PDA

View Full Version : 2nd Gen F-Body Chassis mod questions???



SN65
05-16-2006, 04:25 AM
Hi All,

Our next project car is going to be an early 70's Camaro. It is going to be a B/M modernized clone. We are going to drop in a 630 HP 502 and a 9" 4 link rear and a turbo400 with Gear Vendors overdrive.

I think that we have a good grip on the mechanicals, but, unfortunatly, I am unfamiliar with all the particulars of this chassis.

We are still talking about all the details with the customer, but as it sits now, the car will be a "Pro-Touring" type build with more of an emphasis on straight line acceleration.

The car will be mostly for street use (cruise nights, car shows, drive about town, etc…), with some drag strip capabilities for when the gauntlet is thrown down. :-)

This brings me to my current predicament. The early Ford unibody structures are slightly different than the Chevy counterparts. I know my way around the Ford products, but am scratching my head a bit on the Chevy structure. The Camaro looks quite a bit more “substantial” than the early stang. Also, the bolt on front clip has me questioning the best method for reinforcement. We are currently considering assembling the chassis on the frame rack and then welding everything together (the front clip and the tubular reinforcements that will run from the firewall at the “A” pillars to the front of the sub-frame) and adding welded in sub frame connectors of our own design.

We are thinking that we may have to add an internal brace inside the cowl to help tie the firewall and the “A” pillars together. This should better transmit the loads from the front clip directly to the “A” pillar. Also, when we get into the rear frame rails, we might triangulate some cross bracing to help transmit the loads from the frame rails to the rockers and the “B” pillars.

I was wondering if anyone here has done any studies or reaserch into the weak areas of this design and the best ways to reinforce the unibody structure. Other than what I covered above, what are the other areas that are in need of reinforcement?

Bob

Mean 69
05-16-2006, 06:33 AM
Why use a four link when you can run a three link setup? We have a kit that is ready to go for the second gen F-bodies (and first gen, and Mopar cars too). I am working on a 70 Camaro that will be our shop car, and can send some pic's, etc.

You are correct, the second gen F-body cars are FAR stronger and more rigid than the earliest Mustangs (I have a 65 FB in the shop too, not just speaking out of my rear), but will respond well to reinforcements. How far you want to go will dictate how much improvement you will see, but the main improvements come in the form of subframe connectors, and "down bars" to tie the front subframe back into the firewall structure. Don't be misled into thinking that the aftermarket subframes are stronger than the stock frame, it's not true. Triangulation is the key. A cage is the best method, but it sounds like that might not work for this car.

I have to run, I am travelling over the next few days, but will probably check in later. If you could, I'd suggest changing the title to include "second gen F body," so people will be able to find the specific info later on using the search function.

Mark