Reason for width/track of Midlana

AndreasMergner · Post by **AndreasMergner** » 03 Apr 2014, 19:04

Is there any reason the wide track was used for Midlana? I know the custom axles were needed to mate whatever drivetrain you use to Miata spindles...but why the wide track? Is there a big performance advantage of the larger track?

Part of the reason I ask is that my driveway is (very, very) limited in width.

Thanks!

Post by **Midlana1** » 03 Apr 2014, 19:15

If you look through the diary and book, you'll see that really, the car can't be made any narrower! At the back, once the width of the drivetrain, suspension arms, and tires are added up, it is what it is. Since the rear is what it is, it pretty much specified the front track as well. I really don't think that it could be made much narrower, other than to use narrower tires.

AndreasMergner · Post by **AndreasMergner** » 04 Apr 2014, 04:35

Thanks Kurt. Sounds like a packaging constraint - good to know. I'll have to do some careful measuring when I get my drive train.

Post by **Midlana1** » 04 Apr 2014, 06:44

For the Honda K-series engine at least, there's just not a lot of space to each side of it to make the car much narrower than about 48" (not counting tires and tire clearance).

bgkast · Post by **bgkast** » 04 Apr 2014, 06:55

Another thing to consider is axle length. The shorter they get the more angle change per a given suspension travel. With my engine the axles will be near the limits of the CV joint travel range at the book width and book suspension travel.

AndreasMergner · Post by **AndreasMergner** » 04 Apr 2014, 07:20

Excuse my ignorance, but can't the final width of the car be similar to the width of the original car plus whatever the difference is for the wider tires? Does wheel offset come into play at all?

Post by **Midlana1** » 04 Apr 2014, 07:29

The stock RSX wheel track is 59", while Midlana is about (don't have the numbers in front of me) 64" or so, which is necessary for the rear tire sizes being run.

Wheel offset is just that, it's the wheel centerline relative to its mounting surface; it's unrelated to hub-to-hub distance.

If you go with perhaps 215mm tires, you effectively narrow overall car width by roughly 120 mm ( (275 - 215) * 2), or nearly 5", which is substantial.

JackMcCornack · Post by **JackMcCornack** » 02 Aug 2014, 18:30

I don't have my Midlana book with me (it's up north at my other shop at the moment) so...refresh my memory, please: what is the width of Midlana's powerplant end--from outside of one rear tire to the outside of the other one (and what size are the rear tires)? Yeah, I'm thinking body options.

freakynami · Post by **freakynami** » 02 Aug 2014, 19:54

The overall width of the chassis at the rear is 48", plus 1" clearance per side, plus you're tyre width (275 in Kurt's case) is 48+1+1+10.83+10.83 = 71.65".

Or if you run 215 tyres, you could get it as narrow as 67"

Post by **Midlana1** » 02 Aug 2014, 22:19

Mine is 72" with 275-45 17" tires.

The Midlana Builder's Forum

Reason for width/track of Midlana

Reason for width/track of Midlana

Re: Reason for width/track of Midlana

Re: Reason for width/track of Midlana

Re: Reason for width/track of Midlana

Re: Reason for width/track of Midlana

Re: Reason for width/track of Midlana

Re: Reason for width/track of Midlana

Re: Reason for width/track of Midlana

Re: Reason for width/track of Midlana

Re: Reason for width/track of Midlana