1970RT
Well-Known Member
Overall, it's about the same amount you'd net by installing a chassis from Roadster Shop, Art Morrison, or Schwartz. Those are all made from .120 wall tubing similar in size to what I've got here. If I had to ballpark how much weight is added over a purely factory setup - no torque boxes, subframe connectors, etc - I think something close to 225 lbs sounds about right....how much extra weight do you think you'll be adding as an end product with the beefing up of the chassis? ...With you running a 305/30/19 in the front, what is your plans for the rear? Going with a square set for handling or going to add a touch wider out back?
To be specific, my rocker beam assemblies aren't light - about 44 lbs each. Most of that is made up from the 76" 4x3 beam itself, and I could have shaved 2 lbs from each assembly by using 12 ga on the inner rocker plating, but I decided .120 was a slightly safer choice. Also, there are some weight savings in converting from stamped steel to structural tubing. The factory rear spring mount that connects the frame rail to the rocker is made from a couple of layers of stamped 1/8" and is substantially heavier than the 4x4 and 4x2 torque box I've constructed. I suspect the front rocker to rail integration will net similar savings. Applications like those are where the structural tubing really shows its value, and those weight savings can be applied elsewhere. For me, that will be frame overlays.
Related to tire size, I'm planning for at least a 305 rear, and likely a 325. Even with the planned suspension updates, a setback engine and trans, and an overall lighter powertrain, the weight bias will still be in the front. With the power I've planned, I'll need a bit more footprint out back. I'm really excited to get into that part of the build.
David