|
|
02-04-2022, 09:53 AM
|
#11
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 407
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by carringb
Also mounting leafs to the front of the crumple zone is a huge no-no as well, unless it’s reinforced. That van was most likely a home build, and it probably was not really drivable
|
Is the concern here that the crumple zone region of the frame is not structurally able to withstand the loads imparted by the leaf springs?
The UJOR leaf spring bracket also mounts over the crumple zone region, but I suppose it is has more reinforcement. I suppose this detracts from the frame's ability to crumple under impact, though.
|
|
|
02-04-2022, 10:29 AM
|
#12
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Evergreen, CO
Posts: 493
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Creative Plastic Research
B rock. What’s your plan next ?
|
I have a MG kit + SD axles that have been neglected in the garage. I'm just about wrapped up with the WJ axle and a long string of house projects, so the van can finally the attention it deserves.
__________________
'06 EB 350, Advanced 4x4, 6.7 Cummins + Allison, 24" bubble top.
'05 Pleasure Way Excel TS V10, still boring and 2wd
|
|
|
02-04-2022, 12:14 PM
|
#13
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2021
Posts: 6
|
Right on.
I am heading towards a leaf sprung front end.
Just working out some ideas in Solidworks as to which direction to go.
As always, I want to do some of the kit stuff myself.
Let me know if I am crazy, but a set of 6" lift F350 leafs with custom hangers would fit fine, and be easily replaceable with off the shelf parts.
Very rough model at this point that I will have to confirm with measurements.
|
|
|
02-04-2022, 12:41 PM
|
#14
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: NM
Posts: 1,387
|
Is that a 2021+ frame cad model?
Maybe I'm just the (un)lucky one but I've been scolded by Ford in the past for posting photos of their CAD models online. Lots of people do it and don't get any threatening letters so I don't know what the criteria is or why/how Ford was made aware of what I had posted. I did have to jump through some hoops to retain my access to OEM CAD though. Did you sign any non-disclosures to get access to that model? Member of the TechTransfer program?
|
|
|
02-04-2022, 12:59 PM
|
#15
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2021
Posts: 6
|
Hey MG,
Thanks for the heads up. I removed the image, don't need any grief from Ford.
I have years of random SW files, from different industries and jobs, this is an 09-14 model.
Edit to add; this is for home purpose only, I have no intention of selling anything I create, just an engineer dude geeking out on his own projects.
|
|
|
02-05-2022, 09:59 AM
|
#16
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 5,300
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by motovan_mn
Is the concern here that the crumple zone region of the frame is not structurally able to withstand the loads imparted by the leaf springs?
The UJOR leaf spring bracket also mounts over the crumple zone region, but I suppose it is has more reinforcement. I suppose this detracts from the frame's ability to crumple under impact, though.
|
Yes, that's exactly it. The crumple zone is not intended to be stiff. U-Joint brackets restore the structural stiffness, although that would come at the expense of collision-energy-mitigation. FWIW - Ford did not have a crumple zone on the leaf-sprung pickups and Excursions, but they also weren't tested to the same passenger-vehicle standard that the vans were.
__________________
2000 E450 dually V10 wagon
|
|
|
02-05-2022, 11:24 AM
|
#17
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Denver Colorado
Posts: 820
|
In a van with a short nose, I would think the real world benefit of a crumple zone is negligible at best.
__________________
2002 e350 window eb,
7.3
CCV high top
Conversion in process. Lol
Denver, CO
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Threads |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|