View Full Version : Boxed Truss Frames - Speedway Motors
07-19-2004, 08:35 AM
Me and Wray were kicking around ideas yesterday and I mentioned something Speedway motors is doing with some of their frames for their kit-cars.
They are seeking a patent for this. Thought I would share:
clickhere (http://www.speedwaymotors.com/product_view_full_img.asp?image%5Ffile=91657050%5F 1%2Ejpg&product%5Fname=Boxed+Truss&base%5Fno=91657 050&cat%5Fimage%5Fname=91657050%5F1%2Ejpg&cat%5Fim age%5Fdesc=Boxed+Truss&mscssid=0UDBGA3UHVW08K57X4N MALS4UDVK6HE3/)
Looks pretty cool. The only thing issue I see is it really that productive it seems like for the amount of time/money invested you could just bump up height/width or wall thickness. Also wouldn't there always be at least one side not welded to the inner structure? It would seem as though that would be a loss in stiffness? Let me know if any of my thinking is wrong but those are just my initial thoughts.
07-19-2004, 10:32 PM
Looks as if it would be hell for stout to me, even without the inside boxing plate. It would be way bad if the boxing plate had holes punched to correspond with the bracing to allow at least heavy spot welds.
A guy could get carried away with the weight.........probably only need it in certain areas........
Is there that much problem with frame flex in kit cars? Maybe it is just a selling point (gimmick)...........jb
07-20-2004, 06:59 AM
if I read correctly they only do that on the frame in the front end where the engine will sit. Many of the aftermarket front suspension manufacturers include boxing plates with their kits to strengthen the frame in that region.
who knows, probably just another gimmick, I just thought it looked unique and wanted to see if anybody had anything good or bad to say about it.
Maybe somebody could do some testing?
07-20-2004, 05:38 PM
i could almost gurantee that this structrial member would be stronger than a box or "c" type. in a frame member, it is the resistance against torsion that gives most people thier problems. a box or a thicker taller wall would most deffinitley support more static weight, but to combat torsion a structrial member needs width, well, "connected" width. this is what this photo shows, in effect, more areas tied together by the diagonal gussets, tying the upper and lower part of the "c" across its own width. just my humble opinion. if someone wanted to fab up some 4' sections, or come by my shop to help, i have a HUGE press brake and a transducer set up that would allow for testing these sections side by side.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.