Originally posted by TRiAD: Correct me if I'm wrong, but no one here was talking about mass-producing a motor vehicle complete and legal for the road. What we're talking about is manufacturing PARTS which would underpin an existing CAR. You don't need crash testing for that.
If you're making an exact replica of the frame, using the same methodologies as the original, but with different materials, you damn well better build a few for crash and stress testing.
Even if you were using different methods to build it, I'd want to see a reasonable amount of testing before I spend so much on a frame. We're not talking about printing out new chrome plated aluminum door handles here. We're talking about making reproductions of core structural components of a vehicle, or making interchangeable portions of the frame, of a different design/material. Only replacing the cradle or front cross member is one thing. Replacing more core portions of the frame, which have to deal with different stress patterns than those two pieces do, is a different story.
Sorry, but if anyone is going to expect to build and sell replica frames, they are going to need to test them well enough to be able to avoid having a few hefty law suits on their hand, when the first few people buy the thing and it fails miserably.
I never said ANYTHING about using the same methodologies as the original. "Testing" and crash testing to meet Federal standards are two entirely different things. Do you think ANY of the "replica" companies out there have Federal crash-test data? Get real. I also never espoused "printing" anything. I personally believe we're a long ways from "printing" 3D parts which are structurally sound. Please direct your unnecessary and apparent anger toward those putting forth the ideas you have an issue with.
I never said ANYTHING about using the same methodologies as the original. "Testing" and crash testing to meet Federal standards are two entirely different things. Do you think ANY of the "replica" companies out there have Federal crash-test data? Get real. I also never espoused "printing" anything. I personally believe we're a long ways from "printing" 3D parts which are structurally sound. Please direct your unnecessary and apparent anger toward those putting forth the ideas you have an issue with.
First of all, please don't assume everyone disagreeing with you, or pointing out problems in your comments is somehow "angry" at someone or something. You're the one typing with the "angry tone" (using all-caps and sarcastic comments like "get real").
And I don't know if ANY of the "replica" companies out there have Federal crash test data. I haven't looked. Have you? Or are you just blindly assuming they don't? I do know that companies producing chassis for use in pure racing, are tested and are required to meet certain criteria. Also, most of the kit car/replica chassis builders are selling tube chassis cars, and not stamped steel, or extruded aluminum tubs.
I don't know what thread you've been reading, but you aren't the only one who's put forth some ideas in this one, so maybe you need to go back and read them. Because retroman's last few posts were in fact talking about making exact replicas for some portions of the Fiero frame. So please contain your anger when people post opposing views to your own.
Dobey, when you quote my post before your comment, it's not "assuming" anything to state that your comments were directed at myself. If they in fact were not, I strongly suggest you make your comment a lot more clear in who they're directed to. I don't think too many people would read your comments and not agree that they are very disagreeable at best, and possibly downright rude. If you don't intend them that way, maybe you could find a way to express yourself with more decorum. This comment, for instance...
quote
Originally posted by dobey:...And I don't know if ANY of the "replica" companies out there have Federal crash test data. I haven't looked. Have you? Or are you just blindly assuming they don't?
You ask a potentially legitimate question, then taint it with pure attitude.
Yeah, as a matter of fact, I've been around replicas my whole life and have a pretty good understanding of their quality and testing procedures. At least the ones that bother. Most don't. Any "component" car sold in the US has almost no Federal standards to adhere to. That's why it's so appealing to small "manufacturers". Some (few) have pretty advanced computer modeling and testing procedures, but it's rare. Unless someone is wanting to assign new VINs to these frames and sell them as new motor vehicles, crash testing would not be required. This information is pretty easy to look up as well.
quote
Originally posted by dobey:...I don't know what thread you've been reading, but you aren't the only one who's put forth some ideas in this one, so maybe you need to go back and read them. Because retroman's last few posts were in fact talking about making exact replicas for some portions of the Fiero frame. So please contain your anger when people post opposing views to your own.
Again, if you were talking to him, don't quote me before your comment. Otherwise it's very misleading. My guess is you're actually just being very disingenuous. Later.
here in canada , crash testing is required for all vehicles without regard to sales volume .kit cars without crash testing are not allowed to cross provincial borders .this has pretty much killed the canadian kit car industry .it costs over a million dollars to crash test a car .and modern canadian and american regs require that an unbelted crash dummy has to survive some crashes .that means airbags and extensive crumple zones .since a fiero does not have airbags, it could not pass modern crash testing anyways .the criterion in the united states re crash testing is how many cars you sell .this lets low volume producers off the hook .it used to be 200 cars , i have no idea what it is now .
the crash test laws are the same .and yes i can bring in a factory five by using the broker that they recommend .but that does not mean they have been crash tested .they are getting them in under a loop hole that i doubt our safety nazis will leave open much longer .that is one of the reasons i bought a fiero , body kits are importable with no hassle .but i waited too long and the body i wanted (ASPP GT40 MK 1 ) is no longer produced .i tried to get a Diva kit , produced in ontario , but i left that too long as well and the fellow that ran that retired .so i play with my fiero and soon i am going to start working seriously again on my locost .
