How can one visibly tell the difference between a vintage 550 and a beck?
Original Post
Classified postings do not allow for discussion (replies are not allowed). Direct message the member if you would like to discuss the item.
The Classified section is open to any individual (non-commercial firms) posting of items for sale. Members posting commercial advertisements must be enrolled in a Supporting Merchant program.
Postings without relevant details (PRICE, location, condition, etc.) will be deleted.
Replies sorted oldest to newest
How can one visibly tell the difference between a vintage 550 and a beck?
Pretty much have to look at the frame, I would think, in that more recent vintages have more of a "space frame."
Can you expound on what you mean by "space frme" ?
Check out the following link and look @ the pics:
http://www.pbase.com/carpediem/spyder_frames
http://www.pbase.com/carpediem/spyder_frames
Thanks Joe.The vintage looks more substantial.Wonder how these compare to stuttgarts?
You would be amazed at how close the Stuttgart frame is to the Vintage frame.
angela
angela
yeah because Stuttgart copied my frame.
550 Joe,
I lost your number give me a call or email me and I will email you my number.
Greg
I lost your number give me a call or email me and I will email you my number.
Greg
Immitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Jess:
A space frame is one in which many straight tubes are arranged so that the loads they experience all act in either compression or tension. It offers distinct advantages over other designs, since none of the tubes is subject to to a load that bends it in the middle.
The Vintage chassis may look more "substantial," but looks can be deceiving. It is, in fact, a poor example of a space frame (I call it an "unresolved" space frame) because its structure has negligible triangulation. The classic example of a space frame chassis is the Type 60/61 "Birdcage" Maserati, but there are many others, including the legendary Porsche 917 and the Spyder 550A, in which Porsche considerably improved the logitudinal and torsional stiffness, while decreasing weight, of the earlier Spyder 550's twin-tube "ladder" frame. A quick comparison of Vintage's design with Porsche's 550A frame will reveal they actually have very little in common. There are some excellent books on this subject (I like Forbes Aird's "Race Car Chassis," from which I derived the above definition), as well as quite a bit of information on the internet.
The foregoing is not to say that Vintage's design does not offer some advantages, such as a modicum of side-impact protection, over the traditional 550 ladder frame employed by Beck, which as I recall uses wide (4 inch) main tubes, consistent with Porsche's original design, but you should be wary of claims that it will deliver significantly (or any) better performance over Beck's chassis. When I first became interested in Spyder replicars about five years ago, I spoke with both Vintage's Greg Leach and Chuck Beck, and Chuck personally told me he would offer $10K if Greg could prove, using a proper testing apparatus, that his was the stiffer frame. That was quite a while ago, and I prefer to stay out of the fray, in any event, but if were to buy a Spyder now (and I am checking the classifies for used models), I would, in the absence of anyone else producing a true space frame chassis (Classic Roadsters, Ltd. in the U.K, had such a project a couple of years ago, but I cannot confirm they are even selling the cars now), buy a Beck.
Good luck in your endeavor to obtain a Spyder, and let us know what you decide to do.
Regards, Peter
A space frame is one in which many straight tubes are arranged so that the loads they experience all act in either compression or tension. It offers distinct advantages over other designs, since none of the tubes is subject to to a load that bends it in the middle.
The Vintage chassis may look more "substantial," but looks can be deceiving. It is, in fact, a poor example of a space frame (I call it an "unresolved" space frame) because its structure has negligible triangulation. The classic example of a space frame chassis is the Type 60/61 "Birdcage" Maserati, but there are many others, including the legendary Porsche 917 and the Spyder 550A, in which Porsche considerably improved the logitudinal and torsional stiffness, while decreasing weight, of the earlier Spyder 550's twin-tube "ladder" frame. A quick comparison of Vintage's design with Porsche's 550A frame will reveal they actually have very little in common. There are some excellent books on this subject (I like Forbes Aird's "Race Car Chassis," from which I derived the above definition), as well as quite a bit of information on the internet.
