Hog trough replacement

[Tony S]

I am getting ready for my winter projects and the replacement of the hog troughs is on the list. The 2 options Are the straight replacements or the 2 piece replacements which are about $400 more. Since both require unbolting the body to some degree I am wondering how much more trouble the original style is to do. I have all the tools including a 2 post lift and experience. Is the $400..00 difference worth the extra work sincer I have all the equipment? Do the originals get bonded into the rocker panel like the 2 piece or is this one of the big advantages of the 2 piece reeplacements?

.

[Gunslinger]

The multi-piece hog troughs require cutting away some of the body under the door which requires body work after to make it whole. You'll have to decide whether you want to do versus separating the body from the frame completely.

[regnalbob]

I am getting ready for my winter projects and the replacement of the hog troughs is on the list. The 2 options Are the straight replacements or the 2 piece replacements which are about $400 more. Since both require unbolting the body to some degree I am wondering how much more trouble the original style is to do. I have all the tools including a 2 post lift and experience. Is the $400..00 difference worth the extra work sincer I have all the equipment? Do the originals get bonded into the rocker panel like the 2 piece or is this one of the big advantages of the 2 piece reeplacements?

.

This may be of help to you.

http://hogtrough.blogspot.com/

I am doing a body off restoration on a 1963 and find that the one piece torque boxes are easier for me because I dont have to do any welding. They have bonding strips attached to them and get bonded to the rocker panels just like they came from the factory. These are made from the original dies and fit perfectly. I found that most of the rivet holes in the body from the old boxes match the holes in the new boxes.

Bob Langer

Edited October 29, 2012 by Regnalbob

[MARK]

Thanks so very much for the extremly detailed; with photographs, article or explanation. I am thinking my 64 R2 #5470 might be in need of the left side replacement. If indeed I am correct I will probably replace both sides.

I too drive my car, a lot. Driving is a joy especially when I drive to work in NYC from NJ; about 60 miles each way.

I will submit this article to the body shop that did the original paint and fiberglass repairs.

I suppose labor will be around $2500 for both sides.

Again, thanks so very much

Mark

[Avanti83]

I am getting ready for my winter projects and the replacement of the hog troughs is on the list. The 2 options Are the straight replacements or the 2 piece replacements which are about $400 more. Since both require unbolting the body to some degree I am wondering how much more trouble the original style is to do. I have all the tools including a 2 post lift and experience. Is the $400..00 difference worth the extra work sincer I have all the equipment? Do the originals get bonded into the rocker panel like the 2 piece or is this one of the big advantages of the 2 piece reeplacements?

.

Tony

Bruce is correct about the rocker panel removal using the one piece throughs. I cut the rockers off my 74 to replace the troughs.

This is a couple of shots from the SDC forum of what it looked like. http://forum.studeba...nal-Hog-Troughs

This the follow up post on repairing the rockers. http://forum.studeba...ter-Hog-Troughs

If your body is in nice shape and you can weld then the extra $400 is probably worth it when you consider the cost of supplies and paint. My 74 needed a complete striping and painting so I went one piece. Well! I also got a great deal on the ones I used.

My lift made the job much easier, it would be much more difficult without it. The toughest part was getting the bolts out that are in the body behind the doors. Another post. http://forum.studeba...olt-removal To show the removal

Bob

[Tony S]

I have a Mig welder. The welding isn't a problem. I guess the real question I should have asked is can I "cheat" the body removal with the full rocker support replacement? Lift the body without completely disconnecting steering column, wires and hoses? How much lift is needed with either to get the supports in??

[Avanti83]

I have a Mig welder. The welding isn't a problem. I guess the real question I should have asked is can I "cheat" the body removal with the full rocker support replacement? Lift the body without completely disconnecting steering column, wires and hoses? How much lift is needed with either to get the supports in??

Here's Dick Steinkamp's writeup on the three piece HT replacement. Not much lifting. http://hogtrough.blogspot.com/

With the one piece, I'd guess you would need close to a foot or better as you need to work the HT past the rockers and past the frame.

Bob

[Tony S]

I guess I will go with the 2- 3 piece replacement if I can avoid disturbing the fiberglass. Also lifting the body a foot is a lot different than just trying to pick it up 2 or 3 inches.. Although the paint and body aren't great they are presentable at this time so I don't want to get into body work right now.

[Avanti83]

I guess I will go with the 2- 3 piece replacement if I can avoid disturbing the fiberglass. Also lifting the body a foot is a lot different than just trying to pick it up 2 or 3 inches.. Although the paint and body aren't great they are presentable at this time so I don't want to get into body work right now.

A good choice me thinks, there are several how-to articles to take the mystery out of it and because the one piece body makes lifting the body more difficult and potentially more prone to damage.

