Model A job

[idrivejunk]

[chimp koose]

Just a thought but you might want to try and put something under the frame rail , attached to your brackets to help keep them from dipping down/rolling inward when someone steps on the running board. Too bad you guys don't have something like a hossfelt tubing bender . That would make the bends with a lot less fab needed .

[idrivejunk]

Just a thought but you might want to try and put something under the frame rail , attached to your brackets to help keep them from dipping down/rolling inward when someone steps on the running board. Too bad you guys don't have something like a hossfelt tubing bender . That would make the bends with a lot less fab needed .

Too bad it doesn't pay as well as mowing, too. Mike got a bender but only dies for round. I just work with what I have.

Have you seen an original bracket? Just a stamped L. This should do as well as that and with bare, shiny body colored smooth running boards I figure no standing on the running board will be the policy.

I may be wrong and the part might be too ugly and weak. It was funny, I showed it to Mike to see if there was anything too stupid about it. He said not but it seemed like a lot of work. I laughed because he and Gary both used the "Can't you just..." phrase suggesting making new ones. I "just" did and now its too much work. :?  

Just another thing I'll never understand. Or need to. I just do. The objective seems to be never needing to ask questions or buy things.

Another guy suggested cutting three sides off the bent area, bending, then making new pieces to fill in. Saying it was less welding and the angle will change less when welded. That method requires over two feet of weld for the bend whereas the way I am doing them takes around 18".

Sometimes theres a method to my madness.

[idrivejunk]

[idrivejunk]

[idrivejunk]

[moose]

Hard to tell in the pictures but you did allow for the differences in length and angle,front to back and each side?

With the detail you have put into the rest of this build I am sure you did but just making sure!

moose

[idrivejunk]

Hard to tell in the pictures but you did allow for the differences in length and angle,front to back and each side?

With the detail you have put into the rest of this build I am sure you did but just making sure!

moose

No, I made them all as same as possible but left the top end just tacked. Expecting alterations. But I did assume they are all the same.  The two stock ones I have are too short on both ends, at any corner. So this what I made is a generic set from a single prototype (which is one of them) that looked at a glance like it was within alteration distance of working for any position. A uniformish set of starting points to be worked with. I bolted the first one up at each position, eyeballed them and proceeded, aware of the variations.

The information I have (Mike's word) is that each board is parallel to the ground, side to side. A level placed on either board (across it, not longways) at any point along it's length should have a centered bubble. Do I have the correct understanding of that? :?:

You can see the front one falls short a bit in the bottom pic, for example. Is it the bracket or the sheetmetal's fault? I will address these things next, and shuffling the fabbed brackets for best selective fit as a starting piece for each corner is probably the next step. Notice top ends of brackets are only tacked still, in anticipation of adjusting to fit the board once it is in a level position.

[moose]

Matt, My comments were based on a frame with stock shaped rails. It appears that the rails on the chassis you are working with are near parallel. That would negate the angle and length differences I mentioned.

On an original shaped frame it tapers back to front so the brackets sre longer in the front and they have a twist to account for this taper to keep the running boards parallel.

Sorry if I caused confusion.

moose

[idrivejunk]

Matt, My comments were based on a frame with stock shaped rails. It appears that the rails on the chassis you are working with are near parallel. That would negate the angle and length differences I mentioned.

On an original shaped frame it tapers back to front so the brackets sre longer in the front and they have a twist to account for this taper to keep the running boards parallel.

Sorry if I caused confusion.

moose

No worries here. My only thing was I wondered if the boards should run slightly downhil as they extend outward from the body.

But it seems strange to me that a frame with so many differences from stock is sold with none of the necessary altered fender or running board brackets being offered to go with it.

[idrivejunk]

Today I stared at the car and got an idea or two for other areas before proceeding. Wrote them down. Thoughts of a front end rendering are dancing in my head.

After those minutes began the laying on of hands. Frame is level as she sits so threw down my little torpedo shaped level on the running boards over each bracket.

At the left rear, its on like donkey kong. Bubble dead center.

