Frame Mods to Type 65 Coupe

[Jacob McCrea]

I'm going to be making some frame mods to my new coupe, with the goals of 1) adding door bars to make it legal for SCCA, NASA and ECTA racing; 2) making it safer to crash (not that I'm planning on it); 3) making it as stiff as possible, within reason; and 4) making it mine, so to speak. I've read the foregoing rulebooks, I believe that I understand what each requires, and I have the correct tubing (1.5" x .120 DOM) on hand.
The pictures below illustrate, somewhat crudely, a little bit of what I'm thinking of doing to achieve goals #2-4. I'd really appreciate hearing if anyone thinks that what I'm thinking is a good idea, a complete waste of time, not enough of a benefit to justify the extra weight, etc. Do not hesitate to point out if something will be little more than decorative. I don't want to reinvent the wheel here, and tube chassis design is far from my area of expertise. I'd also appreciate any photos from folks who have done essentially the same thing, particularly door bars, as I am at the early stages of figuring out how to add them. Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
2324
I plan to make the cross-bar on the two rear bars removable with Ballistic Fabrication connections, which should let me install the trunk floor panel without too much hassle. As for the additional bars connecting the front and back hoops, would there be any benefit to doing one diagonal bar from the left front to the right rear (somewhat in line with how the chassis twists under a hard launch)?
2325
Is there anything that I might want to gussett back here? The car will probably make about 350 horsepower in its first iteration (331 c.i.). Twenty years from now, it'll likely have a little more!
2323
Adding a bar in here seems like it would stiffen the rear frame a decent amount. Any downside? From everything I've seen it wouldn't interfere with anything (gas tank, battery), but I'd rather find that out now!
2326
Part of me thinks that the gussetts will be overkill; part of me doesn't. Any thoughts would be welcome.

Jacob McCrea

[Mike N]

Jacob do a search under frame mods here and on the other forum. turbodon (Don Vaught) and David Borden and others have done some great work on chassis improvements using some quite detailed structural modelling techniques. What you are considering is obviously good for strength but if you want improvements in stiffness there are other areas that are a lot more beneficial. Here's a thread by David Borden that contains some really good info relative to the MkIV which also applies somewhat to the Coupe. http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?141-David-s-Mk4-Build-Thread&highlight=frame+mods

[Russ Thompson]

I agree with Mike, check out what others have done. Dave Bordens stuff mostly relateds to the roadster frame but there are many carry overs . The gussets should help and look cool IMHO! :-)

[Hankl]

The one problem I see in the first picture is the location of the bar in the halo, closest to the drivers head. Clearance is very limited in that area, so I would see value in the center bar, but not the one closest to the drivers head. The tunnel structure can also be an area of improvement, along with some stiffening from the foot boxes to the "X" upright.

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

Guys, thanks for the responses; they are greatly appreciated.
Mike, I was amazed by David Borden's frame mods, as well as how stiff the Roadster chassis is right out of the box. It makes me wonder if I should just add door bars and send my chassis out for powdercoating.
Russ, those gussetts are from Ballistic Fabrication, a 4x4 shop out of Tucson, and are available in a few different angles. At $5 each they're a good deal and will help to save some precious time.
Hank, I agree with your concerns about the overhead bars; I have read (and believe) that an ill-placed overhead bar would likely add danger. I may do just one bar, front to back, right down the middle. I was thinking about a diagonal bar, from left front to right rear, but am concerned that I'd be shifting the danger from myself to a passenger, who should not have to wear a helmet just to take a ride around town. I will add the bracing from the "X" uprights to the footboxes, which seems pretty straightforward.
I'll post what I do on this forum. Thanks again for your much-appreciated input.

[Hankl]

Jacob,

Here's a picture of how Carl did the center bar in his Coupe.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Carls%20Coupe/110-1007_IMG.jpg

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Carls%20Coupe/111-1131_IMG.jpg

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

Folks,
Here is a picture of some recent progress on the frame mods. Everything is tacked in place for now and will be welded solid shortly. If you look closely you can see the Ballistic Fab connectors on the rear new cross tube. The connectors worked really well and will likely be used on the X bars across the doors.
For whatever reason, I couldn't resist the urge to install the additional roof tube at a slight angle. I put the Kirkey seats in before deciding on this and the head clearance is still better than the distance between the seats and the "outside" bars.
Two tools which I used for the first time, and which worked really well, were a Starrett angle finder (made for carpenters, I think) and a JD Squared Notchmaster tubing notcher. The latter seems like it was well worth the extra money compared to the entry level notchers.
The next steps are to fabricate and weld in a tie down loop behind where the differential mounts, weld in a Forte's driveshaft loop and finish the tubes from the footboxes to the "X" uprights. I got one cut today but was unable to tack it in place. From there I'll fill in a few open tube ends and install the door bars. As always, constructive criticism is welcome. Thanks for checking this out.

[Jacob McCrea]

Here are a few recent progress pictures.
3651

The Forte's driveshaft loop is a well made part; the fit and finish are very good. I elected to weld it in because it was easier and faster. I chose to install one after recently seeing a rear u joint let go on a really tall full-size truck that had just passed me. It was quite a sight to see. Also, at the left you can see a 1 1/4" tube I added for mounting either the "tow eye" suggested by NASA rules, or a parachute.

3652

I added these bars, as suggested by Hank L., by following David B.'s design on his MkIV thread. I thank Hank L. and David B. for sharing their knowledge of frame mods. This evening I also completed changing the 1" square tube to 2", and I'm considering tying the two together at an angle with a round tube. I will post pictures when the other side is done.

3653

Nothing all that special here; just a tie down loop that I added before I realized that the 1 1/4" square tube could serve the same purpose. Thanks for checking this out.

[riptide motorsport]

Lookin good!

[Jacob McCrea]

Here are some more progress photos. The 1" tubes from the dash area to the front suspension towers are now 2" x .120. This should stiffen the frame a little without the complexity of adding more tubing from the roll cage to the suspension towers. This will require some modifications to the footbox aluminum. This is not my original idea; Gordon Levy was generous in sharing his knowledge with me and I appreciate his advice.

3753

I may add two more tubes connecting the new lower tubes to the new 2" square tubes at an upward angle from front to back. I am not sure if I would gain anything beyond what I have already done.

3754

I had to remove a fair amount of metal to fit the tube to this section of the frame. It looks like I will have to weld a stud into the frame for one of the attaching bolts if I want to use the Mustang pedal box, since the 2" tube prevents installing a bolt from the outside. I may go with Wilwood pedals and master cylinders in the end.
3755

I went with a Type 65 for a lot of reasons, one of which was that I didn't want to do the frame/sheet metal work to make a muscle car handle like a sports car. Well, nevertheless, here I am with a carpet of metal shavings, mig wire and grinding wheel debris on my garage floor. Thanks for checking this out.

[Jacob McCrea]

Attached are photos of protective tubing that I added in the gas tank/fuel cell area. As with the other frame mods, the round tubing is 1.5" x .120 DOM. The placement of these tubes was a compromise between 1) wanting to make them as low on the frame as possible; 2) making this a fairly easy mod to accomplish; and 3) making sure that both the stock Fox Mustang tank and the 22 gallon Fuel Safe cell that is typically used with Roadsters and Coupes will fit. The Mustang tank fits just fine, but by my measurements I would have to move the Fuel Safe cell forward by about 3/4" from where (I think) it would otherwise sit, and probably make some mounts to attach it. This is because the new rear tube intrudes into that area by about 3/4".

If I had to do it again, I might weld the forward-facing tubes directly to the back of the frame rails, rather than widening the ends of the quad shock mounts and welding the tubes to that area. This would solve the (likely) 3/4" interference issue, but would provide a little less protection for the stock Mustang tank since the new tubes would be entirely above it. Anyway, here are the photos.

3982
3983
3984

I would prefer to post these as actual images in the posts, rather than attachments which can only be viewed upon login, but haven't figured out how to do it. If someone can help me with this via a private message, I would really appreciate it.

[Jacob McCrea]

And here are some photos of the most recent additions to the front of the frame. I tied the newly replaced 2" x 2" tubes to the new 1.5" tubes with 1.5" tubing, at an angle, on each side. I left a bit of room to facilitate header installation. Also, if you look at the two photos immediately below you can see some tabs, with nuts welded on them, that I added to the footbox tubing so that aluminum plate can be bolted in for more footbox/side impact protection.

3985

3986

In the photo below you can see a short piece of tube, maybe 4" long, that I added to tie the outer footbox tubing to the 2" square tubing. The objective was a little more side impact protection (although I have faith in the factory design and hope that my mods aren't taken otherwise). I'm not sure if it will do much for stiffness, but it can't hurt.

3987

I added a similar tube to the passenger side as well, to keep both sides consistent in terms of how the footboxes are connected to the 2" square tubing. I have the new upright tube welded in so that it will be just inside of the footbox aluminum on this side. I am trying to keep footbox aluminum mods to a minimum.

3988

3989

As always, thanks for checking this out and feel free to post any constructive criticism.

[Hankl]

Jacob,

Nice work, great minds think alike!! On the fuel cell area, that is also a good way to set up a tow ring for the rear, as that is a requirement under the SCCA/NASA rules, you're already there!! :cool:

(P.S. put gussets on the inside corners to help the flexing side to side)

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3983&d=1315360271


Hank

[vnmsss]

It's so cool to see the development of a competition-level coupe chassis and cage. I've had so many coupe owners and potential owners e-mail or PM over the last few years looking for the race spec on a cage and competition level safety systems....You guys are my heroes! Nice work everyone!!!!

Karen

[Jacob McCrea]

Karen, Hank and Steven,
Thanks for the generous compliments; they are very much appreciated, especially considering the sources. I'm humbly following in the footsteps of everyone who has done this before me, and am happy to see that folks are enjoying the posts. I will keep them coming to try to give back some of the massive amount I've learned here and on the other forum (both of which are allowing me to build a better car than I otherwise could).

The next steps are door bars and figuring out whether the Wilwood pedals will interfere with my newly replaced 2" x 2" frame tubes to the shock towers. Bob (rj35pj) posted a thread today about that issue and was kind enough to discuss it with me at length this evening. The bottom line: it looks like I have a problem if I want to use Wilwood pedals (and I'm pretty sure that I do). I will get to the bottom of that and post what I find. Thanks again for the compliments.

[Jacob McCrea]

To follow up on the post above, I confirmed that the Wilwood pedals do interfere with the 2" square tubes from the roll cage bulkhead to the front suspension towers. I have the fix figured out and partially implemented, but in the meantime here is an overview of what is required to install the 2" tubes in the first place, and to use the Mustang pedal box.
First, I fully removed and replaced one tube before doing the other, just in case there was a lot of tension built up in the tubes. Acually, when I cut each of them, they compressed ever so slightly on the Sawzall blade, but not enough to stop it from reciprocating.

To make it easier to fit the tubes, I clamped a piece of aluminum angle to the front suspension towers to act as a "shelf" for the new tubes to rest on as I fit them. I tacked them in place with the ends sitting on the "shelf", then removed it for final welding. I forgot to take a picture of that.

Cutting the old tubes off of the door hinges and preparing that area for welding was the hardest part. It required a lot of careful, time-consuming work with a cutoff wheel, a die grinder, and a 5 inch grinder. On the driver's side, you will need to cut the door mount in half and remove the top piece with a cutoff wheel, as shown in the picture below (rewelded), because the 2" tube will not slide in from the inside. On the passenger side it is not a problem - it will slide in from the inside. Of course, you need to weld the door mount back on after the new 2" tube is in place! I used 3/16" plates clamped to each side to prevent distortion while welding.
5244

I had to use a 5" grinder and remove a little bit of material from the front suspension tower, where the pencil in this photo is pointed, to get the mig gun close enough to make a pass. The strength shouldn't be decreased enough to matter.
5245

The 2" tubes are simply incompatible with a vacuum brake booster since even the original 1" tube needs to be cut on the driver's side. But, as far as I can tell from fitting up a regular master cylinder and studying photos of others' builds, a hydroboost unit would still fit, albeit tightly. But, you would want to confirm this for yourself if you make this change.

To use the Mustang pedal box you will need to notch the lower left bolt hole area. I am not using it, but I feel some obligation to show what's needed to use the Mustang box. You will also need to weld a stud into the same hole because there isn't enough room to get a bolt, or even a nut, on the outside of the footbox. Here are the photos:

5246

5247

To weld that stud at a 90 degree angle, I threaded a riv-nut from my driveshaft loop kit onto the stud and pressed it tight against the footbox front plate. I set the stud in about half way so I got a decent amount of heat built up by the end of the weld. It came out just fine.

Also, you might need to take a little nick out of the Mustang clutch pedal to clear the new tube. And of course, some changes to the footbox aluminum are needed. As far as I can tell, this covers what one would need to modify to use the Mustang pedal box. To use the Wilwood pedals, as I've chosen to do, I had to make a MIND NUMBING array of changes, starting with relocating the steering shaft bearing 1" to the inside. I will cover those changes in forthcoming posts. Thanks for checking this out.

[rj35pj]

Jacob,
Nice work! You and some of the other guys doing the extra frame work make me think about mine....if I build another one....I may be calling you for advice. :) Keep the photos and info coming
Bob

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks Bob. At the rate you are going you'll be building a second coupe before mine is done.

Here are some photos of how the headers fit with the new tubing - plenty of room! I considered adding a cross-tube here to make a full "X" but I really don't want to add any more weight to the car.

5595 5596

Also, this is hardly ground-breaking, but is useful enough that I thought I'd share it. I had my chop saw set at 90 degrees and had no interest in re-setting it for each angle cut, so I made this thing to clamp to the top of the saw. It is two pieces of 2" wide flat steel welded together via a door hinge from the hardware store. The stationary side clamps to the back of the chop saw with a Vise Grip, while the other is adjustable and, once set to the desired angle, clamps to the base with another Vise Grip. There is a piece of angle iron welded to the adjustable side so that it can be clamped to the base. The saw's existing work clamp still works pretty well at an angle. It saves some time that I'd otherwise spend adjusting the chop saw (or having my fingertip reattached when the piece being cut slips). Thanks for checking this out; I'll keep the photos coming.

5594

[Jacob McCrea]

And here are some photos from making the Wilwood pedals work with my oversized square tubes from the front loop bulkhead to the front suspension towers. When I changed from 1" square tubes to 2" square tubes, the Mustang pedals still worked with minor mods, as described above.

Using the Wilwood pedals is another story and the required changes honor the straight jacket. In short, the clutch pedal won't even move in the stock location because it is right against the 2" square tube. I needed to tilt the front of the pedal assembly forward by approx. 1/2", then move it back approx. 3/4", then move it to the inside by approx. 7/8", then move the adjustable pedal pads all the way to the outside so they don't get too close to the gas pedal.

Sounds easy enough, sort of, but for the fact that the brake pedal then bangs into the steering shaft. So, I moved the lower steering shaft bearing to the inside by 1" - no small feat. I also moved the assembly back far enough that the clutch pedal would hit the 2" tube around the same time that the master cylinder ran out of travel. If the clutch won't disengage, I'll simply switch to a bigger master cylinder for the hydraulic clutch (3/4" was what was supplied by Forte's). It might make the pedal harder, but I'm not concerned.

On top of all of that, I needed to take the bends out of Russ Thompson's pedal arm, move the pivoting attachment to the other side of the pedal arm, plug weld the throttle cable hole, and drill a new hole for the throttle cable approx. 1" to the inside. It was unpleasant to put that nice pedal arm in a vise.

5602 5597 5600 5598

In the first photo above you can see the copper plates that I used as a backing to put the "plug" in place and weld up the old steering hole before drilling a new one. Using copper as a backing to do plug welds is an old body man's trick because the copper doesn't stick to the weld. But, as I found out, at a certain point that's no longer 100% accurate and the two do start to stick. It seems to work fine up to 1/4" holes, but after that the copper was a little more likely to stick to the weld.

With the steering shaft bearing moved, I had to fabricate new mounts for the pedal assembly. The driver's side was simply a piece of 3/16" x 2" cold rolled steel welded to the 2" tube, then drilled and tapped. I went with cold rolled because it is stronger and I wanted to tap the threads. I used the same steel on the other side, but had to bend it twice and weld it to the existing tube and front of the footbox, as shown below. The gusset is there to reduce flex. I know from bicycle racing that flex in the brake system robs a lot of stopping power. Granted, this is no bicycle, but I think the conept is sufficiently universal to warrant making the footbox mounts as stiff as possible.

5599 5601

The fit for all of this was so tight that I had to tape thin paint sticks to the steering shaft and one of the 3/4" footbox tubes to make sure that I had enough room when everything was either welded solid or bolted in. It took a lot of thought to make this work and hopefully the added stiffness and braking will be worth the considerable effort.

I elected to use Wilwood pedals after studying an excellent thread on the other forum about "good brakes on a budget." It's a really interesting read and I would suggest it to anyone who is figuring out what brakes to buy. I have to add that I need to run a hydraulic clutch because a Wilwood manual clutch setup would occupy the same space as a "forward bar" that I need to run through the top of the footbox and out to the front suspension towers to meet SCCA rules (at least as I read them). If I wanted to run Wilwood pedals and a cable-operated clutch, I would have to re-configure where I'd run the forward bars. Frankly, I'm not sure that I could do that with the available space. In hindsight, I might have used 1.5" x .120 DOM tubing in place of the 2" square tubing and just dealt with the other problems that would have been created by that course of action. But what's done is done and the round tubes would have created their own set of issues. I will post a few more pics shortly. Thanks for checking this out.

[xlr8or]

Nice work.

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks for the compliments. Here are a few more photos from making the Wilwood pedals fit with the frame modifications.
It was a little chilly in the garage so I pre-heated the metal just a little. It helps to prevent the start of the weld bead from being too cold, and therefore weak. I also think it is good to burn off any traces of moisture on the surface, but that's just my own unsupported opinion.
5651

I made and used this paper pattern to double-check my measurements for making the new hole for the lower steering shaft bearing. Nice and simple!
5652

The black square tube is an alternative inner pedal box mount that I tried, but it interfered with the gas pedal, so I went with an alternative design using the 2" x 3/16" cold rolled flat steel.
5653

If you look closely you can see where a 3/4" x 3/4" cross-tube was removed in order to move the pedals back.
5654

Nothing special here, just drilling and tapping one of the holes.
5655

The new steering bearing hole.
5656

[Stengun]

Howdy Jacob,

Nice work!

With all your frame mods, will you be able to use any of the factory aluminum panels?

My Spyder has a highly modified frame and none of the factory panels will fit and I'm in the progress of making new panels.

Keep up the great work!

Paul

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks for the compliment, Paul. It looks like your Spyder is moving along very nicely. Those headers are unbelievable!

I think I'll need to make a new panel for the front of the driver's footbox, but that's more the result of the lack of a master cylinder sticking out of it than anything else. I think (and we'll see if I'm right) that everything else can be trimmed and tweaked to fit. The top of the passenger's footbox will need to be lowered approx. 1/2 inch in the front because the 2" square tube runs at a little different angle. Using square tubing, rather than round, made attaching the passenger footbox easier, but the square tubing does not comply with SCCA rules for tubing in that area, so I'll need to add a DOM tube about 5" above it if I want an SCCA-compliant cage, at least as I read the rules. Also, I think I'll build the footboxes to accept a modular engine, even though I'm using a 331, since I plan to own this car until my last day.

Anyway, here are a few more frame mod photos. These were added to the outside of the 2x2 outside framerails to give me more area to mount the interior aluminum panel that runs from the door sill to the frame. The factory panel comes in at an angle; I want it to go straight down so that I have more room to attach Nascar-style door bars and the aluminum panel. It's 1/8" x 1" cold rolled steel. In the photos, they are not welded in. Thanks for checking this out.

5714

5713

5712

[Jacob McCrea]

I know everyone likes pictures, so here are a few more from recent progress. The one immediately below is a pedal stop that I added so that the clutch pedal doesn't crash into the 2x2 tube at the very end of its travel. I mounted the pedal box so that the clutch pedal hit the frame at the same time that the master cylinder ran out of travel, but I still needed to physically stop the pedal from hitting the frame. It's 3/16" cold rolled steel, shaped to fit, and probably stronger than necessary, but I wasn't sure how well 1/8" steel would tap. I guess I could have put nuts on each side of the bolt, but what's done is done.

5968

Here is the dead pedal I welded in - again, 3/16" cold rolled steel. The shiny pads are replacement pedal pads from Wilwood. They were less than $9 each, so it didn't make much sense for me to fab something.

5969

5970

I recently came up with a few ideas for taking off some of the weight that I've been adding. Hopefully I'll have more photos before too long. Thanks for checking this out.

[riptide motorsport]

Just excellent work.

[Bob Cowan]

Way cool, and fascinating. I have one suggestion, and a couple of questions.

After playing around with it, I'v found that the dead pedal works best just slightly behind the clutch pedal, closer to me. It's comfortable, and any easy/quick transition from one pedal to another. But maybe that's just me.

I was fascinated to how see you used the software to figure out where to put the additional bars. That's way beyond my skills. Fitting some of the new braces is probably beyond my skills, too. Because I am ignorant in this area, it got me to wondering. You added all the braces to make the chassis stiffer, and that adds weight. Do you think the car will be faster? or slower? Or will the two balance out, and make the car more precise and easier to drive?

[Brian Z]

Jacob,

Have you tested your turning radius with the addition of this tube?


http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3652&d=1314239915

It looks like it would affect your turning radius at full lock. I am just curious. It looks like it would add alot of strength to the chassis!

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks for the input and compliments, guys; they are much appreciated.

Bob, I may have the dead pedal back too far. I imagine I could make something that bolts to the existing dead pedal if that's the case. I'm 5' 10 1/2," with longer legs for that height. We'll see how it shakes out.
As for the ideas, I've just been following the designs that David B. posted on his MKIV build thread, as well as suggestions from Gordon L. and Hank L. I know computers and software like most people know cars - I can turn it on and use it, but have only a dim understanding of how it works! So, I can't take credit for any computer analysis - that belongs to David B.

Fitting the tubes was tricky, especially at an angle. It required a combination of taking my time, thinking through what I was doing, and constantly checking the fit to see where material had to be removed. I did more trial and error than someone who does this for a living. A good notcher - a JD Squared Notchmaster, was very helpful. It's also worth mentioning that the Notchmaster works on flat stock (like my dead pedal), while the entry level notchers apparently only allow you to notch tubing.

As for the weight, I'm really not sure how it will pan out. Hopefully the added stiffness, which may or may not even be needed, will be worth the weight penalty. I know from assembling racing bicycles that you can start out with a 4lb carbon fiber frame and end up with a 20 pound bike if you don't select the parts with care, and this is no different. The car will be a street-legal track car, so some weight will be omitted - heater, A/C, carpet, etc. I think I'm getting to the saturation point with weight and am thinking about remaking the driveshaft loop, and perhaps a few other parts, out of aluminum.

Brian, I considered whether those lower bars would limit my turning radius and I imagine that they will. My understanding is that I can add "rack limiters" to the steering rack to address that. I don't recall seeing adjustable bump-stops on any spindles, so I don't think I can rely on that. We'll see. It's certainly a situation where I'm "assuming the risk." :)

I'll post pictures upon more progress. Thanks for checking it out.

[vnmsss]

Very nice work Jacob! Really appreciate the pics and narrative description. Your design, fabrication and technological skills are noteworthy....Team Thunder Valley Racing is very pleased to welcome your efforts into the "Coupe for the track" building community....We're sure gonna have some serious track cars out there next year...Can't wait for all of us to run together in the future! (I know Daytona Dan is ready now!!) We'll be out your way soon Dan! ;.)

Karen

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks for the compliments and warm welcome, Karen. I'm pleased to be part of this tremendously talented community, to say the very least.

By the way, here is a little item I fabbed up last week. I noticed that when I pulled up on the master cylinders with my hands there was a little flex in the pedal box, so I made this brace to go from the top of the pedal box to the front of the footbox. It is 3/16" cold rolled steel and should reduce that last little bit of flex in the pedal box and mounts, while only adding a pound or so. I may make another out of aluminum at some point. Conceptually at least, I don't see it as any different than braided brake lines - the goal being to prevent wasting my foot's pressure on something other than moving the brake pads. When I get the car together I'll drive it with and without, and see if there's a difference. I don't imagine it will make a big difference given how strong the existing mounts are, but (for all I know) it might be more noticeable if thinner mounting brackets are used on the pedal box. As always, constructive criticism is welcomed, and thanks for checking this out.

6086

6085

[Jacob McCrea]

I recently had the time to add the "front hoop to front suspension" bars required by S.C.C.A. rule 9.4(C)(2). This rule provides that "[o]ne tube must extend, from each front down tube, foreward to the firewall or through the firewall except in vehicles in Improved Touring, Showroom Stock, Spec Miata, and Touring. This tube, one on each side, must connect to the chassis at a point not more than 12 inches forward of the front axle centerline."

Here are some of the photos. You can see the metal pieces that I clamped in place to set up "limiting points" for fitting the tubes. In doing so, I was able to make sure that I was putting the tube in the same spot each time that I test fit it and decided where to remove additional material.
7849
Here is the initial hole that I drilled for the bar to pass through; I had to ream it out quite a bit at the top to allow enough movement to properly fit the tube.
7857
Here is a good shot of the angles and clamps I used to jig up the front of the driver's side tube.
7856
Here is the passenger side tube in place, but before welding. It is not parallel with the square tube below it, but going forward it gets closer by maybe 1/2" over the length of the tube.
7855
7854
This is the final fit on the two joints, but the edges still need to be chamfered so that the weld penerates all the way through the tube, rather than just sitting on the top of the tube.
7853
7852
I picked up one of these Pipemaster tools from Van Sant Enterprises and it was pretty useful. I would not use them to make the very last cut on a joint, but they do a great job of getting you "in the ballpark."
7851
7850
The driver's side connection, before being chamfered.
7858
Thanks for checking this out; as always, any comments are welcomed.

[Jacob McCrea]

And here are a few more photos. In the first photo you can see how the tube fits through the front of the footbox.
7860
The final fit, before chamfering.
7861
It would have been easier to install straight bars, but for aesthetic reasons, ease of access and to give as much space as possible in the driver's footbox for mounting other items, I elected to make them run parallel to the square tubes. The bends are 19 degrees, although I gave the driver's side a little nudge with the tubing bender during final fitting, so it may be 20 degrees. I arrived at 19 degrees by measuring the angle at which the square bars below the new tubes intersect the bulkhead below the dash, which is about 19.5 degrees. The original square 1" tubes run at a slightly different angle. Also, for what it's worth, I started the bend with 10 1/4" of tube sticking out of the die, which was the perfect length.
7862
The welder in the background is a Miller 211, using .035 wire and a 75/25 gas mix. It works pretty well.
7863
Here is the "ready to weld" tube. I have been cleaning the tubes with PPG DX 440 before welding, and I clean them as well as I would to apply paint. You can use many other things, but DX 440 is what I had on hand.
7864
Here are the welded connections at the front suspension towers. I still need to hit them with a wire wheel.
7865
7866

[Hankl]

Jake,

Nice work, check Karens blog out to see what we did this weekend.


Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

I finally decided that if I'm in for a dime, I'm in for a dollar, so I cut off the mounts for the Mustang tank and set up the frame to only work with the Factory Five-type fuel cell. When I installed the fuel cell protection tubes I followed a design that I had some pictures of, and it had the rear protection tube inside the back of the structure, rather than outside. It didn't seem like it would make much difference at the time, and I knew of no better design, so I simply ensured that I had plenty of room for the FFR cell dimensions (34" x 17.5" x 9.5") and welded it in. What I did not realize until I saw the Spec Coupe design is that the FFR-style cell fits perfectly within the existing 3/4" square cross tubes; all you need to do is weld in some mounts. So, because I had the protection tube intruding into that space by about 3/4", I had to move the cell mounts forward and cut out one of the square cross-tubes which the cell would otherwise hang from. What I ended up with was a design which hangs the back of the cell from the rear cell protection tube, while the front hangs from a 1.5" x .120 DOM crossmember that I welded in to tie the frame rails together a little tighter.

I will likely split the trunk floor in two right in front of the fuel cell and make the rear panel removable so that I can access (and remove) the fuel cell from the trunk. I'll probably bond in a piece of aluminum angle, running side to side, to attach the trunk floor to it, since I had to cut the existing square tube out to make room for what is something of a design oversight on my part. On the upside, the cell now hangs from some seriously strong tubing. I plan to build the rest of the brackets for hanging the fuel cell from 1/4" x 2" aluminum (bolting them to the existing mounts), and make the surrounding lower cage from aluminum as well (following the Spec Coupe design). My guess is that even at 1/4" thick, the aluminum has a point at which it will fatigue and fail, so I'll keep any eye on it when this thing finally hits the roads.

While I committed to buying the cell, I didn't want to "pay the freight" just yet, so I mocked up the mounts with a wooden box I built to the cell dimensions. Anyway, here are the photos:

8791

8790

8792

8789

8788

[rj35pj]

As always, super work, it looks great. :)

[CHOTIS BILL]

Has anyone ever check the tonsional stiffness of a coupe frame before and after modifications?

Bill Lomenick

[Jacob McCrea]

Bob, thanks for the kind words.

Bill, I'm not aware of any actual tests being done. But, Gordon Levy told me that changing the 1" square tubes from the front hoop to the front suspension towers to 2" x .120 will yield about a 200% increase in stiffness. I would be interested in your thoughts on whether these frame mods appear to be worthwhile, effective, etc. Also, welcome to the forum (sorry it is so late).

[Hankl]

You're INSANE!!!


Hank :cool:

[Timb]

You're INSANE!!!


Hank :cool:

You need to issue a stronger jacket to this one :)

[loeffler1]

My only question is: What are you waiting to get hit by? a freight locomotive??

Bill

[Hankl]

You need to issue a stronger jacket to this one :)

Bad thing is, I keep encouraging Him!!

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

My only question is: What are you waiting to get hit by? a freight locomotive??

Bill

Bill,

For what it's worth, some of the mods I frankly doubt I would do again, but what's done is done. I don't think I'd do the diagonal brace between the front and back hoops again. The 2" square tubes in the front add a lot of weight, do not comply with SCCA rules because they are not DOM tube, and were a mind-numbing amount of work to install and make work with Wilwood pedals. So, if I did another car, I'd leave them as is, at 1", but I would install the tubes above them just as I did to comply with SCCA rules. The diagonal across the rear bars I'd probably do again. I really like the look of a complex tube chassis - it reminds me of my (now twice blown up) Ducati 900SS-SP. The little gussets I'd do again. The tube between the rear frame rails, maybe, maybe not.

We'll see how it all works. I'm not too worried about it. I do have some plans to remove some of the weight I've added - the recipe involves Bon Ami cleanser, 99% isopropyl alcohol and a visit to a friend who builds tactical rifles for some machining. Other than the door bars, we're just about done.

[CHOTIS BILL]

Jacob, I have been thinking about your frame modifications and some are very good and some I am not sure about. All the frames I designed and built were a true space frame where as the coupe frame is a ladder type. The space frame places tubes at junctions with other tube which prevents the tubes from having bending loads where as the ladder frame uses thicker wall tubes to resist the bending loads from tubes placed in the middle of other tubes. I see you changed the center tube that joined the two roll hoops from being perpendicular to the roll hoops to being at an angle which I think will add much more tensional strength which is good but there are tubes just in front of the exhaust pipes, joining the front upper and lower frame tubes that I am not sure add much additional strength but if it were me I would model it and see. On all the frames I designed I made a 1/5 scale model out of 1/16” welding rods and soldered them together. I could then add or cut any tube and then try and flex the model and see if that tube actually helped or not. In places you can’t run a straight tube, such as the engine bay you can make a “Y” and join it to the frame at 3 places and make it removable for engine removal. Over all I would think your frame is much stiffer than it was but without real number it is hard know if it is over kill or not but generally stiffer is better.

Bill Lomenick

[Jacob McCrea]

Bill,
I appreciate your thoughts. I was going to run the additional tube across the front and back hoops at a much greater angle, just about from corner to corner, but installed it where I did to keep it out of the passenger's "head space." I'm also not convinced that the angled tubes in front of the headers are worth much. My sense is that I either need to cut them out and do another design, or complete the "X," for them to be fully effective. As it stands, I'm not sure that they're doing much.

I was able to weld in some of the door bar uprights tonight and will post photos shortly. But in the meantime, here are 2 custom tools I fabbed up to work on the IRS differential - a pinion flange holder for setting the preload and a bracket that bolts to the diff cover holes and sits in a vice so you can work on the diff without it rolling around a work bench. I have never seen something like the diff holding bracket for sale, nor would I expect anyone to sell it, but it should make working on the center section much easier. I taped a piece of paper to the back of a diff and ran a pencil over it to outline the pattern, then transferred the pattern to the steel bracket and drilled/cut per the pattern.

8869

8870

8871

[Jacob McCrea]

Here are the pics of the lower uprights. They are 4" from the "saddle" of the cut to the bottom, and if I were to do this again I would make them 1/2" higher, which I think will make the aluminum behind the driver's seat a little easier to install. I placed them 7.25" apart, i.e., I measured 7.25" from the front vertical bulkhead and centered them every 7.25." After I clamped them down with the magnetic angles and the welding clamps I tacked the bottom of the tubes in 4 places. After they were tacked I removed the welding clamps and welded them in solid. Between the tacking at every 90 degrees and the clamps they did not apprear to "pull" when welded.

8885

In this pic you can see how far I spaced the door bars in from the top of the "rocker panel" tube - enough to get some aluminum interior sheel metal in there.

8884
8883
8882
8881
8880

Welding the lower uprights in solid before fitting the lower door bar made that task very easy - just rest the bar on the uprights, rotate the end upwards until it hits the frame, and grind the rear edge until it is parallel with the frame rails. You can see in the pics how I used a level clamped below the frame as a reference point, and used a square as a 6 inch "go/ no go" gauge of sorts (4" for the uprights and 2" for the 2" frame rail). It wasn't quite idiot-proof, but it made the trimming very predictable. I just kept trimming the end of the bar until the square fit and the end was flat against the rear of the frame. The joint came out really tight (no daylight gets through). I beveled the edge pretty well and will weld it in shortly. Those who are familiar with the Coupe frame can see which bars I removed to make fitting these bars a little easier. I'm not entirely sure whether, and if so how, I will put them back in.

8886
8887

[Hankl]

Too Cool, I love it!!

Hank :cool:

[CraigS]

I am glad to see that you put that roof bar in at an angle. Many yrs ago i did a minimal cage in a 280zx for scca IT and had just a square roof setup like your beginning. When i rolled it, the left front top corner moved toward me a little. No big deal,only about 2 inches.But I had rolled along a tire wall protected earth embankment so i think the impact was lessoned. I always thought that,if I did another similiar car, I would put in a diagonal. Great work on all the other improvements.

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks for the vote of configence, guys. Here are a few more pictures of recent progress. I got the lower bars and the top uprights welded in solid. As with the bottom uprights, I squared the top uprights on the lower bar with 90 degree magnets, then laid a tube over them to align them front-to-back, then clamped the whole mess in place with welding clamps and adjusted it with the carpenter's square in the pics until they were square with the frame. I made the process a little easier by grinding a "V" notch into both ends of the welding clamps so that they bit into the tubing, as opposed to sliding around and making me pull my hair out. If I did it again, I'd make both uprights 4.5," rather than 4" on the bottom and 5" on the top, as even measurements would look more uniform. If you go much higher than 4.5" on the bottom uprights, it makes it hard to weld around the 1" square body mount tube.

On each side, I put an upright which was a few thousandths short in the middle, and put the perfect ones at the front and back. As with the lower uprights, having the top ones welded solid will make fitting the upper door bar much simpler - just place the top bar in place and rotate it upwards, then trim to fit. I elected to keep the bars inside the cockpit to reduce the need for fiberglass work, although I have some real concerns that interior space will be very tight compared to the Spec Coupe design. We'll see how it works out.

8931

8932

8933

8934

8935

8936

8937

[Hankl]

Good Job Jake!

I don't think you've lost very much in the way of space compared to the Spec cage, the top bar is at waist height, so steering wheel placement will be OK.

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks! Here are some pics of your excellent door bar design, fully implemented. I found it to be easiest to build the door bars in layers or levels, one on top of the other, and welding the lower level in solid before moving on to the next.

A word of caution to anyone who may try this: save trimming to front of the bars until the very end. If you set up a sort of "go/no gauge," as I did in the photos, trim the end until the bar rotates into place, the back of the bar's contact point will move forward on the rear bulkhead as you remove material. So, save that step for last or you will end up with a bar that's too short to properly intersect with the rear vertical bulkhead. Here are the photos, which I think are self-explanatory. If it looks a little rough, it's because these are as-welded, without using a wire wheel to clean up the steel.

8987

8986

8985

In the photo below you can see that the top bar's bend is a little less sharp than the lower bar; the other side is also less sharp on top. Also, the top bar's bend point is a little farther back, perhaps an inch, to give a little more room between the top bar and the back of the seats.

8988

8989

8990

[jetsbaby]

I noticed that you did not angle the top bar out like Hank L did on his blog. Will this still have you pass NASA rules to run in what ever class you are going to run?? I hate to see you do all that work and not pass tech because you did not angle the top cage bar out..:(

[Jacob McCrea]

As I read the NASA and SCCA door bar rules, I can't see how it would make a difference one way or the other. I deviated from Hank's design and kept the door bars entirely inside the interior space in order to minimize fiberglass work on the doors and body. What I've done will make ingress and egress more difficult, but hopefully it will motivate me to get to yoga class more and stay flexible. :)

[rj35pj]

As I read the NASA and SCCA door bar rules, I can't see how it would make a difference one way or the other. I deviated from Hank's design and kept the door bars entirely inside the interior space in order to minimize fiberglass work on the doors and body. What I've done will make ingress and egress more difficult, but hopefully it will motivate me to get to yoga class more and stay flexible. :)

Just weld the doors shut and do it NASCAR style!!!!! :) In all seriousness I have trouble getting in and out of the normal opening, it will be more of a challenge with the higher bars.
All of your frame mods look first class are you about done?

[Jacob McCrea]

Yes, frame mods are just about done, thank goodness. After a year I am getting tired of metal shavings in my hair. I still need to do a mount on the front suspension X brace for a tow eye, touch up a few odds and ends with the welder, move the rear shock mounts to the outside of the frame rail, and figure out how I'm going to finish the front frame stiffening tubes. I now have half of an X up there on each side, which I doubt is that effective. I'll either finish the X, essentially making 4 triangles, or figure out another way to triangulate that area. I'm not goint to worry too much about the final design up there - it's not the Tacoma Narrows Bridge - but I'd like it to be as effective as reasonably possible.

As for getting in and out, I am thinking that an inch lower door bar would make a big difference. As it stands, I think there's a quick release steering wheel and more yoga in my future.

[Hankl]

I noticed that you did not angle the top bar out like Hank L did on his blog. Will this still have you pass NASA rules to run in what ever class you are going to run?? I hate to see you do all that work and not pass tech because you did not angle the top cage bar out..:(

As Jake said, the rules don't say either way what the angles of the bars should be, we just adhere to the structural necessities of the structure. That cage should pass any sanctioning bodies rules.

Hank :cool:

[smithtlw]

From the clip of the rules posted it looks like there is no height specified of the door bars. Is that the case? How do you determine how high they must be?

Todd

[Daytona Dan]

Looks great man. I agree NASA/SCCA should be fine with what you've done. By choosing to minimize the door work you only lost a couple inches of elbow space and potential crush zone. That said, nothing's going to crush your cage! You'll be fine in and out...I am 6' 1" and able to get in and out with the door closed. The bars are actually very easy to slide in on and sit on as you exit normally. I removed my windows and scoops last season to make sure I wouldn't have an issue getting out in a hurry. Just added a window net to keep my arms inside should I get into a rollover situation. I forget, did you do a center roof bar? I got the idea from that extended wheelbase Coupe last year, and I think the West Coast team might be adding one now.

[Jacob McCrea]

Todd,

I'm honestly not in a great position to answer that and would defer to the Spec Coupe builders and others who have gone through the process of getting an SCCA or NASA logbook. I will say that neither rule book has an explicit height requirement, but in my view common sense should dictate that they be high enough to do their job. My door bars are 12" tall (4" lower verticals, 5" upper verticals, and 3" worth of tube (1.5" x 2 bars). Assuming that the outside frame rail sits 4" from the ground, plus 2" for the rail itself, plus 12" for the door bars, we are at 18", which should provide plenty of protection from anything I'd encounter on a track, or for the most part, on the street. I'll defer to Hank on this, but I understand that the height was set to provide protection from, say, a side impact from a Ford Super Duty.

