If one was to weld u a chassis that was an inch taller than the book, to give more engine clearance and so the bottom frame could be made from 2x1 box for inscreased stiffness (circa 400bhp):

The scuttle and bonnet would fit fine, as they sit on top, the side panels would need to be a little taller but can be worked around.

Suspension mounts could be jigged in the same place with little effort.

the nosecone would be an inch too short in height. The top edge would need to be aligned with the bonnet, but the bottom would finish an inch short of the bottom of the chassis.

Does anyone have any pics of how they attatched theirs? I was considering running a splitter anyway, so I guess this sint a huge issue, but it will be hard to get the curves in the side panels to follow the contours of the nosecone??

Cheers

I had a similar problem - I decided to raise the nose cone up and make a new bonnet in order to make the engine stick up less, so I had to fit the nose cone differently.

On the ST chassis there is a tab sticking out of the front of the chassis to fix the nose cone on, so I made a spacer with a piece of ali U section (see pic).

With the number plate fixed on the front it was not too visible.

I have since made a sort of extension to box in below the nose and fix the number plate on, so the chassis is even less visible.

On my car the side panels don't come right up to the nose cone anyway, so I can't comment on how that might work for you.
Rescued attachment nose cone extra bracket.JPG

My chassis is 1" taller. I wish I hadn't and am planning ways to remove the 1". It just makes the car look that bit bigger and ungainly.

You could still make the bottom rails out of 2x1" but you sure you'd gain much?

None of the properly FEA'd chassis plans like Cymtrics do this... they actually decrease weight and increase stiffness through cleverness of design.

Cheers,
James

cymtriks doesnt, another one I have read recommends using 1x1.5.

Im massively short of engine clearance and if Im starting from scratch with a new chassis it makes sense to do it this way.

Any photos of your side panels humbug?

James, do you have any shots of the whole car?

Cheers guys

Why not just extra triangulation and beef the centre tunnel up?

This thread just makes me think of this song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ip1Luw_WQc

quote:

---

Originally posted by nitram38
Why not just extra triangulation and beef the centre tunnel up?

---

the MK Indy is an inch taller


tony

the chassis is 14 inches high? Wow, didnt know that. I thought it was all in the bodyworkabove the chassis frame?

quote:

---

Originally posted by alistairolsen
cymtriks doesnt, another one I have read recommends using 1x1.5.

Im massively short of engine clearance and if Im starting from scratch with a new chassis it makes sense to do it this way.

Any photos of your side panels humbug?

James, do you have any shots of the whole car?

Cheers guys

---

Rescued attachment Side panel.JPG

quote:

---

Originally posted by James
My chassis is 1" taller. I wish I hadn't and am planning ways to remove the 1". It just makes the car look that bit bigger and ungainly.

---