Lateral-g Forums - Track Day 'Cuda

Lateral-g Forums (https://www.lateral-g.net/forums/index.php)

- Project Updates (https://www.lateral-g.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - Track Day 'Cuda (https://www.lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php?t=52748)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJD Automotive (Post 647725)

Posted up the seat mount question in Ron's Safety Thread. I'm curious too as to what is the best/safest mount style.

I answered the seat question over on my Safety Thread Craig.

Link: https://lateral-g.net/forums/show...t=48392&page=7

:cheers:

Ron if you have time could you indulge one question from me -

Maybe its just a feature of the TA2 design, but it seems the arm design on this clip went out of the way to put the lower rod ends in a single axis. To me this is normally done on OEM style arms so that they can use bushings. With rod ends, it seems like it doesn't matter that much how you align the pivots (for example in your GT clip) since they will articulate. I'm also wondering if that's why the front pivot is skewed as it looks like there would be still be clearance if it came in straight from the ball joint along the FACL, or at least very close. Even though that arm is plenty stout, the amateur engineer in me just see's a big bend right in the load path.

Is there anything you're willing to share on why or why not one would want to keep rod end pivots on axis vs just putting them in the correct 3d space ? And was this skewing of the FLCA pivot mostly done for clearance ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by preston (Post 647760)

Ron if you have time could you indulge one question from me -

Maybe its just a feature of the TA2 design, but it seems the arm design on this clip went out of the way to put the lower rod ends in a single axis. To me this is normally done on OEM style arms so that they can use bushings. With rod ends, it seems like it doesn't matter that much how you align the pivots (for example in your GT clip) since they will articulate. I'm also wondering if that's why the front pivot is skewed as it looks like there would be still be clearance if it came in straight from the ball joint along the FACL, or at least very close. Even though that arm is plenty stout, the amateur engineer in me just see's a big bend right in the load path.

Is there anything you're willing to share on why or why not one would want to keep rod end pivots on axis vs just putting them in the correct 3d space ? And was this skewing of the FLCA pivot mostly done for clearance ?

Hi Preston,

This might be one of the more technical questions I've received. You're correct about part of it & incorrect about parts of it.

Let's get the incorrect items (which I have bolded in your text above) out of the way ...
a. The front LCA mount & rod end is in the optimum location & is in line with the load forces better than if we had run the rod end straight out to the LBJ, like we do with my GT front end. On the GT front end, which uses 2-piece LCAs, I had to really be cognizant of the forces pulling on the rod end at an angle not true with the rod end design. I handled this with both design & material solutions. With the TA LCA here, the forces pulling on the front LCA rod end are closest to being in line with the front LCA rod end.

So you may have a skewed view of which direction the forces are actually pushing & pulling. The forces are not pulling straight out from the rod end to the LBJ. The forces are pulling out & forward on the front rod end, in an arc, based on the rear LCA rod end acting as a pivot location for the LCA ... like a sideways rocker arm. See the photos below.

b. I am not clear on what you mean by the "big bend right in the load path" ... as the front rod end & LCA receptacle for the rod end are very close to the load direction. *You can't be perfect with a non-articulating part (top view), as the load pulling on the front rod end is in an arc, not straight. The rod end in this LCA is at the optimum angle & the LCA design itself is triangulated & braced internally to handle the circular loading that occurs.

c. If by skewing, you mean why are the LCA pivots on the same plane as each other to form a true pivot axis? ... the answer is no, this wasn't done for clearance. It actually hurt clearance a bit & forced the rack forward a bit more then the GT. Is was done so the special adjusters & rod ends on the LCA would function properly over a wide range without binding.

Any time you have a 1-piece LCA, if you don't put the rod ends on the same pivot axis, you have a very small window or sweet spot the rod ends have to be to bolt up to the frame. There is less than a turn or two ... to adjust the rod ends without binding in a 1-piece L:CA if the rod ends aren't parallel. If the rod ends run at opposing angles on a 1-piece LCA ... if you adjust the rod ends to adjust camber, caster and/or track width ... we'd bind up the rod ends in the LCA frame buckets with very little adjustment. So I don't design 1-piece LCAs with the rod ends at opposing angles, only parallel.

