Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Calendar
Monthly
Weekly
Agenda
Archive
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support Hardline Crawlers :
Forums
Rock Crawling Forums
General Discussion
Help settle this Cold verses hrew question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="crawlin85cj" data-source="post: 410073" data-attributes="member: 2643"><p><strong>Re: Help settle this Cold verses hrew question</strong></p><p></p><p>After having several trail rigs a couple race cars and literally beating them all within an inch of their life I can say from experience there is a hell of a lot more to building a chassis than material type. Strategic location of filler tubes plays a huge part in longevity.</p><p></p><p>1.75 x .120 DOM will dent and bend easier than expected unless supported properly. HREW tubing even more so. I've now had 3 buggies with .250 wall subframes and .188 wall overheads. All are supported in key locations and they maintain integrity after being put through a wrestling match with rocks at the mercy of my size 9 Nike. I destroyed the roof line and subframe of my first U4 car in under a year because it wasn't supported right and it took the lesser of the ass whipping. I had to align the axles every time out because things moved around in the subframe constantly. I swore I would do everything to never do that again. WFO is proof that a properly supported chassis with good material will deliver results. After 15 months I threw a tape on it and the axles are still aligned just as they were when it rolled out of WOD. </p><p></p><p>My current U4 car has been beat on now by 2 of us and everything is still right where it should be. WFO has been relentlessly beat by me and as a rental with nothing out if place. I would be willing to bet an experienced chassis builder could easily start with a mix of .250 wall, .120 wall and .095 wall HREW and build a solid chassis that would last years for the vast majority of owners.</p><p></p><p>My question is why? 1020 DOM tube is a better material and in the grand scheme of things the cost isn't that much more. The integrity of the chassis forms the foundation of a buggy and is key to a solid end result unless cosmetics are the only concern.</p><p></p><p>Just my opinion and experience. I have had bad results with both, mainly from inferior design work. Expensive lessons bring solid results later! My next car will be chromoly for added insurance. </p><p></p><p></p><p>2010 Jim' Garage U4 car</p><p>2013 Wide Open Design WFO</p><p></p><p>Looking for a JK!!!!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="crawlin85cj, post: 410073, member: 2643"] [b]Re: Help settle this Cold verses hrew question[/b] After having several trail rigs a couple race cars and literally beating them all within an inch of their life I can say from experience there is a hell of a lot more to building a chassis than material type. Strategic location of filler tubes plays a huge part in longevity. 1.75 x .120 DOM will dent and bend easier than expected unless supported properly. HREW tubing even more so. I've now had 3 buggies with .250 wall subframes and .188 wall overheads. All are supported in key locations and they maintain integrity after being put through a wrestling match with rocks at the mercy of my size 9 Nike. I destroyed the roof line and subframe of my first U4 car in under a year because it wasn't supported right and it took the lesser of the ass whipping. I had to align the axles every time out because things moved around in the subframe constantly. I swore I would do everything to never do that again. WFO is proof that a properly supported chassis with good material will deliver results. After 15 months I threw a tape on it and the axles are still aligned just as they were when it rolled out of WOD. My current U4 car has been beat on now by 2 of us and everything is still right where it should be. WFO has been relentlessly beat by me and as a rental with nothing out if place. I would be willing to bet an experienced chassis builder could easily start with a mix of .250 wall, .120 wall and .095 wall HREW and build a solid chassis that would last years for the vast majority of owners. My question is why? 1020 DOM tube is a better material and in the grand scheme of things the cost isn't that much more. The integrity of the chassis forms the foundation of a buggy and is key to a solid end result unless cosmetics are the only concern. Just my opinion and experience. I have had bad results with both, mainly from inferior design work. Expensive lessons bring solid results later! My next car will be chromoly for added insurance. 2010 Jim' Garage U4 car 2013 Wide Open Design WFO Looking for a JK!!!! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Latest posts
Hollar wood offroad park next weekend
Latest: baldduck74
Today at 4:22 PM
General Discussion
Cash LeCroy Illness
Latest: ridered3
Today at 1:02 PM
General Discussion
Golden Mountain Off-road Park opening
Latest: ridered3
Today at 10:40 AM
General Discussion
Official "Post your trail riding pics" Thread
Latest: Sawzall
Yesterday at 11:03 PM
General Discussion
Coalmont TN OHV New Park info
Latest: ridered3
Friday at 3:48 PM
General Discussion
Forums
Rock Crawling Forums
General Discussion
Help settle this Cold verses hrew question
Top