qa1 k frame weight to factory weight

-
3

345man2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2009
Messages
630
Reaction score
66
been running around ideas of lighteneng my duster and wondering the weight difference between the factory one and the qa1 one , and how they fit in thanks:D
 
345man2 said:
been running around ideas of lighteneng my duster and wondering the weight difference between the factory one and the qa1 one , and how they fit in thanks:D
Click to expand...

The QA1 k-frame won't save you an appreciable amount of weight, if any. They found that any more weight reduction would reintroduce flex into the k-frame, so they kept it as strong as it needed to be. According to them. The control arms and strut bars might save you a few pounds, versus reinforcing the stock.
 
they fit great....alot more clearance in the engine bay
 
A hell of a lot lighter than the factory k frame!
 
Now if you could get them to work with a old school hemi.......
 
Andy....if you want to come and look at the Hemi Denny coilover conversion kit I'm putting on my Duster, give me a call. Stock K frame, factory spindles! O:)
 
killnine said:
The QA1 k-frame won't save you an appreciable amount of weight, if any. They found that any more weight reduction would reintroduce flex into the k-frame, so they kept it as strong as it needed to be. According to them. The control arms and strut bars might save you a few pounds, versus reinforcing the stock.
Click to expand...

what does weight have to due with strength? that makes no sense to me. chromoly is far superior to sheetmetal stamped steel and can be packaged easier and far lighter.
 
I think that if weight savings is your goal there are far better ways that cost allot less.

power to manual steering is a huge weight savings.

fiberglass hood.

fiberglass front bumper with aluminum brackets.


light weight wheel and tire package up front.

disc brake swap with wilwoods or other aftermarket company.
 
younggun2.0 said:
I think that if weight savings is your goal there are far better ways that cost allot less.

power to manual steering is a huge weight savings.

fiberglass hood.

fiberglass front bumper with aluminum brackets.


light weight wheel and tire package up front.

disc brake swap with wilwoods or other aftermarket company.
Click to expand...

now all that is done and still want to remove weight, then what? i started off with manual steering, wilwood brakes, light wheels, but still no room anywhere in the engine compartment for nothing but expensive headers i couldnt use in my turbo build. yet i still end up running logs due to frame rails so close to pass side of the engine and i dont want huge costly custom headers either. im out to make a point as well with the logs, but every ounce counts. titanium bolts etc... all one can do to remove heft of a mopar.
 
turbofreek said:
now all that is done and still want to remove weight, then what? i started off with manual steering, wilwood brakes, light wheels, but still no room anywhere in the engine compartment for nothing but expensive headers i couldnt use in my turbo build. yet i still end up running logs due to frame rails so close to pass side of the engine and i dont want huge costly custom headers either. im out to make a point as well with the logs, but every ounce counts. titanium bolts etc... all one can do to remove heft of a mopar.
Click to expand...

if its to that extreme then how bout a aluminum tube steering column? or ditch the torsion bar suspension all together. go with a coil over rack set up. cut out the heavy transmission and torsion bar cross member and fab a chromoly one. fiberglass or sheet metal dash. the list goes on.
 
An A-body k member weighs about 30# depending which year or engine mounts are on it.
It is a difficult part to produce lighter and remain as strong. When you really look at It is a very weight efficient designed part.
Problem can be it may be not be configured how you like it.
It has a small amount of room to be lightened but not alot. Elephant ears for example when the
engine mounts are cut off may save a couple pounds.
Most k-frames are replaced as a way to change out the steering and torsion bars to a more modern design or for easier header fitment.
It is a very costly swap when compared to even the best fitting or expensive headers normally used with the stock frame. Cheaper to buy the headers.
Some like the rack steering that is normally incorporated with a tubular "K".
Some don't find any flaws with the stock manual steering box which is also very light and
difficult to improve on from a weight perspective.
You can choose about any method to get your car lighter known and it will be cheaper per pound lost than a k-frame or suspension swap.
Better spent dollars on a lighter front brakes, fiberglass body parts and aluminum engine parts than a tube frame for my lightweight needs.
I sure some will disagree with me on this. I'm OK with that. It is your money after all.
If you are serious about getting a car light you wouldn't even be considering a k-member at all but a full tube chassis. Thats when it gets real. Not the pretend bolt on stuff for street cars.
 
ssba said:
an a-body k member weighs about 30# depending which year or engine mounts are on it.
It is a difficult part to produce lighter and remain as strong. When you really look at it is a very weight efficient designed part.
Problem can be it may be not be configured how you like it.
It has a small amount of room to be lightened but not alot. Elephant ears for example when the
engine mounts are cut off may save a couple pounds.
Most k-frames are replaced as a way to change out the steering and torsion bars to a more modern design or for easier header fitment.
It is a very costly swap when compared to even the best fitting or expensive headers normally used with the stock frame. Cheaper to buy the headers.
Some like the rack steering that is normally incorporated with a tubular "k".
Some don't find any flaws with the stock manual steering box which is also very light and
difficult to improve on from a weight perspective.
You can choose about any method to get your car lighter known and it will be cheaper per pound lost than a k-frame or suspension swap.
Better spent dollars on a lighter front brakes, fiberglass body parts and aluminum engine parts than a tube frame for my lightweight needs.
I sure some will disagree with me on this. I'm ok with that. It is your money after all.
If you are serious about getting a car light you wouldn't even be considering a k-member at all but a full tube chassis. Thats when it gets real. Not the pretend bolt on stuff for street cars.
Click to expand...
best post of the month.............100% spot on!!
 
some good thoughts guys thanks, it is a alumium headed street strip car full weight other than the heads, has manual steering now and manual brakes , just wondering if the weight diff was worth the money:D
 
ssba said:
An A-body k member weighs about 30# depending which year or engine mounts are on it.
It is a difficult part to produce lighter and remain as strong. When you really look at It is a very weight efficient designed part.
Problem can be it may be not be configured how you like it.
It has a small amount of room to be lightened but not alot. Elephant ears for example when the
engine mounts are cut off may save a couple pounds.
Most k-frames are replaced as a way to change out the steering and torsion bars to a more modern design or for easier header fitment.
It is a very costly swap when compared to even the best fitting or expensive headers normally used with the stock frame. Cheaper to buy the headers.
Some like the rack steering that is normally incorporated with a tubular "K".
Some don't find any flaws with the stock manual steering box which is also very light and
difficult to improve on from a weight perspective.
You can choose about any method to get your car lighter known and it will be cheaper per pound lost than a k-frame or suspension swap.
Better spent dollars on a lighter front brakes, fiberglass body parts and aluminum engine parts than a tube frame for my lightweight needs.
I sure some will disagree with me on this. I'm OK with that. It is your money after all.
If you are serious about getting a car light you wouldn't even be considering a k-member at all but a full tube chassis. Thats when it gets real. Not the pretend bolt on stuff for street cars.
Click to expand...

i guess my heads up weight is not worth the ballast to move to improve traction. if i can get my car to weight 2800lbs with me in it. i have 500lbs im able to move around front to rear and side to side for traction purposes. so yea weight means a lot to a few and little to most who dont push the limits. kind of a mopar motto apparently and sadly.
with saying that. it is why i have a custom tubular coilover and rack m pinion under my dart. save quite a bit of weight but not mopar fanatic approved. ill take my 14ish lbs total front k kit vs stock any day of the week. vs 40yr old stamped steal factory stuff. or 45lb aftermarket kits.
all depends on what somebody wants to gain or lose with their money. i want to go fast and feel safe. rear steer shimmy and front end flex isnt my idea of safe or fun.
 
Tell him how you got your car to that 2800# so he can determine if it is right for him and his duster. Post up details about your car to help him make an informed decision on his tubular k-frame question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top