Suspension / ChassisQuestions about your suspension? Need chassis advice?
Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!
what options for a sfc for 1982 z28 with 2.5 in pipe where cat usally goes is boltins any good? only a street car with 350/350hp with sphoon tqarm and tranny crossmember kit
This ad is not displayed to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on ThirdGen!
Sponsored Links
Registered users do not see this ad. Click here to register for free!
Our SFC set would work well for you and should be just fine with your exhaust. They are a boxed style and weld in. Here is the link- www.umiperformance.com/2400
If you have any questions I can help with please let me know. Thank you!
Ryan
Round tube SFC's should be better than square tube SFC's, like the ones that Spohn makes. Or, use square tube and build your own through-floor SFC's.
Hello, Just curious to the reasons why round tubing is better than square/rectangular? Not trying to start an argument... just curious of the reasons?
Our SFC's are built from rectangular tubing, we choose this because it allows larger size tubing with out hanging lower to the ground. On the 82-92 F-Body the rectangular tubing fits up into the floor boards very well. The rectangular tubing allowed us to use 1.500" wide to fit in the contour but also allowed us to use 2.500" deep tubing. When using round tubing the entire diameter changes making it harder in some cases to fit in certain areas. The boxed style also allows a better jacking area with less chance of the jack slipping.
I would think round tubing would be better at taking stress from all directions. Cages are built from round tube, and they are meant to keep the driver safe, so the job of those tubes is much more important than that of SFC's.
I built my SFC's from 2"x.120 square tube, but only because I knew it would be easier to make them from square tube than round tube. I didn't say I thought round tube would be easier to fit, I said i thought it would be better (better = stronger).
Slipping off a jack? Most jacks have rubber inserts in them or notches cut it them to prevent slipping anyways.
I would assume that a business such as yours would have a program to that could test the strength of SFC's such as yours and Spohns, so why not do that instead of ask me?
Like I said I was only being curious. I see so many post "buy this" and "buy that" or "this is better" ect., but in most cases there is never a reason why to "buy this" or "buy that" or why something is better. I was just curious to your reasoning behind your recommendations... thanks for explaining.
I would think round tubing would be better at taking stress from all directions. Cages are built from round tube, and they are meant to keep the driver safe, so the job of those tubes is much more important than that of SFC's.
You missed alot there. In tension and compression, it really doesn't matter wether or not you're using rectangle vs. round tubing. However, in shear and torsion, it really matters. Rectangle tubing can't resist torsion or shear as well as a round tube can due to the fact that rectangle tubing handles these loads like a plate where as tubing handles these loads like a round bar.
However, you can overcome this in rectangle tube by changing the moment of inertia in the tube. If you weld the SFC in on its narrow side and use the wide side as the depth of the SFC (1.5" wide by 2.5" deep) then you can reduce the amount of shear and torsion the tube will experience. You also have to make the material thicker to do this, so rectangle tubing will weigh more than round tubing of the same width. But for our applications, that weight difference is negligible and the ease of manufacturing and install is greatly increased with a rectangular tube. Sure, round tube SFC's will work just as well, but it'll suck trying to stich weld those guys to the floorpan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregsz-28
Slipping off a jack? Most jacks have rubber inserts in them or notches cut it them to prevent slipping anyways.
I'd like to know where you can get a jack that has deep enough notches to prevent slipping.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregsz-28
I would assume that a business such as yours would have a program to that could test the strength of SFC's such as yours and Spohns, so why not do that instead of ask me?
You know what happens when people assume don't you?
You missed alot there. In tension and compression, it really doesn't matter wether or not you're using rectangle vs. round tubing. However, in shear and torsion, it really matters. Rectangle tubing can't resist torsion or shear as well as a round tube can due to the fact that rectangle tubing handles these loads like a plate where as tubing handles these loads like a round bar.
However, you can overcome this in rectangle tube by changing the moment of inertia in the tube. If you weld the SFC in on its narrow side and use the wide side as the depth of the SFC (1.5" wide by 2.5" deep) then you can reduce the amount of shear and torsion the tube will experience. You also have to make the material thicker to do this, so rectangle tubing will weigh more than round tubing of the same width. But for our applications, that weight difference is negligible and the ease of manufacturing and install is greatly increased with a rectangular tube. Sure, round tube SFC's will work just as well, but it'll suck trying to stich weld those guys to the floorpan.
Yes, as I have said before, that is why I made my SFC's out of square tube. Ease of installation.
From what you described, it seems we are on the same track: Round tube SFC's are optimal, but square tube ones will be much easier to install.
You sound like you know more about this than I do, and I am sure many other members do to. I know I missed a lot. I would like to see someone actually test round vs. square tube SFC's though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 89_RS
I'd like to know where you can get a jack that has deep enough notches to prevent slipping.
The notches that are about 1/8" deep on mine work fine. I don't know the brand though, and it is a pretty old jack.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 89_RS
You know what happens when people assume don't you?
I assume that my assumption was harmless.
Maybe I should ask UMI: Do you have any kind of program to test the strength of round vs. square tube SFC's?
I have round spohn SFC's but the UMI style just look a lot beefier and impressive to me. If I had to do it again I'd probably go with square-tube sfc's.
But whether or not it would make a real world difference you can actually feel... I have no clue.
But whether or not it would make a real world difference you can actually feel... I have no clue.
In 90% of the applications on this forum, no it won't make a whole lot of difference. Its not until one gets real serious about a big hp big tq race car that the differences become apparent.
