Quote:
Just goes to show, put big enough rims and tires on, with a lot a rake, and anything will look good to somebody. Bathtub Rambler Americans come to mind...
Do a internet image search for "extreme donk" and see what you get.
| Slant Six Forum https://slantsix.org/forum/ |
|
| Body Reinforcement https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=57948 |
Page 3 of 3 |
| Author: | Reed [ Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: Just goes to show, put big enough rims and tires on, with a lot a rake, and anything will look good to somebody. Bathtub Rambler Americans come to mind...
Do a internet image search for "extreme donk" and see what you get.
|
|
| Author: | wjajr [ Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: Who's with me? Would you rather buy a '41 Plymouth/Dodge with a modern powertrain and safety system, or tomorrow's newest, uninteresting raindrop
In its day Plymouth sold a ton of 1941's around 552,000 units of all models domestic & export. In my book it is a rather mundane copy cat of what was selling across the street. Low pricing I suspect helped Plymouth move that kind of volume. 1941 was the last full year of automobile production in the US, 1942 model year was curtailed around January 1942 shortly after Pearl Harbor attack when all US manufacturing switched over to a wartime footing.As for reproducing a 41 anything, all it would be is a bunch of styling cues scratched into Reed's wad of chewing gum. In today's showrooms one can see vestiges of pontoon fenders rendered on the sides of some GM SUV, PU & crossover vehicles of which I think all look just hideous; will GM ever ban straightedges from their design studios... Or, auto's of off shore manufacture which can't quite get the right year trunk lid fitted to current production where tail light configurations never match up, and what's up with the gapping guppy mouth look or front end styling suggesting it was modeled after a rodent & advertised by said furry creatures to the young... This is what passes as cutting edge design these days. |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: crossover vehicles
No, I refuse. They're station wagons.
|
|
| Author: | azray [ Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | door reinforcement |
What is the reasoning for the reinforcement? Do you feel this car is unsafe as is? What type of driving will it be used for? |
|
| Author: | azray [ Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
You Said: You wanted it to withstand some major impacts. Do You intend to inter in a demolition derby? |
|
| Author: | wjajr [ Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dan: Quote: No, I refuse. They're station wagons.
Wadahyah stuck in the 20th century or somethen? Get with the vernacular there Dan. LOLI cringe every time Subaru advertises their SUV on the tube, oops vernacular misspeak, rather flat screen. The little subbie thing sure looks like the same wagon they were selling twenty years ago but with todays one piece forward lighting pods, and hiked up high tail lights. Must be the bike rack festooned atop making it a sport utility because there ain't enough room to place it the back like a proper SUV such as a Suburban would easily accommodate. |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: Quote: Quote: crossover vehicles
No, I refuse. They're station wagons. |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: door reinforcement |
Quote: What is the reasoning for the reinforcement? Do you feel this car is unsafe as is?
The car is unsafe as it is. Some thoughtful reinforcements and equipment upgrades can make it somewhat less unsafe.
|
|
| Author: | SpaceFrank [ Wed Jul 01, 2015 3:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sorry to un-hijack the thread, but... Quote: After putting extra large subframe connectors in my '66 Dart I noticed a lot of flex forward of the firewall. If you visualize the chassis as pair of springs with the firewall as a bulkhead between them it is easy to see that I made the rear spring very strong, but did nothing for the front spring. This is a real problem for the front suspension and for handling. To reduce that flex I would have needed to do work forward of the firewall and the US Car Tool kit looks like a very good option. It's amazing how much the front end flexes and twists when you put on sticky tires and suspension to match.
Josh, what work would you recommend forward of the firewall? One of the major jobs we've got planned for the Race Dart is to tie the subframes together. I actually bought a single US Car Tool subframe connector for the passenger side, but the driver side connector we have to build custom due to the dropped floor.Our roll cage A-pillars currently land directly on top of the rear member of the front subframe, and our backstays land on top of the rear frame rails, but the spreader plates are only welded to the floor. We also had to patch the footwells in the front, and I'm not sure the floor is actually solidly connected to the front subframe up there. I'm planning to go under the car and weld the subframes to the floor everywhere I can. We did add some roll cage bars forward to the firewall to give better side-impact foot protection, since our A-pillars are so far back. I'm guessing I could run some bars from the opposite side of where those land on the firewall up to some point on the front suspension? Gonna be adding a lot of weight. I might have to break down and finally cut some metal out of the doors.
|
|
| Author: | wjajr [ Thu Jul 02, 2015 4:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dan: Quote: calling a station wagon a station wagon
Buzz word station wagon / beach wagon; most non mini van like vehicles configured with windows aft of the second row seat where one would stow assorted crap never sees a railway station, or looks like a buckboard, or is pulled by a beast of burden. Hence the replacement of said archaic lingo by Madison Avenue. Perhaps a resurrection of GM's "Carryall" could be reintroduced to the lexicon.
|
|
| Author: | ILMopars [ Wed Aug 05, 2015 8:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sorry I haven't posted a reply in a while. Real life keeps me away  Well, I am definitely going to do the door bars, I was thinking of a custom fab route that will most likely be more robust than stock 1973 door bars. This car was/is VERY unsafe to drive as-is. The torsion bar crossmember is shot, the Rear spring mounts, rear crossmember, left and right rockers are virtually non existent, inner fenders need patching, cowl and floor have various patches missing. Any speed past 60mph was a nightmare. I will say that while modern cars offer more safety, more reliability, less emissions etc and a laundry list of technological advances...for me it is not the same. So no, I will not go out and buy an American/Italian hybrid econobox. This Dart is more than "just a car" to me. She never let me down. In winter I drove this car through 12" snow and I made it to my destination every time. It always started first try and got good mileage (for an old car). I got accustomed to the size, the feel, the experience. This may be a 6 cylinder sedan and not worth $6000 restored but it is the best damn car I ever drove. |
|
| Author: | Sam Powell [ Sat Aug 08, 2015 5:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Aside from the OP's original question there are three seperate arguments getting confused here: 1. What kind of automotive design do you like? There is no objective right and wrong here. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The folks who make design their life's work are artists with integrity expressing a deeply creative nature as a human being with a lifetime of training and great love of their craft. They get up everyday committed to making the things you use in life both beautiful and funtional. Without them we would still be using rocks to open nut shells. You have every right to express your OPINION, but it is not TRUTH, and it would be better mental health to respect the creator still. 2. Are automobiles better today? They go more miles on less energy, require less routine maintenance, have a far longer routine service life (100k was a huge mikestone 50 years ago), handle better, dirty the air we breath far less, and are far safer. Much of this was government manndated, to the betterment of ALL concerned, even though industry fought all of it tooth and nail. If you do the math you will see that prices are not at all out of line considering inflation. 3. Is there greater freedom of design expression in todays automotive market place? There is certainly a much wider variety of styles that have thrived in the last 20 years. This you can lay at the feet of the consumer. When I was a kid, people WANTED to drive just what their neighbors had. Folks are just not as afraid today to vary from the norm in all phases of their lives. Some wonderfully developed, forward thinking automotive designs failed in the 50's for this reason. Nissan's Cube won an international design award about 2000, and has survived 15 years and inspired at least two copycat designs since, at a time when most automotive designers were thinking smooth and sleek. How long did the Studebaker Golden Hawk survive? I do not know why companies shy away from the word station wagon. I can only tell you that my mom would not consider owning one. Today, the crossover SUV is the hot ticket amomg young mothers, and as Dan pointed out, the only real difference is what they are calling them. It is a head scratcher for sure, but seemingly one driven by a fairly deeply rooted consumer preference. It is a little like the fact that merchants never have "sales" any more. They have "events". There must be some power in the choice of a word. I agree with Lou. Get big bolt pattern disk brakes, at least on the front, and 15" wheels of at least 6" width and you will feel and be much safer. Go for one of the better engineered front sway bars and good shocks as well. I have been pleased with the rear disks I installed, and consider them a wise addition. I put sub frame connectors on my 70 v8 Dart, but not on this slant powered car. The 70 felt tighter, but who knows what other factors contributed to that? Maybe the 70 was tighter to begin with. Sam |
|
| Author: | GTS225 [ Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: This car was/is VERY unsafe to drive as-is. The torsion bar crossmember is shot, the Rear spring mounts, rear crossmember, left and right rockers are virtually non existent, inner fenders need patching, cowl and floor have various patches missing. Any speed past 60mph was a nightmare.
******************************************************Here's the most telling part of the OP's last statement, IMO. He didn't post pictures, but it sounds like there's a host of rust issues to be addressed before he starts adding material to make it more "safe". The rockers, inner fenders, torsion bar cross and rear crossmembers are all structural components in a unibody auto. Getting at least the rockers, inner fenders, and torsion bar crossmember properly repaired will go far in resurecting the structural integrity of the whole package. I suggest he worry about those issues, then start adding more. Roger |
|
| Author: | Dart270 [ Sat Aug 08, 2015 6:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yeah, sounds like a lot of rust to me. I did not remember that piece of info from the earlier posts. Yes, that will make it very unsafe. Even a moderate amount of rust will make the car more flexible for sure. Lou |
|
| Author: | ILMopars [ Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well the car has been in IL since new and was retired 2 years ago. I know I need to restore the integrity of the original design before adding anything, but I want to research this so I may be more educated about the topic. |
|
| Page 3 of 3 | All times are UTC-08:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|