For what it's worth, and I know this isn't responsive to the question, but with this design you can only make the top bar a little higher before it becomes difficult to get a proper angle on a mig gun at the rear of the top bar's junction with the frame, assuming you want to keep the bars parallel with each other. There are ways to work around this if someone wanted use this design and have a higher door bar.

Dan,

Thanks for the compliments. I did a center roof bar, but installed it at an angle. There are some photos early in the thread. The bar is actually removable with Ballistic Fabrication connecting lugs so I can pop it in and out with 4 Allen bolts and see if it makes a difference. The angle is a compromise between wanting to take full advantage of the strength of a triangle and wanting to keep the bar out of my passenger's head space since the car will also be used on the street.

[Hankl]

From the clip of the rules posted it looks like there is no height specified of the door bars. Is that the case? How do you determine how high they must be?

Todd

Todd,

What we were told, is that the preference of the sanctioning bodies was that the bars cover at least 2/3's of the door opening, that in of itself leaves some room for interpretation. The way we worked it out, was to take a measurement of the door opening, not from the sill bar, but from the lower frame rail. From the frame rail to the top of the forward bulkhead is approxmatly 16 1/2", 2/3's of that is 11". We measured several cars that were in the area, and found that most bumpers started at anywhere from 12" to 20", and terminated at 16" to 26" in height(From Hondas to 4x4 Ford Expeditions). With a ground clearance of 4", 4" of distance from the bottom of the 4" tube to the top of the frame rail, and then 11" upwards from there we reached 19" for the top of the upper SIB (Side Intrusion Bar). Any higher, and it starts to become problematic for entry and exit. We moved the top bar outward to negate some of the entry/exit problem, as it ends up providing a little more room to the driver to pivot their body into to the car as they slide in.

Hank :cool:

[flajctype65]

Hank,
Cant wait to see the treatment of the bars with the doors. That should be quite interesting.

Jacob,
Your mods are very interesting as well.

[smithtlw]

Hank - Thanks for the clarification.

Jacob - Your work is outstanding and I appreciate you sharing all the detail. The only bad thing is that I haven't started yet and you are adding time to my build with all of these great ideas. I have a bare chassis as I need to do some bumper mods for NYS. As long as I am doing some frame mods...

Todd

[Jacob McCrea]

As long as I am doing some frame mods...

Todd

Thanks Todd. I laughed when I read that; that's how this got started for me as well, and I have quite a few here to thank for leading me astray. I think you are in for a lot of fun; there is something about these cars (i.e., FFRs in general) that really lets builders get creative. If you ever want to touch base about what I'd do differently, send me a PM and I'd be happy to discuss any aspect of the build.

Also, here is what I just completed. I used some of the 1" square tubing that I cut off of the frame to complete the "X" that was previously half-complete. I can't say I know a lot about structural engineering, but I do know that triangles are pretty stiff, so I added some tubing to triangulate the chassis stiffening tubes that I added. I'd guess it's pretty strong. Whether it is worth the extra weight, I can't say, but I will say that I'll be looking for any way I can to shave weight as the build progresses. When I get a few minutes I'll edit this post and add a narrative explaining how I got the X straight as an arrow. For now, here are the pics.

Here is what I used to model where the tubes would intersect: a piece of 1" wide flat stock. I put it where I wanted the tube to go, marked all 3 connecting points with a Sharpie and clamped it in place.
9073

I used a Starrett angle measuring tool, as well as an angle measuring tool from Van Sant Enterprises, to figure out the angles.

9067

I cut all 4 tubes where they intersect with the diagonal tube at the same time with a JD Squared Notchmaster tubing notcher. I believe that this tool is well worth the extra $100 above the basic notchers because it will accept flat stock and square tubes, rather than just round tubes. Notching all 4 tubes at the same time lets you make all 4 angles the same, which in turn makes fitting them to the diagonal bar that much easier.

Once one tube was welded in place I took a piece of 1.5" steel angle, notched it in the middle, and used it as a jig for the other tube.

9068

Because it was a little chilly in my shop, and because I was welding .120 tube to the thinner square tube, I preheated the thicker tubes with a torch - just enough to burn off the moisture and render them too hot to touch with a bare hand. In my uneducated opinion, this will let the weld melt into the thicker tube a little better, without the need to adjust the welder so high that you either risk blowing holes in the thinner tube or have to move the gun too quickly to make a nice bead.

9069

9070

9071

9072

[rj35pj]

Jacob,
I look forward to seeing you modify the aluminum to fit your frame mods. I hope you supply the same detailed photos.
Keep up the great work!
Bob

[CraigS]

It is interesting to me that you have ended up w/ a lot that is similiar to David Borden's roadster build. He also used CAD (Solidworks I think) to design his. Search the other forum for his long build thread.

[Jacob McCrea]

Bob, yes, I will keep the photos coming! I would feel bad if I did not show the challenges involved with making the aluminum fit.

Craig, yes, I've studied David's frame mods many times and they are excellent. I've incorporated some of what he has done into this car, especially the footbox-to-front suspension tubes, and if I had to do it all over again I would probably follow his front end mods a little more closely as he has actually done a real engineering-based analysis, while I have not.

Here are a few more pics of some of the tools I used, which will give sense of how I figured out angles, tube lengths, etc.

I notched my welding clamps as shown before I did the door bars, which allowed them to really get a good bite on the tubes and keep them solidly in place while welding. It allowed me to really clamp them down and prevent the tubes from pulling from the weld cooling.
9487

Here is a pattern I made showing a bent 1.5" diameter tube with a 5.5" center line radius, which helped me to see and figure out where on the tube the bend should start.
9486

The two photos below show how I needed to move the bend point on the top tube back a little and/or make the bend less sharp to make it intersect the bulkhead at the same spot as the lower bar.
9485

9484

The JD Squared Model 32 bender, which reminds of Archimedes' saying about being able to move the earth with a long enough lever and a place to stand.

9488

The angle finder from Van Sant on the front frame tubes.
9483

[Hankl]

Jake,

Great changes, I'll give you a call tonight!!

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

More pictures of recent progress:

I put this little piece of 1" x .120 flat steel in place of the old 1" square tube to give myself another solid point back there for attaching the interior aluminum.

9556

9557

I moved this center tube back in case I want to install a mid-shifted Tremec at some point in the future. For now the donor car's T-5 will have to suffice.

9558

9559

[McMahonRacing]

A suggestion ..... since you are fabbing so much, a thought might be to drop you seat in and see just how much room you have in relation to the trans tunnel ..... on my spec chassis ( modded ) I wish I had trimmed the trans tunnel back further & really wish I had made it removable ...... on my next chassis ( custom job under a Cobra skin ) I will be doing both for sure, benefits:
Trans. & engine removal ( been thru 3 motor / trans swaps already )
Trans service
Clutch area acess
Sharp straight edges can be tailored ( can't begin to tell ya how many tines I have bumped a knee or elbow or on an edge )

Anyway, just something to think about.
I do like it by the way :) !!!!!!

[Hankl]

Just to let you guys know, Jake isn't having all this fun alone. My Coupe is one of the 1st Gen, and didn't come with a cross bar for the rear hoop.
Instead of installing what FFR has, I checked the rules and did this instead. The "X" configuration allows for the passenger to have a properly installed
shoulder harness that will sit properly with a HANS device.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Frame%20Mods/DSCN0146.jpg

And to the "Sharp straight edges can be tailored" comment, I did extensive mods to the trans tunnel for the mentioned reason,
and to change the slant of the tunnel. It also ended up in making the passenger and drivers sides symmetrical width wise, as they are not from the factory.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Frame%20Mods/IMG_0569.jpg

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Trans%20Tunnel/IMG_0571.jpg



Hank :cool:

[McMahonRacing]

Actually that open top or removeable top is a much simpler design, esp. since you modded the side fit prior .... my just have to put that on the list for this winter ( my alum. trans tunnel cover is 1/8" & removeable but would be easy enough to cut the center 1" supports out and build a removeable unit for service - boy would that make my life easier ) .... very nice job boys !!!!!!

[Jacob McCrea]

^Thanks for the compliments. I will give serious thought to making the top of the transmission tunnel removable. I understand that getting the transmission out without removing the engine is not easy. The routine I've read is something like "pull it back as far as you can, twist it sideways 90 degrees, throw salt over your shoulder, say a prayer, tip the front end down, and maybe it will come out." I'm exaggerating with the salt and prayers, but still, from what I've read it's a hassle.

Maybe making those square 3/4" triangulating bars on the top bolt in and out with, say, 1/4-20 bolts and riv-nuts, along with making the top panel removable, would accomplish this pretty easily. Or, as wisely suggested, get rid of the triangulating bars entirely and go with a thicker top cover.

[McMahonRacing]

Purpose of the 1/8" top in my case = it is a step & offers a touch more protection to me in case of trans./driveshaft/ etc issues.

Triangle racing, I suspect that w/ a fully caged / halo car you really don't need it = when I mod mine this winter I will keep it and make it bolt in prob. w/ thru bolts ( button head allen's ) in say 6 places ( in my case it is more to get the angle of the trans "up" too ease install w/ the motor.

As w/ anything, it is just a thought & I did have a pic several yrs back of a drive shaft/u-joint failure in an FFR that took all the alumn. out and even got into the seat area of the driver, kinda why mine is over laid for driver protection.

Ever have any questions or want to nose around & youre in NH fel free to drop me a note @ swing in .... you might find some of the stuff interesting.

Pat

[xlr8or]

^Thanks for the compliments. I will give serious thought to making the top of the transmission tunnel removable. I understand that getting the transmission out without removing the engine is not easy. The routine I've read is something like "pull it back as far as you can, twist it sideways 90 degrees, throw salt over your shoulder, say a prayer, tip the front end down, and maybe it will come out." I'm exaggerating with the salt and prayers, but still, from what I've read it's a hassle.

Maybe making those square 3/4" triangulating bars on the top bolt in and out with, say, 1/4-20 bolts and riv-nuts, along with making the top panel removable, would accomplish this pretty easily. Or, as wisely suggested, get rid of the triangulating bars entirely and go with a thicker top cover.

Yeah.. It's actually twist it 90 and pull it back as far as you can, twist it another 90 and dump out all the remaining fluid on your then pull back farther, then dip the nose and twist it back the other way as you forward. Finish with cleaning all the trans fluid out of your hair, ears, eyes, etc.

;)

[Jacob McCrea]

Happy Memorial Day to the many veterans on this forum and beyond!

Attached are a few recent progress photos. I followed Pat M.'s excellent suggestion above and cut out the 3 square tubes at the top of the trans tunnel. I'll make new ones out of aluminum and make them bolt in so that the transmission can come out through the top or the bottom without the mess Scott describes above.

9912

Here is the mount I made for the front tow eye, following Scott's excellent design. It's 3" wide, 3/16" cold rolled steel. I set it up pretty far to the outside so that the bolt-on eye I'll make is as short and, therefore, as light and strong, as possible.

9910

This shows how I set up a square to get the mount to sit perpendicular to the frame.

9911

[Jacob McCrea]

And here are some new photos of Hank's alternative outboard shock mounts, as implemented on my car. The material is 3/16" cold rolled steel plate.

In this photo you can see 1 of 2 pieces of tube I used to set the spacing perfectly during welding/assembly.

10391

Just sitting there, before final fitting.

10392

This handy tool from Van Sant was used to set the top of the shock towers parallel with the plane of the lower control arm. And yes, I know that lower control arm is on the wrong side. It didn't matter for purposes of setting the angle of the shock tower.

10393

10394

I like to clean the metal with DX440 immediately before welding. This is also the strongest wax and grease remover for auto body work I've ever used.

10395

I used this piece of 1" steel to set how far away from the bulkhead I placed the towers.

10396

I tacked the mounts in place at 4 spots, checked them again while they cooled, then welded them solid. Tacking at a few spots, waiting just a little, then welding everything solid seems to prevent the pieces from pulling as the weld cools.

10399

10398

You can see how the heat-affected zone grows as the weld goes from top to bottom.

10397

10400


Hank and I have a few more tricks up our sleeve to make the IRS better able to handle heavy track duty. Stay tuned for those mods!

[rj35pj]

Jacob,
You have such a work of art going on here maybe you should just forget about the body. :)

[CraigS]

As long as you are redoing the irs why not get rid of the ffr arms altogether. There are a million pics of formula and sports racers from maybe the 80s that you could model arms after and make them easily adjustable as well. I say the 80s to stay away from cantlever coilovers etc.

[vnmsss]

Jacob....It's awesome that you and Hank are carrying the torch forward in making additional improvements to the IRS system. You know though, that all of these new mods are just reinforcing Hank's designation as "The Never-Ending Builder."

Hank.....I should've know when you two got together that there'd be metal shavings and sparks flying......You're on a timeline, man!! We have a hot date on-track this summer!!! ;)

Love what you guys are doing!!!

Karen

[Hankl]

As long as you are redoing the irs why not get rid of the ffr arms altogether. There are a million pics of formula and sports racers from maybe the 80s that you could model arms after and make them easily adjustable as well. I say the 80s to stay away from cantlever coilovers etc.

