6109D921-FFB3-4B52-BEFF-BE5E028CA51A.jpg

500 (Classic) Ducati powered Fiat from California

I have taken on the crazy task of trying to stuff a Ducati 1100 air cooled L-Twin engine in the back of my 1974 Fiat 500R, and solving all the challenges that will arise because of it!

Introduction

Hello everyone! As the title suggests, I have decided to build a Ducati powered Fiat 500!

I have restored a couple classic American cars, some motorcycles, and have designed and built a handful of Formula SAE cars in college, but I've always wanted to build my own motorcycle powered road car.

After a decade of working at one of the largest Spacecraft companies in California, I decided to take a break and try to make this dream a reality. The car needed to be simple, lightweight, relatively cheap, and older than 1975 (California smog requirements). I have a buddy that did this with an old Honda S600, and another with a Fiat 850 spider, but I wanted to do something a bit less roadster-y. Then, as the wife and I were honeymooning in Italy, I saw the answer: the old Cinquecento.

There seems to be lots of motorcycle powered 500s for hill climbing, and Z-Cars is one of the most popular swaps out there with their Suzuki Hayabusa swapped "Fiabusa" (they also make a Subaru swapped "Fubaru"), but I wanted to keep the motor air cooled (no big radiator up front) and Italian. After a bit of research, I decided to go with my favorite motorcycle engine, a Ducati 1100. The last of the big, air cooled, dry clutch L-Twins. How hilariously adorable would this car be with that noise coming out of it?

I spent a few months looking for the perfect car - something that was driveable, in decent shape, but not too nice, so I could save money up front and put it toward the swap. I ended up with a clean-ish 1974 Fiat 500 R with about 26,000 km on the clock that had been imported into the states a few years prior. The body was in pretty good shape until a strap broke towing it home resulting in a head on collision with the trailer. I minimally repaired the damaged area so I could turn the wheels full lock again, then drove it around a few months until I got the car registered.

Now that the car is legal, it's time to begin the project!

I'm looking forward to sharing the progress and hearing everyone's thoughts on the build. I have reached out to a few people individually and everyone has been extremely nice and very helpful!
  • Like
Reactions: ben
Hey Everyone - I wanted to give a quick Powertrain Update to go through my process of engine and differential selection!


Although I loved the idea of using the Ducati 1100 engine, I did look at a few other options including an electric motor and a much more powerful, water cooled Ducati 1098 engine. I even looked at a Moto Guzzi engine using a VW Beatle transaxle since Fiat had considered using Moto Guzzi on the 500s once upon a time, but that engine isn't very fast revving and I decided I really wanted sequential shifting! My first thought was to look at how these different options would make the car accelerate - so I made a "Tractive Force" plot, showing the vehicle's acceleration (in G) for a given speed in each gear. This is also a helpful tool for choosing my final drive.

1669227683283.png


I plotted the stock Fiat 500, just to remind myself of what I was comparing everything to. I was actually seriously considering an electric option similar to what Electric Classic Cars offer, but I decided it was going to be too slow for my liking. Maybe I can do a more custom electric option for a future Fiat 500 when I have more time to figure out how electrons work. The Ducati 1098 option would definitely be the fastest option of the bunch, but this power curve isn't nearly as smooth, and I really don't need the car to be that fast, even if I were to play with different gearing. Plus, I really didn't want to package a water-cooling system. The air-cooled Ducati 1100 seemed like the right balance between power and drivability. I'll need to add a couple of fans and open the rear of the car to get some good flow over the heads and oil cooler, but rejecting heat through oil coolers in the engine compartment should be much easier than rejecting heat through a radiator. This will be future me's problem.

Now that I've fixated on a particular engine, I need to figure out how I'm going to get this power to the ground, and ideally, go backwards. In the past, I've made a handful of chain-drive differentials but I no longer have access to free CNCs. You can buy complete chain diffs but they still require you to make custom diff mounts. These would also require a separate reverse solution, which I could solve with an electric motor or a reversing gearbox. I could also look at using a small differential from a car or ATV, but these options would just take up too much space, and since I'm trying to keep the back seat (a requirement from our dog, Peach), I really need to be space conscious. Below shows the Z-Car's solution - I'm trying to do the same in half the space!

1669227713921.png


So, I started looking for an off the shelf differential (not a spool rear end for dune buggies) that included a reverse. There seemed to be 2 players in this game: Quaife and Elite.

Quaife is a good brand, I've used their diffs before, and they have a pretty smart design that doesn't really need to be serviced; however, with this configuration, the engine needs to be mounted in-line with the diff, as it would be in the motorcycle. There are lots of these units out in the wild, including the Z-Car and my buddy's Fiat, but they all have much more space available. To package this, I'd have to run the diff in front of the engine, and squeeze everything together to give me as equal length axles as possible, reducing CV angls, while still fitting the engine in the car. This configuration gives me lots of room in the engine bay but it wouldn't be the most aesthetically appealing to me as it hides the engine’s exposed belts and dry clutch. It also would be more challenging to package a symmetric rear suspension.

1669227743352.png


Elite is a brand I've never heard of, and can't find a ton of information on, but they use a tried-and-true clutch pack style differential. I would eventually need to service this unit, but I don't expect that I'll put enough miles on it for this to be an issue. What's unique about this differential is it requires the engine to be mounted in a transverse orientation. This would allow me to directly mount the engine to the diff, eliminating the need to run a chain or belt, as required with the Quaife. However, after thinking about the critical alignment between the two units, and how low I'd have to put the engine in the car to line up with the diff, I thought an indirect drive solution would be best. It also allows me to reduce the input torque as seen by the differential, something that was a concern from the manufacturer.

1669227751744.png


I started to weigh the pros and cons of each solution, moving things around in CAD to see what packaged the best, making some wood templates to check fit and even buying a blown motor to put in the car and see what would actually work. After a pseudo–Design Review with my buddies, we decided that the Elite differential gave me the most options, packaged the best (especially from a chassis design side) and would deliver on the aesthetics potential of the engine bay.

1669227762780.png


So, there you go, I ordered the Elite option, which should hopefully arrive in January. In the meantime, I can focus on the front suspension, tearing down the donor bike, and designing the rear frame!

For the next update, I'll talk about wheels, tires, and front suspension stuff. I'm looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts and continuing to get lots of help on this project!

-Bobby
This is a great update. I am also looking forward to your use with the Elite diff, if it works well in your application, and holds up to the abuse, it might be something i would consider for a future project. Getting the power out of the output shaft of a motorcycle engine too the wheels is always a tricky design challenge, especially when wanting reverse. Which is a given need in most swap applications.

Touching on what you were discussing earlier; a motorcycle engine in a car is i would say can be a win/loose scenario. Usually more pluses then negatives always lol. But the narrow power band and awkward gearing ratio can be tricky to get around and perfect.
I always found when a motorcycle engine is used in a car, the typical factory ratio between gears was a bit close to my liking and i always preferred to have a decent rev range between gear to get a good "harmonic range" lol. Obvioulsy the ratios are designed for peak performance range on a motorcycle. But im sure many of us 4 wheeled folks enjoy using the full rev range when rowing thru the gears. Its just the nature of the beast. There are some awesome motorcycle engines out there nowadays, and their attractive secondary market price makes it very tempting for a cost/lb/power ratio.

If space does become an issue, dont forget plan b. Alot of the racing fiats, have the upward hood hinge system for optimized airflow on the performance engines. Something like that might help with the odd tight squeeze if need be, while still looking "fiat heritage correct" lol.
 
This is a great update. I am also looking forward to your use with the Elite diff, if it works well in your application, and holds up to the abuse, it might be something i would consider for a future project. Getting the power out of the output shaft of a motorcycle engine too the wheels is always a tricky design challenge, especially when wanting reverse. Which is a given need in most swap applications.

