may just squeeze in under a ton with winches) with Toyota FJ80 Axles. 3 Link rear, single link front.

Back on topic - 100" seems to be a 'golden' wheelbase as a compromise between turn circle and stability. I think on the whole it works better than a 93" - though obviously there will be occasions where a 90 or 110 will be better.

Si

That's why I'm considering a go with the plasma on the HCPU. Have to convince SWMBO first, which might be a lot harder than actually rebuilding the car.

One of my close friends has a lifted and ARB'd autobox Jimny. Lovely car, and before I got them lockers and Silverstone tires we used to be quite equal over all. Now he struggles to keep up unless it gets narrow.

Above is another league though.