Lh lx uc cross member
#1
Posted 16 May 2017 - 08:43 PM
#2
Posted 17 May 2017 - 08:14 PM
#3
Posted 17 May 2017 - 09:04 PM
I'd say 57 members looked at this because the thread title is quite ambiguous?
Many of us here are interested in suspension geometry and improving handling, so would have opened the thread just to see what it was about.
This may be a silly question but what are you trying to figure out? As far as I know, the dimension you're chasing would be the same across all the big Torana K-members so there isn't really anything to verify?
#4
Posted 17 May 2017 - 09:43 PM
#5
Posted 18 May 2017 - 07:23 AM
13" or 330mm
#6
Posted 18 May 2017 - 01:44 PM
#7
Posted 18 May 2017 - 05:22 PM
From the center of the hole on the flat on the chassis rail pad on k frame to the bottom side of the x member measured at 90 degrees to straight edge on under side i get 340 mm.
#8
Posted 18 May 2017 - 07:20 PM
#9
Posted 18 May 2017 - 11:42 PM
Underside of cross member to the underside of the chassis rail mount. I put a straight edge across the rail mounts, then measured to the lower side of the x member, x member is from a 1977 UC.
#10
Posted 19 May 2017 - 12:38 PM
#11
Posted 19 May 2017 - 01:41 PM
#12
Posted 19 May 2017 - 05:31 PM
That doesn't sound right?
Commodore chassis rails (at least the early ones) were much lower than the Torana so the height of the K-member should be smaller than the Torana, not 100mm taller?
#13
Posted 19 May 2017 - 06:20 PM
#14
Posted 19 May 2017 - 07:32 PM
under side of k frame is the flat bit of the k frame that usually gets dinged up from possums and wombats , sometimes rocks and wallabies and it has a witness mark in the center/ish.
the pad on the k frame is where it mates parallel/ish to the front rails is the bit that is insulated by rubber/or otherwise that go between the pads and front rails , measured from a 77 hatch k frame , but the 77 uc might be a bit different ? typo?
#15
Posted 19 May 2017 - 07:43 PM
#16
Posted 19 May 2017 - 07:49 PM
http://www.gmh-toran...e-4#entry995402
That doesn't sound right?
Commodore chassis rails (at least the early ones) were much lower than the Torana so the height of the K-member should be smaller than the Torana, not 100mm taller?
#17
Posted 20 May 2017 - 07:11 AM
under side of k frame is the flat bit of the k frame that usually gets dinged up from possums and wombats , sometimes rocks and wallabies and it has a witness mark in the center/ish.
the pad on the k frame is where it mates parallel/ish to the front rails is the bit that is insulated by rubber/or otherwise that go between the pads and front rails , measured from a 77 hatch k frame , but the 77 uc might be a bit different ? typo?
Oops, it pays to read things after you type.
#18
Posted 20 May 2017 - 05:42 PM
#19
Posted 22 May 2017 - 09:36 AM
#20
Posted 22 May 2017 - 11:05 AM
#21
Posted 22 May 2017 - 11:25 AM
I know there are various setups and heights.
#22
Posted 22 May 2017 - 11:33 AM
Message me later this arvo to remind me and I'll measure mine
#23
Posted 22 May 2017 - 07:13 PM
So i now have 3 heights
575
585
587. All to top of chassis rail at the front bolt hole from the ground.
I also have 3 different heights to the underside of th engine crossmember.
135
150
155.
So mine at 150 and 590 is near to spot on.
#24
Posted 22 May 2017 - 07:37 PM
Car 1 630mm. Std Springs 215/65/14
Car 2 585mm. Low Springs 245/50/14
#25
Posted 22 May 2017 - 08:37 PM
Atleast I know it's within the std height of the lx and won't look out of place so far so good
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users