1969 - 1971 C body Stub Frame (subframe)

[polara71]

I really gotta look maybe take a photo or two. If the core is 2 inches shorter it is because of the height in the isolators. Which the way I read it on johns car the fenders shouldn't be able to bolt to the core , there would be a space between the fenders and core support

 

[kmccabe56]

How does that make it " wrong"?

You said " for a reason". What's the reason?

sevnt300 has just given us one of the best tutorials I've seen in a REALLY long, long time. Excellent work.

I can think of a couple of obvious things someone decided to mix and match core supports with stub frames. #1 is alignment. Whether you "should" or "shouldn't" have isolators under the core support if you omit them when they should be there or put them in when it doesn't need them, then you've just lost your alignment of the radiator and shroud to the fan. Let me know what happens when the fan tries to mill off the trailing face of the shroud. Second, the hood latches (primary and secondary) ultimately mount to the core support (I always knew it as the rad yoke, but it's the same thing), so you could be having a hood that latches to thin air. I'm sure there's more stuff that mounts to the front or back of the core support and you're likely to have alignment issues with some of that stuff too.

Chrysler was quite the master of mixing and matching parts, but you really have to pay attention to Everything that was changed when one of these swaps took place.

One of my favourites, right after I win the lottery is to put the whole front end of a fusie Imperial on a Chrysler convertible to create my very own one of none Imperial convertible. Swap the quarter panel caps, the decklid, tail lights and bumper and you've got it. OK, change the I/P if you really want to go whole hog.

 

[ceebuddy]

One of my favourites, right after I win the lottery is to put the whole front end of a fusie Imperial on a Chrysler convertible to create my very own one of none Imperial convertible.

Now that you mention it, I'd really love to see some more pics of this project.

 

[commando1]

I'm still knawing on Mr C about that Formal Imperial 'vert he's itching for.
Told him I would help him. He's the only guy that can do it.

 

[kmccabe56]

Now that you mention it, I'd really love to see some more pics of this project.

Just need the right lottery ticket, and you can call it done!

And after that I'll be doing a '56 Imperial convertible. No, not one of the "one of 3" that KTKeller had built off of a New Yorker body - a REAL '56 Imperial.

 

[kmccabe56]

I'm still knawing on Mr C about that Formal Imperial 'vert he's itching for.
Told him I would help him. He's the only guy that can do it.

That would be BITCHIN' !!!!!!!! Probably need to hack up an Eldo rag to get the reinforcing structure for the top so that you could keep the full width back seat? But whatcha gonna use for the windshield header?

Tying the frame rails would be a given, but would you also fab up an "X" for it too and go for a two piece driveshaft and center bearing?

THAT would be ROCKIN' !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[commando1]

That got old man McCabe up and kicking....
See Mr. C????

 

[kmccabe56]

That got old man McCabe up and kicking....
See Mr. C????

I've been awake for hours........

 

[Samplingman]

Well... I just put a 71 core support in my 70 300 vert.... with no modifications.

Indeed, and now I'm noticing the isolators, so everything should line up, but wouldn't without them. I studied this picture when you first posted because I have a noticeably different core support for my 70 300 vert and wasn't sure why.

I wonder if there are implications in mixing rigid and torsion quiet components. I would be concerned that the stub and the core support would flex at different rates for one thing. If you run into an issue, you could always add body shims instead of isolators.

By the way, this topic is long overdue and needs to be discussed thoroughly.

 

[commando1]

So when you grab the new stub frame, grab the radiator support too....

Looking overdue....

Posted via Topify on Android

 

[polara71]

I have said on this board, other boards and to anyone who will listen, 71 up have a much better ride than previous years. IF you are replacing and can go with the iso's ....do it

 

[tallhair]

That would be BITCHIN' !!!!!!!! Probably need to hack up an Eldo rag to get the reinforcing structure for the top so that you could keep the full width back seat? But whatcha gonna use for the windshield header?

Tying the frame rails would be a given, but would you also fab up an "X" for it too and go for a two piece driveshaft and center bearing?

THAT would be ROCKIN' !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was just gonna ask if C body Converts have the steel reinforcements in the rocker panels but realized probably not since they are not unibody

 

[wyrmrider]

C bodies

Owner of many 66-73 C bodies
I can attest that a 68 Dodge Polara 2 Door uses the same torsion bars as up to 78 Chryslers
I have 78 PD 1.08 torsion bars in my one owner ride (biggest 69 is .98)
Cordoba rear sway bolts right in
73 New yorker disc brakes using 69 non power MC- works fine but went to a smaller rear wheel cylinder to balance the brakes
Using larger condenser from 65 Imperial and reworked Radiator
15 x 7 PD wheels

 

[Big_John]

When someone says "They never" or "You couldn't get", I always wait for someone to reach around and pull something like a Hemi station wagon or a documented A12 Roadrunner with a H in its VIN out of their ***...

The picture Samplingman has shown is the "before" the new core support or yoke was installed.

Now here's a picture of the frame in the car.... This is a 70 Chrysler 300 convertible. That looks like the longer 70 or "torsion quiet ride" stub frame to me! Note isolators properly bolted to the floor. I don't have a good picture of the floor under the carpet, but you'll have to take my word that everything looked just fine up there.



So... Is my car something different? Don't forget, anything and everything happened on the assembly line.. As long as the car got up on the carrier at the factory gates, all was right with the world.

 

[Big_John]

And let's not talk about the transmission pan please. That was added two owners ago and I haven't gotten around to changing it.

Hood latch... Just 'cause...



New Core support

 

[polara71]

I went out and measured the core supports..... THEY ARE THE SAME HEIGHT...21" .... 70 and 71. However...... the difference lies at the Isolator as we all knew...so of course a 71 will bolt into a 70.

First three are a 71 second three are the 1970.................

 

[Big_John]

This has me thinking... and that's usually dangerous.

I looked at Samplingman's thread on his 300 vert and noticed a good pic of the floor pan.



Turns out I do have a crappy pic of mine after I painted with POR-15.




There is clearly a spot not cut for the rear mount in Samplingman's floor and a cutout for that mount in mine.

The carpet is in mine along with two layers of sound deadening that aren't going to get pulled up to check, but I wonder if the hole was cut for a replacement stub frame to mount. The car was hit in the front and the sheet metal was replaced with '71 hood and fenders. It also got a different core support of unknown origin. When I first saw the car years ago (two owners) it had a 69 grille and bumper too.

Now I wonder if the stub frame was replaced too.

BTW, this was done in the early 70's. The story is the car was from Maryland and wrecked in New York State near the Canadian border. It ended up in a GM dealership where the owner had bought a new car (with cash) to continue their journey. At least this is the story I got. The bodyman at the dealership got the car and repaired it for his wife.

Bodywork we've uncovered has been pretty good for the most part and of that era in methods. It wasn't unusual to piece cars together back them.

Either way.... It does prove that you can interchange frames with some work. As this was done in the early seventies, the car seems to have survived the soft mounts with no issues that I'm aware of. I'm not going to make any changes anyway... LOL.

 

[Samplingman]

Thanks, John. I actually took a pic of the dimples in the floor pan on the vert and the mount holes on the parts car a few months ago or comparison.

Here is the vert, no cut outs:

 

[Samplingman]

And here is the coup with the cut outs. Notice the deep recess where the body plugs fit in. I'd love to know the reasoning why the torsion quiet suspension wasn't offered on the verts, seems like a logical choice to upgrade the luxury.

 

[commando1]

Verts need the added rigidity.

Posted via Topify on Android