matthewq4b Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Hell I would be happy with an intregal Full frame unit as would most of the current customers of the Panther. As long as it not a full unit car. The corker is the Conti show car was an intrgal Frame Panther. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I really think a NA version of the Falcon's Control blade IRS will turn up on future Panthers. It was made as a bolt-in assembly so only has (I think) upper bolts and control arms to attach. The unit weighs basically the same as a SRA. About 9 years ago Falcon had watts Link standard and a Multi-link IRS as an option so Watts Link and the easier to fit CB IRS could be used on Panthers with no worries at all. If there is a problem with -40 degree applications, i'm sure Ford can engineer an easy solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Those hinges near the windshield kind of show a contradiction in what you are trying to imply. And you can pull the floor pans fire wall and rockers with off with the body? and leave a full frame sitting there with the drive line it ? You can not. you end up with parts of the body still attached to the frame Come on quit being obtuse. And contradictory just for the sake of it. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Those hinges near the windshield kind of show a contradiction in what you are trying to imply. As does the fact that the floor panels appear to be entirely separate from the steel frame as well. The Corvette doesn't really have a full floorpan. If anything, the major changes have been applied more to the BODY than to the method the frame is built. On the older Vettes, when you took the body off, you'd take EVERYTHING else with it save for the drivetrain. Now it appears that the body is broken up into separate components. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I really think a NA version of the Falcon's Control blade IRS will turn up on future Panthers.It was made as a bolt-in assembly so only has (I think) upper bolts and control arms to attach. The unit weighs basically the same as a SRA. About 9 years ago Falcon had watts Link standard and a Multi-link IRS as an option so Watts Link and the easier to fit CB IRS could be used on Panthers with no worries at all. If there is a problem with -40 degree applications, i'm sure Ford can engineer an easy solution. Oh I know the Control blade will go in the panthers frame with mininal fuss The upper mounting points present no issue and would just require the strenthening of the current above axle cross memeber this would also strenthen the frame from crush impacts. The Lower arms are already in the same basic location as the lower arms on the 3 link in the Stang and 4 link on the Panthers. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) As does the fact that the floor panels appear to be entirely separate from the steel frame as well. The Corvette doesn't really have a full floorpan. If anything, the major changes have been applied more to the BODY than to the method the frame is built. On the older Vettes, when you took the body off, you'd take EVERYTHING else with it save for the drivetrain. Now it appears that the body is broken up into separate components. OMG. You can not remove the whole body from the frame. Body coponants in the vette are active structural members of the frame. On a BOF car NO body componants are active structual members of the frame It is not a BOF car it is an intregal full frame car. What is so hard to understand about that it is not rocket science. Well on second thought , maybe it is for some. Matthew Edited October 25, 2007 by matthewq4b Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Since some seem to have a hrd time grasping the concept of a BOF on frame car This is what your left with when you remove the body from a BOF car. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 OMG. You can not remove the whole body from the frame. Body coponants in the vette are active structural members of the frame. On a BOF car NO body componants are active structual members of the frame It is not a BOF car it is an intregal full frame car. What is so hard to understand about that it is not rocket science. Well on second thought , maybe it is for some. Matthew On a body on frame car the body has no active structural members? If that's the case, I sure hope nothing hits that 69 Stingray of ours higher than 12 inches off the ground, because the frame doesn't go much higher than that. OF COURSE there are structural components in the body. How else does the body stay together when bolted on to the frame? It would be a jiggly chunk of fiberglass with no structural members in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) Another way to look at the argument is this: 1.Unitary Frame (integral chassis) 2. Dedicated Chassis and body - Body on Frame is one type (Perimiter Frame and Ladder Frame) - Corvette complete chassis with attached body panels is another. Edit, I even got it wrong. Edited October 25, 2007 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkisler Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I really think a NA version of the Falcon's Control blade IRS will turn up on future Panthers.It was made as a bolt-in assembly so only has (I think) upper bolts and control arms to attach. The unit weighs basically the same as a SRA. About 9 years ago Falcon had watts Link standard and a Multi-link IRS as an option so Watts Link and the easier to fit CB IRS could be used on Panthers with no worries at all. If there is a problem with -40 degree applications, i'm sure Ford can engineer an easy solution. Not going to happen, jpd80. It's not worth the investment to perfume the pig with limited life span. The aging customers wouldn't know the difference and it wouldn't represent a volume opportunity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Since some seem to have a hrd time grasping the concept of a BOF on frame car This is what your left with when you remove the body from a BOF car. Matthew That's pretty much what the '69 looked like with the body taken off it. The only real difference between that and the current Corvette is the lack of integrated firewalls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 On a body on frame car the body has no active structural members? If that's the case, I sure hope nothing hits that 69 Stingray of ours higher than 12 inches off the ground, because the frame doesn't go much higher than that. OF COURSE there are structural components in the body. How else does the body stay together when bolted on to the frame? It would be a jiggly chunk of fiberglass with no structural members in it. Stupidity strikes again. Apparenlty even the most basic stuff needs to be explained to you. The body has active structural memebers as does the frame. On a BOF the body has no active structural members in the frame. The body and frame structures are passive structual members for each other. The body deos not directly provide structural support to the frame does it ? Nor does the frame provide direct structure support to the body. But they both work together to provide increased structural strength to the vehicle. Two directly different structural members working together. Better quit while you can Nick You are quickly looking the last person that should be commenting on any thing automotive if you can not grasp the most basic automotive engineering concepts. Let alone why the Panther should be compltly ash canned. Just more proof that the pople calling for it's complete retirement have absolulty no clue what the hell they are talking about . Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkisler Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 OMG. You can not remove the whole body from the frame. Body coponants in the vette are active structural members of the frame. On a BOF car NO body componants are active structual members of the frame It is not a BOF car it is an intregal full frame car. What is so hard to understand about that it is not rocket science. Well on second thought , maybe it is for some. Matthew Matthew, you are completely wrong on this one. The vette is body on frame, period. I have recently been to the assembly plant. The frame is fabricated first (in steel or aluminum depending on which version you get). The body panels are bolted to the frame and are not stressed members as you seem to indicate. True, it's not like the Panthers with the fully formed body dropping on the frame, but it definitely has a frame that you could drive around without a body on it. They just happen to use a frame that looks more like a Panther frame than, say, a space frame of a Lotus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Not going to happen, jpd80. It's not worth the investment to perfume the pig with limited life span. The aging customers wouldn't know the difference and it wouldn't represent a volume opportunity. 'OK, 'Nuff said....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkisler Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Stupidity strikes again. Apparenlty even the most basic stuff needs to be explained to you. The body has active structural memebers as does the frame. On a BOF the body has no active structural members in the frame. The body and frame structures are passive structual members for each other. The body deos not directly provide structural support to the frame does it ? Nor does the frame provide direct structure support to the body. But they both work together to provide increased structural strength to the vehicle. Two directly different structural members working together. Better quit while you can Nick You are quickly looking the last person that should be commenting on any thing automotive if you can not grasp the most basic automotive engineering concepts. Let alone why the Panther should be compltly ash canned. Just more proof that the pople calling for it's complete retirement have absolulty no clue what the hell they are talking about . Matthew Matthew, you are wrong on this also. The body is not some sort of weak member that somehow floats on the frame. It has to have structural rigidity very similar to a unibody car. The frame alone does not offer body rigidity and crash performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Matthew, you are completely wrong on this one. The vette is body on frame, period. I have recently been to the assembly plant. The frame is fabricated first (in steel or aluminum depending on which version you get). The body panels are bolted to the frame and are not stressed members as you seem to indicate. True, it's not like the Panthers with the fully formed body dropping on the frame, but it definitely has a frame that you could drive around without a body on it. They just happen to use a frame that looks more like a Panther frame than, say, a space frame of a Lotus. Matthew got served. Now STFU and go enjoy your geriatric Panthers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnFan Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 On a BOF the body has no active structural members in the frame. The body in BOF vehicles has the b-pillar, right? Isn't that a structural member? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Matthew, you are wrong on this also. The body is not some sort of weak member that somehow floats on the frame. It has to have structural rigidity very similar to a unibody car. The frame alone does not offer body rigidity and crash performance. Wrong never said that better go back and reread the post. Here i can qoute it for you since we have anouther that has problems grasping basic concepts The body does not directly provide structural support to the frame does it ? Nor does the frame provide direct structure support to the body. But they both work together to provide increased structural strength to the vehicle. Two directly different structural members working together. They are structual members wroking together. Man what are they putting in the water down south. Man their must have been a blue light red tag sale on stupid pills at the local drug stroe. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkisler Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Wrong never said that better go back and reread the post. Here i can qoute it for you since we have anouther that has problems grasping basic concepts They are structual members wroking together. Man what are they putting in the water down south. Man their must have been a blue light red tag sale on stupid pills at the local drug stroe. Matthew Thank you for the kind compliment. The main reason the body and frame have to work independently is that bolts don't work so well to transfer loads. That's not necessarily a good thing. Sometimes the bof frame rails go in some very strange and unpredictable directions in crash conditions and are difficult to manage. And you lose the opportunity to run the loads through the integrated rail in a unibody car, or to transfer loads from the rails to the body, or to manage the front crash through triggers in the unibody structure. And bof cars don't necessarily make things like convertibles easier where you are looking for all the rigidity you can muster. Panther bof construction was developed when autos were somewhat mixed between unibody and bof. But now it is the sole sedan with bof to my knowledge. Once again, not necessarily a good thing. Only different. And, to many buyers, irrelevant and old. That's not to say that those who appreciate the Panther are somehow wrong or lacking in intelligence. Just becoming rarer, and rarer, and rarer, and rarer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) Thank you for the kind compliment. The main reason the body and frame have to work independently is that bolts don't work