Footspace

[Mr.Fixit]

Not appreciably. But I wouldn't want to start modifying a Kirkham anyway, as much of it's market value is derived for it's 100% originality.

[B. SMITH]

LOTS OF GOOD INFO, AS USUAL.

THANKS, B. SMITH

[RonKahn]

Sorry to reopen this thread, but I am in the middle of building a CR1, and the food space is horrible. I have already reworked the clutch and brake pedals to be much better, but still no room to the left or right. So, in the process to cut the right frame member of the driver under the tunnel and move it 2" closer to my SBF and T5, plenty of room for that. Then will rework the glass to gice much more leg and foot room on the right side. Will also move over the fuel pedal but wont do that till the pervious is all done and the interior is done. Then I will know exactly where i want the fuel pedal.

As for the room on the left side of the clutch, I read that some of you have altered the left fram member after the cowl support by angling it some and then "rebox" the glass wall to be closer to the inside of the body. I might then be able to have a dead pedal next to the clutch. That would be nice. I see maybe 3 3/4 of extra room, but someone stated over 6" of room gained? I dont have that much room on the left side from the box to the inside of the body to gain that much. Like I said, I can easily get 3 3/4", which would be enough for me.

Last question, is dropping the foot box. I already dropped the seat pans about 3" because i am tall from my waist to my head, so I was looking out the upper portion of the windshield until I lowered the pans. I dont like the "angled" fiberglass seat pan in front of the seat, and plan to just make that pan flat all the way across from front to back and side to side. My question is did any of you also lower the foot pan, not the seat pan, LOWER that than the frame member? I assume the pipes would hide it so not worried about it.

Thoughts?

[RonKahn]

I think that with me lowering the seat pan, moving the pedals to better fit, moving the frame and tunnel on the right of the driver over at least 2" (the glass even more), opening up the left side of the clutch about 3 1/2", and then lowing the foot pan/well to be straight across instead of being at an angle, would be the most I can do to be more comfortable in this chassis. I guess lowing the foot pan even below the frame would help?

[sunman]

The steel fabrication shop in Milwaukee that made the Excalibur mandrel bent frame rails is still in business. It would be worth the time to see if you could get some.

Bob said “I threw the cut up Classic Roadsters frame aside, redesigned it with one piece main rails and rear outriggers then changed the doors.”

I ordered the big block package it has about 12” width toeroom both sides.
I’ve seen carpet template photos here with a wider drivers side so I believe small block CR frames exist and all Excalibur were big block.

[MaSnaka]

The idea of riding below the frame rails would make me nervous. I would hesitate going below that plane. My .02

John

[RonKahn]

If I can see from this picture, someone removed the fiberglass floor on the driver's foot well, and added a steel plate that is at the bottom of the frame. Not too much different than what I did for the seat pan. That might give me some more, albeit not much, room for the feet. At the very least I want it level and not with that angled down approach it currently has. It is uncomfortable to rest the feet upwards if I want to.


[/url]

[sunman]

That’s Don Scott’s and from reading posts maybe he made all the CRIIs that way.
Not for sure what he did.
My 1993 frame has 11 1/2” footwell inside dimension at front on both sides.
Royal has great photos of a modified frame in his thread “Emerson Mods to a CRII frame”. 10-23-2021.