with those interested in the cars from Bradford, England. If you want to post on this forum you need to register. The site uses cookies and uses security certificates when you are logged in.
Alastair Gregg wrote:I have this suspicion Scott:-
A Subaru Legacy
Good thinking Batman. Current betting is on a Subaru 2.2l engine, pending further discussion and whether it might fit, they are being dropped into VWs all the time, and it seems a fairly simple swap, lots of technology available to do engine swaps using these engines.
PJGD wrote:I would take a look at grafting in the complete Subaru drive train; that way you would have your disc brakes and 4-wheel drive too.
Philip
The more I think about it, the more this is tempting me. Will be having a good look under the Subaru tomorrow to get an idea of how complex this is likely to be.
If we can fit some narrow wheels onto the Subaru hubs, depending on the width and length of the Javelin vs Subaru, it could be externally a very normal Javelin with a bit of a naughty secret
If Jowetts were still in existence it is quite likely that the current model of Javelin would be very much on the lines of a Subaru. After all there has always been a debate as to whether the Subaru engine is not based on the Javelin engine. Naturally Subaru always denied it and say they developed the engine from scratch – yes like all the Japanese motor and bike industry has done!!!
The idea has appealed to myself – one day perhaps! In that respect ‘just do it’. The only proviso would that you do not cut up a restorable Javelin like the V8 Javelin did. There are a number of javelins about that have gone way past the restorable condition. If you are putting a Javelin body on the Subaru running gear a rough shell that has rotted out underneath should be used! Talking of which there is one just north of Gloucester – see Scrap yard post in cars and parts.
I believe the wheel base of the Subaru is shorter than the Javelin then there is no reason why you should not remove the rear doors and shorten the Javelin. This was done in the 60’s. I have never seen the car but the car still exists, I am informed, I need to go and have a look some time
Hi,
I am joining a bit late into the process, but I have a little information on alternative engines fitted in a Javelin.
I bought, rather unwisely a 1949 Javelin that had a 1600 c.c. Subaru pushrod ohv engine badly installed in it. This engine whilst it had a much shorter stroke than the Javelin and therefore was not as wide, had the camshaft below the crank and a much deeper sump (270 mm below crank C.L. vs. Jowetts 185mm i.e. 3.5" deeper). In order to get some ground clearance (5") the front suspension had been wound up so that it was resting on the rebound stops!
Possible alternative boxer engines could be Alfasud 1490 cc, Lancia Flavia 1500 cc or OHC Subaru.
A previous owner and member of JCC, Joe Lowe of Carlisle had used the car daily with a 1100 c.c. BMC A series engine fitted, retaining the radiator at the rear of the engine. The later rubber bushed suspension had been fitted but the older hydromechanical braked rear axle retained. Adaptor plates were used to mount 15" VW wheels (as per Jowetteer circa 1979).
I don't suppose any of this will help with your project, though it might highlight the possible and the pitfalls.
Best of luck, the result should be interesting.
Chris
I have a Javelin in need of full restoration.
Also member of Doncaster Traditional Car Club.
As a student I previously ran a Javelin and my father owned Jav. & Jupiter (in Eire)
Peter Holden wrote:If Jowetts were still in existence it is quite likely that the current model of Javelin would be very much on the lines of a Subaru. After all there has always been a debate as to whether the Subaru engine is not based on the Javelin engine. Naturally Subaru always denied it and say they developed the engine from scratch – yes like all the Japanese motor and bike industry has done!!!
The idea has appealed to myself – one day perhaps! In that respect ‘just do it’. The only proviso would that you do not cut up a restorable Javelin like the V8 Javelin did. There are a number of javelins about that have gone way past the restorable condition. If you are putting a Javelin body on the Subaru running gear a rough shell that has rotted out underneath should be used! Talking of which there is one just north of Gloucester – see Scrap yard post in cars and parts.
I believe the wheel base of the Subaru is shorter than the Javelin then there is no reason why you should not remove the rear doors and shorten the Javelin. This was done in the 60’s. I have never seen the car but the car still exists, I am informed, I need to go and have a look some time
Hi Peter,
Just to reassure some members, we're not going to do anything that can't be undone I don't believe in chopping cars up, that seems to be bad design and bad modification - you can either change what is there using commonly available parts, or make parts yourself, but if you can't put it back to original then you might as well just buy a donor car and make a kit car. At least, that's how I see it.
We have a Javelin ready for the project that is in the garage collecting dust. It is in reasonable condition, but would require a full and detailed restoration in any case - this little project is much more likely to get it out of its corner and get it on the road, it's nowhere near ready for the scrap man but it will require more work than would be economical unless it is a labour of love. Plus we already have a stock Javelin, and this is going to be something just a little different.
I don't think I'll be dropping a Javelin onto the Subaru floorpan, this is really just an engine transplant and anything else required as a result.
Chris Gibson wrote:Hi,
I am joining a bit late into the process, but I have a little information on alternative engines fitted in a Javelin.
I bought, rather unwisely a 1949 Javelin that had a 1600 c.c. Subaru pushrod ohv engine badly installed in it. This engine whilst it had a much shorter stroke than the Javelin and therefore was not as wide, had the camshaft below the crank and a much deeper sump (270 mm below crank C.L. vs. Jowetts 185mm i.e. 3.5" deeper). In order to get some ground clearance (5") the front suspension had been wound up so that it was resting on the rebound stops!
Possible alternative boxer engines could be Alfasud 1490 cc, Lancia Flavia 1500 cc or OHC Subaru.
A previous owner and member of JCC, Joe Lowe of Carlisle had used the car daily with a 1100 c.c. BMC A series engine fitted, retaining the radiator at the rear of the engine. The later rubber bushed suspension had been fitted but the older hydromechanical braked rear axle retained. Adaptor plates were used to mount 15" VW wheels (as per Jowetteer circa 1979).
I don't suppose any of this will help with your project, though it might highlight the possible and the pitfalls.
Best of luck, the result should be interesting.
Chris
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the heads up and info. I think I have a fix for the ground clearance option, VW modifiers have the same problem with the Subaru engines so there are replacement sumps fairly easily available that are much lower profile - basically a flatter design that isn't as deep, but has the same functionality and baffles etc.
OHC SUbaru is the current plan, but more research is being done at the moment - it seems to be a fairly simple swap due to the number of VWs being converted, custom wiring looms etc make it a lot easier, but we still have a lot of measuring and checking to do before we can be sure of the possibilities.
I considered it, but to be honest the cost is a factor and I can buy an entire donor car for the same price as one of their upgrade kits. Subarus seem to be very undervalued in the UK, and as a result it will be a cheap project to get on the road. Plus we don't have any experience with those engines, and we do have lots of experience with Subarus between us.
Lots more research to do though, not rushing into the project before we do a lot of checking and plan things quite carefully - I have all winter to do that thankfully, and we've got at least 2 cars already on the slab at the moment being finished off!
Yes the Javelin suspension is well equal to many modern cars. The front of course is effectively an unequal-length double wishbone, which gives excellent wheel control (especially in the case of the earlier 'metal bushed' type - Gerald Palmer's design before Roy Lunn came along and quite successfully simplified it).
For many years I've run my competition Javelin (BEG308) with rubber bushed along with Spax adjustable dampers. When I used to race it, I fitted a front anti-roll bar which helped to keep the inside rear wheel down on high (!) speed corners.
The Javelin's downfall is the heavy back axle. Whenever you hit a bump or a yump, there's an enormouse amount of energy transferred to the axle mass, which is difficult to control on rebound. Oddly enough, I found an excellent way to tame this was to tow a heavy trailer. The ride was vastly improved, but it was hardly conducive to competition activities!
I've often wondered if replacing the Panhard rod with a Watts linkage would improve things, but I've never got round to trying it. I certainly feel that in the case of the Jupiter, there may be a 'jacking-up' effect from the Panhard rod, which may explain why many Jupiters have overturned over the years (mine included!).
I well remember the Javelin's 'dice' we had with Roger Clark on one of the Pirelli Marathons (actually, we were following him) - down the Giau Pass. Lots of hairy hairpins! The beauty of the Javelin on roads like that is the 'lift-off oversteer' which allows you to correct understeer with the throttle. The Javelin really is a quite quick car on a twisty road.
Regarding today's cars, many of course employ MacPherson Struts at the front, a rather crude design which has, in fairness, been quite well developed these days. Unfortunately it can't replicate the rather complex active camber alignment of the Javelin system. Undoubtedly modern cars corner well (as opposed to HANDLING well), but much of the prowess comes from improved tyres. Indeed, I've always used radials in competition. Purists may prefer crossplies, but unless you're on something like Dunlop racers, or Avon Wide Safety Ovals (no longer made), then in my opinion, radials are the way to go.
So this is a very long answer to a short question! But whatever its limitations, the Javelin can be enormous fun and deceptively quick. And at the same time comfortable.
Although the XK120 had a solid axle on donkey-cart springs (I believe), the 1953 C-type Jaguar had a top and bottom trailing link rear suspension with Panhard rod and solid Salisbury axle quite similar to the Javelin and Jupiter, and of course that car did quite well at Le Mans.
The contemporary Aston Martin (DB2 I think) had a solid rear axle with a very nice design of Watt linkage. We could easily do something similar.
The D-type Jaguar started off with the same arrangement as the C-type but later moved to a De Dion arrangement. This would require quite a lot more work, but this too could be considered a plausible and "in keeping" modification for the Jupiter.
I tried weighing my spare Jowett Javelin engine using our bathrrom scales, and would say that without Carburettors, Water Pump and Distributor, it weighs just over 250 lbs.
By the way, the D Type Jaguar never went to a De Dion rear end, although someone in Vancouver converted one. The E Type had a fully independent rear.
I weighed my engine not long ago in essentially the same manner as you can see on Ed's http://www.jowettjupiter.co.uk website, and got the same answer as you have.
By the way, as a fellow TNF'er, I bow to your superior recall of the D-type rear suspension!
I don't believe in chopping cars up, that seems to be bad design and bad modification - you can either change what is there using commonly available parts, or make parts yourself, but if you can't put it back to original then you might as well just buy a donor car and make a kit car. At least, that's how I see it.