First look at JBL 4.6/BB touring car chassis - Page 2

Richard Hudgins · #21 (**permalink**) 03-03-2006, 03:12 PM

Sergio,

It appears that JBL will be at the show.

I am not sure what we are bringing yet, but probably a finished 4.6, a couple of comp chassis cars and hopefully a comp roller with the new rear suspension.

Ant · #22 (**permalink**) 03-04-2006, 12:34 AM

Hey Richard,

Congratulations, you are definitely in the category of a can do person!

It had to happen in my opinion with the JBL, (a wider engine that is) as your car is a high tech unit as far as handling and build, some say a Cobra hotrod. The modular engine does solve the California problems, and I guess is as light or lighter than my all alloy 351 engine, and possibly more reliable and dare I say it Economical. I wonder about the chassis stiffness, as your chassis appears to be much the same front scuttle to rear of car, apart from going back to front double A arms, and less stressed skin in the front framework, as you say its designed to be less stiff more of a sportsman chassis.

John M,
Hang in there buddy and keep all your hard work for a while, see what you have done with your Boss JBL modifications to Richards thinking, but the modular will have to get some firepower before it keeps up with your little monster!

jmarsey · #23 (**permalink**) 03-04-2006, 01:09 PM

Hey Ant,

I was just joking man! Don't worry. I have no desire to sell my project. Frankly, I don’t think Richard would sell me another chassis. Besides, I am not done making changes and torturing him with the one I have.

I am anxious to hear more about this new chassis design and hope to check it out at Knott's.

John

GMS · #24 (**permalink**) 03-06-2006, 05:16 PM

John M, thought I best register here at Club Cobra so I can also answer questions about the new chassis and modular engine installation. I have some photos with the body on, so you can see the fit. plenty of room for maintenance or removal. Photos are in member gallery.

Larry

Ant · #25 (**permalink**) 03-06-2006, 05:47 PM

Larry welcome to the forum!

With that big hunk of motor fitted in there, this opens up the options similar as JM has done by fitting Nascar style Yates headed SBF engines to these cars, and an old FE engine purist could be satisfied as well.

GMS · #26 (**permalink**) 03-06-2006, 06:05 PM

Thanks Ant, as a newbie I'm sure to make some mistakes. Ask for everyones patience in advance. Most definitely an FE engine, 385 series or even a 302-351. The main purpose of this project was to build a roadster that would hopefully pass smog with dual exhuast and cats. Also a less expensive road version of the JBL Series I competition car. If a person wants a small block version then we just close up the footbox area. Nothing changes except maybe some spring rates. A very versatile chassis, with good handling characteristics because of the wider track and longer wheelbase.

Larry

jmarsey · #27 (**permalink**) 03-06-2006, 06:23 PM

Hey Larry,

Looking at this chassis now I can see all the differences. I can see why Richard calls it a cruiser. It is very different from what I have but makes total sense as a street car. I still think you could stress the motor somehow and pick up more rigidity in the front end but that's probably not an issue here. The front half of this car is like a street rod. I love it. Look at those lower frame rails!! One question: Will you use any type of anti-roll on this car?

Hey Ant,

It would not make sense to put a motor like mine or yours in this setup as it would defeat the purpose. This is a road car the chassis design is based on different principals than the race chassis. Get in and drive to the grocery store (you know, just like yours

) or drive cross country. Great concept for JBL.

Talk soon, John

David Biele · #28 (**permalink**) 03-06-2006, 06:28 PM

Hello Larry,
Your statement

I have some photos with the body on, so you can see the fit. plenty of room for maintenance or removal.

Plenty of room might be a slight exaggeration

David

GMS · #29 (**permalink**) 03-06-2006, 06:40 PM

David, photos don't do it justice. The only tight area is where the valve covers meet the footbox. The headers are one piece 1 7/8" and can be taken on and off in a matter of minutes. Starter no problem, seriously for the size of the engine we do have alot room!

John, yes anti-roll bars

Richard Hudgins · #30 (**permalink**) 03-06-2006, 06:58 PM

John,

The chassis will use a front bar. Maybe a rear.

But I wish to test the car with just springs and dampers before I put any bars on. (This is the normal process.)

It will handle OK. I think in the .8>.9 G range. With a just bit of understeer.

But you caught the idea for this chassis. It is a cruiser.

Perfect for those who like to take drives out in the country, to the store, or for a cruise down Rodeo drive in a CA smog legal roadster.

But, If you wish/need to go fast, you will need the Comp Chassis.

David,

I think Larry is pulling your leg. Must be a relative sort of thing.

Plenty of room indeed!

Ant · #31 (**permalink**) 03-07-2006, 03:29 AM

John,

I get the picture, I have a distorted view of my car being sort of a road car with my choice of engine. I just tell my wife its a dual purpose car, but the road/race percentage is small.

Richard,

Your chassis will still be very good compared to most Cobra manufacturers, and out handle most of them I am sure! I must try and find out if anyone in the UK has torsional figures on my chassis!

vector1 · #32 (**permalink**) 03-22-2006, 10:51 AM

i think this setup would be better served with a ls6/ls7. lighter weight, simple, easy to work on, more power, good aftermarket support.

jmarsey · #33 (**permalink**) 03-22-2006, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vector1

i think this setup would be better served with a ls6/ls7. lighter weight, simple, easy to work on, more power, good aftermarket support.

V,

Clearly, what you are suggesting would be way too easy and we all know.....that's no fun.

Richard Hudgins · #34 (**permalink**) 03-22-2006, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vector1

i think this setup would be better served with a ls6/ls7. lighter weight, simple, easy to work on, more power, good aftermarket support.

V1,

I am sure that a LS6/LS7 will fit if the 4.6 Ford fits.

It is the biggest lump I have ever dealt with.

GMS · #35 (**permalink**) 04-05-2006, 12:14 PM

Photos of the first test drive of the Big Block / 4.6L chassis are in my gallery GMS.

Larry

mylesdw · #36 (**permalink**) 04-05-2006, 02:06 PM

New chassis looks nice, and you've got rid of that dodgy upper balljoint as well!

clayfoushee · #37 (**permalink**) 04-05-2006, 03:16 PM

Very nice, Richard

.

Richard Hudgins · #38 (**permalink**) 04-05-2006, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mylesdw

New chassis looks nice, and you've got rid of that dodgy upper balljoint as well!

Which ball joint are you referring to?

If you mean the spherical unit on the race chassis, I think that we have different opinions about dodgy.

The bearing that I use has a radial load rating of 55,696 lbs. and an axial load rating of 19340 lbs.

If you put loads that high on the car, you have more to worry about than the spherical joint.

Glad you like the chassis. From what Larry G. has told me, the first test drive went well and it seems that the chassis is pretty well sorted right out of the box.

mylesdw · #39 (**permalink**) 04-05-2006, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Hudgins

Which ball joint are you referring to?

If you mean the spherical unit on the race chassis, I think that we have different opinions about dodgy.

The bearing that I use has a radial load rating of 55,696 lbs. and an axial load rating of 19340 lbs.

I'm sure you know a lot more about this than I, it was a rather flippant remark; I have no doubts about the strength of your bearing but feeding all the suspension forces as a cyclic bending force through the threaded portion of the bearing does make me wonder.

jmarsey · #40 (**permalink**) 04-05-2006, 10:37 PM

Yeah Richard! What were you thinking????