so well to transfer loads. That's not necessarily a good thing. Sometimes the bof frame rails go in some very strange and unpredictable directions in crash conditions and are difficult to manage. And you lose the opportunity to run the loads through the integrated rail in a unibody car, or to transfer loads from the rails to the body, or to manage the front crash through triggers in the unibody structure. And bof cars don't necessarily make things like convertibles easier where you are looking for all the rigidity you can muster. Most of it that is true to a point. BOF do have the body and Frame working in unison. Especialy in torsional loads. The frames generally have little torsianal strength. This is received from the body on the frame. Frontal crash in tradtional BOF cars is Wholly absobered by the frame rails. And this is true. But in newr BOF units (trucks) we have seen triggers stamped in to the front and rear frame rails to promote & contol the location of collapse. Also we have seen the intergration of the body as a structural memeber in frontal collisions. Most notably with the current gen of F-150's that have structural supports from the firewall forward to support the front fenders. This increases torsinal and lateral strength and helps control frontal collsion collapse . Convertables on BOF's have tradtioanlly always been easier to do than on unit cars. Yes you do lose the torsonal and lateral strenght of the roof line in both. But On BOF cars this is much easier to over come with the addtion of heavier side rails and heavier rear frame rails. The bodies generally received very little extra bracing. Usually an extra cross brace is added to the body floor pan at what was the B pillar area to increase crash protection to help prevent body collapase in an side impact. The Panthers received much improved rear body work in 1992 this was done to increase the resistnace to frame folding at the axle hump. As the earlier car suffered frame and body buckling in a rear collsions. A The result being ruptured fule tanks. So to say that the body and frame in a BOF work inderpendantly of each other is not really correct. Yes they are separate structural members. But they do work in unison especially in the event of a collision. Panther bof construction was developed when autos were somewhat mixed between unibody and bof. But now it is the sole sedan with bof to my knowledge. Once again, not necessarily a good thing. Only different. And, to many buyers, irrelevant and old. There are distinct advantages to BOF or intregal full frame especially in larger vehicles. The biggest one is weight savings. Also body redesigns can be done with out comprehensive chassis changes. It also allows easier changes to suspensions designs with out actualy having to change the body structure of the car. Some thing that can not be done with a unit car. That's not to say that those who appreciate the Panther are somehow wrong or lacking in intelligence. Just becoming rarer, and rarer, and rarer, and rarer. Yes BOF cars are endangered. And I 'm pretty sure that the current BOF Panthers will be the last true BOF ones. More than likly if we do see a new full frame auto on the market Ford it Will be an intregal full frame unit. Which actually is the ideal way to go. It offers the advantages of both UNIT and BOF construction The rigtity of Unit and the strength of BOF Befor it was ash canned the update to the Panthers was to go to an intregal frame Panther. But the Update was cancelled, they instead only got the new front suspention. Since it was rather minor cost to fit it compared to the benifits. Matthew Edited October 26, 2007 by matthewq4b Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SysEng Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Panther bof construction was developed when autos were somewhat mixed between unibody and bof. But now it is the sole sedan with bof to my knowledge. Once again, not necessarily a good thing. Only different. And, to many buyers, irrelevant and old. That's not to say that those who appreciate the Panther are somehow wrong Ummm, not quite. unibody works very well up to a certain size limit. I'd argue thats somewhere around the size of the old Taurus, or the current Mustang. Much larger than that and BOF/BWTF ( Body Welded To Frame ) becomes mandatory... unless you like bloat and ultimate structural breakdown. Its pretty much why ( I assume ) you ...and I have a skeleton and a bug has a unibody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 (edited) Just to turn the discussion a little, what if that BOF chassis is made out of Aluminium or Magnesium? Granted, the body mounting points have to be insulated and stainless steel bolts/washers/nuts used but significant weight reduction is possible - even when a steel body is retained. Edited October 26, 2007 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 (edited) Just to turn the discussion a little, what if that BOF chassis is made out of Aluminium or Magnesium?Granted, the body mounting points have to be insulated and stainless steel bolts/washers/nuts used but significant weight reduction is possible - even when a steel body is retained. Considering torque and shock loads, it's cheaper to build a steel frame and an aluminum body to get significant weight reduction. It probably could be done, but aluminum seems to be better suited to monococque, unitized designs, like the XK and XJ or simple ladder frames in heavy trucks and trailers, rather than a perimeter-type frame that the Panther uses. Edited October 27, 2007 by Edstock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) Current thinking is Aluminium Body On Magnesium alloy Frame and is the future direction. I was thinking a halfway step with Mag Frame may save 300-400 lb in a BOF car like a Panther. Maybe that would be enough to make the BOF car design viable again until the second quantum leap to Aluminium bodies. Edited October 27, 2007 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 Current thinking is Aluminium Body On Magnesium alloy Frame and is the future direction. I was thinking a halfway step with Mag Frame may save 300-400 lb in a BOF car like a Panther. Maybe that would be enough to make the BOF car design viable again until the second quantum leap to Aluminium bodies. The only problem with either in a BOF set up is fatigue. Mag does not bend it fractures so could be a seriuos engineering issue. Aluminum could work but you need an exotic alloy to prevent fatigue cracking. I thinkt he best solution would be an intrgal aluminum/ Steel frame. Aluminum center sections with steel frame rails front and back. The center section is pretty stable and does not see lots of dynamic load it also gets the most support from the body structure. Joining them would be an issue. But it can be done. Just not sure how cost effective it would be. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.