Craig,

While there are plenty of new parts that could be used out there, reinventing the wheel is not necessarily a good option for us. Part of the exercise is to make sure that we keep the cost of making the mods down. If a part is well designed and serviceable, there is no real need to change it.
As to the IRS, I feel that with a few tweaks we can improve on the function and robustness of the system. You also have to take into consideration what you would have to change to make another design work, mounting points, shock location(Which we have already changed), knuckle type,
axle length, etc, you change one or two things, and then the Domino effect starts, question is, how much time and money will you end up throwing at the project? The focus is to make the system stronger, and hold up under conditions that the original designers of the system did not expect
us to exceed, plus a cad plated new part here and there doesn't hurt either!!

Hank :cool:

[Daytona Dan]

Jacob....It's awesome that you and Hank are carrying the torch forward in making additional improvements to the IRS system. You know though, that all of these new mods are just reinforcing Hank's designation as "The Never-Ending Builder."

Hank.....I should've know when you two got together that there'd be metal shavings and sparks flying......You're on a timeline, man!! We have a hot date on-track this summer!!! ;)

Love what you guys are doing!!!

Karen

Hank, can you also address the elephant in the room...when are we going to see you out on the track man? I know we all are looking forward to seeing you out there enjoying the fruits of your passionate labor! Don't make me...no, do make me come out there!

[Hankl]

What zip code does the Elephant use, I can't send a mail to his address without one.....

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

I mentioned above that Hank and I have a few more tricks up our sleeve to tweak the IRS for extreme track duty. I will preface this by saying that my comments and mods should not be taken as an indictment or rebuke of the stock FFR IRS system, but rather, like many other builders have done in many other areas, an attempt to squeeze every last bit of performance out of what we have been fortunate enough to have been given to work with.

I will defer to Hank and let him have the final word on what is going on here since the new "A" arm design is the product of his considerable talents and dedication to absolutely maximizing these cars' performance. As I understand it our goal was to counteract the twisting load on the lower control arms under heavy braking, i.e., repeated, full-on braking from high speeds with massive, sticky race tires in the road racing context. A second goal, as I see it, was to strengthen the system directly in line with where the greatest force would exist during heavy cornering.

Here is a collection of photos:

11336

11337

11338

11339

11340

11341

11342

The new arm uses 1 rod end/tube end with right hand threads, and another set with left hand threads. In doing so, the length is infinitely adjustable, rather than just giving you whatever adjustment a half turn on the rod end yields, which is what you'd have with two sets of right hand threads. Also, the bearings in the aluminum knuckle are the full, 3 piece Whitby kit. There is literally no deflection in the lower bearings, so the location of the new pivot point at the back of the frame needs to be right on or it will bind a little during movement. I will post some additional photos and comments before too long.

[Bob Cowan]

Funny you should post this. I'v been thinking of doing the same thing. I was going to modify the upper arm to look like the a Superformance arm. But that was going to make changing rear camber a real pain in the neck, so I have been reluctant to make the change. But I really like your method. Changing the camber would be a breeze.

I will blatently copy your design, and then take full credit for being a brilliant engineer ;)

I would also like to change the poly bushings to spherical bearings. I hear the ERA kit is pretty good.

[flajctype65]

As Bob Cowan, I too have thought about strengthening the upper mount for the IRS. For street duty, the original design is probably fine, but for track duty, seems like a bit more robust system would be advisable. Along with the shock mount position change, this mod should do the trick. I will be probably be incorporating them on my build as well. Spherical bearings would also be a must for exuberant driving duty.

[Hankl]

To expand a little on what is going on here, Jake and severals other coupe builders have been on a path to ensuring that the broken "H" arm is no longer a problem for the Competition Coupes that use the IRS systems.
Let me say for everyone, that this problem is limited to only the Track Cars, the street driven Coupes do not have these problems. The track Coupes are generating so much torque in the system, that we needed to
do some modifications to cure the problem.

Let me give you a little background, when Ford initially designed the IRS system for the T-Bird, they used rubber bushings in the knuckle pivot points, a rigid lower H-arm,
and a U-Channel upper arm, basically the system worked very well in the large framed car. What happened when several manufactures, not just FFR, started to use the IRS, some changes were made to adapt it to the
particular manufactures cars. It appears that everyone followed the same, or nearly the same path on adapting the IRS. Specifically, using a single point at the upper inner pivot point with a Heim Joint/Rod End, and a
simple U attachment at the knuckle, no problem so far.

The problem started, when we began doubling and tripling the springs loads on the Competition Coupe suspension, and, this is the most Important part of the equation, started generating substantially larger brake torque loads.
We have seen race speeds in excess of 150 MPH, for sustained periods, which equated to increases in brake loads/torque, to reduce speed for corner navigation. When Karen broke the first of two H-arms, we first suspected metal fatigue,
as that was the most logical to assume. Not until she broke the second arm, did we suspect that something else was causing the problem. We all sat down trying to figure what was happening, not till we saw an original picture of the T-bird
suspension, did we see what had happened.

In the process of insuring that the inner camber pivot point did not bind, almost every manufacture resorted to a spherical bearing for the new pivot. What this did for normally driven cars was predicable, smooth ride with no binding as a result,
for the Race Coupes it was something different, and here is where the evolution of the need for changes really takes off.

There were three phases of changes that lead to the current conditions as I see it, although some may disagree. The first change made was the addition of spherical bearings to the IRS knuckles by Nate and Alison Hine, which resulted in predicable
movement of the IRS knuckle. This mod allowed the knuckles to move freely and not bind during radical movement, something the rubber bushings prevented.

Phase two, the movement of the shock from the rear inner position, to a forward and outward position. This resulted in lower needed spring rates due to a change in the motion ratio of the shock/suspension relationship. I had at the time asked
several suspension experts about the question I had about the brake torque situation, as I surmised that moving the shock to the front would encourage a twisting motion of the “H” arm. I was assured that it would be OK. I need to state here,
that no one at FFR had been asked for their input, so our modifications were what we thought they should be, not an action endorsed by FFR at any point.

Phase three, Karen driving the Coupe WAY TOO FAST! and bigger brakes. A change had been made to larger brakes, and guess what, that was the coup de grâce! We made the brake torque exceed what the lower “H” arm could handle with the previous modifications.

So several of us put our heads together and we find ourselves at this point. To put it in simple terms, we needed to arrest the torque the knuckle had to deal with. A simple solution is the best, so as of now we are going with a upper A-arm
configuration. Jake and I, along with input from several racers are piloting a A-arm fix. Both Coupes with the fix should be on track early next year, if we don’t decide to change the rest of the car in the process...

FFR did not build the Coupes (or the roadsters for that matter) to be full-on race cars, so it's on us to make the needed improvements....Really, this is the way race car development had happened for years....Manufacturers design and
produce cool, wicked fast cars, and racers take them to the next level, making evey modifications needed along the way....The Corvette, the Mustang, and the Datsun B-210's and Z-cars all come to mind....Great modifiers and fabricators
went so far as to take a full working chassis and re-work the **** out of it to take it to a whole new level....Hmmm...Mickey Thompson, Phil Remington and Peter Brock come to mind....What we're doing is just normal in terms of race car
development.....You can only go as fast as your weakest link.... that WAS the IRS system.....The loose nut behind the wheel, is another matter open for discussion! :p

Jig for Rear Mount, this will locate the rear mounting point for the new top A-Arm. It maintains the angular relationship identical to the lower arm.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Suspension/DSCN0275-1.jpg

Hank :cool:

[Hankl]

Hey Gang,

Last post was about the new Jig that Jake had lead me to design, here's the follow-up.

The pictures below show the jig mounted on the knuckle, and the end relationship with the chassis.
Jake gave me the idea of going with a mount that used the existing rear IRS support, and adding
a new cross bar, and short verticals supports, to link the A-arm mount to.

I made a spacer out of 6061 T6 to insert between the jig and the Knuckle. Once installed, the jig
doesn't move at all, big time rigid!! The angle set by the lower H-arm is mimicked by the angle at
the top of the knuckle, and then to the rear mounting point for the upper A-arm.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0280.jpg

Top view of the Jig and the points that I'll need to make to weld the new brackets to. This also shows
the complexity in insuring that the geometry of the lower H-arm is mimicked by the upper A-arm

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0281.jpg

Jake has been a GREAT PARTNER in this, without us bouncing stuff off of each other, I don't think I would have
seen what was right in front of me. It's good for Anal Retentive types to get together!!

Hank :cool:

[Hankl]

A little more today on making brackets for the A-arm rear mount, just made from "Chip Board"

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0287.jpg

View from the top of the knuckle.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0288.jpg

A better view from the top, it shows the vertical mount that the A-arm brackets attaches to, this was the mod that Jake came up with.
Plenty of room to get wrenches in there, not crowded at all, even though it looks tight..

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0289.jpg

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

Looks good, Hank; very nice! Glad to be working with you on this. I appreciate the detailed history recited above.

I initially added the round tube tying the frame rails together directly above the IRS "X" tubing as I speculated that Karen's axle problems were caused by frame flex, i.e., the framerails flexing in corners and popping the axles out of place. I believe my speculation was wrong, but the tubing ended up becoming part of the structure for the new IRS pivot.

Hank and I considered a lot of options in making the new upper IRS arm to fully arrest braking torque. We looked into, to varying degrees, using the upper A arm from a '03-'04 Cobra, "reversing" the current design with a pivot in front of the factory upper arm, making a "drag link" or Panhard-type bar from the upper control arm and running back to the quad shock mounts, and even making a miniature, "sideways" Watt's link on the upper control arm. Karen and Rick had to endure being CC'd on a month's worth of emails with "back of the envelope" calculations literally drawn on the back of envelopes, shaky hand-drawn diagrams, etc.

As for my build, it will be a big challenge to keep it light given all of the metal I've added. But here are some photos of a few things I just did to trim some of the weight. There is more to come.

This photo and the one below it show the transmission tunnel top tubes re-fabricated in aluminum. They will be screwed in with machine screws and removable for easy transmission access. I used a Miller Spoolmate 100 spool gun hooked up to my mig machine. It took some practice to adjust to the new (to me) process and the weld appearance is nothing to boast about, but everything stuck together fine.

11888

11889

You can see here that I removed the lower 3/4" square tube, which was redundant given the .120 DOM tube I added for fuel cell protection.

11890

The same thing happened here - I removed the lower horizontal 3/4" square tube, which as far as I could tell served no purpose given the way I added the rear fuel cell protection tube (there is a better and simpler way to do the fuel cell protection tubes shown in Karen's build thread).

11891

I will post some photos and explanation of how I located the new IRS pivot. It was somewhat convoluted. Thanks for checking this out.

[loeffler1]

Jacob

Seems the lower outer ends of the "H" arm attachments to the upright look flimsy as compared to the robust arm itself and the robust weldment at the upper arm attachement to the upright.

Bill

[Hankl]

Here are the brackets I finished today, mocked-up so you can see the final layout. Some lightening holes, 3/16" Mild Steel, same as the rest of the
suspension mounts. Waiting for some 1 1/2" .120 Wall D.O.M. tubing to finish up

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0292_zps7b38d627.jpg

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0294_zps290eb1a3.jpg

Hank :cool:

[CHOTIS BILL]

Hankl,

Has anyone given any thought of raising the rear roll center height? I did a quick check on my car and it didn’t seem to be a correct so I talked to FFR about the rear RC height and even though out number didn’t match both seem to be on the low side compared to the front roll center. I had a similar situation with my DSR which had about the same weight distribution but with a lower center of gravity so are not directly comparable but when I raised the rear RC it really helped from mid corner to full throttle. I was wondering if during all your hard work you addressed the roll center height at all.

Thanks

Bill Lomenick

[Hankl]

Bill,

According to all of the information we have, the Roll Center on the IRS is optimum for what we have to deal with, i.e., OEM parts used/location restraints, we would have to move all of the suspension mounting
points to affect any changes. From what I recall from conversations with David Borden, the IRS complements the handling of the car vs hindering it, and if I'm correct, David mentioned that the IRS was better
than the Live Axle in reference to the Roll Center.

Hank :cool:

[CHOTIS BILL]

Thanks Hank,

With out making a change and trying it out it would be hard to know what effect it would have and that does take a lot of time and effort. I haven’t looked into this very much but just changing the upper control arm inboard mounting point should be all that is needed to change the roll cent height but may cause interference other places. Just a thought.

Thanks,

Bill Lomenick

[Hankl]

Bill,

I understand the thought process, always endeavoring to make this better. Just thinking off the top of my head, on a Live axle, we usually bend the axle tubes for a 1/2-3/4 degree of negative camber, as that is usually what the bearing will take. With the IRS we can start out with as much or as little Camber as we want, so we have a substantial advantage right there. I think Roll Center adjustment has always been critical for the front suspension to operate as needed, but the rear, for me at least, is more of a secondary factor. I just put a call into Karen to get some feed back from the new 3 Link Coupe, vs, the IRS Coupe. I'll let you know what I learn from that conversation.

Hank :cool:

Just did a little more thinking about your post, actually moving the upper mount would be one of the easier things we've been up to. Running the current mounting points against new locations with a Suspension Sim would be a good thing, know of anyone that would have the software/could run a couple of scenarios for us?

[tirod]

Stop me where I get this wrong - the caliper rotates the carrier in when compressing the rotor, causing the upper connection to move forward toward the front of the car, twisting the lower A-arm.

I reading way to many car mags in the '70s and 80's, especially articles on F1, Can Am, Trans Am, etc. suspension design. I see adding a trailing link to the top A-arm to arrest the rotation of the spindle. It will be in compression (not good,) but it would stop the rotation.

There's a lot more to it than that, the travel has to be complementary and not negatively affect caster or camber, introduce bump steer, etc. I was a bit surprised not to see one the first time I viewed the chassis layout, as it seemed a natural to me.

