• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

The Elephant In The Room: unloading the load from a B-body.

Tom Tignanelli probably had the most and rarest of the TI and magnesium, factory-appearing parts I've ever seen.
I myself and my alter-ego were floored, not only respectfully for the fact that those parts existed, but that someone beat me to it. LOL.
Here I thought I was the only one with an under dash aluminum brake bar and harness housing and in the midst of the historic panel discussion at MCACN with Geoff Stunkard, Butch Leal, Paul Rossi, Arnie Beswick at the helm, Tom Tignanelli's brother breaks out with both aluminum and magnesium brake bar housing versions. (Posted again below) Not to mention the center drilled Titanium torsion bars which by nature did nothing but support the cars full weight with absolutely no torsion sprung features. Dangerous in my book of rule breaking, but they were there and those guys were fearless.

I did go home with a smile after Tom Hoover Jr. and Bob Karakashian were giving my car a close up inspection. They were indeed intrigued. Really cool couple of gents.

unnamed-4.jpg
 
Last edited:
Now that my juices are flowing without meaning to repost, here's one of the items that most curious cats getting in close were flipping out about.
RMCHRGR was having a Dandy good time revealing it to those NOT IN THE KNOW.
I think I blew by the factory guys with this one, but only the Shadow Knows. LOL.

1-1.jpeg
 
I breakfast with Jim Tig and the guys, every Sunday. I go back to the 70's, dealing with Tom. We used to do lunch a couple times a week.....till he passed.
 
Tom Tignanelli probably had the most and rarest of the TI and magnesium, factory-appearing parts I've ever seen.
Jim has some stories and is funny. We only got to talk with him briefly but it seems like he knows a lot of very interesting stuff. The gun-drilled Ti T-bars were almost laughable.
 
After what some of us have witnessed, heard, assumed and consumed at the MCACN show this past November, I, myself can't say "one of one" or "certain items do not - could not exist" anymore.
It seems that either with limited or perhaps unlimited recourses, that some of these guys from the Old Chrysler Corporation may have reinvented and circumvented rules of logic by building, stamping or revamping unicorn parts for their racing programs.
I was floored when a Titanium torsion bar was handed over to me at MCACN like a golf club. Welcome to the exclusive Golf club of The Old Chrysler Corporations skunk works. Nuff said.
The Motown Missile is known to have had things such as titanium strut rods, but at this juncture, I wouldn't put it pass them that even Titanium lower and upper control arms were stamped and on some of those winning cars.

When time allows, I will return to the drawing board to see if I can outpace them all these years after.
 
Last edited:
I weighed the K frame in my 65 Belvedere, and it came in at 39 lbs after pressure washing. I took 4 pounds of dirt and debris from inside of it. After adding holes and a shave, it comes in at 34 lbs. These are weights for the K frame only, all other pieces removed.
 
I weighed the K frame in my 65 Belvedere, and it came in at 39 lbs after pressure washing. I took 4 pounds of dirt and debris from inside of it. After adding holes and a shave, it comes in at 34 lbs. These are weights for the K frame only, all other pieces removed.
Thank you BV.
I've got my eyes on something out of the ordinary, but I want to make sure its condition is proper.
 
I've just recently laid eyes on two light gauge stainless steel K members that were stamped and installed on the '65 A/FX altered wheelbase cars, but I've only read and wondered about the Aluminum or Magnesium K members that were supposedly installed on the 2% cars of 1964.
Speaking of the unicorn Magnesium members, a friend once got scolded after trying to innocently and respectfully snap a photo (can you believe that?) of a supposed Magnesium K member nestled underneath a certain 2% car at a national show. Based on this uncomfortable incident, it made me suspicious of this cars authenticity and if it ever had one underneath at all in the first place.
Did these so-called unicorn magnesium K members ever exist at all? Well apparently, they do exist because a reputable source, (Jim Kramer) has one and has indicated that it is featherlight along with DVW here who once handled one on his pinky.
As soon as the opportunity presents itself and I have images, there will be a posting not for the reason of boasting, but to make an argument for three strange alloy K members that actually do exist.
 
I've just recently laid eyes on two light gauge stainless steel K members that were stamped and installed on the '65 A/FX altered wheelbase cars, but I've only read and wondered about the Aluminum or Magnesium K members that were supposedly installed on the 2% cars of 1964.
Speaking of the unicorn Magnesium members, a friend once got scolded after trying to innocently and respectfully snap a photo (can you believe that?) of a supposed Magnesium K member nestled underneath a certain 2% car at a national show. Based on this uncomfortable incident, it made me suspicious of this cars authenticity and if it ever had one underneath at all in the first place.
Did these so-called unicorn magnesium K members ever exist at all? Well apparently, they do exist because a reputable source, (Jim Kramer) has one and has indicated that it is featherlight along with DVW here who once handled one on his pinky.
As soon as the opportunity presents itself and I have images, there will be a posting not for the reason of boasting, but to make an argument for three strange alloy K members that actually do exist.
My memory is a little foggy, but as I recall one if the magazines talked about a stainless k-frame being relatively fragile and breaking back in the day? Of course the magazines had plenty of drivel, too!
 
My memory is a little foggy, but as I recall one if the magazines talked about a stainless k-frame being relatively fragile and breaking back in the day? Of course the magazines had plenty of drivel, too!
Apparently, the Stainless K's were prone to cracking, bending or collapsing under harsh landings from rear bumper scraping wheels stands. The Hemi blocks were still iron back then.
I think their weak spots were the LCA tube welds and the eventual orientation of parts as things started to get distorted under abuse.
Lifting the cars (even though they were relatively light) by the K's center was a no-no, so that practice might have contributed to their eventual demise as well.
The Aluminum types I have not heard much about, but I would trust them over the Magnesium types though.

Allegedly, the magnesium ones were a complete cracking disaster because of the metals fragile nature. That's what I remember reading about years back. It now looks like some of these have survived the test of time in the right hands or out of cars.
Magnesium, I would use one, but I'd be under that B!/ch giving it a multi-point inspection at every corner of the day. Those 2% cars were a head trip. Talk about EXTREME!
 
Last edited:
Since the very beginning of this thread, I believe the data here has been real world, but lately, there's been a need to clear the air of outside AI misinformation and exaggerations. No if's and's or but's.

I'm so tired of seeing humanity being steered by garbage info masqueraded as gospel. It infuriates me to read the info on the net particularly of the A/FX cars which tends to be all over the p[lace.
Case in point: I read somewhere recently that the lightweight stainless K-members used exclusively on the 1965 A/FX's saved a whopping 40 Lbs from the OEM steel counterparts.........How is that so? when the steel K-members themselves weigh more or less about 40 Lbs. Is AI insinuating that a stainless K-member weighs 1 lb or less? PLEEEASE............
As of lately, I have had my eyes on a lightweight stainless K, and if it somehow finds its way to me, I will run with it in one hand along with a steel unit in the other to my digital scales faster than a W10.5 car in the 8th.

As I gather real world measurements, weigh-ins and material usage here, I will post those real numbers on the scales. Enough with the scrap crap out there.
 
Last edited:
Tales from the scales.
An Old school Hanson, a Dymo mail scale and a ProForm digital set-up all removed from storage and ready for duty in the Winter wonderland.
Now y'all know that I've lost it if I'm wondering how much each of these scales weigh themselves. LOL.

unnamed-4.jpg
 
Not sure if this has been identified within the thread yet, but figured I might as well add the following to the Elephant thread…..

Stock strut rods: 6.5 lbs.
QA1 dynamic Aluminum strut rods: 4 lbs.
Saving 2-1/2 lbs is probably not as valuable as the superior action of heim-joints over rubber bushings. But 2-1/2 lbs from the nose of the car on a bolt on item, when compared to some of the efforts we’ve seen Lee chronicle here for far less weight savings would seem to an be easy-peasy no-brainer.

Of course, they do stick out like…. well, gold anodized aluminum in a sea of black steel. I suppose one could paint or powdercoat these items to blend in like a face in a crowd.

IMG_4545.jpeg
 
Stock strut rods: 6.5 lbs.
QA1 dynamic Aluminum strut rods: 4 lbs.
Per QA1, switching to their full front end eliminates 18 lbs over the stock stuff. That includes their K frame, upper and lower control arms and the aluminum strut rods. I did it on my Duster. I never did weigh the separate parts against each other though, sorry. Not sure if you could whittle down the stock parts enough without sacrificing strength to net that much.

Also, if you don't care about trashing the powder coating on the QA1 parts you could lop off the sway bar brackets that come on the K frame and lower control arms to save a few additional pounds. Same idea if you have a motor plate - get rid of the motor mounts on the K frame and save even more.

All told, I believe I'm doing OK on the front of my car. Ditching the stock steel hood, hinges and latch for a pin-on fiberglass one has to be at least 60-70lbs. Aluminum cross-flow radiator, QA1 front end, aluminum engine parts, aluminum throttle body, Wilwood 10" drum spindle brakes, aluminum master cylinder, aluminum front bumper brackets and on and on. No, it doesn't appear stock by any stretch but that's not really my game.

Dusters are generally light in the back so I'm curious to see what the front-to-rear balance will be when the car is done.
 
Guys and Gals, so there you have it. QA1 stuff is top notch and advancing every minute. Though not much at all different from QA1 as far as weight, my stock steel strut rods (BARS AND NUTS ONLY) weighed 6-1/4 Lbs and the bone stock looking aluminum jammies replacing them came in at 3 Lbs saving 3-1/4 lbs with the nuts., This doesn't take into account the handmade coned aluminum washers. As can be imagined, I was ecstatic with the medium loss and figured there and then that this mission was going to be in large, medium, small and micro increments all the way.

STOCK looking is always the uphill battle for me and more expensive, but that's my confession of no concessions when it comes to looking stock. I just love hiding things in plain site. The obvious big things supposedly give away the farm, (like my over the top A/FX Hemi Scoop) but it's a constellation of little, invincible things all added up that distribute the harm.

What Lemon Wedge has going for him as far as estethics, is that his car is a cream yellow and won't look out of place with gold anodized strut rods on board. He also has the option to just spray 'em satin black and they'll partially disappear to the naked eye at fast glance.

RMCRGR's approach is a no holds barred, see it as it is and watch your wallet because that nasty small block is going to more than make up for the aftermarket optics. That Duster will be an animal.

unnamed-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top