Heh, more metal randomly strewn across the car is better right?
shakes head
I believe I speak for us all when I say I’m eagerly waiting to see your stock engined, stock chassied, non-tube framed car roll out for the '05 season Bob :lol: Not everyone can be as hardcore and extreme as you 
… getting past the posturing…
I think ‘alesserfate’ needs to qualify his statements , be it monetary, time or modification level… so to avoid 100 different ways to do things… that would help, a tubed frame would be the best chioce but cost/time/ extreme modification to the point of being a heat magnet are all way up there with thisoption… where as weaponR two point braces are at the low end…
dude his question was very clear. He asked about bracing and a cage in orignal post. Nowhere did he ask about tubular race car chassis design.
Andrew.
…?? a cage is still a tube frame, it jst happens to be inside a pre exsisting shell… as well my previous posts stands… a cange can be a $50 ECT ( conduit tubing ) or 4130 .065" tubing…
I guess if your used to thinking at one specific level then it would be ’ clear’ but as a builder, it’s not that cut and dry… asking questions is the best way to understand the requirements and limitations of the person wanting the specific part…
Aight Mr. techincal. I’m starting to like you, your are the devils advocate in every post :lol:
Yes your right, a cage is a tube frame if you want to be picky and I’m not a builder so yeah I can’t relate to you very well.
Andrew.
ECT ( conduit tubing ) :hitit:
:lol: yeah I got a good chuckle out of that. he hes right in all fairness.
Andrew.
lol ECT is not much better then annealed aluminum for strength… you’d be safer without it…
andrew, If you look at it from the point of view of YOU being the customer, would you not want to have all these questions asked;) I think you can relate if you look at it that way…
yes I AM the debil :twisted:
So adding a couple pieces of steel to the front and rear of your car is more extreme then welding your seams???
Not sure anyone really cares but D1 will not allow “tubed frames”.
A roll cage does not = tube chassis.
A tube chassis has tubes from front to back, not just in the middle.
I believe I speak for us all when I say I’m eagerly waiting to see your stock engined, stock chassied, non-tube framed car roll out for the '05 season Bob :lol: Not everyone can be as hardcore and extreme as you [/quote]
Heh… See you in the summer, Bernardo…
Everyone wants the perfect answer to an open ended question…
not sure where you came up with that conclusion about metal ve. seam welding but I certainly didn’t say that…
also a roll cage, IS a tube frme as was made clear it’s a tube frame INSIDE a prebuild shell be in frome on rail or unibody. The specific use or the term ’ tube frame ’ means built up race frames , you take a look under the hood of some of those hoods and you’ll find a tube frome structure holding together most of the front end rad/IC setups, cut back wheel wells and allot of stipped down trunk box sections supported with tube framing…
Just to be even nit-pickier
Unibody is a child of the late 50s early 60s. First unit bodied car was built in the 30s, called the Chrysler Aeroflow IIRC.
Weight saving measure, also much more feasible for “small” A body cars. Chrysler adopted it to their full line in … uhh … '67(?) I think. Sped up production big time too. Very much the same reason we get FWD. Which is why my Charger, fully loaded, with a 6.6L V8 weighs about as much as a Z32 TT or a Skyline.
Oh and FYI … the super hiccup S13 I was parting … it had frame connectors, and they looked factory. Did Nissan do that to all HICAS cars?
You’re tellin us that your fully loaded b body weighs 3200-3400lbs? I figured it would be closer to 3800-3900. And 6.6L? Which mopar motor is that? Not trying to sound accusatory or anything, just wondering!
3400lbs - 3,600lbs for a B body. Mine’s had a bit of lightening done to it ('glass). 3,800 is closer to C body (Fury) size.
Just seems so strange to me, that my 19.5" long car isn’t nearly as heavy as I thought in comparison to a lot of “new” cars.
Heh, hence why I said “about as much”. I guess I should have said E body
(challenger/cuda)
6.6L is the 400ci B series low deck (RBs like the 440, 426 have a taller deck). Short stroke big block, winds out to 6,000rpm.
It’s the evolution of the 383. They just punched it out for '72.
It eventually replaced the 440, and was made up until the 80s.
Ahhhh. I kept thinking you had a cokebottle car which, correct me if I’m wrong, were a bit heavier than the restyle starting in `71.
Yeah, the 68-70s were a bit heavier.
71-72 were lighter and more aerodynamic than the 68-70. After NASCAR nixed the Superbird/Daytona cones and wings, they came out with this body style.
73-74 they grew even bigger, had more crash stuff (bumperettes, extra bracing) and got heavier again.
I don’t honestly know how much the first gen 66-67 weigh, I’d have to check the books. Never trust Internet car weights. People either read the GVW as curb weight, or make up an arbitrary number. Just search S13 curb weight. I’ve seen stock ones referred to anywhere from 2,400lbs all the way up to 3,400.
So, does anyone with a HICAS car know if they have factory frame connectors? If they are factory, odds are someone can get a pt# and you could just order them right out of a catalog.
… meanwhile, back ON TOPIC…
thier was a great segment in Best motoring Vol-12 about how the new EVO VIII MR edition used rivets to strengthen the body around the roofline and A pillars… specifically it was mentioned ( overall ) that riveting was stronger then welding…
rivets, as in what u can get in home depot? like a staple gun?? what size rivets do you suggest
time for more rice… those rivets will sure look bling in my engine bay