View Single Post
  #23  
Old 06-10-2018, 06:33 PM
heinke's Avatar
heinke heinke is offline
MetalShaper of the Month Jan 2018
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 487
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Superleggera View Post


Here is a quick example via digital restyling of lengthening the wheelbase on a Miura. A few inches in the engine bay (offsetting the internal firewall/bulkhead rearward for more cockpit space is an option), longer cockpit and 17in and 18in Campy style wheels (versus 15in original).

FYI: One negative of the Coyote engine is width and especially in a traverse configuration. You will need to determine the transaxle setup with engine before you know where the firewall (rear bulkhead) will go. A narrower engine (or head configuration) might allow you some additional cockpit interior space.

On a current de Tomaso Mangusta project for a customer, the Coyote option was skipped and the engine selected was an old school 289 with Gurney-Weslake heads because it was dramatically narrower. (It will get injectors with an ECM to modernize along with ignition system)

Red lines show offsets based upon centerline of rear wheel forward. (top image is "stock")
Mark: thanks a lot for whipping up that illustration! I think it demonstrates well that a plus sized Miura still looks great. I have Photoshop but still need to learn how to use it for things like this.

Just out of curiosity, what % bigger is the bottom car?

You're spot on for the key negative to use a Coyote engine in this car. What's interesting is that the engine/transaxle package length has been a bigger issue in relation to the chassis than engine width. Yes, the Coyote is wide at the heads but by planning for a longer wheelbase it doesn't appear to be an issue, at least on CAD/paper.

I just happen to have a 347 (stroker 289) sitting in the corner of my garage collecting dust. It has even already been modernized with an Aardema SOHC setup. I elected to go with the Coyote anyway just to get the 4 valve heads. Yes, the SOHC 347 is 2.5 inches narrower at the heads but that's only 1.25 inch per side narrower than the Coyote. On a transverse setup, it's only the forward (aka drivers side) head that matters for firewall clearance purposes. I don't anticipate big modifications (i.e. horsepower adders) for the Coyote but if I do then the 4 valve heads will outflow 2 valve heads anyday.
__________________
Joel Heinke
Be original; don't be afraid of being bold!
Reply With Quote