Seymour Snerd
Lifetime Supporter
Yes, and not beyond what he already posted.
Failed Shock Mount
- Thread starter Jim Craik
- Start date
Hi Folks,
Been away for a while from the forum.
Anyway, SPF GT40 chassis is more of a copy of the original MKII chassis than of the MKI... Louvers on roof, reinforcement on the trial arms around the motor, even A/C unit in front bay is a copy of the dry sump set-up of the MKII. SPF uses the same chassis for both MKI and MKII bodies.
So the rear sway bar set-up is "inspired" on the MKII configuration, as someone has shown in pictures of 1032. But just "inspired", it does not has the same sturdy look as in the original MKII race cars.
None of the MKI cars had that sway bar set up. All of the MKI have similar arrangements as per Mike Drew pictures before and pictures of 1018 and 1017 which I am attaching here.
Mine, being a MKI, has the MKI sway bar set up, but not exactly as the originals right now, although we will be fitting an original set up shortly.
On the other hand, find attached a picture (not very good quality, but that is all I can find now) of 1016 (a MKII) sway bar set up... SPF is a very close copy of it.
Cheers!
JP
PS: My good friend James gave me a great present few weeks ago, which is now reunited with my car. Will take some pictures tomorrow to post them.
.
Been away for a while from the forum.
Anyway, SPF GT40 chassis is more of a copy of the original MKII chassis than of the MKI... Louvers on roof, reinforcement on the trial arms around the motor, even A/C unit in front bay is a copy of the dry sump set-up of the MKII. SPF uses the same chassis for both MKI and MKII bodies.
So the rear sway bar set-up is "inspired" on the MKII configuration, as someone has shown in pictures of 1032. But just "inspired", it does not has the same sturdy look as in the original MKII race cars.
None of the MKI cars had that sway bar set up. All of the MKI have similar arrangements as per Mike Drew pictures before and pictures of 1018 and 1017 which I am attaching here.
Mine, being a MKI, has the MKI sway bar set up, but not exactly as the originals right now, although we will be fitting an original set up shortly.
On the other hand, find attached a picture (not very good quality, but that is all I can find now) of 1016 (a MKII) sway bar set up... SPF is a very close copy of it.
Cheers!
JP
PS: My good friend James gave me a great present few weeks ago, which is now reunited with my car. Will take some pictures tomorrow to post them.
.
Last edited:
I booked the full half-hour version Keith, but fell bored when it became evident that expressing a view is not understood as being simply that.
One suspects that it is possible that defence of one's own brand of car may cloud a person's interpretation of another's words? Eitherway, my point/opinion/concerns were clearly lost on some people and therfore I respectfully leave the field whilst I still have a modicum of dignity left!
Heaven forbid I try to get clever and paste something from another source!Somebody shtop me!
JimmyMac
Lifetime Supporter
Here is the lug arrangement on my chassis.
The lugs have doubler plates spot and fillet welded and there is now also 16swg hardened bushes welded to the outside of the holes.
Brazing was only used to seal to outside edges of the two plates.
The anti roll bar is fitted to the top using the original bushed blocks.
The lugs have doubler plates spot and fillet welded and there is now also 16swg hardened bushes welded to the outside of the holes.
Brazing was only used to seal to outside edges of the two plates.
The anti roll bar is fitted to the top using the original bushed blocks.
Attachments
Last edited:
Guys,
Keep in mind that the sway bar must be changed to one with the "hump" to clear the snakes........
Seymour Snerd
Lifetime Supporter
Personal parting shot followed by exit. Pretty much zeroes out the modicum of dignity.
(And by the way, Mark, just to confuse you with the facts once again, I'm pretty sure I'm the severest critic of SPF on this forum, both in this thread and others. Again, try reading the posts.)
Last edited:
Seymour Snerd
Lifetime Supporter
Rick and Jim and Jimmy --
What I see looking at Jimmy's pictures is a replacement for the upper shock mount, albeit a very nicely engineered one, not a new method for mounting the rear anti-roll bar. If so, what Jim would have to do to use these is cut of the remnants of his existing shock mounts, install these, and at that point he would be back where he started, without having solved the original root cause which is presumably either or both of the cantilievered anti-roll bar mounting and the sloped anti-roll bar arms. Right? Or am I not interpreting the photos correctly?
Last edited:
Howard Jones
Supporter
What I see, is the fix for Jims car. I think that this is the question he was interested in. And by the way it's also what I was describing as best I could in my earlier post when I was thying to help him fix his car along with a couple of other guys.
After all, I thought that was what this forum was for. Even if 10 guys all say the same thing, doesn't it help the other guy who has asked a question. Isn't it helpful to know that all that agreement on a solution might mean that it just might work for him?
