View Single Post
Old 11-30-2011, 05:46 PM   #20
vin63
It's Better With Nitro
 
vin63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chino Hills, CA
Posts: 2,261
Re: X Member Design and Frame Bracing- '66 C10

Quote:
Originally Posted by theastronaut View Post
..Instead of the forces being absorbed by the frame (twisting), the frame will be more solid and transfer the forces into the suspension instead. Boxing the frame should spread out the forces being transferred through the frame over a larger area. I would think that the engine/trans/body mounts would be less stressed since the frame won't be twisting as much; the mounts wouldn't see as much movement....
This is the same principle that allows the use of solid trans and motor mounts in full-chassis drag cars. As an example, when I raced my '63 Chevy II in bracket classes with only subframe connectors many, many years ago, I would occasionally crack my trans case. I built a full chassis with a 14-pt roll cage, solidly mounted my trans and engine with more than twice the horsepower, and have yet to crack a trans case in 20 years of Super Gas racing. These days, I build double frame rail chassises for really high HP applications, like my funny car where everything is solidly mounted to the frame.
__________________
1963 C-10: Deluxe-optioned cab, shortbed, fleetside
Pontiac 462 ci, Kauffman D-Port alum. heads
4L80E, narrowed sheetmetal Ford 9-inch
Tubular front and rear suspension
Custom 6-piston front disc and 4-piston rear disc brakes
vin63 is offline   Reply With Quote