Our new projects

[SN65]

Here are some photos of the roll bar setup. More photos are available on our website.

[SN65]

Just finished the roll bar. Here are some photos. The last on is trying to show the quality of the welds. I think they came out great.

[SN65]

Just got back from SEMA and an extended vacation in Aruba. Had a great time at both, but, I am happy to say, it is now time to get back to business. If we are going to get both of these cars ready for the Detroit Autorama, we are going to have to get our butt's in gear. :-)

I just spent about an hour talking to Chris over at Maximum Motorsports. He told me that they did some before and after testing on Fox body sub-frame connectors.

Did you know....

Sub-frame connectors have little to no effect on improving torsional stability. They do help improve “beam” deflection of the frame rails, but do nothing to reduce torsional deflection or "twist".

[Rick D]

Looks real nice. So what does pervent body twist other than o full roll cage?

Project seems very cool!!

[SN65]

Originally Posted by badrs69

Looks real nice. So what does pervent body twist other than o full roll cage?

Project seems very cool!!

reinforcing the cowl area, torque boxes and also the seat pans greatly improve torsional deflection.

[hotrods]

Just had to give my 2 cents on this one since SN65 has so much to say about the way I build cars. I heard all this talk about how a cage was not needed and how it takes away from all the grocery getting seat area that your so called street cars have, now I see a rediculous bar installed in the car. I looked around SEMA for the yellow car in Magnaflows booth but did not see it there. I dont know if you had the time to come inside and see Rosie but did you figure out that it is a tucked away Moly chassis that is completely welded unibody car tied to the car almost everywhere. you know it doesnt take alot of models and drawings to produce a chassis that works, we can jack the car right off the ground on one front corner and the door gaps do not change and they close as if the car was on all 4 wheels on the ground. with out all your " haha " as you said can you say triangulation. but hey keeping doing your thing and asking everyone who will listen how to build your cars. one thing you never asked me about the car is if I was trying to build the best chassis in a mustang or if I was adding what I felt the car needed to do what I am going to ask the car to do, IE huge stereo, handle, be a show car, run high MPH, have a new style and look unlike what everyone else is building Ie Elinore type looking mustangs, have a slammed look with out being an air bag car that will handle like crap but look cool only when it is parked, the way you see Rosie is the way she rolls. I hope no one takes offence to this as I feel I am allowed to have my opinion and make any comment I like as SN65 has been able to make any comment about my build he has wanted to in the past. OHyah I already did the new style glued in glass all the way around the car all 4 windows and the whole interior of the car is all steel not fibreglass. even the headliner is steel. well hope no one is pissed and is ok with me having my opinion. if anyone wants to call me 778-863-7571 I dont hide behind a computer.

[fatlife]

^^^^^^^
where did this come from???

[hotrods]

I agree with your every comment. Did you get a chance to look at the tube chassis that these guys built?

http://www.kerrst.com/hotrods/rosie_gallery/index.htm

I have a few issues with their design. Can you say triangulation?

For a giggle, read the following thread.

http://www.pro-touring.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20751

They are looking to break the 200 MPH mark. They might just do it, but the front (MII) and rear (Jag IRS) suspension, along with the cage, raise a few questions in my simple mind.
__________________
Bob
http://sn65.com/



posted on corner carvers with other stuff is where it came from actually and posts on here just dont feel like going back and looking at them all to find them. I had held off judgement untill I had a look at his work and felt he no longer had any right to make an opinion on my work but I was going to give mine now. these posts will not be up here for long but what the hell.

[CraigMorrison]

Before this goes down the tube and turns into an all out flame war, I would like to respectfully make one correction to your above statement Bob. The front suspension used on Rosie is not MII. Yes, it does have MII spindles (2" dropped) but that is it. The geometry & control arms are ours, steering is a 79-93 Mustang (not MII) power rack from AGR.

To end this confusion we will be debuting the spindle that we helped develop with Wilwood.

Hope this clears things up a bit. Time to bail! Hope the Aruba trip was good. How was the diving?

