PDA

View Full Version : Picked up my new C4 chassis!



55 Rescue Dog
06-17-2016, 04:03 AM
Picked up a new c4 chassis for my 55 yesterday, and it looks great. Ready to assemble, using all the stock C4 suspension parts. Painted seamless frame with transmission cross member, welded rear cross member with a torque arm. Everything is finished very nice with all the mounts and fully boxed dog bone mounts. I got such a great deal on it, I can't even say, other than thousands of $. Just having them haul it 3/4 of the way here, only left my with a 4 hour drive to pick it up. Saved me enough time and money to easily justify buy the 22 gallon ready to bolt in Rick's tank, which I never considered before. Also got to see 4 different C4 conversion cars that where driven a long ways to the, Back to the 50's car show for the weekend. 55 wagon, 57 wagon, a really cool 30's something rat rod truck, and a 55 truck that had just traveled 2300 miles. All of them were LSX powered. Now I just have to finally get busy working on my car.

carls 56 (RIP 11/24/2021)
06-17-2016, 05:50 AM
congrats, exciting times ahead. :cool:

Bluegrass Trifive
06-17-2016, 07:44 AM
Picked up a new c4 chassis for my 55 yesterday, and it looks great. Ready to assemble, using all the stock C4 suspension parts. Painted seamless frame with transmission cross member, welded rear cross member with a torque arm. Everything is finished very nice with all the mounts and fully boxed dog bone mounts. I got such a great deal on it, I can't even say, other than thousands of $. Just having them haul it 3/4 of the way here, only left my with a 4 hour drive to pick it up. Saved me enough time and money to easily justify buy the 22 gallon ready to bolt in Rick's tank, which I never considered before. Also got to see 4 different C4 conversion cars that where driven a long ways to the, Back to the 50's car show for the weekend. 55 wagon, 57 wagon, a really cool 30's something rat rod truck, and a 55 truck that had just traveled 2300 miles. All of them were LSX powered. Now I just have to finally get busy working on my car. Got any pictures?

Maddog
06-17-2016, 08:34 AM
Who did you buy the frame from?

Custer55
06-18-2016, 12:53 PM
Was it RR from MT? Just talked to them about wheels that will work on mine.
Brian

55 Rescue Dog
06-18-2016, 03:28 PM
http://rrframes.com/

55 Rescue Dog
06-23-2016, 04:58 PM
Only a total of 3 hours on a quick detail of the Dana 44 Grand Sport rear with a fine wire cup brush using WD-40 as a lube, I'm happy with the way it looks. Don't know what is so different about the aluminum on the differential housing, but it will take paint to fix that someday. After only another 2 hours wrestling the complete rear assembly in the frame, I'm ready to install the front suspension, after cutting off the stock engine mounts. Sorry I still need to l still need to learn how to post pics. Easy on face book. Hope to have a roller real soon.

NickP
06-23-2016, 08:06 PM
pics?

LEE T
06-24-2016, 06:15 AM
At least give us a link to your face book where the pics are.

55 Rescue Dog
06-24-2016, 09:46 AM
Ok, first try posting a picture. This is the chassis I built from scratch for my Camaro.
http://oi68.tinypic.com/15x5sp3.jpg

55 Rescue Dog
06-24-2016, 11:58 AM
Here is the frame with the rear end in place. Still working on posting pics. Tinypics is a little awkward so far
http://s9.tinypic.com/5egwae_th.jpghttp://i67.tinypic.com/20hag5c_th.jpg (http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=20hag5c&s=9)

LEE T
06-25-2016, 03:36 AM
No facebook link?

NickP
06-25-2016, 09:26 AM
No facebook link?

Lee, it seems it's common among most of the seniors or ol' farts here not to have a Facebook account.

LEE T
06-25-2016, 09:51 AM
Only a total of 3 hours on a quick detail of the Dana 44 Grand Sport rear with a fine wire cup brush using WD-40 as a lube, I'm happy with the way it looks. Don't know what is so different about the aluminum on the differential housing, but it will take paint to fix that someday. After only another 2 hours wrestling the complete rear assembly in the frame, I'm ready to install the front suspension, after cutting off the stock engine mounts. Sorry I still need to l still need to learn how to post pics. Easy on face book. Hope to have a roller real soon.

He said he does post pics on facebook

NickP
06-25-2016, 10:18 AM
He said he does post pics on facebook


OK, Lee, my bad............................................... ..........................;)

55 Rescue Dog
06-28-2016, 02:47 PM
Buying this factory traverse C4 spring compressor made it so easy, and safe to compress the springs. Didn't have the weight of the car to use, and this made it a breeze to disassemble the suspension. It was well worth $280 for a tool that was $1500 new. Does both front, and rear, and compresses both sides of the spring evenly. When decompressing, you can easily turn the threaded rod by hand. With it compressed to this point, I simply removed the 4 inner pivot bolts, and pulled the spindles, and A-arms intact in a couple minutes each side. It will also make it easy to make ride height adjustments on the front spring, and remove/install the steering rack.
http://oi63.tinypic.com/2pyqr2p.jpg

55 Rescue Dog
07-02-2016, 05:13 AM
Rear suspension looks good, and moves smoothly, with 5 inches of wheel travel, and the stock mounted toe rod has plenty of clearance. The camber swings in about a
3 1/2 degree arc. Uses the early stock C4 shock, and it is mounted at a very effective shock angle near vertical.
http://oi63.tinypic.com/2vcz6ef.jpg

