are sub frames a must ? - Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums

brockv8 · 03-28-2009, 10:59 AM

heard through the grapevine that sub frames are a must that the camaro has a lot body flex which is one of the main reasons they didnt offer t-tops. any truth to this ?

*CamaroSpike23* · 03-28-2009, 11:21 AM

the reason they didnt offer t-tops is because of the body design and safety constraints to try and incorporate them. I have yet to see a good photoshop of a 2010 t-top car any way. the 3rd and 4th gen f-bodies had a ton of body flex tho. but this car is a lot more rigid

OverAnxious · 03-28-2009, 11:23 AM

I would like to think it was structural integrity, design and just plain old good taste that left T-tops a design of the 90s

nUcLeArEnVoY · 03-28-2009, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverAnxious

I would like to think it was structural integrity, design and just plain old good taste that left T-tops a design of the 90s

Pfft. T-Tops were outdated even in the 90's if you ask me. Let's try the 70's. xD

gunslinger · 03-28-2009, 10:53 PM

I have subframes on my 4th Gen, but I have had them so long I don't remember what the car was like without them.

They weighed a decent amount (they are the triangulated type that bolts into the tunnel brace) about 50 Lbs total for both.

To me, the extra weight is worth it to keep the car's frame rigid during torsional flexing. I don't have any data to backup this claim, but 50 Lbs is worth it, IMHO.

Tal · 03-28-2009, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brockv8

heard through the grapevine that sub frames are a must that the camaro has a lot body flex which is one of the main reasons they didnt offer t-tops. any truth to this ?

Haven't heard this anywhere, GM's clearly committed to 5-star crash test ratings though which likely would have been more problematic with t-tops.

Craig · 03-29-2009, 04:34 AM

LOL find a different grapevine, your information is about 180 degrees out of whack. They are making a convertible for 2011 and if the chassis can handle having no roof at all then it stands to reason that it could handle a t-top.

Jack up one side of my fourth gen and the doors will scrape against the sills opening & shutting due to the chassis flex, and I had SFC's welded on with under 1k miles on the clock. The fifth gen by all accounts is a brick shithouse in comparison.

Vash · 03-29-2009, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brockv8

heard through the grapevine that sub frames are a must that the camaro has a lot body flex which is one of the main reasons they didnt offer t-tops. any truth to this ?

I would guess very false is the answer. Have you seen the body and how it's made?

Also T-Tops are very strong and don't flex. Targa tops and converts have so much more flex than anything with a t-top.

When the 4th Generation Corvette was under design there was a major flaw with the Targa top and GM engineers wanted a t-top but where forced to take the chop. The result is 12 years worth of Corvettes that vibrate if you take the top off. Point being... this Camaro is not flimsy like that because it's a much more heavy duty body.

*CamaroSpike23* · 03-29-2009, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslinger

I have subframes on my 4th Gen, but I have had them so long I don't remember what the car was like without them.

They weighed a decent amount (they are the triangulated type that bolts into the tunnel brace) about 50 Lbs total for both.

To me, the extra weight is worth it to keep the car's frame rigid during torsional flexing. I don't have any data to backup this claim, but 50 Lbs is worth it, IMHO.

very worth it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vash

I would guess very false is the answer. Have you seen the body and how it's made?

Also T-Tops are very strong and don't flex. Targa tops and converts have so much more flex than anything with a t-top.

When the 4th Generation Corvette was under design there was a major flaw with the Targa top and GM engineers wanted a t-top but where forced to take the chop. The result is 12 years worth of Corvettes that vibrate if you take the top off. Point being... this Camaro is not flimsy like that because it's a much more heavy duty body.

(speaking 4th gens here)

ever seen a t-top car leak? ever wonder why it still leaked even after replacing the weather stripping?

hard top 4th gens are a lot more sturdy than t-top cars w/o additional support. even tho frame twist is a bitch in both of them. I still have dimples in both rear fenders from flex

LSxJunkie · 03-29-2009, 05:38 PM

No. No no no. This isn't a 4th Gen. Body flex on hardtops has become a thing of the past.

03-28-2009, 10:59 AM	#1
brockv8 Drives: Yukon Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: houston Posts: 13	are sub frames a must ? heard through the grapevine that sub frames are a must that the camaro has a lot body flex which is one of the main reasons they didnt offer t-tops. any truth to this ?

03-28-2009, 11:23 AM	#3
OverAnxious Drives: 1967 RS/SS L78 Coupe Join Date: May 2006 Location: Detroit, MI Posts: 799	I would like to think it was structural integrity, design and just plain old good taste that left T-tops a design of the 90s __________________ Joe Over Anxious - 1967 Camaro RS/SS L78 5th Gen Camaro BLOG // My eBay auctions

03-28-2009, 10:53 PM	#5
gunslinger Drives: 1998 Z28 M6 Join Date: May 2008 Location: Lake Forest, CA Posts: 254	I have subframes on my 4th Gen, but I have had them so long I don't remember what the car was like without them. They weighed a decent amount (they are the triangulated type that bolts into the tunnel brace) about 50 Lbs total for both. To me, the extra weight is worth it to keep the car's frame rigid during torsional flexing. I don't have any data to backup this claim, but 50 Lbs is worth it, IMHO. __________________ GTR: Get Transmission Replaced

03-29-2009, 04:34 AM	#7
Craig Drives: 2023 SLE Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Oregon Posts: 315	LOL find a different grapevine, your information is about 180 degrees out of whack. They are making a convertible for 2011 and if the chassis can handle having no roof at all then it stands to reason that it could handle a t-top. Jack up one side of my fourth gen and the doors will scrape against the sills opening & shutting due to the chassis flex, and I had SFC's welded on with under 1k miles on the clock. The fifth gen by all accounts is a brick shithouse in comparison. Last edited by Craig; 03-29-2009 at 04:44 AM.

03-29-2009, 05:38 PM	#10
LSxJunkie Snark snark snark Drives: RX350 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: 3L Hell Posts: 555	No. No no no. This isn't a 4th Gen. Body flex on hardtops has become a thing of the past. __________________ What is this, CorvetteForum Lite?