heavy85

February 3, 2007

I found that on some of the steel that I have bought the mill scale actually clogs the flap disk on a grinder. For those pieces I use a knotted wire wheel. It has to be a newer wire wheel too, an older one won't do it.

I hate mill scale...

Ditto that scale just laughs at 60 grit flapper wheel - even a new one. I cant get a wire wheel to take it off but I dont have a new other either. In fact I cant find anything to take it off efficiently.

Cameron

February 2, 2007

Jon I think the 'wrong' location is the best at least on my car. For one there is a vertical gusset on both side right behind that area (you can see this in bjhines pics) and you can tie into the top horizontal plate of the cowl. Other reason is it's far enough out that you can weld the bars in instead of using rod ends. I think welding would provide a far stiffer structure. Just my 2 cents after studying it for a while. Here's where I'm planning on attaching. It's centered in front of the vertical support and tied into the top plate. Just tacked in temporarily to get the idea and mock up the tubes.

And I agree the tabs on the strut tower should be spread out like they are now.

Cameron

February 2, 2007

I notice many people who use 2x3 tubing lay it flat (2in high x 3 wide) I assume that this is to lessen the protursion through the floor, but wouldnt you actually want it the other way from a structural point of view? I imagine much more vertical load the horizontal.

Short answer is ground clearance. 1x3 and you dont have to cut into the floors (reason I chose this), 2x3 and you need to cut a slot and recess into the floor, 3x2 and you'ld have big bumps under your feet but your right 3x2 would be the best for this application if it would fit. If I had not needed new subframes I probably would have tied a 3x2 or 3x1 or similar into the rockers (see other threads for examples) and left the subframes alone.

Well you probably don't want to here this but I would have tried to tie the K frame back into the frame rails and not the TC cups.

I am actually confident with the SFC tied into the TC buckets and a tube from the TC area to the rockers (yet to be installed ... need to order some steel) along with a gusset from the TC to the framerail (yet to be installed in pics) that tying into the TC cup is better from a load path standpoint.

I am not sure what engine you are putting in or why you need a K frame

LS1 and I 'need' a k-member because I strongly believe that to be the most efficient method and will add the most stiffness to the chassis with a side benefit of mounting the engine. No offense as your mount is probably effective to mount the engine but I dont believe does a lot for stiffening the chassis and appears to be heavier.

My header on the passengers side comes out just behind the motor mount on my cross member. In fact, you can see the left and right sides point in opposite directions. That is because I had to move the passenger's side mount forward an inch just to get clearance for the JTR LS headers.

That sucks 'cause if that's the case then plan B may be in order. Hopefully the UPS man will be kind and deliver my headers tomorrow and well see for sure.

Cameron

February 2, 2007

A guy I work with just put a 350 w/ a carb in a 4 cylinder S10. He used the original fuel injected fuel pump with a regulator set appropriate for a carb and so far works good. A FI pump is designed for high flow and high pressure but there should be not reason it cannot work at lower pressures for a carb application. At least something to think about before throwing the idea out.

Cameron

January 31, 2007

I've noticed that nobody I can find pictures of who welded a tube between the rear strut towers used a backing plate to weld them to (poor wording but oh well). Is there a reason for this or rather lack of this?

Thanks

Cameron

January 31, 2007

Ran all last season (autox), tore it down in late October, in the middle of LS1 swap (actively working on it), hope to be running again late spring / summer ... of this year I hope.

Cameron

January 31, 2007

I did the LS1 tank install on my car and it required no modification to the tank at all. It did require me to remove the spare tire well and build some custom brackets,

Bartman - do you have to remove the entire well to fit it up in there or could you leave a couple inches depth of the well and still fit the LS1 tank under it? Reason I ask is I have to haul my race tires in the car and they BARELY fit with one in the well, one on top, and two where the passenger seat is suppose to be (15X10 rims). If the well were completely flush then I could no longer fit the tires in the car which obviously is a major consideration but if the tire well could stay recessed by even a few inches I think they would fit.

Thanks

Cameron

January 31, 2007

Here is why I had to reinforce the swaybar mounts - you can see air between the framerail side and bottom .... enough you can measure with a yardstick.

I already showed the top side so here is the finished other side. I split a 1" tube into two 1x1 angles and plug welded through the old metal to the new plate on the bottom.

Here's the new plate on the bottom.

Overall this is way overkill if it was caught many moons back before the parent material cracked up. But as you can see above there was not much left to work with so this is what I came up with to make sure it does not happen again. Hope people are enjoying the show and if you have personal experience please feel free to chime in with advice or other things I need to be aware of. Need to order some tubing for the strut towers and am anxiously waiting for the headers - man I hope I dont have to start over on the K-member.

Cameron

January 30, 2007

OK so blocking off it is but how? I too have had bad luck with rubber caps at least 'vacuum' type caps as they get brittle in a matter of months. The LS1 has a 3/4" and 5/8" (I think) hose connection to deal with so I'm struggling to figure out without using rubber caps how to cleanly seal them up.

Thanks

Cameron

January 28, 2007

That's a whole lotta toolboxes you got there!

Cameron

January 28, 2007

Do you know if the JTR headers will clear the K frame on the passenger's side? ... But on the other side I would worry about header and starter clearance.

I should know in about a week when my headers are delivered. I dont see any issues with the starter from my initial trial fit before the k-members were installed. We'll see but I hope I dont have to redo them.

Also I would think seriously about reinforcing the TC cups where the K frame pieces attach to them. I think the weight of the engine will flex that end of the frame.

I've been thinking alot about this. The back side of the TC cups are very heavily reinforced with the subframe (see pics) but there is nothing vertically to really add support where the cups attach to the frame rail. I'm open to suggestions here if you got ideas.

Thanks

Cameron

January 28, 2007

During construction.

Intersting how they filled in under the batter tray - I always thought that seemed like a built in weak point in the factory design.

Cameron

January 28, 2007

Thanks for the technique, I can try it on my parts car and see how well it works out. As you stated, what do I have to lose?
So the weld doesn't connect to the penny? I may have to try that trick. I've heard of putting something brass behind the hole, but I think I have a spare penny or two that I could use to try this technique. The problem would be holding it there with something while I weld.

I found filling holes in my floors an exercise in frustration so I would drill some holes and practice on something other than your car. Instead of a penny just take a copper water pipe from the hardware store and hammer one end flat. This way you still have a nice handle. I was a little surprised the weld did not stick to or melt the copper.

Cameron

January 28, 2007

Here's the front swaybar reinforcement. I welded 1/2" tube between the top and bottom of the frame rails with 14 guage plates. Haven't figured out the bottom side yet as not only are about 8" worth of spot welds cracked and seperated but the bottom of one frame rail has about an inch long crack.

Overall shot of the engine bay. You can see the finished K-member which the engine mounts will attach to, the swaybar mounts, & strut tower reinforcement. The plates on the firewall will weld to the strut towers through a 1" tube assuming the tubes will clear the engine but I think they will. I chose that spot on the firewall since there is a vertical gusset backing it and it also ties into the top cowl plate so it seems to be about the strongest part of the firewall. To top if off there will be a bolt-in tube from strut tower to strut tower.

I ordered JTR headers Friday so next weekend I should be able to stuff the motor back in and start fabbing the mounts.

Cameron

January 27, 2007

I'm trying to figure out the best way to plumb the former heater hoses on my LS1 since I dont have a heater. I've read lots of debate on the L6 on looping the line vs blocking it and I looped mine without cooling problems. So does anyone have a water system schematic and / or practical experience on how to deal with the heater ports with the LS1 when you don't run a heater?

Thanks

Cameron

January 23, 2007

The sway bar will attempt to twist the arm as it works... That seems wrong...

That's why I dont like these as the T/C rod is meant to to that - take TENSION and COMPRESSION not bending.

.... in fact the ball joint will have to rotate in 360* increments... not just half turns like the Heim joint end...

Can't you just turn the inner rod end and at least get 180 degree? The outboard adjustment seems pointless to me other than for some reason which I dont understand you want to change the relation of the ball joint vs the T/C rod attachment.

Cameron

January 18, 2007

Moving the pivot up or down doesn't do anything to change your camber. I'd suggest if this is a street car and you're not racing that you look at camber bushings as a cheap way out and don't bother with bumpsteer.

Strickly speaking moving the pivot does not change camber but the end effect is that it will affect camber. Let me explain. I raised my LCA pivot about 3/4" and run 1" spacers. This was an effort to keep a favorable camber gain in bump ... i.e. the front control arms pointing up so that the tires scrub out in bump and gain a little camber instead of losing it if the arms were flat or pointing down. Keep in mind my car is low and this allowed me to lower it even further. At normal ride heights the arms are already pointing up. My point is that the net effect of moving the pivot up was to keep the arm pointing up which narrows the track a little and reduces camber over keeping the arms either flat or at a less steep angle as they would be if you did not move the pivot up. I now struggle to get 2 degrees camber with offset bushings and EMI camber plates (which I dont care for but that's another story).

Thanks

Cameron

January 18, 2007

K-member mocked up which will also become the base for the engine mounts. Should both add some rigidity as well as mount the engine.

Cameron

PS - I actually have a receipt from who knows how many owners ago in the early 90's for a $1500 stereo install followed closely by a repair bill to fix the damage when the stereo was stolen ... come to think of it maybe that's why my dash is perfect. When I got the car it still had fiberglassed in front speakers and a subwoofer box fiberglassed into the spare tire well ... there's still a few lbs of glass stuck back there.

January 16, 2007

And the best for last. This is what happens when you are pushing down on your wonky floor trying to make it meet the rails and then proceed to spot them in from the bottom. You think your hand is not on top of the weld and well your wrong

January 15, 2007

I was thinking of using 2x3 .065 wall should be plenty strong right?

I agree with Pete that's 0.065 is plenty strong enough but I was concerned with kinking it with a jack or jackstand or curb etc which is the only reason I went with 0.083. Im my oppinion 0.065 is borderline for that use but I haven't done any testing to prove that out.

Here's a crack I found in factory subframe right at the base of the firewall. Appeared to have been jacked by a small jack which caused the crack. If you look close you can see where the were beat up in other places - they actually looked pregnant since the sides bowed out from being bent up by jacking on them .... granted they are a little less than 0.065.

Cameron

January 12, 2007

Henavevy58 -
Perhaps you mean motor out, but the motor mount towers in place? No luck there - I had the motor in, towers clamped, then drilled the bolt holes and bolted it up.

Yeah that's what I meant. Somehow I missed the page with the mounts themselves so now I can picture the end result. Did you end up attaching the engine to the frame rails on both sides liked you indicated or just to the K-member?

Thanks

Cameron

January 9, 2007

Using the search term "K-member" turns this up at the very top:

http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=117390&highlight=K-member

Jeronimo - I've looked at your site many times as I'm looking to do something similar but you never show the finished product at least as far as I can see. Do you have a picture of the finished mounts .... preferrably with the engine out. Lastly, looks like you used the factory rubber mounts no?

Thanks

Cameron

January 8, 2007

You really shouldn't put holes in the top and bottom, those are the parts of the tube that are seeing the greatest loads when this is treated like a beam. The sides would be a better candidate.

Cary

I put them in the top since it's redundant steel with the floor .... kind of like the factory rails only had three sides to make most efficient use of the floor. Actually the only reason I did this at all was because my factory rails were trashed as it's not the most efficient way to add stiffness to the chassis.

Regardless I'm not sure I agree with you for all load cases in this application. You are correct that the more the metal is from the center the stiffer the beam will be ... high moment of inertia .... however, I'm more worried by the yield case if you were to bottom out on a sharp object, jack in the wrong place, etc since the section is relatively thin vs the potential normal force that could be placed on it. I wanted to minimize the chance of screwing up (off road, slipped jackstand, etc) and kinking the beam. 1" tall tube is not much then start adding holes and well if you look up at my cracked factory frame rail pic and you can see where I'm coming from. This is the reason I went with 0.083 vs .065 wall was to prevent a jack or jackstand or curb from denting them otherwise this thick stuff is just dead weight. I just wish my factory rails weren't beat up so I didn't even have to mess with this ... and they didn't even have spec of rust on them.

Cameron

January 7, 2007

i don't think there is a point in taking out spot welds

I believe it's the cheater way for classes that do not allow seam welding.

Anyway here's the subframe. It connects to a 2x3 that sandwiches the factory subframe in the rear and the T/C bucket in the front. Overall I'm pretty happy with it other than it took forever to get square and level and symetric. Main thing I'm contemplating is how to lighten it as it's close to 25 lbs. As you can see I've drilled some holes but pissed the wife off in the process and killed a bit so no more big holes anytime soon for me otherwise I would have kept going. The rear crossmember is intended to add some strength by tying the two sides together and also double as a driveshaft safety hoop but once I get to the exhaust I realize it'll probably have to be modified or even made into a bolt-in. The front crossmember is just tacked in to keep it square while I welded the rest but it will be repositioned and will become the transmission mount. Hopefully in then next week it'll be welded to the car.

Cameron

January 6, 2007

Hoosier announced that they will be making the above tire size in autocross and road race compounds around March of this year. The tire should be about 22.5" tall and 10" wide.

IMHO, this appears to be the perfect tire for a racing 240Z.

Faster than full slicks? Since I'm classed there anyway do you see an advantage other than maybe in the cold? I'm currently running 9.5x22.5x15 R35 Hooiser slicks and am debating what to get next year.

Thanks

Cameron

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Gallery

Downloads

Store

Posts posted by heavy85