55 Rescue Dog
07-07-2016, 09:01 AM
Didn't take long to turn it into a roller, minus wheels. Less than 20 hours, of which 1/2 went to cleaning parts. What works well for me on aluminum for a quick clean up, is a fine wire cup on a die grinder, with plenty of WD-40 for a solvent and lube, and only takes a couple minutes on each part. Then a quick buff by hand using never-dull. All of the stock C4 suspension pieces bolted right on, using most of the OE hardware too. This is a VERY rare 96 Grand Sport F/R. Pretty slick setup so far.
http://oi63.tinypic.com/24d1shc.jpg

chevynut
07-10-2016, 07:48 PM
Sorry to burst your bubble but there's nothing "very rare" about a C4 Grand Sport suspension. They used all the same suspension parts as any other late C4 corvette with the exception of the black front calipers which are available if someone wanted them. I removed the front and rear suspensions from a 96 Grand Sport and sold them with a frame for the same price as other dana 44 rear suspensions and those with the big front brakes which I get a little more for. Most guys are opting for C5/6 brakes.

My nomad has ZR1 front and rear suspensions. I think they're even rarer than Grand Sports but again the suspensions are really no different. Different suspension options used different springs and swaybars. I think the Grand Sports used the ZR1 suspension option.

You could get the J55 big brakes on other options and the dana 44 came with any car with a manual transmission. I've bought several over the years.

I think I have around 5 dana 44s in stock, both early and late versions. I have at least one set of J55 brakes too. Certainly not "rare".

Btw, if you have "plenty" of room for the stock rear toe adjuster your rear is probably sitting at close to stock height. Imo that kinda defeats the purpose of a C4 conversion.

55 Rescue Dog
07-11-2016, 05:50 AM
Sure the components aren't that rare, but finding a complete package from 1 in a 1000 grand sports in this condition is, I think. In addition to the bigger front brakes, they also came standard with the fast steering rack, and a 3:45 gear. The 96 cars also had the softest spring rates, which I will have to try before changing springs. Yes the rear might sit an inch higher, but NO mods needed to the suspension, or floor pan, and will have a very usable ride height. Spent $2000 for all the suspension, $140 for new rear shocks, and $15 for misc. hardware to put it together. All the bushings look great, and the original pads and rotors show little wear and will get reused too. The whole purpose of using a C4 conversion was to not buy a ton of aftermarket parts to make a better driving car.

chevynut
07-11-2016, 10:01 AM
Sure the components aren't that rare, but finding a complete package from 1 in a 1000 grand sports in this condition is, I think. In addition to the bigger front brakes, they also came standard with the fast steering rack, and a 3:45 gear. The 96 cars also had the softest spring rates, which I will have to try before changing springs.

The point I made is that none of that is unique to the Grand Sport. There were 1000 Grand Sports made in 96, so they're pretty rare as complete cars, but the suspension parts aren't unique or rare. IMO saying it's from a Grand Sport doesn't really mean anything. The guy who parted it out probably made a big mistake.

Sounds like you got a nice setup that's in good shape. I've bought several suspensions with only 50K or so miles on them, but the bushings were still somewhat distorted. These cars are 20-30 years old and deteriorate just by sitting. And a lot of the corvette guys went to urethane bushings just to improve handling performance.


Yes the rear might sit an inch higher, but NO mods needed to the suspension, or floor pan, and will have a very usable ride height.

I doubt you're only an inch higher than mine, but maybe. I don't think I'd have plenty of toe rod clearance at only an inch higher ride height. Even Newman uses a dropped toe rod to clear the frame...so does SRG and others. You also need to plan on smashing the axle bumper to some extent, probably on the order of half it's height. My standard setup sets the rearend at a 2" suspension drop from stock height and the front at a 3" drop. The batwing is only about 1/8" from the bottom of the frame. To me, lower is better because it lowers the CG and makes a better handling car and most guys want them as low as possible these days. I don't know how far Rick drops the front end, but again lower is better with the high CG of these cars. My frames sit at 4" off the ground at the low point which is comparable to make newer sports cars and is driveable. It will work at a higher ride height but won't be optimal imo.

Rick's frames are clearly an exact clone of Newman's frames and I'm surprised Newman didn't go after him for some sort of design infringement. One thing I never liked about Newman's crossmembers is that any sizable exhaust tube is going to hang below the frame. The AME center section eliminates that problem, while significantly stiffening the frame. Bolted in crossmembers do little to stiffen a frame either torsionally or longitudinally. The other thing many of my customers didn't like was the inability to use coilover shocks if they wanted to. You're stuck with the Corvette spring offerings because the shock mounts won't accommodate a coilover. If you just want a cruiser, that's probably not an issue, but for best performance picking the right spring rate is important.

55 Rescue Dog
07-11-2016, 10:55 AM
The brake rotors were really rusty, but after a 2 day soak in a tub of vinegar and water, all the rust was gone. I will hit them with a little paint.
http://oi66.tinypic.com/2v8g8rq.jpg

55 Rescue Dog
07-11-2016, 03:12 PM
The best way to lower the center of gravity without giving up ground clearance or suspension travel on a tri-five, is to eliminate as much weight as possible
above the frame rails, starting with the engine, and anything else, including the driver. Since, unless I go for a better car, I'm stuck with a rat of a car, and might even eliminate side windows to shave weight, since they are all cracked, and I'll never add AC, or drive it in the rain anyway. Just nice non-operating wiper blades parked on the glass like my other car.

Rick_L
07-11-2016, 03:53 PM
Yeah, no engine should do it. :eek:

chevynut
07-11-2016, 04:55 PM
Here's something I just learned today, while I was researching a guy's claim that "J56 C4 rotors" were thicker than J55 Rotors....

"Corvette Black Book notes that the J55 "big brake" option became standard on all Corvettes in 1995. In 95 and 96, some Corvettes (Pace Car, ZR1, GS, Collectors Edition) got different calipers; but, the 'big' 13 inch rotors were standard and the capacity of the brakes were basically the same for all."

So my '92 J55 brakes were actually a lot more rare than the '96 J55 brakes :geek:. I sold them with another late suspension in favor of my 13" Baer brake setup with 2-piece rotors. There were only 502 ZR1 suspension options sold in '92 and even fewer thereafter (ZR-1 was discontinued in 95). BTW, there's no such thing as a "J56 brake option" for C4s, only for C3 Corvettes.

The truth is, I have no idea what year my late front end parts actually are. They all used the same a-arms but the spindle design changed in 93 and they take a different hub with a different ABS sensor. The parts I used for the build were from a '92 ZR-1 but when I built the chassis I just picked some good parts out of my stash of loose parts and polished them. I swapped out my '92 Dana 44 case and used a '94 case for my rebuild, then polished a spare batwing I had and picked some nice rear suspension parts for polishing. My front swaybar is a Z51 30mm unit. The actual year means nothing to me. ;)

55 Rescue Dog
07-12-2016, 10:35 AM
Stainless 22 gallon by "Ricks tanks". Now I have to look at ways to run the lines. Hope the car needs more rear weight bias, because this heavy gauge tank weighs like 45 pounds MT.
http://oi65.tinypic.com/1jnsxk.jpg

chevynut
07-12-2016, 05:57 PM
The best way to lower the center of gravity without giving up ground clearance or suspension travel on a tri-five, is to eliminate as much weight as possible above the frame rails,

I disagree...the best way to lower CG is to lower the weight of the whole car. Ground clearance at 4" isn't really an issue, and a lot of new cars are at that height. New Corvettes are 102mm or right at 4" and they're obviously driveable. And CG doesn't just apply to weight above the frame rails, it includes anything above ground.

I think my frames sit almost 2" below yours with the suspension in the proper configuration. IMO that's significant. What could you move to drop the CG by 2"? Nothing.

What is your front end drop?

chevynut
07-12-2016, 05:58 PM
$1200 for a new gas tank and no A/C or side windows? :) :D

Maddog
07-12-2016, 08:06 PM
Stainless 22 gallon by "Ricks tanks". Now I have to look at ways to run the lines. Hope the car needs more rear weight bias, because this heavy gauge tank weighs like 45 pounds MT.
http://oi65.tinypic.com/1jnsxk.jpg

Very nice

55 Rescue Dog
07-22-2016, 03:13 PM
Here is a good example how to mount the forward dog bone in double shear as they are designed to be. Yes, the OE bolts on the upright are single shear,
but they are 16mm bolts, not 12mm like the front ones. Yeah, I know the 96 composite arms are not as attractive as the aluminum ones, but they have good rubber bushings, which is much better than poly in 3D movements. I believe the composite arms might be designed to twist a little too.
http://oi64.tinypic.com/2146zgm.jpg

chevynut
08-03-2016, 10:25 AM
Here is a good example how to mount the forward dog bone in double shear as they are designed to be. Yes, the OE bolts on the upright are single shear, but they are 16mm bolts, not 12mm like the front ones. Yeah, I know the 96 composite arms are not as attractive as the aluminum ones, but they have good rubber bushings, which is much better than poly in 3D movements. I believe the composite arms might be designed to twist a little too.


You still don't seem to understand engineering very well. Notice that the connection between the dogbone and the knuckle is single shear? How are you going to "fix" that "problem"? :)

All you need is bolts that are strong enough to take the loads the suspension is likely to experience. They don't have to be 16mm, they just need to be sufficient strength. I don't think you can show that a 12mm Grade 10.9 bolt isn't strong enough in single shear. I showed that it is. I use 1/2" Grade 8 bolts at the front dogbone mounts as do many other guys who implement single shear designs there.

If there's significant twisting at the dogbone I'd be more concerned about a fiberglass rod glued into an aluminum end than I would about a solid aluminum dogbone. If it came out it wouldn't be pretty....and you worry about bolts? But as I've showed before, the twist isn't significant and it taken up at the bushings. And why did it take GM 13 years of production to decide that "maybe" the aluminum dogbones are a problem? Hint: that's not why they did it.

Rubber bushings bind more than poly as the suspension articulates. That's a fact. Rubber twists on the inner sleeve since it's bonded to it and poly bushings are designed to rotate on the sleeve more like the spherical rod ends you said you liked so much. It's pretty easy to understand that, I would think.

