1957 Cadillac Chassis Design

[X-Frame]

I wanted to start a new thread about the design history of Cadillac's 1957 style X frame as mentioned in another thread. This would be the tubular X without side rails initially used on the 1957 Cadillac only.

I am trying to first establish background about styling. I understand a retrofitted 1954 (or so) Caddy was fitted with a prototype X but when the 1955 Brougham showcar came out, it used a standard Cadillac chassis?

The Cadillac book I have stated that the design was reminiscent to the Mercedes 300 series frame of the 1950s but comparing it with a 1935 style Fiat 1500, there is no comparison. The Fiat is much more like, if almost identical, to the Cadillac frame. See below.. the blue one is the Cadillac.

Any pictures of the developmental chassis or early pictures you would like to share for my book research? These below just don't quite fit the bill as far as quality.

Thanks!

[X-Frame]

Also for those who may be curious about the Russians "borrowing" designs, here is a 1983 GAZ-14 chassis which was also under the GAZ-13 dating back to 1959.

[Rusty_OToole]

I believe Hans Ledwinka designed a similar frame in the twenties for the Czech Tatra car.

[X-Frame]

I believe Hans Ledwinka designed a similar frame in the twenties for the Czech Tatra car.

Not exactly. The Tatra falls into a different catagory called backbone chassis. The Tatra frame is a tube connected to the differential.

[HotRodTom]

Not much to say beyond.. It was a bad idea.

The torsional rigidity is almost nil, so your body and body mounts have to mange all the flex of the frame. Which is never a good idea.

Chassis/body rigidity are HUGE players in overall ride and handling as well as ride comfort, my day job has taught me that.

I plan on adding some structure to my '57 to improve it.

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

Not much to say beyond.. It was a bad idea.

The torsional rigidity is almost nil, so your body and body mounts have to mange all the flex of the frame. Which is never a good idea.

Chassis/body rigidity are HUGE players in overall ride and handling as well as ride comfort, my day job has taught me that.

I plan on adding some structure to my '57 to improve it.

If you figure out a way without creating an exhaust system routing nightmare let me know. Just be glad you have a coupe and not a convertible. I wouldn't even want to think about the flex that goes on with a convertible.

[X-Frame]

And the rigidity issues you mention seem to be opposite from what I have read. It was said these frames were too rigid and so were noisy (road noise) going through them. And GM advertised them to be more rigid than their previous frames.

But I do have a question since you brought up convertibles. How did the 1957 design frame differ between closed body and convertibles? Traditionally the X was thicker than the side rail steel in the older style frames or there was added plating to the top of rails. How did the tube X handle this?

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

And the rigidity issues you mention seem to be opposite from what I have read. It was said these frames were too rigid and so were noisy (road noise) going through them. And GM advertised them to be more rigid than their previous frames.

But I do have a question since you brought up convertibles. How did the 1957 design frame differ between closed body and convertibles? Traditionally the X was thicker than the side rail steel in the older style frames or there was added plating to the top of rails. How did the tube X handle this?

It wasn't the frame that was different it is the basic fact that having a roof turret strengthens the entire body including its weakest point which would be at the "B" pillar or roughly directly perpendicular to the weakest point of the frame.... the darn center of the "X."

When and if you ever own one of GM's true "X" frame monstrosities you will understand the issues regardless of what you may have read. The "X" frame was and is a piece of crap. First clue GM gave up on it and no other U.S. car manufacturer chose to even think about it to my knowledge.

[NTX5467]

I'd be willing to bet (a REAL, NOS Dublin Dr. Pepper) that road noise complaints were not the real reason the GM X-frame was discontinued . . . but production costs compared to the ladder or perimeter frames Ford used. NOT just material costs, but labor costs.

I remember an avid '58 Buick person talking about how stiff the X-frame was. Something about if you jacked up one side of the car, the other side would raise up with it, rather than lean and flex?

And, of course, the X-frame provided a place for the carrier bearing for the GM 2-piece drive shaft to be located, rather than having an inexpensive crossmember to locate it to. Couldn't bolt it to the underbody due to noise transfer issues!

Regards,

NTX5467

[TG57Roadmaster]

Here's the '50's M-B 300 chassis used on sedans, coupes, cabrios and cabrio sedans.

Larger

I've not heard any current owners complain about the massive frame's flex or lack of rigidity,

nor have I read about past issues in contemporary sources.

TG

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

Here's the '50's M-B 300 chassis used on sedans, coupes, cabrios and cabrio sedans.

Larger

I've not heard any current owners complain about the massive frame's flex or lack of rigidity,

nor have I read about past issues in contemporary sources.

TG

Probably because that frame is little like the GM "X" frame of 1957-1958.

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

Not much to say beyond.. It was a bad idea.

The torsional rigidity is almost nil, so your body and body mounts have to mange all the flex of the frame. Which is never a good idea.

Chassis/body rigidity are HUGE players in overall ride and handling as well as ride comfort, my day job has taught me that.

I plan on adding some structure to my '57 to improve it.

I suppose we could both go find a '59 Olds frame and move the bodies to it. Olds was the only GM division to not fall into the "X" frame trap by adding substantial side rails to it.

Possibly the best article and analysis of the GM "X" frames can be found at:

Automotive History: An X-Ray Look At GM’s X Frame (1957 – 1970) | Curbside Classic

Time to move on!

[NTX5467]

A GREAT article!! Thanks for the link to it!! Even more interesting comments in the "Comments" section for that article. Great pictures, too!

Enjoy!

NTX5467

[28 Chrysler]

Here is a scan from my 1958 Motor' crash book.

[X-Frame]

I suppose we could both go find a '59 Olds frame and move the bodies to it. Olds was the only GM division to not fall into the "X" frame trap by adding substantial side rails to it.

Possibly the best article and analysis of the GM "X" frames can be found at:

Automotive History: An X-Ray Look At GM’s X Frame (1957 – 1970) | Curbside Classic

Time to move on!

Not time to move on until all questions are answered

Not only did Oldsmobile diverted but Buick did too and only used this X design for 1961-1964 (other than Riviera that continued through 1970).

No one has approached as to why Riviera continued for 6 more years with what is considered a "faulty" design?

[X-Frame]

Probably because that frame is little like the GM "X" frame of 1957-1958.

Same principal though - an X without side rails. But this isn't entirely true since the body had heavy boxed side rails that sat below the floor pan and attached to those long outriggers.

BUT... again, this design is not new and Fiat used it for quite a few years and so did Mercedes without complaint.

[NTX5467]

Considering the lower sales volume of the Riviera, there probably was no money for a new "unique" frame JUST for that one car in the original budget "play book" of what was to happen when during the production life of that particular vehicle. Pure economics, I suspect.

Remember, too, there were no federal side impact standards to meet back then, much less frontal or rearward impact standards. Just "seat belts" and padded instrument panels. I believe that traffic collision stats might reveal that a full-sideward collision usually was closer to the front or rear sections of the car, not specifically "dead-on" in the center. Plus, regardless of how strong the frame might have been, or the rocker panels in an X-frame vehicle, were, bumper height was usually about at the driver's hip joint, so all of that strength below that point might make the structure nicer and torsionally stiffer, but NO help in side impact collisions . . . which is why we got "side impact door beams" in 1970s era cars.

IF you want to dig into the S.A.E. Transactions I mentioned previously, you'll also find one paper on door latches of cars of about the middle 1960s. The various designs were mentioned, PLUS the frequency of them NOT staying latched in the event of an accident . . . which, without the occupant(s) wearing seat belts, would mean the jetisoned occupants would become exposed to even MORE perils!

And then there's the one which NASA did on vehicle hydroplaning on wet pavement. LOTS of interesting data with respect to tread depth and design (in a time when "rib" treads were very common).

Regards,

NTX5467

Edited March 6, 2012 by NTX5467 (see edit history)

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

Same principal though - an X without side rails. But this isn't entirely true since the body had heavy boxed side rails that sat below the floor pan and attached to those long outriggers.

BUT... again, this design is not new and Fiat used it for quite a few years and so did Mercedes without complaint.

Perhaps, but then for the most part Fiats and Mercedes automobiles using some form of an "X" frame were of much shorter wheelbase than U.S. cars produced with some variety of an "X" frame. To get an accurate fix on the complaint issue one would have to be able to read Italian and German to get any sort of accurate fix on the volume of complaints and/or deaths caused by either company using the "X" frame. Unfortunately those who died in one of those piles of junk are unable to complain.

[TG57Roadmaster]

This pile of junk used the X-frame I posted above on a 120" chassis, and was the choice of royalty,

captains of industry, heads of state and movie stars, i.e, the very rich...

Larger a 1953 M-B 300S Roadster at the 2009 Meadow Brook.

By 1956 after they began being imported officially, the price of the 3-model 300S lineup was

$12,898 (Coupe, Cabrio, Rdstr.), POE New York. A '56 Eldorado Biarritz cost $6,501 FOB, a Lincoln

Premiere convertible would set you back $4,747 (prices from the Oct. 1, 1960 Red Book).

Larger

The roadster's fitted luggage didn't save many lives (unless perhaps

if they were stuffed with empty hot water bottles), but what a way to

go if your time's up. They're still favored by the fair-to-middlin' wealthy,

selling in the lower six-figures, comparable to their American contemporaries.

TG

[X-Frame]

Considering the lower sales volume of the Riviera, there probably was no money for a new "unique" frame JUST for that one car in the original budget "play book" of what was to happen when during the production life of that particular vehicle. Pure economics, I suspect.

Remember, too, there were no federal side impact standards to meet back then, much less frontal or rearward impact standards. Just "seat belts" and padded instrument panels. I believe that traffic collision stats might reveal that a full-sideward collision usually was closer to the front or rear sections of the car, not specifically "dead-on" in the center. Plus, regardless of how strong the frame might have been, or the rocker panels in an X-frame vehicle, were, bumper height was usually about at the driver's hip joint, so all of that strength below that point might make the structure nicer and torsionally stiffer, but NO help in side impact collisions . . . which is why we got "side impact door beams" in 1970s era cars.

IF you want to dig into the S.A.E. Transactions I mentioned previously, you'll also find one paper on door latches of cars of about the middle 1960s. The various designs were mentioned, PLUS the frequency of them NOT staying latched in the event of an accident . . . which, without the occupant(s) wearing seat belts, would mean the jetisoned occupants would become exposed to even MORE perils!

And then there's the one which NASA did on vehicle hydroplaning on wet pavement. LOTS of interesting data with respect to tread depth and design (in a time when "rib" treads were very common).

Regards,

NTX5467

Nice theories.

Where is that post you mentioned the SAE Transactions and where to view them?

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

By 1956 after they began being imported officially, the price of the 3-model 300S lineup was

$12,898 (Coupe, Cabrio, Rdstr.), POE New York. A '56 Eldorado Biarritz cost $6,501 FOB, a Lincoln Premiere convertible would set you back $4,747 (prices from the Oct. 1, 1960 Red Book).

Yup, the U.S. Pricing of the Mercedes was indeed more than double that of a Caddy or a Lincoln. Reason......the import duty was virtually equal to the price in Europe in U.S. dollars. Paying import duties equal to their European price didn't make them any better of an automobile. I always figured that anyone who voluntarily elected to buy something with taxes equal to the value might not be exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Of course there were those smart enough to go to Europe, buy one and drive it around sufficiently for it to be considered a personal use vehicle which avoided the import duty when shipped to this country.

[Guest INTMD8]

Interesting reading. I had the same concerns about my 57 Brougham frame and after much thought decided to have a new one built for it. (downside being the frame passes through the rear passenger footwell).

Before and after-

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

How do you plan to deal with the passenger foot well issue? Inquiring minds want to know.

[X-Frame]

Now why would someone want to even destroy the integrity of accuracy on a rare 1957 Brougham by making such drastic changes? Won't win any points at a show with that. It is like altering an original Tiffany Stain Glass lamp or redesigning a Frank Lloyd Wright house. I figure due to value these are not daily drivers so why go through the alterations?

[Guest INTMD8]

How do you plan to deal with the passenger foot well issue? Inquiring minds want to know.

Just channeled the floor over the frame. There is room for feet on either side and should still be comfortable.

[Guest INTMD8]

Now why would someone want to even destroy the integrity of accuracy on a rare 1957 Brougham by making such drastic changes? Won't win any points at a show with that. It is like altering an original Tiffany Stain Glass lamp or redesigning a Frank Lloyd Wright house. I figure due to value these are not daily drivers so why go through the alterations?

I've always loved the Brougham design but don't really have interest in driving the car in it's original mechanical form.

With modernized driveline/chassis/brakes it will give me both the looks and performance I'm after.

Points at a show are the least of my concerns, but I do understand your reaction.

[NTX5467]

Looks like a pretty substantial frame. Who built it? Just curious. I've seen several new (seemingly) frame manufacturers with ads in "Street Rodder" magazine over the past few years. "Re-framing" is seeming to become much more common for many vehicles.

Hopefully, with all due respect, I hope it'll still have a Caddy motor under the hood? Even if it's a NorthStar rather than the earlier V-8. I'm not in love with the modern AirRide suspension setup, but that's just me . . . but such a system can be reasonably (key word) period-correct for the vehicle.

One of our Buick Club members took a '49 Roadmaster Riviera and put it on a '79 Cadillac Fleetwood frame many years ago. Same wheelbase, as it turns out. He claimed he had little trouble getting the body mounts to line up. Other than the Cadillac factory Boranni wire wheels, rear disc brakes, and the rear sway bar hanging from the rear suspension, the car looked stock . . . until you saw it drive off and turn the first corner. That was about '87 that he did that. Another member wanted to strangle him for "desecrating" a very low production Buick. But, as he mentioned, it wasn't rusting away in the field he found it in. Several ways to look at these things.

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

[X-Frame]

Yup, the U.S. Pricing of the Mercedes was indeed more than double that of a Caddy or a Lincoln. Reason......the import duty was virtually equal to the price in Europe in U.S. dollars. Paying import duties equal to their European price didn't make them any better of an automobile. I always figured that anyone who voluntarily elected to buy something with taxes equal to the value might not be exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Of course there were those smart enough to go to Europe, buy one and drive it around sufficiently for it to be considered a personal use vehicle which avoided the import duty when shipped to this country.

Jim... then you are saying that the 1956 Mercedes example is not a real price - that half of it is import duty?

Then how do you explain the 1956 Triumph TR3 that cost $2,599 or a 1956 Nash Metropolitan (built in England by Austin) that cost $1,527. Would that mean that the Metropolitan actually only cost $764 US dollars in England?

[X-Frame]

Looks like a pretty substantial frame. Who built it? Just curious. I've seen several new (seemingly) frame manufacturers with ads in "Street Rodder" magazine over the past few years. "Re-framing" is seeming to become much more common for many vehicles.

Hopefully, with all due respect, I hope it'll still have a Caddy motor under the hood? Even if it's a NorthStar rather than the earlier V-8. I'm not in love with the modern AirRide suspension setup, but that's just me . . . but such a system can be reasonably (key word) period-correct for the vehicle.

One of our Buick Club members took a '49 Roadmaster Riviera and put it on a '79 Cadillac Fleetwood frame many years ago. Same wheelbase, as it turns out. He claimed he had little trouble getting the body mounts to line up. Other than the Cadillac factory Boranni wire wheels, rear disc brakes, and the rear sway bar hanging from the rear suspension, the car looked stock . . . until you saw it drive off and turn the first corner. That was about '87 that he did that. Another member wanted to strangle him for "desecrating" a very low production Buick. But, as he mentioned, it wasn't rusting away in the field he found it in. Several ways to look at these things.

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

I get what you are saying but when it comes to low number cars, it is a shame to do alterations that are irreversible. Do you store all of the stock parts including frame for the next person who wants to revert it back for possible show for points state? Get what I mean?

And don't get me wrong. I enjoy looking at the old hot rods and such but they were usually done with common cars produced by the millions so no shortage of donor cars or parts.

Edited March 7, 2012 by X-Frame (see edit history)

[Guest INTMD8]

The Roadster Shop in Mundelien Il. built the chassis.

Speed Inc '57 Cadillac | Custom Chassis | Gallery | Roadster Shop | Performance Hot Rods & Muscle Cars | Roadster Shop

It's getting an engine/trans from an Escalade (and twin turbos).

It had air ride stock so I stayed with it. New setup will be electronically controlled and auto-leveling.

Evod is building replica Brougham wheels in a larger diameter to clear the brakes.

It will retain most of it's stock appearance and be very quiet but also have great acceleration and handling characteristics.

It will never go back to stock but it's engine and trans are allowing another Brougham to go back to original spec (that was missing it's original engine for decades).

Sorry to take this thread off course, my first post here was just to reinforce some of the thoughts mentioned about the x-frame.

[Guest South_paw]

It's getting an engine/trans from an Escalade (and twin turbos).

Looking at this picture of your chassis, it looks like you are fixin to run the exhaust under the X member of the chassis? With twin turbos, 1 3/4 exhuast aint gonna cut it. I'm guessing 3" exhaust but what about ground clearance? Wont it be too low?

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

Jim... then you are saying that the 1956 Mercedes example is not a real price - that half of it is import duty?

Then how do you explain the 1956 Triumph TR3 that cost $2,599 or a 1956 Nash Metropolitan (built in England by Austin) that cost $1,527. Would that mean that the Metropolitan actually only cost $764 US dollars in England?

At the time a given vehicle was imported to this country duties, other applicable taxes, and fees affected the retail value of record in this country. Applicable duties, etc., vary with a given treaty with a given country. I have no idea what tariffs applied in the 1950s to British, Italian, French, built automobiles or even whether some of them may have come into this country as "unfinished goods" which would change the entire game. The Metropolitan could have easily been considered unfinished if any part of it was completed in this country.

Some offshore manufacturers chose to build assembly plants in countries having a favored nation status which enjoyed being able to import into this country with a much smaller tariff exposure or none at all. A good example of this would have been VW in the 1960's and 1970s which produced the Beetle in Mexico for shipment to the U.S. market. That all changed when the Beetle could not be re-engineered to meet EPA standards. They kept making them and selling them in Mexico for many years after importation into this country ceased.

Tariffs and other expenses in importing cars into this country are one of the reasons foreign manufacturers have elected to build assembly plants in this country. The Mercedes automobiles built in this country are far less expensive to U.S. consumers as opposed to importing their German built counterpart for example. In addition, few cars produced offshore today will meet many of the EPA requirements we place on automobiles and most not built specifically for this market will fail to meet DOT requirements for lights and/or other safety devices and would require extensive modifications before being sold.

[Guest INTMD8]

Looking at this picture of your chassis, it looks like you are fixin to run the exhaust under the X member of the chassis? With twin turbos, 1 3/4 exhuast aint gonna cut it. I'm guessing 3" exhaust but what about ground clearance? Wont it be too low?

Routing will be above the trans crossmember, then through the tunnel between the plates that say "RS" on them, from there, through the round reliefs in the crossmember just ahead of the axle.

There is room for dual 3in but it will be dual 3 stepped down to dual 2.5 as I want to keep it quiet (and that exhaust diameter has been fine for us at the 1000rwhp level). This car will likely not see any higher than 750.

[NTX5467]

Thanks for the information. I suspect the old frame will find a home under a Cadillac with a rust-compromised frame?

Enjoy!

NTX5467

[Guest Young80]

Here's the '50's M-B 300 chassis used on sedans, coupes, cabrios and cabrio sedans.

Larger

I've not heard any current owners complain about the massive frame's flex or lack of rigidity,

nor have I read about past issues in contemporary sources.