[SN65]

Hi HotRods,

Whew... not to much pent up frustration there. Take a deep breath. Everything is going to be fine. :-)

I did get a chance to check out your car at SEMA. Your fabrication skills are exceptional. The quality of the sheet metal work is exceptional. Overall, while I may not agree with some of your styling choices, it is an exceptional looking product.

With that said...

I question your choice of components as well as the overall cage design.

For example.

You have installed a huge HP power plant and put the power to the ground with a Jag rear end. I may be mistaken, but I don't think the overall design of the Jag rear lends itself to ultra high HP applications.

Also, in the design of you cage, you only used cross bracing in two areas that I saw. You have one in the door opening and one at the top of the cowl. Everything else is basically rectangular in configuration. Follow the link bellow and check out the cage build by Aronson’s Motorsports and compare their design to yours. I know that their car is a purpose built race car, but the same principles apply to all cage designs.

http://www.fordracingparts.com/builds/buildsindex.asp

Also, in the design of your cage, you do not pick up any of the suspension mounting points. Look at the rear of your cage for example. The coil over’s land nowhere near the cage mounting points. Also, the rear mount of the cage, at the extreme end of the frame rail, is something that you would employee only if you were using the stock leaf springs. When you went to a coil over design, you should have relocated that section of the cage to pick up the new suspension mounting point. Even at that, the current rear location is a problem in many ways, but the greatest of these is safety. This configuration is both unsafe for the passengers of your car, but also the passengers of any car unlucky enough to rear end you. You have completely eliminated any rear crumple zones and, on top of that, you carried a cage out to pick up a suspension mounting point that isn't there.

On another note, your main attachment points of the cage to the chassis are 4 rectangular tubes that cantilever away from the main chassis about a foot or so. This is not a very effective way to transmit the loads of the chassis to the cage. The main purpose of the cage is to protect the passengers in case of roll over or impact AND to pick up and reinforce the suspension mounting points. When complete, a cohesive, well designed package should do all these things and also improve the likelihood that a passenger will survive a high speed impact.

So, is your car cool? Yes, it is very cool.

Will your car do what it is supposed to do? Maybe, I am not sure what the overall performance goals are. But I go back to my earlier statement about High HP applied to a Jag rear end. I am not sure what you did to improve the internal structure of the rear but the control arm intermediate shaft configuration may suffer when exposed to excessive torque and high shock loads off the starting line.

But enough about Rosie.

You attributed a comment about “how a cage was not needed and how it takes away from all the grocery getting seat area that your so called street cars have” to me. I do not remember making such a comment. In fact, I tend to make all my Mustangs into 2 seaters, so maybe you have me confused with someone else in this regard.

And then, you said “now I see a ridiculous bar installed in the car”. What is so ridiculous about the roll bar we are installing? The drivetrain components we are using should put our car in the 10 second range. A roll bar is required. We did add some cross bracing at the front of the cage to reduce torsional deflection. Also, the rear cross bracing was installed to pick up the rear coil over and panhard bar mounting locations. I don’t think that these are outlandish concepts in the world of performance auto design.

As far as SEMA goes, MagnaFlow had two locations. The SN65 was parked next to a Foose and Coddington. I met a couple of people from LG and PT at the display, sorry I missed you.

In closing, I am not pissed. Your opinion is what it is. That being the case, you should not be pissed at any comment made by others. You invited comment when you posted your build on the forums. In fact, here was the first post…

“WHEN SUPER JUST ISN'T SUPER ENOUGH, AND ITS NO LONGER UNIQUE, THEN STEP UP TO THE ULTIMATE MUSCLE CAR......its definatley the year of the Mustang but there is going to be no comparison to what is being built in an Igloo up here in Canada...........Go to WWW.HOTRODSRESTOS.COM
to see the Ultimate 66 Mustang that will be at SEMA”.

A comment like that invites critiques of everything you do. Good bad or otherwise.

OBTW, I can be reached at 630-762-0387. I don’t hide behind a computer either.