How do you like that hole saw notcher? Seen those for sall from Speedway. We always used an end mill.
Great job and pictures !!!!!!! Nice to see a quality build and you are putting alot of thought and preplanning into your build Allen in PA,
I also prefer to use a mill for notching if I know what I'm building ahead of time i.e. to a blueprint, but when your kinda going "off the cuff" like this build you cant beat the JMR. I'd definitely endorse it! It's great if you have a tube tacked in and need a small adjustment it can be made on the chassis with this little notcher. It is the best hole saw notcher period and I've owned every one on the market to date and although this is the most expensive of the "low buck DIY style" notchers it will save you money right away because it simply takes forever to wear out hole saws with it. Meaning if you have used one of those cheap Harbor Freight types it will take you longer to do a fit up because the saw cannot duplicate the angle desired and the way the arbors walk in the bushings wears saw blades out at about 30 cuts. I literally built 3 full round tube chassis doorslammers with the same 1 5/8-inch hole saw before I felt guilty and replaced the holesaw! And I'm sure you know how many cuts that would be equal too
added the rear upright which were a pain to get right. I'd get one where I wanted it and then I couldn't seem to get the other in the same spot even tough it measured the same no matter how I checked it. Just looked off, must have been an optical thing because it seems fine now. I wanted them tilted inward at the same angle as a 488 even though I installed a shoulder bar instead of their bent hoop. Also got the second compartment figured out. A "K" member is the only logical way I can see to triangulate the upright without putting a tube in the third compartment, which if I do that it wil be a headache to remove the rear axle. Not that I plan on doing that alot but I was looking at a friends car that has a bolt in triangulator in that compatment. That's about it for today, i'll pull the pinion crossmember tomorrow and drill it for the anti rotational bungs.
Allen, Thank you for the kind words. Glad your enjoying following along. I love your digger and the Swamp Rat 30 in your album is great. For some reason I don't remember it running; did it run in the late 80's? Michael
Michael, Any progress updates on your TE 448 build, Excellent fabrication skills and build excecution so far Allen in PA
"Michael, Any progress updates on your TE 448 build, Excellent fabrication skills and build excecution so far Allen in PA" No Allen I was locked down in the shop finishing the Belond roadster for a Concours last weekend. I pulled two weeks of all nighters with 1-2hr. cat naps before getting it running at 6:15am the day of the show, 6:00am was the scheduled load in time. Anyway got that project down and it literally took until today before I felt recouperated. So I'll be placing a few orders this coming week and hopefully I'll be able to get moving on it again.
777, I am following along very closely to your mods to the 448 design to be nhra legal. Are you building to 7.50 and slower spec? I am trying to do the same thing but havent figured out some of the necessary roll bar requirements. Have you thought of how you are going to approach the 5 point bar and helmet bar requirements and such? Or is what you have acceptable to an nhra inspector? Thank you for sharing your work and I hope you get recouped so that you can keep going strong!!! Matt
hotrods316, I don't know if you have ever dealt with NHRA inspectors; an FYI is that there is inconsistency among them based on their mechanical knowledge. Some guys are really sharp and you can debate a point and if your correct and they can get a clear understanding of your intent and the basis of the spec they will "cert" your project. And then there are the guys that can only look at the print and if it doesn't look exactly like the picture you fail. I am building for a 7.50 / 180 mph cert. Mostly for the mph because I don't think it will et that hard but I do think it can mph up there which is really more the concern. Let's look at what is legal first and then go from there. From what should be considered the shoulder hoop area down it is built very similar to a 6.50 and faster car. In reality the tubing is actually larger then required, much larger, but I felt if I put in smaller tubing it would look newer. The lower rails are already 1-inch smaller then they should be but I liked what Keith had done with the 2-inch tubing and followed suit. Now there could be an issue with the upper rails not extending a couple of inches past the mid plate uprights but I am hoping that since the mid plate uprights are so far forward, and there is another complete compartment in between them; that the second compartment should be considered the area the upper tubes are past. Hopefully you are following along with an SFI spec in front of you if you are planning on doing something like this!! I'm holding off on the X brace and the rest of the members that run between the lower frame rails because some many of them will see double duty as mounts for the trans sliders, and the pinion support etc. At the moment I am waiting on the rear axle housing because while looking at a friends car it seems that they put the rear axle in from the top, angling it in through the upper rails and then across. Not all cars are that way but and I'd rather take the axle housing out through the side. I'm okay with pulling the brakes, live axle and center section to get the housing out.... Hmmm maybe I'm not fine with that much work to swap an axle assembly. So again I need the axle housing and will need to put together at least a mock up center section before I consider finalizing the rear two compartments uprights also the reason you'll notice the entire car is only tacked together at this point, things change as your project moves forward.
Cool! Sorry I haven't checked in on this in a while to see that. Thank you very much. Now you have a deadline, get back to work!
Have you thought of how you are going to approach the 5 point bar and helmet bar requirements and such? Or is what you have acceptable to an nhra inspector? Whoops forgot to answer this part. I do have an idea of what I will be doing and remember that will fall under a tech inspector and I going over the intent of the SFI spec and both our abilities to understand that intent and NO what is currently pictured would not be considered acceptable for this reason: there is no protection afforded the driver above his head if the car found itself slidding along the top of a K rail.
I have dealt with this exact situation. One inspector spent 4 hours looking over a top alcohol FC we had looking for something to fail it. He tried to fail over the stovepipe not being with the car. Needless to say it was not a fun experience trying to tell the inspector what he is actually supposed to inspect. Finally got the pro tag renewed and then sold the car. The same inspector also would not fail a car we had because he didnt want to write the repair order (acted as though he never say the car). And I have drove 6 hours to deal with one of the best inspectors who understands his job and has a great understanding of the spec and the builders intent like you said. I figured that this is style of car is still very much in the determination of the specific inspector in the specific moment. I didnt know if you were communicating with an inspector you know and if he was providing you any feedback along the way. And yes hopefully the inspector will understand your intent of the second compartment. Becuase I believe that the sfi specs are general and vague in that the actual midplate does necessitate what bar is the midplate vertical. We have gotten 7.50 and slower with a vertical that is past the drivers feet. The midplate was further out-this is on our current dragster. The tubing step down was done before the actual location of the midplate and in order to pass we added in a vertical 3 inches from the 45' slip joint and called that the midplate vertical. I hope my explanation was clear enough. I can get a photo if needed to help show the point. As for the rearend- its all preference. I am with you in that I want the least amount of work to swap parts, but sometimes the design doesnt work. And yes I noticed the tacked frame. And you are probably well aware but the general concenus is to leave the rearend tacked until the entire frame is welded to allow you to adjust the rearend back into alignment. (definately the biggest concern we have when running a coupler) Good luck and keep us the good work.
I know this is old. It is a amazing build with great thought and information. Can anyone provide any updates? Did it get finished? Did NHRA approve it? Thank you
The Jalopy Journal
