|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: jvike]
#1770385
03/19/15 08:19 AM
03/19/15 08:19 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 37
NY
XVracing
member
|
member
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 37
NY
|
Quote:
Quote:
Chris -- Does the E-body upper brace you've picture fit with a SB factory 6-pack setup (incldg the factory air cleaner base)?
Also, what's the weight of the upper brace? (Adding more weight to the car, in particular the front end, is a concern to me.)
I have a 340 (4bbl) and had to modify the XV engine brace to make it fit around the distributor. Easy fix.
Joakim,thanks for posting that....
CR
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: 72Swinger]
#1770386
03/19/15 12:27 PM
03/19/15 12:27 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 380
Escondido CA USA
Tomswheels
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 380
Escondido CA USA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
No love for the A body
That's because they are UGLY 
very true, especially from the rear...
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: 72Swinger]
#1770389
03/20/15 12:24 AM
03/20/15 12:24 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 380
Escondido CA USA
Tomswheels
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 380
Escondido CA USA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
No love for the A body
That's because they are UGLY
very true, especially from the rear...
Tom I was pointing out that the rear is usually all the B&E body guys get to see.....
Ooh I get it now...
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: astjp2]
#1770390
03/20/15 12:10 PM
03/20/15 12:10 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696
Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696
Bitopia
|
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not buying the heims rationalization. I don't like mid unsupported bends in tubing, I don't like tube braces that do not share a node at their termination, I don't see why the relatively thin sheet metal inner fender needs support 4+" above a the nearest suspension point, I don't know how much stiffness an attachment to the firewall provides mid center panel, and I haven't needed to see any numbers/calcs/testing to make the above claims. Haven't heard that torque boxes are little improvement before, which I agree with totally and have postulated for years once frame connectors are installed. But people like to add stuff under the heading "it can't hurt".  
Tell that to tube and fabric aircraft manufacturers or sheetmetal aircraft builders who use tubing engine mounts, they attach tubing to sheetmetal that is only .032-.040 thick and it holds up to way more torsional stresses from a propeller or turbine, centrifugal force from a propeller on a tubing engine mount that is .058 thick is tremendous on a 520 cubic inch 6 cylinder engine. Think of the power pulse from a 5.5" diameter piston. Granted its only 2700 rpms but it also puts out about 800 ftlbs of torque in a 260 hp engine. Put a few bends in the sheetmetal where the mount bolts to it and its rigid. Tim
I think You missed the point, not sure your example is valid, torsional stresses from suspension loads when you talking as one member pointed out 9800lbs per degree are a lot higher then your example. Not sure anybody drops the clutch at 5K on an airplane. The problem with the pictured solution is for one, where the brace connects to the firewall, I bet one can almost by hand bend the sheet metal, but it the brace was moved up only say 4"?, it would near a 90 degree bend and be magnitudes stiffer. Nobody sees this? On the shock tower mount ends the reverse is trus, they are mounted near the bend in the inner fender, which is great if one wants to prevent a fender from flexing/moving, but if the real objective is to firm up the nearby upper control arm suspension points, a thin flat piece of sheet metal connecting the two ain't gonna make it happen. What about my other points, they stand valid by default?
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: BigBlockMopar]
#1770392
03/20/15 01:55 PM
03/20/15 01:55 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 37
NY
XVracing
member
|
member
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 37
NY
|
Quote:
I would think the triangle is more likely to keep the body/sheetmetal square (in just the horizontal plane), than chassis/frame control.
A couple of things here....
There aren't many flat sections of sheet metal on the car, pretty much everything has a bend, curve, or brake to it. Flat sheet by itself, has little strengths in the one direction, put a 90* brake in it, it stiffens up quite a bit. Entire aircraft and race cars are constructed in what is called "monocoque" construction that way, basically the way a unibody works. A cowl section of a unibody car is probably the most substantial, and strongest part of the car for obvious reasons.
The engine brace does two things: We stitch weld up the inner fenders,and some of the torque of the frame rail is transmitted into the inner fender, which is tied to the cowl from the inner fender brace on the one side, and the engine brace cross bar helps keep them from flexing inward and also transmits some of the load back to the cowl with the other bars.
We can armchair engineer this all day long, but the fact is that every part of our chassis stiffening package was tested and bench marked, and delivered something like 9800# per degree of twist.
Sorry to ramble on.....
CR
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: XVracing]
#1770394
03/20/15 06:38 PM
03/20/15 06:38 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,375
SoCal
MuuMuu101
I got lucky at Woodward!
|
I got lucky at Woodward!
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,375
SoCal
|
Quote:
We can armchair engineer this all day long, but the fact is that every part of our chassis stiffening package was tested and bench marked, and delivered something like 9800# per degree of twist.
CR
Just curious, what's the degree of twist for an unstiffened chassis?
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: ntstlgl1970]
#1770396
03/20/15 09:56 PM
03/20/15 09:56 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,375
SoCal
MuuMuu101
I got lucky at Woodward!
|
I got lucky at Woodward!
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,375
SoCal
|
Quote:
If you haven't seen the XV 4 post chassis stiffness video, it's worth a watch....they show the before and after. Pretty cool stuff
I haven't. I'm assuming it was in that DVD thing posted earlier. Maybe I'll take a look at it when I have free time.
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: MuuMuu101]
#1770397
03/20/15 11:17 PM
03/20/15 11:17 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 37
NY
XVracing
member
|
member
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 37
NY
|
Quote:
Quote:
We can armchair engineer this all day long, but the fact is that every part of our chassis stiffening package was tested and bench marked, and delivered something like 9800# per degree of twist.
CR
Just curious, what's the degree of twist for an unstiffened chassis?
Honestly, I haven't been able to locate that data, there's a ton of it to go through...
The thing to understand is that the data collected was done by an independent company that specializes in vehicle dynamics and optimization... The rating is based on an industry standard, kinda like the way manufacturers give you a HP rating...
I don't know that they used the 4 post for torsional testing, I believe that was done on that static rig. The 4 post tested for shocks and spring rates, sway bars, tires stiffness, they even found a vibration that would be near impossible to find without it... Turned out to be flex in the rear upper shock mount and was fixed with a simple gusset.
Hope that helps...
Last edited by XVracing; 03/20/15 11:19 PM.
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: XVracing]
#1770398
03/21/15 12:04 AM
03/21/15 12:04 AM
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 723
Houston Tx
Uhcoog1
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 723
Houston Tx
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We can armchair engineer this all day long, but the fact is that every part of our chassis stiffening package was tested and bench marked, and delivered something like 9800# per degree of twist.
CR
Just curious, what's the degree of twist for an unstiffened chassis?
Honestly, I haven't been able to locate that data, there's a ton of it to go through...
The thing to understand is that the data collected was done by an independent company that specializes in vehicle dynamics and optimization... The rating is based on an industry standard, kinda like the way manufacturers give you a HP rating...
I don't know that they used the 4 post for torsional testing, I believe that was done on that static rig. The 4 post tested for shocks and spring rates, sway bars, tires stiffness, they even found a vibration that would be near impossible to find without it... Turned out to be flex in the rear upper shock mount and was fixed with a simple gusset.
Hope that helps...
The video states 9800 is that of the unstiffened chassis, equal to a modern day sedan. The stated goal was 15000, equal to a modern day sports car.
Video 3, 1:20-1:45
-'02 Dodge Viper Ex-World Challenge racecar
-'73 Duster, 6.1 based 392 hilborn hemi, tko600, full floater rear 9", Hellwig custom bars, viper brakes, built for road course
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: Uhcoog1]
#1770399
03/21/15 10:54 AM
03/21/15 10:54 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 37
NY
XVracing
member
|
member
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 37
NY
|
Quote:
The video states 9800 is that of the unstiffened chassis, equal to a modern day sedan. The stated goal was 15000, equal to a modern day sports car.
Video 3, 1:20-1:45
That sounds about right, it's a ton of raw data, and I'm not sure if the actual numbers were ever published...
Thanks for finding that....
CR
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: XVracing]
#1770400
03/21/15 01:18 PM
03/21/15 01:18 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696
Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696
Bitopia
|
Quote:
Quote:
I would think the triangle is more likely to keep the body/sheetmetal square (in just the horizontal plane), than chassis/frame control.
A couple of things here....
There aren't many flat sections of sheet metal on the car, pretty much everything has a bend, curve, or brake to it. Flat sheet by itself, has little strengths in the one direction, put a 90* brake in it, it stiffens up quite a bit. Entire aircraft and race cars are constructed in what is called "monocoque" construction that way, basically the way a unibody works. A cowl section of a unibody car is probably the most substantial, and strongest part of the car for obvious reasons.
The engine brace does two things: We stitch weld up the inner fenders,and some of the torque of the frame rail is transmitted into the inner fender, which is tied to the cowl from the inner fender brace on the one side, and the engine brace cross bar helps keep them from flexing inward and also transmits some of the load back to the cowl with the other bars.
We can armchair engineer this all day long, but the fact is that every part of our chassis stiffening package was tested and bench marked, and delivered something like 9800# per degree of twist.
Sorry to ramble on.....
CR
We are going in circles here. The added brace is to stiffen the "strongest part of a car" or as "bigBlocK" mentioned to keep the cowl square?. The concern here is mainly where the brace attaches to the cowl, it is a poor choice unless mediocrity is acceptable. Moving it mere inches gives great bang for buck regarding attachment point stiffness, not which is its intended purpose.
So make the tubes straight without unsupported bends, make tubes terminate at a joint node, move attachment points as a close as possible to suspension points, lose the heims, and then back up number claims with before and after results, and we are good to go.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: XV level II front suspension. Who is using it?
[Re: jcc]
#1770401
03/22/15 01:34 AM
03/22/15 01:34 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 68
USA MO
cdoublejj
member
|
member
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 68
USA MO
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I would think the triangle is more likely to keep the body/sheetmetal square (in just the horizontal plane), than chassis/frame control.
A couple of things here....
There aren't many flat sections of sheet metal on the car, pretty much everything has a bend, curve, or brake to it. Flat sheet by itself, has little strengths in the one direction, put a 90* brake in it, it stiffens up quite a bit. Entire aircraft and race cars are constructed in what is called "monocoque" construction that way, basically the way a unibody works. A cowl section of a unibody car is probably the most substantial, and strongest part of the car for obvious reasons.
The engine brace does two things: We stitch weld up the inner fenders,and some of the torque of the frame rail is transmitted into the inner fender, which is tied to the cowl from the inner fender brace on the one side, and the engine brace cross bar helps keep them from flexing inward and also transmits some of the load back to the cowl with the other bars.
We can armchair engineer this all day long, but the fact is that every part of our chassis stiffening package was tested and bench marked, and delivered something like 9800# per degree of twist.
Sorry to ramble on.....
CR
We are going in circles here. The added brace is to stiffen the "strongest part of a car" or as "bigBlocK" mentioned to keep the cowl square?. The concern here is mainly where the brace attaches to the cowl, it is a poor choice unless mediocrity is acceptable. Moving it mere inches gives great bang for buck regarding attachment point stiffness, not which is its intended purpose.
So make the tubes straight without unsupported bends, make tubes terminate at a joint node, move attachment points as a close as possible to suspension points, lose the heims, and then back up number claims with before and after results, and we are good to go.
US car tool makes one that are boxes. Also it's assumed you will use some of the other braces like the lower rad support. they kind of work together to strength the whole thing. also the tube isn't all THAT long any ways.
|
|
|
|
|