The foregoing is not to say that Vintage's design does not offer some advantages, such as a modicum of side-impact protection, over the traditional 550 ladder frame employed by Beck, which as I recall uses wide (4 inch) main tubes, consistent with Porsche's original design, but you should be wary of claims that it will deliver significantly (or any) better performance over Beck's chassis. When I first became interested in Spyder replicars about five years ago, I spoke with both Vintage's Greg Leach and Chuck Beck, and Chuck personally told me he would offer $10K if Greg could prove, using a proper testing apparatus, that his was the stiffer frame. That was quite a while ago, and I prefer to stay out of the fray, in any event, but if were to buy a Spyder now (and I am checking the classifies for used models), I would, in the absence of anyone else producing a true space frame chassis (Classic Roadsters, Ltd. in the U.K, had such a project a couple of years ago, but I cannot confirm they are even selling the cars now), buy a Beck.
Good luck in your endeavor to obtain a Spyder, and let us know what you decide to do.
Regards, Peter
"It is, in fact, a poor example of a space frame"
Peter,
What facts to you have that my chassis is a poor design?
Greg
Peter,
What facts to you have that my chassis is a poor design?
Greg
Peter
Normally I would not waste my time responding to a message as crude as yours, especially from a well-known Vintage Spyders acolyte who is anything but objective, but I will make an exception in this case. I said the Vintage design is not a true space frame (which is not precisely the same as saying it is a bad design), and I stand by that statement. I mentioned three legendary sports cars that have space frames, but I could have named a hundred more, and what all would have in common is a well-triangulated configuration of tubes that achieves the state of tension/compression I described in my previous message. I have nothing personally against Greg Leach, who seemed like a nice guy, and he may even make a good product, but Vintage's chassis does not qualify as a space frame, and should not be called one -- plain and simple. Anyone with even a scintilla of knowledge of structural engineering and/or chassis design would know that I am correct.
Regarding the Beck vs. Vintage debate, I have no dog in that fight, but all Greg has to do is arrange for the test of both chassis that Chuck Beck suggested years ago. What does he have to lose.
Peter
Regarding the Beck vs. Vintage debate, I have no dog in that fight, but all Greg has to do is arrange for the test of both chassis that Chuck Beck suggested years ago. What does he have to lose.
Peter
Actually, Peter, no one said that Vintage has a space frame. David's comment was that Vintag's was "more of a space frame". Not that it was one, but intending that it was closer to a space frame than the essentially ladder frame design of Beck/TR.
So, agreed, that Vintage is not a space frame. But it is a better frame than the TR/Beck setup. How much better? Well, after driving our car for better than a year (TR), and honestly considering it's faults (something very hard to do with a car that you love), I looked at a Vintage frame and came up with an idea for improvement. Even with the additional structural hoops we ordered our car with (under dashand both side pods) we definately had an issue to resolve.
We needed to tie in the upper shock/spring mounts to the frame hoop between the seats and the engine. This eliminated some rather evil and quite substantial flexural problems that we had. A night and day difference.
Does Vintage have the perfect frame? No.
Does Vintage have a space frame? No.
Is it better than TR/Beck? Yes.
And that last question is being answered by a TR owner who also intends their next car build to be a TR. Specifically, a 904 - which by the way, seems to have a quite decent frame beneath it. Sort of a 906 style.
angela
So, agreed, that Vintage is not a space frame. But it is a better frame than the TR/Beck setup. How much better? Well, after driving our car for better than a year (TR), and honestly considering it's faults (something very hard to do with a car that you love), I looked at a Vintage frame and came up with an idea for improvement. Even with the additional structural hoops we ordered our car with (under dashand both side pods) we definately had an issue to resolve.
We needed to tie in the upper shock/spring mounts to the frame hoop between the seats and the engine. This eliminated some rather evil and quite substantial flexural problems that we had. A night and day difference.
Does Vintage have the perfect frame? No.
Does Vintage have a space frame? No.
Is it better than TR/Beck? Yes.
And that last question is being answered by a TR owner who also intends their next car build to be a TR. Specifically, a 904 - which by the way, seems to have a quite decent frame beneath it. Sort of a 906 style.
angela
Peter -
two years ago...try five years ago the offer was made and when it looked like Greg was moving forward with it Beck's tune changed.
And like I said in my post maybe you should put in some seat time in the different cars before opening your pie hole.
No one needs to take my word for anything. I think a picture is worth a thousand words. The following link will show a Beck Frame side by side with a Vintage frame.
http://www.pbase.com/carpediem/spyder_frames
two years ago...try five years ago the offer was made and when it looked like Greg was moving forward with it Beck's tune changed.