Have you checked to make sure your shock isn't too long and so it doesn't bottom out before the bumper is fully compressed? I recall measuring it once and having a hard time fitting a shock between the stock lower stud and the frame. Maybe that's why they don't drop the rear any more than they do, to have room for the stock C4 shock.

Where is your rear swaybar?

By the way, why haven't you answered my question about front end drop? Don't you know what it is? Since your rear is so high I was curious what the designed front end drop is.

55 Rescue Dog
08-03-2016, 02:39 PM
You still don't seem to understand engineering very well. Notice that the connection between the dogbone and the knuckle is single shear? How are you going to "fix" that "problem"? :)

All you need is bolts that are strong enough to take the loads the suspension is likely to experience. They don't have to be 16mm, they just need to be sufficient strength. I don't think you can show that a 12mm Grade 10.9 bolt isn't strong enough in single shear. I showed that it is. I use 1/2" Grade 8 bolts at the front dogbone mounts as do many other guys who implement single shear designs there.

If there's significant twisting at the dogbone I'd be more concerned about a fiberglass rod glued into an aluminum end than I would about a solid aluminum dogbone. If it came out it wouldn't be pretty....and you worry about bolts? But as I've showed before, the twist isn't significant and it taken up at the bushings. And why did it take GM 13 years of production to decide that "maybe" the aluminum dogbones are a problem? Hint: that's not why they did it.

Rubber bushings bind more than poly as the suspension articulates. That's a fact. Rubber twists on the inner sleeve since it's bonded to it and poly bushings are designed to rotate on the sleeve more like the spherical rod ends you said you liked so much. It's pretty easy to understand that, I would think.

Have you checked to make sure your shock isn't too long and so it doesn't bottom out before the bumper is fully compressed? I recall measuring it once and having a hard time fitting a shock between the stock lower stud and the frame. Maybe that's why they don't drop the rear any more than they do, to have room for the stock C4 shock.

Where is your rear swaybar?

By the way, why haven't you answered my question about front end drop? Don't you know what it is? Since your rear is so high I was curious what the designed front end drop is.
Well I'm sorry I'm such an idiot for not realizing that a single shear mount, small bolts, is the best way to do it. It must have been a total waste of time, and money for the chassis builder to make a mount that is way too strong. Poly binds up in the articulation of the suspension more, adds bending forces on the bolts, plus shear forces, so that must be better too. Hundreds of bend cycles per mile no problem. It's too bad I can't mount Band-Aid safety straps under the bolt heads to hold it together, like yours, in case only one bolt breaks at the worst possible time, because they are not needed. I'm surprised GM went to the trouble to double shear the front dog bone mounts, when they could have just welded on a chunk of steel tubing hanging off the frame!
I don't care what the front end drop is. I've seen 2 of the 100 plus cars on the road, and they sit right where they need to be. Not to high, not too low. A stock tri-5 would be faster on a bumpy road, than one low for looks.
The C4 rear shocks have FULL travel. Sway bars will be bolted on last.

Maddog
08-03-2016, 07:30 PM
55 rescue dog, ignore the dick head.

55 Rescue Dog
08-04-2016, 05:26 AM
A couple cans of spray paint and this $900 "327" should be good for another 100k miles.
http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6199&stc=1http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6200&stc=1

55 Rescue Dog
08-07-2016, 06:12 AM
Having to always buy another tool is never part of the plan. Never had to make 3/8 fuel line before and tried my POS bender that never works, and decided I had to buy another one. Found a used Imperial on ebay for $32 delivered. I wanted to run the newer Ni copp tubing, but it is a thinner wall, and even this bender would distort the bend. Probably need the $200 bender for that stuff. I will run the smaller Ni copp on the brakes though. Didn't have a 37 degree AN flaring tool either, so I ended up with The Rigid for $110. It made a great flare, but I thought something was wrong with it because the cone was wobbling. Took it apart far enough to see the that the cone spins around offset angled bearing, so it rolls the flare instead of just going straight in.
Scrapped 5 feet of tubing so far trying to get the first 2 foot piece made.
http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6206&stc=1http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6207&stc=1

Custer55
08-07-2016, 12:14 PM
The brake rotors were really rusty, but after a 2 day soak in a tub of vinegar and water, all the rust was gone. I will hit them with a little paint.
http://oi66.tinypic.com/2v8g8rq.jpg

RD, What ratio of vinegar to water did you use? Looks like it worked pretty well.
Brian

55 Rescue Dog
08-07-2016, 02:40 PM
RD, What ratio of vinegar to water did you use? Looks like it worked pretty well.
Brian
Did 2 rotors at a time in a plastic storage tub with 3 gal of white vinegar and a couple gallons of water, let it sit for a couple days, scrubbed with a brass brush, and washed with soap and water. But they flash rust instantly, so hit them with WD40 while wet. Do not splash it on the driveway or anything, because damn, it turns orange!

55 Rescue Dog
08-07-2016, 02:53 PM
Got most of the fuel line done. 14 bends in 9 feet, but 20 feet to do it. I think I have the bends dialed in now, so the brake lines should be easier.
http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6208&stc=1

chevynut
08-10-2016, 01:52 PM
Well I'm sorry I'm such an idiot for not realizing that a single shear mount, small bolts, is the best way to do it. It must have been a total waste of time, and money for the chassis builder to make a mount that is way too strong.

