Stock G-body frame flex!

[Toady]

One of the members at montecarloss.com had Schwartz Performance build him a new frame. It's done now and they've posted some videos showing just how much the stock frame flexes, and how theirs looks in comparison.

Their frame is also lighter, with better F/R weight bias. I want one, but I'd have to sell the T to afford it!

Amazing that guys run in the nines with minimal mods to the wet noodle holding up our cars.

Stock GM G-Body Monte Carlo chassis flex - YouTube
Stock GM G-Body Monte Carlo chassis flex (rear) - YouTube
Schwartz Performance G-Machine G-Body Monte Carlo Frame flex test - YouTube

 

[charlief1]

Mine's not a wet noodle any more.:biggrin: I noticed how badly the frame flexed and boxed the frame and did a few other braces to remove some of those issues.

 

[Toady]

Charlie, you were the first person I thought of when I saw the second video.

 

[motorhead]

Ride and comfort is all the stock chassis was built for... no surprises here although the visuals are good for a laugh.

 

[charlief1]

That's pretty much what I was suprised about on mine. If you notice, when the side he's lifting goes down at the front the other front side goes up. I'll see about getting a vid of the difference in mine if one of my friends decides to co-operate and loan himself and the camera to me.

 

[motorhead]

This is also the reason why a lot of folks are welding the frames to the bodies making unibodies; and then adding subsequent rollcages to add stiffness and safety at key points throughout the chassis.

 

[big reazon]

Guess Ill be welding on some braces and putting in a rollcage. 20,000 for a rolling frame ouch

 

[charlief1]

After I get the frame done I'll be looking at doing a 4 or 6 point bar for safety. It really does help to box the frame with 1/8" plate but you can make it to stiff which will ruin the ride. A frame has to have some sort of flex to it or you have to do other things to make it ride halfway decent.

 

[Hot Air]

Those videos are lacking to say the least! Someone needs to do better! This is an excellent opportunity to educate all us gearheads.

Conrad

 

[turbofish38]

Part optical illusion if you ask me. Sure the frame will flex sitting on jack stands with out a body mounted to it. Think about the entire car as a system, not just a bunch of parts bolted together.Bolt the tub on and you wont see near the amount of flex. I couldn't help but notice the rear impact bar was bolted on but not the front.Hey I'm not saying our cars dont flex. Heaven knows I've almost torn mine in half from 25 years of autocrossing and open track events. Anybody here have cracks(rips?) on their B-pillars? I do agree with all of you. I'd rather build my own. Call me a liberal, 99%er or whatever. Just like the thread in the general forum http://www.turbobuick.com/forums/ge...987-pro-touring-grand-national-ground-up.html I have a problem with these guys and companies making parts for 30 year old cars and making(what appears to me IMO) a 3 digit profit margin. I dont know about you guys but when I see videos like these two things come to mind. 1, they dont know what they are doing. 2, the parts are marketed to those with deep pockets who wouldn't know the difference between a MIG and a TIG, therefore they dont intend to race or use their cars other than as a trophy sitting in the garage as a tribute to the amount of money they spent(or wasted). You better watch out. The next thing you'll know we'll be able to buy improved frames built in China for a fraction of the price. I could rant all day but this isn't the place.

But really sit back and think what type of bang you get for the buck with these frames or frame mods.

 

[charlief1]

Well I partially agree here Eric, but I will also point out that the design of the frame and the body are very simular to a 1st or 2nd F body chasis, and they flex about the same. You can get subframe connectors for them so boxing the center of the frame is basically the the same, with less bulk on the bottom of the car.