Building "Thor"
Discussion
ivanhoew said:
http://www.rodsnsods.co.uk/forum/garage/medusa-206...
I seem to have lost 2-3 hours of my day. What a brilliant build.. Edited by ivanhoew on Thursday 20th August 07:50
Art0ir said:
ivanhoew said:
http://www.rodsnsods.co.uk/forum/garage/medusa-206...
I seem to have lost 2-3 hours of my day. What a brilliant build.. Edited by ivanhoew on Thursday 20th August 07:50
A recently linked build exhibits welding of brackets etc to the chassis which in my understanding is a no-no.
I think I may have said this before. Leave the chassis as it is and make your own 'Sub-chassis' that picks up on the existing body mount points. You can then weld whatever you like to the sub-chassis.
Steve
I think I may have said this before. Leave the chassis as it is and make your own 'Sub-chassis' that picks up on the existing body mount points. You can then weld whatever you like to the sub-chassis.
Steve
Steve_D said:
A recently linked build exhibits welding of brackets etc to the chassis which in my understanding is a no-no.
I think I may have said this before. Leave the chassis as it is and make your own 'Sub-chassis' that picks up on the existing body mount points. You can then weld whatever you like to the sub-chassis.
Steve
Problem is Steve, the chassis needs to be about 5 feet longer between front and middle axles..I think I may have said this before. Leave the chassis as it is and make your own 'Sub-chassis' that picks up on the existing body mount points. You can then weld whatever you like to the sub-chassis.
Steve
Paul
Storer said:
Steve_D said:
A recently linked build exhibits welding of brackets etc to the chassis which in my understanding is a no-no.
I think I may have said this before. Leave the chassis as it is and make your own 'Sub-chassis' that picks up on the existing body mount points. You can then weld whatever you like to the sub-chassis.
Steve
Problem is Steve, the chassis needs to be about 5 feet longer between front and middle axles..I think I may have said this before. Leave the chassis as it is and make your own 'Sub-chassis' that picks up on the existing body mount points. You can then weld whatever you like to the sub-chassis.
Steve
Paul
Steve
Storer said:
I hope not and I will do my best to make sure it isn't.
P
I'm not sure i'd be that bothered by a Q plate? For "show" use take the plates off, or have some show plates, and for driving on the road, no ones going to be looking at the Reg when you drive past!!P
(Also, if that allows you to properly engineer the car, rather than bodge it, which the current system seems to drive people to do, then i'd be much happier!)
It's especially comedy when we are talking about "chassis mods" to a basic ladder chassis that was designed in the early 1970's. Do we think that LR spend millions on complex stress analysis and crash testing back then? Nope, they drew something on the drawing board that looked right, put the axles in the right place, held the transmission and body, and called it a day! So yes, taking an angle grinder to a 2015 unitaryframe passenger car chassis probably has some implication, but to your 1970s ex RR chassis, er, nope, in fact, yours will probably be stiffer and stronger as you don't have the production limitations that the OEM did........
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 17th November 10:58
Max_Torque said:
It's especially comedy when we are talking about "chassis mods" to a basic ladder chassis that was designed in the early 1970's. Do we think that LR spend millions on complex stress analysis and crash testing back then? Nope, they drew something on the drawing board that looked right, put the axles in the right place, held the transmission and body, and called it a day! So yes, taking an angle grinder to a 2015 unitaryframe passenger car chassis probably has some implication, but to your 1970s ex RR chassis, er, nope, in fact, yours will probably be stiffer and stronger as you don't have the production limitations that the OEM did........
I doubt it's even that sophisticated; it's the evolutionary development of a copy of a jeep chassis Maurice Wilks lashed up in 1948. The millions for chassis development must have been diverted into corrosion protection, waterproofing and reducing panel gaps. 
Edited by hidetheelephants on Tuesday 17th November 17:06
RoverP6B said:
So you need five feet more wheelbase than the Range Rover chassis allows? Surely you should just get a big truck chassis? Ford F-650?
I think we can do a bit better than that. Through the 1950s, Ford did their pickup trucks from the factory with an optional "tandem axle" setup, as below:
Goodness only knows where you would get hold of the chassis for one of these (presumably Kansas) but it might be an option.
I guess one question is "do you want to be able to drive it regularly, with some semblance of chassis capability?
IE an old truck chassis, on leaf springs and beam axles, with a massive clonky steering box, and 43 turns lock to lock with huge, thuddy great drum brakes is, quite frankly, going to be awful to actually drive.
On the other hand, a RR chassis, with the right springs and dampers, and the right steering box tuning isn't bad to drive at all, will ride ok, and the brakes can be made to feel and work really quite well. I'd not want to put in a huge amount of work on such a machine and then find when i'm done i don't actually like driving it.............
(it's also narrow enough these days to be pretty useable on our crowded roads, possibly not something you'd say of an old US 15ton truck chassis)
IE an old truck chassis, on leaf springs and beam axles, with a massive clonky steering box, and 43 turns lock to lock with huge, thuddy great drum brakes is, quite frankly, going to be awful to actually drive.
On the other hand, a RR chassis, with the right springs and dampers, and the right steering box tuning isn't bad to drive at all, will ride ok, and the brakes can be made to feel and work really quite well. I'd not want to put in a huge amount of work on such a machine and then find when i'm done i don't actually like driving it.............
(it's also narrow enough these days to be pretty useable on our crowded roads, possibly not something you'd say of an old US 15ton truck chassis)
I like your thinking and I have spent quite a while looking at trucks.
I know I will not be short of power/torque but these later truck chassis are horribly heavy and crude. Parts would also be a bit of an issue.
I will dig out a picture of what I think might be ideal but it is rare and not sure I wish to prevent someone restoring one to original.
Paul
I know I will not be short of power/torque but these later truck chassis are horribly heavy and crude. Parts would also be a bit of an issue.
I will dig out a picture of what I think might be ideal but it is rare and not sure I wish to prevent someone restoring one to original.
Paul
Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff