Mk4 vs Mk5 Chassis

[fauxbra5.0]

4" Round Tube vs. Space Frame

[fauxbra5.0]

I also have added 20 images from the PowerNation video to an album for you all to parse through - would love to know your thoughts!

[Jphoenix]

Appears to have both road and race height suspension mounts. Similar to the Coupe.

[Papa]

The trans tunnel is a lot different and the e-brake is on top of the tunnel vs. the passenger side.

[cv2065]

The new frame definitely looks more robust. I've always been a fan of the 4" round tubing as it just looks good. That said, I'm sure that the constant 2" tubing on the entire car is incredibly strong. It's everywhere!

[BRRT]

It looks like a lot more metal in the new frame. I wonder how the weight compares?

[BRRT]

The trans tunnel is a lot different and the e-brake is on top of the tunnel vs. the passenger side.

We can hope the entire parking brake cable thing has been revised.The handle looks real similar.

[gbranham]

The new frame probably makes footbox aluminum fit a lot better. No more round tubes to contend with.

[toadster]

very cool

[fauxbra5.0]

The new frame probably makes footbox aluminum fit a lot better. No more round tubes to contend with.

Looks like a piece of cake to me...my only concern is clearance between the headers and footbox for heat insulation.

[fauxbra5.0]

The trans tunnel is a lot different and the e-brake is on top of the tunnel vs. the passenger side.

I noticed that as well - also the steeply angled panel at the front of the cockpit was an interesting choice....

[GoDadGo]

While I don't think the MK-4 needed to be improved, Dave and his team never ever seem to rest.
With the MK-5 being developed, my hope is that one day Factory-5 will bring back the Spyder.
I feel they could easily graft the Type-65 front clip to a stretched MK-5 in the firewall area.
That car was the best looking car which was way ahead if it's time and it needs to return.

[David Williamson]

The trans tunnel aluminum looks exactly like a Gen 3 coupe. The Gen 3 coupe and the Hot Rod/Truck have similar space frame designs.
David W

[fauxbra5.0]

The trans tunnel aluminum looks exactly like a Gen 3 coupe. The Gen 3 coupe and the Hot Rod/Truck have similar space frame designs.
David W

Hey David - I believe they said they used the Gen3 coupe as a test bed for the space frame chassis and leveraged a lot from what they learned there to build the new Mk5.

[Kbl7td]

Guys this frame is basically a replica of the coupe. Shape designs in all the same places. The coupe exhaust is that close as well, same trans tunnel, etc. damn near same everythung

[MPTech]

Jim Schenck said on Jan '17:
"The round tube vs spaceframe debate may be just as polarizing inside of FFR as it looks like it could get here, however there is a fairly simple solution that keeps everyone happy, we just continue to offer both styles of chassis along with whatever other things we could come up with for a MKV."

[ggunter]

Maybe it's the camera angle but the new frame just looks heavier. Wonder what the weight difference is?

[ggunter]

I'm curious as to the three two hole flange mounts along the bottom of the frame. Body mounts perhaps? Exhaust mounts?

[egchewy79]

That's a beefy looking frame. If you're looking for a good chuckle, look up the frames for a backdraft or superformance cobra....night and day difference. This race ready frame design is one of the main reasons I went w/ FFR.

[BrewCityCobra]

Wow, very nice. Got to hand it to FFR for continuing to push. I was extremely impressed with the MKIV overall, really curious to see what types of practical improvements this new generation will have over that once a few builds get thrown together.

[fauxbra5.0]

That's a beefy looking frame. If you're looking for a good chuckle, look up the frames for a backdraft or superformance cobra....night and day difference. This race ready frame design is one of the main reasons I went w/ FFR.

Screenshot 2024-11-27 at 10.57.42 AM.png

I never really looked...but holy ****...the Superformance frame is laughable compared to FFR!

[Mike.Bray]

Screenshot 2024-11-27 at 10.57.42 AM.png

I never really looked...but holy ****...the Superformance frame is laughable compared to FFR!

The Superformance comes assembled less engine and trans for a premium price. I had a chance to crawl over one a couple of years ago, I thought it was rough and certainly didn't look "professionally assembled" by any means. I'll stick with Factory Five.

[Blitzboy54]

I noticed that as well - also the steeply angled panel at the front of the cockpit was an interesting choice....

I like it. depending on what's underneath you could put a lot of stuff in there. Buttons, switches etc....

I'll bet a 302/T5 you could get an LCD in there.


If I am reading the tea leaves correctly Jeff is building one with an LS. I hope he does a build thread, or at least documents the build and publishes after.

[Presdough]

I love my Spyder! The only beef I have is that they never came through with the promised soft top...

[CraigS]

I look at it this way. FFR started w/ the 4" tube frame since that was what the original cars had. Over the years they hired on actual engineers w/ experience in frame design. They have made significant improvements to the old 4" tube design. Then they designed the 33 hotrod frame w/ no need to mimic anything. Look at it, full of triangles and wide based control arms. Then they redid the coupe. All the while their cad design abilities have been improving. Now they redo the roadster. For me this is a culmination of constant improvement in every aspect of the chassis. Also ad in that new tube cutting machine. I can tell you from my diy experience that coming off that machine w/ a perfect cut that needs no grinding away slag, or fine tuning on a grinder is a game changer. And they tripled the chassis stiffness. Absolutely fantastic in every way.

