Unibody rigidity

Apr 12, 2014 25 Replies

the strikers inward on all four doors in that thing, and it actually began speaking German! Seriously - the body felt tighter, the suspension respo nded more readily to both the road and my inputs. It felt more like an Aut obahn burner than a cushy Detroit rolling library.

. But I read in the chassis manual I bought for it that both the front and rear glass "must be properly mounted and sealed to insure body rigidity."

glass for total rigidity??

Short answer, yes. That's why pretty much all recently built cars use glue d-in glass rather than the old style rope-in gaskets. It's not because the y're deliberately trying to make it more difficult for a DIYer, that's just a side effect.

Steve W. wrote: "cut-aways to companies who then installed regular cargo boxes and ambulance bodies as well as motorhome bodies on them, Many added framerails to the rear but there were quite a few that simply changed the "

Don't forget twinkie wagons!! :)

The first as far as I know was Lancia in the early 1920s.

The first U.S. car companies to convert completely to unibody construction were Hudson (1948) and Nash (1949). Nash previously built a unibody model, the "600," in 1941, but the company's other models at that time were still body-on-frame.

Yep, lot's of different delivery outfits used them. We had one for a while. Handled about like a drunk elephant walking on marbles....

Steve W: "- show quoted text - Yep, lot's of different delivery outfits used them. We had one for a while. Handled about like a drunk elephant walking on marbles....

Well, the Lincoln was a "normal" car so I'd still call it the largest. Also, didn't those Chevy vans use subframes in the front? Not so on the Lincoln.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required