Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, sunsetR33 said:

but that can be mitigated if necessary

No. No it can't. It will absolutely end badly. There's no need for it, so there's no need to create the risk. Mitigating a risk that didn't need to be there in the first place is even dumber than mitigating a risk that could be engineered out in the first place. And the risk has already been engineered out.

2 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

You can also make your own. It doesn't need to be rubber. It just needs to mate securely enough to whatever the jack/arm point is, and have a slot in the top. If that means welding a few chunks of steel together, or slotting something in a mill, then, that's what it means.

if need be I guess I will, yeah. Just to be clear, it's okay to use the sill area around the jacking points for loading, meaning the actual pinch weld or jacking point just sits in the slot without taking on any weight?

9 minutes ago, sunsetR33 said:

if need be I guess I will, yeah. Just to be clear, it's okay to use the sill area around the jacking points for loading, meaning the actual pinch weld or jacking point just sits in the slot without taking on any weight?

Absolutely. Look very closely at the photo (of yours) that I took my second snip of. See how the sill is thicker material right behind the pinchweld, where the two notches are? That is the factory reinforced area for lifting. That pad is supposed to carry the weight. The factory jack (go look at it, and how it interfaces with the car at the pinchweld) shows you exactly how the load is carried from the car to the jack to the ground.

5 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

Absolutely. Look very closely at the photo (of yours) that I took my second snip of. See how the sill is thicker material right behind the pinchweld, where the two notches are? That is the factory reinforced area for lifting. That pad is supposed to carry the weight. The factory jack (go look at it, and how it interfaces with the car at the pinchweld) shows you exactly how the load is carried from the car to the jack to the ground.

but any other area than the bulge you are talking about will just cave in then?
The front driver side is pretty bent so I don't know if that will work the way it is now. I can still kinda make out where that bulge is/was but it looks like the position of it also changed due to all the mistreatment? Hard to tell

35 minutes ago, sunsetR33 said:

but any other area than the bulge you are talking about will just cave in then?

As well as being risky WRT tipping off anyway.

36 minutes ago, sunsetR33 said:

but it looks like the position of it also changed due to all the mistreatment?

Yeah, I wouldn't expect it to move. Just measure from the rear one to the front one on the good side, then measure that same length on the wrecked side. You will find the notches in the pinchweld, and the jacking pad. Just spray a spot of marker paint or something there.

1 minute ago, GTSBoy said:

As well as being risky WRT tipping off anyway.

Yeah, I wouldn't expect it to move. Just measure from the rear one to the front one on the good side, then measure that same length on the wrecked side. You will find the notches in the pinchweld, and the jacking pad. Just spray a spot of marker paint or something there.

Can you elaborate what you mean with your first sentence?

I meant move as in the bulge kinda seemed like it got pulled "outward" meaning it got pulled down and to the side with the jacking rail itself, so the load bearing bulge now sits lower than usual and is not level with the sill on the other side of the jack point. Either that or the jacking rail just got pushed in a good bit.

21 minutes ago, sunsetR33 said:

Can you elaborate what you mean with your first sentence?

I mean, if you were to move the jacking points away from the original location, that is, away from the wheels and closer to the centreline of the car, then it will be more likely to overbalance and tip off the supports. Same as we talked about before.

30 minutes ago, sunsetR33 said:

I meant move as in the bulge kinda seemed like it got pulled "outward"

I was talking about moving for-aft. If the sill is bent outward or inward, then the car would obviously look unstraight from the outside. Hopefully that hasn't happened either. Again, you can do comparative measurements from the chassis rails to see if there is much deflection.

14 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

I mean, if you were to move the jacking points away from the original location, that is, away from the wheels and closer to the centreline of the car, then it will be more likely to overbalance and tip off the supports. Same as we talked about before.

I was talking about moving for-aft. If the sill is bent outward or inward, then the car would obviously look unstraight from the outside. Hopefully that hasn't happened either. Again, you can do comparative measurements from the chassis rails to see if there is much deflection.

I understand, thanks.

Yeah I wouldn't want the car to tip over, I'll try and use the sills, I don't want to risk smashing the chassis rails. I ordered some rubber pucks that have a hopefully big enough slotting. If the front right gives me trouble I can always just make a wood block.

I'll measure and inspect the sills closer once I actually take the car up.

13 hours ago, Duncan said:

FWIW the depth of the groove in the rubber pad is not super essential, the blocks are rubber and squish a bit. If you are worried an angle grinder will make a deeper groove quick smart

I hope so, but the rubber blocks I had in hand so far were pretty damn firm, if they are that hard they won't give much way. I'll let you know what happens. Angle grinding rubber isn't one of my favorite tasks.

I'll probably start a build thread soon, for my own documentation and "log" as well as sharing what's going on with the car.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi...a little refresh. Is Nistune gonna be enough to run BoV? Or do i need some proper ECU? 
    • Yep that's pretty much what I want to see. Racecars that look and sound like the Group A but with newer tech underneath to make them faster and safer. I'm sure there's enough VK-to-VN commodore, E30 BMWs and Foxbody mustangs shells around to make up a decent number of cars with hopefully a couple of sierras, rx7 and R31s in there too. 
    • Contact Jessestreeter.com/Skevas Racing/JustJap for a new r34 rb gearbox or go a cd00# conversion. No point playing with unknown condition gearboxes.
    • Such a shame places like Amaroo Park have been redeveloped, smaller tracks always make for good racing. Cheers for sharing @PranK there's some good Lakeside video's too. Its so hard with older the cars as parts are so rare and everything was made for a particular chassis at that point in time. Even the V8 Supercar Blueprint era cars are all different between each chassis within a team as they learnt things and made improvements. The COTF cars between each Chassis builder is different too especially motor/oil systems/intakes. The Group A stuff is worth so much too especially chassis with good history. The only way to do it would be composite panels and similar engine drivelines to the original cars. Ford sierra running Focus RS driveline, Commodore running a short stroke LS/LT or a Falcon with coyote and a H Pattern dog box. Could use a standard ecu across all models with a Torque Map and DBW for parity which is not even used in Supercars currently. Hell a TCM is almost a full chassis car these days and the suspension is not even close to standard style in the front running cars.  
    • Dashcams Australia (13/05/25) captured JDMHSE (Vic plate) being a right tosser. 
×
×
  • Create New...