Nocones $2020 challenge build thread

nocones said:

But if moving the bushing away from the upright and adding the steering link takes even just 25% of the torsional load off the strut section it's worth it.  

I agree and I think it should accomplish that.

In reply to nocones :

fair enough on the its cheating.

How about a simple little bracket that would let you use a hemi in the correct ordination or one of the ball joint options you found....super simple to make with a hemi, you'd need to turn a tape bore fo ra ball joint but that is pretty easy too..

In reply to wheelsmithy (Joe-with-an-L) (Forum Supporter) :

You have the X1/9 conceptually correct, and it does have toe change from the inner pivot being non parallel with the car center line. I have never examined the AW11 so expect you are correct by description. Nocones car as currently presented has no roll steer, as both inner pivots are parallel in both planes. You are correct that divergent inner pivots can produce roll steer to a limited degree. Still it has been done frequently as a means of causing anti-squat, although that is loosing favor on modern racing cars.

MKEs sketch on this page made an idea click with me that I am going with.  I had been trying to keep the UBJ axis in line with the design which had it at the upper strut mount hole.  There really isn't a reason for this.  Moving the UBJ behind the strut just required a little bit of projection of the A-arm axis through the upper strut bolt and then as long as I was on that line the geometry was 99.9% retained.  It will be ever so slightly different because the upper arm is a little shorter but the at ride height roll center and VSAL are the same.  

So I got this far tonight.  I made the plates, and threw a piece of 1" in to demonstrate. 

The top hole is slotted to allow 0 to -3* camber.  The upper adapter will accommodate toe, and I will run the toe link on the lower A-arm to a dropped steering link like my sketch from a page ago.    I'm going to run an single outboard Heim and deal with having to only have 1/2 turn resolution on the arm.  This saves $6 per side and can always be replaced with a RH/LH Heim pair later.  But Toe Changes aren't that common so once I set it it won't get messed with much.  

Plates are .125 thick and added $0.88 per side.  Added 1.75 hours bringing the total to 171 hrs.  

New Video is done.  I'm a bit behind but I may actually try to roll right into editing the subframe video and Try to be sort of caught up.  

If you make a diagonal bar from the tie rod mount to the lower bolt hole on the strut mount (but don't weld it in, just bolt it), then it still gives the knuckle rigidity without needing to move when you adjust toe or camber. 

Maybe that is already your plan.

In reply to Robbie (Forum Supporter) :

I was thinking about something like that when I was going to put the toe link on top.  Though your solution sounds a bit more elegant then anything I had come up with before I abandoned it for lower mounting of the toe link. 

I think with the current plan everything is getting loaded the way it is intended.  The only exception is the steering arm will have a bit more torsional load then it would in the stock Subaru as the tie rod will be about 1" lower then the stock one.  I think that will be ok... .

I got some work done on the car in addition to making the video.  

I made the 2nd set of rear strut plates.  And then I turned some of this bedframe I got off the side of the road

Into Racecar parts!

The part is just 3 pieces of the bedframe.  The A-Arm will be mounted to the two bolts in the adapter.  

So with that bracket cut I can start on the A-Arm.  The square tube is just a placeholder.  Looking at how things lined up I think I'm going to just weld a couple of tabs for the strut plate on the backside of the strut and have the Pullrod attach direct to the upright.  This reduces load on the A-Arm and bushings.

+2Hrs, +$0 for scrap bedframe.

5 bolts to do the job of one? I hope this is just prototyping.

Are you wanting a shorter upper arm for camber gain?

Moving the upper joint away from the tire CL seems like a step backwards? Wouldn't it be better to shorten the inboard end of the upper arm?

In reply to bentwrench :

It's not.  I may rebuild the brown part out of metal with pedegree long term (I also may switch the upper to some kind of ball joint /spherical bearing once I don't care about every $$ spent).  For now Each of the 5 bolts have a purpose and serve to make this upper Arm pivot function and cost $2.50 including bolts.  It is more complicated then it could be.  The "Extra" bolt is really just the 3/8 that clamps the upright pivot bushing.  I would need 4 bolts minimum, because I would not run the upright with only a bolt in the upper strut mount hole.  I would put plates on the side and and run 2 bolts in that location.  Without resorting to a ball joint of some kind the A-Arm has to allow for toe adjustments (unless I eliminated the ability to adjust toe).  That requires the 2 bolts in the arm to allow the upright bushing to angle relative to the chassis.  So I'm trying to get the most functionality possible while retaining stock Subaru uprights.  

The A-Arm length is simply what fits when I allow for 2.5* of camber adjustment at the upright and place the pivot along the desired arm trajectory.   It won't largely impact the suspension in function because the Arms are quite long so as a relative change is it minor.  The arms are nearly 20" long, so removing 1" from their length isn't a huge change.  In the rear the increased KPI won't make a difference either. 

The impact on camber gain would be very minor.  At ride height the VSAL length will be the same.  The ratio of arm lengths (which impacts how much your VSAL changes during travel) is pretty small.  So the VSAL will get shorter slightly quicker because the upper arm is shorter but at 1" of bump travel it really won't diverge greatly from the camber curve expected from the chosen VSAL.  

Got in the garage for a 1/2 hour and welded together the bed frame brackets.  I ended up not giving quite enough clearance to the upright bracket so I have to grind back some of the welds for clearance.  But otherwise they turned out fine. 

Got the strut adapters welded and mounted and am ready to start fabricating upper Arms.  I mocked up the back half just to see but nothing is welded in yet. 

+1.5 Hr.  +$1.08 for sleeve and bushing materials.

