74 Challenger driver

[Chlngrcrzy]

I agree, that you should probably take it back and point out all the little messes and such. You paid good money and i would think that this shop would be embarrassed as heck if it got out that they did such a terrible job. 

[Bullitt-]

I agree, that you should probably take it back and point out all the little messes and such. You paid good money and i would think that this shop would be embarrassed as heck if it got out that they did such a terrible job. 

    Costs you nothing to ask... Speak with the owner not the peons

[femtnmax]

I canceled payment on the last check to the body shop, about $2500.  I had the car piggybacked to 4 paint shops in town, estimates ranged from $4200 to over $8000.  They all said the job was 80% done, but the remainder was very poor work, such as visible dirt in the clear coat.   Everyone had good comments, even pointing out problems I had not seen.  3 of the 4 estimates said to do proper prep and repaint the entire car.  They all said the clear coat had been sanded so thin you would not have much protection left.  Basically they said my money was took, charged way too much.  One shop showed me a shelby mustang with paint job cost 10% higher than mine...the car really looked sharp.  They said the cost was high because of many hours fitting fiberglass fenders, hood, rear quarter scoops, rear spoiler, etc.  Paint was glass smooth with consistent panel fit.
Now that I have estimates, tomorrow morning I'll call the guy that painted the car.

[Chlngrcrzy]

You did your research. Good luck with the chat. A confrontation like that is never easy. Keep a cool head, a civil tongue, stay firm and don't let them go ballistic on you. Good luck

[70burntorangeT/A]

That sounds like a lot for just sanding down and painting. But i guess things are just a lot priceyer in other parts of the country..where im at getting it sanded down adn repainted would cost 1500-2K tops.

[femtnmax]

That sounds like a lot for just sanding down and painting. But i guess things are just a lot priceyer in other parts of the country..where im at getting it sanded down adn repainted would cost 1500-2K tops.

I'm sure your 100% correct. The rocky mountains have turned into a playground for the rich.   Prices for 100 year old homes are stupid, and as you pointed out the cost of everything else is stupid too.  That's why we are moving asap.  Just have not found the right place yet.
The body shop that painted the car will do nothing to correct the fisheyes or other flaws in the paint.  I've been told to take them to better business bureau.  The last time I spent time in court, it took over 2 years to settle a $1800 dispute.   I have enough issues in life right now without adding a legal hassle.  The car was supposed to be fun, not a drawn out headache.  If I let this sh*t paint job get to me more, the fun will fade away... might as well get rid of the car.   I don't keep depressing things around.
The local auto paint supplier said the fisheyes are in the primer or base coat, so the best answer is to sand the entire car down to the primer, or go to metal.  They recommended a single stage paint I could apply myself next summer when the weather is warmer.  They suggested just enjoy the car.  The car looks good from 10 feet away.
So my answer for now is:  my wife helped me to realign the doors, fenders, and hood.  ONe painter that gave an estimate said the fit and gaps were better than factory.  The left tail lamp assembly did not fit at all.  I ground out lots of bondo, recontoured to match the right side, and will prime/paint/seal coat myself the next day we have warmer weather.   I bought a used 360 short block with roller cam on ebay. It will be here in a week.   I tear it apart see what condition its in, maybe switch to roller cam, or keep it as a spare.
Put grill support in, picked up parts at the local parts yard, cleaned, glass beaded, painted nuts, bolts.   The K-frame will come out next for powder coating.  Bought all new Moog front suspension parts.  Will put all that in, then rebuild the power steering box and pump.  Need to under coat the bottom of the car, then make new fuel and brake lines.

[70burntorangeT/A]

Wherever you move too you should be able to find a decent shop somewhere to fix it, if there are only a few bad areas it shouldnt be to hard to just have someone do a few spot jobs on it.

[femtnmax]

I'm taking the front suspension apart, noticed my 74 chally with 318 V8 came with the smallest diameter torsion bars mopar offered, 0.862 inch diameter.   Did some searches on this forum for Tbar sizing.  The T/A and AAR came with 0.92 inch diameter, and 0.88 was a common next size down.    Some folks said the 0.92 bars gave a somewhat harsh ride, but handled well in the corners.
Since this car is a true driver, and my wife has neck problems from 2 accidents prior to when we met, I"m leaning away from "lumber wagon" ride quality for the Challenger.
The local parts yard has several cars with the 0.88 Tbars.  How will they match up to the 0.92 bars when I include my front end weight savings?  Comparing 0.88 to 0.92 gives 0.04 diam difference.  10% of 0.88 is 0.088, so 5% is 0.044.  So the TA AAR bars are about 5% larger in diameter than the 0.88 bars.
Now looking at the weight savings on the car:  alum cyl heads=50 lb, intake manifold=20 lb, battery in trunk takes 60 lb off the nose.  So far have 130 lb., now the battery is behind the rear axle so assume another 10 lb off the front wheels for a total of 140 lb.
Car weighs about 3200 lb.  Assume 60% of this weight is over the front wheels = 1920 lb.  Reduce that amount by 7.2% = 138 lb. which is real close to my weight removed from the nose.  That 7.2% lighter front end is more than the 5% increase in stiffness of the TA AAR Tbars, so I'm going to say the weight savings is about equal to the increase in stiffness of the 0.92 TA AAR torsion bars.   This means with my weight savings I can run the 0.88 Tbars and have the handling of the 0.92 bars.
Now looking at the weight on the front and rear wheels.  OEM front weight was 1920 lb, so OEM rear wheel weight was 3200-1920= 1280 lb.   With 140 lb weight reduction front weight= 1780 lb.  Now add the 60 lb. battery weight to rear wheels= 1340 lb.  Total car weight is 1780+1340=3120 lb.   Amount of weight over front wheels is 3120x.57=1778, so about 57% of weight is over front wheels.  Thats better than the 60% I started with.
Now just to experiment, add 80 lb BEHIND the rear axle, so total car weight is back up to 3200 lb we started with. Assume another 10 lb off the front wheels, so front wheel weight is 1780-10=1770 lb, and rear weight is now 1340+80=1420 lb.  Percent of weight over front wheels is 3200x.55=1760 lb.  So weight over front wheels is just about 55%, and rear wheel weight is then 45%.  This 55/45 weight balance is supposed to be a decent balance for front engine/rear wheel drive cars.
So I'm going to do my weight reductions, install 0.88 torsion bars, battery in trunk, set the car ride height level front to rear, align per specs in the suspension section of this forum, then experiment with and without the extra 80lb in the trunk. 

[70burntorangeT/A]

i have the .92 dia torsion bars on my car and i dont think it rides rough at all ......but then again i have been driving a mid-60's f-100 for the last two years and i have never been in anything that rides rougher then it does so the challenger may feel smoother to me then it really is

[femtnmax]

i have the .92 dia torsion bars on my car and i dont think it rides rough at all ......but then again i have been driving a mid-60's f-100 for the last two years and i have never been in anything that rides rougher then it does so the challenger may feel smoother to me then it really is

So it sounds like not too stiff a ride.  Thats good to know.  Like your F100, I have a 67 F250 4x4, the seat springs smooth out the ride, not the suspension 
Todays progress:  compared Goodmark rear bumper to AMD one that I straightened in an earlier post.  My AMD was as straight as the Goodmark, better in some places.  I noticed the Goodmark bumper was kinda flimsy, like I could bend it with my hands.  I measured the Goodmark metal thickness at 0.069 inch, compared to the AMD thickness of 0.097 inch.  So I'm going to return the Goodmark and use my hand straightened AMD.
Finished welding the K-frame.  Tried to improve the factory welds where needed, then welded all edges closed.  Added the hemi style skid plate after I welded a 3/16 plate to the underside just to give it a little more stiffness/damage tolerance.  I added a couple of filler plates to stiffen the steering box mount/LH engine mount.  I'll get it sand blasted, then etch prime and paint with NAPA chassis paint.  I'll clean up all the other suspension pieces using a glass bead blaster, and paint the same way.

[femtnmax]

Been working on the front suspension.   Had the K-frame powder coated.  I etch primed and painted the other front suspension parts.  The POR doesn't stick well to bare metal, even if it is rough sanded.  So I've been using a 2-part etch primer then POR and seems to work well.
So have the front end back together.  All new ball joints, tie rod ends & adjusters, bushings, larger diameter torsion bars, new wheel bearings, turned brake rotors, and replaced the power steering gear pitman arm seal.  Installed the offset upper control arm bushings which allow for more caster.
Was going to install the tail light assemblies, but the left one would not fit even close to flush with the sheet metal.  The paint guy had at least 1/4 inch thick bondo on the tail end of the new AMD rear quarter.  The chrome for the quarter panel did not line up with the trunk lid.  I checked the sides of the quarter panel above the side marker light, there was thick bondo there too.  I used a carbide cutter to scallop the bondo, still the light assy wouldn't fit well, so I cut out all the bondo and fiberglass, including on the side of the quarter.
The light assy fits, but not perfect because the body shop guy did not correct the damage to the tail light panel sheet metal before welding on the new quarter.  It would have been so easy to do when the quarter was off, but NO, he didn't bother.
I have some paint left over, so I'm arranging to have a guy repaint the corner.  Have started to scrape and undercoat the underside.
MERRY CHRISTMAS Everyone.  Hope you all have a good 2010 !!!

[femtnmax]

Check fit the 1970 grille to my 1974.  Parts fit well, not much hassle really.  Used a 1970 center radiator support; had to drill two extra holes for interior hood release cable attach bracket, but the 74 center support could have worked.  Earlier I added the 1970 headlite buckets to my 74 fenders.  Would have been easier to buy new reproduction 1970 fenders that had good buckets already attached, as the headlite surround pieces needed fender tabs bent at 45 degree angle as shown in photo, and the 74 fenders had barely enough material to do the job. 
Overall it will be ok for what I'm doing.

[wagesofsin]

 

looking good!!!

[femtnmax]

Here's my home made locking gas cap.  It's a small bolt that threads into the filler neck so the gas cap cannot be rotated enough to unlock the cap from the filler neck.  Hopefully will keep sugar and such out of the gas tank.  I'm going to weld an air cleaner wing nut to the end of the bolt so its easier to turn by hand.
There seems to be plenty of people out there that resent and want to ruin what others have worked to accomplish.

[Kapteenikosmos]

I'm taking the front suspension apart, noticed my 74 chally with 318 V8 came with the smallest diameter torsion bars mopar offered, 0.862 inch diameter.   Did some searches on this forum for Tbar sizing.  The T/A and AAR came with 0.92 inch diameter, and 0.88 was a common next size down.    Some folks said the 0.92 bars gave a somewhat harsh ride, but handled well in the corners.
Since this car is a true driver, and my wife has neck problems from 2 accidents prior to when we met, I"m leaning away from "lumber wagon" ride quality for the Challenger.
The local parts yard has several cars with the 0.88 Tbars.  How will they match up to the 0.92 bars when I include my front end weight savings?  Comparing 0.88 to 0.92 gives 0.04 diam difference.  10% of 0.88 is 0.088, so 5% is 0.044.  So the TA AAR bars are about 5% larger in diameter than the 0.88 bars.
Now looking at the weight savings on the car:  alum cyl heads=50 lb, intake manifold=20 lb, battery in trunk takes 60 lb off the nose.  So far have 130 lb., now the battery is behind the rear axle so assume another 10 lb off the front wheels for a total of 140 lb.
Car weighs about 3200 lb.  Assume 60% of this weight is over the front wheels = 1920 lb.  Reduce that amount by 7.2% = 138 lb. which is real close to my weight removed from the nose.  That 7.2% lighter front end is more than the 5% increase in stiffness of the TA AAR Tbars, so I'm going to say the weight savings is about equal to the increase in stiffness of the 0.92 TA AAR torsion bars.   This means with my weight savings I can run the 0.88 Tbars and have the handling of the 0.92 bars.
Now looking at the weight on the front and rear wheels.  OEM front weight was 1920 lb, so OEM rear wheel weight was 3200-1920= 1280 lb.   With 140 lb weight reduction front weight= 1780 lb.  Now add the 60 lb. battery weight to rear wheels= 1340 lb.  Total car weight is 1780+1340=3120 lb.   Amount of weight over front wheels is 3120x.57=1778, so about 57% of weight is over front wheels.  Thats better than the 60% I started with.
Now just to experiment, add 80 lb BEHIND the rear axle, so total car weight is back up to 3200 lb we started with. Assume another 10 lb off the front wheels, so front wheel weight is 1780-10=1770 lb, and rear weight is now 1340+80=1420 lb.  Percent of weight over front wheels is 3200x.55=1760 lb.  So weight over front wheels is just about 55%, and rear wheel weight is then 45%.  This 55/45 weight balance is supposed to be a decent balance for front engine/rear wheel drive cars.
So I'm going to do my weight reductions, install 0.88 torsion bars, battery in trunk, set the car ride height level front to rear, align per specs in the suspension section of this forum, then experiment with and without the extra 80lb in the trunk.

Nice work with the car!

I noticed small glitch in your calculations..

The stiffness of a torsion bar goes in the fourth power of the diameter. The equation for the round bar "stiffness" or polar moment of inertia is -> J = (1/32) * Pi*d^4

So J for 0.88in bar is 0.0059 in^4 and for 0.92 bar J = 0.007 in^4.

So the actual stiffness increase when going from 0.88 bar to 0.92 bar is almost 20 % not the 5% as you used in your approximations for the front end handling vs weight decrease.