And like I said in my post maybe you should put in some seat time in the different cars before opening your pie hole.
No one needs to take my word for anything. I think a picture is worth a thousand words. The following link will show a Beck Frame side by side with a Vintage frame.
http://www.pbase.com/carpediem/spyder_frames
Joe:
who said anything about two years ago? Me message said the wager was made five years ago, and I ought to know, because Chuck Beck made it to me personally. I do not know what transpired after that, but I will take your word for it.
As to a picture being worth a thousand words -- I completely agree -- an the picture makes my point. Res ipsa loquitur ("the thing speaks for itself").
Frankly I find your rather angry and defensive responses to my messages amusing. As one who has negotiated engineering and construction contracts and done business worldwide for over two decades, I find that people who react as you do either lack confidence in the substance of their arguments, or have other, more personal, insecurities. I am rather surprised that Greg Leach would want such a toxic cheerleader for his cause, but perhaps he has no control over the situation. With advocates like you, he doesn't need adversaries.
Angela:
Thank you for your intelligent and well-considered message. It represents the kind of input and dialogue I was hoping for when I decided to participate in this site. It sounds like you really know what you are doing, and improved a decent but flawed car. As one who has admired the 550 for most of his life, I suppose I am like other afficionados, in that I would like to have the cachet of the original cars, but with a space frame chassis, which I believe could be designed to also include a variety of saftety features (such as Vintage's admittedly excellent side impact protection), as well as a modern wishbone or multi-link suspension, rack and pinion steering, etc. That is why I found the Classic Roadsters project to be of interest. I know some very capable individuals have made improvements to their cars to incorporate such features, but among the regular manufacturers, I believe only Graham McRae got close. To me, the others represent opportunites lost.
I am most intrigued by the 904 project you mentioned, and I would like to learn more about it. Please stay in touch.
Regards, Peter
who said anything about two years ago? Me message said the wager was made five years ago, and I ought to know, because Chuck Beck made it to me personally. I do not know what transpired after that, but I will take your word for it.
As to a picture being worth a thousand words -- I completely agree -- an the picture makes my point. Res ipsa loquitur ("the thing speaks for itself").
Frankly I find your rather angry and defensive responses to my messages amusing. As one who has negotiated engineering and construction contracts and done business worldwide for over two decades, I find that people who react as you do either lack confidence in the substance of their arguments, or have other, more personal, insecurities. I am rather surprised that Greg Leach would want such a toxic cheerleader for his cause, but perhaps he has no control over the situation. With advocates like you, he doesn't need adversaries.
Angela:
Thank you for your intelligent and well-considered message. It represents the kind of input and dialogue I was hoping for when I decided to participate in this site. It sounds like you really know what you are doing, and improved a decent but flawed car. As one who has admired the 550 for most of his life, I suppose I am like other afficionados, in that I would like to have the cachet of the original cars, but with a space frame chassis, which I believe could be designed to also include a variety of saftety features (such as Vintage's admittedly excellent side impact protection), as well as a modern wishbone or multi-link suspension, rack and pinion steering, etc. That is why I found the Classic Roadsters project to be of interest. I know some very capable individuals have made improvements to their cars to incorporate such features, but among the regular manufacturers, I believe only Graham McRae got close. To me, the others represent opportunites lost.
I am most intrigued by the 904 project you mentioned, and I would like to learn more about it. Please stay in touch.
Regards, Peter
I actually don't know what I'm doing, but I have a very high level of honesty and curiousity. I recognize the faults with a beautiful car and love it anyway. But I also believe that it is important, even a duty, to fix the items that you can. I look, research, and then convince my husband that it's a good idea. Then away we go!
When we made the decision to correct the frame flex, that was a pretty easy thing to talk him into. It worked really well. When I diagnosed an issue with the DeDion tube and figured out what would be needed to fix it, well, that took a bit more convincing. But he trusted me enough to try it. That fix involved putting the car on a four wheel alignment rack, cutting the tube nearly in half, pulling the wheels into alignment and re-welding that tube. We also altered the rear supsension mounting points to allow proper travel. A little scary looking in the process. But the car had 5/8" total toe-in at the rear - with DeDion! Vicous and twitchy, a white knuckle affair at anything over 50 mph, even going straight. After that fix, both tires dead ahead, relaxed cruising at 80-90, even tire wear, and predicitable handling.