At the other three corners, shimming the outside end of the bubble level with the edge of a roll of 1/4" tape set it just right.

Exactly, at all three corners. Hmm, so remember the left rear apron bolt holes being so far off?

And me making new bolt holes at rear of running board? Contrary to the suggested "correct" given, I suspect that the majority rules.

That is to say, a quarter inch drop from inside to outside of running board is about the slope I would want, so water doesn't collect.

So I'll assume that matching that left rear corner to the rest is the sensible thing to do.  Rather than matching the other three to it.

Agreed?

That puts me in a good spot with only one corner to mess with. Easy.

I believe the TCI frame rails do follow a different floor plan than stockers.

I'm gonna break here then do today pix, but this new short paragraph format is just something that might be simpler for you guys to read mixed in with the big pictures.

[idrivejunk]

If you read all them words, thanks and here is a short break from brackets. Bryan's new project-





I see some lip rot there, woohoo!

Mark tackled the hood which a newer guy stripped with an 8" mud hog-  

[idrivejunk]

The bracket race is about won.

I shuffled brackets to my heart's content and having checked the running board positions as mentioned post before last...

Added two inches or so to each front bracket, trimmed one about a half inch on top, straightened one rear by twisting the arm on the top base a little.

They fit now.  Some welding remains to be done on all but one.



That was driver's side, front tire's eye view looking rearward. This is the passenger side-



Now, if I can trouble you for more reading, allow me to explain the board attachment plan briefly:

Boards have upside down top hat shaped channels as attaching points over the brackets, with keyhole slots for carriage bolts pointing down.

Front and rear channels differ in length and bolt spacing.

I hear tell some kinda spacers may go between board and bracket. * all that mess.

My plan is to of course use flange strips. Maybe angle iron or split 14 ga tubing but I think just 18 gauge sheet can work.

Plug weld flange strip to forward edge of channel, hanging down in front. Set nuts in front of tubular bracket.

Match bolt holes drilled in flange strip on board to welded nuts in bracket. Allow adjustment slop.

This will hide and protect the gap over the bracket from debris, move the ugly fastener away from the bottom of the brace...

making height adjustment possible at the board and providing for easier assembly with less fuss.

 :?:    

[enjenjo]

As I recall the carriage bolts are 1/4", I may be wrong. But in any case I would drill the holes through the tubing from the bottom, and enlarge the hole on the bottom side to about 1" for socket clearance. You can still shim the boards if needed, and I don't think there will be a rust problem if you spray the inside of the tube with Boeshield or something similar.

[idrivejunk]

As I recall the carriage bolts are 1/4", I may be wrong. But in any case I would drill the holes through the tubing from the bottom, and enlarge the hole on the bottom side to about 1" for socket clearance. You can still shim the boards if needed, and I don't think there will be a rust problem if you spray the inside of the tube with Boeshield or something similar.

Sure. That way was my first thought. I would cap the end and use hole plugs. Don't know if 1/4" is correct or not.

Now, how is that way better? The idea I have eliminates shims but easily adjusts, keeps pebbles out of the area above the bracket, has no down-facing hole or nut, and is easier to install.

My time justification for adding the angled piece is in lessening the degree of precision and experimentation needed for carriage bolts to work. The mounting reinforcements are not welded in precisely enough, nor are the brackets perfectly angled enough, for measurement to be valid. That leaves me with, for carriage bolts, drilling the board skin from below in the precise carriage bolt location, then putting the bracket on to put a pilot mark on the bracket through that hole in the board from the top, removing the bracket, then drilling the mounting holes which may not necessarily be centered in the width of the bracket. Then welding the holes in the skin.

For the angle strip method, I just bolt the strip to added nuts on the bracket, adjust it to sit up against the board brace, tighten, and tack it. Done, and plug weld next time it is apart. Carriage bolts are almost always a good thing to eliminate in my book but its also easy for me to make mistakes in my thought process so I described it in case I overlooked something. A sketch is probably needed to convey the idea, as my verbal description of intent might not be sufficiently clear. But when at the car trying to figure the fastest way through this step, thats what I came up with for this "no standing on" running board application.