That's not the argument. I've never said there's anything wrong with a double shear mount like you keep implying. You keep saying the smaller bolts are too weak in single shear but you can't prove it. I never said it's the "best" way to do it with a single shear mount, but you can't seem to get through your head that if the bolt is strong enough a single shear mount is just fine. Your problem is you're always fixated on what is "best" not what works, because you don't understand stress and strength. Many guys have done single shear mounts for the dogbones, and they work. Even GM did it.

Do you agree that if you took out the dogbone bushings and put 1.5" diameter bolts through the front of the dogbones and the frame, it would be adequately strong? How about 1" bolts? How about 3/4" bolts? Your problem is you have no clue what size they have to be, but you think it has to be a double shear mount to work. It doesn't. GM proves that to you at the back of the dogbones. Guys build stuff just like GM did it because they don't know how to engineer anything otherwise. Rick apparently copied Newman's design exactly because he didn't know how to design a frame himself.

Since you can't calculate it yourself let me explain the loads that four 1/2" Grade 8 dogbone bolts can support. Each bolt can support nearly 29,500 pounds of load in shear. There is no torque on the knuckle under acceleration so all 4 dogbones share the load. That means they can support almost 120,000 pounds of load together in shear. If the car can accelerate at 1G, you get a total of around 3800 pounds of total forward force (F=ma) on all 4 dogbones. That's less than 13% of the strength of ONE bolt. During braking there is torque on the knuckle. It wouldn't be hard to figure the compressive and tensile loads on the dogbones if one was concerned about that...and knew how to do it. But it doesn't concern me.

Have you bothered to calculate how much force it would take to tear the hole your thin dogbone bracket, or break it off of the frame?


Poly binds up in the articulation of the suspension more,

No it doesn't. The sleeve is designed to rotate in the poly. You obviously don't understand how poly bushings are supposed to work. I can't turn a tightened dogbone with a rubber bushing in it, but I can turn it with poly bushings. The offset is small in the dogbones when the suspension articulates. It's only as much as the camber gain which is a degree or two. I have poly bushings in the rearend in my frame jig...sounds like you've never touched one.


adds bending forces on the bolts, plus shear forces, so that must be better too.

You obviously know very little about shear forces or bending forces, so why do you talk about them unless you can quantify them? I already estimated for you how much offset you get in the dogbones when the suspension articulates, but apparently you couldn't understand that. Poly isn't solid and it gives quite a bit, and there are different durometers used for different applications. MILLIONS of cars have used poly bushings with no problems. The rubber binds a lot more, and it tears. That's why you can't tighten the bolts until the car is at ride height. That's also why most guys replace them with poly.


It's too bad I can't mount Band-Aid safety straps under the bolt heads to hold it together, like yours, in case only one bolt breaks at the worst possible time, because they are not needed. I'm surprised GM went to the trouble to double shear the front dog bone mounts, when they could have just welded on a chunk of steel tubing hanging off the frame!

My bolts, aren't going to break, and you can't, show why they will. I put the outer plates on as a safety item mostly to keep the dogbone bushing from pulling through the dogbone . But it also ties the heads of the bolts together so one can't move relative to the other (especially during braking) and cleans up the look, imo. It looks better than large washers and they cost a couple of bucks laser cut and I've been using them for a few years now instead of washers. GM single-shear mounted the rear of the dogbone with a lower grade bolt. I wonder why?

If you think you should do everything the way GM did it, then why don't you brace the bolted in k-member in the front and rear like GM did it? You expect 8 small bolts to hold the entire cradle with the suspension to the frame?:eek:


I don't care what the front end drop is. I've seen 2 of the 100 plus cars on the road, and they sit right where they need to be. Not to high, not too low. A stock tri-5 would be faster on a bumpy road, than one low for looks.

Well, I know for a fact that Rick hasn't done 100 Tri5 frames, so you're exaggerating. He builds complete cars, not just frames. When I talked to him a couple of year ago I'd done more than he has. I think he's done a couple dozen tri5s....maybe. Sounds like a Goldilocks car...not to high, and not too low. But you don't know how it compares to stock.:D

Sure a chassis set up for close to stock height can be made to sit lower, but the suspension won't have the right geometry.

I think it's hilarious how you nitpick at what's "best" and all your comments about "best" suspension geometry, "best" weight distribution, how a BBC is too heavy for "best" handling, how coilovers don't work right, yada, yada, and you don't care about one of the most important things that make a car perform....it's center of gravity.

You nitpick about every little detail on my frames, but you don't even care about the ride height of yours....you don't even know what it is. That's funny imo. :D

BTW, I hope you're not planning to use the stock C4 engine mounts that you still have on your k-member. They won't work. The engine is way too far back and offset 1" to the passenger side.

chevynut
08-10-2016, 01:57 PM
Got most of the fuel line done. 14 bends in 9 feet, but 20 feet to do it. I think I have the bends dialed in now, so the brake lines should be easier.

I see at least you liked the way I did my fuel line plumbing, eh? ;)

http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6217&stc=1

55 Rescue Dog
08-10-2016, 02:56 PM
I see at least you liked the way I did my fuel line plumbing, eh? ;)

http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6217&stc=1
Sorry never saw the pic before. Looks almost as good, but I'm sure it is much better though. Does 1/4 inch brake line help braking power when there is so little flow?

chevynut
08-11-2016, 09:58 AM
Does 1/4 inch brake line help braking power when there is so little flow?

That statement proves you don't understand hydraulics any better than you do stresses. :D

I chose 1/4" line everywhere for consistency and because I had a lot of 1/4" stainless AN fittings on hand. I saw no need to change line size anywhere in the system. I bent all of this up during mockup and it was taken off. 1/4" line resists damage better than 3/16" line when taken off the car and put into storage until needed for assembly. It's also easier to polish without bending. But 3/16" is adequate for short runs like the front brake. Lots of OEM applications use larger lines to the rear brakes.

chevynut
08-11-2016, 10:21 AM
Since you seem to be so obsessed about the strength of a single shear 1/2" bolt let me add this....

As I showed above, the total acceleration force at 1G is only around 3,800 pounds, if you can achieve 1G which isn't easy to do. That's a small percentage of the strength of ONE of my Grade 8 dogbone bolts, which can support 29,500 pounds each in shear, and there are 4 of them. I see no other loading scenario where the FORWARD forces on the dogbones would exceed what you'd get from acceleration. A tire can only support so much load before breaking loose, even when dumping the clutch. But there's plenty of safety factor in any case.

You once speculated about what would happen in the case of potholes or other impacts at the tire. So I took a look at that scenario, which I may have commented on before. ONE 1/2" grade 8 bolt can support 29,500 pounds in shear as I mentioned. The aluminum dogbones themselves are .700" diameter and are 6061 forged aluminum. Any idea how much tensile load one dogbone can support before breaking? It's about 17,300 pounds, which is far less than the shear strength of the bolt. So the dogbone will break before the 1/2" grade 8 bolt shears.

And that's a solid aluminum one....imo the ugly fiberglass ones are probably weaker at the bonded joints. So the aluminum dogbones are the "best" unless you replace them with steel ones.

You recently made a comment about eliminating one of the three bolts holding the toe rods onto the differential in another off-topic post on another thread. You also mentioned something about bump-steer with a dropped toe rod. It's related to this discussion so I'd like to know what your concerns are. Pretty much everyone does it, unless the car sits high enough in the rear to allow toe rod clearance or the frame design allows the use of the stock C4 part.

55 Rescue Dog
08-11-2016, 12:48 PM
Since you seem to be so obsessed about the strength of a single shear 1/2" bolt let me add this....

As I showed above, the total acceleration force at 1G is only around 3,800 pounds, if you can achieve 1G which isn't easy to do. That's a small percentage of the strength of ONE of my Grade 8 dogbone bolts, which can support 29,500 pounds each in shear, and there are 4 of them. I see no other loading scenario where the FORWARD forces on the dogbones would exceed what you'd get from acceleration. A tire can only support so much load before breaking loose, even when dumping the clutch. But there's plenty of safety factor in any case.

You once speculated about what would happen in the case of potholes or other impacts at the tire. So I took a look at that scenario, which I may have commented on before. ONE 1/2" grade 8 bolt can support 29,500 pounds in shear as I mentioned. The aluminum dogbones themselves are .700" diameter and are 6061 forged aluminum. Any idea how much tensile load one dogbone can support before breaking? It's about 17,300 pounds, which is far less than the shear strength of the bolt. So the dogbone will break before the 1/2" grade 8 bolt shears.

And that's a solid aluminum one....imo the ugly fiberglass ones are probably weaker at the bonded joints. So the aluminum dogbones are the "best" unless you replace them with steel ones.

You recently made a comment about eliminating one of the three bolts holding the toe rods onto the differential in another off-topic post on another thread. You also mentioned something about bump-steer with a dropped toe rod. It's related to this discussion so I'd like to know what your concerns are. Pretty much everyone does it, unless the car sits high enough in the rear to allow toe rod clearance or the frame design allows the use of the stock C4 part.
Jeez I love being stupid, and made fun of. I must be, because I am convinced a bolt in single shear will bend long before it even come close to shearing one. If you take a coat hanger and clamped one end and try and pick up a brake rotor the wire will bend and not shear. If you clamped both sides of a coat hanger you could probably pick up 10 brake rotors because the wire is trying to shear in 2 places without bending, I think?
Never said the dog bones were pretty, and don't care at this stage. Maybe they are better? Some things are going to have to wait to be show worthy. I would never get to drive the car if I waste too much time for shiny form over ugly function.

55 Rescue Dog
08-11-2016, 01:49 PM
That statement proves you don't understand hydraulics any better than you do stresses. :D

I chose 1/4" line everywhere for consistency and because I had a lot of 1/4" stainless AN fittings on hand. I saw no need to change line size anywhere in the system. I bent all of this up during mockup and it was taken off. 1/4" line resists damage better than 3/16" line when taken off the car and put into storage until needed for assembly. It's also easier to polish without bending. But 3/16" is adequate for short runs like the front brake. Lots of OEM applications use larger lines to the rear brakes.
If hydraulics is anything like electricity I get the idea. It just like OHM'S law that I'm in the middle of teaching for the electrical course at a local college.
As soon as the brake system gets up to pressure, there is no flow. A 1000 volts of pressure with a short current flow spike doesn't need a very big wire. The smaller line actually adds a little resistance to slow the flow spike and help lessen brake lock-up.
The only times I've noticed bigger rear lines was always with dumb brakes systems.

NickP
08-12-2016, 10:12 AM
Popcorn anyone?

Maddog
08-12-2016, 12:47 PM
YOU CAN'T BEAT A KNOW IT ALL

markm
08-12-2016, 01:15 PM
Hard to believe any one person can be an expert on everything. When it came to brake line sizing I went t my middle garage and popped about 4 or 5 hoods, all had 3/16 to each front wheel and 1/4 to rear. Done.

Rick_L
08-12-2016, 01:42 PM
I use an even simpler method. I look at what size fitting is in each of the brake system components I have. I then choose a line size that requires the least number of adapters using commonly available fittings. In other words keep it simple as possible. This usually results in what markm said.

chevynut
08-12-2016, 03:24 PM
I use an even simpler method. I look at what size fitting is in each of the brake system components I have. I then choose a line size that requires the least number of adapters using commonly available fittings. In other words keep it simple as possible. This usually results in what markm said.

I looked at what fittings each component took, looked at what I had in my storage bins, and went with 1/4" everywhere because that was the lowest cost for me. Stainless fittings are expensive pieces. Pretty simple shit to understand, I'd think. Even simpler than changing line sizes front to rear.

chevynut
08-12-2016, 04:04 PM
Jeez I love being stupid, and made fun of.

You take anything anyone tries to explain to you as being made fun of. And you go back to the same arguments over and over no matter how many times it's explained to you because you don't understand and don't want to.


I must be, because I am convinced a bolt in single shear will bend long before it even come close to shearing one.

If two steel plates are clamped tightly together with a bolt through them, where is the bending stress in the bolt? It's in shear. When you cut sheetmetal with a pair of snips or a hole punch, it's in shear, it's not bending it.


If you take a coat hanger and clamped one end and try and pick up a brake rotor the wire will bend and not shear. If you clamped both sides of a coat hanger you could probably pick up 10 brake rotors because the wire is trying to shear in 2 places without bending, I think?

So if the coathanger bends, does it break? If your coathanger was inside the brake rotor and clamped on the other end, it would lift the rotor. Of course two coathangers are going to carry more weight...but how much weight do you need to carry? If you're lifting a couple of washers instead of rotors, do you need two coathangers?

FYI bending doesn't necessarily cause failure, shearing does. Metals bend when the stresses exceed their yield strength.

And don't start in on your fatigue claims. I already explained that if stresses are low enough in steel, fatigue does not occur (fatigue limit). Remember when you were knocking C4 suspensions and said the aluminum suspension parts would fatigue? I do. :D

The fact is, my single shear mount works and you can jump up and down and talk about coathangers and other irrelevant BS all you want, but you can't prove it will fail in use. You can't even prove it with calculations, and I've shown the bolt is plenty strong. Show me how much bending stress there is in the bolt, and that it's above the yield strength of the bolt an I'll believe you. I already showed you the shear case and the stresses are far below the strength of the bolt.

One more time....a double shear design is better than single shear, but there's nothing wrong with a well-engineered single shear design where the stresses are below the strength limit of the fasteners. Get that through your head and maybe you'll stop arguing about it.

55 Rescue Dog
08-12-2016, 04:47 PM
Glad I'm not the only one that is stupid.

chevynut
08-12-2016, 09:45 PM
Study the drawing below. Please explain to me how you think this bolt is going to bend and at what force. What has to happen for it to bend? It's torqued tightly to the plate. The direction of the force stays constant, parallel to the plate the bolt goes into.


http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6225&stc=1

chevynut
08-12-2016, 10:00 PM
If hydraulics is anything like electricity I get the idea. It just like OHM'S law that I'm in the middle of teaching for the electrical course at a local college.
As soon as the brake system gets up to pressure, there is no flow. A 1000 volts of pressure with a short current flow spike doesn't need a very big wire. The smaller line actually adds a little resistance to slow the flow spike and help lessen brake lock-up.
The only times I've noticed bigger rear lines was always with dumb brakes systems.


Why would you ever want a restriction in a brake line to intentionally slow the fluid flow? Brake lockup has nothing to do with it. I've read a lot of really STUPID stuff on the internet regarding brake line sizing.

I hope you don't get around electrical systems very often. It could be dangerous if you believe what you wrote.

55 Rescue Dog
08-13-2016, 06:05 AM
Study the drawing below. Please explain to me how you think this bolt is going to bend and at what force. What has to happen for it to bend? It's torqued tightly to the plate. The direction of the force stays constant, parallel to the plate the bolt goes into.


http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6225&stc=1
Since this is a test question I'll just have to guess. If you tried to lift 29,500lbs with it, the bolt would stretch, the sleeve and bolt would bend or break at around 1500lbs.

NickP
08-13-2016, 07:43 AM
OK, who brought the Cheetos?

chevynut
08-13-2016, 08:14 AM
Since this is a test question I'll just have to guess. If you tried to lift 29,500lbs with it, the bolt would stretch, the sleeve and bolt would bend or break at around 1500lbs.

That's actually pretty funny and shows you really don't have any idea. Where did you get the 1500 pounds? Just a wild ass guess? :D

I actually made a mistake in a prior post above, but I think I had it correct in the other thread where you argued this. The shear strength is typically 60% of the tensile strength. So instead of supporting 29,500 pounds in shear, the bolt will "only" support 17,700 pounds in shear, about the same as the tensile strength of the aluminum dogbone. But it will support 29,500 pounds in tension.

