Topic: Torque box brace

[ruppstang]

Does anyone know why 68 fastbacks and coupes have the torque box to frame braces and the convertible does not?

[J_Speegle]

Choice made by the engineers though that doesn't answer the question as to why they made that educated and experienced choice

[krelboyne]

Probably because the engineers realized that the front ends were kind of flimsy? Issue may have become more obvious with the 390-4V engines in 1967.

Progression:
Passenger side torque box included at the start of 1968 model year.
Reinforced shock towers on big block cars, starting in the Spring of 1968. Maybe coincided with the availability of the R code 428CJ engine in April? Earlier like March 1968?
Starting in 1969, extra bracing on the shock tower braces with 351 and larger engines.

[J_Speegle]

Probably because the engineers realized that the front ends were kind of flimsy? Issue may have become more obvious with the 390-4V engines in 1967.

Progression:
Passenger side torque box included at the start of 1968 model year.
Reinforced shock towers on big block cars, starting in the Spring of 1968. Maybe coincided with the availability of the R code 428CJ engine in April? Earlier like March 1968?
Starting in 1969, extra bracing on the shock tower braces with 351 and larger engines.

Think the progression would start in 67 (if you ignore the earlier export package) with the reinforced/welded shock towers on some applications

[J_Speegle]

Just to provide some pictures of the bracket/support/ reinforcement the OP is referring to

68 Non-Convertible




68 Convertible with no brace in those corners

[ruppstang]

Thanks for the thoughts. I just found it surprising that with all that was done to beef up the 76 body that the torque box bracket were not used.