[J R Jones]

Craig, In my development experience jobbing out mechanical bits to be fabricated, a laser tube cutting machine was $1M, as of five years ago.
One problem is programing, set-up and run volume. One has to make a lot of each part at a time. I speculate there are 120+ tubes in the new frame.
You end-up with a lot of inventory waiting to be welded.
jim

[CraigS]

I was thinking that too Jim. But as long as they can afford to make the needed production runs and hold them in inventory, the end result should be lower cost. I am thinking that, based on the company history, Dave Smith has it figured out.

[Jeff Kleiner]

Many of the cut pieces are interchangeable and used on multiple models so in the end it actually reduces the number of unique pieces in inventory.

Jeff

[J R Jones]

I was thinking that too Jim. But as long as they can afford to make the needed production runs and hold them in inventory, the end result should be lower cost. I am thinking that, based on the company history, Dave Smith has it figured out.

The conundrum of growing a business. All it takes is capitol. I have seen it in dealerships and manufacturing, the obsticle to making the next (volume) step is cost. Apparently that hurdle has been resolved at FFR. I worked with Erik Buell when he could not build over 200 bikes/year. Harley stepped in for 49% and Buell grew. Eventually it got complicated.
I was an owner/partner in producing a small off road motorcycle with the vision of CAD/CAM and robotic welding to drive down the cost of the truss frame of 135 pieces.
We could not buy a $1M laser cutter and contracting it (~100 set-ups and hundereds of each part) was a huge obsticle. How many assemblies would we sell year one and beyond?
Working for OEMs years ago, if they were risk averse, we went into production with soft (cheap) tooling at higher part cost, evolving to lower cost hard tooled parts at 20K units per year.
One accounting evaluation is turns per year. If you make (and own) 1000 sets of parts, how quickly can you sell them? The bottleneck (welding?) sets the pace.
A team of horses must pull together.
jim

[s_martin]

If you believe the video the frame is about 20 lbs heavier than the MKIV.

https://youtu.be/bYJgauwpzGc

20 lbs for 3X stiffness, I call that a win! Should allow for much softer spring rates and some serious ride improvement/flexibility.

[Jeff Kleiner]

If you believe the video the frame is about 20 lbs heavier than the MKIV.

https://youtu.be/bYJgauwpzGc

20 lbs for 3X stiffness, I call that a win! Should allow for much softer spring rates and some serious ride improvement/flexibility.

Be careful what you listen to in that video; among other errors he quoted me as citing test figures that resulted in 2 inches of deflection when in fact I said 2 DEGREES of deflection. That's more than just a small difference

[Sharris2]

when ca an MK5 be pre ordered?

[mrmustang]

Be careful what you listen to in that video; among other errors he quoted me as citing test figures that resulted in 2 inches of deflection when in fact I said 2 DEGREES of deflection. That's more than just a small difference

I imagine the whole round tube vs square tube discussion is now put to rest


Bill S.

[Jeff Kleiner]

I imagine the whole round tube vs square tube discussion is now put to rest


Bill S.

Sure...just like the carb or EFI discussion

Jeff

[GoDadGo]

Sure...just like the carb or EFI discussion

Jeff

You Forgot The Flip Phone!

[Kbl7td]

The conundrum of growing a business. All it takes is capitol. I have seen it in dealerships and manufacturing, the obsticle to making the next (volume) step is cost. Apparently that hurdle has been resolved at FFR. I worked with Erik Buell when he could not build over 200 bikes/year. Harley stepped in for 49% and Buell grew. Eventually it got complicated.
I was an owner/partner in producing a small off road motorcycle with the vision of CAD/CAM and robotic welding to drive down the cost of the truss frame of 135 pieces.
We could not buy a $1M laser cutter and contracting it (~100 set-ups and hundereds of each part) was a huge obsticle. How many assemblies would we sell year one and beyond?
Working for OEMs years ago, if they were risk averse, we went into production with soft (cheap) tooling at higher part cost, evolving to lower cost hard tooled parts at 20K units per year.
One accounting evaluation is turns per year. If you make (and own) 1000 sets of parts, how quickly can you sell them? The bottleneck (welding?) sets the pace.
A team of horses must pull together.
jim

Really puts to light the figures of a company like send cut send. Some serious machinery in their arsenal.

[fauxbra5.0]

Sure...just like the carb or EFI discussion

Jeff

3 link or IRS, too

[Mike.Bray]

Sure...just like the carb or EFI discussion

Jeff

Pushrod or Coyote

[rich grsc]

I imagine the whole round tube vs square tube discussion is now put to rest


Bill S.

That may be the funniest thing I've ever seen from you Bill.

[mrmustang]

That may be the funniest thing I've ever seen from you Bill.

Come on, how could I not

Now I need to start my 289 roadster campaign, enlisiting the entire FFR community, along with "Da Bunnies"(tm)