Unibody strength

My imp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
1,102
Reaction score
32
Location
Brunswick, Ohio
I had posted earlier about using a big block (440) with a 4 speed in an '81 Imperial t-top with sub frame conn's & torque boxes. The general consensus was that the frame would pretzel. That's all the hemi convertible's had, & they didn't pretzel. Are the J frames that weak? I really don't want to cage the thing. In '78, the Magnum came with a 400 auto & t-top, however it had the latitudinal torsion bars. Is this the only difference between the B & J unibodies? If so, has anyone tried to adapt the earlier style? Thank you, Larry
 

ramenth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Messages
906
Reaction score
96
Location
Beaver Dams, NY
The Hemi convertibles also had two rocker panels. One that was thicker (if I remember correctly it was 16 gauge metal) and inside the one we see. That, in turn, was tied to the torque boxes.

In a unibody car every piece of sheetmetal in integral to the strength of the car, but there is a frame, per se, which ties everything together and lends strength. Those are: the frame rails, crossmembers, and rocker panels. By tying in all four rails with the connectors we can stiffen things up and torque boxes allow for a better tie-in with the rockers. But the rockers are still a weak point. Hence the reason Ma Mopar double up on them in Hemi convertibles. Every other part of the sheetmetal structure welded together, and usually overlapped in the process, keeps adding the strength, like the inner aprons and core support tied into the front rails.

While our FMJ's (and Y's) don't have the torsion bar crossmember, we still have a crossmember tying both rockers with the floor pans.

If you're worried about body flex beyond the added frame connectors and torque boxes you can do what Ma Mopar did with the rockers. You also have the option of going in on the frame connectors and putting in an x-brace. This is what the Brand-X full frame car convertible cars came with.

XV Motorsports also proved out on the chassis dyno that putting in a reinforced brace on the core support does a lot in tying together the ends of the front rails. You can google XV and see the brace I'm talking about.

You can also go in and run an X-brace between the rear rails that shouldn't interfere with the tank.

Personally, I don't see the need in the X-bracing, just an idea to run by you if you like to over-engineer things.

My M-body will be seeing the rocker "upgrades" since I want to stiffen it up that little extra. Also, it will see the usual frame connectors and torque boxes, as well as the added bracing to the core support. I want the car to be able to plant the power to the ground on curves.
 

My imp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
1,102
Reaction score
32
Location
Brunswick, Ohio
Thanks, I planned on using the solid mounts, FFI offers them, however, I believe the company that provides FFI is out of business. They were considerably cheaper than FFI. Gary Beineke used tubing inside his rockers on a '71 GTX convertible. He also sliced the A pillar open & pounded round stock in before he tied the firewall to the core support. I don't remember what trans he had in that one though he did have one of his 6 pack Hemi's in it. The Imperial is supposed to be built with thicker steel, so is this sufficient? Lol
 

MiradaMegacab

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Messages
1,847
Reaction score
753
Location
Long Island NY
Are you gonna drag race or road race? If your drag racing you don't need to go crazy with the frontend, frame connectors would be your friend. Cutting the floor and dropping them in from the top would eliminate the need for rocker panel modification. Tying the frame rails togethe and welding the connectors to the floor is the ultimate flex reducer as they become integral.
 

My imp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
1,102
Reaction score
32
Location
Brunswick, Ohio
Both & neither. I may take it to Norwalk once or twice to see what it will do, & perhaps a parking lot slalom or two, but that is it. I want it for spirited driving & I believe in starting with as smooth a foundation as possible. I still believe in "Do it once, do it right, & weld the hood shut!". Try to make every aspect of the car as bulletproof as possible. If I hammer this thing & pretzel the hell out of it, I want to make sure I did everything I could & didn't half-ass it. I know the 400 only put out 195 hp in '78, & either 230 or 320 lb ft (I sometimes have trouble with numbers from far too many Opana & OxyContin over the past 15 yrs.) of torque & either way that isn't going to tweak a frame. I do plan on making more torque & hp than that. I'd love to run a stick, but stand a better chance keeping the thing in one piece with an auto. I want to make this thing a one of a kind, sort of like how Chrysler should have done it. As you all know, we in Mopardom are harder on ourselves than anyone else. Guys getting totally anal over using the size or manufacturer of '71 fender bolts on a '73 w/the wrong size captive washer, like I give a sh*t! I build my cars the I like them, not you. If you don't like the way I built it, then buy it from me & build it exactly the way it came from the factory. Tanks, Larry
 

Dago Red

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
171
Reaction score
7
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
Think about this Imp, if your going to do the "spirited driver" thing, have the frames tied, go with a small block stroker (400+ c.i.) and be several hundred pounds lighter in the nose.

Selling/trading the 440 for a 340/360 shouldn't be tough. In addition, ask the Mopar racers in the Ohio area who they'd have do a frame tie. Attitude will mean a lot on the craftmanship side. Give serious consideration to a 4 or 6 point roll bar. Love the 4 speed thing. Can you imagine handing some Mustang his a$$!!!!!????
 

65 Dartman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Messages
180
Reaction score
6
Location
Strasburg VA
The Hemi convertibles also had two rocker panels. One that was thicker (if I remember correctly it was 16 gauge metal) and inside the one we see. That, in turn, was tied to the torque boxes.

I parted out a 65 Valiant convertible and had a difficult time cutting through the rocker panels - inside the outer was an inner one that was at least 1/4 in thick. Bet my 65 Dart 'vert is the same - not gonna try and find out though.
 

kkritsilas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
1,965
Reaction score
420
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
I think the weight difference between the big block and small blocks is not as much as most would think. It is probably in the 150 lb. range, both all stock, and with the use of some aluminum parts (intake manifold, cylinder heads) some of that can be further reduced, not to mention the performance advantages of aluminum heads. The use of tubular headers vs. the factory cast iron exhaust manifolds can also help. I think the weight difference would end up somewhere below 100 lbs., probably in the 75-80 lbs difference comparing a big block with aluminum parts vs. the as delivered small block.

Kostas
 

Dago Red

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
171
Reaction score
7
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
I think the weight difference between the big block and small blocks is not as much as most would think. It is probably in the 150 lb. range, both all stock, and with the use of some aluminum parts (intake manifold, cylinder heads) some of that can be further reduced, not to mention the performance advantages of aluminum heads. The use of tubular headers vs. the factory cast iron exhaust manifolds can also help. I think the weight difference would end up somewhere below 100 lbs., probably in the 75-80 lbs difference comparing a big block with aluminum parts vs. the as delivered small block.

Kostas

".....it ain't a matter of how he grips it!!!! It's a simple matter of thrust to weight ratio.........."

Run Away.jpg
 
Back
Top