Omega Owners Forum

Chat Area => General Car Chat => Topic started by: feeutfo on 17 February 2011, 22:35:02

Title: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 17 February 2011, 22:35:02
This is the telling shot IMO.
(http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p326/chrisgixer/00033fd5.jpg)
 Provided by members of ls1tech it shows an ls1 v8 in a Catera engine bay, so left hooker obviously,diy project. Top of the pic, rear cylinder exits directly into the side of the steering box, I reckon one good blip of the throttle and the engine would twist enough to touch it.

How on earth did Gm sanction such a project? No room for the manifold at all.

Some other shots.

Headers pre fitting drivers side
(http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p326/chrisgixer/9e5d8d09.jpg)

Pass side, still not straightforward
(http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p326/chrisgixer/0fd778f2.jpg)

Headers pre fitting pas side
(http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p326/chrisgixer/2c27fb71.jpg)
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Shimmy on 17 February 2011, 22:38:55
They could have just rebadged a commodore over here :P

Basically the same car with a V8, and still popular and in production today!
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 17 February 2011, 22:44:35
Quote
They could have just rebadged a commodore over here :P

Basically the same car with a V8, and still popular and in production today!
If only, commodore chassis is wider, or widened I should say, for reasons shown above.
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Shimmy on 17 February 2011, 23:00:08
Yeah I'm aware they made it slightly larger to accommodate, just saying they could have rebadged it here like they did with the Monaro. 
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: TheBoy on 18 February 2011, 09:14:32
GM would probably have reconfigured the layout slightly? And they most likely would not have used performance manifolds, and more likely gone for a cheaper, more compact manifold?
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Marks DTM Calib on 18 February 2011, 09:17:06
Lol, I seem to recall the correct headers were considerably different to that and fitted better.

I also seem to recall the mention of a steering rack (could be wrong though)
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: TheBoy on 18 February 2011, 09:32:20
Quote
Lol, I seem to recall the correct headers were considerably different to that and fitted better.

I also seem to recall the mention of a steering rack (could be wrong though)
Nah, still a steering box. The idler has been changed to one that can cope better with heat according to the usual sources...  (2001 Technical Features)
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 18 February 2011, 09:45:42
Theses are the original part for the v8, aquirred by lingenfelter tuning after Gm sold on thier stock of v8 parts. The space available is clearly the same, there's pics available of the steering box upgrades to the pas system, including a cooler obviosly.

(http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p326/chrisgixer/12cba9f9.jpg)

Clearly the space is tight, but hadn't appreciated how close it is until seen in situ.

The rats omega used a rack and cut the chassis, as I'm sure you know.
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 18 February 2011, 10:05:08
More associated parts shown here, differant subframe and engine mounts may help with clearance but the headers give the game away still.

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/conversions-hybrids/778988-ls1-into-cadillac-catera-56k-death.html
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: omegabsw on 18 February 2011, 12:11:41
Thats an ls1, didnt GM use a Northstar v8 which is smaller?
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: aaronjb on 18 February 2011, 12:18:42
Quote
Thats an ls1, didnt GM use a Northstar v8 which is smaller?

Overall width of the Northstar seems to be wider, but I wonder if the exhaust manifolds are more compact.

Northstar is 28" wide (source (http://grannys.tripod.com/enginescadillac.html)) while the LS1 is a little under 25" wide (source (http://paceperformance.com/p-3990-engine-dimensions.html))

'course one measurement could include headers and the other definitely doesn't.

(There are some really narrow - older - pushrod V8's around, though: http://www.carnut.com/specs/engdim.html)
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: omegabsw on 18 February 2011, 12:36:11
Yeah, I think you may be right one must be without as 3 inches is a fair old whack.

As already said before the manifolds on the top conversion are massive, tubular and aftermarket. 

The bottom ones im sure are Northstar manifolds and a lot slimmer.

I dont know a lot about GM V8's but im sure that the LS1/LS2 is a pain in the arse to wire up, where as the Northstar is an easier engine to use for a conversion
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Kevin Wood on 18 February 2011, 13:01:24
The Northstar is a DOHC-per-bank 32v engine so it's very wide around the exhaust manifold area due to the much wider heads needed to incorporate the valve gear.

I think the Omega was destined to get the LS1.

Kevin
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 18 February 2011, 13:02:43
Quote
Yeah, I think you may be right one must be without as 3 inches is a fair old whack.

As already said before the manifolds on the top conversion are massive, tubular and aftermarket. 

The bottom ones im sure are Northstar manifolds and a lot slimmer.

I dont know a lot about GM V8's but im sure that the LS1/LS2 is a pain in the arse to wire up, where as the Northstar is an easier engine to use for a conversion

Those shown, as said, are the exact part designed for the ls1 specific to the omega chassis and would have been part of the production run, had it gone ahead.

As you say thats an ls1 lump, and we know the northstar is wider, so can you explane how any northstar compnonents would be involved in the Gm omega v8 project?

The diy manifolds shown in the top pic are so because the genuine part was not available, therefor had to use construction methods available to him, giving the result shown. Non of this however has any baring on tne space avaiable, which is governrd by the width of the omega chassis, the use of a steering box and its fixed position on the omega model range and the size of the engine used.

Result, not enough space.

There are however production manifolds availabl that are far more efficient with the space used, but even these would need modification on the rear cylinders, and dont join the cat section at the same position causing other minor agros as well. All in all, given possible flow restrictions on top of everything else, 1 i can see why the diy builder went the route he did, good job imo! And 2, non of the above has any baring on the main issue, the position of the steering box re manifold outlet!
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Kevin Wood on 18 February 2011, 16:02:22
I'm guessing a pair of bog standard cast manifolds would have gone in easier, albeit with a performance hit.

The other possibility is that the engine could have been moved over / forward, perhaps?  :-/

Not desirable, but if it's the only way to make it fit. Difficult to say from a picture, TBH.

Kevin
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: aaronjb on 18 February 2011, 16:39:48
And/or would the GM 'risers' on the mounts have raised the engine to add a little clearance (it was still clearly tight, since the GM manifolds have that flattened rear runner).
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Marks DTM Calib on 18 February 2011, 16:47:22
I recall the use of an aluminium bonnet in order to recover the weight gained by the bigger V8 unit
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: TheBoy on 18 February 2011, 16:58:37
Quote
I recall the use of an aluminium bonnet in order to recover the weight gained by the bigger V8 unit
I think it was more than just the bonnet...
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 18 February 2011, 17:57:27
Quote
Quote
I recall the use of an aluminium bonnet in order to recover the weight gained by the bigger V8 unit
I think it was more than just the bonnet...
... Such as? Do you know?  :)
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: TheBoy on 18 February 2011, 18:22:05
Quote
Quote
Quote
I recall the use of an aluminium bonnet in order to recover the weight gained by the bigger V8 unit
I think it was more than just the bonnet...
... Such as? Do you know?  :)
Not without firing up TIS. And its Friday night, so that ain't gonna happen any time soon ;)

Look until Technical Features for 2001 ;)
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: omegabsw on 18 February 2011, 19:09:10
Quote
Quote
Yeah, I think you may be right one must be without as 3 inches is a fair old whack.

As already said before the manifolds on the top conversion are massive, tubular and aftermarket. 

The bottom ones im sure are Northstar manifolds and a lot slimmer.

I dont know a lot about GM V8's but im sure that the LS1/LS2 is a pain in the arse to wire up, where as the Northstar is an easier engine to use for a conversion

Those shown, as said, are the exact part designed for the ls1 specific to the omega chassis and would have been part of the production run, had it gone ahead.

As you say thats an ls1 lump, and we know the northstar is wider, so can you explane how any northstar compnonents would be involved in the Gm omega v8 project?

The diy manifolds shown in the top pic are so because the genuine part was not available, therefor had to use construction methods available to him, giving the result shown. Non of this however has any baring on tne space avaiable, which is governrd by the width of the omega chassis, the use of a steering box and its fixed position on the omega model range and the size of the engine used.

Result, not enough space.

There are however production manifolds availabl that are far more efficient with the space used, but even these would need modification on the rear cylinders, and dont join the cat section at the same position causing other minor agros as well. All in all, given possible flow restrictions on top of everything else, 1 i can see why the diy builder went the route he did, good job imo! And 2, non of the above has any baring on the main issue, the position of the steering box re manifold outlet!

I was sure that GM never intended on putting the LS1 in the Omega!

It was designed with the Northstar V8, Not the LS1!

I have just googled it and one of the first things that came up was a thread from OOF where an admin even says it was the Northstar lump.

http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1175280656/7

I may be wrong, I sometimes am

Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 18 February 2011, 19:21:50
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
I recall the use of an aluminium bonnet in order to recover the weight gained by the bigger V8 unit
I think it was more than just the bonnet...
... Such as? Do you know?  :)
Not without firing up TIS. And its Friday night, so that ain't gonna happen any time soon ;)

Look until Technical Features for 2001 ;)
I no longer have access sadly.
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 18 February 2011, 19:30:47
Quote
Quote
Quote
Yeah, I think you may be right one must be without as 3 inches is a fair old whack.

As already said before the manifolds on the top conversion are massive, tubular and aftermarket. 

The bottom ones im sure are Northstar manifolds and a lot slimmer.

I dont know a lot about GM V8's but im sure that the LS1/LS2 is a pain in the arse to wire up, where as the Northstar is an easier engine to use for a conversion

Those shown, as said, are the exact part designed for the ls1 specific to the omega chassis and would have been part of the production run, had it gone ahead.

As you say thats an ls1 lump, and we know the northstar is wider, so can you explane how any northstar compnonents would be involved in the Gm omega v8 project?

The diy manifolds shown in the top pic are so because the genuine part was not available, therefor had to use construction methods available to him, giving the result shown. Non of this however has any baring on tne space avaiable, which is governrd by the width of the omega chassis, the use of a steering box and its fixed position on the omega model range and the size of the engine used.

Result, not enough space.

There are however production manifolds availabl that are far more efficient with the space used, but even these would need modification on the rear cylinders, and dont join the cat section at the same position causing other minor agros as well. All in all, given possible flow restrictions on top of everything else, 1 i can see why the diy builder went the route he did, good job imo! And 2, non of the above has any baring on the main issue, the position of the steering box re manifold outlet!

I was sure that GM never intended on putting the LS1 in the Omega!

It was designed with the Northstar V8, Not the LS1!

I have just googled it and one of the first things that came up was a thread from OOF where an admin even says it was the Northstar lump.

http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1175280656/7

I may be wrong, I sometimes am

Your aware the northstar is WIDER than the ls1? Yes?....


Maybe we all have it wrong, maybe it was the merlin engine in the diy pics and that's why it's so tight for space. Thus a northstar would be far easier to fit, and an ls1 would have acres to play with.  ;D

Anyway it won't be northstar in any diy project I have to pay for, thier mega bucks. Even before fitting!  ::)
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: omegabsw on 18 February 2011, 19:39:39
I am aware it was wider but as we were discussing on the first page those manifolds are not helping him out one bit.
Which is why I stated that the manifold in the other pic that was posted looks like a lot better fit.

I just want an answer for my own sanity, was it the Northstar that GM intended or the LS1?

Now a Merlin engine in an Omega  :D

Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: 2woody on 18 February 2011, 22:42:11
no, definitely Gen-III Chevy, not Northstar.

The Northstar is absolutely huge and was designed for front-wheel-drive (yes, really), so doesn't readily adapt to correct-wheel-drive. I did a Northstar installation back in 1996 for a company I can't name on here, there were no rwd Northstars available then, so I had to design a bellhousing for them. I believe that there is a Northstar now available with rwd, so at least the bits are available. Cadillac STS ?

Not aware of any other rwd Northstar conversions around. Certainly all the fwd donor vehicles need to be hooked up to the 4T80 transverse gearbox for the electrics to work - much more difficult than with an LS1 (at least an early one anyway)

The "original" manifolds for the Omega V8 were tubular - you have the correct pics, but these may have been low-volume pre-production items destined to be replaced with cast for series production. Any way up, I have no fear that current after-market "tight-tuck" manifolds can be made to work with the Omegas steering box.

The clearance pictured isn't that bad. In the region of the manifolds, the engine movement is "up/down" and not "side-to-side". 3/4 inch is good enough for clearance under all circumstances and to slide a heatshield in.
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: omegabsw on 18 February 2011, 22:49:06
Quote
no, definitely Gen-III Chevy, not Northstar.

The Northstar is absolutely huge and was designed for front-wheel-drive (yes, really), so doesn't readily adapt to correct-wheel-drive. I did a Northstar installation back in 1996 for a company I can't name on here, there were no rwd Northstars available then, so I had to design a bellhousing for them. I believe that there is a Northstar now available with rwd, so at least the bits are available. Cadillac STS ?

