nludkin
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 03:53 PM |
|
|
Missing Triangulation
I have just noticed that yet more bits are missing from my chassis. After dropping the engine in and attaching all the bodywork I didn't really
want to discover that my "bought" chassis is also missing the triangulation between the engine bay and the tops of the footwell
bulkheads!!
What I ideally need to know is, will this fail an SVA as a poorly braced chassis or will it get away without? I know for a fact that it is meant to
have these struts shown as W7DE-241 on the CAD drawings.
This is now the Forth missing chassis part I have found to add to the 15 deviations to the official plans. Cheers GTS!
|
|
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 04:02 PM |
|
|
provided the rest of the chassis is welded properly, i doubt you will fail sva. Is it powder coated? You can easily weld in a few bars where required
anyway.
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 04:03 PM |
|
|
I would get in touch with Darren if I was you...
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
nludkin
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 04:06 PM |
|
|
Darren (Surprise surprise) won't take any calls from me anymore as my kit has caused way to many problems for him over the past year.
I still don't have top wishbones that fit properly either! 
|
|
|
graememk
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 04:11 PM |
|
|
might be worth a trip to the newark show
|
|
|
BKLOCO
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 04:13 PM |
|
|
Picture?
Not sure what triangulation you are talking about.
Experience is what you get when you don't get what you want!!! 
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 04:15 PM |
|
|
I do, look at this pic:
http://locostbuilders.co.uk/upload/Progress.jpg
the triangulation from the sides of the car to the footwell bulkhead is missing...
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
nludkin
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 04:20 PM |
|
|
That's the cookie.. I have just put a top-down piccy in my archive to highlight the issue.
Hmm.. Should I try welding the missing struts with the side panels on? The side panels were such a tight fit that they have already started cracking
and I fear they won't go on a second time.
|
|
|
mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 04:54 PM |
|
|
Mine doesnt have that brace and I have a MK.
What my solution is to put a bolt in tube much like the ones you get in for production cars between the turrets across the engine bay
It is not the end of the world and having a go at anyone online is no way to sort the problem.
As for the 15 changes Ive yet to see a seven replica that matches its stablemates. Even in a production run.........
PS your w7de wind screen is coming soon.....
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 05:07 PM |
|
|
AFAIK - no MK Indy's have that triangulation. This is likely due to the interference it would cause with different engine designs.
Steve
|
|
|
nludkin
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 05:07 PM |
|
|
You are right in the fact that having a go at anyone online is not the way to sort the problem.
I have however, had nothing but problems with this kit and was very glad that the end was in sight. However, discovering that yet again I had to
suffer due to bad quality control (Company confessed) was a little more than I could cope with today.
So, apologies for the mini rant, but I think I am entitled to a little whine once in a while. :-)
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 05:30 PM |
|
|
I can't see a problem. There are Indys running round with every engine you can think of including V8s and none of that bracing in the engine bay
and it hasn't caused any of them to fail SVA. They aren't bending in the middle or falling apart either.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
DIY Si
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 05:56 PM |
|
|
Whilst it won't fail the sva, those tubes are fairly important for chassis stiffness, as they leave the engine bay as an open box. This was what
I did on my chassis in the same place:
PS this isn't quite finished at the front yet.
[Edited on 24/5/06 by DIY Si]
 
Rescued attachment PROGRESS2.jpg
|
|
|
nludkin
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 06:31 PM |
|
|
Well thanks for all the suggestions. I think I am going to skip adding bracing for the time being, and when I add the V8 that I am rebuilding I will
then weld in as much bracing as possible 
Sorry for the rant earlier. I am just fed up of finding issues that shouldn't be there. I have enough issues coping with the issues that should
be there!!
|
|
|
andyw7de
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 08:57 PM |
|
|
missing brace
Here is a pic of my bay showing the missing braces. I think this shows that these should be fitted in order that the chassis performs as
designed.
 
Rescued attachment brace.jpg
|
|
|
nludkin
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 09:24 PM |
|
|
The kit was meant to be the first W7DE produced. At the time of purchase it was by no means meant to deviate from any other W7DE produced and was the
one the moulds were meant to be taken from.
However, the chassis was sent out to me before the moulds were taken (Why?) and the designs were apparently "lost".
This means that Darren has no idea what my chassis looks like and explains why I have had to butcher the fiberglass to get it to remotely fit. It also
explains why the top wishbones still foul the shock absorbers. And why both the fuel tank mounting tubes and the aforementioned bracing is missing.
So, what I have received is not what I agreed to purchase I would have liked to still had a dialog with Darren but he has refused to talk or deal
with me since (I have done him such an injustice?).
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 10:17 PM |
|
|
I would say that those braces ARE quite important to the overall stiffness of your car. Those braces are designed to replace the standard Locost
"R" tube which goes from the inboard corner of the footwell to meet tube "S" (IIRC) just above the offside rearmost suspension
mount.
Cymtriks (you know the FEA guy) stated several times that the removal of tube "R" was a bad thing although unavoidable if you want a V8 or
other wide engine. The best solution was "Y" braces like those shown above by DIY SI but having two 45 degree braces (one either side) was
much better than nothing at all.
My McSorley 7+4" chassis has the same 45 degree braces either side and I firmly believe that they add a great deal to the strength of my
chassis. You should be okay for SVA but I'd fit the braces as soon as possible and certainly before any spirited driving!
Here is a photo from a couple of years back:
Cheers,
Craig.
[Edited on 24/5/2006 by craig1410]
[Edited on 24/5/2006 by craig1410]
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 11:12 PM |
|
|
Everyone will have a personal view.
The FEA analysis i've seen seems to suggest that they are a good idea. Personally I would stick with the locost original design as it works. If
you can't then the two Y braces are a very good compromise (perhaps marginally better as there is two of them), then the small braces which a
lot of manufacturers use including westfield. I've not seen any chassis without any bracing before.
|
|
|
nludkin
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 07:30 AM |
|
|
From my own limited understanding of mechanical engineering I can see how the cross bracing would help substantially. It would be good to get figures
of the "flex" in the chassis before and after though. I have decided to put this one to a mate of mine who works with ansys all day to
investigate. :-) I will try and post some figures in the future to settle this one once and for all :-)
Hopefully you can all see why I am a little disgruntled though. You pay for something and it arrives not as described and blatently not to designed
spec!
|
|
|
locoboy
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 09:07 AM |
|
|
I had to lop mine out to alow my engine cradle for the R1 to fit.
I also had to lop out the diagonal round tube that runs upwards from the rear of the engine compartment to the top of the suspension mounting to allow
the R1 exhaust to exit.
I will however replace this one with a suitable alternative.
My engine cradle will go someway to replacing those diagonals that were removed to allow correct placement.
[img][/img]
ATB
Locoboy
|
|
|
.jpg)
