pucksaver
|
| posted on 11/4/06 at 07:27 AM |
|
|
New here -- quick question about McSorley.
Hi everyone. I've been lurking around this site for a while and am looking at building a McSorley based chassis with a miata donor. I
can't start working on it until summertime (school) so I'm in the brainstorming stage.
Being a first-year Mechanical Engineering student I have access to the Solidworks CAD package. Soooo i've been working on modeling my chassis in
this program and messing around with it before i start building.
I am following the McSorley +442 designs exactly at first, then i will do my own tinkering however ive run into a slight problem. My question is if
there are any errors in the plans, specifically the front L assembly. I made all the correct angled cuts on the computer but when i assembled them
they were off by quite a bit. Anyone have any trouble with this particular section of the chassis? It is entirely possible that i am doing it wrong on
the program because i have very limited experience with the software but i figured i would check just to make sure i'm not missing something
simple.
Thanks guys.
|
|
|
|
|
James
|
| posted on 11/4/06 at 07:38 AM |
|
|
I'd be surprised if there were any mistakes there- lots of people have used his plans and I've heard no one else mention a problem.
At the end of the day, it should be too hard to check with a bit of trigonometry.
Atb,
James
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The fight is won or lost far away from witnesses, behind the lines, in the gym and out there on the road, long before I dance under those lights."
- Muhammad Ali
|
|
|
D Beddows
|
| posted on 11/4/06 at 07:57 AM |
|
|
Well, if there are big gaps between the tubes then yes, there is a problem with what you've drawn - if it's just that there is a bit of
overlap at some of the points where some of the tubes meet then no, thats how Mr McSorley has drawn them.
|
|
|
Gav
|
| posted on 11/4/06 at 08:04 AM |
|
|
The plans were spot on for me, just had to gusset behind the front top bracket.
|
|
|
omega 24 v6
|
| posted on 11/4/06 at 08:37 AM |
|
|
Plans for the 442 were spot on for me BUT
the wish bone mounts do not fit on the chassis rails as you would want them to. See my archive photo's for an explanation. Basically the tube
angles from the footwell to the front are different from the "book" and I for one did not think about hoe this affected the wishbone
setup
Good luck.
|
|
|
D Beddows
|
| posted on 11/4/06 at 11:04 AM |
|
|
Just to clarify my answer - I'm talking about drawing the tubes on CAD and then assembling them on CAD as is I believe Mr pucksaver. In virtual
reality the joins between some tubes aren't quite as perfect as us CAD monkeys are used to - if you download the IGES files from the McSorley
site you can see that they didn't quite work for him either.
Obviously they work fine in the real world.
|
|
|
pucksaver
|
| posted on 11/4/06 at 06:56 PM |
|
|
Ok, thats good to hear. Some of the joints were slightly off (2-3 degrees variance) so i wont worry about those right now. However, the top tube (i
think its LC) doesnt meet up with LA and LB as close as i wanted (1/2" off) so i will just recheck my angles i suppose, or use a different
feature to cut my angles... perhaps thats the problem. What do you guys think is an acceptable error gap for where tubes meet up? And yes, all of this
is in CAD at the moment... i havent done any real-life assembling yet.
|
|
|
