(Note: Donations are not tax deductible)

This is a public forum. The opinions expressed here don't
necessarily reflect the feelings of The Folks That Run The Site (that's us)
unless we explicitly say so, ok?


Forum's been "upgraded".
Things will look a bit different.
A *few* posts might have gotten lost in the crossover.
PM bobc with problems, or post in "Website Suggestions".

Author Topic: Bockscar 2.0  (Read 86653 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jack Gifford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1309
  • Age: 79
  • Location: Phelps, NY
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #345 on: October 28, 2018, 12:28:54 AM »
I must be missing something- it looks to me that it will behave like an infinitely-stiff anti-roll bar. :?
M/T Pontiac hemi guru (or does guru status expire after 30 years?)

Offline SPARKY

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6702
  • Age: 77
  • Location: Phoenix
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #346 on: October 28, 2018, 11:18:01 AM »
should limit individual wheel travel I would think
Miss LIBERTY,  changing TKI  to noise, dust and RUST!!!

The # 1 issue is: TO KEEP THE REPUBLIC      
   Center for Self Governance            tncsg.org     mrspowell.org

"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing."   Helen Keller

Offline Stainless1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7331
  • Age: 68
  • Location: Near Furley and Kechi KS
  • Robert W. P. "Stainless" Steele
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #347 on: October 28, 2018, 12:50:47 PM »
Jack, is that a bad thing for a car built to only go straight?  
We had a 4 link with a panhard bar, on a very narrow car, the bar was really short and suspension movement up and down also caused right and left rear steer... not a lot, but enough to make the car wander.  
We changed that to a 4 link with triangulated top links, that eliminated the movement and made the car more stable but the rough courses of late caused a little bit of body roll and that made the drivers a bit uncomfortable.

Looking at some cars on the salt, I noticed some commonality, a lot of the Special Construction cars basically had a swingarm rear suspension.  That pushed me this direction... if it ends up not working, I will rebuild it with something else.  I can tell you there is no sideways movement, and no flex in the entire setup.  Both wheels will move together, and the coilovers will control that.... with any luck.  Hoping it will be a lot like having a solid rear, but with some suspension movement.

Any suspension guru's out there what to chime in?   :cheers:
Stainless
Red Hat 228.039, 2001, 65ci, MSA Bockscar Lakester with a little N20 
MSA Bockscar Lakester #1000 my fastest mile 245 and change, 84 ci turbobusa motor... but Corey's 233 MPH H/BFL record is still 3MPH faster than mine.

Offline manta22

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3461
  • Age: 80
  • Location: Tucson, AZ
  • What, me worry?
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #348 on: October 28, 2018, 01:53:23 PM »
How about using a Watts linkage to control rear axle lateral movement instead of a Panhard bar?

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ
Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ

Offline Koncretekid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1099
  • Age: 72
  • Location: Yarmouth, Nova Scotia & Lafayette, Co.
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #349 on: October 28, 2018, 05:09:42 PM »
I must be missing something- it looks to me that it will behave like an infinitely-stiff anti-roll bar. :?
No suspension guru here, but I agree with Jack, but I don't think that is a bad thing on a narrow car.  That being the case, I would box up the two arms to make sure there isn't any flex side to side.  Otherwise, I think that 1" x 2" cross bar will take a sh*t kicking and may crack at the welds as one side tries to move independently from the other.

Sort of like a motorcycle - - You want to make sure the swing arm is stiff enough not to twist!
Tom
« Last Edit: October 28, 2018, 05:13:03 PM by Koncretekid »
We get too soon oldt, and too late schmart!
Life's uncertain - eat dessert first!

Offline Stainless1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7331
  • Age: 68
  • Location: Near Furley and Kechi KS
  • Robert W. P. "Stainless" Steele
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #350 on: October 28, 2018, 09:51:15 PM »
Neil, I'm thinking the way its made it is it's own lateral control and should not need additional lateral control. 

Tom, not expecting a lot of twist flex... the coilovers will attach to the old 4 link mounts above the point that has the three 1/2 in bolts that hold the 5/8 steel plates on the swingarm to the axle... Not a lot of twist allowed, but we will look at it after it is built to see if it needs more stiffness added.
 :cheers:
Stainless
Red Hat 228.039, 2001, 65ci, MSA Bockscar Lakester with a little N20 
MSA Bockscar Lakester #1000 my fastest mile 245 and change, 84 ci turbobusa motor... but Corey's 233 MPH H/BFL record is still 3MPH faster than mine.

Offline Jack Gifford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1309
  • Age: 79
  • Location: Phelps, NY
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #351 on: October 28, 2018, 10:18:01 PM »
Thanks for explaining your approach. I sure can't argue with "surveying what works". If my lakester doesn't have enough room for a driveshaft and U-joints, I may consider a similar scheme- but having the engine/trans/rearend as a sprung unit.
M/T Pontiac hemi guru (or does guru status expire after 30 years?)

Offline Rex Schimmer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2369
  • Age: 76
  • Location: Fulton, CA
  • Only time and money prevent completion!
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #352 on: October 29, 2018, 09:05:55 PM »

Stainless,
If you find that your swing arm requires more twisting stiffness I would suggest that you weld in an X member out of some 1 x 2 tubing and make the 2 inch section vertical. X members resist twist by bending so you want the largest section vertical.

Rex
Rex

Not much matters and the rest doesn't matter at all.

Offline Stainless1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7331
  • Age: 68
  • Location: Near Furley and Kechi KS
  • Robert W. P. "Stainless" Steele
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #353 on: October 30, 2018, 10:02:49 PM »
Started bending tubes for the back of the car.  Bent the curves for all 4 with John Goodman's (ggl205) tube roller.  I will need to do the compound curve up for the bottom back. 
Ross (mc2032) was over and suggested that I build it upside down because it will be easier than suspending these tubes and then trying to bend the tubes up to meet them and keep everything in the right place.  So these are the top tubes, they are just being built on the bottom. 
BJ Burkdoll suggested it would be just short of impossible to do all the compound curves in one piece, but if I cut the curve where it starts to rise, bend that part, clock it where it goes and then weld it back in it might be easier to duplicate. 
But before I can do that I need to figure out a chute tube. 
Stainless
Red Hat 228.039, 2001, 65ci, MSA Bockscar Lakester with a little N20 
MSA Bockscar Lakester #1000 my fastest mile 245 and change, 84 ci turbobusa motor... but Corey's 233 MPH H/BFL record is still 3MPH faster than mine.

Offline tauruck

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4891
  • Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #354 on: October 30, 2018, 11:31:11 PM »
You've got some "good" guys assisting there.
The project looks awsome. Your shop is so tidy.
I wish I could say the same.

Building the rear clip upside down makes sense IMO.
Great progress. :cheers:

Offline floydjer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2866
  • Age: 61
  • Location: grand rapids, michigan
  • "There is no duck side of the moon..."
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #355 on: October 31, 2018, 07:59:59 AM »
I spy an orange fitment device...Looks great Bob.
I`d never advocate drugs,alcohol,violence or insanity to anyone...But they work for me.

Offline Stainless1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7331
  • Age: 68
  • Location: Near Furley and Kechi KS
  • Robert W. P. "Stainless" Steele
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #356 on: October 31, 2018, 09:37:45 AM »
Mike, if you saw the entire space, you would not consider my shop "tidy"  :-o  although I did clean up a little and put some stuff away before I started bending because I had to turn the car around because I couldn't reach the back of the car with the TIG.  Ross and I rolled the car outside through the big shop because there is not enough open space to spin it indoors.

Jerry I could have used this pic to get you a better view of El Kabong... also added a refresher course
Stainless
Red Hat 228.039, 2001, 65ci, MSA Bockscar Lakester with a little N20 
MSA Bockscar Lakester #1000 my fastest mile 245 and change, 84 ci turbobusa motor... but Corey's 233 MPH H/BFL record is still 3MPH faster than mine.

Offline Rex Schimmer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2369
  • Age: 76
  • Location: Fulton, CA
  • Only time and money prevent completion!
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #357 on: October 31, 2018, 09:57:55 PM »
Stainless,

Have you ever thought of just making the top and bottom tubes the same and parallel in side view and not have the rear bottom come up? We were planning to do the rear of our car with both the top and bottom come together to form a point this would make the rear body have a continuously decreasing diameter, i.e. a NACA 66018 cone. I talked with Woody regarding this and he suggested that we retain the NACA shape in the plan view but make it a constant dimension in the side view. Except for the slight increase in skin area the aero is about the same. It also forms a fairly large side view area which moves the center of pressure back.

Rex



 
Rex

Not much matters and the rest doesn't matter at all.

Offline Stainless1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7331
  • Age: 68
  • Location: Near Furley and Kechi KS
  • Robert W. P. "Stainless" Steele
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #358 on: October 31, 2018, 11:58:01 PM »
Rex, I will have to consult my Aero guy on that, but to answer you question, I had not considered that.  The car was designed as a streamliner in the 70's.  It turned into lakester in 84 with the tread layouts recommended by the same guy.  Several years later he suggested a nose job...
Tom Burkland  asked me if I was going to build a new car, I said yes.
Then he asked if I was going to change the shape and build a fast car... told him I hated to screw with success but I was hoping to make improvements as I went along... He is not a flat bottom car fan....

The car has changed a little over the years.... I think our first record in 1984 was J lakester in the  low 130's .  :cheers: :cheers:
Stainless
Red Hat 228.039, 2001, 65ci, MSA Bockscar Lakester with a little N20 
MSA Bockscar Lakester #1000 my fastest mile 245 and change, 84 ci turbobusa motor... but Corey's 233 MPH H/BFL record is still 3MPH faster than mine.

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6475
  • Age: 59
  • Location: Beerhaven, Wisconsin
  • After further investigation, I/GT record holder
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Bockscar 2.0
« Reply #359 on: November 01, 2018, 08:19:39 AM »
Stainless -

I was aware that the Bockscar had undergone some reiterations over the years, but I was unaware it had started out as a streamliner.
That's a very cool set of pictures, and a really good example of project development over a number of years.

This new one is going to rock.

Carry on, chief.
"Problems are almost always a sign of progress."  Harold Bettes
Well, I guess we're making a LOT of progress . . .  :roll:

We are NOT rebuilding . . . We are reloading.

GOD SAVE MG - The Queen can take care of herself!