We have had vehicles in our shop before that the shock towers are pointed inward and the brace is very hard to fit on... if we jack the vehicle up by the center of the K-member to take the stress of the shock towers and let the them relax outward the brace would then fit perfect. This tells us over time there is a lot more stress applied to this area then what most think.

Thanks everyone for the positive words! We appreciate the support

Ryan

Does anyone have the 3-point Edelbrock brace? I would be interested to see what it does and doesn't interfere with under the hood.

Hotchkis here:



Got it mostly for looks.

Any noticeably difference in the handling?

I noticed some better handling but honestly think it is more of a placebo effect than anything else....

It has no effect on handling. The 4th gen fbody chassis is pretty damn strong and deflection doesn't occur like it does in the 3rd gen. I've heard the STB helps a lot in a 3rd gen.

Think about it. The shocks and springs do the job of controlling suspension travel up and down. No effect on that. Body roll? Springs and swaybar resist the car rolling while the shocks control the roll rate. While those things are doing that, the STB is just sitting on top. If anything, it might provide slight bracing for the chassis, but again this car doesn't deflect really that much. That being said... it can't hurt you.

OK... After my previous post, I got frustrated that my Edelbrock brace is another part that I bought for the Firebird and is just sitting on the shelf out in the garage. So, I got out in the garage tonight just after 9 PM to put it on. Let me tell you, there is no "just putting it on". The two point braces are much easier to deal with. The three point Edelbrock brace ties up under the cowl. To do this, you have to remove the lower windshield black plastic trim piece, which requires you remove the windshield wipers. All of this adds up, especially if you don't have the proper windshield wiper puller. Once this is done, you'll realize what a challenge it is to drill two holes in the cowl with the engine in place. It took me a few tools and some head scratching to get there, but I got it done. One of the plastic rivits that holds the trim in place cannot be re-installed because the brace sits under the fastening hole. Also, the transmission oil dipstick tube interferes very hard with the brace.

Now that it's all done, I think it looks nice. I just wonder if I'll be able to bring myself to put it back on after I need to remove it to work on something else. I still don't think the two point brace works the best in all situations, but the serviceability of it is orders of magnitude better.

Yes and no. Small amounts of deflection in the body of the car can lead to large changes in alignment of the wheels.

Back when I had a 1971 Chevelle I put my hand in between the window frame and the body of the car. While barreling down the road I could feel the amount of space between them change.

That was a car with a frame..... I am sure it is worse with unibodys.

The unibody is changing all the time and you don't know it. Every panel in the car bends and flexes. Strain gauges would be the only way to know.

BTW in these cars the fenders have nothing to do with the suspension of the car. It is all in the wheel panels transferring the load to the subframe.

The only way we can say that the strut tower brace has no effect is to install it. Slap on a strain gauge, and take some turns.

Not sure how your specific car is built, but in mine, all the race cars I've built and all those I've worked on, the front frnders and hood bolt directly to those inner panels.

And at 100 mph, putting your finger on a seam and "feeling the seam change" is probably more to do with the air buffeting the 16 guage fender (on your Chevelle) or the plastic fender (on a lat model F-Car) than the stamped steel chassis.

While turning, the tire is deflecting on the pavement. That loading of the wheel is then transfered laterally to the hub and knuckle. Now because the loading is BELOW the lower ball joint, 90%+ of the loading is transferred through the lower A-Arm and to the K-Member

The ONLY time significant loading is applied to the upper, is when the suspension bottoms out, like when you do your best Duke of Hazard imitation or you have trashed shocks and weak springs. STB won't compensate for that.

But this internet banter is is all speculation, as you mentioned. The only way to know for sure, is with a strain gauge, as you mentioned.

Good points and good discussion.

Does anyone have access to this kind of equipment? Someone in college, maybe? Sounds like a good senior project.


Personally, I would love to find out but I don't have the equipment.

Just curious, a LOT of newer cars have a STB standard. I even saw it on a new Lexus ES. Its almost embarrassing that my car doesn't have one, and I don't really care, but surely the penny pinching designers didn't just put it there for show? Perhaps its there because the car is built differently???


Not discrediting anyone here..... every person in this thread probably knows more than me, I'm just curious.

My 93 cadillac came with one, and all bmws as well. But I think their designed for strut setups, not shocks.

i have bmr, but stb is a must!

I know I'm answering an older thread. Basically almost all of the lateral force is absorbed through the lower control arms through the k-member and the force at the upper point of where the shocks mount is not very much. Having one can't hurt though. I had one at one point but I removed mine.

Absorb energy in side frontal impact?

Possibly, but if the vehicle is taking a hit that far forward of the cabin then i dont really see the benefit for having it there for that particular application. Not saying your wrong or anything, that was just my thought on it. Im thinking about getting a STB mainly to see if my drivers side shock tower is where it should be, since my car was in a wreck before my time. It moved the shock tower out of place. So this item would definatly show if its in place or not.