This post is request for guidance since I now need to learn how to fabricate an entire tub.
Here's the back story:
I originally intended to replace the firewall, floor pan, and trunk pan. That plan quickly eroded when I identified backyard hackage throughout the car. Now it appears the only original metal will be the rear sear frame. I'll limit the finding list to bondo, 3/4" thick, sheet metal screws, rivets, and house grade silicone. The typical bad scenario. This car was also hit in the T-bone area (back seat window) on both sides.
Experience and confidence level: high
Frame rails, trunk pan, floor pan, and firewall removed. What does that mean? The alignment points are missing.
Parts on hand: Door and rear quarter frame / full rockers (pic below), trunk pan, floor pan, firewall, frame rails, full rear quarters, rear inner and outer tail panels, (on order: cowl, cowl shoulders).
Where's the starting point? 1. Build a jig and restore from the frame rails, and interior pans up? 2. Replace the door frame, rear quarter frame on each side and then pot it on a jig?
Second Question: Are all metal seams supposed to be even or do the seams vary in depth (ie.. Floor pan to rockers)
Third question: Can I fabricate (weld) the truck pan to the floor pan or will doing so cause a misalignment risk? 1. Is the one piece front to back floor pan measurement provided on the vendor websites accurate?
If it was me.. I’d first make it squared up by finding similar points on each side and cross measure them so each match in measurements. The build braces to secure them. Next I’d make sure it’s absolutly level. Do the secure (screw) the fire wall first because the floor rests on to of the it’s lip. Secure (screw) The the floor section (wheel well j area next. Then lay the floor pan next laying it above the other panels lips... check the alignments.. this will take time be sure everything is square. Once it fits and measures right start ( having fun... can’t teach over the net but with patience..It can be done nicely.. but this is no amateurs job to say the least.... :0....... may the force be with you on this one...:0
Apparently, I am somewhat of a masochist. Haa! Had I not purchased all the parts already, I would have likely changed my plans on this build.
I've taken measurements (multiple times) and although I still don't trust the numbers, the diagnal-section and cross section measurements are within ~1/16 of an inch. I would like to validate my findings but I cannot find these measurements in my books. can someone provide me with these three measurements:
Center of door striker to door striker; Inner rocker to inner rocker at the kick panel; and Inner rocker to inner rocker at the front leaf spring / frame rail area.
I can build up my bracing once I have some affirmation that my measurements are good.
I wasn't sure i was clear in my explanation. Here's a pic of the measurement locations I am seeking. The red arrows are the rocker to rocker measurements I need. At least as close as possible. As well as the measurement from the center of one door striker to the center of the other.
Now, those "diagonal measurements" I referenced previously are represented as the blue lines. They are within 1/16 inch, which I have to assume means the tub is square at this section.
As mentioned, I'm simply looking to validate the measurements I have are at least close to another vehicle or two.
The pic up above clears it up nicely for me. I will be happy to get the measurements for the door strikers for you tomorrow. Taking these diagonals would require some sort of tram gauge underneath the car, something I will not be able to do. Hopefully there is someone with their car in a state of assembly that will be able to help you out. I did see that you have opened another thread also. Good luck with it. I will post up the measurement tomorrow for you. Cal
Evening Wade, From our '67, the measurement door striker to door striker is 61.5". Our car is assembled, so I don't know how close the strikers might be to the hole for them, but "as assembled" that was the number. Cal
I took some measurements on my 67 coupe for you. I measured the inner rockers from under the car since the transmission tunnel gets in the way of measuring inside the car.
At the front, I measured 47 1/8" just behind the front floor pan seam. At the rear, I also measured 47 1/8" just behind the rear foot well. The pinch weld seam is kind of wavy, so it could vary by 1/8" or so depending on exactly where I took the measurement. In the rear picture, my passenger floor pan has been removed (rockers are original).
Edit: As best I can tell, my door striker measurement is 61 11/16". The door frames stick out in front of the strikers and make it hard to line up the tape measure. The strikers are designed to be adjusted in/out and up/down, so expect some variation in this measurement between cars.
You have quite the job coming your way. If you are an experienced welder then go for it. If not, consider Chief's recommendations.
You can verify your panel placement using the dimensions give in the Fisher body book.
On my 68 vert ... I replaced my entire floor pan (except trunk floor), patched rockers, replaced rear quarters, rear wheel wells, patched front cowls, replaced dash top panel, patched toe kicks. I got the frame straightened and then measured the car based on the nos. in the Fisher body book. It was very close and probably better than stock. I installed all body panels for a fitting fit test and everything aligned well without much fuss.
