[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Torsional rigidity figures of 100 / 200 series bodyshells?

In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.970605004207.11587A-100000@apollo>, in 
mail.Chris_CC's,Graydon D. Stuckey wrote:
> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 00:44:40 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "Graydon D. Stuckey" <graydon@apollo.gmi.edu>
> To: Chris Wilson <chris@maximum-bhp.u-net.com>
> Cc: quattro@coimbra.ans.net, chris@maximum-bhp.u-net.com
> Subject: Re: Torsional rigidity figures of 100 / 200 series bodyshells?
> On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Does anyone on the list have access to torsional rigidity figures for 
> > the circa 83 to 90 100 and 200 series bodyshells?
> No figures, but I do know that the car flexes _ALOT_ when I jack it up 
> and put it on jackstands.   I'm not impressed at all.  Seems as flimsy as 
> a '70s Vette!   They made it handle pretty well despite the flex however, 
> so I guess I'll put up with it for now.    A front strut brace will help 
> a little, BTDT.   OTOH, its good for crashworthyness, if that matters to 
> you.

OK Thanks Graydon.
  Subjectively I thought this,too.But a pal claims he has seen figures 
making this series particularly good.I recall one of the most rigid of all 
production bodyshells being the old British Leyland "land crab" 1800 / 2200 
series.Rather a waste given the rest of the running gear on those machines 
. ;-)
  I know a lot of manufacturers are reticent about revealing torsion 
figures,probably because so many are atrocious.Mentioning Vettes,I had a 
colleague who actually _liked_ these things,and swore blind a half inch 
diameter anti roll bar on the back end transformed it...I don't think you 
would even notice a half inch bar on a Vette,given the elasticity in the 
chassis and the bushings :-)

    Best Regards,
                 Chris Wilson