Though not for everyone, I believe that the 550 frame, brakes and suspension should be evolutionary. Keep the lovely shape, but re-think the underpinnings. Be creative. Be bold. Porsche would have. As every improvement came along, they put it in/on their cars. There philosophy has always been to develop their cars and to be unafraid to think outside the box. Guess that's how I think.
The 904 that TR is building has a different frame than the Beck. I think I like this alot better than the Beck frame. Even if it were a draw, I'd buy from Tom anyway as I love him like family. We've been running some ideas past our engine builder and have come up with 450 hp air-cooled six turbo motor with a broad power band, good life expectancy and tractable-drive-on-street-gas nature. Well, tractable until you spool up the turbo anyway...
What do you think of this frame? Though I am endowed with pretty good horse sense, I'm not an engineer. Sometimes structures look good but exhibit serious flaws. It's definately a light year ahead of the spyder frame, and I quite like the rear of it. The odd thing is that I have the sense I've seen it somewhere before but can't recall where (not a 904).
http://www.thunderranch.com/904two.html
angela
When we made the decision to correct the frame flex, that was a pretty easy thing to talk him into. It worked really well. When I diagnosed an issue with the DeDion tube and figured out what would be needed to fix it, well, that took a bit more convincing. But he trusted me enough to try it. That fix involved putting the car on a four wheel alignment rack, cutting the tube nearly in half, pulling the wheels into alignment and re-welding that tube. We also altered the rear supsension mounting points to allow proper travel. A little scary looking in the process. But the car had 5/8" total toe-in at the rear - with DeDion! Vicous and twitchy, a white knuckle affair at anything over 50 mph, even going straight. After that fix, both tires dead ahead, relaxed cruising at 80-90, even tire wear, and predicitable handling.
Though not for everyone, I believe that the 550 frame, brakes and suspension should be evolutionary. Keep the lovely shape, but re-think the underpinnings. Be creative. Be bold. Porsche would have. As every improvement came along, they put it in/on their cars. There philosophy has always been to develop their cars and to be unafraid to think outside the box. Guess that's how I think.
The 904 that TR is building has a different frame than the Beck. I think I like this alot better than the Beck frame. Even if it were a draw, I'd buy from Tom anyway as I love him like family. We've been running some ideas past our engine builder and have come up with 450 hp air-cooled six turbo motor with a broad power band, good life expectancy and tractable-drive-on-street-gas nature. Well, tractable until you spool up the turbo anyway...
What do you think of this frame? Though I am endowed with pretty good horse sense, I'm not an engineer. Sometimes structures look good but exhibit serious flaws. It's definately a light year ahead of the spyder frame, and I quite like the rear of it. The odd thing is that I have the sense I've seen it somewhere before but can't recall where (not a 904).
http://www.thunderranch.com/904two.html
angela
Peter
Joe -- I'm not speaking for Peter, but in response to your "got to be blind" slur, I don't remember him ever saying there is no visual difference between the B and V frames. He, and I'm sure everyone else would agree that there is a visual difference.
Where this debate started, Jess asked the simple question: Can you expound on what you mean by "space frme" ?
Joe, you responded by posting the pictures of the side-by-side B and V frames which I took as your intent to exhibit the V frame as an example of a space frame.
It looks like Peter took it the same way as I did, and presumeably Jess would have taken it that way too. Whether you intended to or not, your posting could lead anyone who doesn't know better to aquire incorrect conclusions.
Peter simply corrected any possible misleading confusion Jess may have incurred by correctly emphisizing that the V frame is not a space frame. And that the V frame (although looking different than the B frame) has little if any meaningful performance improvement over the B frame. To an engineer this is a logical observation.
No one said the V frame was a bad frame, only that it was not technically definable as resembling a space frame and that in perfomance it was probably no better than the B frame.
Like Peter, I have no dog in this fight. In fact, I may be the ONLY one on this whole board who really does have a true space frame - at least to the degree of a late 550A or 718.
So Joe, you are entitled to your opinions and your continuing quest to vilify anything not Vintage Spyder as well. And it is always fun to read your tirades. But this thread degenerated into: Is V a space frame (not really); and is there a perfomance advantage of a V frame over a B frame (not really). Thus having answered those two questions, how about answering Jess' original question -- how can he tell if a car is a B or a V.
