Hi BOM,
Adding structural foam will increase the strength of the individual item, unfortunatly, the major issue is the joint or connection between the "A" pillar, the roof and the cowl structures. To improve this area of our cars, we are adding gussets between the cage and the existing "A" pillar, cowl and roof structures . Also, if you look at our layout, you will note that we have added additional cage bracing at the roof and "A" pillar intersection.
Bob
Hi BOM,
Adding structural foam will increase the strength of the individual item, unfortunatly, the major issue is the joint or connection between the "A" pillar, the roof and the cowl structures. To improve this area of our cars, we are adding gussets between the cage and the existing "A" pillar, cowl and roof structures . Also, if you look at our layout, you will note that we have added additional cage bracing at the roof and "A" pillar intersection.
Bob
Yes, I see where you have added the additional bracing, along with the cage work. I guess where I am coming from is more of a stock look, hence no round tube cage. I have been following your fire & ice projects and have done (copied) many of the chassis strengthening ideas (convertible rockers, seat platform, engine compartment bracing) along with bracing from the rockers up into the B pillar area. So far most of this can be hidden by body, interior panels so I was looking for ways to add as much strength as I can while keeping the stealthy appearance.
Does the structural foam have to be used in an enclosed channel (ie. frame rail, rocker panel, etc) or can it be used in a C type channel that is open on one side?
1 the roof structure that runs from the "A" pillars at the windshield to the "B" pillars behind the drivers door.
2 The strut towers and any reinforcement that runs from the tower to the firewall at the "A" pillar.
3 The "A" pillars themselves.
4 The front frame rails from the firewall to the core support.
5 The rockers and the torque box structure.
6 The structure at the top of the windshield.
7 the structure at the botom of the windshield or cowl area.
8 the frame rail extension that runs from the firewall to the seat pan structure.
Addressing these 8 areas is where the best bang for your buck will be in reducing torsional deflection.
I find it interesting that, under torsional loads, the area under the greatest stress is the roof structure at the edge of the roof just over the side windows.
Of course if the "A" pillars and other areas of the car are not correctly reinforced none of the loads will transfer to the roof, etc, etc, etc...
We have just about finished all of our modifications (sans roll cage) and we have reduced torsional deflection (applying 750 lbs to the front suspension mounting point) from 1.33" to just over 1/8".
Bob
Agreed.The integral nature of the roof on the structural integrity of the unit body car is the reason that I try to steer folk’s away form shaving the drip rails on these cars. While I believe that this can be preformed safely I feel that most people are not willing to do the necessary reinforcement to the roof that is required to offset the lose of this component.
Hi 66,SNIP...
One other thing to consider. Crumple zones. The nice thing about Reen's front sub frame bars is the "S" bending of the tubes. This allows the tubes to crumple on impact, while loosing a marginal amount of strength for their intended purpose. (IMO) a great compromise.
Great thread!
These tests were done without the rear seat divider and without the sfc x-brace. Also, someone wondered about the effectiveness of the tank armor to reduce flex. I put the gas tank back in to get an idea of how much that area contributes.
Stock gas tank back in: 0.37" About 2.5% gain. Tank armor would probably add more but with a substantial weight gain.
So you did this test with just the stock tank and not the tank armor? It well may be true that the tank armor would add more weight, but at least the weight would be at the right end of the car as most of these cars are very front heavy, especially with the big block like in my 68.
Subscribing - interesting testing going on here. Is this to be a drag car or street/strip or road race?
The fully dressed engine is about 630lbs vs. 480lbs for a 289 and 365lbs for the all aluminum 347 in my fastback.
\\Some more awesome info! I want to build an all aluminium 331 with IR fuel injection and distributorless ignition, etc. (sort of the pinnacle of the Windsor technology evolution) - it's good to get some fairly solid info on the weight differences! What block did you go with? I'm thinking about using a Dart.
\\
I used the Dart 8.2" deck block. Originally I planned on IR fuel injection but the engine builder talked me out of it. He said the Webers were easier to tune! If I could do it over I would buy a kit from TWM and use Megasquirt to control it.
I have this habit of weighing almost everything I put on or take off the car so the weights are pretty accurate.
Runt66: I've added about 100lbs not including the x-brace or export brace. I realize I'm at the mercy of Newtonian mechanics and polar moments but with the 4.6 DOHC and IRS this car will be heavy no matter what. I'm expecting about 500rwhp with the mods to the supercharger so I want extra strength in the chassis. The fully dressed engine is about 630lbs vs. 480lbs for a 289 and 365lbs for the all aluminum 347 in my fastback. The fastback is about 2900lbs and I expect this car to be at least 3300lbs.
420 lbs is only slightly more than a 289/302 with aluminum heads, so that's not bad. I guess it's more compact than a 4V modular engine too, but I don't know by how much.
As another 67-68 vert owner with the GW subs welded in...your best bet is to run some bracing to tie the two SFCs together like TCP offers. That can make exhaust/driveshaft removal an issue down the road, but the stringers they are talking about are a no-go on verts due to the different undersides and rockers.Mustbereel, what a great post. I have welded Global West SFCs but dont really know what the welded stringers mean? I put the export brace on my vert, along with the "bent" Monte Carlo at the same time. Now I know which to thank for the decrease in front end and cowl shake.
\\
I have this habit of weighing almost everything I put on or take off the car so the weights are pretty accurate.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?