Rear suspension work continues.  The rear tube on the upper A-arms are done(+21"/side, +$4.73).  This meant I could actually articulate the suspension!  And it articulated.  I mean fairly undramatic but it worked.

I also decided on a general location for the shocks.  As much as I want them to run up towards one of the bungs the routing for the Pullrod just won't support getting them there.  So they are going to aim up like this.  Plus the weight will be lower then going up to the bung and the Pullrod is 5" shorter; Delta the weight is more rearward and I have to create a new node above and behind the suspension for the loads.  

In reply to nocones :

That's some awesome progress! Your latest vid was great too. 

In reply to Pete Gossett (Forum Supporter) :

Thanks Pete.  I'm hoping to get the next video up more quickly then the last one which was like 5 weeks later.  I have it already filmed just need to edit and do the intro/outro

Where is the steering link going to fit?

Maybe a dumb question, but why are the bolts green? :)

In reply to bentwrench :

Thre rear toe link is going to attach to the stock steering arm with a bracket that will bring it down to inline with the Lower Ball Joint pivot.  It is just going to be a simple pair of 1/2" heim joints in a turnbuckle arrangement.  Then the link will run to attach along the back tube of the lower A-arm and I will add reinforcement to ensure it is rigid.    Since the Inner ball joints are parallel to the Chassis cenetrline and level, as long as the toe link is parralell and level to the LBJ the toe link can be attached anywhere on the Arm and won't cause any toe changes during suspension travel.

In reply to java230 :

They are Angry Grade 2 hardware.  

They are Grade 5 fine thread and that is the color that Rural King has in their $2.25/lb bulk Grade 5 fasteners.  I fully expect the green to wear off nearly instantly once they are used.  

nocones said:

The above reminds me of this:

In a good way.

Just caught up to this thread. I freaking love it! 

Word of caution about the bed frame angle. I've used some on my travel trailer build and it cracked very quickly in an cast iron kind of way. No elongation before fracture. Don't know what kind of steel it is, but it was no where near as strong as normal mild steel. 

So please be careful with using it on your upright. Maybe do a little test to see if it's actually decent steel before putting yourself in harms way. 

YMMV of course

In reply to fanfoy :

Apreciate the caution.  I am aware of it's dubious sourcing and am likely to re-build it out of 4130 plate before the car sees anykind of High speed track action.  I have plenty of the material left over as well as a short section of some HR of equivalent size so it would be a good Idea to do some basic destructive testing.   Mostly I used it because it was really easy to fabricate this way, and who doesn't like seeing: SCRAP BEDRAIL STEEL on a challenge build sheet

In reply to nocones :

Bit of googling comes up with nothing good to say. I confess to having a stash of the stuff and have made many a bracket with the stuff. The bit about always riveting the stuff was illuminating.

Another theory puts forth that it might have become work hardened over the years.

Again I ask, what kind of E36 M3 is bed frame rails made from. Today a friend who also does machining, called and needed a 11/16" end mill, so I gave him one, it wouldn't cut, being it was a new cheap Chinese cutter, it didn't really shock me. I then lent him some 11/16" annular cutters and the R8 arbor, 3 cutters and one complete hole, so now I'm trying to figure what the hell is going on, he then lets it slip that the pieces are made of bed frame rails. So $90 in cutter down the drain, and his project is still unfinished. He is going to pay to have the cutters resharpened, if possible, and replace them if not. As I'm about to leave I see about 8 drills bits with the points burnt right off. I've read that they are made of mainly crap steel and what ever also happens to be laying around (sort like the recipe for hot dogs). This stuff is junk. It welds like total E36 M3 and stinks when welded, but I finding it hard to believe it that hard to drill. I know it has to do with carbide inclusions, slag inclusions or some other kind of inclusion, but it just junk to work with. Since I've rarely used it for anything, this is a somewhat new experience for me and I hope to never have to use it again.

Best I can remember:
They are formulated to yield maximum rigidity vs thickness and weight so they can be effective weight bearing frames in lightweight assemblies. They're good for little else and should never be used for critical welded assemblies.
They are riveted together for good reasons, never welded because the beads can separate at any moment without warning.
That should be clue enough.
Besides that, they will ruin your drill bits and they can break teeth off your blades. Junk

 

In reply to NOHOME :

Hmm Interesting.  I didn't  have any big issues working with the stuff but I guess I will just move Re-making those brackets up on the list of things to do before the challenge.    Bed Frame, You go into the Fixtureing pile only from now on.  

Thanks for the research and watching my back.  

NOHOME said:

In reply to nocones :

Bit of googling comes up with nothing good to say. I confess to having a stash of the stuff and have made many a bracket with the stuff. The bit about always riveting the stuff was illuminating.

Remember the internet is full of "expert advice"....that is pure BS.  The truth is it's hard to know for sure what you have but you can get a good idea by grinding it.  If its Iron then it 3-4% carbon and will create quite the light show in the sparks and you need to remake those parts. ....but I don't remember the last time I found actual angle iron, I have a way old cart I grabbed from my grandparents that I'm pretty sure is iron, but I don't thing anything made in the last 50 year is anything but HRS.   Grind a piece of low carbon steel, then your frame and compare compare the sparks, its called a spark test,  if they look even similar you are good to go.  If you've not played with this before see what else you have lying around, iron, HSS tool bit, h carbon steel.....the sparks will all look noticeably different, the HSS makes orange sparks that king of curve at the end so its very distinctive, low carbon makes sparks the are  streak the a sparkle as the carbon ignites and blows the molten melt apart, High carbon the same but a lot more sparkles and iron is a sparkle festival because its really high carbon.

her's a video so you get the idea.