Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 15:10:21 +0100 From: Colin Stamp <col.dustbinnospamp.plus.com> Subject: Re: Have Saab reintroduced hatchback yet?
On 23 Sep 2007 09:29:24 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvsnospaml.com> wrote: >Eeyore (rabbitsfriendsandrelationsnospamail.com) gurgled happily, >sounding much like they were saying : > >>> > They brace the entire rear of the car. > >>> No they don't. > >> Pillars *always* 'brace' the bodywork. It's their very function. > >>> A hatchback has a great big opening at the back. Saloons don't. The >>> weaker chassis stiffness of a hatchback can be designed out of the >>> machine over a given generation - so a mark three Mondeo hatchback is >>> going to be stiffer than a mark one / two Mondeo saloon, but the >>> hatchback is usually not as stiff as the saloon. > >> The size of the hole (beyond something really small) is no reliable >> guide. > >Perhaps, but the solid bar across the full width of the rear, half way up, >complete with bonded glass above it, is. > >Go and open the hatch of a 350Z for a fine demonstration. What this? http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/gallery/?model=583&img=archive/Nissan/350Z/DSC04656.JPG You're not seriously suggesting that thing in the boot was put there by any kind of engineer are you? It will have been "designed" by either a stylist or a marketing man. If they'd been serious about bracing the shell at the back, then they'd have done it diagonally. About the least effective thing they could do would be to brace it straight across from one side to the other. Their thinking in this case seems to have been along the lines of "How can we create the maximum visual impact without altering the shell stiffness too much". Incidentally, the 9-3 hatch has a thick heavy bar running behind the top of the back seats to hold the seat belt reels. It's completely unable to flex or stretch, yet it sits perfectly happily in its latches, quietly and constantly proving that, if it were a strut-brace or a steel parcel shelf, it would be doing nothing worthwhile. Cheers, Colin.