G-body Roll Call

[Tony_SS]

http://www.facebook.com/#!/album.php?aid=21834&id=101846653183796&ref=mf

Here's a link to the AME Facebook album that has some pics of the G body that Holley is building. Pretty amazing car; it was one of the GM cars that was sold at BJ - vin 00001 and 50 miles on the odometer. Another 20 miles were put onto it while at Holley and then it was taken apart and shipped out to us.

We are reverse-engineering a new chassis for it right now and it is going to be Holley's track day car. Out of all the cars I have seen come through the shop over the years this has to be one of the cleanest cars we have ever started with. It's a brand new car that just happens to be 23 years old.

Awesome... what a great project. Can't wait to see how it turns out.

[somcamaross]

Greetings,

My first post at pro-touring.com! The facebook photo is of a CMM (coordinate-measuring machine or device,) no doubt to capture key locations along the chassis to check against factory specifications. Here is a link to a recent discussion of an aftermarket rolling chassis for an A/G body platform at montecarloss.com that you may find interesting:

http://www.montecarloss.com/communit...=811908&page=1

On edit: I got linked to this thread out of a discussion about the AME rolling chassis. Going back and seeing now that this thread is ostensibly about gauging the A/G population out here, I'll add that I've owned four of these cars over the decades: a 1978 4-door Malibu, a 1981 Grand Prix LJ, a 1978 Malibu coupe, and now a 1981 Monte Carlo (soon to be an SS clone with bulged quarters and fenders for wider wheels.)

Best,
MAP

Great to see you over here, MAP!

[Granny 5]

A couple of mine from past years. Lost the White one after 8 years! Make sure you have the proper insurance coverage to protect your investment!!! We lost a bunch of money by trusting our insurance guy and just carrying "FULL COVERAGE"!

[John S]

Welcome aboard MAP, great to see another Monte advocate over here! What took you so long

[Tony_SS]

A couple of mine from past years. Lost the White one after 8 years! Make sure you have the proper insurance coverage to protect your investment!!! We lost a bunch of money by trusting our insurance guy and just carrying "FULL COVERAGE"!

Thats horrible. How did that fire start?

[malihoochie]

I'm pretty sure it's just been GM- G-bodies up till now, but heck, why not let the mopar guys in too.

Haha

[MAP]

Greetings,

Somcamaross and John S - many thanks for the welcome. Posting on different web sites can be an incredible time sink, so I frequent extremely few.

Question for Craig Morrison/AME: if you wouldn't view it in the realm of proprietary information, would you please share any stiffness measurements on the stock chassis? Torsional stiffness about the car's CL longitudinal axis, and between the front and rear axle locations, would be of key interest. My opinion is that the stock chassis is woefully limp, and mostly because of those flimsy C-channel side rails in the mid section of the frame. Also, as I recall, the fundamental vertical resonance of the body mass on the frame (lambda/2 deflection mode,) was down in the 15-18Hz range. Again, a woefully low number for anything other than a cushy boulevard cruiser.

Best,
MAP

[Norm Peterson]

We did have some discussion on the chassis stiffness topic a while back and a few crude-ish numbers came out of it but no confirmation.

Linky


And welcome to visibility (took ya long enough to start posting )


Norm

[MAP]

Thanks, Norm!

I don't know my way around here at all, so that link is a good inducement for me not to take this thread too far adrift.

Best,
MAP

[Granny 5]

Thats horrible. How did that fire start?

Not really sure. We were driving down the highway and don't even know how long it had been on fire before it filled the interior with choking smoke. By the time we were stopped and out of the car it was blazing. So hot it melted the front wheels and lead from the "A" pillar. Very heartbreaking. Car was a birthday present from my wife a couple of years after having to sale my first GN early in our marriage to make ends meet. After about 8 years of tweaking it was my pride and joy. Ran low 11's and could drive it home with the a/c on while getting 20+ mpg. Very fun car!

[CraigMorrison]

Craig I hit you up on FB. Does this mean there will be a new AM G-body frame in the near future?

This chassis is part of our custom bolt-on chassis program. Because of the rendering and the customer's request we are also stretching the wheelbase by 3". What they have done is moved the front wheels forward in the fender by the 3". IMO it really makes this car look good!


We do have some really great data on these cars now!

[CraigMorrison]

Greetings,

Somcamaross and John S - many thanks for the welcome. Posting on different web sites can be an incredible time sink, so I frequent extremely few.

Question for Craig Morrison/AME: if you wouldn't view it in the realm of proprietary information, would you please share any stiffness measurements on the stock chassis? Torsional stiffness about the car's CL longitudinal axis, and between the front and rear axle locations, would be of key interest. My opinion is that the stock chassis is woefully limp, and mostly because of those flimsy C-channel side rails in the mid section of the frame. Also, as I recall, the fundamental vertical resonance of the body mass on the frame (lambda/2 deflection mode,) was down in the 15-18Hz range. Again, a woefully low number for anything other than a cushy boulevard cruiser.

Best,
MAP

MAP- Thanks for the question! No, it's not proprietary info, but to be honest we haven't done any calculations on the stock chassis because it is so horrible. When we were measuring the chassis with the Faro arm, just mounting the arm onto the chassis was causing it to deflect. We had to add extra supports under the frame to keep the 30# of the Faro arm from deflecting the chassis and creating errors in the measurement data!

With the chassis supported by jack stands under the housing you can hold the rear passenger rail in one hand and lift and visually see the deflection all the way up to the front suspension crossmember. I know that this is pretty anecdotal evidence but we've never seen a chassis that has been this weak.

It is pretty apparent that it's sole purpose is to locate the bumpers and suspension points and the body is providing the chassis strength.

You are extremely correct when you say that the chassis is woefully limp!

[Doober]

I can't wait to see the frame... I'd asked if it's going to be along the same lines of the MaxG style chassis, but I'm not sure if you'd responded yet. Regardless I'm sure it will be way beyond the capacity of any stock G-Body frame! I'd love to be able to fit wide tires at all 4 corners (definitely not easy in the front), do you think it may be possible with this new frame?

[Samckitt]

Craig, what type front suspension are you putting on this?

[67rstbkt]

I just picked up a g-body for a daily driver and mini-project. I guess my Firebird build just wasn't enough. I think I have a sickness.......
Anyway, here it is in all it's glory; a 1983 Grand Prix
I took the rollers off of my firebird and threw them on there. I'm thinking 275/60/15 rears and 235/60/15 fronts and paint the thing hot rod black. What do you guys think?

[CraigMorrison]

Craig, what type front suspension are you putting on this?

They wanted a 3-link in the rear and we are using our "Sport IFS" up front.


I haven't seen the chassis design yet, so I'm not sure if it is a MaxG style or not. As soon as I see it I will let you know.

[MAP]

Hi Craig,

Amazing! My plan is quasi unibody conversion, bulged quarters and fenders for wider tires, front wheels 1.7-4" more forward, and 3-link at the rear with a Watt's link. The Monte Carlo body style accommodates the bulging and the front-wheel relocation surprisingly well, as renditions show: you have to look at before and after pictures two or three times, and even then, the differences are difficult to detect - the car simply looks like it came that way from the factory, since the stock crease lines in the body suggest a reality waiting to happen...

Previous measurements showed the body to be a good deal more rigid than the frame - agree here - I think that frame probably ran well down the production lines GM had at the time, and maybe that's why they used a bare minimum of a connection between the front and rear halves of that frame.

Not to try to pull too much attention from this thread, but a lively discussion of your frame is happening here:

http://www.montecarloss.com/communit...441#Post829441

On edit: I've got a 1981 Monte Carlo minus suspension, and up on jack stands, as I write this. The car is completely stock, and without even a trace of rust. The condition of the OE frame/body bushings is TBD, however. I'll try to take a torsional stiffness measurement on the frame in this condition over the next several days and report back. Edit 10/17/10: Got it. Without suspension, drivetrain, nor hood, the frame with all 14 OE body bushings attachment to body, measures 2,490 ft-lb/deg. I'd assign about a +/-5% tolerance to this measurement. If the car had all missing components installed, I suppose this number would have been a tad higher - maybe 2,600 ft-lb/deg? The frame, body, and even the bushings look essentially as-new (with 100% of the car's life lived in eastern San Diego, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.)

Best,
MAP

[mc84_zz4]

Well, this week there was an update on AME's facebook page.
There may still be some details or changes later, but this does look REAL tasty.
The little magic I would like to see, is if they can package the tri-link rear to still retain some form of rear seat, or if a triangulated 4-link may follow later...
Still, very exciting to see this project coming to market.






You may need to login to see the album:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/...01846653183796

[Samckitt]

I am curious to know I'd they are narrowing the rear frame rails, what rear width tires will fit, what front suspension are they using, raer seat still usable? Are they going to sell this frame, how much?

[RKHiPerformance]

79 bu
LS-1, magna charger, hotchkis suspension, baer brakes, gn rear, budnik wheels.

81 sleeper wagon
540, T-400 w/4,000 stall, 9" w/ 4:10, steel wheels and police car caps.

Wagon pics, please!