As far as the roll bar mount goes. If the shock mount is made strong enough, and the above picture from Jim does look to be a lot stronger, then the orginal roll bar mounting method might be OK.
The addition boxing will prevent a lot of the flex caused by the roll bar loading. At least I think so.
After all, I thought that was what this forum was for. Even if 10 guys all say the same thing, doesn't it help the other guy who has asked a question. Isn't it helpful to know that all that agreement on a solution might mean that it just might work for him?
As far as the roll bar mount goes. If the shock mount is made strong enough, and the above picture from Jim does look to be a lot stronger, then the orginal roll bar mounting method might be OK.
The addition boxing will prevent a lot of the flex caused by the roll bar loading. At least I think so.
Seymour Snerd
Lifetime Supporter
I didn't object to your post; as I said I didn't understand it. Sure repetition-as-agreement is useful as long as the reader can tell that is your intent. However, I couldn't determine if you thought you were rebutting something, agreeing with something, or asserting something new. So if your intent is to expess agreement with a previous post, it's a lot easier for the reader if you say so or at least refer to the previous post. When I'm trying to follow a 130 post thread it helps a lot to know what post provoked your thought; hence the quote function, like I used above. It makes the whole thing more conversational and sequential.
Last edited:
Seymour Snerd
Lifetime Supporter
No doubt you're right. But that leaves behind some at least philosophical issues with how thoroughly, elegantly and/or accurately you or I want to solve the problem.
My take on this is that the SPF implementation was mechanically, historically and pragmatically incorrect, and in multiple ways. So I, for one, am going to attempt to adddress all those issues, rather than just the pragmatic one. I usually reserve "just get it back on the road" for my daily drivers, and even then rarely.
I booked the full half-hour version Keith, but fell bored when it became evident that expressing a view is not understood as being simply that.
One suspects that it is possible that defence of one's own brand of car may cloud a person's interpretation of another's words? Eitherway, my point/opinion/concerns were clearly lost on some people and therfore I respectfully leave the field whilst I still have a modicum of dignity left!
Somebody shtop me!
Gosh, how spot on is that?
I think what is being said here is "you don't own one so butt out"
What a shame, even the solution is hidden from us mere mortals...
Egad this forum has changed....
And I think it (the fix) should be paid for my either the manufacturer or fellow SPF owners - he could have kept quiet about it but chose to share...
All win..
Gosh, how spot on is that?
I think what is being said here is "you don't own one so butt out"
What a shame, even the solution is hidden from us mere mortals...
Egad this forum has changed....
Aint that the truth, still, must be reassuring to drive around wondering which weld is going to fail next!!
Howard Jones
Supporter
Sorry I even gave it a try..........Good luck with your SPF's guys. You can have this page all to yourselfs. Jim. I'm nearby, If I can help drop me a PM. SEE ya.
Steve Wood (PANAVIA)
Lifetime Supporter
GT40 _ Crew, - Greetings from your Cobra and Daytona Driving colleague.
My firm has been retained by Superformance USA to administrate the fix for Jims Car, -we will advise and post as prudent/warranted.
I have trained welders, fabricators and chassis engineers on staff so we can perform updates and fixes of this type.
As soon as Jim and I agree on timing, our flatbed tow truck will pickup Jim's car , and escort it to the Mustang Ranch, in Santa Clara CA. We have direct contact and support from the SPF factory, and the US Importer.
I have already shown photos of the crack/tear and the proposed fixes to my lead fabricator and we will be generating a fix / enforcement plate from good strong .125" steel. -- inspecting the rest of the chassis for cracks/fatigue etc. --
I can only sum that the local potholes and 28000 miles (most on hwy 9 and 35) have contributed to the tear/rip/etc.
Whatever the cause, - it will be fixed and in excellent manner, with attention to strength and detail.
With Best Regards,
Steve Wood ( Panavia )
The Mustang Ranch
My firm has been retained by Superformance USA to administrate the fix for Jims Car, -we will advise and post as prudent/warranted.
I have trained welders, fabricators and chassis engineers on staff so we can perform updates and fixes of this type.
As soon as Jim and I agree on timing, our flatbed tow truck will pickup Jim's car , and escort it to the Mustang Ranch, in Santa Clara CA. We have direct contact and support from the SPF factory, and the US Importer.
I have already shown photos of the crack/tear and the proposed fixes to my lead fabricator and we will be generating a fix / enforcement plate from good strong .125" steel. -- inspecting the rest of the chassis for cracks/fatigue etc. --
I can only sum that the local potholes and 28000 miles (most on hwy 9 and 35) have contributed to the tear/rip/etc.
Whatever the cause, - it will be fixed and in excellent manner, with attention to strength and detail.
With Best Regards,
Steve Wood ( Panavia )
The Mustang Ranch