The trick adjusters on this 1-piece LCA for my TA & TA2 front suspensions (you can see them as a Gold Hex on the frame side of the LCAs) have the rod ends screw into them, with a jam nut on the other side. The cool part about these is you can adjust track width, camber or caster, at the LCA quickly & easily. They have a wide range of adjustment because the rod ends are parallel. We couldn't achieve that if they were at opposing angles in a 1-piece LCA.

With most LCAs using rod ends, you have to unbolt the rod end from the frame bracket ... loosen the jam nut ... make an SWAG length adjustment by threading the rod end in or out either in half or full turns ... then bolt it back up & see if we hit the target on the camber, caster or track width changes we're looking for. With these special adjusters on the TA & TA2 LCAs, we can loosen the jam nut(s) and turn the gold hex adjuster ... to adjust camber, caster and/or track width .... without unbolting the LCA rod ends from the frame. Quick, easy & more precise.

To clarify, we can run the rod ends at opposing angles in a LCA. If it is a 1-piece LCA, you just don't have much rod end adjustment without binding. So on my GT cars where I do run the rod ends at opposing angles, the LCAs are 2-piece. There is a main LCA that comes straight out from the frame to the LBJ ... and a strut rod that comes from the chassis to the LCA mounting point. That mounting point is what allows us to adjust the rod ends without creating bind like a welded 1-piece control would. The bolt together design simply allows us to adjust the LCA rod end at the frame mount ... and/or the strut rod rod end at the frame ... a pretty good amount, without binding the rod ends.

As you can see from the photos, the load arc is more in line with the rod ends being parallel, and not when the rod ends are at opposing angles. So when we build 2-piece LCAs, we need to insure the design & materials are super strong, and the rod end is a wide body chromoly rod end, not the standard mild steel or even narrow body chromoly. The wide body provides more contact area & control of the monoball in the rod end body, which is critical, because this rod ends sees more side loading.

Make sense?

.

Hey Guys,

I am super busy right now & need to hold off answering any more technical questions until I get back from SEMA.

:cheers:

Ron Sutton

Wow that was a great explanation, I really appreciate it.

I usually get more excited by front suspensions but that fully adjustable shock dampened de-coupled 3 link looks so bad ass.

Quote:

Originally Posted by preston (Post 648504)

I usually get more excited by front suspensions but that fully adjustable shock dampened de-coupled 3 link looks so bad ass.

Well then, here's a few more...

http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psdhaf4bro.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...ps5gnu3dmc.jpg

Few more...

At a stopping point on the rear waiting the cell, so going to move to the front. You can see the lower leg of the X brace removed here.

http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psqxednuks.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psju2cep0n.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psfpgkim1x.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...pskrjvl6xn.jpg

Thanks we always appreciate the photos. Not sure about the olive green paint scheme though - c'mon this is pro-touring we need the undercarriage to be bondoed and painted in a flip flop chameleon color to be taken seriously :lmao:

Far be it from me to second guess the Sutton-meister, but it sure surprises me not to see any triangulation on either of those watt links mount. I've seen his math on the loads but 1 lb of metal gussets would give me a lot of peace of mind.

Really looking forward to seeing the front clip put in place. What ride height are you targetting ? I saw some numbers on your drawing that looked very low. Is this a race car that can survive the street or do you plan on a fair amount of street driving ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by preston (Post 648766)

Everything is in epoxy, just different colors depending on what I had ready at the time and what I had to mix. It all gets painted later, just need a little protection now, and it will be very nice and pretty, just like before. It's my street car-slash-track car.

Quote:

Originally Posted by preston (Post 648766)

Far be it from me to second guess the Sutton-meister, but it sure surprises me not to see any triangulation on either of those watt links mount. I've seen his math on the loads but 1 lb of metal gussets would give me a lot of peace of mind.

The long side, on the left, is triangulated. The right side is short and isn't. I overbuild everything, so trusting Ron's calc's. (BTW, EVERYONE has told me that!)

EDIT: This is the same setup that is on Greg's car. It broke on the forth or fifth lap when he dropped a wheel over the curb. So, most definitely needs a support!

Quote:

Originally Posted by preston (Post 648766)

Really looking forward to seeing the front clip put in place. What ride height are you targetting ? I saw some numbers on your drawing that looked very low. Is this a race car that can survive the street or do you plan on a fair amount of street driving ?

