Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Liam wrote:might want to move the swirl pot/ pump and fuel lines. any sort of a leak and you'll be wearing it.

i used bard fittings which can handal more than that pump can through at it, and if your a suzuki owner you would no that there is no room at all any where in them, at the best of times.

yes but having the fuel system where it is may not impress the engineer. also if the engineer goes by the d.o.t.a.r.s guidelines the max engine working off a sierra tare weight is 2.0 litre.

joeblow wrote: also if the engineer goes by the d.o.t.a.r.s guidelines the max engine working off a sierra tare weight is 2.0 litre.

The Engineer should be following the NCOP guidelines as instructed by VicRoads and under them there is no set recomended limit for 4wd's

Did you rotate the knuckles or did you narrow it?

You have done a lot of work. Nice build.

Jason

locktup4x4 wrote:Did you rotate the knuckles or did you narrow it?

You have done a lot of work. Nice build.

Jason

Yeah i rotated the knuckels 15mm, diff center was at 2degress now its at 15,
thanks john

joeblow wrote:yes but having the fuel system where it is may not impress the engineer. also if the engineer goes by the d.o.t.a.r.s guidelines the max engine working off a sierra tare weight is 2.0 litre.

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/registration/ ... v_2007.pdf

check that out. not sure if its the same for each state, yes there is a limit on engine capacity. but this says
The above limits do not apply to 4WD’s, light trucks and buses up to 4.5 tonne gross vehicle mass.


it says -->


Signatory certified
modified production category
Maximum engine capacity
Normally aspirated Supercharged or turbocharged
Mono constructed



All vehicles originally having an engine with up
to 4 cylinders or a rotary engine as the largest
optional engine and with a tare mass up to

1100kg

(turbo)

In cubic inches:
Original tare mass (kg) x 0.153

In millilitres (cc):
Original tare mass (kg) x 2.5
----------------------------------------

(N.A)
In cubic inches:
Original tare mass (kg) x 0.183

In millilitres (cc):
Original tare mass (kg) x 3.0

----------------------------------

Other vehicles
with a tare mass
over 1100kg,
and/or with
engines having
more than 4
cylinders.
Vehicles with a separate
chassis construction
(as original equipment)

(mono constructed)
(turbo)

In cubic inches:
Original tare mass (kg) x 0.244

In millilitres (cc):
Original tare mass (kg) x 4.0

-----------------------

(mono constructed)
(N.A)

In cubic inches:
Original tare mass (kg) x 0.294

In millilitres (cc):
Original tare mass (kg) x 4.82
----------------------------------

seperate chassis construction OE
(turbo)

In cubic inches:
Original tare mass (kg) x 0.286


In millilitres (cc):
Original tare mass (kg) x 4.68

-------------

seperate chassis construction OE
(N.A)

In cubic inches:
Original tare mass (kg) x 0.333

In millilitres (cc):
Original tare mass (kg) x 5.46



ashley

hi mate, I am looking at doing something close to yours but not quite as high and with 33 inch tyres. What spring rates and free length of the coils did you use on the build. In mine I think I will use radius arms front and rear not a 3 link rear. Cheers, Stirlo.

great to see another suzuki on krawlers

even better - seeing someone put some real effort into a hard top and not slap an exo on it

just like everyone else though, i'll be interested to hear how you go with having all the fuel system inside the car... i'm wondering if you might need to box it off from the passenger area. i.e. split the cab into two areas - one passenger, one cargo.

if you are handy with a welder - you could always modify the tunnel a bit to get that body lift out should you want to run it any lower.

Zooknut wrote:hi mate, I am looking at doing something close to yours but not quite as high and with 33 inch tyres. What spring rates and free length of the coils did you use on the build. In mine I think I will use radius arms front and rear not a 3 link rear. Cheers, Stirlo.

i used 12inch on the front and 10 inch rear coil overs. spring rates are 200 top and 250 bottom all round, only reason why i put 10s in the rear only cause i didnt wont to chop the back out and i still wont to fit the dog in the rear,
good luck with ya build mate.

greg wrote:great to see another suzuki on krawlers

even better - seeing someone put some real effort into a hard top and not slap an exo on it

just like everyone else though, i'll be interested to hear how you go with having all the fuel system inside the car... i'm wondering if you might need to box it off from the passenger area. i.e. split the cab into two areas - one passenger, one cargo.

if you are handy with a welder - you could always modify the tunnel a bit to get that body lift out should you want to run it any lower.

its not that high in real life, its the same hight as me mates gu and all he has is 4inch and 35s, and its not that bad on hills but will see.

thanks john

TUFFMQ wrote:

Liam wrote:might want to move the swirl pot/ pump and fuel lines. any sort of a leak and you'll be wearing it.

i used bard fittings which can handal more than that pump can through at it, and if your a suzuki owner you would no that there is no room at all any where in them, at the best of times.

Mate, I reckon I might know one or two things about zooks, but that's besides the point.
In the unlikely event that this actually passes with the fuel system in the cabin, it's still very dangerous.
Bard fittings can still come undone, still fail. hoses still fail, shit leaks, parts wear out, get damaged in accidents, get stood on, wear through and generally stuff up.

There's plenty of room underneath them to hide all this stuff.