Originally Posted by 18psi
(Post 492197)
can someone post non-shitty pictures of them installed?
|
Originally Posted by hustler
(Post 493329)
How about I pound your ass instead?
|
Originally Posted by cueball1
(Post 493331)
errected
|
Originally Posted by hustler
(Post 493335)
now its tight.
|
Originally Posted by bbundy
(Post 493307)
In my professional opinion as a chassis structural engineer a flat plate on the bottom of the car will do next to nothing for stiffness. a flat plate to resist parrelelogramming like where one rail shifts forward and the other one shifts back will also do next to nothing in this case as well because I don’t thing that is a weak mode for the chassis to flex in.
Closing the bottom of the transmission tunnel in a structural way such that it makes the trans tunnel behave like a big tube rather than an open channel will do quite a lot. But you still have that torsion bar concept going on like where the material in the middle of a torsion bar adds minimal torsional stiffness. Hollow bar and a solid bar of the same OD have very similar torsional stiffness and yet the hollow one is ¼ the weight. The trans tunnel being in the center of the car isn’t as effective as material further away from the centroid like near the sills. The stiffness that the FM butterfly adds to the chassis is mostly from its effectiveness at closing off the bottom of the trans tunnel making it behave like a tube. The problem I see is it could be designed allot better and be lighter than what it is to do this. It needs to bolt to the car near the edge of the tunnel not out by the frame rails. The later model factory braces are much better at doing this than the FM peace. I saw it as way to much weight for the benefit. Bob I suspect the reason FM did the butterfly brace the way they did is it makes it more of a bolt-in proposition once the frame rails are in. Although, the fab involved in attaching a pre-formed piece to the floor board at the trans tunnel transition would not be much more work than installing the frame rails IMO. If it were not for the transmission being in the way, an easy, mass-efficient way to stiffen this mode would be to cross-brace the rails by tying the front end of the left rail to the rear end of the right rail (and vice versa) using the same simple crushed end tubes like those at the k-member and the diff. There is some risk of column bucking I suppose since they would be in effect simply supported, and have a large length to dia ratio. Hell it could even be braced with pre-tensioned cables for that matter, just like the bracing on a string-truss Newtonian telescope tube. Same situation, just tubular instead of planar. |
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by ZX-Tex
(Post 493346)
If I follow you here, as a chassis engineer/ME albeit for spacecraft, I agree. Put another way, if it were not for the trans tunnel the existing floor board would do a decent job of stiffening the bending mode you describe. Thus, it could be alleviated by closing out the trans tunnel.
I suspect the reason FM did the butterfly brace the way they did is it makes it more of a bolt-in proposition once the frame rails are in. Although, the fab involved in attaching a pre-formed piece to the floor board at the trans tunnel transition would not be much more work than installing the frame rails IMO. If it were not for the transmission being in the way, an easy, mass-efficient way to stiffen this mode would be to cross-brace the rails by tying the front end of the left rail to the rear end of the right rail (and vice versa) using the same simple crushed end tubes like those at the k-member and the diff. There is some risk of column bucking I suppose since they would be in effect simply supported, and have a large length to dia ratio. Hell it could even be braced with pre-tensioned cables for that matter, just like the bracing on a string-truss Newtonian telescope tube. Same situation, just tubular instead of planar. Other than the sills, the trans tunnel, and the wimpy so called frame rails it already is a flat plate trough the center of the car. To make it stiffer it needs added section modulus in the vertical direction to reduce vertical bending and torsion. A flat plate structure on the bottom of the car dosnt give section modulus in the correct direction. Spindly tubes replicating the flat plate is harldy better. Door bars do ad a huge amount of vertical section modulus though not as much as a real roof or a cage would. Also Converting the Trans tunnel from an open hat section to a tubular section also would significantly change the section modulus in both vertical bending and especially torsion. Mazda I think was pretty on track on the Mazdaspeed as seen in the pic but I still think it can be done better. Bob |
That mazdaspeed brace that is right by the cat is freakin heavy just an fyi.
|
Originally Posted by jacob300zx
(Post 493715)
That mazdaspeed brace that is right by the cat is freakin heavy just an fyi.
I think there both too heavy. Door bars are lighter and they do more. Bob |
I love this thread.
I'm convinced I need door bars, and not just due to anectdotal evidence. Bbundy's reasoning makes tons of sense. I still think they'd work even better if they went all the way to the firewall though. |
Originally Posted by gospeed81
(Post 493742)
I love this thread.
I'm convinced I need door bars, and not just due to anectdotal evidence. Bbundy's reasoning makes tons of sense. I still think they'd work even better if they went all the way to the firewall though. |
dammit
+1 for door bars added to the wish list. And I JUST knocked a couple off that list. It's never gonna go down, is it? |
Originally Posted by TrickerZ
(Post 493770)
dammit
+1 for door bars added to the wish list. And I JUST knocked a couple off that list. It's never gonna go down, is it? I've always wanted them...and my 91 chassis is very loose compared to my 93. I've been trying to knock off parts from my list too, it's impossible. |
Originally Posted by TrickerZ
(Post 493770)
dammit
It's never gonna go down, is it? |
Originally Posted by bbundy
(Post 493710)
Go Park your car on some flat ground takes the roof off or put the top down open both doors and look at it from the side.
Other than the sills, the trans tunnel, and the wimpy so called frame rails it already is a flat plate trough the center of the car. To make it stiffer it needs added section modulus in the vertical direction to reduce vertical bending and torsion. A flat plate structure on the bottom of the car dosnt give section modulus in the correct direction. Spindly tubes replicating the flat plate is harldy better. Door bars do ad a huge amount of vertical section modulus though not as much as a real roof or a cage would. Also Converting the Trans tunnel from an open hat section to a tubular section also would significantly change the section modulus in both vertical bending and especially torsion. Mazda I think was pretty on track on the Mazdaspeed as seen in the pic but I still think it can be done better. Bob That underbody has more skid plates then a Jeep Rubicon! :laugh: I'm not sure how tight Miata's normally are, but I get about an inch of flex front to rear when I jack the car up just infront of the back tire or just behind the front tire as a "door bar car". Doing the same on an Fbody produces around 10 inches of flex.... No joke |
My MSM was super stiff.
|
Originally Posted by jacob300zx
(Post 493791)
My MSM was super stiff.
|
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 493771)
I've been trying to knock off parts from my list too, it's impossible.
By the time I transferred over what I hadn't finished and added new stuff it was just as long...a full page. My wife was laughing her ass off at me...but said she'd help me out by getting me a Hello Kitty steering wheel as a stocking stuffer. Car sure will be nice when I'm done though. |
Originally Posted by gospeed81
(Post 493798)
Car sure will be nice when I'm done though.
|
I might sell the one I have but I will always have a miata. Well let me put it this way, I'll always have a cheap sports car...the S2000 is getting cheap. Lets move this discussion to m.net ;)
|
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 493804)
does anyone else feel like they will keep their Miata forever?
I'm actually planning on it. I stock backup parts second only to rharris. I've got 3 workable turbos for my oddball setup, and can almost switch straight back to stock. $150 local jy 1.6Ls keep me happy.
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 493804)
I don't see any automakers building a similar car that would be within my budget.
But we know how these plans tend to change. If it's based on a Subaru boxster motor I can only imagine the aftermarket support would be great. Tokyo 2009: Toyota FT-86 Concept Unveiled - egmCarTech |
Originally Posted by bbundy
(Post 493710)
Go Park your car on some flat ground takes the roof off or put the top down open both doors and look at it from the side.
Other than the sills, the trans tunnel, and the wimpy so called frame rails it already is a flat plate trough the center of the car. To make it stiffer it needs added section modulus in the vertical direction to reduce vertical bending and torsion. A flat plate structure on the bottom of the car dosnt give section modulus in the correct direction. Spindly tubes replicating the flat plate is harldy better. Door bars do ad a huge amount of vertical section modulus though not as much as a real roof or a cage would. Also Converting the Trans tunnel from an open hat section to a tubular section also would significantly change the section modulus in both vertical bending and especially torsion. Mazda I think was pretty on track on the Mazdaspeed as seen in the pic but I still think it can be done better. Bob |
Re: MSM
When I added the butterfly to my 2000, I could swear it ended up stiffer than my friend's MSM. |
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 493804)
I know this is probably short-sight, since one's interests and tastes change over time, but does anyone else feel like they will keep their Miata forever? Mine is rust free with a straight body. Motors and parts are plentiful. I don't see any automakers building a similar car that would be within my budget. Within a few years it'll be virtually worthless, so there wouldn't be much point in selling it.
|
Originally Posted by gospeed81
(Post 493798)
Car sure will be nice when I'm done though.
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 493804)
I know this is probably short-sight, since one's interests and tastes change over time, but does anyone else feel like they will keep their Miata forever? Mine is rust free with a straight body. Motors and parts are plentiful. I don't see any automakers building a similar car that would be within my budget. Within a few years it'll be virtually worthless, so there wouldn't be much point in selling it.
|
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 493804)
I know this is probably short-sight, since one's interests and tastes change over time, but does anyone else feel like they will keep their Miata forever? Mine is rust free with a straight body. Motors and parts are plentiful. I don't see any automakers building a similar car that would be within my budget. Within a few years it'll be virtually worthless, so there wouldn't be much point in selling it.
Bob |
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 493823)
Re: MSM
When I added the butterfly to my 2000, I could swear it ended up stiffer than my friend's MSM. Frame rail reinforcement + soso making a tube out of the transmission tunnel > making a slightly better tube out of the transmission tunnel. I don’t know for sure that is just my best guess. Bob |
Yes, FM's butterfly requires that their frame rails are in place. I installed em all at once.
And yet the door bars made a more dramatic improvement. I suspect though that with the door bars, removing the butterfly/frame rails would be very noticeable. IOW they both help. BTW I posted months ago on m.net that an easy way to measue stiffness would be to look for the dominant resonant frequency in the chassis motion in the left-right direction in an accelerometer mounted on the rollbar. The higher, the stiffer. In my car it was 17 Hz IIRC, with all the bracing in place. I don't have any before/after numbers though. P.S. Here it is http://forum.miata.net/vb/showthread...=accelerometer The 17 Hz resonance is by far the largest resonance in the car, and it is largest in the left/right axis on the rollbar. This agrees with the butt-o-meter in that the chassis shudder feels like the seatback and the steering wheel are vibrating left-right (I'll bet, in opposite directions, due to chassis twist). |
P.P.S. I wish there were a door design wherein when you close it, some kind of strong mechanism latches in and makes the door a load bearing member, to make it part of the structure. Would work great for convertibles.
|
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 493804)
but does anyone else feel like they will keep their Miata forever?
__________________ Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote |
Originally Posted by bbundy
(Post 493710)
Mazda I think was pretty on track on the Mazdaspeed as seen in the pic but I still think it can be done better.
Bob |
If mine doesn't get totaled or something catastrophic doesn't happen to it..im going to keep it as long as I live and I'm going to keep modding it..:D
1990 78k Original Miles, original paint, lots of Original stuff, 2nd owner.. Nomie |
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 493804)
I know this is probably short-sight, since one's interests and tastes change over time, but does anyone else feel like they will keep their Miata forever? Mine is rust free with a straight body. Motors and parts are plentiful. I don't see any automakers building a similar car that would be within my budget. Within a few years it'll be virtually worthless, so there wouldn't be much point in selling it.
There's no substitute for my car...and track rubber is only $600 a pop. |
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 493891)
P.P.S. I wish there were a door design wherein when you close it, some kind of strong mechanism latches in and makes the door a load bearing member, to make it part of the structure. Would work great for convertibles.
I always end up thinking I'd be better off doing everything else first, or just putting in a real cage for the effort. |
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 493891)
P.P.S. I wish there were a door design wherein when you close it, some kind of strong mechanism latches in and makes the door a load bearing member, to make it part of the structure. Would work great for convertibles.
|
If this thread has taught me one thing, it's that I need to sell the Butterfly sitting in my garage and pick up a pair of door bars...
Good stuff. |
Originally Posted by cueball1
(Post 491673)
Hard Dog bolt in bars right?
Great review and good to know it makes a difference. Boss Frog slams them so much I was waffling. Got a set coming for the holidays now. In what way do they slam them? on installation or just function? because they seem to be in the game now: Miata Performance http://www.bossfrog.biz/Miata_Performance/IMAG004.JPG http://www.bossfrog.biz/Miata_Performance/IMAG006.JPG http://www.bossfrog.biz/pdf/BF.DoorB...tions.0912.pdf |
I'm no engineer so I can't comment on their functionality, but aesthetically they look utter garbage.
I had door bars with my old Carbing cage, I miss them, (but not the loss in legroom!) |
What size tubing is that? Looks small. To me, that design looks like it will crumble on side impact.
|
Seems like I recall BF slamming door bars unequivocally...until they introduced their own, then suddenly they were only slamming the other designs. The page explains their use of 1" tubing and sheetmetal instead of larger tubing.
It's ugly, but I could live with ugly if it was a truly superior design. They just lost some credibility with me when they changed their story about door bars (especially when consumer reviews of other doorbars are almost universally positive, even more so than roll bars, frame rails, butterflies, etc). |
Without looking at their page, their design could be stiffer for the same weight or the same weight for the same stiffness. The plates would increase beding stiffness considerably in the plane of the plates (vertically as installed). Also it can be narrower with the smaller diameter tubing.
Nice idea from a purely mechanical standpoint but I do not like the look at all especially with the lettering cutouts. I still prefer the ones I have. OK read the description.. Traditional single-tube door bars with two mounting points do little to stiffen the frame Clearly that is not true. Marketing-speak. |
Originally Posted by ZX-Tex
(Post 514385)
:facepalm: Clearly that is not true. Marketing-speak. They've always contended HD's door bars do nothing. Obvious in this thread it's not true. Sure it bolts in only two places but it triangulates the door and rear bulkhead openings. Now they have theirs and it bolts in four places. It may be better but it sure looks fugly and a whole lot tougher for entry and exit. |
Originally Posted by ZX-Tex
(Post 514385)
Without looking at their page, their design could be stiffer for the same weight or the same weight for the same stiffness. The plates would increase beding stiffness considerably in the plane of the plates (vertically as installed). Also it can be narrower with the smaller diameter tubing.
Nice idea from a purely mechanical standpoint but I do not like the look at all especially with the lettering cutouts. I still prefer the ones I have. OK read the description.. :facepalm: Clearly that is not true. Marketing-speak. |
I Recall reading that boss frog was against the idea of door bars. I guess not anymore.... They call them frog ribs :giggle:
Frog Ribs (Door Bars) - MX-5 Miata Forum |
I realize this thread is older then dirt, but I've got questions.
Has anyone tried bossfrogs door bars, are they better then the hard dog door bars? Would they even fit since I've already got a HD rollbar? How do door bars effect handling? Do they promote/diminish oversteer or understeer? |
The mounting point on the BF door bar does not match the HD rollbar and vice versa. BF has two bolts and HD has three.
|
Thanks.
|
Any comparison of the HD Doorbars vs the DIY Roadster Bars?
I read over at m.net, the roadster bars are easier to get in and out of. However, it has a larger outside diameter. Any interference with driver seating position? Does the DIY Roadster bars bolt directly to hard dog roll bar mounting plates? |
Originally Posted by Ninjaneer
(Post 854398)
Does the DIY Roadster bars bolt directly to hard dog roll bar mounting plates? |
Originally Posted by newold_m
(Post 854446)
Yes, they do. I found them pretty easy to get in/out with stock seats. You slider over them and seat bottom is almost level. Because they angle out, I'd think there is more space with the DIY ones, but have not seen a HD bar in person. Also keep in mind the DIY ones will interfere with NB door pockets, again due to the bend. You can notch the plastic.
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:30 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands