Strut Tower braces: Useless?

[Haysoos]

As you can tell by my other thread, I just installed front and rear strut tower braces. Obviously I went for a quick drive to see if I could feel a difference, and started thinking about that myth that they are useless. After just feeling the car through turns, I realized that the braces DO something, but I don't know if it's good or not.

I did feel the difference in that the inside (in relation to the turn) side of the car seemed to lift up a bit more. I had heard that the bars could exagerrate body roll, but I don't thik thats what it is. I just think that when the force from the turn is applied to the chassis, without the bar the towers would pivot at their base, thus twisting the car. This would also change the distance between the tops of the tower, in an uncontrolled manor. So the only real job the bar does is keep the tops of the struts equal distance from each other, which would reduce the amount of twist. If the distance changes, then alignment angles would be different for each side. Maybe only minutely, but still a fact.

Now, for my car, not so good, because my suspension is loose, not stiff, so the body roll allows more travel on the inside side of the car. But on a stiff suspension, I think it would be good, keeping the alignment even on both sides, especially when it's a tuned setup with specific angles. Again, add to that better tires with a lot more grip, then through turns more force will be applied to the chassis, causing more flex, making larger changes to the alignment.

I know this is a lot of already there knowledge, I just wanted to see what the other side has to say about all that. I may not have used the right terminology, but it makes logical sense to me and proves that strut tower bars DO something. Now, whether they do good or bad, I'm not trying to say that, otherwise I wouldn't have opened the discussion.

[DirtyDC4]

I agree, solid front stut bars can make a difference.

I bought my car bone stock; no strut brace, stock springs, rubber bushings, no sway bar.

I added Eibach's: felt better, responded better.
I added a Neuspeed bar: felt even better response and turn-in was a lot more crisp but got a bit more understeer.
I added poly bushings: more response but also a little more understeer.
I changed from Eibach's to full-coilovers: a lot more cornering ability but about the same amount of understeer.
I added an HF front sway bar: understeer went bye-bye.

:thehump:

[solo-x]

the phase of the moon has more impact on chassis roll then a strut bar does. 'nuff said.

[Haysoos]

the phase of the moon has more impact on chassis roll then a strut bar does. 'nuff said.

What is your reasoning though? Just stating the fact without at least a thought process to back it up is just about useless. The reason I spouted all that BS was to try and get a discussion about the topic that actually has some substance to it.

[solo-x]

the reasoning is that strut bars have no affect on chassis roll. things that have an affect on chassis roll are your sway bars, your springs, and the geometry of the suspension. when doing any chassis math, we assume that the chassis is infinitely stiff. there are two reasons to that. the first and most important is that what little chassis flex there is doesn't really affect anything enough to change the numbers. your strut bar might have increased chassis rigidity by 1% (if you're really lucky and got an incredibly well designed product. something of a shot in the dark since you won't find chassis rigidity numbers published by manfucturers and strut bar manufacturers likely don't test their products (a safe bet considering the price point of a strut bar)) but you're talking 1% of a function in the equation that has such a small impact we ignore it in the first place.

a more likely scenario? you've modified something in your car, you expect to feel a difference and as such pay much closer attention to how the car feels and how much it rolls. i never hear more squeeks and rattles from my car then when i think i've got a wheel bearing heading south or a ball joint that is tweaked. finally, if you are feeling that much of a difference daily driving your street car, i'd definitely be seeing a difference with my DL1 during competition pulling just over 1g steady state and spikes approaching 1.2g's. (that's on street tires too, btw)

nate

ps. just for reference, driving really aggressively on the street you might see .8g's. if you're driving harder then that on the street, you might want to re-evaluate your friendship with Darwin. ;)

pps. yes, i datalogged my commute to work. doesn't everyone? :)

[solo-x]

so, what about the Integra Type-R?!? it has strut bars all over the place! again, good luck getting honda to publish chassis stiffness numbers with and without the strut and tie bars. i have some theories on why they are on the car (and so visible too...) but i'll keep those to myself sense they are only theories. when thinking of these things, i tend to focus on where we want the stiffness. it's not at the ends of the 'box', it's in the middle of the 'box' where you'll see gains by increasing stiffness.

[DirtyDC4]

i tend to focus on where we want the stiffness. it's not at the ends of the 'box', it's in the middle of the 'box' where you'll see gains by increasing stiffness.

Very true, which is why the new trend is to strip down to the bare shell, do all sorts of cool welding (forget the technical name for all this), and then BLAMO! stiffer chassis.

I did feel crisper steering when I put on my Neuspeed bar. Whether or not the chassis is stiffer doesn't matter to me.

[Haysoos]

...but i'll keep those to myself sense they are only theories. when thinking of these things, i tend to focus on where we want the stiffness. it's not at the ends of the 'box', it's in the middle of the 'box' where you'll see gains by increasing stiffness.

Don't keep it to yourself, this is a no beef discussion. I'm ot worryed that you have a different opinion, its just that most discussions on the subject have been:
"yes they do!"
"no they don't!"

ya know? But I agree, it's not hard to see what would be the most likely to flex, that baing the big, open middle.

On the topic of how much it heps, I think it has more to do with weight. There are factory strut bars put on cars, they logically make sense, so I hardly see how they can do nothing. 1% is still 1%, not much but SOMETHING. Now, what about if your car was heavier? All the forces applied through the turn would be bigger, which could cause more flex. Of course, if the car is built sturdier, that would reduce flex too, as well as simply designing the chassis better.

As for the paying more attention to my driving, I doubt thats possible. Driving too and from work, or whatever, I pay more attention than most. When I'm out for a drive, I usually turn the radio off, and just pay attention to nothing but my car. :D:D The difference that I noticed wasn't so much a change in body roll or handling, but the car itself does feel less spongy. Not the suspension though, it's still squishy. Does that make sense? I can understand why most people say it makes their car handle better, because I car feels a lot better putting power down after a turn. But I don't think it made my car handle BETTER.

[NastyHabitzCRX]

the type R, has more than just some added strut bars to make the frame tighter. the frame itself has been strengthened in all the right places too.

i guess it just depends on how in tune with how your car drives, to notice a difference. on mine it was instant when the Nuespeed bar was added to the front.:beer:

[Mixelplix]

I'll throw in my 2 cents worth of information, after thinking about the subject for all of five minutes.

A. I suspect that the strut bar is typically under tension, rather than compression... Weight transfer to the outer tire would move the outer strut tower AWAY from the centerline, making the strut bar be under tension. The only time the strut bar would see compression is when the car's chassis is forced down evenly.. like if you were to jump it or something.

B. The strut tower brace is there to support the strut tower. (Duh, I know) I often hear people discussing it as if it supports the strut itself - which it doesn't.

I'll think about it more during the day, and see what I come up with and post back here.

-Des!

[turbohappy]

It's possible that strut bars can make your chassis stiffer (less squeaks, etc.) without actually improving max lateral acceleration.

[solo-x]

Very true, which is why the new trend is to strip down to the bare shell, do all sorts of cool welding (forget the technical name for all this), and then BLAMO! stiffer chassis.

I did feel crisper steering when I put on my Neuspeed bar. Whether or not the chassis is stiffer doesn't matter to me.

it's called seam welding.

[xxbrualxx]

hrmm w/e...i dunno if it was psychological or what..but my chassis felt liek ti stiffened up..around corners i found my steering to be a little sharper at speeds in excess of 40 miles...but w/e..just like my AEM pulleys...got it for free...cant complain when its free

[xcthc]

my steering felt a little stiffer..... placebo effect? maybe.

[solo-x]

It's possible that strut bars can make your chassis stiffer (less squeaks, etc.) without actually improving max lateral acceleration.

if it isn't making the car handle better, why bother? if the only defense for buying one is "i felt like my chassis was stiffer after i installed" then should we listen to engine tuners that claim their chip makes more power because someone said their car pulled harder?

i may not be a national champion, but i can hold my own when it comes to dodging cones. i can feel a half pound change in tire pressure. i'm stressing the chassis on my car WAY more then anyone on the street ever should be. yet, i can't feel any difference with or without a strut bar. someone else claims they can feel a change. maybe i'm just pickier then everyone else, but i have a hard time dropping my hard earned $$$ on something that people can't even agree actually does the job it is advertised to do. i have to rely on what imperical evidence i can get, and the data from my logger says "strut bars = waste of money".

i'm not telling anyone NOT to buy a strut bar. i'm not even saying that it definitely doesn't stiffen the chassis. all i'm saying is that even with an impartial tool taking imperical data i don't see any performance improvement from adding a strut bar. personally, i'll take that strut bar money and put it into something that WILL improve the performance of the car. things like koni 2812's, an SMS header, dyno time, wider/lighter wheels, different spring rates, lighter swaybars and so on. and for everyone that tells me "but my chassis is stiffer with strut bars!" i'll say prove it. yeah, i can get my car to sit on 3 jackstands too. so what?!? :)

[jdmd16]

they worked for me, but i think this whole discussion is a matter of opinion because some people think they work some people dont. If they didnt work do you think companies would waste their money producing them

[SillyImportRacer]

It stands to reason that the bars would at some chassis stiffnes. However, the level of improovement would be marginal. If you're running very high spring rates on a track car, you might see a gain. On a street car, in good condition, the rates shouldn't be that high or the driving nearly that aggressive.

That said, I have a pair of upper bars on my daily driver, EJ!. No, I didn't feel ant change after I installed them. & yes, I will be moving them to my Solo2 car, EJ2. Because they are paid for, the wieght gain will be minimal, & any gain might help.
...& they look nice when I have the hood open for tech

[99EJ6T]

the bar in itself doesn't do anything but make a car look good under the hood, when combined with a stock car. it also does nothing in a chassis that has serious modifications (roll cage, seam welding, redesigned suspension geometry, etc). but on a 90% stock car that is just lowered (2.5 in.), it does do something.

thanks for reading my .02 on the subject.

[krychek57]

It comes down to, if you like them great, if you don't great. they matter little either way.

BTW there has been lengthy convos about this already.

[turbohappy]

if it isn't making the car handle better, why bother? if the only defense for buying one is "i felt like my chassis was stiffer after i installed" then should we listen to engine tuners that claim their chip makes more power because someone said their car pulled harder?
It made the top creak less on my del Sol ;) I don't have any bars on my EF because I couldn't find any benefit either.

[turboedpickup]

It's possible that strut bars can make your chassis stiffer (less squeaks, etc.) without actually improving max lateral acceleration.

i think he summed it up.

but if the car doesn't "handle better" - defining "better handling" as being able to take a turn faster...then ok. but it does seem to stiffen up the chassis - and if anything... you're buying something to make the car "feel better" - but not necessarily improving the handling. it's just improving the feeling of the drive.

[1991rex]

in my opinion depends what the strut bar is made out of... do u really think a drilled aluminum strut bar actually helps a nearly 2000 lb car? solid or a 3 point like the passwordjdm bar only way to go if want function and not just looks

[Haysoos]

So I think we can all agree it does SOMETHING, but improving handling is not one of them. To me, it's more or less just to reduce flex, if that matters or not, I don't care. Like 96EJ said, on a lowered car, it keeps the strut towers from angling inward. So I would say this is less of a performance part, and more for just keeping everything a bit more square.

Buy something cheap and be done with it. If you are serious autoxing, try the passwordJDM stuff, but I would recommend doing runs with and without it and see if there's a difference. But I do think any lowered, modded car should have upper strut braces. Just don't expect it to do anything drastic.

[solo-x]

i'll concede only that a strut bar MIGHT do something in the way of increasing chassis stiffness. can you measure it? no. does it improve handling? no. does it make the car perform better in any way? no. does it win you points at car shows? maybe, i wouldn't know. i play with these things to make them handle better and go faster then the next guy's car. i leave the ricey bits to the, um, ricers.

this argument is like asking which color of racecar is faster. i say red, but i know a bunch of other guys that say yellow is the fastest color. much like this discussion, i can only argue with them for a little bit about it before i tire of the whole thing, then i let the results speak for me. see ya at the track!

[Steve-O]

after much readin on the internet, i would conclude that if you couldn't cage your car and do all the seam welding and chassis reinforcements that competitive racers do, IMO a good i.e QUALITY, set of stiff lowering springs (or coilovers if you want height adjustability), adjustable shocks, poly bushings, large F&R stabilizer bars, and solid strut bars (front and rear, upper and lower) like the password:jdm ones would be a nice complete package for a street vehicle :TU:.

just my $0.02

[jdm ek]

my experiences with strut braces have been pretty good. first off i fitted a front upper brace in the engine bay, not really alot of difference, then i fitted a front lower brace and a rear upper, the front felt better going into turns at speed and the rear felt a little more stable, so i thought id go for the package and get the rear lower brace and the c pillar brace, at the same time i replaced my lca's with some jdm sports spec lca's and now with the full suspension lowered 60mm, jdm sports spec lca's and 5 strut braces in total the entire car feels stiffer and seems to have less lift/roll round corners when taking them at some speed, obviously if your travelling at a slow speed say 30-40mph you wont notice any difference, but before i couldnt really corner above 60-65mph without thinking this is where i roll my car, now i can corner comfortably up to 90mph sometimes more if its a sweeping bend and not give it a second thought. i know in the us you dont have roads like we do, but trust me if it works on the uks never end bendy roads it is pretty much worth while going the whole way.

[jdm ek]

i'll concede only that a strut bar MIGHT do something in the way of increasing chassis stiffness. can you measure it? no. does it improve handling? no. does it make the car perform better in any way? no. does it win you points at car shows? maybe, i wouldn't know. i play with these things to make them handle better and go faster then the next guy's car. i leave the ricey bits to the, um, ricers.

this argument is like asking which color of racecar is faster. i say red, but i know a bunch of other guys that say yellow is the fastest color. much like this discussion, i can only argue with them for a little bit about it before i tire of the whole thing, then i let the results speak for me. see ya at the track!

forgot to mention, in response to this comment, can you measure it? no you cant, but how much could a solid metal bar stretch when being pulled by the cars movement? in reality solid bars do not stretch, so they must strengthen the car, everybody knows a chasis flexs, but a solid bar wont so it has in theory a positive action, am i right?

[kyle h.]

I can't read all this but, I'm sure Honda and other car engineering companies didn't waste billions of dollars equiping cars out of the factory with strutbars, for no good reason.

[turboedpickup]

they did it to make the car "feel" better. less sloppy but equally handling... i think.

[Speedjunky01]

here is my pla. ebay "mugen" bar.mounts to the stock ITR/civic Si location AND around the strut tower.

I will basicly weld on a bracket and put and extra bolt through to make it a solid bar.

Paint killzzzz biatches lol.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y155/speedjunky01/Stutbarmod.jpg

I definetly feelt and improvement from the megan lower H brace. and my solo II time went down 1.2 sec the next time I went. could it be wather? mabby days were close to identical nothing else was changes so im thinking there is deff something to them.

or I improved at driving lol.

[Gassaver]

I did a google search on this. Just typed in, Strut bar myths and this link turned up. Not saying I believe or don't. Just thought I would add it here for the debate.

http://e30m3performance.com/myths/Strutbar_Theory/strut_bar_theory.htm

[Haysoos]

This 333 lb load amounts to about 12% of the car's total weight. Even though the strut tower is designed mainly to manage vertical forces , 333 lbs in the horizontal direction is not going to permanently deform the chassis. But the problem is that this force is repeatedly applied over many cycles during the life of the car. The more you drive it hard the more cycles you generate. This can lead to fatigue failure of the material that forms the strut tower (or where the strut tower attaches to the inner fender well).

Gassaver, that article is EXACLY what I thought, just I didn't have the fancy words and math to say it right. I even figured that in a turn, the bar would pull up on the inside tire. :D:D There IS a force applied and it is NOT good for your car. Chassis flex = bad, whether it helps handling doesn't matter.

Another point to consider is that if your outer strut tower is deflected outwards 0.20" by this 333 lb force, then you just lost 0.5° of negative camber! If it deflects 0.42" you have lost a full degree of negative camber.

Also a good point, just rmemeber this is on a full race setup. Like I said in my initial post, the bars will not help handling, but COULD on a full race because the flex causes a change in the suspension geometry. I'm pretty sure that what I said in my first post.

Add to this the fatigue failure, which will allow the metal to flex more over time, causing your alignment angles to be even more off. Since solo-x said id did nothing for his time, the flex might be very little on our cars, but could definitly be greater on heavier cars.

So remember guys, there more to this car thing than just time slips. Strut bars aren't just for handling, it's to keep you chassis from taking as much abuse.

[turbohappy]

I would submit that running over potholes and other bumps in stock form puts more stress on the chassis than racing. I really don't think you are going to permanently deform your chassis without strut bars.

[Haysoos]

I would submit that running over potholes and other bumps in stock form puts more stress on the chassis than racing. I really don't think you are going to permanently deform your chassis without strut bars.

It's more about the failure fatigue makign the car "squishier" as the years go by.

Simply put, this is a maintenence item, to maintain you chassis. Some believe that it's BS and it doesn't matter, and thats your choice. It very well might not make a damn bit of noticable difference over 10 years. But I KNOW metal flexes, just like how your crank shaft twists and rebounds like a rubber band when the pistons fire, so I would rather do what I can to reduce that and keep my chassis in as good of shape as possible.

I also plan on keeping this car 20-30 years. After driving this thing for 6 out of 7 of my driving years, I still love it and it's MY first car I bought with my money, so it has sentimental value as well. *shrug*

Regardless, you cannot arue against the physics of the situation, you can only aruge that it doesn't improve handling. One our cars, without a full race-only setup, I highly doubt it would improve handling.

Oh, and you are right, potholes would cause instant force that exceed what we experience in turns, but it's instant only and is not a CONSTANT force. Just there is XXXlbs of pressue I can hit you with and you would be fine(ish), the same pressure held on you for a period of time could do serious damage.

[Steve-O]

I can't read all this but, I'm sure Honda and other car engineering companies didn't waste billions of dollars equiping cars out of the factory with strutbars, for no good reason.i have to agree.

now, they probably didn't see the point in putting them on the econobox base model civic for obvious reasons. but the SiR civics, 94-01 tegs, 98+ accords as well as the s2k come with tubular ones standard. after working at a dealership for two years and seeing some of the engineering marvels that honda comes up with that are CONSTANTLY making my jaw drop, i'm inclined to believe that if honda engineers put it on there, it must do something and serve a purpose.

p.s. all of honda's bars are solid which should also say something ;) :TU:

[Haysoos]

I did a google search on this. Just typed in, Strut bar myths and this link turned up. Not saying I believe or don't. Just thought I would add it here for the debate.

http://e30m3performance.com/myths/Strutbar_Theory/strut_bar_theory.htm

For those that don't want to read much, glance at that link, explains it all how I tried to (and failed horribly :D).

@steve-o
I know, I LOVE honda because first and foremost, they are an transportation engineering comany more than a car company. Yes, I know ALL car companies have engineers, but how many started out as simply a research company and have kept that at their heart? Did you know honda has designed and build a small corporate jet? Did you know it gets better fuel economy that anything in it's class? ;) I don't see honda putting stuff on their type-r that was just show. Honda is the type of company to call BS on BS.

Bottom line, and this is NOT a flame or me trying to be a dick, but engineers who design F1 cars > autox-ers. Yeah, there may be a lot of autox guys that think sturt bars are a waste, but theres a lot of autox guys that don't really know shit either. (That is not aimed at anyone here, don't want people thinking I'm talking trash on anyone here :D)

[Steve-O]

...@steve-o
I know, I LOVE honda because first and foremost, they are an transportation engineering comany more than a car company. Yes, I know ALL car companies have engineers, but how many started out as simply a research company and have kept that at their heart? Did you know honda has designed and build a small corporate jet? Did you know it gets better fuel economy that anything in it's class? ;) I don't see honda putting stuff on their type-r that was just show. Honda is the type of company to call BS on BS.

Bottom line, and this is NOT a flame or me trying to be a dick, but engineers who design F1 cars > autox-ers. Yeah, there may be a lot of autox guys that think sturt bars are a waste, but theres a lot of autox guys that don't really know shit either. (That is not aimed at anyone here, don't want people thinking I'm talking trash on anyone here :D)it's what people can always expect from a company that's led by engineers :TU:

for example (and i don't know, maybe i'm just anal but ya) when i'm told "who cares about what the tire pressure says in the doorjamb, just put in 30 or 32 and you'll be fine. a couple psi isn't going to make a difference" :sadface:

i know it's petty but even down so small as that, i STILL to this day set tire pressures on all my services to what they are spec'd at in the doorjamb tag. because in all honesty, after installing some accessories from honda and seeing the absolute genuis with some of their stuff and how many times i'm like "how the heck did someone think of that?!?!?!", i'll do whatever honda says for that exact reason...because they know what they're doing and what they're talking about :TU:

[Haysoos]

it's what people can always expect from a company that's led by engineers :TU:

for example (and i don't know, maybe i'm just anal but ya) when i'm told "who cares about what the tire pressure says in the doorjamb, just put in 30 or 32 and you'll be fine. a couple psi isn't going to make a difference" :sadface:

i know it's petty but even down so small as that, i STILL to this day set tire pressures on all my services to what they are spec'd at in the doorjamb tag. because in all honesty, after installing some accessories from honda and seeing the absolute genuis with some of their stuff and how many times i'm like "how the heck did someone think of that?!?!?!", i'll do whatever honda says for that exact reason...because they know what they're doing and what they're talking about :TU:

x2, I thought anyone worth their salt went by the number on the doorjam? (disregarding running a certain PSI for performance, aka, tuning) Thats what my friends who I would let work on my car recommend. I prefer to avoid "good enough" mechanics...

[DirtyDC4]

Go by what the doorjam says if you're running stock sized wheels/tires.

My car came stock with 175/70/13's. I'm running 195/50/15's. I run 36 front/34 rear instead of (according to my doorjam) 32 front/30 rear.

[kyle h.]

^^ I agree, once you start modifying the car, doorjam numbers don't mean dick, because now you've re-engineered the car.

also, when I referred to the OEM strut braces/bars, I wasn't only thinking about honda. Think about all the other manufacturers, and race teams that use them. (and someone is saying, they don't do jack...yea ok, that's good for a laugh) <-- although I think we all agree that they do do something.

[1991rex]

also depends what the car is built for, alot of times racers delete the front sway bar for drag racing... does the front h- brace do anything other than get bashed to hell? thought of getting 1 of these but figure the upper strut, front sway and front lower should be enough... only have the upper strut bar thus far..

[Steve-O]

Go by what the doorjam says if you're running stock sized wheels/tires.

My car came stock with 175/70/13's. I'm running 195/50/15's. I run 36 front/34 rear instead of (according to my doorjam) 32 front/30 rear.i was just giving an example of how honda thinks of everything and what they do they do for a reason.

i know that once you change something on the car you need to change the variables involved that are related to it.

[Haysoos]

x2, I thought anyone worth their salt went by the number on the doorjam? (disregarding running a certain PSI for performance, aka, tuning) Thats what my friends who I would let work on my car recommend. I prefer to avoid "good enough" mechanics...

c'mon fellas, we're reaching into the areas that should be common knowledge with this. :D:D

@1991rex:
I thought the lower H brace was a great drag addition since it can put a stop to wheelhop? I can understand not having the others, but I could have sworn people bought the lower H braces to kil wheelhop...

[solo-x]

^^ I agree, once you start modifying the car, doorjam numbers don't mean dick, because now you've re-engineered the car.

also, when I referred to the OEM strut braces/bars, I wasn't only thinking about honda. Think about all the other manufacturers, and race teams that use them. (and someone is saying, they don't do jack...yea ok, that's good for a laugh) <-- although I think we all agree that they do do something.

yep, i'm laughing. you haven't the slightest notion of the reason behind the strut bars in an OE application, nor the reason a race car engineer working with a production chassis might utilize one. zero engineering background, zero racing background, zero car development background, yet YOU (the collective you supporting something without understanding it) think you've got the inside track, the otherworldly understanding? now that right there is a great joke if i've ever heard one.

anyone in here do a load path analysis on these chassis'? take my car, cornering at 1g. the front tires as a pair must generate roughly 1400lbs of force (2260lbs total weight, 61/39 weight distribution). i can't get grip vs. load graphs of the tires i use from the manufacturer, but based on tire loading of roughly 200lbs/1200lbs i'd ballpark the outside tire is generating nearly 90% of that grip. (doesn't really matter for this though). so, the outside tire is generating ~1260lbs of force. that force is acting through the lever arm of the tire with the lower balljoint as the fulcrum and the wheel bearing as the other fixed point, multiplying the force exerted on the lower control arm. i haven't measured ball joint offset from the wheel bearing or contact patch, but i'd guess the lower control arm is seeing at least double the force at the contact patch and that force is acting towards the center of the car.

the upper control arm sees less force because the upper balljoint actually attaches to the knuckle farther from the wheel bearing center then the contact patch. i'd guess something like 75% of the force at the contact patch which would only be 1000lbs or so, and in the outward direction. now, if the upper part of the strut tower is going to deflect with only 1000lbs of force put on it, i certainly don't want to be in that car when it gets in a wreck. or when the chassis bottoms out in a pot hole, an event that can shock the tower with several tens of thousands of pounds of force.

now, if i were going to put a reinforcement in the front of the car, i'd look to reinforce the k-frame, ala ITR. if you're going to see any substantial gain from a brace, it's going to be in an open sided box. the k-frame is open in the middle and sees all of the multiplied load from the lower control arms. honda put a brace there on the type-r, and all of the dc/eg subframes that i've seen have the blind nuts to bolt that brace to as well. now why would honda put blind nuts there 6yrs before they built the first type-r? why doesn't the 99-00 Si have that brace? but it has the upper strut tower brace? which one is more easily seen? how many of you in here blindly think an upper strut bar does something to stiffen the chassis? "honda put it there, so it must stiffen the chassis!" how about, "honda put it there to help sell cars!".

nate

ps. the rear of the car only has to generate 860lbs of cornering force, pretty much all from one tire. both upper and lower control arms are inside the diameter of the wheel, so both see multiplied loads. the uca/camber arm is reinforced by the trunk floor, the lower is in a boxed frame. i've seen cars that have hit curbs and wiped out the trailing arm AND the lca and didn't affect the tub at all. yep, lots a deflection from cornering happening there too.

pps. does anyone here understand harmonics and how to change/dampen them? think NVH and strut bars start to make more sense. then go back to that whole "selling cars" bit and it starts to make even more sense.

[solo-x]

oh, btw, don't take my word for ANY of this. ask yourself the questions. if you don't agree with me, present your case. i must warn you though, subjective opinion and a poor grasp of engineering, vehicle dynamics, and car prep will get your argument torn to shreds. or ignored if your argument is really dumb. if you want regurgitated internet bs, don't look to me.

