Introduction / 4 seater cage question

I'd be very interested in learning more about the rally specific parts developed for the galant also. What sort of stuff? Suspension pieces, bracing or what?

the colt vista would a be fun sleeper

but if you plan to build a more serious rally car sort of thing, then an evo clone would be better
outlander rear suspension with dsm power train in a 4g mirage chassis

rally proven parts through and through. let me know if i can help either way

---

I would rather drive a slow car fast as a fast car slow!
first rule of cars: get what makes you happy, your the one paying for it!

Well like I said before I need more basic rally x experience at least for a start. If I start getting into it with the vista enough to build a "serious" car i will give more thought to a different platform. I've never said what everyone is saying is not a valid, I've never disagreed on the qualitative assessment of the vista, just the actual degree of quantitative difference. I've compared all the relevant physical information to arrive at my own conclusions, like I said spring rate being the biggest thing really. It was not ever designed to go fast so the spring rate selection was made accordingly, I've corrected that bit. The chassis was however designed for off roading and towing load, these make it tough and make it more adaptable to rally use.

My friend has built a fwd drag 4g mirage. I can't say I was impressed by the chassis of that car. Apples to apples mod for mod I would put my vista up against a 4g offroad for sure. I have most of the stuff to put together an awd galant if I could find a decent shell. That could be in the future. What year range outlander rear suspension are you talking about? I've literally never seen one in a junkyard to even crawl under, that also tells me sourcing parts for it would probably suck.

Quote
timiacobucci
I'd be very interested in learning more about the rally specific parts developed for the galant also. What sort of stuff? Suspension pieces, bracing or what?

Just ther normal stuff. Big alloy uprights with gigantor wheel bearings and hubs, alloy hats and around 280-285 x 27mm rotors, AP calipers, Inverted 40mm Bilstein early on..probably about 190mm travel....Big diff. Even in Group N anybody that was fast was cheating and using alternate tooth count gear-sets---but stock ratios...tubular adjustable junk in the back...
But all mountings within +-20mm
(this is in the rest of the world--I spent a day at a guy named Walfridsson talking about his GpN Gaylant...which he won GpN is Swedish WRC rounds like forever (both Gaylant and Lancer)

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Ah, thank you rally anarchy. I will fall asleap giggling tonight, thinking about how a colt vista wagon actually is just like a lancia delta...


In fact I'm having trouble resisting the urge to closely read the rules and see if you could get away with running a colt vista integrale evoluzione...

Since this concept is so funny and I am the uninitiated how about yall school me on the joke here?

Lets make a for real list of why it is so very different. We already have on the list,

height, 6 inches btw. Big ol 15% difference (62.4 in vista, 54.3 in delta)
rear overhang/length 19 inches, again about 15% ( 176.8 in vista, 153.3 in delta)
and I guess visibility? I can see pretty damn well out of the vista though so i don't really get that but whatever

i'll add rear suspension full trailing arm vs semi for lancia
rear torsion bar vs rear coils

With that said I am converting mine to galant rear coil overs and possibly dsm/galant rear subframe in the future so even the semi trailing arm system might be identical


What's on the side for similarities?
Chassis structure 4 door hatchback
front engine all wheel drive layout
Very similar weight, low 2000 lbs fwd high 2000 awd
wheelbase extremely close 6% difference (103.5 in vista, 97.6 in delta)
width extremely close 1.5% difference (64.8 in vista, 63.8 in delta)
4g63 so easy enough turbo swap, I'm gonna just call that turbo inline 2l 4 cylinder
5 spd manual
mcpherson strut front suspension
viscous center lsd
torsen vs clutch rear lsd (optional vista) gotta actually give the vista the nod on that one

Edited to revise original delta figures, I was using 2nd gen figures for the comparison earlier. John's comment a few posts down are referring to my original figures that were incorrect that are now fixed.

I would argue the vista is closer to the lancia then most of the rally cars other people choose to build

I figured the picture was illustrative. I guess let the hard technical facts sink in now

I realize the heritage the delta has. That was born of time and work and investment in developing the platform though. Why is it so absurd, when the underlying structure of the 2 cars is so similar, to think much of that development and knowledge applied to making the delta into the proven rally car it is could not just as easily carry over to the vista?

C'mon, look past the exterior and the advertising and image and meaningless fluff and see the real physical structure and spirit of the two machines





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2015 03:44AM by timiacobucci.