TG

This drawing looks great! I love the design of old-school cars, especially Cadillac. This topic immediately goes to my bookmarks:)

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:TargetScreenSize>800x600</o:TargetScreenSize> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings> </xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>RU</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true" DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="267"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" Name="Normal (Web)"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Обычная таблица"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";} </style> <![endif]--> Photo editor

[Rusty_OToole]

I have always thought of the X frame car as a type of unibody with subframe design. Many cars have used unit construction plus a sub frame for isolation of noise and vibration.

In other words the frame was never supposed to be the strength. The strength was in the body which supported the frame more than the frame supported the body.

It is true that the X frame GM cars were weak. Watch this comparison test of 1958 GM, Ford and Chrysler cars.

Buick Lincoln and Cadillac suffer suspension failure and the Cadillac flexes so much the doors and trunk fly open. The Chrysler products soar serenely over the bumps.

I put this down more to inadequate strength of the body than the frame. The frame was only there to isolate the running gear from the body.

[X-Frame]

I think that the issue is that the X is too rigid which makes it more impact unfriendly as G-forces travel throughout the car more.

Has anyone looked at the other crash test involving a 1962 and 2002 Cadillac in a 50-mph head-on collision?

Also, I like the way Rusty_OToole describes the design theory. In fact, I was told by Fred Cowin who worked on the 1957 style X-Frame design that Fisher Body wasn't ready to add the extra strength components needed to work with the new frame so yes, there is a lot of fault with the body design rather than just the frame.

Eric

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

I have always thought of the X frame car as a type of unibody with subframe design. Many cars have used unit construction plus a sub frame for isolation of noise and vibration.

In other words the frame was never supposed to be the strength. The strength was in the body which supported the frame more than the frame supported the body.

It is true that the X frame GM cars were weak. Watch this comparison test of 1958 GM, Ford and Chrysler cars.

Buick Lincoln and Cadillac suffer suspension failure and the Cadillac flexes so much the doors and trunk fly open. The Chrysler products soar serenely over the bumps.

I put this down more to inadequate strength of the body than the frame. The frame was only there to isolate the running gear from the body.

The underlying problem with all the GM cars and the Lincoln as well as Mercury lied more in the suspension system than anything. I know for a fact having owned a '58 Lincoln, owning a '58 Mercury both had severe problems with spring strength and shock absorbers being far to soft. It was a time in which "softness of ride" was considered a good marketing tool. Early '58 Lincolns and Mercurys had spring replacements because the springs were too soft and quickly settled or sagged. Mercury rear leaf springs were widened by half an inch for the '59 model year as well.

Now to the GM cars. They were equally under sprung and shocks were way to soft as was well illustrated with the rear suspension failure in the Oldsmobile. Then we come to Cadillac. It should seem rather obvious that the weak suspension provided for the perfect storm for its pure "X" frame which obviously suffered from a lot of rotational torque or the door(s) and trunk lid would not have opened.

The Chrysler torsion bar suspension was obviously far superior to any of the other cars on the given test course.

[Rusty_OToole]

What is interesting is the torsion bar Chryslers had a soft ride without mushy springs and handled the corners to boot.

I put this down to the progressive nature of torsion bar springing. The first inch or 2 of travel was soft but the springing stiffened the farther you pushed it.

Other makers later learned to get the same effect with coil springs. But Chrysler had the advantage for quite a few years.

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

What is interesting is the torsion bar Chryslers had a soft ride without mushy springs and handled the corners to boot.

I put this down to the progressive nature of torsion bar springing. The first inch or 2 of travel was soft but the springing stiffened the farther you pushed it.

Other makers later learned to get the same effect with coil springs. But Chrysler had the advantage for quite a few years.

Exactly! Some manufacturer's even opted to combine a form of the torsion bar suspension with conventional coil springs. A good example of this can be found with the '72-'79 Lincoln Mark series which has torsion bars that appear to exist to control rotational torsion. May have also been a characteristic of the '68-'71 Marks, I've just never gotten underneath one to check it out.