I have the car set at one of the lowest race heights now. Ron designed the suspension to allow 2" of height adjustment without affecting the geometry. You can see the jack screws in the trunk, and there is another set for the front. All the way up is close to 5" clearance, which is more than some new cars.

Quote:

Originally Posted by preston (Post 648766)

Hey Preston,

I understand your concern. A lot of people subscribe to the "When in doubt, make it stout" philosophy. I don't ... because a pound here & pound there ... ends up making the car 200-400# heavier than they need to be. So I run calcs on everything & see what it needs. Then I make it as strong as it needs to be ... but no heavier than it needs to be.

FYI ...
* The upper watts link mount tube that sticks out of the axle housing tube on the driver side DOES have a 45° brace. You just can't see it in the photos.
* The lower watts link on the passenger side, bolts on behind the coil over shock. That mount is boxed & welded pretty well. It does flex about .040" so adding a piece of 7/8" x .058" tubing as an angle brace is doable if someone wants to do that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Sutton (Post 648770)

It does flex about .040" so adding a piece of 7/8" x .058" tubing as an angle brace is doable if someone wants to do that.

Just need this followed up with, "..but totally not necessary, because it won't break or fail as designed!"

Never mind, it broke on Greg's car, so i'll be adding a gusset.

Couple of pics of the fuel cell bladder before the foam goes in. Had Fuel Safe make this to mount a Holley VR2 pump internal. The VR2 is basically two fuel pumps, so it has two -10 pickups. The Holley pre-filters also mount internal, but are mounted under and accessible by removing the fill plate. You can see the two pickups in the collector box that attach to the filters and pumps. The two smaller pumps are the lift pumps to keep the collector full at all times, under all G load situations. it's an 18 gallon cell, but thinking closer to 17 with all the "stuff' inside.

http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...pspj1mbkoz.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...pse1yjlzs5.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psizz3pnge.jpg

I am guessing that was not cheap and I really like watching this build as I am learning a bunch.

Quote:

Originally Posted by syborg tt (Post 651130)

I am guessing that was not cheap and I really like watching this build as I am learning a bunch.

Glad you like it!

The cell turned out to be "reasonably priced". Funny thing is, Fuel Safe quoted me about half of what ATL did, and they are owned by the same company.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJD Automotive (Post 651135)

The cell turned out to be "reasonably priced". Funny thing is, Fuel Safe quoted me about half of what ATL did, and they are owned by the same company.

your suppose to keep that a secret.

Were the lift pump mounts a requested option ? I mean I assume they are not standard.

I looked up that VR2 pump - holy cow are you really planning on more than 2200hp in this thing or put another way why didn't you just use the VR1 ?

Thanks for the tip on Fuel Safe vs. ATL.

Another thought not directed at you but someone looking at this setup - I was using saddle tanks and I used the "passive" pump from a late model Vette to continuously pump fuel into the primary tank (same as OEM vette). You could use a similar strategy here in fact I think that's what the OEM's do in the last gen Camaro and Cadillacs (pump into a reservoir with a passive pump). I'm not sure how you would run two of them though, not sure they could work that way.

Looking good !

Quote:

Originally Posted by preston (Post 651142)

Were the lift pump mounts a requested option ? I mean I assume they are not standard.

No, not standard! I went over what I was wanting to do with there engineer and this is what we came up with. IMSA, Nascar and Arca use a similar set of lift pumps as well with the EFI setups.

Quote:

Originally Posted by preston (Post 651142)

I looked up that VR2 pump - holy cow are you really planning on more than 2200hp in this thing or put another way why didn't you just use the VR1 ?

I am turbocharged, so I built an engine capable of a sustained 1800 HP for Bonneville and Mile events. It will NEVER see that on the street or road course/autoX. I can "adjust" the output between about 550-1100 for different venues. This is one of the reason my car is a bit of a pig. Aside from needing a beefier cage, the driveline has to handle the top power level, so much heavier components are needed for more than just a road course/autoX car.

Anything new with this one?

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJD Automotive (Post 651145)

Have you decided what transmission your going with given the max possible engine output and the targeted duties for the vehicle (track and street)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by LateralJeaz (Post 654191)

Anything new with this one?

Quote:

Originally Posted by out2kayak (Post 654207)

Have you decided what transmission your going with given the max possible engine output and the targeted duties for the vehicle (track and street)?

