Ffr Opinions?

[grumpy]

Break out the WILD TURKEY,
I'm still trying to get over the chassis sagging over time, HMMMM.
grumpy

[TomH]

A point missing in the "frame rigidity" discussion is the negative effect of frame flexure on steering and braking precision while managing bumps in the road and >400bhp. Today's frames achieve rigidity via structure and materials science versus the '60's strategy of "mo mass mo betta"

With a CAE toolkit (Incl. FEA) a small firm like FFR can easily design and test at a rate better than 100X what was possible in the '60's. When you consider that today's efforts reverse engineered the old frames as their point of departure; there can be little doubt that the "is it live or is it Memorex" question favors the copy over the original.

[decooney]

Originally posted by thardin


I just ordered an FFR kit the other day. When I am done, I will have exactly the car I want and have the pride associated with building it from the ground up.

thardin,
If you can have "exactly the car" you want, it seems you are off to a great start. Hats off to you for building what you want vs. worrying about what other people say is right, wrong, or better. Have Fun!

[Ant]

Interesting reading the posts, I have a 4X3 ladder frame platform chassis with diagonal bracing etc, very similar to an ERA design to look at I guess, my fibreglass body is one piece, what I am proposing is to carbon fibre over the outside of the transmission tunnel, connect it with tubing from both firewalls and tube down to front and rear suspension,

This will make part of the body as a stressed member, I dont know whether thats a good idea or not? Some people say build a backbone to strengthen a ladder frame but keep the body separate?

I am sure some of these enhanced chassis are much better than an original, and that probably wouldn't be hard to do, but I feel the cars should keep the original door openings and cockpit look, much like an ERA, after all they are a sixties car, that we all are mad about.