SysEng Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 SysEng, That's me trying to horn in on RJ's joke without offending you... And, if you are open to a full frame on D3, why couldn't it be a stronger integral frame? That way you get the ease of unitary construction and most of the BOF's strength. Sure you cant separate the body from frame but you get a strong car that's repairable after lighter crashes and kerb hopping. I'm game for the idea that cars in that class would be significantly better if they had full length perimeter frames. Whether BOF or unitized would be an issue depending on who exactly does the job... like anything else. 30 years ago, I owned a Malibu, at that time the size of the current D3s. That had a full length frame and was exceptionally rigid... it survived my rather brutal driving habits, though walls, trees and other cars may not have fared that well... And yes, it could easily reduce the weight of a D3 ( a car smaller that a Town Car yet heavier than same ) by at least 500# ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bored of Pisteon Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 yeah, lack of RWD is definitely KILLING Honda But in the end, it will ultimately KILL TOYOTA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 And yes, it could easily reduce the weight of a D3 ( a car smaller that a Town Car yet heavier than same ) by at least 500# ... Right. Adding a perimeter frame to a D3 unitized platform will allow "at least" 500 lb. weight saving? Please tell us how. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 And yes, it could easily reduce the weight of a D3 ( a car smaller that a Town Car yet heavier than same ) by at least 500# ... Actually, both the Taurus and MKS are lighter than the TC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SysEng Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Right. Adding a perimeter frame to a D3 unitized platform will allow "at least" 500 lb. weight saving? Please tell us how. :hysterical: Probably the same way it made similar size cars from 30 years ago 500# lighter... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 (edited) :hysterical: Probably the same way it made similar size cars from 30 years ago 500# lighter... Panther Math 101, 4000lb D3 + 200lb perimiter frame = 3500. Simple, just ask Spicoli.. Edited March 10, 2010 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 :hysterical: Probably the same way it made similar size cars from 30 years ago 500# lighter... And watch them fail today's collision standards. :hysterical: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syrtran Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 :hysterical: Probably the same way it made similar size cars from 30 years ago 500# lighter... Hmm, some of us are confused. Please enlighten us on just which "similar size cars from 30 years ago" lost weight by adding a full frame. As I recall (and, yes, I was an adult car enthusiast 30 years ago), the LTD and Caprice both lost weight by lopping about a foot off their length - and they were both full-frame vehicles before - and after - their downsizing. Chrysler's large cars had already lost their full frames nearly a decade and a half before, and, in fact, disappeared entirely. In fact, I can't recall even a single vehicle in that time frame that actually added a full frame. Please help, as I can't handle the idea that there's a vehicle out there that I've completely forgotten. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SysEng Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 Hmm, some of us are confused. .. In fact, I can't recall even a single vehicle in that time frame that actually added a full frame. Please help, as I can't handle the idea that there's a vehicle out there that I've completely forgotten. You mean you can't remember a single car with similar dimensions to D3 that came with a full frame??? Easier question ( since there were so few of them :rolleyes: ) how many cars had airbags??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 You mean you can't remember a single car with similar dimensions to D3 that came with a full frame??? Easier question ( since there were so few of them :rolleyes: ) how many cars had airbags??? if its that bad , leave her at home... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 You mean you can't remember a single car with similar dimensions to D3 that came with a full frame??? Easier question ( since there were so few of them :rolleyes: ) how many cars had airbags??? if its that bad , leave her at home... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 Hmm, some of us are confused. Please enlighten us on just which "similar size cars from 30 years ago" lost weight by adding a full frame. As I recall (and, yes, I was an adult car enthusiast 30 years ago), the LTD and Caprice both lost weight by lopping about a foot off their length - and they were both full-frame vehicles before - and after - their downsizing. Chrysler's large cars had already lost their full frames nearly a decade and a half before, and, in fact, disappeared entirely. In fact, I can't recall even a single vehicle in that time frame that actually added a full frame. Please help, as I can't handle the idea that there's a vehicle out there that I've completely forgotten. I believe the only car that ever went from unitary construction to a body on frame was the Ford Torino. According to Wiki the Ford Torino went from Unitary construction to Body on Frame in the 1972 re-design. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Torino The biggest change for the Torino was the switch to body-on-frame construction from the unit-construction of the 1971 models. 1971 Unitary Torino Weight 3,141–3,663 lb (1,425–1,662 kg)* 1972 BOF Torino Weight 3,369–4,042 lb (1,528–1,833 kg)* *Shipping weight I know this is Wiki so you always have to question all of the information, but still it appears that by going from a unitary design to a BOF design the Torino gained several hundred pounds. It looks like even going way back BOF adds weight to a car. It looks like SysEng theory that a BOF car is lighter then a unitary car is nothing but BS. Granted today's cars are completely different then these old ones, but since SysEng likes to live in the past I thought I would pull up an example out of the past. 1 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.