Welcome to TSG - This channel will be a chronicle of my efforts in my little garage. The current build is a 1966 Volvo Canadian (Amazon/122) and I'll cover each step as I attempt to transform this car from good to great.
Are you still going to use the C4 vette spindle/upright or is that going to be made custom as well? I had planned on using the same setup in a 69 triumph GT6 but now I’m thinking it may not work since I need to narrow it so much. Great job on explaining your thoughts.
Since the original steel hood didn’t have any structure I am very curious what the difference in weight was since you used foam core to stiffen the carbon hood.
Harbor freight Warrior 4.5 in Poly carbide woven disc. $7.99 before sale price. BAUER Carbide Grit Triangular Grinding Rasp for Oscillating Multi-Tools. The problem with mill scale is it wants to just burnish or glaze over and you can't get under it. The poly silicon carbide woven wheel are hard enough grit to break thru. Ceramics do too. The triangle carbide grit on the vibration multi tool will break up the scale with a quick pass, then hit with the woven wheel. Use a router speed control to slow down the grinder 11,000 rpm is too fast on scale it glazes, slow it down.
Excellent work, I'm going to get stuck in on mine once I get my body mounts done (thanks for the idea on casting your own by the way) so I'm sure of the fender clearances. I have slightly less variables than you as I need to keep the lower control arm frame side point on mine but the upper (within reason) and definitely the wheel side are all available. Thanks for compiling the data on things like KPA and Scrub out of all of those cars as a starting spot. Unclear if I start clean sheet on the front or practice by pulling the Q45 dimensions on the rear. Also why the 350Z hub for 5x4.5in [5x112.3mm]? I get not going with Ford hubs with the big centerbores but Nissan/Mazda/Hyundai are all still bigger than the Toyota/Honda size bore you have on your rear hubs. Keep up the great content!!!
Thanks - I still have to work out the side view - reading more textbooks right now. Stalling progress. Pull the rear dimensions and get a feel for it before tackling the front. That's basically what I've ended up doing. I also got lucky on the rear when I shortened it - no adverse effects. The 350Z hub is compact - about as compact as I've found and was on the same bolt circle (5 X 4.5") - it was also a rear wheel drive car - so the front hub doesn't have a drive spline. The difference is the hub center can be accommodated with a centering ring if needed.
I have a software program that designs headers with the desired primary tube lengths and packaging constraints. A design like this would have only 2 to 3 welds per primary tube. No trimming and fitting,
I'm assuming you've seen the G-Comp Unser corvette upright as used on the StanceWorks Ferrari. These appear to be a good design that can be self fabricated.
I know you already replied that the level was not placed as expected on the hub, but I think it’s important to notice that you were reading the “bubble” level backwards. As you increased bump on the C4 suspension mock up, camber was going more negative. I watched a promo video for the tool to confirm. I don’t mean that this is the right setup for your car, but I don’t want you to be confused and frustrated in the future when using that tool. Also, you are embarking on a long journey if you plan to fabricate all the components. Mike Burrows from the channel Stance Works did something similar and re-did it a few times. He has some good videos to reference on the fab techniques and learnings. Good luck!
Thanks - I noticed that after the video was released. I had moved the level to shoot the segment. It happens. I understand the nature of the journey - looking forward to most of it whatever happens.
Don't measure from the tip of a tape measure if you care for good accuracy, "burn an inch" or perhaps 10mm in your case and measure using the divisions and not the fairly approximate tip of the tape :) The effort you're going into for this is pretty impressive and your willingness to jump into areas where you know you need to learn is great! I will admit the suspension stuff is Greek to me although I've certainly heard many of the terms and have some vague understanding. Much appreciation for trying to explain it as you're learning! The feedback you'rew getting is also awesome and I cannto wait to see what you end up building and how you like driving it eventually afterwards. It's like you're building Tally Ho in automative form - I love it!
i know its years ago and you likely forget but what issue did you find was taking the most time when trying to mock up the plastic jig? i thinking to make my own for welding, thanks in advance
The plastic jig was the best part of building that manifold. Easy to work with, and if I had to guess, I'd say that getting the lengths dialed in took the longest. It really didn't take that long - it's just playing with shapes.
I realize it's been a while since this vid but that filleting was is available through EZ composites from the UK. They also deal in Canada. I'm sure u also know they have many help vids but I watch them over sometimes.
This video talked about a program software that can help you and discussed the details the suspension variables ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-eg4dI5NiQkQ.htmlsi=sLp0ijBVfsHlF1s3
@@ThrottleStopGarage i hate to be so caustic about it, but its literally some blow molded plastic that probably costs them $5 per kit. (Not sure of their particular process but still...) I realize molds and design time are in there but it seems way over the top to charge that much. It prevents home gamers from trying and encourages going to thingyverse and investing in a 3d printer or two. And I understand being on the no to little demand side of things and how exorbitant low volume parts are having a 1976 Ford Elite 400 - a set of A arms is $500... I dunno. I think the company(ies) that make these are taking the wrong approach here
@@BAMAJiPS 100% agree. That's why I've put the models on thingiverse. You can 3D print them for free. I would bet that if they lowered the price, the'd sell a bunch more - probably more than they think. I'd rather buy these things than build them if the price is reasonable.
@@ThrottleStopGarage YES... I HAVE SEEN IT IN SEVERAL VIDEOS... I DON'T KNOW WITHOUT TIRES OR ELECTRICS... I JUST WANT THE NAME OR CODE TO LOOK FOR THEM ON AMAZON...
How much were the new dies? Thanks for the good video. My philosophy on HF tools is: Unless I can eventually use it as a doorstop or hammer, I don’t buy it. In this case, you’re ok. These are heavy enough to be used as a doorstop😇
Wow, I love your honesty and the way you explained your process. From my experience, I would say most will run in loops because of the lack of tyre data available, as most things are fundamentally linked to those characteristics. It is interesting to use existing vehicles to determine your foundation numbers; however, it would say you should make sure you have similar spec tyres to those vehicles and have similar weight and centre of gravity. So, the critical pieces of data characteristics you are missing are the following Slip angle Vertical load Horizontal load Alignment torque Rolling resistance Another factor would be the aero characteristics of the vehicle. I look forward to seeing more videos from you. When I was a student, my go-to was Race Vehicle Dynamics. I think everything I've stated is within that book. Essentially, they say that the suspension is designed for the tyres and keeping them in their ideal window
Thanks - I hold fast to the notion that honesty is the only policy. We learn by our mistakes. In the next episode, I will expand a bit and try to resolve the selected variables from first principles. I was missing a few details that I've now got filled in and will work that through. It would have been too much in the first video!
Thanks so much for sharing that hard earned information with us, sir. I'm just at the same stage with my build and wasn't confident with the direction I was going in. I'm utilising MX5 front and rear hubs on a scratch built Lotus 11 I,m currently building and was hoping use the same upper and lower control arms but with a different track width. I think I need to go downtrend route you've taken to haveany success...
The explanation of front view design is great, start with the track width you need, add a few locations at the wheel, start from the center of the car then connect the dots. I'll be waiting for the side view and am hoping for a top view vid as well. Concerning top view, most if not all street cars ( use a 77 to 90 full sized GM ) have the lower control arm rotated so the front pivots are closer together. I'm not sure why this is done but I think it interacts with what I'm typing below. The upper is rotated as well but I'd have to look at a suspension to see what way. As for side view, the control arms pivots are tilted relative to each other , I'm pretty sure this has to do with anti dive where braking forces try to add spring rate to the front suspension. Think of it this way. If the brake was locked and you applied a torque in the direction of forward motion , how much torque would it take to move the suspension into droop? High torque = minimal anti dive = nose droops a lot under braking. Low torque = high anti dive = minimal nose droop = possibly too high of an effective spring rate leading to turn in problems.
Great video! Most of my experience is as an auto tech performing alignments, and while trying to learn more than the basic stuff, it always seems as if most people don't understand. Your video is an excellent explanation of how things work! I've also found that FDF Raceshop's videos were absolutely amazing as far as simplifying the angles involved and how they effect each other ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-8tupcwACMfU.htmlsi=oyel6vc4kDc7bJT9
Cool video! I use the C4 front suspension for my race car, and I did a few things to help (not solve) the issue that you observe. My first solution was to get a longer lower control arm ball joint from Howe. Does put the control arm close to wheel hoop though, but 18" wheels clear fine. I also chucked the upper control arm cross bar spacers in the lathe and cut them down to the absolute minimum in the back and enough in the front that I could run more caster than stock for camber gain under steering input. Still doesn't give more than bout 2 degrees maximum static camber and I am going to go to a custom shorter upper control arm to get that sorted. Lowering the upper arm inboard pickup points would help as well, but not sure how much fabrication I'm willing to undertake. Nice video, thanks for making it!
I could only make it through 1/3 of the video before having to stop watching. Having built many chassis with the C4 suspension, I think you should ride/drive a car with it installed correctly before you assume things are not good. Your 2 dimensional approach is probably not the best. Your assumption that you have a grasp on suspension design and it should be shared with the world may be a bit off as well. Hopefully too many people don't watch this video as a tutorial.
Why even comment? You didn't even watch the design part. I'm not making assumptions, this is what they do...it won't work for me. GM changed it for a reason.
Just discovered this channel and this is truly amazing and fascinating. I'm an engineer who first started before my degree, and had to ask what your background is because I am genuinely impressed at your ability to ally practical manipulations and theory.
The level wasn't sitting flush on the hub when I filmed this and I didn't catch the error. The computer model is correct. It does go negative, but goes positive first. Anyway, my mistake trying to get this filed when tired.
