It’s also clear that my points are getting to Autostream as the only thread in his blog is a defense of this topic. He seems desperate to back what pathetic credibility he had.

Here is where Autostream threw out this same pack of crap in the past. Needless to say he was roundly shot down by people who know more than he does. He refused to debate me here even though I signed up just for him!

forums.motortrend.com/70/6658793/the-general-forum/preleminary-corvette-zr1-ring-times/page15.html

Let’s ignore much of his Jeremy Clarkson want to be language. It’s all fun and games until he gets caught in it. Kind of like the post he deleted in which he states that no chassis engineer he talk to disagreed. Hum. How many chassis engineers did he talk to?

So he claims it’s a ladder frame. Well there are some problems with that. Let’s start with the manufactures which claim it’s a space frame. Those would include GM, Dana, and Alcoa. Note that Alcoa knows a thing or two about the subject as they work with Ferrari on the Ferrari aluminum chassis.

Autostream seems to love a picture he lifted, or plagiarized, from a National Geographic special. Incidentally, the NG episode says “space frame”.

Perhaps now would also be a good time to mention that Autostream doesn’t believe in the space frame chassis. He says it doesn’t exist… Funny that he is showing a picture of one now.
“Please enlighten us vettably. Since you have experience with chassis design, what type of chassis does the latest Corvette use (other than a spaceframe since thats not a type)?”

So are you saying it’s a type now? Which is it?

You say the Corvette chassis is a ladder frame but it doesn’t have a series of lateral rungs. Instead it has a large 3D bulkhead in front and behind the driver. Your pictures don’t show it but the ones in the Motor Tread thread do show it.

Your picture highlights the hydroformed rails that help give the chassis its stiffness. Of course in the case of the Z06 that you drove the stiffness also comes from the roof and windshield header which are part of the chassis. Funny that you didn’t mention that…

Now let’s look at the Countach chassis. You claim it’s not a space frame. You must as you said space frames don’t exist. Still let’s ignore that for a moment. The chassis has many small steal tubes that form a side girder and a central tunnel. The Corvette has the same to elements but the side tubes are larger hydroformed tubes. The tunnel is an aluminum sheet assembly. The fact is both chassis use a central box and side sills to carry the load. The Countach has a tubular bulk head in front and behind the driver. So does the Corvette chassis. Hell the Corvette chassis includes a bolt on, load carrying windshield header and welded in roll hoop. The Countach chassis seems to be missing those.

I like the Corvette assembly picture. I don’t know what your point was since it just shows the drive line being raised into the chassis. The drive line of the Porsche and Miata are assembled in the same fashion. As you often do you try to tick rather than make a point.

Funny that in your supper research on the subject you never noticed that Dave McLellan wasn’t the Corvette C5’s chief engineer. That would be David Hill. How can people believe you when you change your story and can’t get simple facts right?

You make safety claims regarding the Corvette yet you have provided no crash test data. Show some data! Interesting that you took a quote regarding the GT1 Corvette out of context. Note that you didn’t include the part where he commented how well the chassis absorbs crash test damage. Perhaps that is because that would support the notion that the car is safe. The IIHS seems to think so.

Your functional description of the torque tube is also wrong but why bother going into more detail you won’t understand.

Funny that you can’t show any proof as always! Anyway, you are still full of shit and if you want to debate this why not return to your old thread. Every point you have made was covered there.

VanPala: As always, you suffer from a reading comprehension problem. I never said McLellan was chief engineer. I also never claimed the Countach was Not a spaceframe. On Youtube, I said the Spaceframe was a modifier when uttered in corporate press releases (GM, Dana, Alcoa), in which case this idiom can be used en masse. However, physics-wise, its a type. You will never grasp these concepts of chassis dynamics because you’ll always look at it top-down. Bottom-up: the C6 Corvette fails all of Aird’s SF properties plus the ball-joint test, which the 2 ‘purer’ examples I listed above, pass.