[NastyHabitzCRX]

why would honda put blind nuts there 6yrs before they built the first type-r?
wasnt six years before that brace showed up on them i've seen them on 94/up GSRs.:beer:

[Steve-O]

yep, i'm laughing. you haven't the slightest notion of the reason behind the strut bars in an OE application, nor the reason a race car engineer working with a production chassis might utilize one. zero engineering background, zero racing background, zero car development background, yet YOU (the collective you supporting something without understanding it) think you've got the inside track, the otherworldly understanding? now that right there is a great joke if i've ever heard one.

anyone in here do a load path analysis on these chassis'? take my car, cornering at 1g. the front tires as a pair must generate roughly 1400lbs of force (2260lbs total weight, 61/39 weight distribution). i can't get grip vs. load graphs of the tires i use from the manufacturer, but based on tire loading of roughly 200lbs/1200lbs i'd ballpark the outside tire is generating nearly 90% of that grip. (doesn't really matter for this though). so, the outside tire is generating ~1260lbs of force. that force is acting through the lever arm of the tire with the lower balljoint as the fulcrum and the wheel bearing as the other fixed point, multiplying the force exerted on the lower control arm. i haven't measured ball joint offset from the wheel bearing or contact patch, but i'd guess the lower control arm is seeing at least double the force at the contact patch and that force is acting towards the center of the car.

the upper control arm sees less force because the upper balljoint actually attaches to the knuckle farther from the wheel bearing center then the contact patch. i'd guess something like 75% of the force at the contact patch which would only be 1000lbs or so, and in the outward direction. now, if the upper part of the strut tower is going to deflect with only 1000lbs of force put on it, i certainly don't want to be in that car when it gets in a wreck. or when the chassis bottoms out in a pot hole, an event that can shock the tower with several tens of thousands of pounds of force.

now, if i were going to put a reinforcement in the front of the car, i'd look to reinforce the k-frame, ala ITR. if you're going to see any substantial gain from a brace, it's going to be in an open sided box. the k-frame is open in the middle and sees all of the multiplied load from the lower control arms. honda put a brace there on the type-r, and all of the dc/eg subframes that i've seen have the blind nuts to bolt that brace to as well. now why would honda put blind nuts there 6yrs before they built the first type-r? why doesn't the 99-00 Si have that brace? but it has the upper strut tower brace? which one is more easily seen? how many of you in here blindly think an upper strut bar does something to stiffen the chassis? "honda put it there, so it must stiffen the chassis!" how about, "honda put it there to help sell cars!".

nate

ps. the rear of the car only has to generate 860lbs of cornering force, pretty much all from one tire. both upper and lower control arms are inside the diameter of the wheel, so both see multiplied loads. the uca/camber arm is reinforced by the trunk floor, the lower is in a boxed frame. i've seen cars that have hit curbs and wiped out the trailing arm AND the lca and didn't affect the tub at all. yep, lots a deflection from cornering happening there too.

pps. does anyone here understand harmonics and how to change/dampen them? think NVH and strut bars start to make more sense. then go back to that whole "selling cars" bit and it starts to make even more sense.oh, btw, don't take my word for ANY of this. ask yourself the questions. if you don't agree with me, present your case. i must warn you though, subjective opinion and a poor grasp of engineering, vehicle dynamics, and car prep will get your argument torn to shreds. or ignored if your argument is really dumb. if you want regurgitated internet bs, don't look to me.
not flaming here but sometimes not everyone wants to calculate every last possible pound of force exerted or graph every linear motion of their suspension. even if they wanted to, most people don't have the knowledge or resources to be able to do so.

i know if i ever got to this point in building my car where i was calculating and graphing the force and physics of the suspension of my car, the fun is gone IMO.

just my $0.02 and putting my flame suit on

wasnt six years before that brace showed up on them i've seen them on 94/up GSRs.:beer:when i helped put my friend's 96 teg LS together it had one already. my eg has the threaded holes for them as well.

[Steve-O]

i still stand by my previous post in that SOLID bars like password:jdm ones for both the front and rear uppers AS WELL AS solid front and rear lower bars are the best combination to have as opposed to just one bar on the front upper. just how much of an increase they provide is only measureable by engineers, complex equations and precision equipment, obviously things most of us don't have access to.

i think the problem is people are led to believe that having one front upper bar will give their car amazing handling which IS NOT the case. but add all four tie bars, large F&R sway bars and performance springs (or coilovers) with adjustable performance shocks

to be honest, people pay more for items on their cars that do absolutely nothing but look good. if i buy a password:jdm 3pt bar for a few hundred dollars instead of a spoon valve cover and perhaps gains a bit of chassis rigidity in the process, i'm happy....although i'd honestly like to have both ;) :D

[Haysoos]

I just don't understand why you can't just spout that knowledge from the beginning, solo-x? I realize this topic creates a good amount of trash talk, but thats kinda why I brought it up how I did because I wanted real info. I wanted both side to say their piece, but you won't until someone says something like kyle did. Are you here to help or are you just trying to punk people out? You seem like a smart guy and sounds like theres some things I could learn from ya, I just don't see why you gotta be an ass about it.

@steve-o:
Are you kidding me?! I would LOVE to datalog and understand every possible force, number, and equation involved. I was gonna go to Louisville Speed Engineering school for mechnical engineering because the physics behind what we do is facinating to me. Otherwise I wouldn't have started this thread! Like I said earlier, I have a natural knack for physics, I just don't know all the terminology and shit...

[Steve-O]

the fun is slowly being engineered out of this passion, i can see it :sadface:

this is why i usually look at what double duty street/track cars do and use. maybe i'm stubborn or a bit naive, who knows.

[Speedjunky01]

what about the lower front H brace like megan offers? I know when I instaled mine the car feelt much much better then before.

solo-x ever test the H-brace?

[Steve-O]

I just don't understand why you can't just spout that knowledge from the beginning, solo-x? I realize this topic creates a good amount of trash talk, but thats kinda why I brought it up how I did because I wanted real info. I wanted both side to say their piece, but you won't until someone says something like kyle did. Are you here to help or are you just trying to punk people out? You seem like a smart guy and sounds like theres some things I could learn from ya, I just don't see why you gotta be an ass about it.

@steve-o:
Are you kidding me?! I would LOVE to datalog and understand every possible force, number, and equation involved. I was gonna go to Louisville Speed Engineering school for mechnical engineering because the physics behind what we do is facinating to me. Otherwise I wouldn't have started this thread! Like I said earlier, I have a natural knack for physics, I just don't know all the terminology and shit...don't get me wrong man, i'm not knocking guys who want to know those things.

i don't know, maybe it's because i'm picky about so many other aspects of my life i just don't want to turn my hobbies and my passions into an engineering experiment. to me it starts to take the fun out of it. if you're a competitive racer who needs every possible edge then i think it's something you need to do. but for the average street level guy like me, i'm comfortable with knowing that having what i have works for me and puts a smile on my face when i drive :TU:.

not trying to flame anyone, just kinda seems a bit too much for me, like the effort you put into it eventually isn't worth the outcome i.e. the law of dimishing returns.

[fireant]

I'll post my meager experiences with strut bars:

At last year's ProSolo event I was visiting in the impound with some of the nationally-competitive STS civic guys about car setup. They were all commenting on my STS2 crx with a neuspeed front strut bar, and how it had been found to be of no help on the EF/CRX chassis in autocrossing. Sure enough, none of them had strut tower bars.

I asked for more details on this, and I heard these comments:

One guy took some thin soft wood and made holes in it then bolted it between his sway bar and the chassis like a gasket. He then proceeded to do serious autocross runs with the bar/wood shims in place. After making a few test runs (that showed no difference in time vs. having just the bar in place) he carefully studied the soft wood for signs of deformation from the bar putting any stress on it, and found nothing at all.

They said there is an advantage in some cases to using a strut tower bar, especially on cars that have mcPherson strut setups, which put tons of stress on the upper shock towers. With our double-wishbone cars, the vast majority of the stress is in the lower control arms and their attachment points to the subframe or chassis.

Finally, their conclusion was this: "Look that thing will always be in your way when you are working on your car, and it IS extra weight in a high-forward place...so if you're going to have it, it better be damn necessary. Why dont you take it off for the next runs you do and see if you can tell any difference at all...find out for yourself if it matters to you"

So I took the bar off and ran my runs...getting my best times of the event, and not really noticing anything feeling different. I never put the bar back on, and never have seen any of my peers (national-level autocrossers) with one on an EF or CRX chassis either.

If someone REALLY wants to know whether or not they need one, try making a bar out of wood in a way that it could easily snap if given more than 1/4" or so of load...install the bar, drive, then see if it broke or not. heck if you already have one of the "turnbuckle" style bars, you could just find a way to replace the inside bar part with something that is sure to break, and then go see just how much stress is on it.

If I could see proof that they were helping something I would use strut bars in a heartbeat, but that hasnt happened yet.

[99EJ6T]

anyone in here do a load path analysis on these chassis'? take my car, cornering at 1g. the front tires as a pair must generate roughly 1400lbs of force (2260lbs total weight, 61/39 weight distribution). i can't get grip vs. load graphs of the tires i use from the manufacturer, but based on tire loading of roughly 200lbs/1200lbs i'd ballpark the outside tire is generating nearly 90% of that grip. (doesn't really matter for this though). so, the outside tire is generating ~1260lbs of force. that force is acting through the lever arm of the tire with the lower balljoint as the fulcrum and the wheel bearing as the other fixed point, multiplying the force exerted on the lower control arm. i haven't measured ball joint offset from the wheel bearing or contact patch, but i'd guess the lower control arm is seeing at least double the force at the contact patch and that force is acting towards the center of the car.

i thought all loads made a circular path?

traveling from the lower control arm -> across the k frame -> other lower control arm -> up the spindal -> through the upper control arm -> and then to finally end up at the upper dampner mounting location

so wouldn't you want to continue the load path from that mounting location to the other side, and then rounding out the load path? i just want some correction.

ps: i went over my previouse post and realized the chassis expansion (between the towers) was probubly due to it being in the air with the full weight of the nose pulling downward on the towers. granted it was about 1k lbs of pressure, but it was over several hours. not "momentary load" like as if the suspension was cornering. so it was a very bad example to give.

[turboedpickup]

now, if i were going to put a reinforcement in the front of the car, i'd look to reinforce the k-frame, ala ITR. if you're going to see any substantial gain from a brace, it's going to be in an open sided box. the k-frame is open in the middle and sees all of the multiplied load from the lower control arms. honda put a brace there on the type-r, and all of the dc/eg subframes that i've seen have the blind nuts to bolt that brace to as well.



what is the k-frame... and where would that brace be located?

[99EJ6T]

what is the k-frame... and where would that brace be located?

"lower subframe", where the lower control arms bolt to.

[solo-x]

haysoos, you can't wade into a forum and make a huge post like that and expect anyone to read it. create some drama and they'll read every word. steve-0 already illustrated that not everyone is interested in all the grit behind technical threads like this, so i try to post what is relevant and most easily understood. some understand, some don't, but if i get people thinking i consider the post worthwhile. i'm not trying to punk anyone, but i hate to see people burn money on a part blindly believing it does something it doesn't.

[Steve-O]

haysoos, you can't wade into a forum and make a huge post like that and expect anyone to read it. create some drama and they'll read every word. steve-0 already illustrated that not everyone is interested in all the grit behind technical threads like this, so i try to post what is relevant and most easily understood. some understand, some don't, but if i get people thinking i consider the post worthwhile. i'm not trying to punk anyone, but i hate to see people burn money on a part blindly believing it does something it doesn't.please don't think i was trying to come at you man or say information like that isn't wanted or looked for. i know it is and people who have the wealth of knowledge to contribute such as you are definintely needed in forums to challenge myths and put bullshit to rest.

i'm just saying that while information like that does interest me to read, even if some parts of it are difficult to understand or may contain information that has to be read a few times to be fully grasped, i just find that sometimes we can get lost in the details so much that the fun of a hobby is quickly lost in the technical melee. kind of like how everyone drools over spoon steering wheels yet they're just slightly altered momo steering wheels (the MOMO name is even imprinted right on it :p).

that's not to say that i would buy something even if i knew it did absolutely nothing at all, but sometimes people do things because they enjoy it or it gives them a sense of accomplishment or satisfaction.

i do enjoy reading your posts solo-x and it definintely sheds alot of light on areas people would otherwise overlook or just not know about. i just ask that you or anyone else don't take it to heart if people still do what they want to do in light of the information they have presented to them.

[Haysoos]

@fireant:

Thank you, that post helps a lot. It does raise a question, the EGs are macphearson strut right? Would that make a difference?

But, best of all, you gave the greatest answer. I will go put something in that will easily deform/break, and give it a go (AFTER my suspension and new tires that arent traction B).

@solo-x:
I understand the drama thing, it just seemed like you wanted people to blindly believe they were crap and people had to call shit out to get you to explain why. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions though, you did get me thinking and you got me ready with a drill that will go through your skull to bleed all that delicious information out!! :D:D

@steve-o:
You are right. Some people the fun is in the act, some the fun is in the numbers. Some the fun is both. *shrug*, I'm a both kinda guy.

[fireant]

All the 88-00 civics are double wishbone suspensions. I look forward to seeing the "breakable bar" tested out.

[Haysoos]

All the 88-00 civics are double wishbone suspensions. I look forward to seeing the "breakable bar" tested out.

reeeally? I thought for sure the 92-95 was macphearson strut. maybe Im retarded.

[99EJ6T]

only 2001+ civics are mac. strut dampner set-up. all 88-00 are double wish

[Haysoos]

>_< Oh well, I "learned" that awhile ago and never had a reason to question it.

Well, I'm glad I didn't buy the password JDM stuff, but I WILL still do the test when I get my shit on. I may even leave the cheap stuff on there for SnG. I'm still not 100% convinced its not good for the car in some way, but thats why I'm going to test it, probably several times.

Just think, you can end any arguement about strut tower bars by linking to this thread.

------------------------
What about lower frame braces, such as the 4-point NRG front brace, or the megan H brace? What about the Password:JDM rear X-brace (upper)? If I'm not mistaken, not having a lower tie bar (chassis brace, whatever) with a 20+mm sway bar could be bad news. Is there any debunking in these areas to be done?

[Speedjunky01]

NRG one is less solid then the megan the megan has 2 cross bars. the NRG has just one.

[Haysoos]

NRG one is less solid then the megan the megan has 2 cross bars. the NRG has just one.

Aye, and some say that one extra bar makes it too stiff. The question is, are they worth buying, or are they like the strut towers and can be proven close to useless?

[kyle h.]

solo-x, you read my sentences to many times.

they wern't meant to hurt your feelings.

I'm just proving the point, that these bars do, do something, because of the money spent factor.

I don't give two shits what they do or what they are supposed to do. I don't have the time. But if you can't understand what I'm saying, then you are at a loss.

[99EJ6T]

Aye, and some say that one extra bar makes it too stiff.