Yes, I'm using a PPG sequential 6 speed.

Good Heavens....

:bigun2:

This car is reaching the point where, when it's done, seeing it (preferably in action) will be on par with a major celebrity sighting. Keep adding the awesomeness!

At one point I made the decision to stick with 315's on the front of my car as I'm not that competition oriented and 335's would have forced a lot of compromises on the inside or created visually obnoxious fender flaring.

These photos of 335's on the front of your Cuda make me question those decisions !
Looks so awesome.

Also, you have a few holes in your firewall you need to patch :)

This is looking downright MEAN! Nothing gets us riled up like the rough-looking freshly-caged phase of a racecar. :wow:

Quote:

Originally Posted by rustomatic (Post 654287)

This car is reaching the point where, when it's done, seeing it (preferably in action) will be on par with a major celebrity sighting. Keep adding the awesomeness!

Thanks, not sure it will ever have celebrity status, but I think the older cars will always draw far more attention than the newer ones. Promise if you see it, it won't be at a car show, I will be beating on it!

Quote:

Originally Posted by preston (Post 654293)

Also, you have a few holes in your firewall you need to patch :)

Yep, had to cut out the old cage and get access to weld in the new bars. I am keeping the stock firewall, so will go back and make new patch panels once I figure out where everything is fitting...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Centerforce (Post 654326)

This is looking downright MEAN! Nothing gets us riled up like the rough-looking freshly-caged phase of a racecar. :wow:

Thanks, "rough" is the operative word right now!

That is coming along nicely. Sub and tires look right at home in there.

Coming along nicely! Should be a beast when its done!

Thanks guys!

Few more of the cell structure, haven't welded it in yet.

http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psrgr1zsfh.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...pssxnsk3xb.jpg

Got my Mopar horder friend to give up a 'Cuda core support off a junk car. Just using the top piece. It locates the fenders and lets me mount up the stock latch, etc...

I built the jig on the front clip, before cutting it off, to be able to locate the core support and hinge location. I sold the clip complete, so couldn't hack any
pieces off it.

http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psty5h5y43.jpg

Craig, your fuel cell cage is looking good.

I see you keep the side fuel inlet. Is it plumbed to a 6x6 collector with 3 trap doors?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Sutton;

I see you keep the side fuel inlet. Is it plumbed to a 6x6 collector with 3 trap doors?

Does 4 doors, two lift pumps and dual fuel pumps count? ��

http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...pspj1mbkoz.jpg

Got a little smarter and starting putting pieces in epoxy before welding them in. Got the fuel cell as close to the watt's pivot as I can and still allow access, and as low as practical without bottoming out on it. Was hoping the cell would have been a little further forward for crash protection, but as it is, the outer cage is about 1-1/2" forward of the rear crossmember. I think I'm going to add a crash bar/hoop on the rear, extending down and behind the cell with two angled kickers back to the frame. This will also serve as the the adjustable attaching point for the diffuser. Not sure if it's necessary as this "exposed" area is already pretty low. Have to think about that and get a few opinions.

http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...pscb0mzmrz.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...pso5t7rkww.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psujvjh742.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psw9wjo0ux.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...ps3zkfkzti.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psnxjl49ik.jpg

Jumped back to the front to put in the upper coil over adjusters. Made a telescoping mock up shock gauge with some scrap DOM. This ensures the adjuster is inline with the control arm mount. The little offset pieces for the adjuster is a piece Ron sells. Makes life easy in that you don't have to notch the tube. The tape roll is simulating the spring to make sure it is centered in the upper control arm.

http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psthwqivqj.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psybqjlfpn.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psnla3cdqh.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psxmjzv9eq.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...psbgpzreis.jpg
http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...pswblwgyub.jpg

Or you could have just used a mockup shock and spring :)

Kidding, I know the right parts are not always available when you need them.
Looking good.

I've always though E-bodies were the wickedest looking of muscle cars but in the past nobody was able to do them right - stance too high, tires to narrow. Even Sick Fish didn't quite get it perfect. In fact one reason the G-Cuda blew me away because at the time it was the first one I ever saw that truly sat right. Around that same era Bobby Allison made on that was pretty cool too I don't know if it has a name.

Seeing this thing swelled out and low and knowing it can back it up is going to be awesome.