Touching on what you were discussing earlier; a motorcycle engine in a car is i would say can be a win/loose scenario. Usually more pluses then negatives always lol. But the narrow power band and awkward gearing ratio can be tricky to get around and perfect.
I always found when a motorcycle engine is used in a car, the typical factory ratio between gears was a bit close to my liking and i always preferred to have a decent rev range between gear to get a good "harmonic range" lol. Obvioulsy the ratios are designed for peak performance range on a motorcycle. But im sure many of us 4 wheeled folks enjoy using the full rev range when rowing thru the gears. Its just the nature of the beast. There are some awesome motorcycle engines out there nowadays, and their attractive secondary market price makes it very tempting for a cost/lb/power ratio.

If space does become an issue, dont forget plan b. Alot of the racing fiats, have the upward hood hinge system for optimized airflow on the performance engines. Something like that might help with the odd tight squeeze if need be, while still looking "fiat heritage correct" lol.
Follow-upon Jacques comments regarding the reason that the engine cover is raised on the 600 based Abarths,and subsequanly, the 500 based variants. The story goes that a test session was being carried out on a 1000tc at (I think) Monza in the mid-sixties by their test driver Mario Poltronieri. The story goes that they found that the more they opened up the engine cover, the quicker the car went---in the end, they gained 6mph with the engine cover horizontal---an early 'boot-spoiler'! Let's face it, to gain that sort of mph out of a 1000cc car for the cost of 6 lengthes of tubing and a few small pieces of steel can only called one thing---"a result" The result was about 30% cooling and 70% earodynamics.
 
This is a great update. I am also looking forward to your use with the Elite diff, if it works well in your application, and holds up to the abuse, it might be something i would consider for a future project. Getting the power out of the output shaft of a motorcycle engine too the wheels is always a tricky design challenge, especially when wanting reverse. Which is a given need in most swap applications.

Touching on what you were discussing earlier; a motorcycle engine in a car is i would say can be a win/loose scenario. Usually more pluses then negatives always lol. But the narrow power band and awkward gearing ratio can be tricky to get around and perfect.
I always found when a motorcycle engine is used in a car, the typical factory ratio between gears was a bit close to my liking and i always preferred to have a decent rev range between gear to get a good "harmonic range" lol. Obvioulsy the ratios are designed for peak performance range on a motorcycle. But im sure many of us 4 wheeled folks enjoy using the full rev range when rowing thru the gears. Its just the nature of the beast. There are some awesome motorcycle engines out there nowadays, and their attractive secondary market price makes it very tempting for a cost/lb/power ratio.

If space does become an issue, dont forget plan b. Alot of the racing fiats, have the upward hood hinge system for optimized airflow on the performance engines. Something like that might help with the odd tight squeeze if need be, while still looking "fiat heritage correct" lol.

Thanks Jacques! Agree, I'm not a huge fan of the narrow power band that most of the high revving motorcycles have, which is why I like this particular motor - lots of torque, very low in RPMs, and very flat torque curve. Most bikes don't start building power until 5-6000 RPM but this is pretty useable after 3000.

The nice thing about this plot is that you can really visualize how the final drive plays with the driveability of the car. If you want to run through the gears on your way to cruising speed, there's a gear for that. If you just want to just use 3 gears, that's an option as well (at the sacrifice of acceleration). For me, I wanted something that would require lots of shifting, but also wanted 60MPH in top gear to not be spinning too fast. At least I can change out gearing later when I get disappointed with my selection!

Follow-upon Jacques comments regarding the reason that the engine cover is raised on the 600 based Abarths,and subsequanly, the 500 based variants. The story goes that a test session was being carried out on a 1000tc at (I think) Monza in the mid-sixties by their test driver Mario Poltronieri. The story goes that they found that the more they opened up the engine cover, the quicker the car went---in the end, they gained 6mph with the engine cover horizontal---an early 'boot-spoiler'! Let's face it, to gain that sort of mph out of a 1000cc car for the cost of 6 lengthes of tubing and a few small pieces of steel can only called one thing---"a result" The result was about 30% cooling and 70% earodynamics.

Yup! As you guys mention, I've always thought I can mimic an old 1000tc, but hopefully I can package everything internal. I also have thought about just partially cutting out the lid to reveal the dry clutch and timing belts, or leaving it off all together. When I get closer to that point, I will probably ask everyone's opinion on what they like!