I am one of those people. I just found when I had the H brace in the car did not rotate/respond the way I liked. For my driving style it seemed a little too stiff. But to each his/her own, and I purely drive my car on the street. So some that may auto-x may find the NRG not stiff enough for thier needs. refer to this thread for the discussion: http://www.d-series.org/forums/showthread.php?t=52697&highlight=nrg+brace

[Haysoos]

EDIT: Apparently you changed you mind Kyle. :D Makes my post worthless.

[Steve-O]

i know this is mostly about autox but what about general street driving or high-speed manouvering? situations where the driver isn't trying to make hairpin turns or get the car to rotate around an object on the road but rather keep the car tracking on a certain line through a bend or long corner? would the physics still be the same and would strut bars still not be required?

[Haysoos]

i know this is mostly about autox but what about general street driving or high-speed manouvering? situations where the driver isn't trying to make hairpin turns or get the car to rotate around an object on the road but rather keep the car tracking on a certain line through a bend or long corner? would the physics still be the same and would strut bars still not be required?

Technically, there would be less stress, so they would be required less.

BUT, I know louisville roads have some GNARLY potholes, and strut bars will do something to prevent instant deformation due to hitting a pothole or whatever. Whether thats actually useful or worth worrying about, I don't know.

[kyle h.]

EDIT: Apparently you changed you mind Kyle. :D Makes my post worthless.

aren't your posts always worthless :p


haha, well a 64bit cpu is the shit if you think about it, marketing or not.

everything is relative...

p.s.s.s. I am an engineer and a race car driver, hence the super cool picture of my car in the autox below. fuckers (this was a joke, like the strut bars not doing anything joke) haha, laugh a little. jackass's.

pslsps,..s.s. it's time to hang up the keyboard and get the fuck off your computers.

[Haysoos]

aren't your posts always worthless :p


haha, well a 64bit cpu is the shit if you think about it, marketing or not.

everything is relative...

p.s.s.s. I am an engineer and a race car driver, hence the super cool picture of my car in the autox below. fuckers (this was a joke, like the strut bars not doing anything joke) haha, laugh a little. jackass's.

pslsps,..s.s. it's time to hang up the keyboard and get the fuck off your computers.

I'm at work fucker, and I work on computers. :haha: What would you rather me do..... work..? *shudder* Geez man, then my boss might start expecting shit of me, can't have that.

[DirtyDC4]

only 2001+ civics are mac. strut dampner set-up. all 88-00 are double wish

BUT 92-95 is superior to 88-91 because they have that stupid, how-you-say, front crossmember...........:(

[kulo]

any reccomend the password:jdm 3point front strut bar $199.99

[solo-x]

what about the lower front H brace like megan offers? I know when I instaled mine the car feelt much much better then before.

solo-x ever test the H-brace?

no, i haven't tested the h-brace. it isn't legal for the class i compete in and i've developed other ways to eliminate wheel hop.

DirtyDEF, i wouldn't say the 92-95 is superior. true, the EF's have a front cross member and utilize a strut rod instead of a true a-arm, but the EF's have a LOT more bump travel then the EG's. the EF's also have a steeper camber curve, both are huge bonuses when you start looking at competition.

nate

[solo-x]

i thought all loads made a circular path?

traveling from the lower control arm -> across the k frame -> other lower control arm -> up the spindal -> through the upper control arm -> and then to finally end up at the upper dampner mounting location

so wouldn't you want to continue the load path from that mounting location to the other side, and then rounding out the load path? i just want some correction.

ps: i went over my previouse post and realized the chassis expansion (between the towers) was probubly due to it being in the air with the full weight of the nose pulling downward on the towers. granted it was about 1k lbs of pressure, but it was over several hours. not "momentary load" like as if the suspension was cornering. so it was a very bad example to give.

the force on the lower control arm acts on the entire chassis. forces don't always travel in a circular path, but the sum of the forces must always equal zero. so if you had a situation where the control arms were equal distance from the wheel bearing and you applied 100lbs of force to the lower control arm in the inward direction you'd have 100lbs of force in the outward direction at the upper control arm. the sum of the forces would then be equal. hth

[turbohappy]

BUT 92-95 is superior to 88-91 because they have that stupid, how-you-say, front crossmember...........:(
The cross member and strut rod get in the way of headers and can be annoying to take apart, but they certainly work. I'm sure the change was not made for performance reasons.

[DirtyDC4]

The cross member and strut rod get in the way of headers and can be annoying to take apart, but they certainly work. I'm sure the change was not made for performance reasons.

Those first 2 reasons are why I hate it. Sooo ugly, who cares about performance, LOL.

[oranges]

Personally, I love the EF crossmember. Front-center jackpoints are VERY useful.

[DirtyDC4]

Personally, I love the EF crossmember. Front-center jackpoints are VERY useful.

Haha, yeah, but my car is low enough that I have to jack up one side just to be able to get my jack under the crossmember.

[SOHC_Rules]

^^^ lol 8)

same here

i have the cheapo ebay front upper, and i honestly feel no different between when its off or on. i know its aluminum and has flex joints and whatnot, but im just saying..

[1991rex]

interested as well in the test with a wood strut brace..would provide proof beyond any doubt whether or not these actually do anything or are merely a dress up part... starting to believe if factory didn't provide it not necessary... ie v8 mustang gt have it as standard equipment while v6 mustangs don't

[vtecduck]

I noticed a diff when I put mine on. I added the front upper first, then the rear upper. Def a noticeable diff in handling. I'm running the neuspeed front and rear upper bars on mine, c-pillar brace, and fac front and rear sway bars. I noticed most of the changes in handling when I put on the rear sway bar and lca's. If you're wanting to know what the best set up is, PM Remoer, he's a suspension guru :).

[turbohappy]

Haha, yeah, but my car is low enough that I have to jack up one side just to be able to get my jack under the crossmember.
Need a better jack then ;) I have to use my HF aluminum racing jack.

[Honda4VW]

interested as well in the test with a wood strut brace..

How would it prove it? I would think that the deflection amount between the strut towers would not be greater than the deflection ability of the wood.

[Speedjunky01]

How would it prove it? I would think that the deflection amount between the strut towers would not be greater than the deflection ability of the wood.

yup wood is very very flexibel.

nw if you did it with glass or something very brittle like that I would see it giving good results. but practicly it would be hard.

[OniFactor]

best test idea:

rod with a pencil mounted on it, on one side. rod with a piece of paper mounted from the other side. pencil meets paper. drive. see if it shows any sort of deflection.

[turbohappy]

How would it prove it? I would think that the deflection amount between the strut towers would not be greater than the deflection ability of the wood.
The test done before was a chunk of balsa wood under each side of a normal metal strut bar, see if it is deformed at all.

[DirtyDC4]

Need a better jack then ;) I have to use my HF aluminum racing jack.

OH NOES YOU DIDNT!!1

Actually, it IS that low, trust me. ;)

[My93Civic]

bump for a great thread! really interesting to see many kinds of comments, ideas, thoughts, plans. Some are hardcore, some are enthusiasts, some are average joes like me who have little knowledge of anything like this at my age.
Bump for this thread to prove whether or not strut bars do anything. That wood strut bar thing is a good idea, just that you need to use something that would be able to flex, nothing like a 4x4 piece of wood.

