A few weeks ago I posted a pic of my Merc frame showing the transmission tailshaft hitting the plate at the center of the crossmember. I had to remove the center section which meant that the structural "X" design was no longer viable. I was a little concerned about how strong this new design would be...but now that it is done I have stood on the center supports and bounced up and down with no flexing. That 1x2 box is a lot more rigid than the original channel. I chose to lower the frame rather than channel the body...I'll have a little higher tunnel on the floor pan but it won't be too noticable...
That sure is a cleaner looking setup than if you had tried to make the origional crossmember work. Well thought out modification, it will go nicely with everything else you have done on that car. Does your driveshaft still have clearance at the crossmember when the suspension is at its highest travel? The angle of the picture makes it look like it might be close. Frank
[ QUOTE ] Does your driveshaft still have clearance at the crossmember when the suspension is at its highest travel? The angle of the picture makes it look like it might be close. [/ QUOTE ] Here's another pic that shows the rear driveline...Corvette C4 IRS...no clearance issues because the differential/driveshaft doesn't move. However, there is 2.5" clearance between the driveshaft and the side supports. I don't know if you noticed it but the supports are different length...this engine/driveline sits 3/4" off center (to the right) to compensate for torque...I made the supports meet directly below the driveshaft rather than in the center of the chassis to maximize clearance. Never can tell, I may change my mind and want to put a rigid third member in this car some day...don't want to eliminate options if you don't have to...
Forgive me for not remembering about the IRS. DUH!! I should have know as you have kept us pretty much updated on this project. Too bad all of that pretty suspension won't be out for everyone to see. Frank
The Jalopy Journal
