Side Impact Volvo 45Mph Series Volvos Will
A Volvo dealer can only perform this. Understand Volvo's Side Impact Protection System.SUBJECT: Side Impact Protection System (SIPS)TOPIC: Volvo (SIPS) TechnologyOBJECTIVE. Since there seems to be no complete survey of the X-Frame – at least any available on the web – let’s lift off all those handsome and finned GM bodies by Fisher, and take a closer look at what’s really under there.Understanding Volvo's Side Impact Protection. The SIPS design is the direct result of research compiled by Volvos accident investigation team based in Sweden.( originally posted ) GM’s X-Frame, upon which millions of GM full-size cars sat from the years 1957 through 1964 (Buick Riviera through 1970), has generated plenty of controversy, speculation, and accusations. For the 92 model year, all 700 and 900 series Volvos will feature a unique Side Impact Protection System (SIPS). SIPS: A UNIQUE SAFETY SOLUTION FROM VOLVO Once again Volvo has advanced the frontiers of automotive safety.
Side Impact Volvo 45Mph Update Free Of
Starting with a real stunner: The X-Frame first appeared in 1957, underpinning the new C-Body Cadillacs and Eldorado Brougham (pictured). Side Impact Protection System (SIPS) is a passive safety system in Volvo designed to protect against injury in a side. Depending on how old your Volvo is, you may get the update free of charge.
With a very deep central section, which worked well in a sports car, the Elan had unparalleled rigidity, the ultimate goal of any frame/body structure. In these, the body was rigidly bolted to the platform, to create essentially a unitized structure from the two halves.The pure backbone chassis was taken up by others, none more famously so than by Colin Chapman, with his brilliant Lotus Elan. Needless to say, a very similar route was also taken by others, including Porsche for the now very-familiar (and similar) VW platform frame. A strong solid steel tube was the carrying member for the whole car and its (lightweight) body.The Tatra tube frame evolved into a combination central backbone-platform frame, as seen here in the mid-thirties Tatra 97. I’m not a frame expert/historian, but Cadillac’s approach in developing the X-Frame seems to be rather unique, although it combines aspects of two very distinctive frame designs: the backbone frame and the X-braced ladder frame.The backbone frame originates with Hans Ledwinka’s revolutionary Tatra T-11 of 1921 ( full story here). To be continued is a similar program evaluating production Volvos.
This is a sedan frame for a ’57 Chevy.And here is the center section for the convertible version. It undoubtedly increased rigidity, at least in certain planes.X frame centers were also used to stiffen ladder frames specifically for convertible use. Its origins are obviously in the heavy timber frames underpinning wagons, but the seminal 1901 Mercedes was perhaps the first to sport something akin to what became this timeless approach to automotive frame buildingJumping ahead about a century, here is a modern ladder frame, as now used in pickups and BOF SUVs.The origins of using an X-member to reinforce a ladder-type frame has been credited to the fwd Cord L-29, and this excerpt from its brochure substantiates that claim.But this 1939 Buick frame shows that its adoption had expanded by then, and for obvious reasons. A certain amount of flex was an intrinsic part of the equation.
So where did the rear foot wells go? Did the Buick C-Body ride higher than the Cadillac? If I could find overall height specs on both, it might possible to ascertain that.Rather curiously, for 1959 Buick even dropped the X center-reinforcement, going with a strict ladder-perimeter frame, with a K-type front section. The ’57 and ’58 Buicks, which shared Cadillac’s big C-bodies, did not go with the X-Frame, keeping an X-strengthened ladder frame. And it was inevitable that GM would eventually centralize these aspects.But not during the X-Frame’s reign. It really was ass-backwards or it certainly came to be so, given how increasingly little folks actually appreciated what went on under the floor, at least very technically speaking. Back then, Fisher body engineered a common body to be used by various divisions, but each division engineered its own vehicle otherwise, including the frame, suspension, drive train, etc. Now, numerous vehicles (and brands) with distinctly different bodies share a “platform”, generally the key underbody structure, suspension and/or floor platform.
And for those that assume that X Frame cars were intrinsically poor handlers, the Riviera in GS guise was generally highly regarded as one of the most capable handlers in its size class. Here’s a 1969 Riviera showing off its skeleton. Full-sized Buicks stayed with the X through 1964.And the Riviera maintained its X-Frame all the way through the 1970 MY.
And you know what kind of steel the crumple zone is made of? The same mild steel the whole old car is made of.Here is a crash test of a 2002 vs 1962 Sadly, that’s unlikely to ever be revealed. The new car passenger compartments will demolish the old car passenger compartments once the crumple zone finishes crumbling. It’s more a matter of suspension tuning.What is most amazing, and disturbing, is that all those so-called fanboys can rattle off for hours about engine sizes, horsepower ratings, camshaft specs, carbureter jet sizes, all to exact detail, but do not appear to know the following cold, hard numbers:Mild steel: 35,000 pounds per square inch of tensile strengthUltra High Strength Steel : 110,000 pounds per square inch of tensile strengthOld cars, made before the mid 1990s are made of the weak mild steel, including the frames, X frame of ladder frame.New cars are made up of up to 5 types of steel, and guess which kind of steel is used around the passenger compartment? So no 50s of 60s car is capable of “slicing through” a new car.
Plymouth is the only real possibility I can see, and then you wouldn’t really be doing a fair test of Chrysler platforms because Plymouth was always where Chrysler threw out the trash from their more expensive divisions before they became decontented Dodge rebadges in the late 70s, so of course they’ll crumple like paper regardless.40 years ago when in the air force and enjoying my avatar above, a 1964 Chevy Impala SS convertible, 283, 2 bbl, powerglide, when TDY on Okinawa for my second time, I left my car with a buddy for the four months I was gone at our base, Beale AFB in California.We had planned some “upgrades” to the car. DeSotos from that era can’t really be found outside of museums, and as for Dodge, good luck finding a Coronet or Royal that hasn’t been restomodded to hell and back. I’m sure their 60s frame architectures are similar to those of the pre-300G letter series, given that Chrysler has never been known for their vast R&D budget or concern for customer safety, but likely not exactly the same. The later ones, the early 60s designs with the ugly trunk tire wart and the boxy late 60s designs that look little different from the boring emissions yachts of the 70s are more affordable, but that would defeat the purpose. The NHTSA would be looking at $120k+ to even get an unrestored rustbucket that wouldn’t come close to a fair test, and destroying one in any condition would likely spark an insane amount of backlash. The 300G is my dream car, but by the time I’m on my midlife crisis they’ll probably be commanding McLaren F1 prices.
Should have just replaced the springs with the proper ones…The year before (1971), my friend rebuilt the engine and installed a 327, 350 hp cam and dual exhausts with glass packs – full tail pipes, of course. This was only apparent when starting from a dead stop, and went away – at least I didn’t notice it anymore – to 10 mph.That car not only rode like a truck, but looked like it had 4 wheel drive! It did handle a bit better, though.That was my one regret with that car, as it wasn’t “perfect” in my eyes and mind. No matter how much I shimmed the bearing, I could never eliminate the vibration completely. The second? A serious vibration problem with the center U-joint affixed deep in the center of that X frame! This was due to the fact that the geometry had changed. One, ball joint extensions were needed, no problem. This raised the car about 2″ higher off the ground.
0 kommentar(er)
