b) 190 bhp 2.3 naturally aspirated aluminum frame Fiero
Initiate bench racing stage XII (That's stage 12, booyaa)
The 2.3l car would probably handle better. Even though its block is still iron, it is a lot smaller than the 2.9. Not to mention the added weight of the turbo.
As far as speed goes, I think it'd be really close, but I'd think the 2.3l would edge it out over a 1/4mi.
Oversteer wrote:It states that there was two of them built in 1986 by Alcan Automotive Structures of Canada. The frame was built using the same molds as the conventional steel frame but used an adhesive agent rather then welding. The reduction in weight was 68% (frame), and the boosted torsional stiffness by 42%. These cars were equiped with the high output 2.3 Quad Four with 190 bhp matted to the good old 282 Getrag. These cars also had the power steering option.
Decrease in weight and increase in stiffness by going from steel to aluminum with the SAME shape and thickness?
Chevy did that with the C6 perimeter frame and LOST significant stiffness. That's why the new ZO6 roof panel is non-removable... gain back the chassis stiffness that it lost by going to aluminum. (See? Fiero development efforts paid off in the C6 ZO6!!!)
The only way the Fiero could conceivably manage decreasing weight and increasing stiffness is if the spot welding on the steel chassis was so poorly laid out that the greater bond area of the adhesive technique made up the stiffness difference.
That's far from impossible, of course. We all know the Fiero was low budget. I bounced an '86SE off an embankment and the engine compartment lower left frame rail separated from the passenger compartment... looks to have stayed straight, but just come off.
Not questioning the book. Just examining how what it says was the case could be the case.
I imagine the C5 is put together a good bit better than the Fiero, so there probably wasn't any stiffness to be gained through improved joint integrity, because there wasn't any joint integrity to be gained. However, there probably was quite a bit of joint integrity improvement available in the Fiero.
The Dark Side of Will wrote:Not questioning the book. Just examining how what it says was the case could be the case.
I imagine the C5 is put together a good bit better than the Fiero, so there probably wasn't any stiffness to be gained through improved joint integrity, because there wasn't any joint integrity to be gained. However, there probably was quite a bit of joint integrity improvement available in the Fiero.
Is there any easy way to measure chassis stiffness at home? I was going to weld some seams next time I've got the MIG out. I could take before and after measurements if I could find a way to stress the chassis..
Support three corners of the chassis (not the suspension). Pull down on the fourth with a big lever and use an indicator to measure deflection. Calculate torque per degree of twist. You'll need to figure out how to hold down the corner opposite the corner you're pulling on, of course, which may be the hard part.
