Tubular Chassis Components?

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Neodeuccio

Addicted to boost...
Sep 30, 2006
846
0
16
Schenectady NY
At Figgie's recommendation I'm rewording this thread...

Does anyone know of a company that produces tubular or otherwise new chassis parts, like subframes and the like?
 
D

Doward

Banned
Jan 11, 2006
4,245
0
36
Alachua, FL
Not yet, but I will be :) #3 on my list of 'Shit we ain't got but dammit, we need it, so I'll build it!' :)

If you're needing something pronto, I can move it up my list a bit.
 
N

Neodeuccio

Addicted to boost...
Sep 30, 2006
846
0
16
Schenectady NY
I'm in no rush personally, since I still need a new engine, but it was something I thought of last week. We spend so much time and money rebuilding our cars, but we're still using 20 year old parts. If we can get new chassis parts out there to go with our new suspensions, brakes, engines... our cars will have the potential to perform even better, and last much longer.

Why not stop rebuilding, and start renewing?
 
D

Doward

Banned
Jan 11, 2006
4,245
0
36
Alachua, FL
That would be interesting to see!

I'm planning on doing adjustable upper and lower A arms for the front/rear, and subframe connectors first. Tubular subframes will be behind that.
 
D

Doward

Banned
Jan 11, 2006
4,245
0
36
Alachua, FL
group a supra;1322061 said:
doward ye alll the specs for the uprights to go to a single nut centre for the race wheels i have which are dymag 17x10.5 from the group a car
Click to expand...

I don't understand what you're getting at here. :1zhelp:
 
I

IJ.

Grumpy Old Man
Mar 30, 2005
38,728
0
0
62
I come from a land down under
I looked at building tubular Al subframes when I was going to lighten the Fat car but after crunching the numbers it wasn't cost effective or worth the effort for the weight savings.
 
F

funky_monkey58

Closing in on 200+MPH
Apr 3, 2006
1,307
0
36
St.cloud MN
IJ.;1322394 said:
I looked at building tubular Al subframes when I was going to lighten the Fat car but after crunching the numbers it wasn't cost effective or worth the effort for the weight savings.
Click to expand...

You are 10000% correct. I have subframe connectors on my car. And the be honest they weigh about 40lbs for both sides. And the weight is the ver bottom center portion of the car. Which is a good spot for additional weight to be.

I have been wanting to sell some to the supra community for a long time but my last thread on the topic kinda died.
If there is interest I will chop them off my car and jig it up and make them available.
 
I

IJ.

Grumpy Old Man
Mar 30, 2005
38,728
0
0
62
I come from a land down under
You'd probably be better designing something that bolts inside the car under the seats in a X with connectors in the trans tunnel Sean.
(think boxing in the seat rails)

This approach gives you a structure with X Y and Z planes covered not just X and Y of the under floor connectors dictated by how shallow the rear chassis rails are.
 
D

Doward

Banned
Jan 11, 2006
4,245
0
36
Alachua, FL
Ian, you wouldn't be able to get any major thickness under the seat (at least not under my power seat, lol!) limiting the amount of strength you can add there.

The X-Y plane its the dominant plane of motion when the chassis goes into what I affectionately refer to as "Wet Noodle Mode" - I've already mapped out a route to tie the front and rear subframes together, as a bolt-in solution (that obviously should be welded in for maximum strength) using 1.5" chromoly tubing, with no appreciable loss of ground clearance.

Funky, you should post up how you ran your system, though - I tucked my design up along the stock 'frame rails' running under the car (and the subframe connectors would make a great jacking point!)

I will be making these, but I've got a 0.66 5th gear for the r154 and 12.65" rear brakes to build first.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom