50 Series?? (Shorty 55)

[Delancy]

I now see why so many guys attach sheet metal to tube frames, though I've no intentions of traveling that path.

There's a lot to consider from various aspects, but, at some point, I'd imagine the engineers calculated load in a roll inverted scenario and based the load capabilities on all 8 pillars being present.

The rear corners on the Pigs are a structural, integral component to the overall stability in a front to back and side to side, as it probably it is in all vehicles, but it "looks" like the majority of rigidity comes from the C & D pillars.....both of which I'm proposing to remove.

The roof skin provides very little structural integrity, which is odd. The roof support rail that circumvents all 8 pillars is stout, but I find it odd that there's no side to side support structure of merit, between the B&C pillars, themselves, but claim nothing more than pignorance.

So, what I was thinking was to increase the structural rigidity of the rocker, reinforce and enlarge the B pillar, with internal structure that "should" afford similar integrity to the 90 degree rear corners, then reinforce the roof channel for B pillar to B pillar, then cross bracing (in an x) from B to A.

I know I keep going back to this pic, but similar to the pillar shown here:



The issue with fabbing similar is the inherent curvature from the rocker to the roof support. For the purpose of complexity, 'cause "simple" isn't synonymous with any of my lofty ambitions, thinking an internal subframe, damn near like a wing, that the steel can be wrapped to, to recreate the curves, but hope to have a complete pillar from the '71 out to further investigate.

Thinking a similar internal support structure may be necessary on the rear quarters, since chopping off all cross bracing from side to side, leaving only the tailgate between the now shortened D pillars.

Used to employee a CAD detailer that returned to oil and gas when the chit hit the fan on '09. He's going to input (because I never learned how to utilize all the features of AutoCad, therefore dependent upon) what we "know" from the drawings I've accumulated, but it really isn't going to be the blue print for success, because there's not enough data to work with.

Here's the thing, folks.

I don't want any part of a POS, period. If it's gonna be done, it has to be done right.....but determine what's "right" when you're not an automotive engineer proves very difficult.

You'd think that a body as square as a Pig would be easy to even conceptualize good looking lines, but guess I don't have an eye for it, or am overtly critical, because I can't seem to find a good way to do it, and it not look like a ghetto fabbed, hack job.

I've never modified anything but a quad, before getting into Toyota's a few years back, but I've learned that Toyota has a reason for everything, regardless if it's visible to the uneducated eye.

For instance, I've cussed Toyota 10-11 times for the monstrosities of body mounts they used on the FJC, as I chopped them off of others to run tires that fit the fat girls body, never understanding "why" they had to be as long and boxy as they are.

Then, I saw this....



and it became clear in an instance.

Now, I lose sleep over those I've removed and instances similar are why I'm thoroughly exploring every option on every damn thing I do, now.

 

[tucker74]

You'll definitely want a front hoop, the a-pillar is the weakest support of the entire roof structure on a pig. Then b & c depending on where you chop it, large floor footers are going to give you one-time protection but not roll it every weekend. The body will be FUBAR either way unless you exo it like Gumby. Good thing is there is a body mount right under the a-pillar mount -

Tucker

 

[Delancy]

You'll definitely want a front hoop, the a-pillar is the weakest support of the entire roof structure on a pig.

Is it illogical to contemplate rebuilding the a pillar? (Haha. Asked on an illogical "build")

Not that I need another garage queen, or wheeler for that matter, but seeing the time that'll be invested, especially if I do myself, it's going to be very, very difficult to beat on this.

For some reason, keep reverting back to the root of this consideration, being saving the '71 from the crusher. The more that furthers, the more my thinking resorts to building for fun, but wheeling the 80.

Not happening right away, so irrelevant to discuss that aspect, but it is weighing heavily....

 

[crushers]

IF you do a front hoop take into consideration that hunk of steel that is now next to your head.
we lost a fellow wheeler to a front cage to tree impact a few years back, his head somehow ended up between the two when he went off the road. (IF i remember the story correctly and my dislike for front cages was reinforced when i heard)
so, yes, a front cage will reinforce the interior in the case of a continuious barrel roll down a long hill or hauling ass down the highway and loosing control.
but
when you see drag cars, competition trucks, circle track car etc the occupants are ALWAYS held in with at least a 4 point AND a helmet to prevent the noggin from cracking against the steel tubing.
i have yet to see anyone with a cage off roading (at least up here) wear a helmet let along a proper restraining belt.
plus
with a PROPER restraining belt and helmet can you picture what it would be like to drive down the road? on a tight trail where you want to see the placement of your tires? not practical at all.
i know most, if not all will disagree with this statement and that is your right. but common sense for safety around the cage needs to be considered.

 

[Delancy]

Final determination on purpose will be reserved until I see what the body looks like.

If it looks like chit, then will address the method and means for a cage, but would probably opt for a buggy with Pigskin before trying to build an internal cage for hardcore wheeling.

