If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Unibody rigidity
Are we still in 4 figures Nm/degree-wise or we're long in 5 digit territory?
I see the % improvement in the press from time to time but no actual figures for any car[s]. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Unibody rigidity
On Sunday, April 13, 2014 1:48:51 AM UTC+8, I hate front wheel drive, most torque must go to the rear wrote:
> Are we still in 4 figures Nm/degree-wise or we're long in 5 digit territory? > > > > I see the % improvement in the press from time to time but no actual > > figures for any car[s]. I had a 1997 car, and put lowered sports suspension on it. When parked on uneven ground, the front doors were hard to close, which means not enough rigidity. The next model was beefed up (probably to get more stars in crash tests) and was quite stiff, had no such problems. and was |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Unibody rigidity
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Unibody rigidity
My 1981 Buick Century: Noticed lots of squeeks and rattles. I relocated the strikers inward on all four doors in that thing, and it actually began speaking German! Seriously - the body felt tighter, the suspension responded more readily to both the road and my inputs. It felt more like an Autobahn burner than a cushy Detroit rolling library.
My 1996 Ford Contour: Much taughter little sedan than the Buick for sure. But I read in the chassis manual I bought for it that both the front and rear glass "must be properly mounted and sealed to insure body rigidity." Are unibodies(like that Mondeo/Contour) that dependent even on the fixed glass for total rigidity?? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Unibody rigidity
My 1981 Buick Century: Noticed lots of squeeks and rattles. I relocated the strikers inward on all four doors in that thing, and it actually began speaking German! Seriously - the body felt tighter, the suspension responded more readily to both the road and my inputs. It felt more like an Autobahn burner than a Detroit rolling library.
My 1996 Ford Contour: Much taughter little sedan than the Buick for sure. But I read in the chassis manual I bought for it that both the front and rear glass "must be properly mounted and sealed to insure body rigidity." Are unibodies(like that Mondeo/Contour) that dependent even on the fixed glass for total rigidity?? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Unibody rigidity
My 1981 Buick Century: Noticed lots of squeeks and rattles. I relocated the strikers inward on all four doors in that thing, and it actually began speaking German! Seriously - the body felt tighter, the suspension responded more readily to both the road and my inputs. It felt more like an Autobahn burner than a cushy Detroit rolling library.
My 1996 Ford Contour: Much taughter little sedan than the Buick for sure. But I read in the chassis manual I bought for it that both the front and rear glass "must be properly mounted and sealed to insure body rigidity." Are unibodies(like that Mondeo/Contour) that dependent even on the fixed glass for total rigidity?? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Unibody rigidity
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Unibody rigidity
Steve W. wrote: "Most newer vehicles use the glass as a structural part. The glass is also used in concert with the airbags for passenger restraint during "
Doesn't say much for the 'rigidity' of unibody does it? I guess it goes with the territory: Remove the subframe(body-on-frame vintage), and that strength has to some from someplace else. Thicker guage sheetmetal? Now that's an idea. Utilizing the glass in concert with the airbag does, however, make sense. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Unibody rigidity
On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 2:09:38 AM UTC-10, wrote:
> Steve W. wrote: "Most newer vehicles use the glass as a structural part. The glass is also used in concert with the airbags for passenger restraint during " > > > > Doesn't say much for the 'rigidity' of unibody does it? I guess it goes with the territory: Remove the subframe(body-on-frame vintage), and that strength has to some from someplace else. Thicker guage sheetmetal? Now that's an idea. > > Reducing weight and increasing the stiffness of the parts that the drivetrain is bolted to is a good thing to do. If you can meet both goals at the same time, it's simply good engineering. It's not that radical a comcept - some motorcycles have been using the engine as a stressed part of the frame for a while. > > Utilizing the glass in concert with the airbag does, however, make sense. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
3 or 4 inch indent on unibody side of Kia Spectra before tailight | [email protected] | Technology | 5 | June 14th 07 10:43 PM |
I hate unibody! | Stupendous Man | Jeep | 6 | October 10th 06 04:44 AM |
Adapters for jack stands on unibody pinch welds? | [email protected] | Technology | 5 | March 1st 06 03:54 AM |
Cracked VW unibody frame | george | Technology | 11 | February 23rd 06 04:39 PM |
Chassis Rigidity | [email protected] | Simulators | 15 | July 27th 05 08:57 PM |