Jess -- it's not so easy to tell the difference from across the parking lot since both cars have the same body shape (the V was patterned directly off of the B). So look in the cockpit. The B has a big diameter tube ladder frame that is a very close replica of the original 550 design (see Joe's picture), the V has . . . . something else.
If you lean towards authenticity, you gotta like the B. If that point of authenticity is not important, the V (or Stuttgart) frames get the job done well.
Where this debate started, Jess asked the simple question: Can you expound on what you mean by "space frme" ?
Joe, you responded by posting the pictures of the side-by-side B and V frames which I took as your intent to exhibit the V frame as an example of a space frame.
It looks like Peter took it the same way as I did, and presumeably Jess would have taken it that way too. Whether you intended to or not, your posting could lead anyone who doesn't know better to aquire incorrect conclusions.
Peter simply corrected any possible misleading confusion Jess may have incurred by correctly emphisizing that the V frame is not a space frame. And that the V frame (although looking different than the B frame) has little if any meaningful performance improvement over the B frame. To an engineer this is a logical observation.
No one said the V frame was a bad frame, only that it was not technically definable as resembling a space frame and that in perfomance it was probably no better than the B frame.
Like Peter, I have no dog in this fight. In fact, I may be the ONLY one on this whole board who really does have a true space frame - at least to the degree of a late 550A or 718.
So Joe, you are entitled to your opinions and your continuing quest to vilify anything not Vintage Spyder as well. And it is always fun to read your tirades. But this thread degenerated into: Is V a space frame (not really); and is there a perfomance advantage of a V frame over a B frame (not really). Thus having answered those two questions, how about answering Jess' original question -- how can he tell if a car is a B or a V.
Jess -- it's not so easy to tell the difference from across the parking lot since both cars have the same body shape (the V was patterned directly off of the B). So look in the cockpit. The B has a big diameter tube ladder frame that is a very close replica of the original 550 design (see Joe's picture), the V has . . . . something else.
If you lean towards authenticity, you gotta like the B. If that point of authenticity is not important, the V (or Stuttgart) frames get the job done well.
Mark
Joe,
I just came in from the garage: New exhaust gaskets and new push rod tube gaskets. Getting ready for the new season, and Morro Bay in a month. The car has over 15K miles on it now and is surprisingly reliable!
I never did paste on the Pegasus stickers I got from you. I think it's about time.
Take care yourself.
Mark
I just came in from the garage: New exhaust gaskets and new push rod tube gaskets. Getting ready for the new season, and Morro Bay in a month. The car has over 15K miles on it now and is surprisingly reliable!
I never did paste on the Pegasus stickers I got from you. I think it's about time.
Take care yourself.
Mark
Angela -- I think you are far too modest. Your posts speak highly of your insight and skill in this rather arcane discipline. I completely agree with your philosophy regarding the evolutionary development of these vehicles. Thank you also for the information about TR
Damn, sorry for started a fight with sloppy description. Not sure how else to describe the Vintage frame.
How about, "It's a frame with loops, kinda like a space frame, but not."
For what it's worth, I have a Beck. The previous owner put an solid alumunium pan in the car, which (apparently, as I never knew the difference) greatly increased stiffness.
I added a cross bar at shifter level (made from structural drill pipe; can you tell I am in the oil field) to look more original and give me somethig to attach my nifty original E-brake to. Not sure it added anything, but sure looks cool.
I indeed to add a "loop" behind the engine "fire wall" (again, sloppy description, but those who know, know) mainly to give me a bit more of horizontal protection. Russ and Fibresteel sells these.
Candidly, not to be biased with my own set up, but I think the best frame would be: (1) Beck (2) with aluminium floor pan and (3) and two loops (front and rear of passenger compartment.
How about, "It's a frame with loops, kinda like a space frame, but not."
For what it's worth, I have a Beck. The previous owner put an solid alumunium pan in the car, which (apparently, as I never knew the difference) greatly increased stiffness.
I added a cross bar at shifter level (made from structural drill pipe; can you tell I am in the oil field) to look more original and give me somethig to attach my nifty original E-brake to. Not sure it added anything, but sure looks cool.
I indeed to add a "loop" behind the engine "fire wall" (again, sloppy description, but those who know, know) mainly to give me a bit more of horizontal protection. Russ and Fibresteel sells these.
Candidly, not to be biased with my own set up, but I think the best frame would be: (1) Beck (2) with aluminium floor pan and (3) and two loops (front and rear of passenger compartment.
David -- don't apologize, your comment initiated what may be the liveliest and most relevant dialogue this site has seen for a long time. I think it provided calibration, and also dispelled some misconceptions, at least for those who are open to a diversity of ideas.
The use of an aluminum floor plan would certainly add stiffness to the Beck chassis, and I am sure it also provides a little more protection, a structure for securely mounting seat belts, etc. (if you recall, one of my positive comments about the Vintage frame was its side impact protection). I am sure your set-up serves your needs well. I am looking for a somewhat more advanced design concept, which was really the thesis of my posts, but I absolutely respect people like you and Angela (and apparently Mark, who indicates his car has an actual space frame), who find creative and sound means to improve what they have.
Best regards,
Peter
The use of an aluminum floor plan would certainly add stiffness to the Beck chassis, and I am sure it also provides a little more protection, a structure for securely mounting seat belts, etc. (if you recall, one of my positive comments about the Vintage frame was its side impact protection). I am sure your set-up serves your needs well. I am looking for a somewhat more advanced design concept, which was really the thesis of my posts, but I absolutely respect people like you and Angela (and apparently Mark, who indicates his car has an actual space frame), who find creative and sound means to improve what they have.
Best regards,
Peter
Minor correction to my previous post -- of course I was agreeing with your comment, and meant to say that the "hoops" would provide additional protection, and a better structure for mounting the seat belts. I agree that is one of the virtues of that aspect of Vintage's design.
i'm heading to indiana next week to check out chamonix via special edition. i'll pay closer attention to the frame...
i have a fond memory and photos - including photos of frames (but not framed photos) from my trip to thunder ranch. tom taught me a lot.
when the club was in pacifc grove last time around, i learned a lot about the vintage/subaru set up, gear ratios on spyders, and lots of other important stuff, but i didn't ask about the frames.
i wish that i had kept the brochure that chuck beck sent me way back around 1980...
i have a fond memory and photos - including photos of frames (but not framed photos) from my trip to thunder ranch. tom taught me a lot.
when the club was in pacifc grove last time around, i learned a lot about the vintage/subaru set up, gear ratios on spyders, and lots of other important stuff, but i didn't ask about the frames.
i wish that i had kept the brochure that chuck beck sent me way back around 1980...
Mark -
I will look through a few old drives tonight, I am pretty sure that I have a copy of and old Beck ad, if so I will post a link hear tomorrow. Although I had better be careful Peter might get his panties in a knot if I post anymore pictures.
I will look through a few old drives tonight, I am pretty sure that I have a copy of and old Beck ad, if so I will post a link hear tomorrow. Although I had better be careful Peter might get his panties in a knot if I post anymore pictures.
Peter -- Inspired by (but not cloned duplication of)the 718 space frame idea. http://www.spyderclub.com/phpbb2/download.php?id=5893
The latest model 550A had a similar looking space frame.
Mark
The latest model 550A had a similar looking space frame.
Mark
Panties, Joe? It sounds like we finally found your area of expertise. We know it is not chassis.
Mark, I can't seem to access the pictures on the SpyderClub site, but I will join it if that is what is required?
Thanks, Peter
Mark, I can't seem to access the pictures on the SpyderClub site, but I will join it if that is what is required?
Thanks, Peter
Mark -
This is all I could find http://www.pbase.com/carpediem/spyderstuff I will keep looking
This is all I could find http://www.pbase.com/carpediem/spyderstuff I will keep looking
hey joe,
i remember that ad - and a road test that called the beck "sneakers" for the road. i should have framed them.
thank you very much for finding/posting/responding.
mark
i remember that ad - and a road test that called the beck "sneakers" for the road. i should have framed them.
thank you very much for finding/posting/responding.
mark
Glad I could help, if I fine anything else I will post it
Ok, Mark & Mark
I added a few more interesting pictures I thought you may like
http://www.pbase.com/carpediem/spyderstuff
I added a few more interesting pictures I thought you may like
http://www.pbase.com/carpediem/spyderstuff
Can we get off this topic and start selling some of your 550s? The market is a little stagnant.
Mark -- great looking chassis. That is certainly one of the ways it should be done, and pretty close to what I had in mind. Who built it, and what body panels were used? Please tell us a little more about the engine/drive train, suspension, brakes, steering etc.
Thanks, Peter
Thanks, Peter
Peter: Here are the answers to most of your questions: http://www.spyderclub.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=11433
Steering is standard vw bug, as is the front torsion bar suspension (but with ride height adjusters).
Wheels and brakes were switched over from what I originally started with (standard bug 4-bolt) to standard bug wide-5s. The intent at the time was to set the car up for eventual transition to Porsche 356-B finned aluminum drums (which are correct for the 718). However, I've since lost interest in doing anything with the brakes since I don't have any trouble stopping with what I have.
The rear suspension I fabricated myself. It is a true IRS with 5-link attachment at the hub. Rear springs and shocks are Bilstien coil-overs.
Mark
Steering is standard vw bug, as is the front torsion bar suspension (but with ride height adjusters).
Wheels and brakes were switched over from what I originally started with (standard bug 4-bolt) to standard bug wide-5s. The intent at the time was to set the car up for eventual transition to Porsche 356-B finned aluminum drums (which are correct for the 718). However, I've since lost interest in doing anything with the brakes since I don't have any trouble stopping with what I have.
The rear suspension I fabricated myself. It is a true IRS with 5-link attachment at the hub. Rear springs and shocks are Bilstien coil-overs.
Mark
The authoritative consultation for this topic is Costin and Phipps, " Racing and Sports Car Chassis Design." There are more recent discussions, but theirs was closest to the time and they were in the thick of it. The TR chassis fits their description of a "multi-tubular" chassis, which was an evolutionary step from the ladder type to the true space frame. Ref. the Cooper Monaco chassis on page 11. "True space frame" has to be taken with a grain of salt, of course, as achieving the objective of no bending moment in *any* chassis tube is virtually impossible when you have to fit an engine and a driver into the chassis.Thus the lightened bulkheads required by the Lotus 19 on page 13, which C and P do call a spaceframe. For better stiffness, chassis designers moved on to monocoque construction, leaving spaceframes, like ladder chassis, as evolutionary markers on the development road.
When a reproducer commences to conjure up his time machine, he knows that he is driving a stake into the timeline at some point long since past. Improving the beast is reasonably well understood - the factory, in this case Mssrs. Porsche, has in fact drawn the map. How close to stick to the driven stake is his quandary, and in folksy terms, "different strokes for different folks," and the result can be fiery passions erupting in our generally sleepy, but charming discussions. An outfit in Argentina appears (from the available photos) to be producing a pretty sophisticated "almost space frame" chassis with double coil wishbones at all four corners tucked under a 550-ish body. Pretty cool! (but not very original!)
have fun,
markb
When a reproducer commences to conjure up his time machine, he knows that he is driving a stake into the timeline at some point long since past. Improving the beast is reasonably well understood - the factory, in this case Mssrs. Porsche, has in fact drawn the map. How close to stick to the driven stake is his quandary, and in folksy terms, "different strokes for different folks," and the result can be fiery passions erupting in our generally sleepy, but charming discussions. An outfit in Argentina appears (from the available photos) to be producing a pretty sophisticated "almost space frame" chassis with double coil wishbones at all four corners tucked under a 550-ish body. Pretty cool! (but not very original!)
have fun,
markb
Mark B says:
When a reproducer commences to conjure up his time machine, he knows that he is driving a stake into the timeline at some point long since past. Improving the beast is reasonably well understood - the factory, in this case Mssrs. Porsche, has in fact drawn the map. How close to stick to the driven stake is his quandary, and in folksy terms, "different strokes for different folks," and the result can be fiery passions erupting in our generally sleepy, but charming discussions.
Perfectly stated Mark -- THANKS!!
When a reproducer commences to conjure up his time machine, he knows that he is driving a stake into the timeline at some point long since past. Improving the beast is reasonably well understood - the factory, in this case Mssrs. Porsche, has in fact drawn the map. How close to stick to the driven stake is his quandary, and in folksy terms, "different strokes for different folks," and the result can be fiery passions erupting in our generally sleepy, but charming discussions.
Perfectly stated Mark -- THANKS!!