Good luck, Bob

[p schmidt]

I did mine ..use the one piece as it is a lot stronger also I have extra s.steel pop rivets if you need them...removing all the excess rusted troughs and glue is a (dirty) job onece done wipe the underside down with some cleaner solvent and re glue the new ones in then pop rivet you will have to cut a sq section out of the rear inner wheels well to access some of the bolts at the very end...then reglue the sq back in and cover with undercoating here's 3 links to my you tube posts

[p schmidt]

sorry missed this one the hog troughs

[p schmidt]

here's some more pictures

[kramerdad1]

I admit, Im new to Avantis but not new to restoring classic cars. I have over 40 years experience bringing old classics back to life so I have to ask...why bother? Ive replaced dozens of mustang torque boxes because they were actually structural, as far as I can tell these sheet metal hog troughs are no more then splash shields. Ive read several articles from respected avanti guys who also question the need for all the work needed to replace these parts. The '80 avanti I bought lost its throughs within 10 years of driving in Illinois' salt covered roads and now, 20 something years later the body has no cracks, the doors open and close just fine. Ive looked at replacement troughs and for the life of me I can't see were they add anything that a "L" channel or "U" channel wouldn't do far better and way easier. The Lark frame appears to be more then adaquate in supporting the body. Of course a "purist" would probably recall in horror but why does everyone automatically assume these parts MUST be replaced? Why? Can you actually proove these are structural? Call me crazy but if it aint broke why fix it? all Im going to do is remove the little that's left of the original parts, run a "L" channel front to back paint it and be done with it.

[Avanti83]

I admit, Im new to Avantis but not new to restoring classic cars. I have over 40 years experience bringing old classics back to life so I have to ask...why bother? Ive replaced dozens of mustang torque boxes because they were actually structural, as far as I can tell these sheet metal hog troughs are no more then splash shields. Ive read several articles from respected avanti guys who also question the need for all the work needed to replace these parts. The '80 avanti I bought lost its throughs within 10 years of driving in Illinois' salt covered roads and now, 20 something years later the body has no cracks, the doors open and close just fine. Ive looked at replacement troughs and for the life of me I can't see were they add anything that a "L" channel or "U" channel wouldn't do far better and way easier. The Lark frame appears to be more then adaquate in supporting the body. Of course a "purist" would probably recall in horror but why does everyone automatically assume these parts MUST be replaced? Why? Can you actually proove these are structural? Call me crazy but if it aint broke why fix it? all Im going to do is remove the little that's left of the original parts, run a "L" channel front to back paint it and be done with it.

If what you mean by L-channel is a support that takes the load of the three (per side) body mounts then you could possibly be OK. If it is only cosmetic then the total load of the body in the rear is supported by the rear cross member and it won't hold up long doing that.

The hog troughs also give the glass floor a lot of support as I could see when it disassembled mine.

Here is what the original owner did to replace the HT's on my 74. If you look closely you will see that the frame does not touch the body when the hog troughs are in place. That is the job of the hog troughs.

I can't comment on your tolerance for "good enough" but by looking under my two Avanti's I would never run them without some form of structural support between the body and the frame mounts.. I intended to build my own originally but got a great deal on a couple from an SDC forum member and installed same.

[/img][/img][/img]

It seemed to keep the body from cracking and the doors fit ok but I'm putting over 400 HP to it in the future and want all of the strength I can muster. Now that the new HT's are installed the rigidity of the floors and body are substantially improved.

I'm not a structural engineer but I've been up close and personal with two of these and would never let the body be mounted without some form of large area support.

To paraphrase another poster, Your Car, Your Money, Your Tolerance Level.

Bob

Edited December 30, 2012 by Avanti83

[kramerdad1]

bob, if I was putting big horsepower in any car Id beef up the frame too, all Im saying is rather then blindly tossing 4-5K into replaceing the troughs because thats what everyone else does, maybe its time to take a fresh look at alternatives (( L or U channels for example) rather then going through everything it takes to replace a part that may not actually need to be replaced by the same exact part that has already proven to be a bad design, especially in light of the cost and work involved.

In any sport a certain tunnel vision sets in, its true on all the other sites you go to, people have something in thier minds and when someone comes along with a fresh look at a resolution the fur flies. Go to any of the other sites, the MG site for example, the dogleg frames on the "B" all rust out, in the same spot, the "fix" was to replace the dogleg with an exact replacement, which in a few years, rusted out again, the debate was a different way to fix the problem. any outsider ( like me, I dont have a MG who looked at the debate saw the problem for what it was, doing everything that everyone has done in the past and wonder why the problem is still there.

I for one am not going to spend 5K recreating the same mistake the factory made, namely installing a part that is guarenteed to fail and takes a huge effort to replace, why would you? if it failed before, it will fail again, why not take a better (different) approach to solving the problem? If you are putting a 400 HP engine in your car its obvious that is not going to hurt its value, would fixing the throughs in a better manner lesson the value of the car if its a better way to do it?

[Avanti83]

bob, if I was putting big horsepower in any car Id beef up the frame too, all Im saying is rather then blindly tossing 4-5K into replaceing the troughs because thats what everyone else does, maybe its time to take a fresh look at alternatives (( L or U channels for example) rather then going through everything it takes to replace a part that may not actually need to be replaced by the same exact part that has already proven to be a bad design, especially in light of the cost and work involved.

In any sport a certain tunnel vision sets in, its true on all the other sites you go to, people have something in thier minds and when someone comes along with a fresh look at a resolution the fur flies. Go to any of the other sites, the MG site for example, the dogleg frames on the "B" all rust out, in the same spot, the "fix" was to replace the dogleg with an exact replacement, which in a few years, rusted out again, the debate was a different way to fix the problem. any outsider ( like me, I dont have a MG who looked at the debate saw the problem for what it was, doing everything that everyone has done in the past and wonder why the problem is still there.

I for one am not going to spend 5K recreating the same mistake the factory made, namely installing a part that is guarenteed to fail and takes a huge effort to replace, why would you? if it failed before, it will fail again, why not take a better (different) approach to solving the problem? If you are putting a 400 HP engine in your car its obvious that is not going to hurt its value, would fixing the throughs in a better manner lesson the value of the car if its a better way to do it?

KD1

I didn't say to put them in at a cost equivalent to purchasing the vehicle. What I hope I conveyed was the thought that there needs to be support between the body and the body mounts on the frame spread over a decent area. My total cost was under $600 for my 74.

If I had not found a decent buy on the troughs, I would have fabricated them from 16 ga sheet metal like I did on my 54K Studebaker.

Without that support the total body weight in the rear is held by the support in the middle of the trunk and, eventually, by the frame as that mount fails.

If you have no fabrication skills or no place to do it, Draw up a flanged U-shaped box and take that to a local sheet metal fabricator. We have a couple here in my small corner of the world and for a couple hundred bucks you can have a viable replacement that will have required a few bends to make. That will be cheaper that buying thin wall rectangular tubing in the correct dimensions.

As I said, I'm not a structural engineer but I've had enough Avanti smutz fall on me and in my eyes to know that some support is necessary.

In any case, I never worry about resale on my cars. I buy 'em cheap, build 'em the way I want to drive 'em and sell them when I want something else. I've never lost a dime on the sale of the past ones, (AH 3000, 72 Bronco, 70 GT-6, 39 Ford Coupe, Fiat 850 Coupe). But if I had charged myself labor, I'd be in the poor house so I'm pretty good at resolving issues outside the box.

The total 383 SBC stroker and T-56 trans setup in the 74 will come in at less than $2100 total cost due to Craigslist including a new flywheel, clutch/pressure plate assembly and hydraulics so you don't need to spend a ton to keep these little devils on the road.

All that aside, it continues to be JMHO that it's important to support the body in a reasonable fashion.

Besides, the torque boxes on the Avantis lasted a lot longer than the rockers and frame on my 2000 Silverado so I'm not so sure about the failed engineering label on them.

In any case, I'm not creating flying fur, just making a case for adding some form of support to replace the rotted structure.

Again, YCYMYTL, Bob

Edited December 30, 2012 by Avanti83

[kramerdad1]

hope I didn't sound like I was going after you, just jaw-jacking about the cost of doing something that doesn't seem to be that necessary. Im interested in your idea about the rear suppoert however, can you post a drawing?

[Avanti83]

KD1

I wasn't being sensitive, I lost that years ago, but wanted to reiterate my point that the HT's provide a lot of support and with them missing the body's only support is the front body mounts which a quite strong as they are part of the firewall and a single rear support in the middle of the trunk floor which is quite weak. I'm sure it will fail and leave the frame as the contact points for the body.

My suggestion was to have a local sheet metal shop bend a set of HT replacements to support the body. They would just be a flanged "U" shape that would be pop riveted like the troughs and provide a mounting for the body/frame attachments. They would just be a simple form, easily bent by the local shop and cheap also.

You could also just use lengths of thin wall rectangular tubing and shim the mounts like the previous owner of my 74.

The rest was the fact that I am not rich and do anything I can to keep costs under control as I build my Dream Cars.

No harm, no foul, Bob

[kramerdad1]

just got off the phone with the "god" of avantis, dan booth, who has over 40 years experience and currently owns all the avanti blueprints, paperwork, dies and parts. the expert word on the troughs is that they were used for saftey purposes, not for body flex. the trough was used to support and mount the roll bar and for side impacts, not for any support of the body. Dan explaned that if you rolled a car without troughs the roll bar would go right through the floor and the roof would collapse, in a side impact the troughs protect you from crush injury, these were were very advanced ideas for the early 60's but that seems to explain why they were built the way they were, to support the roll bar, not for the body flexing. using that information Im going to repair the area were the rollbar mounts and run a lenghtwise chanel to do the same thing the troughs did but without all thje drama of installing throughs