Totally makes since with the improved aero by turning that cover horizontal. It's a huge low pressure zone back there and it sounds like it did wonders to cut down drag and draw out engine heat!
 
Very cool project! I've had a couple of Ducatis, 748 and a 800 monster, and the sound and feel of the engines is something special.

I will watch the project with interest!

It looks like you're considering the 'professional' gearbox solutions, but if you did decide you want a more budget option then I've seen some interesting things done on other bike engine builds online using a second starter motor as an electric reverse and a CV joint to remove the challenges of perfect alignment.
 

Attachments

  • b916070c353d.jpg
    b916070c353d.jpg
    423.9 KB · Views: 83
Last edited:
Very cool project! I've had a couple of Ducatis, 748 and a 800 monster, and the sound and feel of the engines is something special.

I will watch the project with interest!

It looks like you're considering the 'professional' gearbox solutions, but if you did decide you want a more budget option then I've seen some interesting things done on other bike engine builds online using a second starter motor as an electric reverse and a CV joint to remove the challenges of perfect alignment.
Thanks!

That's a pretty clever solution, but too bad there's no space in these cars to run a car differential without loosing the back seat!
 
Happy New Year! It's been a few weeks since my last update, so I figured I'd fill everyone in! Since I'm still waiting on the differential to come in, I have shifted focus to the front of the car.

Wheels and Tires (Tyres):

When I first started this project, I was planning to use early Miata suspension, since they are plentiful in the States, super cheap, and a good way to get better suspension, steering, brakes and hubs/cvs/axles that can handle the added power. Since I know people run 175/50R13s on these cars, and 13" wheels are the smallest you can fit on a Miata hub, I figured I'd throw on my buddy's 185/60R13 Miata wheels tires and see if this was possible.

1673292132902.png


Haha, absolutely not! At least not without massive modifications and I'm really trying to limit the amount of bodywork I do at this stage. Then I was curious to see how tight the 175/50R13s would be, thinking I could run 13s in the rear, allowing me to run Miata hubs that can support the power increase, and run 12" wheels up front if I still had clearance issues. I ordered a tire and checked the clearance.

1673292246450.png


Diameter looks okay, but they're just a little too wide to fit without doing any body work (or raising the suspension height). During this time, I also found out about the Fiat 500 CV/Tripod upgrade which seems to be good to handle the higher power applications, meaning I can stick with a 12" wheel option and be fine. I ordered a Yokohama A539 in 165/60R12 and was happy with the clearance at the rear. I also got some help from Ian, @Bleeding Knuckles, who runs these, boosting my confidence in selecting them. I can't seem to find any of these tire dimensions, so I just calculated the size, but note that there is more than a 10mm width differences between these two tires! Now that I know what wheels and tires, I can move onto the suspension.

Front Suspension

Forcing myself to stick with 12" wheels was really a blessing in disguise. It meant I can use off the shelf aftermarket parts, saving time from designing a front suspension. I bought this Mr. Fiat leaf spring conversion kit and started to install.

Unfortunately, the aluminum leaf spacer on the driver side was being stubborn. After a couple hours of hammering and a ton of heat, it finally came off, but not without damaging the mounting bolts, now loose and with damaged threads. I could see a broken tack weld on one of the existing bolts, so there had definitely been a repair in this car's previous life.

1673292284220.png


I cleaned up the threads with vice grips and a thread die and since I wasn't using the spacers any more, I cut notches in it to give access to tacking. This allowed me to make sure studs were normal to the surface and aligned to the other side. After tracking and grinding, I put some torque on them to make sure they won't come loose in the future.

1673292307765.png


Now I was ready to bolt up the lower cross member but it turns out that the bolts were too far apart by about 1/4". Not the end of the world, nothing that can't be fixed by a band saw and a welder! I cut the member in half, bolted it up, aligned everything best I could, and tacked it in place. Since it had such a large gap, I took my time welding this up, trying to keep the part from getting too hot, and constantly checking to make sure the cross member didn't warp out of place. After it was all done, the part bolts up nicely. This will require some tricky alignment compromises, since my lower inboard balljoints are no longer centered on the vehicle, but I will be a future me problem. I'll likely go back and fix this when I revisit the body work down the road.

1673292343707.png


I also got the Mr Fiat front disc brake conversion and bolted those up, along with the upper control arms and the shocks, so I could take some measurements on the suspension.

1673292367752.png


I was happy with the geometry of this setup, especially compared to stock, but after playing around with the geometry in CAD, I realized it can really benefit from a higher inboard upper ball joint mount, resulting in much less camber change, a longer instant center, and therefore a lower roll center height. So, I'll probably also add these suspension relocation brackets, since it should help the suspension even more.

1673292423910.png


Brakes and Steering

For Brakes, I copied Jacques, @Bounding Bambino, setup and ordered a dual circuit Master Cylinder from a 128. It’s quite a bit longer than the stock cylinder, and requires different mounting holes. I hacked up the old mount, bolted everything together, then put some spacers between the assembly and the bulkhead. It still had minor contact, but I took care of that with sledge hammer :D Now it fits like a glove! I’ll make a nicer spacer for it later, but I’m happy with the overall fit.

1673292453022.png

I also decided to go with the 126 rack and pinion upgrade. This seemed like a no brainer since you just can't compete with the feel from a Rack and Pinion steering. I ordered the rack, the bracket kit, a double jointed column, and found a local 128 column to steal the steering shaft spline so I can adapt the stock 500 steering column. The bracket kit is pretty expensive and doesn't fit the rack very well, but it was nice to not have to make my own mounts. I mounted everything up, took a guess at where the shaft entered the bulkhead and drilled away! It was only slight off, nothing a little die grinding can't fix! I do remember Jacques mentioning that he had interference with this clutch pedal that requires modification, but I actually have interference with the brake pedal. Should be an easy mod to clear though.

1673292501246.png


And that's what's been going on the last few weeks! Near term items include:
  • Shock supports
  • Check wheel clearance and hope there are no major issues
  • Finish up steering connections
  • Finish brakes and plumbing
  • And many more!
I'm curious to hear what everyone thinks!

-Bobby

Attachments

  • 1673292161308.png
    1673292161308.png
    1.6 MB · Views: 84
Awesome update!

Im surprised how your center swing arm brace was that far off from the holes. Im sure the fab shop in italy or wherever has the "upmost" quality framing jigs to insure repeatable fabrication 🤣 . Are the A-arms the correct length?. We have the same kit/different supplier, My center rib was spot on yet my swing arms were just about a inch too long. A bit inexcusable for the price, but it is what it is.

Interesting feedback on the rack mount bracket. Im curious on why the rack placement is slightly different then mine. All i could think of is, there are different clutch pedal assemblies between the early and later style 500's. likely the brake pedal arm could be slightly different too. and their positioning has a different offset? "i was going to attach a photo, until running out to the garage and realizing i didnt have the pedal box installed at the moment, and its cold lol"

Regardless, the build is looking great! cant wait to see how it evolves!(y)
 
Awesome update!

Im surprised how your center swing arm brace was that far off from the holes. Im sure the fab shop in italy or wherever has the "upmost" quality framing jigs to insure repeatable fabrication 🤣 . Are the A-arms the correct length?. We have the same kit/different supplier, My center rib was spot on yet my swing arms were just about a inch too long. A bit inexcusable for the price, but it is what it is.

Interesting feedback on the rack mount bracket. Im curious on why the rack placement is slightly different then mine. All i could think of is, there are different clutch pedal assemblies between the early and later style 500's. likely the brake pedal arm could be slightly different too. and their positioning has a different offset? "i was going to attach a photo, until running out to the garage and realizing i didnt have the pedal box installed at the moment, and its cold lol"

Regardless, the build is looking great! cant wait to see how it evolves!(y)
Thanks! Haha, yeah, I'm sure it was botched by one of those shops. I'm sure it matters much less with the leaf spring setup. The A-Arm length looks to be adjustable from about 9.5-10.5", does that match what yours are post shortening?

The pedals may be different (I know there are multiple versions out there) but it does seem like my pinion shaft is sticking out in a different spot than yours. I am using 128 rubber bushes at the rack bracket, so maybe that's changing the angle of the pinion enough that I'm hitting a different pedal? Who knows. We can exchange pedal pictures when it warms up!
 
Thanks! Haha, yeah, I'm sure it was botched by one of those shops. I'm sure it matters much less with the leaf spring setup. The A-Arm length looks to be adjustable from about 9.5-10.5", does that match what yours are post shortening?

The pedals may be different (I know there are multiple versions out there) but it does seem like my pinion shaft is sticking out in a different spot than yours. I am using 128 rubber bushes at the rack bracket, so maybe that's changing the angle of the pinion enough that I'm hitting a different pedal? Who knows. We can exchange pedal pictures when it warms up!
What rack did you use? Was it a'126' rack? I was just wondering, because all the people that I directly know bought the complete 'rack-mount' from my colleague in Sudbury (England) have had no problems with mounting their '126' rack---be-it RHD or LHD. However I do concede that as far as I am aware, they have all use '126' rack-mounting rubbers
 
What rack did you use? Was it a'126' rack? I was just wondering, because all the people that I directly know bought the complete 'rack-mount' from my colleague in Sudbury (England) have had no problems with mounting their '126' rack---be-it RHD or LHD. However I do concede that as far as I am aware, they have all use '126' rack-mounting rubbers
Yes, used the 126 rack from LP that also provided the bracket. Ricambio UK sells this kit that supposedly work for 126/127/128, so I got these from a US supplier.

Pics of the rack and bracket. I had to notch out the bracket a little more because the pinion shaft was contacting. Not sure if that's normal, or if my bushes are orienting this rack at an odd angle.

Does this look right to you guys?

1673398260888.png


1673398271360.png
 
Does this look right to you guys?
That could be where our alignment discrepancy is coming from.?
No i did not have to do that. Only modification to the rack bracket i did was regarding adding a bit of clearance for the heads of the nuts and edge of the brake master cylinder flange.

Let me go thru my photos and see if i have anything. Regardless, its now cut and its where it is on your car. I would guestimate on mine the input shaft had about a 1/2" clearance between the bracket edge.

I will admit, the way the rack alignment/rubber bushing/clamp hold down vaguely works. It leaves room for a variety of final positions. I wish that the hold down clamps had a bit more of a "defined profile" if you get what i mean. To ensure a repeatable positioning . For those who cant see, there is somewhat of a flat profile where the isolation bushing goes on the inputshaft side of the rack. Thus why the 2 rubber bushings are different. The shaped D style bushing took me some time to hunt down. I found the flat didnt locate all too well inside the clamp bracket.

Keeping the input shaft as low as possible, helped a bit with pedalbox clearances in my case.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_8131.JPG
    IMG_8131.JPG
    625.5 KB · Views: 56
  • IMG_8201.JPG
    IMG_8201.JPG
    640.2 KB · Views: 60
  • IMG_56761.jpg
    IMG_56761.jpg
    799.9 KB · Views: 55
Last edited:
That could be where our alignment discrepancy is coming from.?
No i did not have to do that. Only modification to the rack bracket i did was regarding adding a bit of clearance for the heads of the nuts and edge of the brake master cylinder flange.

Let me go thru my photos and see if i have anything. Regardless, its now cut and its where it is on your car. I would guestimate on mine the input shaft had about a 1/2" clearance between the bracket edge.

I will admit, the way the rack alignment/rubber bushing/clamp hold down vaguely works. It leaves room for a variety of final positions. I wish that the hold down clamps had a bit more of a "defined profile" if you get what i mean. To ensure a repeatable positioning . For those who cant see, there is somewhat of a flat profile where the isolation bushing goes on the inputshaft side of the rack. Thus why the 2 rubber bushings are different. The shaped D style bushing took me some time to hunt down. I found the flat didnt locate all too well inside the clamp bracket.

Keeping the input shaft as low as possible, helped a bit with pedalbox clearances in my case.
Yeah, and I'm sure the clocking is a bit different depending on the rubber manufacture. Oh well, as you said, it's done now!
 
Hey Everyone! I it's been about 3 months since my last update, and there has been some good progress, though not as much as I'd like (is it ever?). See below!

Front Suspension

Last time I realized that there had been some funky front end repair work that resulted in my suspension mounts being off. Upon further investigation, it does appear that the driver suspension points are shifted about 1/4" to the outside, when compared to the passenger. I tried to take this difference up with shimming and adjusting the control arms, but although I could get the static alignment correct, the camber changes were very different between the two sides. Also, I wasn't super happy with the design of those control arms and that they contact the support frame under full bump, SO, I've decided to make a new suspension mounting structure, lower control arms, and modify the upper control arms to fit the bigger tires with this messed up body. :oops:

1681152247729.png


I made asymmetric lower mounts to correct for the difference in mounting positions and to allow for lower and longer lower control arms, give me a better roll center height and camber control for the new wheel size. The lower structure is pretty simple, so I can remake that once I fix the suspension mounts.
1681151961917.png

Mounting the coil overs to the wheel well gave me some concern, so I built a test rig to see how much load I could put into the shock tower before yielding the structure. I got up to 800 lbF with less than .015" of deflection and decided it shouldn't be a problem keeping the stock structure as is without added re-enforcement. Also, the MrFiat coilovers didn't seem to be of the best quality and were limiting my total droop travel, so I ordered some GAZ shocks. Excited to see the difference!

I also finished up the steering, modification of the brake pedal for clearance, and added a spacer to the pedal assembly to give the master cylinder a bit more room.
1681152004416.png


Rear Chassis

I've decided to keep the front relatively mild from an upgrade perspective - using all standard off the self 126 parts and upgrades. I am making slight modifications to the control arms and mounting structure, but in general, it's in the spirit of the original car. The rear needs to be a totally different animal due to the engine packaging. This Fiat is going to be all business in the front, party in the back!

First, I cut out some of sheet metal that was going to interfere, like the rear suspension mounts, engine bay closeouts, rear engine mount and part of the air inlet snorkel thingy.

1681152101622.png


The Elite MX200 differential/reversing gearbox arrived so I built a simple jig to hold the engine and diff with respect to each other so I could put it in the car and make sure everything lined up the way I had hopped. As expected, I needed to change things around a bit to ensure I had acceptable CV angles, spacing between the engine and differential for the correct belt length, and to make sure I had good clearance to the engine lid (decided I want the option to keep the engine completely concealed)

1681153825909.png

After I was happy with the rough position of everything, it was time for another scan and to get heavy into the design work.

1681152378900.png


The frame needed to connect to the vehicle at 4 points: two forward lower swing arm mounts, and the two rear engine panel mounts. The frame not only needed to hold the engine, differential, and belt drive assembly, but it also needed to contain my suspension mounting locations, and look cool!

I started with the engine portion of the frame. With the motor being lifted from a Ducati, I wanted to retain the same "trellis" look of those bikes. I also wanted to have the option to run this car without the engine lid and panel, primarily help evacuate heat out of the engine bay during aggressive driving events, but also to look awesome. The frame is actually two parts (shown in green and red) that way the engine can actually be removed without cutting it out of the frame!

1681152629756.png


Next was to figure out the frame around the diff, and suspension pickup points. After doing some quick and dirty suspension sketches, I realized I could package a double wishbone suspension, which I used to set my nodal constraints. Then it was a matter of connecting the dots in a side/elevation view, then in bottom/top/plan view. I wanted to give the diff some adjustment since hitting the two drive axis will be extremely important, so I have incorporated slots and shims accordingly.

1681153125992.png


After I was fairly happy with that design, it was time to tie everything together, adjust, repeat! After quite a few iterations, I ended up with a design that I can make work. I've now ordered the laser jet sheet metal parts tubing so hopefully I can start fabricating next week!

1681153234044.png


In the meantime, I need to finish up the outboard suspension details (shock mounts, a-arms, uprights) and belt tensioner. That should be the main things to knock out before she can be back on her feet again!

Looking forward to hearing what everyone thinks and I promise to not let so much time go by before another update!

Attachments

  • 1681151033945.png
    1681151033945.png
    206.6 KB · Views: 104
  • 1681152361562.png
    1681152361562.png
    323.3 KB · Views: 139
  • 1681153206441.png
    1681153206441.png
    212.7 KB · Views: 110
Last edited:
Looks like you got some awesome progress on the build.

The joys of 3d scanning and modeling definitely are great tools for doing custom stuff like this. I treated myself to a Shinning3D scanner this past Christmas, the final tool in my trifecta of prototyping goodies.

One question. How does the diff output flanges align up with wheel location. The side view of the engine/trans combo looks to have "potentially" the output flanges forward of the wheel center line?. Just wondering how that is aligning up for you. Would be awesome if you could get the engine to fit fully under the hood. I don't see anything wrong if that is the case, universal joints do have a decent range of angular power transfer; just curious.

I have a future project in the works for a friend of mine, and im going to be doing the math on how to figure out shoehorning a lexus 1UZFE v8 with Porsche trans axle into the back of a lotus Europa. The cv-joints are unfortunately going to have to run at a bit of an angle if we don't lengthen the frame.

On a side note, i ordered those front upper control arm spacers that you were talking about. After fiddling with the stock a-arm positioning, i didn't like the geometry also, and also wanted the top of the wheel to come out more. Ill be doing a build update myself soon, lots has been going on here as well. (y)
 
Looks like you got some awesome progress on the build.

The joys of 3d scanning and modeling definitely are great tools for doing custom stuff like this. I treated myself to a Shinning3D scanner this past Christmas, the final tool in my trifecta of prototyping goodies.

One question. How does the diff output flanges align up with wheel location. The side view of the engine/trans combo looks to have "potentially" the output flanges forward of the wheel center line?. Just wondering how that is aligning up for you. Would be awesome if you could get the engine to fit fully under the hood. I don't see anything wrong if that is the case, universal joints do have a decent range of angular power transfer; just curious.

I have a future project in the works for a friend of mine, and im going to be doing the math on how to figure out shoehorning a lexus 1UZFE v8 with Porsche trans axle into the back of a lotus Europa. The cv-joints are unfortunately going to have to run at a bit of an angle if we don't lengthen the frame.

On a side note, i ordered those front upper control arm spacers that you were talking about. After fiddling with the stock a-arm positioning, i didn't like the geometry also, and also wanted the top of the wheel to come out more. Ill be doing a build update myself soon, lots has been going on here as well. (y)
Thanks!

Yes, getting the CV angles have been one of the pains on this project. I ended up redesigning the belt drive system, getting a pulley that is slightly larger so it fits over the diff flange. That allowed me to bring the diff and engine about 1" closer together, giving me a nominal CV angle of about 17 degrees (up to 19 under full bump). I'm using VW Type 4 CVs on the inboard side, which have a 22 deg max operating angle, but I have no idea what my special Axel Gerstl Tripods are rated for. Typically, tripods are good to about 20 deg, so hopefully it'll work out, if not, I may have to make some adapter flanges to use something with more operating angle. Below you can see the overlapped pulley and my tubes representing the axles, in the full bump and droop configuration.

1681256985386.png


That Lexus/Porsche powered Europa sounds like quite an awesome project! They have some very expensive 930 CVs that are good to 35 degrees, but hopefully you can just get away with the standard 930s (I think they're good to about 25 degrees).

I'm curious to see how you like the upper control arm spacers. I had ordered them, but then decided not to use them, since I needed to tweak the lower mounts anyways, I decided I could get the geometry I wanted by keeping the stock inner upper ball joints in place. The wider wheels with 3-4" of travel and no fender flares are definitely throwing some curve balls, but it's keeping it exciting!

Definitely can't wait to see the progress update on the Canadian Bambino!
 
Back
Top