[Hankl]

Tirod,

What we are doing here is adding a rear portion of what would be referred to loosely as an A-arm on the upper knuckle pivot point. The mount has been place in such a location as to mimic the angular movement of the lower "H" arm in the IRS. The lower "H" arm performs the combined function of the IFS lower A-arm, and a Tie Rod, in that it controls the upward and side to side motion at the lower part of the knuckle. Since the lower portion of the knuckle is fixed by the H arm, the H arm in effect eliminates any Bump Steer & Caster, as that is a front end suspension problem that is not germane to the IRS. As to the camber, that is controlled by the upper mount, shorting increases negative camber, and lengthening provides the opposite result. The rear link is in tension, and it is not a "Trailing Link", so that is also not applicable to the design.

REAR OF CHASSIS........................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................... FRONT OF CHASSIS

This is the Jig, not the actual tubing used.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Suspension/DSCN0275-1.jpg

Hank :cool:

[CHOTIS BILL]

Hank,

I use WinGeo by Bill Mitchell but I am not sure of the pickup point locations that I measured on my car since I took the measurements with the car up on blocks and not on my scales. I was going to get the car on the scales and check the numbers I came up with but if someone could get me the pickup point locations we have now and what change you would like to try I can run them and see what needs to change.

Bill Lomenick

[vnmsss]

Hank...It was good talking with you last evening. I appreciate the detailed background you have provided in this thread, as well as the explanation of the ongoing thought process in the development of what will be a more stabilized IRS.

In regards to the comparison of the 3-link in my new Coupe with the modified IRS in my older Coupe, the new car (3-link) certainly felt stable and responsive in the two trackdays in which I have participated. As we discussed, a number of changes that were made in the new build were the result of our on-track experiences with the first car. Other than moving to a 3-link system, we chose to use of the FFR spindles in the build, and I believe it was a good decision, as the front suspension geometry produces a ton of grip and good turn in, while also creating zero bumpsteer (with the use of rack extenders).

Early in 2010, and with your design and direct assistance, we changed the rear shock location (outboard) on our older Coupe, and that singular change made a world of difference in the car's overall stability and handling. The addition of the SAI mod (Dave Borden's design) added another level of sophistication and performance enhancement to the car's handling....As the old saying goes though, a system is only as strong as the weakest link, and as we "fixed" one issue, we inevitably found the next "weakest link.".....The ever loosening wheel bearings and constant movement/excessive wearing of the hubs are symptomatic of the next area in need of attention, which is arresting movement in the UCA area.....In the middle of all of this, we also stumbled upon the issue with the axles being machined too short, which certainly added another dimension to the challenge.....

If I were to venture a guess, I think that 99 out of every 100 FFR builders using an IRS in their cars will never experience the issues we've had, if for no other reason other than the fact that they will never be pushing their cars to the extreme conditions such as we experienced in the 25 hours.....That said, we know there are issues a number of builders have already faced with the IRS, and working together, it's our hope that we can provide improvements for our own use, as well as for the benefit of others.

It's been a pleasure to work with Hank on the challenges we've faced, and I have truly appreciated Jake McCrae's insights and execution of various steps in the development process as well. Bill (Chotis Bill), thanks for offering to help us...While some may question the thought process (welcomed critsicm BTW, which helps assure we're not Kool-Aide drinking over here), your offer of pragmatic, on-the-ground assistance in running the numbers is much appreciated.

Thanks again everyone!!!!

Karen

[CHOTIS BILL]

Karen,

I hope no one interpreted what I wrote as a criticism in any way. I have designed the suspension systems on many of the race cars that I have built and know there is no one correct design. I was just curious with all the work that was being done if changing things like the roll center was considered since it can help correct a problem if one even exists. The only reason I mentioned roll center is because of all the work being done to the upper control arm and that is the easiest place to play roll centers. Anti-squat is also a powerful tool to tune suspension but that requires changing the lower control arms pickup points to do the most good and that is another big job.

Bill Lomenick

[vnmsss]

Hi Bill......No worries...No one here took your input as anything other than great questions and great brainpower, which is helping us work through these issues....I have a great respect for your experience, and we truly appreciate your offer to help!! ;.)) Thanks!!

Karen

[Jacob McCrea]

My frame mods have almost come to an end, and yesterday I picked up the frame from the powder coater. They did a very thorough job on it, blasting it with a fine medium (titanium dioxide if I recall), followed by pre-treatment with iron phosphate (again, if I recall), followed by a powder primer and a powder top coat. It was quite a bit more expensive than what FFR charges, if anyone is wondering, but since the car will hopefully change hands via my will, I wanted it to be as durable as possible.

I owe a hearty thanks to everyone who has commented above and offered help and guidance to me in the process; it was and is recognized and very much appreciated. Here are a few photos:

12349
12350
12351
12352

I still have a few ideas to lighten up the frame on this thing, which I hope to post here before too long.

[johngeorge]

Jacob, looks great! nice job

[vnmsss]

Awesome job Jacob!!!!!! Hank's Coupe is coming along nicely, and I know there are a number of others out there building as well...Can't wait for us to get our Competiton Coupes on track together!

Karen

[Hankl]

Hey Gang,

Been really busy the last couple of weeks with school, Russ Foster called to see if I had fallen of the end of the earth, no, but going to classes all day long feels like it.
Here's what I did last weekend, getting closer to the powder coat phase.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0298.jpg

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0297.jpg

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0300.jpg

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0296.jpg


Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

That looks really good, Hank.



I see adding a trailing link to the top A-arm to arrest the rotation of the spindle. It will be in compression (not good,) but it would stop the rotation.

We gave some thought to this approach, specifically running about a 12" link from the upper A arm back to the quad shock mounting area, since it initially seemed like a very easy way to solve the problem. The problem, though, is that the suspension travels up and down in a straight line, while the link moves up and down in an arc, as shown by this rough drawing:
16083

With a 12" link, and assuming 4" of suspension travel, the arc of the new link "departs" from the suspension's path of travel by about 3/16" in the middle of the travel. I am pretty confident that the resulting binding would promptly show us what the weakest component in the system is. This is unfortunate because adding a link would be really easy.

Anyway, with all the great new coupe threads going I thought I'd join in and post a few pics, despite my modest progress.

16084

16085

Here are the completed and powder-coated upper control arms.

16086

The super-lightweight diff breather is actually a spare fuel filter for my Stihl saws.

16087

I am keeping the fluid reservoirs inside the footbox for simplicity, and will make dual access panels atop the footbox.

16088

Modest front suspension progress; don't attach the steering arms upside-down, or on the wrong side (what I did) the first time around!

16089

[vnmsss]

Hi Jake! Thanks so much for posting the great pictures, and congrats on the progress! You've been an an amazing supporter and fellow builder in our Competition Coupe project, and I'm stoked to see your build moving forward.

We have some great builds going on amongst our forum members right now, and it's great that so many people are posting pictures and information for others to use in their builds (or to inspire them to make other modifications). After seeing the finished product, and in being able to follow a number of Coupe builder's progress, such as yours, an increasing number of folks are choosing to add the frame and door modifications to their cars, which is very cool.

Tom Coon has been relentlessly working on his Coupe (don't tell anyone, but I think he's just a tad bit OCD), and I've never seen anyone make the progress he makes in such a short amount of time! His car looks amazing, and I am looking forward to stopping by his place to "oooh, and ahhh" over it next weekend.

Thanks again for all of your assistance with the Competition Coupe build manual. The document is destined to become another milestone accomplishment and benchmark resource for our community. You rock!!

Karen

[tcoon]

Hey Jacob the car looks great! It's really cool to see forum members from all over the country picking up the competition coupe torch! Can't wait to see you on track...one small thought, I think you will find your master cylinder location to be impossible to use. At it's current location it is under the cowl of the body with the body on the car. The cowl comes about midway down the footbox. The 2x2 tube is way under the body. Even with a forward access door(which I also put on mine) you will not be able to reach the master cylinders in that location. Now is the time to change it. Keep up the good work!

[tcoon]

One other thought while I'm at it...I found the steering wheel to quite high and far to the right. I lowered the shaft and moved it to the right, about 1" each direction, by notching and boxing in the 2x2 crossmember. Rick Anderson made a similar mod to Karen's car. Before I did this I could not even see the tach and speedo with the steering wheel on. I unfortunately only discovered this after the dash, wiring ,etc was completed. I then had to take all that apart to notch and weld the crossmember. Again...NOW is the time to address that issue.

[TimC]

Any photos of this? I'd like to drop my steering wheel just a little too. Now it would still be kind of easy but before long that are will be finished.


One other thought while I'm at it...I found the steering wheel to quite high and far to the right. I lowered the shaft and moved it to the right, about 1" each direction, by notching and boxing in the 2x2 crossmember. Rick Anderson made a similar mod to Karen's car. Before I did this I could not even see the tach and speedo with the steering wheel on. I unfortunately only discovered this after the dash, wiring ,etc was completed. I then had to take all that apart to notch and weld the crossmember. Again...NOW is the time to address that issue.

[Hankl]

There is actually another way to move the steering wheel. Move the location of the thru shaft bearing in the foot well.
Moving the bearing up, lowers the steering wheel, and moving it outwards, moves the steering wheel in towards the centerline of the chassis.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Interior/DSCN0239.jpg

As originally configured, there is a slight cant of the wheel in the "X" axis, it leans inwards on the door side. Here there is no longer any cant.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Interior/DSCN0236.jpg

I have a radically different footbox now, but you get the idea.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Frame%20Mods/109-0945_IMG.jpg

Hank :cool:

[CHOTIS BILL]

Hank,

Just using my SWAG gauge I would say that modification to the footbox must add a bunch of torsional stiffness to the cockpit area. Thanks for the idea of moving the lower bearing.

Bill Lomenick

[CraigS]

I just came across this thread, and I don't have IRS or a coupe but have always had a few questions about the FFR IRS. I understand using the T-Bird stuff as is works fine on a street car but I think it could be improved a lot and still use the spindle as is. 1- I would like to see the LCA cut into two parts. This would allow much easier alignment, especially toein. IE; the front of the LCA could be a triangle picking up the two frame mounting points and the front of the spindle. The link to the rear of the spindle could be a single tubular link w/ left hand rodend on the inner end attached to the rear of the triangle near the frame like Jacob did to the outer end of his UCA in post #82 pic #3 and 4. The outer end of this link would be right hand threaded bolt w/ a big "U" shape welded to it to attach to the rear of the spindle. Seems this would also allow a UCA mod like mentioned by Jacob in post #105 but w/o the binding. 2- I like HankLs' UCA w/ two questions. a-Looks like no fun to adjust camber. b-the base of the triangle at the frame end is pretty narrow.

[Hankl]

CraigS,

Like this?

http://www.jblmotor.com/images/ch20.jpg

http://www.jblmotor.com/images/ch25.jpg

http://www.jblmotor.com/images/ch50a.jpg

http://www.jblmotor.com/images/ch49a.jpg

There are several BAD parts to doing it like this. Engineering wise it's neat, but loads on some of the components, (to Me) are excessive. You're going to have extremely high spring rates
to deal with due to the location of the shock mounts. That's how the IRS got into trouble to start with (racing wise). There would have to be major modifications to the FFR chassis to
make everything work, not impossible, but would it be worth it?

Hank

[CraigS]

Hank, I see what you mean. His LCA is what I was thinking of but not his coilover attachment points. He would need huge springs.

[CHOTIS BILL]

With the spring mounted that far from the wheel not only does the spring rates need to be very large but you get very little movement on the shock making them difficult to get setup for different track conditions. It would seem to me the spring and shock could fit to the outside of the UCA cross brace and if not it would be better to curve the UCA tubes enough to get them into that area. I think I still have some #1000 springs left if anyone would like to try them out. :)

Bill Lomenick

[Jacob McCrea]

Interesting discussion here, as is the norm. It wouldn't be too difficult to build a lower control arm as Craig suggests and those pictures show, graft on Hank's outboard shock mod, use the upper control arm I modified (post #105), and run a drag link backwards to the quad shock mounts, as mentioned above by tirod, myself and others, to arrest braking torque. Assuming that there are no big downsides, this would obviate the difficulty I encountered in accurately locating the new, 4th pivot point. It won't be anytime soon, but I may give it a try someday.

Here are some photos showing what I had to do to "extrapolate" the stock upper control arm inner pivot point location to the new location. I basically had to build a jig or fixture (not sure of the right term) to use the 1" x 2" frame rail as a surrogate for the pivot point tabs, which are not parallel and are therefore tough to use as a starting point. The device I fabbed up got me within about .030, and a little heat resolved the rest of the problem, but it was not easy fab work.

16257

16258

16259

16260

16261

[Jacob McCrea]

I haven't done much on the coupe for about nine months, having been tied up with 60-80 hour weeks at work and a really odd assortment of other obligations. Anyway, I spoke to Hank the other day and mentioned the pinion rotor parking brake setup I'm working on. After reading about problems people have with making their parking brakes work, I decided that if I had to be aggravated by a lousy setup that doesn't work well, it may as well be my own lousy setup that doesn't work well. The other, more important goal was to give great flexibility in choice of rear brake. With the parking brake moved to the pinion I can install whatever brakes I want, provided I can fab the mounting brackets.

I bought a pinion rotor from Superformance (about $80), a Wilwood hydraulic billet spot caliper, and a 1/4" spacer for the caliper ($7 from a snowmobile shop). For reasons unknown Wilwood lets you adjust the width of the caliper with a spacer but doesn't sell the spacer. I just need to get a two-tiered spacer machined to perfectly index the rotor, the pinion flange and the driveshaft to each other. It will look a little like the "power dome" hat that those jokers from the band Devo wore. The other parts, not seen in the photos below, are a hydraulic "drifting" emergency brake handle and a short braided line. I grafted a mount for the spot caliper onto a Forte's drive shaft safety loop. I may gusset the loop as I've cut into it to make the caliper fit. To be totally honest no one will be more surprised than me if this holds the car well; it's really just there for inspection purposes and the above-mentioned reasons. Anyway, here are the photos:

21696

21697

21698

21699

21700

Edit: If anyone finds themselves using the Wilwood billet spot caliper and needs a spacer, here is the link to the snowmobile shop that sells them:
http://www.wahlracing.com/product.php?productid=18874

[Hankl]

Jake,

There will be a small package arriving at your work Monday or Tuesday..........:cool:

I like the caliper!


Hank

[Hankl]

Some pictures of todays progress, the tubes are tack welded to the adjusters for testing, I'll be using swedged steel trailing arms made from 1" O.D. x .072 wall thickness and have a 3/4" right and left hand thread.
They are available in 1/2" increment

http://www.colemanracing.com/Assets/ProductImages/128-104.jpg


Here's the view from the top of the knuckle at full extension. I fortunately had no binding during full shock travel, however, exceeding the downward travel 2 inches past the shock stop did incur some binding,
but I imagine that was past the limits of the geometry of the suspension design.

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0376_zps4ec88c3f.jpg

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0375_zpsb5aa69af.jpg

View from up top.
http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/IRS%20and%20Shock%20Mods/DSCN0381_zps3f86a47a.jpg


I'm a HAPPY CAMPER!!

Hank :cool:

[loeffler1]

Jake

If you are registering the coupe for the road you might want to check with your state if a hydraulic emergency brake is allowed. I had thought about this idea a couple of years ago prior to relocating my e-brake up to the tunnel. I called my state's inspection dept and they told me it would not be allowed. Must be mechanical. FWIW.

[Jacob McCrea]

Jake,

There will be a small package arriving at your work Monday or Tuesday..........:cool:

I like the caliper!


Hank

Hank, I got it yesterday; the fit is perfect. I really appreciate it and most certainly owe you!

Bill,

I appreciate the comments. As I read the PA vehicle code, the hydraulic parking brake is permissible. I forget the exact language but the bottom line was that the parking brake system had to be separate from the regular brakes. So, something like an inline hydraulic valve, which I initially wanted to use, would not pass in PA.

[loeffler1]

Maybe I misunderstood them as it might be a possibility they would allow this to be done separatly from the regular system. I think I'll readdress this again with the state and clarify that it is a separate system. i might not have been clear originally.

[Hankl]

Bill,

Here's what is on the Maine DMV site.

http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/rules/16/222/222c001.doc


(4) Parking Brake Performance

Set the parking brake firmly to determine the reserve travel of the hand lever or foot pedal. If the vehicle is equipped with the “band” type parking brake, inspect the propeller (drive) shaft for the presence of oil or grease, the condition of the lining, and tightness.
(a) Reject vehicle if the parking brake does not hold the vehicle upon testing.
(b) Reject vehicle if the method of applying the parking and service brakes are connected and are constructed so that failure of one part leaves the vehicle without operative brakes.
(c) Reject vehicle if there is no reserve travel in the lever or pedal unless designed with no reserve by the manufacturer.
(d) Reject vehicle if there is oil or grease on the drum or lining.
(e) Reject vehicle if the lining is worn through to the steel band.
(f) Reject vehicle if parking brake fails to properly disengage.

HTH

Hank :cool:

[loeffler1]

Thanks Hank, Now to decide if to scrap existing and go with hydraulics. Maybe save this for a winter project update. A guy's gotta have something to do out in the shop doesn't he?

[Jacob McCrea]

I'm resurrecting this long-dormant build thread and trying to get back into building, having been delayed and distracted by a staggering number of major changes and major obligations in my personal and professional life. Among other things competing for my time have been serial 50-80 hour work weeks, getting engaged, wedding planning, honeymoon planning, finding a new job in a very different area of law, learning that new job, basement flooding, substantial car repair projects, endless bicycle and real estate repairs, tons of traveling, pro bono legal work to help the needy, helping close friends with everything from trademarks to tree removal - and that's just the very short version.
I want to thank Hank L. for repeatedly checking up on me during what was a very challenging time in my life, for stirring me to post some photos and participate on the forum, and for being the good friend that he has been to many of us. Here are some photos, with more to come:


36731

36732

36733

36734

36735

36736

[smithtlw]

That's awesome Jacob. Congrats on your engagement and new job! I look forward to following your progress. You are an inspiration to me and I'm sure others. I know the whole life thing as I am in a similar situation with my kit.

[68GT500MAN]

Welcome back and starting the build again.
Doug

[Hankl]

Looks GREAT! Jake

Hank :cool:

[John Dol]

Yeah I'm coming out of the other end of the same type of tunnel finally. Was able to do a few small things on the car recently and it felt great. Congrats on the engagement and welcome back, keep posting progress big and small!

John

[jkrueger]

Awesome to see you working the car again!

JC

[Plebeian]

I was wondering what the heck happened. Welcome back!

[Fluge]

Welcome Back. Sounds like you have a lot to show for your time away. Many of us have had distractions through the build period. It is suppose to be fun so forcing it isn't right. Glad you are back in.

Marc

[Mark Dougherty]

Awesome job

[Jacob McCrea]

Guys, thanks for the support and vote of confidence. My life really went sideways around the end of 2012 when I got involved in an all-consuming demolition lawsuit at my old office, and from there the litany of issues recounted above took over nearly every moment of free time I had. Thankfully all of the developments and life changes were very positive ones. Having read the forum for a good long time, I know that that's not always the case.

I don't have any new photos but can at least offer some of the Daytona prototype, which I saw at the Simeone museum in Philadelphia early this year. The museum is really cool and well worth the modest price of admission.

37085
37086
37087
37088
37089

[Sydney Chris]

Has anyone ever check the tonsional stiffness of a coupe frame before and after modifications?

Bill Lomenick

hi Bill,

I had some data post minor mods to the front down tubes to increase the torsional resistance from the windscreen forward.. can PM if you are interested.

Chris

[Jacob McCrea]

Here are a few more photos of recent progress, for the good of the cause. I need to figure out the brackets for the NASCAR-style sway bar, which is a 1" hollow Speedway Engineering bar with 49 spline, 1.25" ends.

The finish on the aluminum panels is POR-15's Glisten PC clear coat (applied with a brush and roller; you would never know it). I prepped the panels by sanding them with 280 grit wet sandpaper, followed by the POR-15 adhesion promoter for aluminum, followed by paint. Adhesion seems pretty decent.


38012

38013

38014

38015

38016

38017

[wallace18]

Very nice work!

[loeffler1]

Nosy Question

What is the wheel weight for without a tire? Couldn't help myself, probably a left over.

[Jacob McCrea]

Bill, the wheel weight was on the wheel when I bought it (used, with no tires).

Here are photos showing how the next panels were fit around the side impact bars.

38156

38157

Having no quick access to a shear, I split the panels you see by scoring them about 40 times with a utility knife, then snapping them and cleaning up the rough edges with a hand file. I will make new panels for inside the door jamb out of stainless.

[CHOTIS BILL]

[QUOTE=Jacob McCrea;186351]Here are a few more photos of recent progress, for the good of the cause. I need to figure out the brackets for the NASCAR-style sway bar, which is a 1" hollow Speedway Engineering bar with 49 spline, 1.25" ends.



To mount my front sway bar I used 2x2x1/4 thick aluminum angle which I bolted to the inside of the radiator mounting brackets. I used the standard type mounting brackets that bolted to the horizontal leg and made Delrin bearing half shells.

Bill Lomenick

[vnmsss]

Glad to see you're still making progress. I've been working on a new engine for the Warrior Princess, and am planning some fun track stuff for the Challenge Coupe in the future. :) K

[Hankl]

Jake,

Russ Foster and Russ Thompson used that position for their sway bars, see if you can get to Russ Thompson website and see what he's done.

Hankl

[Plebeian]

Any updates?

[tirod]

X2 I wanna see that sway bar mount. Will you be using the blade arms that rotate to vary the resistance?

[Jacob McCrea]

Sorry for the long delay in posting; I hope everyone is doing well. Here are the sway bar mounts, which I completed a few days ago. It is 1/4" thick aluminum angle, about 1.5" x 1.5" when I got it all trimmed down to the size I wanted. I'll be using steel Speedway Engineering arms, bent to fit.

50188

50189

50190

The reason for the long delay is mostly as follows: Since I started practicing criminal defense law almost two years ago, much of my time has been consumed by defending heroin buyers, heroin dealers, prostitutes working for heroin, street kids robbing heroin dealers and users, heroin dealers shooting other heroin dealers, people stealing scrap for heroin money, people stealing from stores for heroin money, people endangering their kids because they are high on heroin, heroin addicts breaking into cars and houses, heroin addicts tipping over old ladies and stealing their purses, heroin addicts trading in stolen guns, heroin addicts crashing their cars after overdosing, and so on. I was going to title this post "Heroin, Heroin and More Heroin" but I would probably be rebuked by the administrators. So, between litigating the Western Pennsylvania heroin epidemic and trying to maintain some semblance of health and fitness, time has been tight, but I am digging back in!

Here is the custom fluid reservoir mount I built. I used a "new" tool I bought, a 30" Pexto stomp shear from 1957, to cut the stainless backing plate to size, then drilled and tapped some shaft collars from McMaster Carr and attached the stainless plate to them. The stomp shear is going to put the sheet metal work into high gear, or at least what is high gear for me.

50191

50192

[Hankl]

Jake,

Really great to see you back at the Coupe! Great Work Buddy!!!

Hank :cool:

[John Dol]

Nice work, keep the progress coming!

John

[jkrueger]

Looks great Jacob. Keep us updated. I like the white frame.

JC

[mjazzka]

Glad you are back, I am impressed you have been able to handle all of that! Looking forward to seeing how your mods work out and this coupe getting built

[Tom Mauldin]

Great to see you back at it!

[Dragonfire]

Very nice work!:)

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks for the vote of confidence and support; I really appreciate it. I was able to finish the passenger foot box this weekend, and I also got the e-brake handle (a hydraulic drifting handle with a latch/stop figured out. I just need to get a -3 AN line and run it back to the spot caliper. It should look and work good enough to pass inspection. Here are a few more pictures:

51788

51787

51789

51790

I've determined that I could not build this thing without my 30" Pexto shear, the best $275 dollars I ever spent, and would suggest that anyone building a coupe scan Craigslist for such a device. It has really allowed me to move forward efficiently. In the coming weeks I should finish the driver's foot box and the rest of the aluminum right behind the seat.

"I am impressed you have been able to handle all of that!" Yes, it has been pretty crazy and eye-opening. Dealing with society's criminal underclass is one of those experiences that you can't fully get your mind wrapped around unless you've been there and done it. I could write at length about the experience, but suffice it to say it has totally readjusted (downward) my understanding of where the bottom of our society is. I've also developed something of a specialty in working with people with mental health problems, which, perhaps coincidentally, requires a lot of the same temperament and problem-solving abilities as building one of the these coupes!

[John Dol]

Looks good Jacob,
Now that you have for boxes did you sit in it and make vroom vroom noises?��

John

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks; I'll admit to thinking about it, but not to actually doing it!

[Hankl]

Nice work Jake!

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

Thank you gentlemen! Here is the final sway bar. These are Speedway Engineering steel arms, cut down about 5" and bent to fit in a press, with the help of a bit heat. I mocked up the mounting holes for the rod ends with the lower control arms parallel to the ground, which I understand is their orientation at standard ride height. The sway bar arms are connected to the lower control arms with male and female rod ends threaded together, like the Challenge Car's sway bar kit. I wanted to paint the arms black but only had white spray paint on the shelf.

54399

54400

And happy Memorial Day to the long list of veterans on this board.

[Hankl]

Jake,

Great work, glad you have thee time to get back at it!!!:p

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks Hank, I am plugging away at it, slowly but surely. Here are a few photos of my removable footbox top. I have been having great luck finishing the aluminum by wet sanding it with 220 grip sandpaper, then POR-15's AP-120 prep solution, then cheap Rust-Oleum clear enamel from the hardware store.

How is your car coming?

56571

56572

56573

56574

[Hankl]

Jake,

That looks GREAT!!! I hung out with the BADASS, (Bay Area Daytona Association) yesterday at Jeff's place (Cobrakai) and got to show them some of my new projects, I'm back at it!!

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

Great, I'm glad to hear you are back at it. I may need to give you a call in the coming weeks for some tig welding guidance. A friend's unfortunate circumstances may result in me storing his Dynasty 200DX and a litany of other light fabricating equipment in exchange for being able to use them. If that happens, your thoughts on using that thing would be great.

And here are a few more new photos, albeit unremarkable ones, for the good of the cause:

56601

56602

56603

[Tom Mauldin]

Looks great Jacob!!! I can't wait to get time to work on mine again, but it gives me time to watch what you do and copy some of your improvements.

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks Tom. It sounds like you in the same situation as many of us - trying to find time to build despite a litany of other things competing for our time.

Here are a few more pictures of the driver's footbox, now with the last two panels installed. I have to say I am pretty happy with how the fit came out; making three panels was the right choice here. I also managed to get the steering rack installed. Next will be the tie rod ends and the upper steering bearing, which will make it a roller, albeit without tires.

57022

57023

[Hankl]

Jake,

That is great work, glad to see that you are making progress!!

Guess what this is......

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w284/hankl_album/Suspension/DSCN05951_zps0e8w2aaq.jpg

Hank :cool:

[Tom Mauldin]

Looks good Jacob!

Hank, I would say you have a pretty set of uppers!!!

[John Dol]

I'm with Tom on this one Hank!

John

[Jacob McCrea]

Yes, I agree that it looks like you now have custom upper control arms, to match the custom lowers if my memory serves me correctly. Very nice!

Here is all I can offer up right now, but with heavy rain in the weekend forecast I may be stuck in the shop, rather than biking, so maybe I'll get more interior paneling and the radiator shroud finished.

57302

[Gav]

Love your alloy panelling, gives it a very original look.
What's better is that it won't mark or corrode!

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks, the cheap clear coat came out much better than I expected.

Here are two photos of today's progress. I got the stainless heat shields on (1) the driver's footbox and (2) the rectangular space behind the engine installed. I will add another one in the tall, thin space between them before too long. Also, I'm happy to report that the car steers. I will post photos later, but I got the rack and tie rod ends installed, installed the steering shaft and added a quick-release kit from Breeze. Now not only can I sit in it and pretend to drive, but I can turn the wheel and pretend to drive. Good times!

57610

57611

[Hankl]

Jake,

How's the emergency brake set up doing?

Hank

[Jacob McCrea]

Hank,

I haven't worked on that system for a while, but will return to it shortly. A while ago I bought an -3 AN line and completely mocked it up, but didn't install the hydraulic handle because the fluid reservoirs for those cheap Chinese master cylinders are too wide to fit where I want the handle to go. So, I need to get a Wilwood compact master cylinder with the integrated reservoir, mount that to the handle, and set it up. I will do that in the next few weeks, in conjunction with mounting the seats.

Here are a few more pics, namely a better shot of the driver's inner heat shield and the radiator shroud I threw together this week.

57655
57656
57657

Can someone tell me if the way that the fan shroud sticks up above the radiator will cause a problem, namely interference with the hood? I can put the overhanging part on the top or the bottom, but I went with the top to not interfere with the aluminum paneling down there. Should I reverse it? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks!

[smithtlw]

Good to see your progress Jacob - looks good! I really like the adjustable height steering.

Todd

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks Todd; I hope you are doing well.

Hank, here is how the hydraulic e-brake setup ultimately looks. I switched the original master cylinder to a Wilwood with an integrated reservoir. I had to put the original master cylinder's push rod on the Wilwood to maintain the correct (metric) threads for the brake handle. A banjo-to-AN bolt and fitting at the master cylinder let me run the line exactly where I wanted, and it hooks up to the caliper nicely. The caliper's pads aren't perfectly flat against the pinion rotor, but I will have to adjust that after the driveline angles are set. Here are a few photos:

60088
60089
60090

Next is finishing some interior aluminum and mounting the seats. I also found a company making kits to install 14" 07-12 GT500 front rotors and the accompanying Brembo calipers on SN95 spindles. The same kit also lets you use the bigger and dramatically cheaper 2015+ GT front calipers with those rotors. So, it looks like I may get front brakes on the car by the year's end as that fits my budget much better than Wilwood's racing brake kit.

[Hankl]

Jake,

That really looks great, keeps us posted on your progress.

[Tom Mauldin]

Jacob,
I think you may have a clearance issue with the shroud up that high. I'm in the middle of putting a roadster radiator with dual fans on a Daytona for a friend. There's not much vertical real estate there. For that matter, not much real estate at all.

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks Tom; I ended up flipping the shroud upside-down and hopefully it will clear. Hopefully I won't need to move the top of the radiator forward.

Here are the rear brake cooling ducts I threw together over the last few days. A friend's unfortunate marital woes resulted in (among other things) me storing his fabricating equipment, one of which is a Dynasty tig. This was my first attempt at tig welding aluminum, after a half hour of practice. It's not a stack of dimes (more like toothpaste flattened with a fingertip), but it should get the job done.

61283
61282
61280
61281

Edit: Happy Thanksgiving to the everyone and their families.

[Hankl]

SWEET!!!

Hankl :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

"Huge brakes" and "dirt cheap" are usually mutually exclusive, but here is a custom rear brake setup I finished today. We have cheap 14" eBay rotors from a 2012 GT500 ($137.00 for both), Aeroquip 3AN lines and related fittings ($50 or so), 4-piston front calipers from a 2015 Mustang GT, which are the size of an NFL regulation football ($140 each including core charge from Tasca Ford), and custom brackets made from $20 worth of 1/4" cold rolled steel. It took a bit of time and care to get the fit perfect, but I think it was worth it. The same parts are going on the front, with an adapter kit for SN95 spindles. Let me know what you think.

63248

63249

63250

63251

63252

[jkrueger]

Where is the like button! Great job.

JC

[CraigS]

Great work. I am convinced that having the same brakes front and rear is the setup for these cars.

[FMJ]

Jacob,

Drove past a few months ago but no one was home. My brother knew where the garage was.

-Fred

[smithtlw]

Brakes and cooling ducts look great! Sounds like a great solution. I will have to check in to those especially for the front. 14 inch rotors are huge - what wheels are you running?

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks for the compliments; I thought some folks would enjoy seeing 14" brakes for under $500 an end.

Todd, I will use either Ford wheels for a Boss 302 or GT500, or a set of RTR Tech 7 19 x 9.5" wheels. Those wheels clear the 14" Brembo brake setup of that era (aka the Ford M-2300-S brake kit), but my 2015 GT calipers are even larger than those Brembo calipers, which creates a problem. The 2015 GT rotor is recessed in from the hub face quite a bit to make up for this. So, I will likely need short wheel spacers to make even those high-spoke-clearance wheels fit. I could've avoided the problem by just installing the M-2300-S calipers, or getting remanufactured M-2300-S calipers, but I elected to try this to save some money. The adapter kit for the front is made by Fully Torqued Racing in California. I will let you know how the wheel situation turns out.

Fred, thanks for trying to visit, stop by any time, and say hello to your brother for me when you see him. He was a great guy to work with on acquiring the adjacent property.

Here is a seat brace I welded up from .120 aluminum; it is not fully bolted in as I am waiting for some tube clamps for it and the harnesses. Slowly but surely!

63307

[Hankl]

Jake,

That is a really great execution of your idea! Those calipers are MONSTERS!

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks, I thought monster brakes for dirt cheap would be well-received!

Fred J. was kind enough to reach out to me and check in, and I promised I would post up some pictures of recent, albeit modest, progress. I am going to finish the interior panels and start on the wiring in the next month or so.

Having more argon, electricity, time and aluminum than disposable income, I welded up a battery box, rather than buy one. I also bought wheels (RTR Tech 7s, 19 x 9.5"), split and mounted the dash, and finished a few other little things in the interior. From here on out I am trying to make everything as simple and by-the-book as possible as I would like to keep this under a ten-year project!

69025
69026
69027
69028
69029
69030

[John Dol]

Jacob,

Great progress, however I have to warn you that the cover plate for the emergency handle in the last picture infringes on the patent I have for making that exact cover many years ago!:cool:

John

[Tarmac]

Hi Jacob,

I have been following your build since you started, but rarely if ever comment on threads... You have excellent fabrication skills, and am glad you have kept the build going.

Paul

[Jacob McCrea]

John,
Just send me a licensing agreement for that patent!

Paul,
Thank you for your kind words, and I'm glad you are following along.

This build has been going so long that I've watched (very talented) people buy kits, build them, race them, win shows, sell them, and move on to the next project. I'm surely not alone in this regard, but it's always a challenge to find large blocks of time to devote to the project. A lot of time that could go to the coupe goes to bike riding and skiing with my wife, taking proper care of multiple pieces of property, helping my parents with their fading ability to maintain their property, trying to maintain old friendships and make new ones, maintaining a fleet of things that roll about on wheels, and ten other things I could list.

I'm not complaining; I just find myself in a constant state of motion, and the coupe project isn't in my "critical path" on any given day. But I'll keep plugging along, and I appreciate you and others following along and offering kind words of support and encouragement.

[John Dol]

Jacob,

Agreement sent!
But on a serious note, you are indeed not the only one. I've been at it for longer then I really wanted, but the good thing is it's there when you have time for it. And your doing a great job at it so it will get done when it gets done.

John

[Jacob McCrea]

Alright, here is a little more progress: front calipers from a 2015 Mustang GT are installed thanks to a kit from Fully Torqued Racing. The big downside is that my wheel choices are almost nil due to the lack of offset between the hub surface and the rotor/friction surface, and even these 19" RTR Tech 7s required me to shave about 1/16" from the edge of the caliper. The dash is covered in thick carbon vinyl and ready for the gauges and switches. And I mounted up and partially plumbed a power steering cooler from C&R Racing, using a stainless bracket and -6AN lines from Breeze. If it rains this weekend I may get to bleeding the brakes and filling all those holes in the dash.

71176

71177

71178

71179

71180

71173

71174

71175

[Hankl]

Nice wheels Jake,

Looks like you're making steady progress.

Hank

[Jacob McCrea]

Steady progress indeed! Here is the most recent of it, thanks largely to leaving the public sector (for the second or third time now) and starting my own business. We have a 22 gallon Fuel Safe Enduro cell with a 255 lph Walbro pump sitting in a surge tank. Getting the cell to fit the chassis was an exercise in measuring twice, welding and bending five times, and I'd put a smaller cell in it if I had to do it again. The engine is a new Boss 302 (Windsor) from Ford, with the "B" cam, a Quick Time bellhousing and a Ford Performance Parts 7 quart road race pan. Alternator bracket is from Speed Doctor, and the power steering bracket is from CFR. I'm still figuring out whether the GT40 intake will clear the hood without modification. The chassis and engine are about half wired, but overall it is coming along as my limited time permits. I hope everyone's doing well and enjoying the summer.

87571

87572

87573

87574

87575

[John Dol]

Jacob,

When do you think first start will be?
I like the wheels you chose too.

John

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks John. Depending on free time I should get it to run around September. I need to make some braided AN and hard lines for the fuel, weld the O2 sensors into the headers, merge the chassis and engine harnesses, and figure out how to wire the kill switch to also shut down the 3G alternator. I also need to modify the homemade clutch slave cylinder bracketry to get more travel; it now sits too far from the transmission. It's taking a lot of pedal movement, even with a 1.125" master, to move the 7/8" slave enough to disengage the clutch. With those tasks accomplished, it should run, and even drive if I put tires on it and fit the parking brake!

[Hankl]

Jake,

Some really great progress. I'm welding up a cage for my fuel cell right now.
Having some of the same problems, but my inlet is on the passenger side of the cell.
I need to catch up with you!!:cool:

Hankl

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks Hank; I hope all's well with you and your family, and give a call any time.

Progress here remains steady, although "everything almost fits" is still the theme of the project. If I had a dollar for every part that just bolted on, without cutting, fitting, bending, welding, grinding, filing, or making a custom spacer, I doubt I could buy a sandwich and a cup of coffee at Starbucks. That said, I got the engine fully wired yesterday and pretty much figured out the rest of the wiring, and fuel lines should be done this week. I'll need to fab an angled throttle body adapter so that the hood closes, as FFR did on the old "Champ Coupe," and weld in o2 bungs. And with that the thing should fire up!

87746

87747

87748

[jkrueger]

Progress looks great!

JC

[smithtlw]

Looks awesome Jacob. Great to see the persistence.

[Jacob McCrea]

Thanks Todd. Persistence indeed.

Well, the thing now runs. In short, I had to fabricate an intake elbow to put the throttle body below the hood, and a bracket for the mass air meter. For the former I joined 2 EGR delete plates with some aluminum tube. The tig welds aren't beautiful but they are good enough. As for the headers and side pipes, they simply didn't fit together, despite breaking 2 exhaust pipe expanders and lot of oxygen and acetylene being applied to them. Both my patience and oxygen bottle were nearing exhaustion, so I cut the connectors off the side pipes and welded on ones that actually fit. Then the driver's side header physically impacted the footbox, and not lightly. So that got cut apart and re-fabricated, and now clears the footbox and the body nicely. This took a staggering amount of time.

Other than some fussing with the distributor, timing, idle and belt tension & alignment, the thing started and ran fine. Fuel pressure is perfect, the alternator charges, the kill switch seems to work, etc. Now I can move on to the body work, something I really know how to do, or at least knew how to do 15 years ago.

Thanks to everyone who has offered support, advice and encouragement over the many years of this endeavor; it is very much appreciated and will not be forgotten. I'll try to post a video of the thing running as soon as I find the patience to figure out YouTube.

91556
91557
91558
91559

[John Dol]

Nice work Jacob, no guts no glory!!

John

[FMJ]

Hi Jake,

Maybe a Saturday or Sunday in September we can check out your progress?

-Fred

[Hankl]

Great work Jake, nice re-route on the headers!

Hank :cool:

[Jacob McCrea]

I take no pleasure in saying it, but the pandemic may be what creates enough free time in life to finish the bodywork, paint this thing and get it on the road. I've been fitting panels here and there as time permits and here's what we have so far. Hood gap is even but the hood needs to come back about 1/16." The driver's door is a little better now than the pictures show, and closes better than those of the old Pontiac sitting next to it. But I need to add a little HSRF to the bottom to tighten up the gap. A reasonable amount of filler is needed to get the hood, cowl and doors to match. The hatch glass is tight in spots but nothing that some sandpaper can't fix. I'm actually looking forward to doing the filler work and giving Slick Sand a try, having never work with that type of product before. I was expecting another nightmare after how much the headers and side pipes needed to be re-fabricated, but this has been pretty easy by comparison.

124696
124695
124697
124698
124699
124700

[John Dol]

Nice Jacob,

Good to see your back at it. Hopefully you’ll get a lot more done in this “down time”
Keep posting those updates.

John

[Hankl]

Looks really good Jake! I'm stuck doing Home Improvements for now, but as soon as the painting and flooring is finished. Back to the Coupe!!!

Hank