GT Forte..........
Discussion
I'd be interested in people experiences too.
I've read the bad press in the past but haven't heard bad stuff for a while, the gt40 chassis in kit form looks good value, I've got body panels etc from an old KVA kit and this looks a good start.
Haven't spoken to them yet but was hoping to order by the end of the year.
Rich.
I've read the bad press in the past but haven't heard bad stuff for a while, the gt40 chassis in kit form looks good value, I've got body panels etc from an old KVA kit and this looks a good start.
Haven't spoken to them yet but was hoping to order by the end of the year.
Rich.
Hoonigan said:
Don't think there's a registered one on the road yet, though there does appear to be a couple of nice cars being built, pay your money and take your chances.
Personally I'm very much time limited, at most I get as much 6 hours on the car, even when building a car full time (eg Tornado TS40 #875) with *all* the parts it took a good 6 months of full time work and he had all the panels pre-cut etc. At my best work rate that would still be 3 years for me! (and I've had many many months of zero time on the car).
Hoonigan said:
Or give Mick a call at Southern GT...
I'd say that Southern GT is probably the best kit in the UK at the moment.ezakimak said:
if it helps there was a bit of angst going on from Tornado about how the chassis are similar.....
But that's just Andy s**t stirring more than anything. It's what he does. Any criticism and he threatens court. I've spoken to a number of people who have been silenced from raising issues with his stuff. With regards to how similar they are, all the (GT40 replica) space frame chassis are very similar as they have to have the same kind of suspension and fit the same bodywork! Besides he's hardly one to talk, IIRC he only didn't get sued by GTD because they went under before it got as far as court...
IMO the original GT Forte Chassis was not a copy but has some of the same features (and fixes for some of the issues), the "new" current one has been substantially changed so that there can be no accusation of copying (warranted or not).
Yes, my point about the similarities was made to point out the fact the Tonado have been around for while so if its similar it cant be all bad. I have never seen a Tonado or a GT Forte so its just an observation.
what i will add is that i have the dimensions from our chassis jig, and it is remarkably similar to other chassis dimensions i have seen.
height of the side rails/sills is all fairly similar ±5mm, same with the length and width of the main cockpit area again, roughly ±5mm. given that most of the body work over hangs the chassis and you want a bit of wiggle room for alignment its highly likely that they will all work.
they are a b
d of a chassis to get right though. i sat in front of the CAD model for ages and i'm still not happy with where i'm at. Close enough that i can now start with the suspension bits though.
Ryan
what i will add is that i have the dimensions from our chassis jig, and it is remarkably similar to other chassis dimensions i have seen.
height of the side rails/sills is all fairly similar ±5mm, same with the length and width of the main cockpit area again, roughly ±5mm. given that most of the body work over hangs the chassis and you want a bit of wiggle room for alignment its highly likely that they will all work.
they are a b
d of a chassis to get right though. i sat in front of the CAD model for ages and i'm still not happy with where i'm at. Close enough that i can now start with the suspension bits though. Ryan
I realise this chat started a long time ago but my advice to anyone buying a chassis is to look at a finished car. Keep in mind the weight of everything that will be bolted to it and how it might withstand a bump and where the engine and gearbox might end up if you were so unfortunate. Depending on what engine you install, this car could be capable of 200 mph. Some work I saw did not give me much confidence that the car should be driven much more than 70 mph. Anyone who knows about fabrication would be able to give you an idea of a chassis capability by looking at the box sections being used in the construction. You might not be able to see a cross section but the bend radius at the corners will give you an idea of the wall thickness being used. Also keep in mind that a chassis put together by a professional will have good welding, they do it all the time, they are good at it. I realise it's not rocket science but it is you that will be sitting in the car with an engine weighing a few hundred pounds sitting just behind your shoulder. I don't want to put anyone off, unless they are making the wrong decisions.
Edited by Martin-c6gw0 on Wednesday 1st August 13:42
Freshly registered, first (and only) post and here to sling dirt...
The thickness of the box section used is only of relevance to a single tube. It's all about how it is triangulated and constructed. You cannot just look at the cross section and make a judgement unless the design is identical (and even then does the thicker one *need* to be that thick or is it over-engineered). It is *all* about how it is laid out (and joined etc).
It's also not that simple when you have bonded (and riveted) aluminium cladding as it's not just cosmetic, that adds a structural element.
I know that GT Forte have designed their chassis in CAD and based on some of the stuff Darren has posted on FB I'd expect it's been FEA'd as well.
In the case of GT Forte it is largely 16swg (1.6mm) 40mm or 25mm tubing with some 3mm plate and the CDS (I'm not sure how thick that is) for the roll-over hoop, this is hardly thinwall.
Of course we could get on to certain GT40 replica chassis and their bending of lower front arms, front suspension mounts bending etc.
Where I do agree however is that as GT Forte are producing a "kit" of chassis parts for home builds the chassis quality will be variable based on the quality of the welding.
The thickness of the box section used is only of relevance to a single tube. It's all about how it is triangulated and constructed. You cannot just look at the cross section and make a judgement unless the design is identical (and even then does the thicker one *need* to be that thick or is it over-engineered). It is *all* about how it is laid out (and joined etc).
It's also not that simple when you have bonded (and riveted) aluminium cladding as it's not just cosmetic, that adds a structural element.
I know that GT Forte have designed their chassis in CAD and based on some of the stuff Darren has posted on FB I'd expect it's been FEA'd as well.
In the case of GT Forte it is largely 16swg (1.6mm) 40mm or 25mm tubing with some 3mm plate and the CDS (I'm not sure how thick that is) for the roll-over hoop, this is hardly thinwall.
Of course we could get on to certain GT40 replica chassis and their bending of lower front arms, front suspension mounts bending etc.
Where I do agree however is that as GT Forte are producing a "kit" of chassis parts for home builds the chassis quality will be variable based on the quality of the welding.
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff