Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  1 2 3 >  
 Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Tubular Space Frame?, How would you do it?
plymouth37
post Mar 8 2010, 07:57 PM
Post #1


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,825
Joined: 24-May 05
From: Snoqualmie, WA
Member No.: 4,138
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
So I have been playing with the idea of adding a couple more tubes to the back of the Anklebiter. If you were to replace the back half of a 914 with tubes where would you put them? Here is a rendering of the original cage (red), drivetrain (Grey), and points that need to be tied in (green).
What would you do?



Attached image(s)
Attached Image Attached Image Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
plymouth37
post Mar 8 2010, 07:57 PM
Post #2


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,825
Joined: 24-May 05
From: Snoqualmie, WA
Member No.: 4,138
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
Here is my first draft, any thoughts?


Attached image(s)
Attached Image Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
plymouth37
post Mar 8 2010, 08:11 PM
Post #3


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,825
Joined: 24-May 05
From: Snoqualmie, WA
Member No.: 4,138
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
Attached Image
Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
underthetire
post Mar 8 2010, 08:18 PM
Post #4


914 Guru
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 5,062
Joined: 7-October 08
From: Brentwood
Member No.: 9,623
Region Association: Northern California
Dam. Just cut the body off the pan and build a whole tube frame (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
plymouth37
post Mar 8 2010, 08:23 PM
Post #5


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,825
Joined: 24-May 05
From: Snoqualmie, WA
Member No.: 4,138
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
I would like to keep the passenger compartment intact, I know it seems like a contradiction but I would like a nice stockish interior with a pretty stock passenger tub.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SirAndy
post Mar 8 2010, 08:24 PM
Post #6


Resident German
*************************

Group: Admin
Posts: 41,675
Joined: 21-January 03
From: Oakland, Kalifornia
Member No.: 179
Region Association: Northern California
QUOTE(plymouth37 @ Mar 8 2010, 05:57 PM) *

any thoughts?

Overkill? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
plymouth37
post Mar 8 2010, 08:27 PM
Post #7


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,825
Joined: 24-May 05
From: Snoqualmie, WA
Member No.: 4,138
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
QUOTE(SirAndy @ Mar 8 2010, 07:24 PM) *

QUOTE(plymouth37 @ Mar 8 2010, 05:57 PM) *

any thoughts?

Overkill? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

This is the feedback I am looking for, I want it to be able to handle at least 500hp but I don't want to add unnecessary weight by going over board.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
URY914
post Mar 8 2010, 08:28 PM
Post #8


I built the lightest 914 in the history of mankind.
****************************************************************************************************

Group: Members
Posts: 121,017
Joined: 3-February 03
From: Jacksonville, FL
Member No.: 222
Region Association: None
Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
URY914
post Mar 8 2010, 08:29 PM
Post #9


I built the lightest 914 in the history of mankind.
****************************************************************************************************

Group: Members
Posts: 121,017
Joined: 3-February 03
From: Jacksonville, FL
Member No.: 222
Region Association: None
Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SirAndy
post Mar 8 2010, 08:32 PM
Post #10


Resident German
*************************

Group: Admin
Posts: 41,675
Joined: 21-January 03
From: Oakland, Kalifornia
Member No.: 179
Region Association: Northern California
Ury, that stock starter looks heavy ... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif)


Aha, i see you replaced it in the second pic ... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/happy11.gif)
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
plymouth37
post Mar 8 2010, 08:32 PM
Post #11


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,825
Joined: 24-May 05
From: Snoqualmie, WA
Member No.: 4,138
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
I was thinking of yours when I was working on this Ury, it is amazing how much more complicated things get when you cut off the rear frame rails.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SirAndy
post Mar 8 2010, 08:34 PM
Post #12


Resident German
*************************

Group: Admin
Posts: 41,675
Joined: 21-January 03
From: Oakland, Kalifornia
Member No.: 179
Region Association: Northern California
QUOTE(plymouth37 @ Mar 8 2010, 06:27 PM) *

I want it to be able to handle at least 500hp but I don't want to add unnecessary weight by going over board.

For example, i think in the rear going from the top of the shock towers to the transmission mounts, just the X brace should be plenty as long as you still have the stock cross member where the transmission hangs off of.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif) Andy
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
plymouth37
post Mar 8 2010, 08:37 PM
Post #13


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,825
Joined: 24-May 05
From: Snoqualmie, WA
Member No.: 4,138
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
The plan would be to eliminate all sheet metal behind the firewall but I would replace the stock cross member with a tube between the mounts.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SirAndy
post Mar 8 2010, 08:42 PM
Post #14


Resident German
*************************

Group: Admin
Posts: 41,675
Joined: 21-January 03
From: Oakland, Kalifornia
Member No.: 179
Region Association: Northern California
More examples, some better, some not so much (IMHO), just food for thought ...

Attached Image

Attached Image

Attached Image

Attached Image

Attached Image

Attached Image
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jd74914
post Mar 8 2010, 08:47 PM
Post #15


Its alive
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,782
Joined: 16-February 04
From: CT
Member No.: 1,659
Region Association: North East States
I like the design you posted. You really do need many of the bars because of the load paths, but IMHO it isn't overkill as long as you use correctly sized bars. With sparing use of .035 and .049 wall tubing you can keep the structure light in incredibly rigid. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Crazyhippy
post Mar 8 2010, 08:54 PM
Post #16


Insert witty comment here...
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,659
Joined: 28-July 05
From: Home of the Coyotes, AZ
Member No.: 4,493
Region Association: None
The tube from the long too the motor mount wont be doing much the way it is, and would be better served meeting the cage w/ the other tube.

Likewise, the inner vertical from the motor mount up to the hoops will not be as strong as if they go to the "shoulder"

Last (and probably way overkill, but i've been doing Baja Trucks) would be a support from the upper shock mount down to the motor mount.

Could probably lose the bar between the trans mounts, there wont be any stress in that direction back there.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
plymouth37
post Mar 8 2010, 08:55 PM
Post #17


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,825
Joined: 24-May 05
From: Snoqualmie, WA
Member No.: 4,138
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
Tube wall thickness is another factor, I like the concept of using more light tubing versus less heavy tubing. No need to worry about racing rule books so any size that is appropriate is fair game. I like Jim's ideas, I was thinking 1.5 dia. what wall thickness would you guys use and where?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jeff Hail
post Mar 9 2010, 02:14 AM
Post #18


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,141
Joined: 3-May 07
From: LA/ CA
Member No.: 7,712
Cost no object I would go the route Hari Matsuda went. Not to shabby for a 72 year old. Actually these pics are a few years old.

Hari ran a few different cars but he did things with a 2.0 186 HP four / 1730 lb car that others running six's COULDNT do. The four cylinder was 100lb lighter than his later 3.4 car. The light weight car just by weight alone was 1-2 seconds per lap faster than the heavier cars. I am a believer in light weight versus BIG Horse Poo. Quicker and faster to a stop.

The orange car in the pics is the 3.4 that weighed in at 2080 lbs. Evil on the track.
When Hari was 69 years old he considered converting this car to street legal.






Attached image(s)
Attached Image Attached Image Attached Image Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jeff Hail
post Mar 9 2010, 02:19 AM
Post #19


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,141
Joined: 3-May 07
From: LA/ CA
Member No.: 7,712
Hari's latest configuration was this.


Attached image(s)
Attached Image Attached Image Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
BigD9146gt
post Mar 9 2010, 03:30 AM
Post #20


OCD member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 24-January 05
From: Sydney, Australia
Member No.: 3,502
Region Association: Australia and New Zealand
QUOTE(plymouth37 @ Mar 8 2010, 06:32 PM) *

I was thinking of yours when I was working on this Ury, it is amazing how much more complicated things get when you cut off the rear frame rails.


... complicated??? that photo should simplify things for you based on your drawings... he doesn't have half ( if any) of the triangle bracing you've implemented in your cad drawing. however those sharidon bodied 914 photos Andy put up are when you have a 3.6 track monster and probably need the extra bracing... you don't need to re-engineer the wheel, these cars have been around for some time now. take a tip from the track guys. if you can find some photos of that otto's venice guys' car, he knows his stuff too. did you know he has the fastest time at the streets? last time i stuck my head underneath the rear fender there were a bunch of Ace Hardware washers off-setting he rear 930 calipers to the rotor. its not rocket science mate, lots of these guys are running with early 1900's lotus logic.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · 914World Garage · Next Newest »
 

3 Pages V  1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Display Mode: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Switch to: Outline

Track this topic · Email this topic · Print this topic · Subscribe to this forum

- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 7th June 2024 - 12:38 PM
Invision Power Board v9.1.4 © 2024  IPS, Inc.
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community!
We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ...