Board logo

... and 5 hours later ....
02GF74 - 15/8/09 at 05:34 PM

.... sorted.

front of the rail taken to where the top rail is doubled up, triangulation taken back to top rail where it meets vertical side rail.

Should hold, whaddya reckon?

[Edited on 15/8/09 by 02GF74] Rescued attachment DSC04823.JPG
Rescued attachment DSC04823.JPG

mookaloid - 15/8/09 at 05:42 PM

Very odd - but if it makes you happy

oldtimer - 15/8/09 at 05:45 PM

I don't mean to be negative, but is it the photograph that makes the top rail look bent?

02GF74 - 15/8/09 at 05:48 PM

quote:
Originally posted by oldtimer
I don't mean to be negative, but is it the photograph that makes the top rail look bent?


aahh see what you mean. that is the rubber trim - had to lift that up as well as some of the aluminium that is folder over in order to get at the top rail to weld to it.

top outer rail is straighter than a unbent straight thing.

RAYLEE29 - 15/8/09 at 05:49 PM

Is it me or perhaps the picture but it looks like the top chassis rail has got distorted from what youve done
also was it actually necessary?
im sure theres a simpler solution

RAYLEE29 - 15/8/09 at 05:53 PM

sorry looks like im just the slowest typer in the world

Richard Quinn - 15/8/09 at 06:04 PM

Why not just a single piece from the end of the doubled bit back to the bulkhead?

RichieW - 15/8/09 at 06:25 PM

I'm not sure that mod is actually adding anything to the stiffness of the engine bay. Looks like a bit of a waste of time really.

As hicost says the bracing needs to run the length of the bay and be triangulated.

Try and picture where the forces are coming from and going to. I'm no engineer but I can't see any forces going through that mod at all so I don't think its doing very much other than adding weight.

zilspeed - 15/8/09 at 06:55 PM

This would have been my solution I reckon. Rescued attachment engine.jpg
Rescued attachment engine.jpg

iscmatt - 15/8/09 at 07:08 PM

quote:
Originally posted by zilspeed
This would have been my solution I reckon.


This exactly what i was thinking you should do. What zilspeed has done adds strength, being honest i think what you have done will not add anything to the integrity and strength of the chassis

imo

rusty nuts - 15/8/09 at 07:16 PM

Have to agree with the above. Neater and stronger!

02GF74 - 15/8/09 at 09:11 PM

there is one flaw with that and that is the radiator sits behind the front rail - so in the diagram above, it is not possible to run the left arm of the V as shown.

aslo to redirect the irght hand arm would require either cutting the rail and fiotting a new one or put in a noth, bending then welding it up.

I am not pulling the engine out again and access is tight to weld in that area

thanks for suggestions btw - I realise it is not ideal but no worse than what was there before.

scutter - 16/8/09 at 09:07 AM

I'd try this,





Sorry, but I think it's worth removing all you've done run the left end to as close as possible to the orginal mounting point and the right side outboard enough to clear the exhaust, the shorter link in red may not even be needed. You'll be looking at it for the rest of the time you own the car thinking I could have done something better.

ATB Dan