I told you the Delta was virtually the same physically as a Golf. Golf doesn't have a 100" wheelbase...
Much shorter..
You see there your research skills are faulty, but more than that .
It is not a matter of anybody proving that a narrow TALL mini-van is all wrong...
I mean if you can't look at all over the whole wold and see what worked--and jsut see there hasn't been any mini-vans entered and if you can't see the flat silliness then nobody can help you...

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Quote
alkun

Quote
timiacobucci


What are the conditions for the backstays to be removable?

I don't mind loosing the back seats, if I do welded straight rear stays can the rearward x reinforcement be removable? It's not even 100% required for a strict 253 36c cage is it?

How low is that door x supposed to be?

Something like this for example seems super low to me,

Those doorbars are actually pretty high in ther rear. Usually if top tube crosses the b-pilar at the door striker it works out right.

But first off, are you going to log book and rally this?

If not then you don't need to follow fia rules, and can do what ever you want. But that will likely make it more dangerous rather than safer, and ruin a totally sweet Plymouth Colt Vista.

Thanks for actually answering this question btw. The thing is I really meant the forward part of the x, the junction just under the dash, are there any rules about how low that can or is supposed to be? The 253-49 diagram shows the measurement E being equal for both front and rear sections of the x. I don't think I've seen any rally cages they are actually equal in though. There is also like you said only reference to a maximum height requirement.

Quote
john vanlandingham
I told you the Delta was virtually the same physically as a Golf. Golf doesn't have a 100" wheelbase...
Much shorter..
You see there your research skills are faulty, but more than that .
It is not a matter of anybody proving that a narrow TALL mini-van is all wrong...
I mean if you can't look at all over the whole wold and see what worked--and jsut see there hasn't been any mini-vans entered and if you can't see the flat silliness then nobody can help you...

My apologies, I was looking at the 2nd gen delta specs, it was a quick search, wheelbase is 97.4 in I apologize for my 2.6% error I will fix it,

my quick internet sources, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancia_Delta

http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=40854

Both say 97-98 range. Still about 6% difference from the vista. What do you think it is?

Quote
john vanlandingham
It is not a matter of anybody proving that a narrow TALL mini-van is all wrong...

I'm not asking anyone to prove anything to me, and your argument that it is wrong because it is tall still requires a quantitative value for TALL

A newer camry is 60" tall. You are saying the vista is TALL, again relative to what? Compared to most small cars now, quantitatively it's damn near identical, compared to a delta it's about 11% taller. That's not really very much and there's not allot of mass in the area that adds that height to really affect much. Am I correct in assuming the importance of height is center of gravity and its relation to track width and roll? I doubt the roof skin adds much weight and the cog location is likely within 5% of a delta. Also I am widening the entire front track.

Quote
john vanlandingham
I mean if you can't look at all over the whole wold and see what worked--and jsut see there hasn't been any mini-vans entered and if you can't see the flat silliness then nobody can help you...

I SEE, I SEE, I see #s and physics. I see a car that is 6-11% identical to one of the most successful rally cars ever.


Look man, I like you, I really do. If we were having this discussion in real life it would work better. I imagine you are projecting on to me a perspective and opinion here which isn't accurate. I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm not trying to argue or prove a point or impress anyone or make you look bad or myself look good. Everything is relative and everyone has difference areas of experience and knowledge. It's not a better or worse competitive type of a thing, just different relative perspectives. I know you know more about this stuff and I am trying to learn. That is why I am here and to maybe share some of the interesting stuff I've been working on and some knowledge or advice I have that might be useful to others.

What I am specifically trying to do right now is just get some of you others to see what I see, you don't need to say you agree or I'm right or wrong or whatever. Just try to see my point of view. Look at the pics, look at the relativity of the numbers and leave notions of minivans or hatchbacks aside for a moment. That's all I'm asking.

Quote
john vanlandingham
I have driven one of those Vista things for about 8-10 days when we had a huge snow storm followed by an ice storm..My partner I manufacture rally parts with has 2: one for him, one for his wife.. I drove wifeys cause she didn't dare venture out.
It WAS a fun fuck around hoon car.. Both have rear clutch plate diffs....

