1973 2.0L Rustoration, Restoration turned OT garage build Options

[Superhawk996]

I purchased my first 914 back in 1987 (1973 1.7L) and had that car for nearly a decade and I personally put over 100,000 miles on it before it ultimately fell victim to a negligent driver that drove into the back end of it at about 40 mph while the vehicle was stopped at a red light. That rear end crash totaled the vehicle but what is amazing is how well it crumpled (early crush zones!) due to the kink in the frame where the halfshafts are. Everyone walked away unharmed.

I replaced it with a 1991 Miata. Great car in its own right but I've always missed my 914.

Purchased this "replacement" in May 2018 as a known poster child for a complete right side longitudinal rustoration.

This vehicle had been put into storage inside a pole barn around 2004 as far as I can tell.

Vehicle initially purchased in non-running condition:
Engine couldn't be started.
Transmission shift linkage was disconnected
Half shafts and CV's were in pieces, and the wheel stubs were not installed therefore the vehicle couldn't even be rolled without risking having the rear wheel separate from within the bearing.
Fiberglass laid into the floorpan . . . that can't be a good sign.

Vehicle looks great . . . until I got under it.

I spent the better part of the summer putting the items above back together and trying to confirm that it would:
1) Run under its own power
2) Drive though the neighborhood and shift though all gears.



Looks pretty nice eh?

Here is what is lurking underneath once the rockers came off.



and when I started cutting back the rust. Oh my . . . .

[Superhawk996]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/headbang.gif)

Having a rough go of getting the trailing arm mount positioned properly. I've been chasing measurements around the past couple of weekends. May be drifting into OCD territory on this but I'd really like to ensure the suspension mounts are located as exactly as possible.

Would appreciate any insight from others that may have fought this battle.



Currently can get X/Y dimension correct but Z dimension is too low by 5-6 mm. Trying to force it up in Z results imparts a twist to the body at the rear locators of 4 mm. I'd rather not do that.

Due to the geometry of the frame rail, the X dimension and the Z dimension are interrelated. the dark blue line is where the mount wants to be if Z dimension is correct, the current (orange line) is where X/Y dimensions are correct. You can see the variability between them and how they are related by the angle of the frame.



I've been using a trammel to measure the body locations but this measurement technique seems to have about 3mm of error on each end depending on how square the measurement point is to the trammel. This could account for up to 6mm of measurement error end to end.



Ideally the trammel extensions should be kept as short as possible to minimize parallax error. However, that isn't possible given the need to clear the body cart and the difference in Z height between the front mounts and the rear trailing arm mount.
The error is actually much larger than 3mm unless I use a level to ensure that the trammel extensions are 90 degrees to the trammel bar.

I had loaned a laser plumb bob to a buddy for the last couple years to do a basement remodel. I've gotten that back and intend to remeasure everything today using the laser to drop the suspension locators to the floor and then measure that with a simple tape measure.

The laser plumb bob specs are +/- 3mm at a 15m on the laser projection upward and +/- 6mm at 15m on the downward projection. The downward projection is literally an inch off the floor so that error is negligible. Likewise, the up projection will only be less than 1 meter so again negligible. . . . . IN THEORY.



We'll see how this works out today. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/calvin.gif)