If i go with panel adhesive, my concern is going to be clamping. Im not sure how i would clamp the panel in the middle of the back wall like it is.

 

Nick, what I do many times when I have a large panel that is difficult to get to the edges with a clamp, is to use clecos or even sheetmetal screws to pull in the edges. The adhesive has glass beads in it that will force the adhesive to maintain a proper gap when clamped...in simple terms it means that it is almost imposible to overclamp and force out all the adhesive. The holes are easily filled after the adhesive has set with, you guessed it, panel adhesive.

Here is a sample product listing on ebay for what you need if you choose to go this direction: http://www.ebay.com/itm/3m-08115-Panel-Adhesive-08571-Manual-Applicator-Gun-a-6-pack-of-08193-nozzles-/331108747226?hash=item4d179e87da&item=331108747226&pt=Motors_Automotive_Tools&vxp=mtrThe adhesive is mixed at the proper proportions within the disposable tip so there is no issue with getting the mix wrong. Once the cartridge is inserted in the gun, the tip is attached to the cartridge and you just squeeze it out like you would a caulking gun. Use what you need and if there is any left in the cartridge then remove the tip and reinstall the cap/collar that came with the cartridge. I have had half-used cartridges in the tool box for weeks...when you need to use them again you just follow the same procedure as a new unused cartridge. Each cartridge comes with two tips...on a big job I will only use one tip and expend the whole cartridge, that leaves an extra tip for the next job. Several small jobs may require more tips before the cartridge is used up. Good luck...

 

I'd use screws or pop rivets, I'd be real sad if I glued my cleco collection to a panel.

 

Before the OEM Body Engineers approve the use of adhesives significant testing is done at each and every location to ensure that failures do not occur over time or in a crash. Often they do not approve its use in certain critical spots. AX's warnings in post #15 are spot on.

 

While I would generally agree that safety should be a concern when considering these options, this youtube video showing a 1959 vs a 2009 automobile indicates that if safety is what you're after, stay away from 1950's vehicles:


My main point is, welding will unlikely give you any significant safety advantages when the overall safety of these vehicles is quite questionable when compared to modern cars. Crash survival didn't seem to be a major concern (I'm probably wildly oversimplifying as I don't know what they envisioned as the main use of these trucks, and if it were farm use, you probably wouldn't encounter head-ons like that depicted in the video).

 

That is an offset barrier crash, something they never designed for in 1959. But that really isn't the issue. The issue is not knowing how a substitute like structural adhesive will perform. Will it be better, worse or just as good as the original engineering design in each and every location where you plan to use it? You really won't know unless you do testing like you see in the video.

 

I understand - I think I was probably making a veiled, but bold statement - it's unlikely to do any worse than stock as stock doesn't seem to do all that well. My comment is restricted to the safety part and only to a crash.

How long have structural adhesives been around and how well tested (generally speaking) are they in applications like this? AX's reply hints (says?) that they're becoming more and more wide spread and even used in a high metal stress applications like airliners which is quite impressive.

 

Without testing we are just guessing.

They are being used more but only after significant testing particularly in airliners. Here is a good article on the subject:
HowStuffWorks "Is it possible to assemble a car with glue?"

 

A couple asides:
Re: using manufacturer's recommended materials only.
On last night's episode of American Restoration Rick was doing a $ multi K restoration on a Water Scooter. He told the customer he would refinish the FG body and hull using jell coat rather than paint for adhesion and durability. Turned out he had never used the material before but decided to spray it. Tyler read the instructions which said to add a specific proprietary solvent and styrene for thinning. Rick says we don't have either of those so I'm just going to use regular acetone! We see the project completed but they have no idea how the acetone affected the material and if the coating will hold up for any length of time with age and use.

RE: the crash test comparison cited.
They deliberately chose a 59 Chevy sedan to give a worse case scenario comparison.
GM used a "new X" configuration frame rather than a perimeter frame from 58 into the 60s with a single central backbone and minimal thickness rockers so they could drop the front floorpan below the frame to give more interior foot space with the new lower slender flat mostly glass roofline, slender rockers, and roof posts. However it proved to be a very weak design especially in front 1/4 collision impacts as used in the comparison, The leverage on the single spine design caused it and the car to easily fold. GM realized it's mistake and in the next generation redesign returned to the perimeter frame and box structural rocker panels.
The comparison was a highly stacked deck.

 

I was curious about that (and secretly hoped one of you knew) - I know the newer cars are designed to be safer, but that thing folded like a lawn chair! I had started to think they purposely sought one that was very rust stricken just to get that effect.

I haven't watched that episode yet, but I will have to skip a few on hulu to get to that!

Edit: I know I'm bringing this slightly off-top, but here's a chinese truck in a crash test (at least the cargo would survive ;-)

 

[QUOTE=AXracer;14402990]A couple asides:
Re: using manufacturer's recommended materials only.
On last night's episode of American Restoration Rick was doing a $ multi K restoration on a Water Scooter. He told the customer he would refinish the FG body and hull using jell coat rather than paint for adhesion and durability. Turned out he had never used the material before but decided to spray it. Tyler read the instructions which said to add a specific proprietary solvent and styrene for thinning. Rick says we don't have either of those so I'm just going to use regular acetone! We see the project completed but they have no idea how the acetone affected the material and if the coating will hold up for any length of time with age and use.

RE: the crash test comparison cited.
They deliberately chose a 59 Chevy sedan to give a worse case scenario comparison.
GM used a "new X" configuration frame rather than a perimeter frame from 58 into the 60s with a single central backbone and minimal thickness rockers so they could drop the front floorpan below the frame to give more interior foot space with the new lower slender flat mostly glass roofline, slender rockers, and roof posts. However it proved to be a very weak design especially in front 1/4 collision impacts as used in the comparison, The leverage on the single spine design caused it and the car to easily fold. GM realized it's mistake and in the next generation redesign returned to the perimeter frame and box structural rocker panels.
The comparison was a highly stacked deck.[/QUOTE
Was it the same crew that did the famous Chevy pickup gas tank report that for 57 min tic tic