:TU: :TU: :bravo: :bravo:

[1991rex]

if not wood something that would snap under the cornering loads... from my intereptation (sp?) of this thread money is better spent on the front strut bar would be better directed for a rear sway bar...

[My93Civic]

if not wood something that would snap under the cornering loads... from my intereptation (sp?) of this thread money is better spent on the front strut bar would be better directed for a rear sway bar...

I think everyone here agrees that a rear swaybar is bang for the buck, instant results. :TU:

However, I don't think the OP poster was even talking about sway bars, hence the title mentioning strut tower braces. Let's not go there just yet.

Everyone is trying to spell out if tower bars actually DO SOMETHING or not.

[stmotorsports]

best test idea:

rod with a pencil mounted on it, on one side. rod with a piece of paper mounted from the other side. pencil meets paper. drive. see if it shows any sort of deflection.

:stupid:
really anything to that effect with one side mounted solid and the other side setup as some kind of indicator

and if you want to test for strut tower collapse you could use a similar setup- a strut bar mounted normally on either side but modified to have a slip joint in the middle with a memory indicator gauge mounted to actually measure how much (if any) lateral compression/extension exists

[boostdeliquent]

I'm too lazy to read all the post but did you preload the strut bar when you installed it? Alot of people don't so they don't realize the full benifits of the strut braces. I'm not sure if this is applicable to every car and every situation but what I have read about it does make sense. Can anyone else chime in on this?

[Speedjunky01]

I'm too lazy to read all the post but did you preload the strut bar when you installed it?
by preload do you mean to have the car up in the air THEN install it?

[boostdeliquent]

by preload do you mean to have the car up in the air THEN install it?

Yeah, that's it. I was looking at some Tanabe strut tower bars and they recommend doing it on their site.

[DirtyDC4]

Yeah, that's it. I was looking at some Tanabe strut tower bars and they recommend doing it on their site.

It was the only way I could install my Neuspeed bar. I'm sure most people with a solid front bar did it that way as well.

[My93Civic]

Oh my God. I didn't do that :(

Where is that link that explains how to do this? You said it was at the Tanabe?

I have lots to learn. :sadface:

[boostdeliquent]

I'll see if I can find the link.

[boostdeliquent]

Here's what it said in reference to their strut bars w/ adjustable preload:

Adjustable Preload

A very common error when installing tower bars, It is always recommended to raise the vehicle when installing so that the load of the shock uppermounts on the shock towers is relieved and balanced out. When raised, and the tower bar is placed onto the vehicle, the preload can be adjusted and set. After it is bolted on and the car is lowered, each shock tower will have equal load and will prevent independent movements of each shock. This will provide an extremely noticeable difference after installing. If a tower bar is installed on a car that is not raised, great benefits will be missed.

[charliemopps24]

^^ Good to know. Should you raise the back too when you put that one on?

[Speedjunky01]

^^ Good to know. Should you raise the back too when you put that one on?

yup. suspension should be unloaded when instaling any brace.

[solo-x]

Here's what it said in reference to their strut bars w/ adjustable preload:

Adjustable Preload

A very common error when installing tower bars, It is always recommended to raise the vehicle when installing so that the load of the shock uppermounts on the shock towers is relieved and balanced out. When raised, and the tower bar is placed onto the vehicle, the preload can be adjusted and set. After it is bolted on and the car is lowered, each shock tower will have equal load and will prevent independent movements of each shock. This will provide an extremely noticeable difference after installing. If a tower bar is installed on a car that is not raised, great benefits will be missed.

lol. "extremely noticeable" and "great benefits". fuggin awesome!!! :bull:

[kyle h.]

I think certian people live for this type of threads.

[solo-x]

I think certain people live for these types of threads.

i think certain people just like to instigate because they've got nothing else to offer. ;)

[bootlegcivic]

play nice or I'll take you cars lol.....ineresting thread by he way nicre to see some honest answers

[MommaMayer]

lol. "extremely noticeable" and "great benefits". fuggin awesome!!! :bull:

didn't you say something back there, that strut bars DO help for mcpherson style setups? so.. wouldn't that tip, in fact, help, in a mcpherson situation?

[boostdeliquent]

I have yet to use a strut tower bar on any of my cars however when a company w/ a reputation like Tanabe says that, it only seems apt to put some trust in it. They didn't get where they are by not knowing what they're talking about. I'm not saying what they say is the word of god but think of it, this is the same company that designed and manufactured the Tease SEVEN coilovers. If you don't know what that is, go on their site and read up on it. It's like engine managment but for suspensions.

[1991rex]

I think certian people live for this type of threads.

i guess i have to lump myself into this category as this is not another how to do a mini me swap thread! lol i actually find this thread quite informative ( didn't know about having to preload the suspension) rep for everyone involved in this thread!

[stmotorsports]

i have to agree, i think this is a pretty good discussion as I would like to know if strut bars really do in fact do anything and to what extent on what cars/chassis.

I myself can say that certain chassis bracing on my car (94 ex coupe) has definitely made a noticeable difference in handling and feel. For one, a friend of mine let me borrow the stock front lower subframe brace off his 95 teg, we put it on my civic & immediately i noticed crisper turn-in response and a bit less understeer. I swear the front end absorbs bumps better now too- less harshness. He still hasn't gotten his bar back :haha:
Same with my rear upper strut tower bar, but I would say to a lesser extent. I was also given a cheapie front upper bar (the kind with the pivot points) for nothing from a friend, so I figured what the hell and put it on. Didn't really notice much immediately, but in certain maneuvers the car does seem like it reacts a little bit more confidently.

On the other hand, I wouldn't say my rear lower subframe reinforcement did much of anything, even with my 22mm itr rear sway & poly bushings - other than just adding weight to the rear of the car.

[My93Civic]

Here's what it said in reference to their strut bars w/ adjustable preload:

Adjustable Preload

A very common error when installing tower bars, It is always recommended to raise the vehicle when installing so that the load of the shock uppermounts on the shock towers is relieved and balanced out. When raised, and the tower bar is placed onto the vehicle, the preload can be adjusted and set. After it is bolted on and the car is lowered, each shock tower will have equal load and will prevent independent movements of each shock. This will provide an extremely noticeable difference after installing. If a tower bar is installed on a car that is not raised, great benefits will be missed.


To make it worse. The way my strut bar was installed was on a driveway where it was on a incline. Maybe 20 degrees incline?

I'm gonna have to re-do this one day in the summer or if its sunny out.

[Gassaver]

if the C-pillar bar doesn't do anything at least you can have a bar to hang your clothes.

[1991rex]

this thread probably saved me money... was going to get a traction bar to help control wheelhop but getting a h brace instead as i seen alot of people say it helps control wheelhop, probably not as much as a traction bar but i don't have a 300+ hp car either

[DirtyDC4]

if the C-pillar bar doesn't do anything at least you can have a bar to hang your clothes.

That's why I bought it!