Re: B-body Stiffening Q
[Re: 4speeds4me]
#2267319
03/11/17 12:21 PM
03/11/17 12:21 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,406 New Jersey, USA
yella71
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,406
New Jersey, USA
|
yes my challenger has that from the factory. any brace you can think of is most likely a good idea on any mopar
71 challenger convertable, 64 sport fury 383 ci with factory air
99 sebring convertable
89 CTD pup
|
|
|
Re: B-body Stiffening Q
[Re: 4speeds4me]
#2267436
03/11/17 03:16 PM
03/11/17 03:16 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
|
I know about the torque boxes, basic subframe connectors, etc. Wondering if it is worth bracing from the outside of the cowl forward to the inner fender on a 68 B-body. Looking to keep mods as "invisible" as possible...
Thanks! Well IMO smart engineering normally suggests one concentrate on the "weakest" areas first that give the most bang for buck. "Worth" will be your own personal calculation. Not sure what your goals are other then "invisible", nor what else has been done or is in the planning to help decide if your cowl brace achieves much. Anything you add will likely show an increase in chassis stiffness, but is it smart or needed? Based only on what has been shared to this point, I'm skeptical. Simplest trick to increase strength and remain the most invisible is to simply increase any member thickness, however the obvious weight penalty its not IMO the best bang for buck because if that.
Last edited by jcc; 03/11/17 03:21 PM.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: B-body Stiffening Q
[Re: jcc]
#2267531
03/11/17 05:33 PM
03/11/17 05:33 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,089 Sorrento, BC, Canada
4speeds4me
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,089
Sorrento, BC, Canada
|
jcc- I'll try to give a bit more background/rundown...
68 Charger. 5.7 Hemi/A833 4-speed. SPC UCAs, boxed lowers, QA1 strut rods. Hotchkis rear leafs. I'm not going full Pro-touring, but I am trying to build a daily driver that handles as much like a new-ish car as possible without giving up too much of the classic look as possible. I understand that there will likely be compromises.
Currently, the car is disassembled and basically bare metal, so it's a good time to add some stiffening where it can do the most good.
Hope that makes sense, and helps guide any advice...
2 Demons...no, not my kids!
|
|
|
Re: B-body Stiffening Q
[Re: 4speeds4me]
#2267537
03/11/17 05:50 PM
03/11/17 05:50 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,432 NorCal
RylisPro
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,432
NorCal
|
I would love to be in the situation you are in to have a car be disassembled and bare metal! I would put that thing on a rotissere and get the welder out. Stitch welding for the win!
|
|
|
Re: B-body Stiffening Q
[Re: 4speeds4me]
#2267689
03/11/17 10:23 PM
03/11/17 10:23 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
|
I would hope then that SFC would be first task, and welded not bolted, use the largest cross sectional tube you can fit/accept, with that member's thickness is then much less crucial (using the contoured style means the smallest cross sectional area of that member, starts to control the installed stiffness), I am an not a believer in SFC AND torque boxes, kinda redundant, with torque boxes more of a band aid solution, if your welding chops are decent, welding every spot welded seam solid, would be a plus, but the weld joints are often dirty, thin, and out of position, but usually not too visible. A monte carlo style bar or similar, would be effective, but hard to position, and real in your face. I think stiffening your K member might be another best place to start, and is out of view, it is the foundation on a mopar's front end, most of the rest of the surrounding sheet metal mainly tries to keep it positioned, and stiff.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: B-body Stiffening Q
[Re: 4speeds4me]
#2267992
03/12/17 01:38 PM
03/12/17 01:38 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889 up yours
Supercuda
About to go away
|
About to go away
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889
up yours
|
Cowl braces were added to reduce cowl shake, of the fenders flapping, not to stiffen anything chassis wise.
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.
|
|
|
Re: B-body Stiffening Q
[Re: Supercuda]
#2268123
03/12/17 05:15 PM
03/12/17 05:15 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,406 New Jersey, USA
yella71
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,406
New Jersey, USA
|
On ANY "unibody" type car every part that is welded together that makes up the body IS the chassis. welding all the seams is a good place to start. as I said before any thing that can be done to tighten up the body is good on any mopar. I saw one company made a tube brace for the lower part of the rad support. welded on that would tie the two front frame rails together at the front. I hate to say it but the cars we all love are very flimsy. you think your charger is loose? try a convertible.
71 challenger convertable, 64 sport fury 383 ci with factory air
99 sebring convertable
89 CTD pup
|
|
|
Re: B-body Stiffening Q
[Re: 4speeds4me]
#2268202
03/12/17 07:20 PM
03/12/17 07:20 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889 up yours
Supercuda
About to go away
|
About to go away
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889
up yours
|
Apparently you do not know that the factory cowl braces are bolted on and about a sturdy as a pair of EMT conduit pieces flattened at the ends.
It is NOT a chassis item. Not even close. The aftermarket make have sturdier stuff, but not the musclecar era factory stuff.
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.
|
|
|
Re: B-body Stiffening Q
[Re: 4speeds4me]
#2268469
03/13/17 05:12 AM
03/13/17 05:12 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,491 Lethbridge, AB, Canada
dangina
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,491
Lethbridge, AB, Canada
|
I've done exactly what your trying to achieve, stiffening the body as much as possible without resorting to a cage. I stitched welded the entire underside of the car, torque boxes, lower rad brace, inner fender braces, subframe connectors, and even added braces underneath to tie the torsion bar member to the frame rails. I have even read some guys added a brace in the rear to tie the rear frame rails together. Some have even beefed up the rear brace the shocks mount to on the car. I've also beefed up and stiched welded and gusseted the k member, and added LCA braces.
Last edited by dangina; 03/13/17 05:13 AM.
|
|
|
Re: B-body Stiffening Q
[Re: 4speeds4me]
#2275183
03/24/17 02:08 AM
03/24/17 02:08 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,712 Sacramento, Ca
Darius
master
|
master
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,712
Sacramento, Ca
|
I installed the entire XVMotorsports (now defunct but operating under one of the employees) B Body stiffening system on my 70 GTX. I also used an Alterktion and a 4 ling but, that car handles like a go cart. I had it on the Willow Springs 2 1/2 mile road course and it was a blast. DO IT!!!!!
Driving modern convenience in classic beauty
|
|
|
|
|