Originally posted by TRiAD: Dobey, when you quote my post before your comment, it's not "assuming" anything to state that your comments were directed at myself. If they in fact were not, I strongly suggest you make your comment a lot more clear in who they're directed to. I don't think too many people would read your comments and not agree that they are very disagreeable at best, and possibly downright rude. If you don't intend them that way, maybe you could find a way to express yourself with more decorum. This comment, for instance...
Again, if you were talking to him, don't quote me before your comment. Otherwise it's very misleading. My guess is you're actually just being very disingenuous. Later.
Obviously my comments were directed at you. You're the one calling others "apparently angry" because they posted dissenting opinions to your own and asked you questions. The particular comment you're talking about was not "rude." It was direct and a legitimate question. You haven't posted any information regarding your experience with anything, nor any links to any relevant information to your own comment, and so yes, it is a very reasonable question to ask where you got that information from. Sorry if you don't like direct questions. But there's nothing rude about being direct.
What's rude is your derailing the thread by going off about how "rude" you think someone is, for asking and commenting on the topic at hand. Please stop making ridiculous assumptions and going off about how rude you think some comment is, that isn't anywhere near rude; and being rude while doing it, attempting to placate yourself to the moral high ground with terms like "decorum" or insisting that people are disingenuous or don't know what they're talking about because you have some slightly different experience.
Please try to keep it on topic and answer the questions posed to you, without going off on a tangent about how you think it's rude to ask you those questions. Also, it's not your thread. As I said, just because you didn't say anything about copying original manufacturing techniques for the Fiero frame, doesn't mean it hasn't been discussed. It has been openly discussed in this thread several times, hence the comment asking if you've read the thread or not.
Anyway, there are plenty of reasons why kit car companies like Factory Five make tube chassis cars, and not stamped steel or extruded aluminum frames. It's cheaper and easier for them to produce. It's less likely for them to produce a chassis that will have horrible problems in a crash, when using a tube chassis. And many of the kits are actually just race cars, so the chassis used in those is designed to meet some specific standards of safety, even if it's not the federal crash test standards for mass-produced consumer vehicles. The GTM might not have crumple zones or air bags, but with a five point harness, you can roll one a few hundred feet and still be totally safe. And they can be made street legal very easily, and registered as a "kit car" depending on state laws, in the US at least.
Making a stamped steel or extruded aluminum frame, is a whole different game though. I wouldn't want to buy one that didn't have significant stress and crash testing done to it, even if it's not the federal mass-market crash standard. A tube chassis will typically be fine with less testing, assuming the materials are of the right quality, and not poorly made super-cheap tube steel off the boat from some random plant in China that nobody knows about.
Alright, time to get this thread back on track. I am continuing to pursue licensing permission through GM to use the Fiero name, logo, and eventually gain rights to use the frame design (better to have permission and not need it than need it and not have it). I also submitted to a freelance graphic design website to come up with artwork for use on merchandising and promote publicity. I plan on putting the winning design on shirts and whatnot. I don't expect the so called needed $35M+ from it, but it is a start, and whatever proceeds I get will be reinvested into the business, specifically this project. Again, nothing is going to happen overnight, but they say the way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time, right?
Just another update. So far I've received two designs, and neither was remotely anything what I had asked for. I'm going to stick it out and see if there is a designer on the web that can provide the image I want, but I'm thinking I will be getting my money back on this one and finding someone more local (although I'd welcome anyone with artistic talents here). Aside from that, I have no response from GM as of yet for licensing, so looks like I will have to give them a call early next week. More to come...
Birdcage design , as in Maserati, and the Lotus 7 are notorious for fragility. Tube frames are light but high maintenance. The really light dry carbon fiber requires equipment beyond the capability of the the small fabricator, I believe. Wet CF is fiberglass with comsmetic CF embedded. Careful design of light gauge sheet metal can produce remarkable results such as the original Lotus Elan "I" bone frame weighing in at 75 lbs. Of course that car was very small, 1500-1800 lbs.