Since the bolt has to stretch to bend, or the sleeve has to collapse, do you still think it will only support 1500 pounds?

55 Rescue Dog
08-13-2016, 09:03 AM
I wouldn't even try and lift a BBC with it. :)

yosso
08-18-2016, 03:15 PM
Need more data.

Bolt diameter and grade?

Torque on bolt?

Were the threads lubricated when the torque was checked?

Wall thickness of bushing?

Length of bushing?

Or should I just read the previous earlier posts? :)

Quick and dirty analysis...

1/2" diameter bolt thru bushing with a 1500 lbf load at the center of the bushing.

10,000 lbf tension load on the bolt. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwituZaKi8zOAhVPyGMKHbsNC7EQFggeMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spaenaur.com%2Fpdf%2FsectionD %2FD48.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHjdNMdXEsrTN_-8wVzokD0pKQh5g&sig2=bSzAfJ9zfoUbIByRDqET1g&cad=rja

Minimal deflection,

http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6228&stc=1

NickP
08-19-2016, 06:56 AM
Welcome Yosso! I just love real pictures. Nice short study.

chevynut
08-19-2016, 02:32 PM
Yosso, glad you showed up...welcome to the site. I was going to ask one of my former employees to model this in FEA but now I don't have to. ;)

The application is a 1/2-13 grade 8 bolt torqued to 100 ft-lb through a 1.625" long steel sleeve with a 1/2" ID and 3/4" OD . The load is through a poly bushing surrounding the sleeve and as a result is probably a distributed load not a point load as shown. The bushing is inside of a rod end that is constrained to move up and down parallel to the plate in the drawing. So that configuration actually helps resist bending loads to some extent.

Hope that helps. :)

55 Rescue Dog
08-25-2016, 02:28 PM
With limited time, I have a loosely bolted together a rolling chassis in a little over 2 months. Now I have to start onhttp://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6251&stc=1 the POS 55 210 I bought for $3000 after too many beers, and 1 click on ebay. BTW those are temporary wheels I can't give away. I have no idea why I am even attempting this project, other than my first memory of any car was my dad's new 55 210 when I was 3.
I'm not proud of my garage floor, but every spot was another project, or screw up.

55 Rescue Dog
08-27-2016, 04:16 PM
I have bought so many tools over the years, that only get used once, or so that it makes me want to get rid of some. This one though is a keeper, used thousands of times, and will come in handy trying different combos on the 55. Like tools in the background. Nitrogen generator, fresh air respirator, sheet metal brake, broom, etc.
http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6253&stc=1

Maddog
08-27-2016, 05:03 PM
What brand is that tire changer? Looks impressive

55 Rescue Dog
08-28-2016, 05:06 AM
What brand is that tire changer? Looks impressive
It is a Corghi Master tire changer I bought used for $9500 in 2004 after I tried to change a set of C5 run flats on my rim clamp tire changer. Got the old tires off, but couldn't get the new tires mounted back on. This machine is still one of the few machines designed not to make rim contact. Even the new Hunter has a plastic head sliding on the rim. Tires keep getting harder to work on, as all the OEM's keep making lower, and wider tires. One of the toughest sets I have done were OEM 335/25-20 run flats on a C6 ZR-1. I love working on the now rare, 70 series 14 in tires/wheels I can pick up with one hand.

markm
08-28-2016, 08:39 AM
I would love to have a rim clamp for Supertrick wheels and GFs 17s my 40/40 signs off at 16 just like me.

Maddog
08-28-2016, 01:02 PM
You have to change a whole lot of tires to pay back $9500, doesn't seem to practical for a home shop, but I'm still impressed.

55 Rescue Dog
08-30-2016, 02:40 PM
I am ashamed to have to post a picture of the Rat 55 I have to throw onto a new chassis, as is for now.http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6284&stc=1http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6285&stc=1

55 Rescue Dog
08-30-2016, 02:49 PM
I am ashamed to have to post a picture of the Rat 55 I have to throw onto a new chassis, as is for now.http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6284&stc=1http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6285&stc=1

At one time. I had enough money to buy a really nice car, but I spent all my money on beer! Still do, as I've had a couple
AN fittings already.

markm
08-31-2016, 07:46 AM
That does not look like a bad starting point, nice tires and wheels already included.

Rustaddict
08-31-2016, 04:32 PM
I wouldn't be ashamed of it.

55 Rescue Dog
09-01-2016, 04:05 PM
That does not look like a bad starting point, nice tires and wheels already included.
The wheels and tires, along with a complete rolling 55 seamless frame will hopefully be for sale in a couple months. My goal is to try and at least make this POS drivable by late spring for under $12k. Then go from there. Other than I forgot about wheels/tires, ugh.

55 Rescue Dog
09-19-2016, 03:55 PM
Since not much new going on here, or my car either, I thought I would post a picture of my street legal Camaro, from a school benefit car show. 18 year project starting from a 400 foot pile of steel tubing, all designed on the fly, without much of a plan.6377. My biggest regret is I should have done it with a 55 body. But, the body on this car was originally designed to be crashed every Saturday night, cost less than a $1000, and weighs less than 100 pounds, with pre-painted panels too!