I would love to hear your partners opinion about my project. He must really be into them if they have 2 and both have rear lsds. Show him my galant strut mod. It's pretty easy to find a 1g dsm strut setup, drill a new hole and bang a bit for clearance. I'm not sure if the camber will be off but the strut bolts to the stock vista spindle.

I have not had a chance to test it back to back like that because I already had the engine out before I did this but I wish someone would, it's a simple mod. Just tell him about it and drive the car again with proper springs and see what you think.

I've already told you a good bit of details. If you spent half as much time actually thinking about what I wrote as you did captioning funny pictures maybe you would have something meaningful to contribute.

Perhaps we need to communicate in a common language? Here's a classic for you.



I already said everything you've pointed out myself. It doesn't even make any fucking sense to mock me??

I want you guys to tear into it. Tell me why I'm wrong. What is the track width of a delta btw I'm having a hard time finding the technical hard #'s on this car.

An implicit part of sarcasm is an element of condescension, this implies gearter knowledge so I'm calling you out on that. Back that shit up and school me please. This is not to prove and point, I really want to know and I am wondering more and more if there even is any content behind all this posturing.

Quote
timiacobucci
I've already told you a good bit of details. If you spent half as much time actually thinking about what I wrote as you did captioning funny pictures maybe you would have something meaningful to contribute.

Perhaps we need to communicate in a common language? Here's a classic for you.



I already said everything you've pointed out myself. It doesn't even make any fucking sense to mock me??

I want you guys to tear into it. Tell me why I'm wrong. What is the track width of a delta btw I'm having a hard time finding the technical hard #'s on this car.

An implicit part of sarcasm is an element of condescension, this implies gearter knowledge so I'm calling you out on that. Back that shit up and school me please. This is not to prove and point, I really want to know and I am wondering more and more if there even is any content behind all this posturing.

Condensation? This is Seattle and it's full on raining right now. I wish condensation was the worst of it.

Simply put it isn't worth getting through to you and no one else will try also most likely. It is quite clear and has been said as to why the Colt Vista is a piss poor candidate for a rally car. Grass-o-cross is another can of worms. If the cars runs then take it out there and screw around.

The Colt Vista was also known as the Chariot and was in Misterbitchy's lineup long before the Gaylant VR-4 yet I wonder why Misterbitchy's engineers never looked at it and said "Hmmmmm now that would make a good rally car" like they did with the Gaylant. Of course, you know better than they I mean it's only 6-11% larger than a Delta.

The Gaylant was a good rally car and won Dubya Arsey events but even it got the axe by Misterbitchy. Why? It was a good car but you want numbers I will show you some numbers only once because this seems to be a waste of my time due to your obstinance but here I go.

Delturd wheelbase is 97.4
Gaylant wheelbase is 102.4

Only 5% difference there.

Delturd length is 153.3
Gaylant length is 179.5

That is a 17% difference there.

I can go on with height and width but the Delta is a smaller car and had more success in part due to the asphalt rallies (the roads were much narrower). Due to this fact manufacturers started downsizing their cars. The drivetrain was good but the bodies wrapped around the drivetrain was too large.

Examples of manufacturers shortening their cars:

Ford Sierra RS Cosworth to Escort RS Cosworth
Misterbitchy Gaylant VR-4 to Dancer Evo
Subaru Le-gassy to Subaru Impretzeled
Toiletta Sillycar All-Crap to Commodahhh Dubya Arsey Ka

Now this was driven by the primitive AWD systems at the time but cars got bigger when active differentials started coming into play. However these cars weren't total giants compared to the Delta. However that extra dimension is the difference between the success of Delta and the success of the other cars prior to the "great downsize".

Do you play baseball? A guy can hit a homerun off of a 90 mph fastball but may swing and miss on a 95 mph fastball. That extra dimension was the difference. The irony is that you post physical dimensions but you lack the reasoning to think in mental dimensions.


The whole point isn't figures but the whole package and their is quite frankly nothing intelligent or "logical" about using a microvan when you have access to a perfectly good rally car in the Gaylant where less efforts will lead to a better car.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/2015 12:42PM by Fly-Half.

Quote
Fly-Half
Ford Sierra RS Cosworth to Escort RS Cosworth
Misterbitchy Gaylant VR-4 to Dancer Evo
Subaru Le-gassy to Subaru Impretzeled
Toiletta Sillycar All-Crap to Commodahhh Dubya Arsey Ka

Haha, oh man I can't even tell what the last one is supposed to be.. All trac?
Even the lofted Delta's a Delturd huh? No trash talk on the cosworth though?

I apologize for seeming obstinate or confrontational, honestly if you could see in reality how I'm approaching this I'm not taking it too seriously, just looking for an informative discussion. I do appreciate the response.

I don't mind the jokes and all either but it's just the collective judgment with such little regard to any explanation or real information, on lots of occassions, it begins to disappoint a bit.

So the delta wheelbase is 97.4, that's about what wiki had. The numbers for the vista were dead on vs the factory manual from the wiki. Any idea on the width, vs the wheelbase.

See this is the kind of discussion I was curious to have, the numbers you've given for the galant are EXTREMELY close to the vista you realize right? I mean I'm not even gonna bother to do the math it's within like 1 or 2 percent, the very car which everyone is saying is a damn decent rally car that I SHOULD be building.

So at best all this has done is define the vista somewhere between a galant and a delta, so the general physics of the chassis are somewhere between a damn good rally platform and a great one.

As far as ease of building, it sounds like the general gist of the aftermarket for the galant I've sort of already unwittingly been following. Stronger uprights and wheel bearings. Have you seen the spindles and hubs for a 3000 gt? I just did it with more readily accessible and serviceable parts from what was mitsubishis heavy ass supercar at the time. I can already bolt on rally specific struts for a dsm or galant. The work for the cage will actually be easier than working in a sedan body. I mean everyone seems to be overlooking so many of the things I've already addressed and alternatively point out an extremely similar chassis.

I am not claiming any sort of superior knowledge of what makes a great rally chassis. That is the position everyone else is taking here and rightly so, that kind of expertise is pretty much the point of this forum right? I am trying to understand it better, I do that by asking questions. I apologize again if it seems like I'm questioning anyone in particular or being disrespectful. I know some people have the opinion that some ideas or people's opinions are "beyond question". It's my opinion such philosophies are better left to sheep. I am not arguing this point to prove the vistas worth, as you can see I'm already balls deep building the thing so the entire argument to choose another platform is pretty moot. The question of WHY everyone is vehement in their agreement about this still eludes me. So I ask questions to try and understand.

John provided some specific avenues of difference to expand on the details of the overall judgment. I and now you have put a few numbers to it. We are starting to get a tad more quantitative and closer to the heart of it. Specific COG and track width would be nice.

The amount the wheelbase was altered on the above mentioned cars that where shortened is a very interesting subject I didn't know anything about. That alone gives me allot more to learn and I thank you for pointing it out.

There are lots of considerations why a manufacturer would choose not to run a certain platform in a race series, a big one is image. Who the hell gets excited about a minivan racecar? Well obviously me, but I've long known I am not in the mainstream for that kind of shit but are my aesthetic sensibilities really what is under debate here? Who the fuck cares what the thing looks like, it could have been a giant purple dildo on a delta chassis and still handed everyone their ass for years. Shit, part of the appeal to me is that it doesn't appeal. It's not a wolf in sheeps clothing, it's a fat delta in an 80's soccer mom minivan's clothes. I like it because it's like a really involved optical illusion. If anything this discussion has shown me the chassis is even more rally worthy than I had anticipated, I know it doesn't have any heritage, it's a fucking minivan, why would it? The appearance of the thing really doesn't have much relation to the reality of it's chassis, a chassis which has VERY close relatives in the evo and galant. I mean I literally have very important suspension, steering and drivetrain components from both of those vehicles already on the car.

looking at things as they are the vista basically has the galant vr4s front suspension and the xr4ti,e30,510,ect rear suspension with some air cooled mixed in

with basically the the same powertrain as the galant,dsm

folks on here keep talking about serious or competitive rally cars and not a fun car to build learn and play car. i don't recall him talking about building a wrc vista or some such thing.

i did see someone asking for serious help with a car
bad jokes are not a good way to promote the sport but a great way to kill it!!!

i'm a visual type of person and as such i'm really looking forward to seeing more pix!

the thought of and turbo vista powersliding around a hairpin gives me the goosebumps, while i laugh my ass off!

---

I would rather drive a slow car fast as a fast car slow!
first rule of cars: get what makes you happy, your the one paying for it!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2015 06:49AM by tdrrally.