Lightness is good and there are threads here which show what can be done. Sometimes perhaps too radical for some, but a 250 lb reduction is a great result and immediately apparent in the Fiero. Keep dreaming and doing.
[This message has been edited by hobbywrench (edited 04-20-2013).]
or someone can buy my Garaged 79 Actual mile 1987 Fiero... its never been Driven or Started since june 1987.DOES NOT RUN>>> 000079.9 miles on it. Complete new car... NO TITLE... First $2500 takes it... Bring a Transmission Jack as its been stored 4 feet in the Air .... BRAND NEW FRAME!!! if ya need one? email me ed.ruth@aol.com Thx Ed
or someone can buy my Garaged 79 Actual mile 1987 Fiero... its never been Driven or Started since june 1987.DOES NOT RUN>>> 000079.9 miles on it. Complete new car... NO TITLE... First $2500 takes it... Bring a Transmission Jack as its been stored 4 feet in the Air .... BRAND NEW FRAME!!! if ya need one? email me ed.ruth@aol.com Thx Ed
I'd love to, but it'd be such a shame to start a car like that let alone tear it apart. It's perfect museum quality. Any frame I get will be systematically torn apart at the tac welds, scanned, and analyzed, plus I'm not really looking for a whole car, just the frame or as stripped down as possible.
Nobody does it on a commercial basis that I'm aware of, though I've successfully formed a few portions of the upper and lower rear frame rails on a one-off basis from steel. These are simple shallow drawn parts though, so I doubt anyone without the multi-ton presses and dies would be able to fabricate the deep drawn parts like the door frames for example.
Rear upper frame rail section:
Rear lower frame rail section:
Front upper cross member mounts ('84-87)
To lighten it up is easy just do what the above poster did, Drive around in some salt. The weight just falls off.
Also, been thinking and it may be feasible when going the OEM route to reproduce small sections of the frame at first, namely those areas most commonly affected by rust and other corrosion. Yes, I know that Fieros are still cheap, but I'm trying to think ahead. Sooner or later, good frames will become more scarce.
Originally posted by retroman: Also, been thinking and it may be feasible when going the OEM route to reproduce small sections of the frame at first, namely those areas most commonly affected by rust and other corrosion. Yes, I know that Fieros are still cheap, but I'm trying to think ahead. Sooner or later, good frames will become more scarce.
I think this is the only path to eventually making complete reproduction fiero chassis. Start small so you can spread out the upfront cost for the stamping dies and start generating revenue. Then over time add more and more pieces until you get to the point of only needing a few more to build an entire chassis. This is how the replacement chassis for the 69 camaro (and other hot rods) came to be. After decades of expanding their single replacement part business, they added the last few needed parts for a complete chassis (and the process to assemble them).
Upper rear frame rails, trunk corners, battery tray would all be good places to start as I see a need for these parts currently.
I think battery trays are already offered, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't be willing to offer improvements and help bring the cost down with a little competition. Funny you should mention the rear frame rails and trunk corners because that is exactly where I would start too.
BUMP to bring this thread back from the dead, because I think this is a great idea worth pursuing, and a comment:
I'm not sure I'd be in a hurry to make reproduction battery trays, since so many people move the battery to the front anyway. I think trunk corners, frame rails and, if feasible at a competitive price, a full 88 cradle should be on top of the list. With a full 88 cradle made from two-sided galvanized steel, you could get sales from both 88 owners who are restoring their cars AND 84-87 owners who are upgrading theirs, and more sales means a chance to break even sooner, and move on to reproducing other parts quicker.
Making a full 88 cradle also has another advantage: you could also get sales from wealthier Fiero owners who want to perform a swap without taking their Fiero off the road. They would just buy one of your cradles and start installing their new powertrain in it while still driving their stock Fiero.
[This message has been edited by Hidalgo (edited 04-03-2014).]
Going back to reproducing 88 cradles, I wonder how expensive it would be to make them out of aluminium instead of two-sided galvanized steel? I know it would be expensive, and that few Fiero owners would be willing to pay the extra cost of aluminium, but still, how big would the difference in price be?
A buddy of mine who has just completed an LS4 swap got his powertrain from a wrecked Impala SS, and it came in the original aluminium cradle. Aluminium has gotten so common in cars these days that I assume the cost of manufacturing things in that metal have gone down, even though it's still pricier than making things out of steel. Am I right?
[This message has been edited by Hidalgo (edited 04-04-2014).]
Going back to reproducing 88 cradles, I wonder how expensive it would be to make them out of aluminium instead of two-sided galvanized steel? I know it would be expensive, and that few Fiero owners would be willing to pay the extra cost of aluminium, but still, how big would the difference in price be?
