Thread: Followed Me Home II

Tweet

Thanks,daytonagary,,and parkwood.. I've only just got back to this thread,,and I was going to suggest Wescott's site,too.. They would have to have the best looking steel cage I've seen,,and intend to use a few of their ideas in our own glass bodies..

No Roger I'm not saying that the frame is going to flex at the c notch----------I'm saying that the whole frame will have enough droop over its total length that isn't consistant with the down force from the length between the suspension points-------and then with the weight of a body added, especially an open top body, it will flex even more and will be an issue with the door gaps at the top------------and the issue with the c notch is that normally about all that is behind there is the fuel tank and yes, definitely you will have different droop with full/empty tank that will be evident at the trunk door line---------


and as to basic statics--------I'd probably have to guess if you want to list your experience with statics-----maybe I'd list mine---maybe we could do a poll???

Sorry Jerry, but your position switches more often than the weather, to suit the whim of the moment and prolong the "discussion". Kind of like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a while you realize that the pig simply enjoys the mud, and couldn't care less about the wrestling. Just declare yourself the winner and I'll get on with my build.

Poll, Schmoll.
Jerry, I've built over 100 32's in my years of being @ this game, and have never had 1 have the frame flex as you so stated. These frames are 2" x 6 " and they don't flex @ all, they may twist a little but that the nature of the beast.
I usually don't comment on your post's but Roger is doin it right.
Go back and lay by yer dish.

Originally Posted by rspears

OK, I've got the No Bonding point. I'm not sure if it's that this body sat on a flat dolly for five years, or if it's just a normal thing but the doors are about 1/4" wider at the top than the bottom and the passenger side has to be forced closed at this point. I was attributing it to not being anchored well enough but I guess that's not the case. I'm going to look at it closer tomorrow, but thinking that I need to shim the body mount at the back of the cowl up a bit,the one just at the back of the door, or both.

This is your post that caused me to tell you about the support while working on it-----------I'll remove myself from this thread

I'm just trying to understand how a short boxed frame like these will droop with no weight on them? How much does that roadster body weigh? Just asking because I sure don't know it all. I've had people tell me my frame on my K30 will flex horribly and I'm still waiting for it. It's boxed with 1/4" and I feel you'd have to be at the end of a 300' sled pull with the weight of the sled at your back door to get it to flex.

Roger or anyone else, when I built my Corvette and did the front tilt. I used 1" round tubing for my inner structure and I wrapped the tubing with wax paper and then glassed over that to keep the 2 seperate. I got that trick from one of the greatest Corvette restorers around here. Whom, has sadly passed away. On cold days when the dew sets on the hood, you can see the factory bracing, but not my tubing. It worked on it pretty well.

Originally Posted by 40FordDeluxe

I'm just trying to understand how a short boxed frame like these will droop with no weight on them? How much does that roadster body weigh? Just asking because I sure don't know it all. I've had people tell me my frame on my K30 will flex horribly and I'm still waiting for it. It's boxed with 1/4" and I feel you'd have to be at the end of a 300' sled pull with the weight of the sled at your back door to get it to flex.

Roger or anyone else, when I built my Corvette and did the front tilt. I used 1" round tubing for my inner structure and I wrapped the tubing with wax paper and then glassed over that to keep the 2 seperate. I got that trick from one of the greatest Corvette restorers around here. Whom, has sadly passed away. On cold days when the dew sets on the hood, you can see the factory bracing, but not my tubing. It worked on it pretty well.

Ryan,
Me too on the droop. The roadster body weighs something less than 400 pounds - my neighbor & I moved it from trailer to dolly and we're both old guys.

I read the whole instruction from Wescott, and they clearly say that the supports on stands are used to check the frame for square & distortion. Once satisfied that the frame is straight they say to get it sitting on the suspension before bolting the body down and working on body alignment. I commented that mine has been sitting on the dolly for five years, may have "settled" some, and that I believe that I might have to shim a bit to get the door openings squared up. I still believe that to be true, but now that I've got he mounting holes opened up and had the body on the frame for the first time the next step is to paint the rear end and other loose parts, and get it sitting on the wheel & tires. At some point the body will go back on to mess with alignment, but I'll also be dropping in the engine & tranny so that I can start thinking about exhaust.

The wax paper trick sounds pretty slick! I'll try to remember that one, but may have to ask you again some day as memory fades.....

I've only had one fiberglass rod experience that I helped build. My old friend traded a ratty near junk 69 Corvette for enough parts and pieces to put together a 32 3 window roller. I can't remember the body brand, but it had been sitting on a pallet for years. We had to shim and trim that thing to get it looking decent when we tried to mount the body to the frame. That was almost 8 years ago. I so badly wanted to buy that car.

Great news Roger!!! I was shuffling things in the little garage yesterday looking for the rest of the Cutlass parts and found the perfect gears for your new project!!!! You'll have to get some different axles but I've got a mint set of 5.13's on a lightened 40 spline spool!!!! Put a bit of a cage in that Deuce and you'd have a heck of a nice little bracket racer!!!!---and still the automatic tranny you promised to have in the next project!!!

You know me, always trying to help a guy out!!!!!!

Gee Dave, I really appreciate the thought, but I don't think that the 5.13's are in the cards. I ordered a set of 3.55's from Speedway yesterday about 2pm and I was surprised when the FedEx truck pulled down the drive this morning at 9am with two boxes! Great service, even if Lincoln is only about five hours away!

When I got ready to cut the slot for the brake pedal I decided to copy the feature that Duane used on the '33, making the threaded bung removable so that the slot can be smaller and the pedal can easily be removed and replaced in the future. The bung was on the gas pedal side of the arm, which didn't make sense to me for an automatic so I swapped it to the left side looking at the pedal. More clearance from the gas, and won't be cheating the steering column so much, either.

DSC00670.JPG

DSC00666.JPG

DSC00667.JPG

Got it all done, mounted it on the pivot and decided to mount the pedal to the arm and the stinkin' bolt wouldn't fit. It threaded in about two turns easy, but stopped and wouldn't go farther. I decided maybe it was metric so I took the end piece off and headed to the hardware store. A 12mm metric slid through the hole, and a 14mm was obviously too big. A 1/2x20 would to two threads and stop. About then I noticed that the threads only went about 2/3 through the bung You can actually see it in this head-on shot!

DSC00668.JPG

Finally decided to cut off the bung and weld on a piece of a threaded coupling but they didn't have one in NF so I swapped it to NC, bought a new bolt to match and headed back home. Turned into an all afternoon project, but the darned thing's mounted!!

DSC00671.JPG

OOOo... one of "those" jobs! You know the ones, shoulda taken 1 - 2 hours tops..... then murphy steps in and there goes the day!

Most everything I do should take a few minutes and stretches into a few hours! Neat and clean job on the brake pedal install! The 3.55's should give the car a nice launch, probably a lot more practical then my suggestion, too! Oh well, someday I might get practical too.....

3.55's behind a 700R4 have more "kick" than my'68 GTO with M20 Muncie and 4:11's in back. Good choice, Roger.

Nice work Roger!

Originally Posted by Henry Rifle

3.55's behind a 700R4 have more "kick" than my'68 GTO with M20 Muncie and 4:11's in back. Good choice, Roger.

It must be a HP to weight issue. I bet I could make that 4 speed give a better kick than that 700R4.