Jump to content

X-Frame

Members
  • Content Count

    803
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by X-Frame

  1. Thanks, Roger. Possibly the repair shop used an aftermarket fender or hood and not one from the factory or from an original parts car? Aftermarket panels are notorious for not fitting properly unless there is some alignment issues with the cowl from the accident? I am noticing the rear being up higher than normal... air suspension?
  2. Roger, congratulations. This is one of my favorite year and model as well as color combinations. Low mileage, still have the correct original whitewalls. But you have a sharp eye obviously with your 1/12 scale cars like me having managed auto detailing for major dealerships many years ago. My concern is where I circled on your photo... where the hood meets the door. There is a fit and finish issue and since the paint shade does seem to be off on the fender and hood, possible a fender bender in the past occurred and the new fender is not a good fit (alignment)? There should not be a big g
  3. 1940 Cabriolet Chassis Question... I am new here but have been gathering information for an academic book on the design and development of vehicle chassis for the past 9 years. The '40 Convertible fame has been a puzzle for me and hope historians or those who own them can help solve this one? We know that there was no 1939 Convertible offered in the states but there was one exported to Australia. The frame had a conventional X brace added to it by Holden prior to assembling the kits. The '40 models were also delayed. The chassis design is a one year, one
  4. Want to bring this topic back up and hope new members may have something to contribute. I can add that the new London Taxi TX5 is a unibody car and so, the TX4 was their last to use an X frame configuration. Now, are there "any" cars (or trucks) being made, worldwide, that still uses a cruciform or X braced chassis frame? Thanks!
  5. Bringing this back to the top for the weekenders who may want to add to the discussion... thanks!
  6. There were two more oddities I recall. The 1935 Chevrolet Standard which used a X brace (not the V-K the Master used) and was used on that one model, one year only. The same with the 1940 Chevrolet Cabriolet. It had a massive, overbuilt but under engineered chassis that utilized stacked side rails, heavy cross members, off axis X legs, a large wolfs plate (large square plate covering the area where the axis should be). Chevrolet declared it a disaster and used a more traditional X the following year on the convertibles. I have yet to know why the 1940 design was eve
  7. Sorry, used that in a generic sense. I suspect that the frame looked similar in shape and structure though... any photos or illustrations of the Wagonaire chassis?
  8. Roger, yes... I have been doing this research for at least 6 years concerning various X designs. And yes, have been part of both the 1956-1957 Continental Mk II forums and helped you out with photographs years past. Since I am only one of two people in the entire United States with my name, what would be the odds
  9. Getting back to the original post - any more comments about the transverse mounted X brace design? As time went on, more variables showed up. This include the design used on Chrysler products between 1932-1933 which is called an "X" girder even though it had odd length legs which looks more like a curved beam in the rear section. But goes to show that manufacturers do call odd designs "X" designs.
  10. Your model building is a full time job as is. And besides, if you can use a microwave then you can cook. They have autotune now for singing. And who wants to go 80-mph on two floor planks holding on either a rope behind a speeding boat creating wakes or holding two toothpicks to keep you from becoming tree pâté? I rather have a feeling of being in control (and enclosed) going that fast. Eric
  11. Your English may have limitations but your talents don't!
  12. Yes, cars of today are supposed to be safer due to materials, design, and as you said, scientifically tested crumple zones. And as you have also seen, cars of years past were heavier with thicker gauge steel but that created a problem. They were so stiff (pre 1966 safety standards beginning) that people were injured more by the hard G-force impacts of non giving hard steel body and chassis designs because you were thrown harder upon impact than if the car crumpled and absorbed the impact. I am sure they were probably safer in slow speed crashes or non violent rollovers but more high speed im
  13. Hey Roger... yes, the 1957-1964 Cadillac (and continued to 1970 on the Buick Riviera) was the Tubular Center-X chassis. And true, there is usually a "fish plate" of about 1/4" thick stitch welded to the rails up to the kicks on convertible models. Here is an example looking at one of the X legs with the convertible metal strip reinforcement...
  14. How about the 1931-1933 Auburn X... different?
  15. I had learned not too long ago that the Wagonaires used the Lark Convertible chassis. Just like another oddity was the 1957-1959 Chrysler Imperial 4-door HT used the convertible X frame as well but did not need it. Think there was another oddity as well but can't put my finger on it at the moment.
  16. Maybe Australian imports were using older style frames as opposed as in the states? Just like some Ford models in the 1950s lag a year behind in style in Oz. Here are some of the later year examples from 1946-1948 The disassembled one on its side is from 1947. The gray painted frame from 1946. The one in the grass is 1948.
  17. emjay, the X is still being used today on at least (and may be the last) one production car today. The London Taxi TX4. I also know that the X is used by many custom high performance chassis makers, some reproduction boutique cars, and is in a form on a few NASCAR chassis so its importance and strength are still respected.
  18. Those double pipes are the mufflers with cylinder baffles in them. Being small diameter they used two
  19. Ahhh... but of course Ford did use the X starting in 1933 and on convertible models only from 1949-1964 (Fords - Mercury and Lincoln had different time brackets of use) I put together a visual identification example for them a couple years back for the 1935-1948 models. The 1933-1934 was slightly different than the 1935:
  20. Even here in America... an example of the more traditional X being used in this 1924 Goodyear chassis:
  21. The 1924-1927 Delage GL was an early example of the more traditional X design used on an automobile long before the Cord L-29.
  22. I see you noticed the center section where halves meet kept getting smaller. Most are riveted together and some welded. Of course, this was not consistent and of course there were more traditional equal length legs from a central axis design being used on vehicles at the same time. (see Alvis X chassis used between 1928-1931 attached for inconsistency). Strength also came from the fact that early on, engines were bolted to the frame at four points which kept it from twisting but when rubber mounting was introduced and of course, floating power, the frames became weak and the use
  23. X OR NOT AN X - That is the question! The examples (and there are others) I put together show what is considered a Transverse X brace chassis design. The earliest "automotive" use I have come across thus far is on the 1922 Hotchkiss AM. It, like the others, claim that it is truly an X design. Some people will dispute that even if the manufacturer state it is. Delage, as with authors, have made claim they have been using an X brace for years like shown, starting 1926. Please stake your arguments here, pro or con, and why...and if you know any earlier use... Thanks
  24. If no one has responded this late in the game, I will with a brochure illustration that shows this is part of the exhaust bracket:
  25. Roger, everyone starts somewhere and even though it was an early (first?) attempt with the Avanti chassis, it shows skill even then in forming the frame! It looks right in concept which is more than I can say for some of the diecast model makers who have completely botch the chassis, sometimes getting it completely wrong. We know (with my help) that the 1955 Futura Show Car has a prototype Continental Mk II chassis that was designed for a retractable top version that was never developed but still has the same Y-backbone frame layout as placed in production. There is a version that came out t
×
×
  • Create New...