It would be complicated, expensive, and not worth the effort. I have worked on engine cradle and control arm prototypes and production models for Honda, and there is an incredible amount of design, fixturing, welding (or hydroforming) involved. There is practically no money in making Fiero parts, especially ones like this that would cost tens of thousands to develop. Anyone seriously considering getting into this is thinking with their emotions rather than with any semblance of business sense. A big underlying theme in Fieros seems to be that a lot of owners have no money. How many threads have you seen on the mall saying.. "Must sell XXX item, need cash" or.. "I wish I could buy your tail light lenses, but I did not get my tax refund yet". Recreating frames, cradles, tail light lenses, etc sound great in theory, but are cost prohibitive and will never sell. This is a shrinking, niche market, and there are still plenty of good, rust free Fiero frames to be had for next to nothing.. Why re-invent the wheel?? Or re-invent the sunroof?
I thought the EV1 aluminum space frame was based on the fiero space frame design, this chassis was about 40 percent lighter than a steel version. EV1 had an alum frame 10 years before the Corvette zo6 first had an aluminum space frame.
[This message has been edited by gtjeff (edited 04-04-2014).]
Originally posted by lou_dias: That looks awfully close to the point of just modify it to fit...
Considering only 60 frames (40 in North America and 20 in Europe) weren't crushed after GM's experiment, I'd say you would have a hard time getting one to modify or copy. According to Wikipedia all of them went to museums or educational facilities where agreements were signed that none of them would be used again.
Interesting... I never knew this. It's as if GM was experimenting with ideas and processes that eventually became the C6 Vette. Most of us know that the C6 was built with both steel and aluminum chassis depending if you checked the Z06 option box or not.
Interesting... I never knew this. It's as if GM was experimenting with ideas and processes that eventually became the C6 Vette. Most of us know that the C6 was built with both steel and aluminum chassis depending if you checked the Z06 option box or not.
All the manufacturers have been playing with aluminum in some form, to work how to to make frames cheap enough to use in production. The 2015 Ford light duty trucks will be getting alloy frames. I don't think the GM trucks will be in 2015, but I don't see them far behind, especially with what they've done with the aluminum frame in the C7R and coming C7 Z06.
I know this is old, but the topic is just too good to let it die. I've thought about this many times. I think there could be money to be made here. Think about it. Due to the Fiero's construction and engine layout, it has much wider applications than just the Fiero community. While I know alot of people might buy a new frame to restore a Fiero for what it is, alot more would buy it because the Fiero is the world's number one chassis donor when it comes to kit cars, and face it, with the newest of our cars being 25 years old, the pool of donors is slowly drying up. We could someday be forced to restore cars that would've been previously used for parts and crushed. New tech may also be able to improve our cars' original design. I for one like the idea of an aluminum spaceframe. If someone were to pursue this, I think costs could be brought down to a reasonable level. I'm no engineer, nor do I know anyone who is, but my plan of action for something like this would be as follows:
1. Get licensing approval from GM. No one likes lawsuits, and besides being able to label a product as "Officially Licensed by GM" is always a plus and would allow a small business owner to ride GM's coat tail.
2. Try to obtain as many original blueprints and manufacturing details as possible. Hopefully, GM would be willing to cooperate and give a boost on this one.
3. Have a near perfect Fiero spaceframe put through a 3D scanner. Reverse engineering has really taken off due to this technology and it ensures accuracy, so cutting time and maintaining the cars proportions to the last microscopic detail is another plus. People like OEM looking parts. You don't want something that looks like it was hacked together in a garage. This part could be expensive, but good news is it only has to be done once.
4. Consult a tooling company. I don't expect the volume of production that GM had, but regardless of volume tooling is always a must in manufacturing.
Well, that's my .02
Maybe a kickstarter. THis could be done, use the frame as a kit car starting point. Mid engined. All that it really requires is the Fiero parts will bolt to it. It doesn't even have to use a stock fiero cradle, so long as a stock one will bolt in. 25574 registered members. 50 buck donation a piece is 1.2 mil. It could be done.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 03-21-2015).]
I haven't followed up on this in awhile, but I am using some of what I had previously outlined for a much smaller project. As with all things, it's not what you know, it's who you know, and fortunately for me I've been able to expand my network of contacts over the last year, but not to the point that I could start working on this again.
I've heard of people using the cradles from other cars and swapping them in complete. One person used a cradle from a Grand Prix with the suspension as well. I wonder if the impalas with a aluminum cradle could be adapted. I'm sure the axles and hubs are much stronger than the fieros .
The weight just falls off.
