Unibody rigidity

On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 12:17:25 -0700, dsi1 wrote:

> 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.

The 1934 Chrysler Airflow was very well designed as a unit body for that
time.

On 4/16/2014 12:38 PM, sctvguy1 wrote:
>
> The 1934 Chrysler Airflow was very well designed as a unit body for that
> time.
>
That is interesting. I did not know that. Thanks.

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.
>
> Utilizing the glass in concert with the airbag does, however, make
> sense.

Unibody has been in use far longer than a lot of people think.

You also have to consider how the rigidity of the design effects the
ride quality and safety.

You could design a vehicle that was very rigid and had no flex. It would
have the ride of a solid block of concrete and survivability would be
low in a major impact.

For examples of unibody just look at Mustangs (and every variant of the
fox body), Camaros, Every Chrysler car since 1961. Pretty much every
other car built by all makers since the late 90's. Trucks and some
specific vehicles still have BOF construction but it's a very low count
these days.

These days with safety and fuel mileage they look at everything for ways
to make the vehicle lighter. One of those is thinner stronger steel
alloys and using more of the components of the body to carry the weight.

--
Steve W.

On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:37:55 -1000, dsi1 wrote:

> On 4/16/2014 12:38 PM, sctvguy1 wrote:
>>
>> The 1934 Chrysler Airflow was very well designed as a unit body for
>> that time.
>>
> That is interesting. I did not know that. Thanks.

Look on youtube for the video of the 1934 Airflow going off a cliff, then
driving off under its own power!

On 4/17/2014 8:41 AM, sctvguy1 wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:37:55 -1000, dsi1 wrote:
>
>> On 4/16/2014 12:38 PM, sctvguy1 wrote:
>>>
>>> The 1934 Chrysler Airflow was very well designed as a unit body for
>>> that time.
>>>
>> That is interesting. I did not know that. Thanks.
>
> Look on youtube for the video of the 1934 Airflow going off a cliff, then
> driving off under its own power!
>

I have seen this famous footage. I'd like to see them do that using a
modern car. That would be cool!

On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 18:41:57 -0400, "Steve W." >
wrote:

>Ashton Crusher wrote:
>> On Sun, 13 Apr 2014 01:33:00 -0700 (PDT),
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>
>>
>> I had a 1980 Citation (MT Car of the Year!!!) and it was the most
>> flexible car I have ever owned. Felt like a wet noodle.
>
>
>NYS bought some of the first generation Chrysler mini-vans and
>discovered that the chassis was not even close to sturdy. They would
>open the sliding door and then discover that after they got the people
>in that the door wouldn't close and you could see ripples in the roof
>panels from the stress. Chrysler used the same approach to repair them
>as they did the K-Car convertibles. Extra rocker panel braces to stiffen
>the unibody.


Years ago our agency bought a bunch of K-cars. They flatbedded them
out to usage sites. On the flatbed they attached straps to the frame
to anchor them to the trailer. Doing so bent the frames......

On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 03:29:51 -0400, "Steve W." >
wrote:

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.
>>
>> Utilizing the glass in concert with the airbag does, however, make
>> sense.
>
>Unibody has been in use far longer than a lot of people think.
>
>You also have to consider how the rigidity of the design effects the
>ride quality and safety.
>
>You could design a vehicle that was very rigid and had no flex. It would
>have the ride of a solid block of concrete and survivability would be
>low in a major impact.
>
>For examples of unibody just look at Mustangs (and every variant of the
>fox body), Camaros, Every Chrysler car since 1961. Pretty much every
>other car built by all makers since the late 90's. Trucks and some
>specific vehicles still have BOF construction but it's a very low count
>these days.
>
>These days with safety and fuel mileage they look at everything for ways
>to make the vehicle lighter. One of those is thinner stronger steel
>alloys and using more of the components of the body to carry the weight.

I believe the largest Unibody car ever built was the 1960 Lincoln.