Hoping to do a good enough job that I won't want to beat on it, quite frankly. Have an 80 and body parts are everywhere for, so makes much better sense.

As little headroom afforded me already, I might have to pad the roof supports to DD any Pig, but I'm in complete agreement on occupant safety with tube frames.

Before the LC addiction, hit the dunes of OK very frequently, until growing tired of seeing dead bodies or Lifeflight activity regularly.

I witnessed the event, the long term ramifications are here say, but saw a guy hit his head on the cross bar of a long travel buggy, knocking him unconscious. He left in a chopper and was later said he had to learn to talk again, due to a skull fracture and embolism from what appeared a slight bump against the frame. No helmet, of course.

 

[tucker74]

I'm really not trying to argue here, but since we are talking specifically about the 55 ... this slow-speed snow bank rollover resulted in this:

That made a lot of us pig owners re-think the safety of the stock a-pillar, I'd rather bump my head on a roll bar than have it crushed. To your other point, no idea what kind of wheeling you guys do up there ... but locally it's either rock crawling or long range expedition type off-road driving. I will assure you those guys in serious rock crawling buggies with full cages are ALL in 5-point harnesses and racing seats. I don't see an interior cage being a negative in either of theses uses for Chris, I've got the old SOR cage in mine (b & c pillar) and am planning on adding an a hoop -

Tucker

 

[crushers]

point taken, i have never seen a 55 rolled and that ... well, sad.

to take this a bit further, what is your initial reaction in the event of a roll? you duck. of course now you have other issues to contend with.
we had a topless 40 do a roll when racing a jeep down a forestry cutline. no doors, windshield down and 4 occupants, factory bar. when i came across the wreckage there were 4 people sitting outside the vehicle. the windshield frame was shaped down to the hood that was shaped down the engine. the roll bar was flat.
but
4 people walked away, 3 with scratches and bruises and the driver with a concussion. no broken bones. no deaths ... very lucky.

i pondered this for quite some time over the next few months wondering how a Cruiser racing down the back roads and rolling into the ditch would not kill someone.
my assumption is that during the roll the occupants "ducked" which took their bodies inside the truck at in the back side seats as well as the front.
i also am led to assume that the factory "joke" of a roll bar actually did do the job intended ... to sacrifice itself in absorbing the energy of the roll, laying the truck down upside down.

now, i have had this debate many times in the past. cage vrs factory bar. similar discussion of cage vrs factory sheet metal. a cage is like a pop can, you roll it across the floor and the can just keeps rolling till the energy is expended.
if you cut that can in half and leave a couple strips of aluminum near the middle and the can rolls and the strip collapses absorbing the energy of the roll. depending how hard you try to roll it, it might roll once or might roll twice but then it stops.

so taking the original idea of the occupants "ducking" during the initial roll, they are protected due to the distance from the flesh to the metal or dirt. the bar collapses eating the energy and the vehicle stops.
but in the case of a cage, the first roll the occupants duck but since the cage stays intact the energy of the roll is expelled by the truck and the items inside the truck, the occupants. as the roll continues the head, arms, back are forced up and out. G force idea. IF this is the case the more the vehicle rolls the more the occupants are flung around while still wearing the lap and shoulder belts. more damage potential, in my mind.

i would say, IF you are considering stiffening the front A pillar section then put the cage on the outside away from the occupants.

Sorry Delancy, didn't really want to head off on a tangent in your thread.

 

[Delancy]

Sorry Delancy, didn't really want to head off on a tangent in your thread.

I am a tangent.

Stopped for fuel for the '76, taking her home for a weekend of deconstruction.

Considering it's not legitimately tagged (heavily insured, mind you), pouring down rain and she's a wiper short, brakes lock up, and now a funny miss, I think due to her first taste of ethanol from the last 5 gallons I put in her.

I'm praying I don't test the A pillars....

Anyhow, going to depict and pose a few idears in a few hours, after getting the headliner out, and if I can get my wife to take a pic of current headroom.

 

[crushers]

when i lived in Alberta we had long, gravel, rock, dirt hills anywhere from 100 ft to close to 1000 ft climbs. mud, skag, sidehill (with the potential in spots for a long long barrel roll to the nearest tree)
here in ontario we have mostly mud bogs and rocks, short hills, slippery rocks and if you do slid off the side it will be more of a flip than a roll.

to expand on the factory cage a bit more, i just remembered a couple decades back when my B-I-L rolled his lifted on 44s 40 down about (according to him and the spectators) 700 ft dirt and rock hill with steps included. he came down (no top or doors) and when he neared the bottom at a terrific speed backwards the truck caught a log sticking out from the bush around him and he ended up doing an endo and a barrel roll. he walked away with 2 cracked ribs, bruised kidney and other minor cuts and bruising. once again the factory roll bar was flattened.
point is he walked away.

i feel you need to take into consideration what kind of wheeling you do or plan to do and build accordingly. if i was going to wheel in Moab, i might be tempted to do an external cage.

 

[Delancy]

For S&Gs.





I came and left, as instructed.

 

[Delancy]

And better add a couple of hours to my timeframe.

Going to go home and nurse the boys from the third degree burns, due to lack of a cup holder for my coffee.

 

[crushers]

missing your 80, eh?

Kum and Go,
what genius thought up that name, or can you rent Asian hookers inside to go with your Coffee?

 

[LAMBCRUSHER]

And better add a couple of hours to my timeframe.

Going to go home and nurse the boys from the third degree burns, due to lack of a cup holder for my coffee.

pfrt...laughing with; not at...HAHAHA, but they give you chit over the word pig on a license plate that's OK, I guess

 

[bobm]

Chris, you got me thinking know on this internal cage. Tucker also got me thinking after posting that SLOW ROLL. I have a couple of questions as far as what priorities are.

1. Most important part of internal cage is safety?
2. Least intrusive into interior cabin.
3. Structural integrity of internal cage.

I have some ideas for you depending on the above. That may solve all of your issues. Keep in mind that a Roll Cage should be an integral part of the frame not the body.

Thanks Bob.

 

[Delancy]

Bob,

I don't see any way to increase the structural integrity of either the a pillar, not the roof support, without a cage to the inside.

Problem there is, there's no room for "pillars" on the inside, nor anything below to attach to.

The B pillars afford strength, but, for lack of a cross support between the two, don't think they'd really protect an occupant.

Doesn't appear that Toyota was concerned about roll overs, evidenced by the lack of any cross supports in the roof itself.

So, in light of a lofty goal for it to appear as though it came from the factory, I'm pondering this:

Strengthen the B pillar and provide a cross support structure between the B pillars, capable of maintaining in the event of a roll.

Strengthen the support between the A and B pillars, cantilevering the strength from the B pillar....if that's even possible, then running another roof support from the A to A, then an X pattern from As to Bs.

Somehow, have modern glazing formed for the windshield with tighter tolerances, minimizing popping out.

Best I can conceptualize at this time, having spent intimate time with the '76, today.

I don't want to build a buggy and wrap in pigskin. If I can't achieve it, the first reconsideration would be to leave a topped Pig, utilizing the D pillar, with the B.

Babbling now.

Paging you to the '76 thread...

 

[crushers]

what you can do is reinforce the roof from side to side with small tube bent to follow the roof line similar to the idea of the 60s and 70s roof reinforcement strips. this would help prevent the collapse as in the pic of the slow roll and yet still leave you without steel next to your head ...
just an idea

 

[scrapdaddy]

what you can do is reinforce the roof from side to side with small tube bent to follow the roof line similar to the idea of the 60s and 70s roof reinforcement strips. this would help prevent the collapse as in the pic of the slow roll and yet still leave you without steel next to your head ...
just an idea

That's exactly what I want to do on mine. A whole frame work for the roof, that can be a multi use addition. Roof support, roll over support ( wouldn't be a lot of support, but some ) and a place for dome lights, etc.

Would have to be fastened well to the body, very doable.

 

[LAMBCRUSHER]

what you can do is reinforce the roof from side to side with small tube bent to follow the roof line similar to the idea of the 60s and 70s roof reinforcement strips. this would help prevent the collapse as in the pic of the slow roll and yet still leave you without steel next to your head ...
just an idea

That's exactly what I want to do on mine. A whole frame work for the roof, that can be a multi use addition. Roof support, roll over support ( wouldn't be a lot of support, but some ) and a place for dome lights, etc.

Would have to be fastened well to the body, very doable.

sometimes the solution is right in front of you...^^^is what I would do

 

[onemanarmy]

That FJC looks like it ran under something....the strucural bumper looks to be in the right place (bumper cover ripped off)...the hood got pushed back, ripped off. The body doesn't look buckled.

 

[Delancy]

That FJC looks like it ran under something....the strucural bumper looks to be in the right place (bumper cover ripped off)...the hood got pushed back, ripped off. The body doesn't look buckled.

The body mount stopped the tire.

Had the body mount been removed, who knows where that tire would've stopped.

I had heard fellow FJC owners, who profess an engineering background, state that was the reason put the monstrous body mount there, but it rubs any tire on any lift, over 32" diameter, without squirreling the front alignment, and impossible to fit 35s, so I chopped mine off and have chopped others, too.

Now, if, being operative, I slam into something, there's nothing keeping the tire from going straight into the firewall, or possibly further into the cabin itself.

On top of that, dealers will note "frame damage" and won't take in trade, or will adjust the value dramatically. I've heard that if they replace the body mount, "frame damage" is tied to the VIN, so I'm going to put 32s on mine, even though it has a long travel suspension, and weld body mounts robbed from a part out, in place of the current, before selling.

Next guy wants to chop, his choice.