I applaudand impressed by your efforts. I always like the Gen 1 CRX's more then the Gen2. I looked into doing what you did before I bought my 90 HF and decided I didn't have the time or the fabrication skills to pull off what you did.
The pictures are up at pictiger.com
Use the following link to view them click on the album then look at the top for the title of each picture and on the upper right are the green keys to use to scroll.
Started with the original hood and used a hand-held grinder splitting the fold-over on the edge all the way around the perimeter of the hood. This allowed separation of the steel skin from the reinforcement bracing and maintained the reinforcement bracing as the substrait since it is so thin and weighs almost nothing. Using the original skin as the template, I duplicated the shape in .050 6061-T6 aluminum (as you likely know, most fabricators working with aluminum use dead soft 303). The original hood skin is .030 mild steel. With the use of my English wheel, Pullmax P5, sheetmetal brake and an assortment of hand tools, I formed and attached the new skin to the bracing, folded it around and glued it on just as the factory did.
As for the strength of materials, the 6061-T6 aluminum is 66% thicker. It is aircraft grade and has a yield-point value of 40 Ksi, tensil strength 45 Ksi; the mild steel 1020 has a yield-point value of 50 Ksi, tensil strength 64 Ksi.
With the 66% increase in thickness, the T6 surpasses the factory hood yield point value by 16.4 Ksi, tensil strength by 10.7 Ksi. Even with the increase in material thickness, the hood has a weight reduction of 43.26%, an increased yield-point value of 32.8% and a tensil strength increase of 16.72%.
As for woodworking, since you asked, I will plan on doing a write-up and pics in the Off-topic forum. That will need to be a little later as it has to be prepared and my work is calling.
NOTE: This message also appears as an answer to 101mpg in Introduce Yourself thread.
Oh man no VSS on those old trannies? Fabricating engine mounts...
Was there no HF in 88-91? This would be a much easier swap. I think I would recommend people starting with any 88+ CRX, swapping the motor, and doing some weight reduction. If you go with 90-91 you get independent rear suspension vs the solid rear axle.
Like you, I had a goal, it's not a goal for others unless they choose it.
I enjoyed your thread and understand the need for speed. I have a 340 slapstick Dodge Challenger that is all numbers matching, engine and transmission, has 3.91 gears and runs 11.6 at 117 mph. Its race weight is 3,825 lbs. and even at that it's 60 foot time is 1.66 seconds, it gets 14 mpg. That is two miles to the gallon better than it got when it was stock. Efficiency comes in many forms. I took it to Vegas a couple of years ago where it won the MOPAR Muscle magazine dyno challenge with 400 horsepower and 453 ft lbs of torque to the ground. It also won third in the car show. It has air conditioning, and is so user friendly that my mom drives it. I built it and the CRX VX totally, no outside help as with all my cars and trucks. (No money!) You can see a small picture of it in the garage along with my Toyota SR5 and 1968 Dart (which I painted, again because of too many bad experiences with other peoples' workmanship.)
I am watching with interest your upward momentum on mileage with the sleeper VX.
Thanks for the contact.
QUOTE=suspendedhatch;96071]Oh man no VSS on those old trannies? Fabricating engine mounts...
Was there no HF in 88-91? This would be a much easier swap. I think I would recommend people starting with any 88+ CRX, swapping the motor, and doing some weight reduction. If you go with 90-91 you get independent rear suspension vs the solid rear axle.[/QUOTE]
Nice write up! Much props for the 1st gen conversion, I've done a few b16a swaps into those carbed CRXs and never liked doing it. Looks clean! I've got to wonder if I've seen you on the road, judging from your mileage log, we live near the same area.
^^^If we do live close we should get together. PM me if you are interested.
I'll be finishing some aero-mods soon and head for the road and more tests. Like you, I also found that the stock bodied CRX HF, 1st gen, coasts very poorly on some large hills. I think the very light car and its poor aerodynamics causes it to slow quickly until it gets beneath the aero-drag resistance; then it coasts forever. I hope my new aero-mods fix this major drag. (Pun intended .)
I have a little different approach for testing: I have been adding 1/3 of the vehicle's wet weight to my test platform so I can get a real world readout. My as tested weight is 2441. This way it's a good representation of the worst average mileage I can expect (so when I plan a trip I'll know if I can afford to go. )