Not aware of any other rwd Northstar conversions around. Certainly all the fwd donor vehicles need to be hooked up to the 4T80 transverse gearbox for the electrics to work - much more difficult than with an LS1 (at least an early one anyway)

The "original" manifolds for the Omega V8 were tubular - you have the correct pics, but these may have been low-volume pre-production items destined to be replaced with cast for series production. Any way up, I have no fear that current after-market "tight-tuck" manifolds can be made to work with the Omegas steering box.

The clearance pictured isn't that bad. In the region of the manifolds, the engine movement is "up/down" and not "side-to-side". 3/4 inch is good enough for clearance under all circumstances and to slide a heatshield in.

Just proves that you cant believe everything you read on OOF then!   ;D

Seriously tho, V8 FWD!  :o

Makes sense tho when you check this out  :o

Code: [Select]
http://www.cwstuning.com/gallery/coupe-degolf/engineandfrontshot
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: 2woody on 18 February 2011, 22:50:54
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Premium_V_engine#Northstar
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: omegabsw on 18 February 2011, 23:02:49
How about a BMW M60?

I had one of these in my E38 740 and it pulled like a train. The engine is still about funnily enough my mate is making a manual 7 series v8

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0hjHHgGkEY[/media]
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: sassanach on 18 February 2011, 23:26:39
fwd it is
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9038936@N07/4693321896/
its a tight fit in here!!!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9038936@N07/2939190064/
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: omegabsw on 18 February 2011, 23:55:21
Quote
fwd it is
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9038936@N07/4693321896/
its a tight fit in here!!!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9038936@N07/2939190064/

Whats car is that in the second picture? it looks real strange the engine sitting in there
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 19 February 2011, 00:04:43
Quote
How about a BMW M60?

I had one of these in my E38 740 and it pulled like a train. The engine is still about funnily enough my mate is making a manual 7 series v8

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0hjHHgGkEY[/media]
I reckon the bloke who built those manifolds needs to concider flow and shockwave issues on the markII versions.  :o
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 19 February 2011, 10:29:09
Quote
no, definitely Gen-III Chevy, not Northstar.

The Northstar is absolutely huge and was designed for front-wheel-drive (yes, really), so doesn't readily adapt to correct-wheel-drive. I did a Northstar installation back in 1996 for a company I can't name on here, there were no rwd Northstars available then, so I had to design a bellhousing for them. I believe that there is a Northstar now available with rwd, so at least the bits are available. Cadillac STS ?

Not aware of any other rwd Northstar conversions around. Certainly all the fwd donor vehicles need to be hooked up to the 4T80 transverse gearbox for the electrics to work - much more difficult than with an LS1 (at least an early one anyway)

The "original" manifolds for the Omega V8 were tubular - you have the correct pics, but these may have been low-volume pre-production items destined to be replaced with cast for series production. Any way up, I have no fear that current after-market "tight-tuck" manifolds can be made to work with the Omegas steering box.

The clearance pictured isn't that bad. In the region of the manifolds, the engine movement is "up/down" and not "side-to-side". 3/4 inch is good enough for clearance under all circumstances and to slide a heatshield in.
Probably a silly question as i have no idea how the steering box is installed, but is there anything go be gained by moving the steering box over? How is it fitted? Guessing the universal joints in the steering colum will allow it? And track rods could be set up out of center to keep the pitman arm straight, i'm fairly sure....? :-/
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Kevin Wood on 19 February 2011, 19:03:41
Quote
Probably a silly question as i have no idea how the steering box is installed, but is there anything go be gained by moving the steering box over? How is it fitted? Guessing the universal joints in the steering colum will allow it? And track rods could be set up out of center to keep the pitman arm straight, i'm fairly sure....? :-/

I reckon that's a non-starter, TBH. ;) Moving the inner pivot point of the track rod will make it handle like an underinflated, badly worn Falken on a bad day, for a start.

Kevin
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 19 February 2011, 19:41:47
Quote
Quote
Probably a silly question as i have no idea how the steering box is installed, but is there anything go be gained by moving the steering box over? How is it fitted? Guessing the universal joints in the steering colum will allow it? And track rods could be set up out of center to keep the pitman arm straight, i'm fairly sure....? :-/

I reckon that's a non-starter, TBH. ;) Moving the inner pivot point of the track rod will make it handle like an underinflated, badly worn Falken on a bad day, for a start.

