Body / Glass: Hog troughs....

[mmagic]

Would one of you engineering minds please explain to this old number cruncher the function of the torque boxes. Normally a little listening and reading the threads answers my questions... but not on this one. I've deducted from the fear and horror that a little rust on a torque box raises that their function is of more importance than an ebay car having an engine.

This holly grail appears to only be an issue on C/K and Avanti, yet the frames on these vehicles appear to be nearly identical to sedans. We're not talking about uni-body construction so I would expect the frame to do the hard work. We're not talking about a 600 HP engine that would apply tremendous "torque" to the body/frame unit but rather the same drive train found in everything from Champ to Sedans.

Is it that these cars are expected/designed to run through corn fields to avoid flashing red lights? How can these little boxes ( or lack there of ) send intelligent Sr. Citizens into panic attacks when talking about a vehicle whose "A" Pillar support is premised on a frame outrigger attached to a disintegrated floorboard and whose front fenders are 85% iron oxide?

I really shouldn't be that worried about this issue as my Speedster project seems to still have the original paint on this Achilles heel of Studebakers. But, you guys have me in absolute fear of scratching them in the restore process simply out of group think pressure rather than for a logical reason.

I'm sure they have extreme importance beyond my current comprehension ability or Classic Enterprises would not have a market for $1,600 shiny stainless steel replacement versions of an item for the underside of a vehicle that already has more chrome and stainless than an Elvis Cadillac.

Please help me with this one as its starting to effect my sleep habits.

[thunderations]

In the case of my 1950 Champion convertible, the extra strength under the floor keeps the body from flexing. On a sedan the roof does this job. The frames alone are very flexible. It's surprising to see them twist with no body on them when you roll them over a ramp or any unlevel surface.

[junior]

The way I look at the issue is the factory would not have put them there if they were not required. regarding c/k cars, only the k cars had them, and I suspect that is because of the lack of a b pillar to add rigidity to the body to maintain door fit. If you car's boxes are sound why mess with them...if they are not sound, then they should be repaired, or if they are totally messed up, then replace them...but do they need to be stainless...no. cheers, Junior.

[studegary]

Having worked on many rust belt cars, I see the importance of the torque boxes. On K bodies and Avantis, when the torque boxes are really bad, the car's doors are hard to get to work/close properly. Studebaker (1953 up) frames are designed to work in concert with the body, sort of a semi-unit body construction.

[skyway]

"Studebaker (1953 up) frames are designed to work in concert with the body, sort of a semi-unit body construction."

Very diplomatically put!

[SN-60]

To: studegary,----That really was 'Well Said'!!!!!

[mmagic]

Thanks for the enlightenment. I'll now closely examine my Torque boxes to see if I'm looking by a hard to see flaw as the cause of the 5/16" door sag on the driver side of the Speedster.

[rockne10]

5/16" door sag on the driver side of the Speedster.

Could just be an indication of use. Sometimes even people leaning on open doors can cause it. Have you done any adjusting at the hinge mounts?

[mmagic]

No, I haven't touched the hinges as per my previous thread, I am convinced that rushing to adjust the hinges is normally exacerbating a symptom rather than correcting a problem. I had planned to shim the A pillar frame support as I am convinced that is where the sag is. When I lifted the door as noted in the previous post, the floor popped further suggesting this is the fail point. However, after this discussion, I will carefully examine torque boxes to make sure the failure is not in them or their attachment.

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?67822-Door-alignment-theory

[sweetolbob]

No, I haven't touched the hinges as per my previous thread, I am convinced that rushing to adjust the hinges is normally exacerbating a symptom rather than correcting a problem. I had planned to shim the A pillar frame support as I am convinced that is where the sag is. When I lifted the door as noted in the previous post, the floor popped further suggesting this is the fail point. However, after this discussion, I will carefully examine torque boxes to make sure the failure is not in them or their attachment.

That's not a good sign as the torque boxes are connected to the floor in three sections, along the length of the boxes and the rocker panel along it's entire length. I would think that to see flex in the floor, it would be quite evident that the boxes were severely compromised.

You haven't mentioned anywhere that I see about the condition of the A-pillar to floor area. I'd check that area if the hog troughs don't look to bad.

As an aside. Looking at most automobiles suggests that they are all box structures as that is a very stable configuration to resist torque and flex. My 2008 Impala is a total design of box structures including one piece side panels from the cowl to the rear bumper. If you think the hog troughs are important just ask a body shop what it takes to repair the newer bodies and maintain the integrity of the structures. That's why the A, B and C pillars are so large today.

Bob