It's a fairly simple process to verify measurements that can be done by one person.
These responses will help me extend the posted body cart / "Jiggy cart" capabilities, which I will explain and document in a post once complete.
As for the work and welding, my son graduated UTI autobody and fabrication school and also is a certified welder. between the two of us we have the skillsets required, but arguable... Dad's always right. :p
There is very little salvageable metal on my car requiring a new tub to be assembled. I will document the entire build, which begins this weekend.
1967 FB 400, original CA car (smog), now 455, soon to be out of Paint Jail 2006 Mustang V6 Pony, factory ordered, retirement cruiser and future classic(?) 2019 BMW X3 (Titled to the wife, but I'm always driving it for her. So I'm claiming it) Old projects, gone but not forgotten: 1980 Turbo Trans Am 1970 Mustang fastback, 351C 4Bbl, auto 1988 Mustang GT, 5 speed 1983 F-150 4x4, built 302 1994 Chevy K2500 HD 4x4, 454 TBI
My son and I cannot figure out why we are failing to get a square and equal measurements between the areas identified on the attachment.
That 64 5/8" measurement is messing with my head! No matter what we do or how we adjust, that ******* measurement persists!! lol The Camaro "jiggy" plan identifies both measurements as 65 1/4. We cannot get there the way we are measuring.
Are these measurements NOT supposed to be as illustrated?
All guidance accepted and welcome!!
Re: Major Restoration - Assembly Questions
#321274 02/12/1909:28 AM02/12/1909:28 AM
I am relaying my experience of cabinet making on how to to square things up, should apply here. I would adjust the frame frame back to get the 64 5/8 measurement down to 65 1/4. This will throw off the the two 76" measurements such that one is too long and one is too short. Then take you will need to push/pull the diagonal probably with a hydraulic ram but maybe some threaded rod will work. It will likely bounce back so take that into account. Then check all the measurements again as things probably moved (like the subframe). Repeat.
Have you checked your subframe and the body itself to make sure it isn't tweaked. If one of those is tweaked, doubtful you can get it aligned.
Look at the problem as if it was a parallelogram. It's technically not but the principle will apply. So once you set the distances of A, B, C and D, you need to adjust the sides to bring the diagonals to become equal. In this case, you slide both A and D to the left while maintaining the distances between A/B and C/D. At some point the diagonals will equal and you stop. This will take some iteration but should work.
Understood. But all other measurements are accurate except A to B. If I adjust for A to B then all other measurement points are affected.
These are accurate right now: A to C B to D A to D B to C C to D
I don't understand how A to B can be inaccurate given all other points are accurate to a precision measurement (a hole punch) using a tram gauge. It's mind boggling. I'll try a few variations using your principle and report back.
As illustrated by the pictures, I'm trying to build a frame cart. The last few posts were related to the cart / jig and not a car.
These measurements derived from my Fisher manual.
Clarification post: Is there a specific sequence of measurement? Tonight my measurements (sequenced in the attachment) came out less than an 1/8" off on the body cart pin alignment, which is acceptable,yes?! Last night I measured using a different sequence and found myself 5/8" off. Big difference.
No problem. I recently did the same thing. The question really now comes down to this: If I split the difference between the 3 respective pins, it would be 1/32 of deviation at each pin. I'm not even sure it's worth the additional thought. I'm going to re-measure one more time tomorrow to ensure I obtain the same measurements as I did today. I will update once again tomorrow.
The sequence of measurements seems to matter.
Also, I realized tonight that the tram measuring tape has some slop when opening and closing. That may have contributed to the inaccuracies last night as well. NEW TOOL = learning curve.
You provided that to me prviously, which is what I used. The body cart is already welded up / assembled. The tram measurement issue I'm dealing with is strictly related to the 5/8" alignment hole pin placement / location. once the pins are welded on the body cart is complete.
1. The measuring ribbon inside the tram is sloppy. All measurements must be measured by fully closing and re-extending the tram / ribbon.Sloppy by a full 1/4". 2. The tram sags in the center when opened to 76". This causes the tram pointer to push out just over 1/16" beyond actual presenting a false reading. Actual reading (with sag) is slightly more than 76 1/16". Preventing the sag and deviation presents a precise 76" measurement.
Lesson learned. Will re-measure the points tonight now that I've "calibrated" the tram.