Kevin
Ah, will need a longer centre tie rod.  :-[
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: 2woody on 19 February 2011, 19:56:05
The problem with the steering box re. movement is that its a lot of work. The handling is very sensitive to the effective track rod end position, and if i was going to put the effort into a re-calculation, I'd prefer to spend it on a rack

the manifolds would be of the non-interference type, so runner lengths, etc. aren't important.

The BMW engine is a good one, but probably quite wide, and just try finding one in the aftermarket with a manual box.
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 19 February 2011, 21:21:23
Quote
The problem with the steering box re. movement is that its a lot of work. The handling is very sensitive to the effective track rod end position, and if i was going to put the effort into a re-calculation, I'd prefer to spend it on a rack.

And fabricating manifolds to the space available simpler still?  ......  By comparison?
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: markrl on 19 February 2011, 23:07:34
Isn't the pre production V8 Omega languising in the Opel museum in Russelsheim? At least it was until fairly recently. 
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Kevin Wood on 19 February 2011, 23:09:27
Quote
Isn't the pre production V8 Omega languising in the Opel museum in Russelsheim? At least it was until fairly recently. 

Best we get over there with a tape measure pack of Rizlas then. ;D

Kevin
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: TheBoy on 20 February 2011, 11:25:06
Quote
Quote
Isn't the pre production V8 Omega languising in the Opel museum in Russelsheim? At least it was until fairly recently. 

Best we get over there with a tape measure pack of Rizlas then. ;D

Kevin
I was thinking more balaclavas, crowbars, and a swag bag (a bloody big swag bag) ::)
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 20 February 2011, 16:13:46
No sign on the opel museum web site....afaict.  :'(
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: 2woody on 21 February 2011, 10:01:23
sounds like a weekend out for the four of us !

I need to put some miles on the Holden before it's first trackday
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Kevin Wood on 21 February 2011, 10:47:27
Quote
sounds like a weekend out for the four of us !

I need to put some miles on the Holden before it's first trackday

A road trip.  8-)

 :y

kevin
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 21 February 2011, 22:00:45
Quote
Quote
sounds like a weekend out for the four of us !

I need to put some miles on the Holden before it's first trackday

A road trip.  8-)

 :y

kevin


O-oh!   ;D.    :y
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: 2woody on 24 February 2011, 13:20:47
isn't Nurburgring between here and there ?
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 24 February 2011, 15:39:48
Oh now your just asking for trouble.  ;D

But yes your right, it is.  ::)
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Kevin Wood on 24 February 2011, 17:04:26
Quote
Oh now your just asking for trouble.  ;D

But yes your right, it is.  ::)

Got a trailer for that velocipede of yours? ::)

Kevin
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 24 February 2011, 17:39:44
Quote
Quote
Oh now your just asking for trouble.  ;D

But yes your right, it is.  ::)

Got a trailer for that velocipede of yours? ::)

Kevin
Veloci what?  ;D.    yep, the ring is on my bucket list. If i'm not too old and shriveled by the time i get round to it i would prefer to take the bike. Towing mght calm the journey too and from somewhat though.  :-/
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: Kevin Wood on 24 February 2011, 19:14:34
Quote
Quote
Quote
Oh now your just asking for trouble.  ;D

But yes your right, it is.  ::)

Got a trailer for that velocipede of yours? ::)

Kevin
Veloci what?  ;D.    yep, the ring is on my bucket list. If i'm not too old and shriveled by the time i get round to it i would prefer to take the bike. Towing mght calm the journey too and from somewhat though.  :-/

You'll have to ride it instead, then.

Just don't be a "7 second ringpiece king". ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4Qxic6qj3E

Kevin
Title: Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
Post by: feeutfo on 24 February 2011, 19:53:20
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Oh now your just asking for trouble.  ;D

But yes your right, it is.  ::)

Got a trailer for that velocipede of yours? ::)

Kevin
Veloci what?  ;D.    yep, the ring is on my bucket list. If i'm not too old and shriveled by the time i get round to it i would prefer to take the bike. Towing mght calm the journey too and from somewhat though.  :-/

You'll have to ride it instead, then.

Just don't be a "7 second ringpiece king". ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4Qxic6qj3E

Kevin
I could do with a bit more run off to be fair. I once only managed 2/3 of a lap of Mallory.   :D