Ashton Crusher wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 03:29:51 -0400, "Steve W." >
> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>>
>>> Utilizing the glass in concert with the airbag does, however, make
>>> sense.
>> Unibody has been in use far longer than a lot of people think.
>>
>> You also have to consider how the rigidity of the design effects the
>> ride quality and safety.
>>
>> You could design a vehicle that was very rigid and had no flex. It would
>> have the ride of a solid block of concrete and survivability would be
>> low in a major impact.
>>
>> For examples of unibody just look at Mustangs (and every variant of the
>> fox body), Camaros, Every Chrysler car since 1961. Pretty much every
>> other car built by all makers since the late 90's. Trucks and some
>> specific vehicles still have BOF construction but it's a very low count
>> these days.
>>
>> These days with safety and fuel mileage they look at everything for ways
>> to make the vehicle lighter. One of those is thinner stronger steel
>> alloys and using more of the components of the body to carry the weight.
>
> I believe the largest Unibody car ever built was the 1960 Lincoln.

Car maybe. The GM vans were unibody up until 96. They built cargo trucks
on that design.

--
Steve W.

On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 10:06:21 -0400, "Steve W." >
wrote:

>Ashton Crusher wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 03:29:51 -0400, "Steve W." >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> Utilizing the glass in concert with the airbag does, however, make
>>>> sense.
>>> Unibody has been in use far longer than a lot of people think.
>>>
>>> You also have to consider how the rigidity of the design effects the
>>> ride quality and safety.
>>>
>>> You could design a vehicle that was very rigid and had no flex. It would
>>> have the ride of a solid block of concrete and survivability would be
>>> low in a major impact.
>>>
>>> For examples of unibody just look at Mustangs (and every variant of the
>>> fox body), Camaros, Every Chrysler car since 1961. Pretty much every
>>> other car built by all makers since the late 90's. Trucks and some
>>> specific vehicles still have BOF construction but it's a very low count
>>> these days.
>>>
>>> These days with safety and fuel mileage they look at everything for ways
>>> to make the vehicle lighter. One of those is thinner stronger steel
>>> alloys and using more of the components of the body to carry the weight.
>>
>> I believe the largest Unibody car ever built was the 1960 Lincoln.
>
>Car maybe. The GM vans were unibody up until 96. They built cargo trucks
>on that design.


1994 G20 Chevy Van.. wheelbase 125 inches, overall length 204.1
1960 Lincoln wheelbase 131 inches, overall length 227

Ashton Crusher wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 10:06:21 -0400, "Steve W." >
> wrote:
>
>> Ashton Crusher wrote:
>>> On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 03:29:51 -0400, "Steve W." >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> Utilizing the glass in concert with the airbag does, however, make
>>>>> sense.
>>>> Unibody has been in use far longer than a lot of people think.
>>>>
>>>> You also have to consider how the rigidity of the design effects the
>>>> ride quality and safety.
>>>>
>>>> You could design a vehicle that was very rigid and had no flex. It would
>>>> have the ride of a solid block of concrete and survivability would be
>>>> low in a major impact.
>>>>
>>>> For examples of unibody just look at Mustangs (and every variant of the
>>>> fox body), Camaros, Every Chrysler car since 1961. Pretty much every
>>>> other car built by all makers since the late 90's. Trucks and some
>>>> specific vehicles still have BOF construction but it's a very low count
>>>> these days.
>>>>
>>>> These days with safety and fuel mileage they look at everything for ways
>>>> to make the vehicle lighter. One of those is thinner stronger steel
>>>> alloys and using more of the components of the body to carry the weight.
>>> I believe the largest Unibody car ever built was the 1960 Lincoln.
>> Car maybe. The GM vans were unibody up until 96. They built cargo trucks
>> on that design.
>
>
> 1994 G20 Chevy Van.. wheelbase 125 inches, overall length 204.1
> 1960 Lincoln wheelbase 131 inches, overall length 227

That would be a "normal" van. They also sold them as cab/chassis or
cut-aways to companies who then installed regular cargo boxes and
ambulance bodies as well as motorhome bodies on them, Many added frame
rails to the rear but there were quite a few that simply changed the
rear axle to a dually design and bolted the stuff onto the factory floor
pan.

Something like these
http://cyberauctions.com/ItemPics/63074_1.jpg
http://imganuncios.mitula.net/1992_g...1214204318.jpg


--
Steve W.