Subframe connectors for a driver/cruiser, necessary to weld to floor?
Hey
I have not been involved with the "weld to floor" designed connectors. What I gather from the internet is that the weld to floor connectors are cut from channel and get seam welded to the floor. This is a less than desirable design. If the channels had flanges and could be plug welded to the floor with tight tolerance, I would be more inclined to consider that design as equal to or even superior to the square or rectangular tubing. I can see the existing "weld to floor" design tearing out or separating as Brooks James has witnessed. Just an old, burned out Body Man's opinion.
Yeah I don't think the open channel, weld-to-floor style connectors are as good as they could be. It would be better if they actually mimicked the original frame rail design. Again, I won't go as far as to say one type of connector is better than the other because there just isn't any real data, and it's a complicated system. But I do know that installing that type of connector is 10x more work, and there are more than a few drawbacks to that design. Both have their pros and cons, no doubt.
There’s an echo in here. :D
Based on the historical application of these two measures, I think there is a strong case for the OP to use this option. His car sounds like it has been upgraded to at least the level of cars that would have come with this equipment and while it’s not being raced, it’s not being driven like a fragile Model T nor is it being put-putted around to car shows like a *gasp* priceless Hemicuda either.
I guess the problem is that it’s very hard to have real data on how much these things help and therefore very hard to compare one chassis flex countermeasure over another. Nobody is sacrificing their own car to chassis rigidity testing and even if they did, these are all half-century old, used and often abused platforms making control data nigh impossible to come by.
Anecdotally, torque boxes seem to have made a huge difference in preventing chassis twisting/long term damage when big power and slicks were added to the formula…so even without data, I’m pretty confident that they do something helpful.
I mean, the torque boxes on my car are pretty visible in the pictures I posted:p
But yeah I don't think anyone is going to do the actual chassis analysis needed to prove this out. The factory installed torque boxes for a reason, and from a chassis construction standpoint by connecting the frame rails and the rockers they're basically gusseting the corners of the box, so it makes a lot of sense that even being a small addition they would make a significant difference. And again, the factory didn't do anything it didn't think was necessary because that definitely cost money.
The subframe connectors I think we can all agree from an anecdotal standpoint do something. Door gaps stay true even with the car on jacks, less body rattles and creaks while driving, the whole car feeling more planted and accurate through corners, etc. I install both on everything I'm driving.
The other thing is these cars are all 50 years old. So, even if you made the argument they didn't need them from the factory, there's a good argument that after 50 years of wear, tear, metal fatigue and rust that pretty much everything out there now would see an improvement from their addition.
