The Peerless & Warwick Discussion Forum

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Restoration of Irish Peerless?Warwick


Status: Offline
Posts: 30
Date:
Restoration of Irish Peerless?Warwick


After getting the car home from Detroit in September it taken a little time to document details for starting the restoration.  The car has now been blown apart except for the front & rear suspension and steering column.  Chassis is various states of disrepair primarily from the firewall back.  This winter will be spend finishing a couple other projects so don't expect much progress until Spring.

 

Attached are a few photos

frame overall.jpg

The next photo shows a close up of the inner rocker panel showing how they widened the frame in the rocker area to get more seat room.

Widened frame.JPG

The last photo shows what appears to be a modified fiberglass floor pan which was riveted/screwed to frame and then the body set over top of this and was attached to the frame with sheet steel brackets.

Floor pan.JPG



Attachments
__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 392
Date:

wow thanks for sharing those with us Jim, they really did go for the widening section there...still it did need it (IMHO)



__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 209
Date:

Ah, but everyone was thinner in the 1950's Nigel. Like our cars, we've all bloated.

If you think the Peerless is tight for space, you should have tried my old Rochdale GT. Supposedly a 4 seat family car.

__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 72
Date:

Thanks for putting up these pictures Jim!

Strange to see these changes compared to a standard chassis.

Would it be possible to put up some pics of the front cradle structure and engine mountings?

Very curious to see.



__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 130
Date:

Yes, I'd love to see some shots of the front end and engine mounts as well!

Eric: you have PM.

Frank


__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 30
Date:

Here's a few more shots of front frame area for Erik

frame 1.JPGframe 2.JPGframe 3.JPG

 

Because the widened the passenger area the rocker panel gas tanks were relocated. They installed a single tank behind the rear seat with a filler below the left rear corner of the rear window. Here is a photo of the tank. It appears to be from another vehicle as shown by the relocation of the neck.  Anyone have any idea from what?

fuel tank 1.JPG

fuel tank 1.JPG



Attachments
__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 130
Date:

Thanks for posting these. Apart from the extra diagonal braces this is the same as the V8 chassis
That I have seen. I love the way the engine mount is a 9/16 bolt in shear mode.

If you compare this with a Peerless or Warwick front end of is difficult to believe that a 2 litre could
somehow be "converted" to V8 or vice versa.

Frank?

__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 209
Date:

I'm intrigued by the positioning of the chassis cross rails. In the first picture, both sides of the chassis cabin area have 3 cross rails. The driver (US) side has 3 equidistant to each other but the passenger side has 2 opposite 2 of the rails on the driver side (the middle one is missing) and the third further towards the passenger footwell. In the head on view of the front of the chassis there appears to be a shorter, extra cross rail on the passenger side.

Any particular reason for this layout or has the chassis just been messed about with?

__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 72
Date:

Excellent Jim!

Some more differences there.

What puzzles me is the very ridgid cradle construction, while the engine mounts are separate from it.

I always used to think that the engine mounting was integrated into the cradle.

The mounts themselves aren't over dimensioned, are they?

You can almost call them flimsy.

How many hp did the Buick make in these days? 

Frank, you've been trying to put a Buick V8 into your Warwick a long time ago.

The Warwick chassis doesn't have a cradle structure like this, am i right?



-- Edited by Erik V on Tuesday 11th of December 2018 08:50:09 PM

__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 130
Date:

OK, here's a 2 Litre Warwick front end for comparison.

Discuss......

Frank

35.jpg



Attachments
__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 72
Date:

Yes, that's what i remember.

Pretty much identical to my Phase 1 chassis, including the horizontal reinforcement tubes at the top of the turrets.

I put these in because you recommended that Frank.

The major difference is that i built in rack and pinion steering.



__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 130
Date:

Here's a bit more.

A "standard" Warwick does have a cradle, but it's a lot smaller than the one on a V8

32.JPG

 

And here's a couple of other V8's for comparison

Scanxx.jpg

 

V8 War JN.jpg



Attachments
__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 72
Date:

That's clear Frank.

The Buick V8 is a 90° block which makes it very wide.

If they had chosen a 60° V engine it would have probably fitted into the std chassis, still tight though.



__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 30
Date:

Eric,

The low compression 2 Bbl Buick motor was 135 hp. The high compression 4 Bbl was 180 and the Oldsmobile JetFire (turbocharged) was 215. It appears from the looking at the 2 surviving cars I've seen that the motors used appear to be the high compression versions.

I've done a similar engine conversion on my MGB GT and the cross member is the key to everything. There are a lot of critical components (oil pan, dampener, oil pump/filter) the share the lower front of the engine. These interfere with the crossmember. I haven't directly compared the two but my guess is that the top of the cross member is lower to the ground in the V8 car compared to the 4 cylinder. It doesn't appear to me the width at the cylinder heads came into play except in the rear firewall area at the top of the footboxes. It appears these were cut back at a 45 degree angle to clear the back corners of the cylinder heads. I also think they moved the steering shaft for the same reason.

I had not noticed the different in cross bracing under the floor until Mike pointed it out. I'll look more closely this weekend when I'm back in the garage to see it there is any sign of modification.

Thanks all, Jim



__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 130
Date:

The plot thickens....

Yes, the oil filter and pressure relief valve are a clearance problem.   The GT350 photos I've seen
seem to have just a blanking plate.  This probably works just fine if the lump never gets over
2000 RPM, but hydraulic lifters and no filter or PRV will inevitably end in tears.

The cylinder heads also were a bit of a mystery to me.  I tried to fit Buick 215 manifolds on
to RV8 heads, and they are bolt-compatible, but too wide for the chassis.  A casual look at
an alleged GT350 block has too many head studs to be a Buick, so were these engines a
Buick/Oldsmobile hybrid?

The more you look at these cars, the more questions you have...

(Good luck Jim!)

Frank



__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 30
Date:

Olds motors had an extra head stud but from what I understand from a Buick 215 specialist in the US many of the blocked were machined for this extra stud by GM that way they could assemble with either Olds or Buick heads as needed by the assembly plants. Not sure what they did on RV8 as they were not imported to US.

On the former Virginia Beach car (#3) and, Motor mag photos of chassis #4 clearly show a remote oil filter mounted to the right side of the chassis behind the front wheel arch. My engine also has a block off plate in place of the filter but no remote head or filter was there. There does appear to by holes/bracket near where the other cars have the remote unit.

__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 72
Date:

OddBrit wrote:

I also think they moved the steering shaft for the same reason.


 This must be the reason for widening the chassis and putting the seats further apart.

Otherwise the seating position would be to much off-set regarding the steering wheel.

The 350 GT surely is a very interesting subject!!



__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 30
Date:

The chassis was only widened front the door hinge pillar to the cross member in front of the rear tires. This gave more interior space but did nothing in the engine bay. It appears from measurements I got off of Chassis #3 that the fiberglass seat buckets were widened 2 inches also.

I believe the steering was moved to make room for the exhaust manifolds/pipes. Is can be clearly seen in the photos Frank posted the of the 4 cylinder car that the shaft runs inside of the shock tower. If you look at the front end engine shot of the red V8 you will see the exhaust occupies the same area. The steering was moved outward by locating it in the frame rail. Thinking about it though this would push the steering wheel towards the outside of the car a little.

__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 150
Date:

Fascinating read and pics, many thanks for sharing them, Jim.

Best of fortune with it.

Gary


__________________
Rust Never Sleeps - Cavity Wax and Valium Should Do It


Status: Offline
Posts: 27
Date:

I have been following this discussion with great interest. Especially like the pictures. I have been planning to convert my Warwick 4 cylinder to a V8 for some time. I raced mine for about 10 years here in the US with the TR3 engine in it. It was a very well handling car and did not hang out the back end as easy as my TR3 did. I have now reached the age that I am going to stop racing the Warwick and plan to change it to a V8 and use it for Vintage tours. That being said, I have now moved the Warwick into the heated part of the garage and have started to remove the TR3 engine. I already have a Rover V8 rebuilt with a 5 speed gear box and ready to go in. Should know before too long if it will fit or not. Should answer a lot of the questions that have been raised. John Todd converted his 4 cylinder to a V8 back in 1962 and ran it in a lot of SCCA races. I have seen pictures of it and also was able to see the V8 that was in Va Beach before it went to Germany. Mine might not end up like the factory one but I will get it in and running.

Deanfullsizeoutput_3b2.jpeg

 



Attachments
__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 72
Date:

Very nice Dean!

Really curious to see the result!

That car is in really nice condition, I love the grey chassis.



-- Edited by Erik V on Thursday 20th of December 2018 12:37:10 PM

__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 392
Date:

I've been fortunate in the past to drive Ian & Celia's V8 a couple of times and have never noticed the off-set of the steering....to concerned looking out the big window at the front!

Dean, Looking at the 4 cylinder installed it looks like a large dia pulley on the alternator? was this standard (came with alternator) or something you went for?

And do you remember which rack you used for the steering conversion and I assume you managed to eliminate bump steer??



__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 27
Date:

Nigel

        I used the large pulley on the alternator because as a race car it spends most of it's time from 4000 to 6000 RPM. I didn't need it to turn real fast to charge the battery. The large pulley slows it down a little.

The long story on the steering is I had to build a total new frame as the original had a lot of tubes totally rusted out. As I planned to use it as a race car, I decided to build it with TR6 front suspension to get some caster and to be able to adjust the camber. As the original had the frame running at an angle from the firewall forward to get some caster, I built my frame flat and let the trunnion of the TR6 suspension set the caster. The lower A arms of the TR6 suspension has brackets that let you shim them for camber. I used the TR6 steering rack and positioned it so it was flat with the tie rod ends. This got it close and I could add or remove shims to the height of the rack to get rid of bump steer. If you notice in the picture, there is a very large antiroll bar on the front. The car had very little lean in the turns. The rear suspension worked really well and I had installed a Nisson 300ZX differential with limited slip. With no inside wheel spin, it really drove out of the corners well. I also had the engine mounted 4 inches to the rear so the front pulley did not get in the way of the rack. 

You might ask how I got away with racing it with that many changes? Well over here they didn't know what a Warwick was let alone know what they came with. We are only racing for fun, no trophies or money, so if you behave yourself and have fun they leave you alone. I only say this now as I have hung up my racing helmet and am changing it back to a street car. That's why I am putting in the V8. 

A really fun car to drive.

Dean



__________________


Status: Offline
Posts: 392
Date:

Ha haa, they don't really know what they are over here either!

Great set up by the sounds of it, hope the V8 clears all your mods too.



__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard