Quick Question: Subframe connectors- WHY didn't they do this from the factory?

-
MRGTX

MRGTX

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2007
Messages
2,198
Reaction score
728
Location
CT, USA
It couldn't possibly have cost much money to extend the unibody reinforcement a couple feet. Is there a reason that they opted not to? It seems insane.

Is there anyone out there (other than those restoring a car to factory specs) who thinks that welding in subframe connectors is a bad idea?
 
One of the best things you can do to a uni-body mopar.
 
hate to say this...i agree with you...but if you have taken one of these cars apart you can tell they (the workers) didn't give a ****.. just look at the neatness of the welds..the quality of fit...no, these cars were just slapped to together.. especially when you compare them to other cars of that era.. and they handled like **** as well...

But we love our car anyway...
 
grassy said:
hate to say this...i agree with you...but if you have taken one of these cars apart you can tell they (the workers) didn't give a ****.. just look at the neatness of the welds..the quality of fit...no, these cars were just slapped to together.. especially when you compare them to other cars of that era.. and they handled like **** as well...

But we love our car anyway...
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I totally agree. I think most cars from the era were hastily assembled. Even a higher dollar car like a Corvette will frequently have evidence careless assembly. Yes, there are some bugary welds, etc...and my "Dodge" logo on the rear panel was tilted by 5*...the build quality seems pretty ok over all.

Regardless, this is a design issue. The assembly line workers can't be blamed for this.
 
For the connectors it is a design issue..actually more of a cost issue...but the fit and finish issue rests squarely on the shoulder of the people that did the work..it was shoddy at best..

I actually thought my K frame had been mangled in an accident...I gather that this is what they look at..yeah..the person working on it was responsible..

I also had a '71 MG that I rebuilt The welds were beautiful...who ever worked on that car had pride..

We can go on..stripes being put on the cars ..the left side being different than the right..whomever installed the floor panels on my car couldn't be bothered to get it right because they left a triangular hole...who do I blame for this ? The accounts receivable clerk ?

Not sure if you lived through that era but it is probably the biggest reason that the jap cars got a hold in North America..

I should also note that the big three still cannot produce a car that can do high mileage and require the minimum of repairs..which is a screaming shame..
 
MRGTX said:
It couldn't possibly have cost much money to extend the unibody reinforcement a couple feet. Is there a reason that they opted not to? It seems insane.

Is there anyone out there (other than those restoring a car to factory specs) who thinks that welding in subframe connectors is a bad idea?
Click to expand...

Production Line = Speed and Cost

The 'Uni-Body' provided a smoother ride.


 
As designed these old unibodies flex during use to some degree.If designed properly they should flex evenly as a unit.
..making them more rigid is a racers trick for a better launch or improved handling.
 
To the OP; If it added $2 in cost (A very conservative estimate), and you built 100,000 cars (also conservative), your cost to the bottom line is $0.2 million dollars. Look at the real numbers, and you'll get the picture, quickly.

Factor in that you have to build equipment to make each part, add people to add each part, etc. Would you want to buy that stuff for a part that is not, even by today's standard, necessary?

Also remember, at the time, these were passenger cars, NOT race cars, not street machines, not drag cars, not anything but grocery grabbers and occasionally, musclecars. Street cars didn't go around corners quickly back then. Frame connectors don't do anything when you're sliding around on greasy rubber donuts.

grassy said:
I should also note that the big three still cannot produce a car that can do high mileage and require the minimum of repairs..which is a screaming shame..
Click to expand...

My '96 Neon would disagree with you.
 
69 Cuda 440 said:
Production Line = Speed and Cost

The 'Uni-Body' provided a smoother ride.


Click to expand...

ir3333 said:
As designed these old unibodies flex during use to some degree.If designed properly they should flex evenly as a unit.
..making them more rigid is a racers trick for a better launch or improved handling.
Click to expand...

lol...
So this is a "design feature?"
 
jos51700 said:
To the OP; If it added $2 in cost (A very conservative estimate), and you built 100,000 cars (also conservative), your cost to the bottom line is $0.2 million dollars. Look at the real numbers, and you'll get the picture, quickly.

Factor in that you have to build equipment to make each part, add people to add each part, etc. Would you want to buy that stuff for a part that is not, even by today's standard, necessary?

Also remember, at the time, these were passenger cars, NOT race cars, not street machines, not drag cars, not anything but grocery grabbers and occasionally, musclecars. Street cars didn't go around corners quickly back then. Frame connectors don't do anything when you're sliding around on greasy rubber donuts.
...
Click to expand...

Yep...this makes sense. :(

The point about the tires is an important one too...the flexibility of the chassis was much less important when the tires of the day had less grip and did a lot more of the flexing than what we're used to these days.
 
grassy said:
...I should also note that the big three still cannot produce a car that can do high mileage and require the minimum of repairs..which is a screaming shame..
Click to expand...

Ok... valid points about the careless stuff you have found on your car. So far, mine has not surprised me with anything too bad but I do believe you.

That last point (quoted above) seems to not be reflecting reality though, especially if you compare American cars to products from Europe.
 
MRGTX said:
the flexibility of the chassis was much less important when the tires of the day had less grip and did a lot more of the flexing than what we're used to these days.
Click to expand...


So true. I just got my Barracuda back on the road after 6 years. I run E70-14 re-pop Bias ply tires.

They are true pieces of rolling crap when compared to even the lowest end modern radial.
 
even torque boxes were only installed on a special few cars. purely a cost issue I am sure. My 67 383 a-body only got rear torque boxes, no fronts.
 
American made vehicles all had full frames for many years. Most recent example I've personally seen was 66 Impala. Massive steel frame made of formed members welded together. You would think it was part of a ship. The entire body was lower onto the frame from overhead and bolted on. Lesser margins for error too, especially with a 4 door body. A truck cab and bed are separate so they don't have to be exact.
Unibody was a foreign idea. Much less material and labor involved so daily production count went up and profits went up. Ours lasted as long as they have only because we paid for better roads and highways. They weren't meant to last longer than 10 years anyway, even on smooth roads.
Any 30 year old unibody structure needs some reinforcements today.
I'll add this, If new cars were built today like that 66 Impala was... none of us could afford one.
 
Rocky_JS said:
even torque boxes were only installed on a special few cars. purely a cost issue I am sure. My 67 383 a-body only got rear torque boxes, no fronts.
Click to expand...

And yet my 67 383 has torque boxes front and rear. Mine is a 4spd, wonder if this is the difference.
 
Any mass produced car was and is assembled as quickly as possible in the era in which it was built. The purpose of mass production is only one. To make money. It's not to build quality. You want quality? Look at Rolls Royce. Everything built by hand. Everything the same. That is true pride in workmanship. Of course the price reflects it.
 
RustyRatRod said:
Any mass produced car was and is assembled as quickly as possible in the era in which it was built. The purpose of mass production is only one. To make money. It's not to build quality. You want quality? Look at Rolls Royce. Everything built by hand. Everything the same. That is true pride in workmanship. Of course the price reflects it.
Click to expand...

No. Just because something is made in mass, it doesn't dictate that it is made shittly... why do you think today , with their cheap, mass produced cars did the jap cars blow the doors off the american cars late 70s and beyond...and the big three haven't caught up ? And Chrysler, of all companies was bought by fiat .. Fiat ?? ..fix it again tony.. ?
 
RedFish said:
American made vehicles all had full frames for many years. Most recent example I've personally seen was 66 Impala.
Click to expand...


No..GM was making and selling to the north American public uni bodies as early as late '56.

This quality thing is personal...especially what these guys make $, they could do a proper weld...you are doing a major disservice to your self saying fu*k this car..I'll just push it together because it is only being a grocery getter ? Is that why so many autoworkers use to leave stuff in the doors, etc ?

If the duster was just a grocery getter, than what was the '76 Toyota Carolla ?

Neon ? Seriously ? perhaps you should look at the neon thread on this site.

We regularly put 225K miles on a car before we sell. We have done it three times over the last 20 odds year or so. She also must have awd or 4wd because some of the roads she travels are pretty snowy..We have a friend that put more on his Yukon but he could have bought our car in the process.

Even though I liked the mopars, I went into another type of car because they could handle and turn. Now we have the technology to modify these cars so they can do the same..

This was probably the time America lost it first place as a manufacturing nation..
 
RustyRatRod said:
Any mass produced car was and is assembled as quickly as possible in the era in which it was built. The purpose of mass production is only one. To make money. It's not to build quality. You want quality? Look at Rolls Royce. Everything built by hand. Everything the same. That is true pride in workmanship. Of course the price reflects it.
Click to expand...

I have worked on RR cars before, its all an illusion for people to buy that can afford them that will never look at them any closer than looking at the hood ornament
 
While near 99.5% of the A-Body Uni-Body cars got the typical 'Union Label' weld job,

There were a few 'select cars' that got the 'special treatment'.

Additional welds, and in some cases 'hidden' cross-braces inside the frame.

See > Jere Stahl's 1966 Valiant 2-Door Sedan 273 Commando
See > The Golden Commando's 1965 'Goldfish'
See > Dave Patterson's 'Brand-X' 1965 Barracuda
See > Ron Root's 1965 Dodge Dart GT
See > Charlie Allen's 1966 Dodge Dart GT {D/Dart}
 
69 Cuda 440 said:
While near 99.5% of the A-Body Uni-Body cars got the typical 'Union Label' weld job,

There were a few 'select cars' that got the 'special treatment'.

Additional welds, and in some cases 'hidden' cross-braces inside the frame.

See > Jere Stahl's 1966 Valiant 2-Door Sedan 273 Commando
See > The Golden Commando's 1965 'Goldfish'
See > Dave Patterson's 'Brand-X' 1965 Barracuda
See > Ron Root's 1965 Dodge Dart GT
See > Charlie Allen's 1966 Dodge Dart GT {D/Dart}
Click to expand...

Not sure who these guys are but cool. There were folks that took pride in their work. My dad always said that whether the job is big or small, do both to the best of your ability.

My duster..and I know because we took it all apart..was not one of them :(

Or was this special ordered ?
 
Grassy, I think your a bit off considering the techniecs of the time. Bobby is more so correct. The cars were built to acceptable standards of the time just like there done today.

Today we have a host of tech upgrades and advances that we're not available then.

Quality control may have been lacking but so at the same time, things like the mention of poor welds we're let go then. Not so today. Today, if the robot fails to do the job, a tech guy is sent in to fix the robot.

Back the. It was closer to, "Did it penetrate?" Then it's a good weld. NEXT!

It was what it was. I really don't think pride or lack of it was an issue. It just was what it was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top