![]() |
|
![]() |
#581
|
||||
|
||||
![]() The support for the nose of the car looks like a compromise between what is ideal and what would fit the car. Probably all caused by the open hood taking up the space needed to do it properly (as you describe).
The triangulation of the center brace by the rod is really poor. I question the effectiveness of it in the first place. Also, the nose of the car is notched so that the bumper attaches directly to the bracket and does not really support the nose body work. The corner braces do capture the body between the brace and the bumper but how effectively does that support the nose. Support of the nose appears to be accomplished by the headlight brackets that are mounted directly to the bumper. That is a pretty convoluted system for a support. I don't have a good answer but I was hoping to use a conical front mounted air filter in between the U shaped center brace. Unfortunately, the rod is in that space so I need to come up with something else.
__________________
|
#582
|
||||
|
||||
![]() BBshark, there was a guy building a snorkel that went over the rad to an airbox filter on cf. That design might allow you to put a filter on the inlet and tie into your TB. I was kind of amazed he snaked it through there. Probably not hard to tweak/fab.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...] On another note, cf one piece roof. Lightweight isn’t cheap. I posted some of his vids and he mentioned this, but didn’t show it. [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...] Fiberglass lower cost version [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...] Last edited by rtj; 09-29-2020 at 11:44 PM.. |
#583
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#584
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() |
#587
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Finished up the front bumper aluminum center support bracket a while back, and got it installed. The original steel bracket was 6.8#, and the replacement ended up at 4.4#. I was satisfied with that reduction, given that I don't feel like I scrimped on the material thickness that I used.
Leverage wise, a bit more than that 2.4# off the front axle, and a wee bit more of the vehicle rear mass allowed to settle back down on the rear axle. Win-win. |
#588
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Excellent! That means you now have 2.4# for a small carbon fiber splitter - or low weight PVC airdam. Get back that "missing" mechanical downforce (weight) back at speed with some small aero improvements!
(put tongue in cheek Emoji here...) Cheers - Jim
__________________
Rebuilder's Zen Saying: One thought leads to another. If these thoughts link into a chain we become bound to the project. This bondage is subtle and remains until we complete the tasks -- or, STOP Thinking! [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...] |
#589
|
||||
|
||||
![]() My Pace Car spoiler has a short "splitter" length in its design, and I've got a sheet of 1/8" Lexan under there going back to the suspension crossmember. The Lexan sheet and brackets weigh 4.6#, so the bumper bracket weight reduction helps get rid of about half of the mass penalty of the "splitter pan".
|
#590
|
||||
|
||||
![]() While perusing one of the local U-Pull-it junkyards I noticed a couple cars with the bumper covers removed, and I noticed what looks like an extruded aluminum structure underneath. The shape looked like a capital B (looking into the extrusion). Got me thinking if one of these items might be a decent candidate to replace the extreme rear (bumper) crossmember on my frame. Down side is I suspect the stock steel crossmember weighs next to nothing, but it's just a guess.
I think I'll do some measurements of the frame crossmember material thickness and width/length, and try to calculate the volume/weight of the crossmember to see if this idea/change makes any sense. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |