??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subframe.

Whether it's a "book" chassis or another variant, FEA talk or roll cage advice that you're looking for, this is the place to talk frame construction.

Moderators: a.moore, horizenjob

skou
Posts: 462
Joined: April 16, 2010, 12:19 pm
Building: Miata Scratch Build
Location: Meridian, Idaho

Re: ??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subframe.

Post by skou »

Matt,

I rendered out your model to visualize it a bit better.

My impression is that the upward sloping CB2 members may make locating the LCA brackets a bit tricky. Reference the second photo below of a Westfield Miata IRS with the LCA brackets mounted both above and below the equivalent of the CB2 members. There is a guy in the UK putting a Miata rear end into a Haynes chassis and he has gone to flat CB2 members (see third photo below). I believe I have also seen that layout on a couple of builds here.

The other concern is that CB2 and CB5 captivate the differential since it hangs from the 1/8" thick plates. The Westfield layout is a bit slicker IMHO in that it uses removable brackets to mount the differential above the equivalent CB5 members (see last photo below), allowing it to be removed from above.

A final comment is that the sketch has the UCA length noted as 9.8". The actual Miata UCA is closer to 8-7/16" in case you want to replicate the OEM geometry.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Steve
chetcpo
Posts: 7043
Joined: August 15, 2005, 10:13 pm
Building: positive attitude
Location: Charleston, WV

Re: ??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subframe.

Post by chetcpo »

There's no question the westfield is a "slicker" design as you said, but the one rendered above isn't bad at all. It works good and is much easier to fabricate. The diff is not captive and can be removed for service, and the lower rear suspension pickup points aren't that challenging to integrate. Obviously the wider you make the lower A arm the harder of a time you will have.


A final comment is that the sketch has the UCA length noted as 9.8". The actual Miata UCA is closer to 8-7/16" in case you want to replicate the OEM geometry.

Well if you think the control arms in my sketch are too long you can forget about the Wesfield rear. Those UCAs appear to be at least 3" longer than mine.
He is a wise man who does not grieve for the things which he has not, but rejoices for those which he has.
skou
Posts: 462
Joined: April 16, 2010, 12:19 pm
Building: Miata Scratch Build
Location: Meridian, Idaho

Re: ??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subframe.

Post by skou »

chetcpo wrote:There's no question the westfield is a "slicker" design as you said, but the one rendered above isn't bad at all. It works good and is much easier to fabricate. The diff is not captive and can be removed for service...

Another shot of the UK guy's design showing that he's going to "hang" the differential in the same manner, leaving the challenge of getting it out for service.

chetcpo wrote:Well if you think the control arms in my sketch are too long you can forget about the Wesfield rear. Those UCAs appear to be at least 3" longer than mine.

I didn't say they were too long. I was just pointing out that they are longer than the OEM length. Sorry if you took it that I was critiquing your design. :cheers:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Steve
chetcpo
Posts: 7043
Joined: August 15, 2005, 10:13 pm
Building: positive attitude
Location: Charleston, WV

Re: ??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subframe.

Post by chetcpo »

skou wrote:<snip>

chetcpo wrote:Well if you think the control arms in my sketch are too long you can forget about the Wesfield rear. Those UCAs appear to be at least 3" longer than mine.

I didn't say they were too long. I was just pointing out that they are longer than the OEM length. Sorry if you took it that I was critiquing your design. :cheers:


No, I didn't take offence, and I don't mind a critique. You pointed out that the OEM geometry wouldn't work with my sketch and then pointed out the superiority of the Westfield design. I was only stating that if OEM geometry is your goal then it wouldn't work with the Westfield design either. I agree though the Westfield design looks better. If you guys wanted to model it too there was a member here "Stein" who said they had drawings of the design. Attached are some shots of the frame.
He ended up selling the project uncomplete and it has passed through at least two other builder's hands, but hopefully he kept a copy of the plans. If not you can try to contact the other two owners that I know of. It went like this Stien-Winston-Titus-?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
He is a wise man who does not grieve for the things which he has not, but rejoices for those which he has.
dilbert
Posts: 278
Joined: January 24, 2009, 1:33 pm
Building: A dream...
Location: St.Thomas Ontario

Re: ??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subframe.

Post by dilbert »

You could have the two supports at the very bottom bolt into place instead of being welded. This way if you did need to take the diff out it would go out the bottom. At least in the sketch it doesn't have any other tubes in the way. Worst case scenario is that since you built the car from scratch, you cut these two tubes, replace the diff then re-weld them back in.
skou
Posts: 462
Joined: April 16, 2010, 12:19 pm
Building: Miata Scratch Build
Location: Meridian, Idaho

Re: ??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subframe.

Post by skou »

chetcpo wrote:If you guys wanted to model it too there was a member here "Stein" who said they had drawings of the design. Attached are some shots of the frame.
Yeah, I actually found Stein over on miata.net a few months ago as a Westfield-like IRS design is where my build is headed. I offered a couple of times to model up his design and post it for all to use McSorley style. Never heard back from him after the second PM.
Steve
chetcpo
Posts: 7043
Joined: August 15, 2005, 10:13 pm
Building: positive attitude
Location: Charleston, WV

Re: ??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subframe.

Post by chetcpo »

dilbert wrote:You could have the two supports at the very bottom bolt into place instead of being welded. This way if you did need to take the diff out it would go out the bottom. At least in the sketch it doesn't have any other tubes in the way. Worst case scenario is that since you built the car from scratch, you cut these two tubes, replace the diff then re-weld them back in.

Like I said above, no need to cut anything the diff comes out fine.
He is a wise man who does not grieve for the things which he has not, but rejoices for those which he has.
User avatar
mattrogers
Posts: 505
Joined: November 13, 2009, 8:43 pm
Building: Miata-based +442
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: ??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subframe.

Post by mattrogers »

skou wrote:Matt,

I rendered out your model to visualize it a bit better.


Slick, thanks! I always forget about perspective mode.

chetcpo wrote:Well to be totally fair the "chetcpo" rear end you rendered for me is a copy of the CMC (now defunct) design. I've never measured or seen a CMC frame in person, but I've eyeballed the heck out of the one in K. Tanner's book and the design I drew was based on that.
Ah ha, I see. Thanks for the provenance. I kind of like the fact that it's book-based on the outside, but then just has an IRS setup inside.

chetcpo wrote:Don't start cutting yet though. I built a book frame for a friend last year and used those drawings and decided it would work better with the diff about 3/4" higher. I used a combination of pieces cut from 1/8" x 2" and 1/8" x 1" steel band to lift the diff up a bit without changing any of the rear frame tubes. I'll attach a pic below. (well, below the pic below, at the bottom) It would likely be easier just to raise the two cross tubes that carry the diff mounts, but I was already past that point when I decided to raise the diff on that particular frame.
If there's a good way to motivate me to do some math, it's stuff like this. I thought "about 3/4" higher: does he actually want it an inch higher? Or what's the actual number?" I measured the differential inputs and outputs and ear heights and something didn't add up on the differential mounting height. Then I saw that your car was designed around 20" tires (I realized I hadn't actually read your build log up until last night). That would make a big difference in differential mounting height. I ended up needing to add another 2.5" to the O3 mounting tube location along K3/4 to compensate for designing around 23" tires once you factor your change in.

Here's the quick numbers about the math:
Wheel size: 23"
Wheel radius: 11.5"
Frame clearance: 5"
Desired differential output height above bottom of frame: 11.5" - 5" = 6.5"
Differential ear height above differential output shafts: 6.175"
Differential ear height: 6.5" + 6.175" = 12.675"
O3 spacing from the top front corner of B1 along K4 = 11.5" (with some corrections, this is just dividing the height by cos(17°).

Thanks for the feedback.
chetcpo
Posts: 7043
Joined: August 15, 2005, 10:13 pm
Building: positive attitude
Location: Charleston, WV

Re: ??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subframe.

Post by chetcpo »

mattrogers wrote:
skou wrote:Matt,

I rendered out your model to visualize it a bit better.


Slick, thanks! I always forget about perspective mode.

chetcpo wrote:Well to be totally fair the "chetcpo" rear end you rendered for me is a copy of the CMC (now defunct) design. I've never measured or seen a CMC frame in person, but I've eyeballed the heck out of the one in K. Tanner's book and the design I drew was based on that.
Ah ha, I see. Thanks for the provenance. I kind of like the fact that it's book-based on the outside, but then just has an IRS setup inside.

chetcpo wrote:Don't start cutting yet though. I built a book frame for a friend last year and used those drawings and decided it would work better with the diff about 3/4" higher. I used a combination of pieces cut from 1/8" x 2" and 1/8" x 1" steel band to lift the diff up a bit without changing any of the rear frame tubes. I'll attach a pic below. (well, below the pic below, at the bottom) It would likely be easier just to raise the two cross tubes that carry the diff mounts, but I was already past that point when I decided to raise the diff on that particular frame.
If there's a good way to motivate me to do some math, it's stuff like this. I thought "about 3/4" higher: does he actually want it an inch higher? Or what's the actual number?" I measured the differential inputs and outputs and ear heights and something didn't add up on the differential mounting height. Then I saw that your car was designed around 20" tires (I realized I hadn't actually read your build log up until last night). That would make a big difference in differential mounting height. I ended up needing to add another 2.5" to the O3 mounting tube location along K3/4 to compensate for designing around 23" tires once you factor your change in.

Here's the quick numbers about the math:
Wheel size: 23"
Wheel radius: 11.5"
Frame clearance: 5"
Desired differential output height above bottom of frame: 11.5" - 5" = 6.5"
Differential ear height above differential output shafts: 6.175"
Differential ear height: 6.5" + 6.175" = 12.675"
O3 spacing from the top front corner of B1 along K4 = 11.5" (with some corrections, this is just dividing the height by cos(17°).

Thanks for the feedback.


Here's some more for you to think about. The diff outputs can be moved around quite a bit without any ill effects due to the joints on both ends of the axles. The axles don't need to sit perfectly level at desired ride height or be perpendicular to the center line of the chassis. The reason I moved the diff up was to reduce the driveshaft angle from diff to transmission. Since the fuel tank sits above the diff carrier I could only raise it so far before it ran into the tank.
He is a wise man who does not grieve for the things which he has not, but rejoices for those which he has.
User avatar
RichardSIA
Posts: 1648
Joined: November 11, 2013, 4:47 am
Building: Dio Tipo
Location: No. Nevada

Re: ??? and hopefully some answers to using the miata subfra

Post by RichardSIA »

Related ?

For my use I want to narrow the Miata rear about 5".
Seems it's not too difficult to mod the cradle.
I know this will affect the suspension geometry.
How badly?
I should go model it in my suspension program but am fighting the flu.
Bored out of my mind but unable to concentrate.
Only need a rough estimate at the moment, really significant or easily adjusted out?
Hope is to retain stock upper and lower arms for easy service.
If I must be a one-man PC free zone, so be it!
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests