Sam Strano

iTrader: (41)

And stiffer, lower springs are not for everyone. There are all kinds of things at play with the feel and tuning of a suspension. And a lot, a LOT of it is subjective.

This thread is a PERFECT example of this. Not everyone finds the same things, which is why it drives me so nuts when something is put down to be the only option, or I head "I read on the internet that.....".

libertyforall1776

iTrader: (2)

SFCs on my 'Vert w/Konis were vastly noticed, but on my coupe w/Bilsteins not as much but still noticeable.

cyberkill

So...I'm just a guy that has put SFCs in my shopping cart, then deleted them, then added them, then deleted them, and so on...If SFC's don't protect from dimples, and seem to be made obsolete by good shocks anyway...what's the reason for them? All I have so far are Bilstein shocks x4, Strano Springs x4, and Strano front swaybar. Is my suspension "good enough" to warrant skipping SFCs?

If you had, not that I do, 500 rwhp and took it to the strip, wouldn't you want SFCs? I understand that SFCs made you slower in the road races (actually, no I don't), but at the strip, would they give any benefit?

Personally, I goto the strip like 0-2 times a year. I haven't been to a road course yet, but I enjoy the twisties, which is why I began to upgrade my suspension. Is SFC something I should finally remove from my wishlist?

Sam Strano

iTrader: (41)

Allow me to be more blunt than normal.

Y'all have to decide if you want them or not. Really the only way to know if they are "right" for you, is to try for yourself. It's not like there isn't a pretty big and ready market for such things if you decide you didn't feel they you any good.

Frankly I'd be looking to add a matching rear bar to what you have, and SFC's would be a big chunk of change that you could put to Koni's, and both those things have handling benefits beyond what SFC's will give you (being they are actual suspension parts).

RevGTO

iTrader: (12)

I put SFC's on after developing a crease all the way down the right quarter panel from launching. It even wrinkled the wheel well lip. Had it fixed and it hasn't re-occurred despite many launches since. I still get the dimples, though.

The downside was a major increase in impact harshness and decline in ride quality. Bilsteins helped with that. I've continually toyed with the idea of trying to cut them off. If I give up going to the track for good, I just may. The harsh ride is the only thing I don't like about the car, althought it has remained tight and solid at 123k.

sick_tight

after sam strano commented... /thread

glad to see you giving everyone (including me) some solid advice, makes sense with the way you described it. and youve driven the proof at the track.

Kevin97ss

Little story: when I first got my car in 97 the panel gaps were not the best, over flush here under flush there. Three weeks in I decided to tackle adjusting panels. Interestingly, after I finished with the hatch there was a very noticeable "tightening" of the car. The hatch was basically hanging by the latch, the adjuster feet not touching the body. Another side effect of having the hatch properly adjusted is that it is now very difficult to close when it is sitting on jack stands. With the stand under the LCA mount, popping the hatch the back of the car will actually droop. Trying to close the hatch is almost comical watching the rear of the car bounce like a diving board.

SladeX

I noticed the 4th gen chassis to be much more stiff than a 3rd gen. If I jacked up my 3rd gen from a side, the rear tire would always contact the ground. If you ever opened the door, it would NOT close.

On my 4th gen, I could jack up the car from front or back and eventually lift both tires off the ground (not recommended). It is stiffer by a significant amount that it is possible to open the door and close it still.

Is it flexing? Yes. Don't kid yourself that just because it is stiffer that there is no chassis flex going on, it's just lesser than a previous generation.

Now with subframe connectors, the effort to lift both tires off the ground has changed significantly. I can jack it up from front or rear and within a few pumps of a speed jack be off the ground on front/back (great for rotating tires front to back).

The other thing I noticed is the way the weight transfer works. There's less whole car movement and less suspension travel as the weight transfers. It's much quicker in getting the weight to the rear tires. From a driver's standpoint, you don't feel the car "tip" as much to the back. The grip is improved out back, in rain/wet situations, this is much more noticeable and welcomed as it means you are moving forward rather than breaking loose the rear.

Now suspension comfort wise, I fixed my problems before I went to subframe connectors. If you want to be more comfortable, the key is getting your suspension setup to move and absorb that movement energy rather than transferring it to the chassis. The better the articulation of your suspension to move within and control that movement, the more comfortable it feels.

Stiffer is not necessarily better, but wet noodle flex is a not an ideal substitution for comfort level. (My internal car panel rattles actually come from certain harmonic frequencies my engine makes off poly mounts to the chassis at certain rpm's outside of cruising speeds 2500+rpm).

In my opinion, subframe connectors do not add any extra noise/vibration, they only transmit an existing noise/problem/situation which existed in the first place and was dampened/absorbed by a flexible chassis.

trans_am7935

iTrader: (15)

honestly the only reason i left my SFC's on my car is cause it gives me an awesome spot to jack it up from, that is the only reason. After finding dimples in the floor panel in the shape of a floor jack, i always make sure those ******** at the tire shop jack it up by the SFC's. Again, this is the only reason i still have them on there.

VIP1

I love jacking up the whole side of my car from the SFC. Makes wheel swaps quicker/easier.

99Bluz28

iTrader: (35)

IMO, the added flexibility to safely jack the car up at almost any point between the factory front and rear jack points is a real plus!

MMWS6

^^Honestly didn't think of that. lol Swapping tires in the driveway this week too! Will be the first time swapping tires with connectors under there

VIP1

I have the boxed 3-point SLP SFC and those are extra strong. I don't know how the cheaper 2-point tubular ones will handle it.

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

Most of the SFCs on the market aren't really connecting the subframes. So you're adding weight without any real benefit.

Btw, my Nissan is so stiff I can put the jack in the middle of the car on one side on my sloped drive way and 3 wheels come off the ground. It handles better than my T/A. But the T/A rides nicer.

01ssreda4

iTrader: (96)

My UMI boxed 2 points will hold the car up easily. Have put jacks and stands under them a million times. One of their best features.

01ssreda4

iTrader: (96)

What differences have you seen between a standard sub-frame and say a midwest chassis (a "true" subframe connector)? You have experienced both right?

Wnts2Go10O

iTrader: (12)

a proper chassis and suspension will ride and handle well. this discussion is a bit.. odd..

the chassis is simply supposed to hold u, the engine, and all the other bits. the only ONLY thing that should be determining ride and handling is the suspension. choose the correct shock and spring setup and it shouldnt ride like youre in a suspensionless kart.

MMWS6

^^ I have to agree with this one. Seems like Strut and Shock choice is more the issue than the rigidity of the chassis. I have run and recommended the Eibach Pro with Sensa-Trak struts from Munroe to more than a few guys. Sounds cheap and silly right? Don't knock that combo until you ride on it. Amazing feel on the highway, throw it into a turn and how those struts and shocks lock in and take it is just a great combo between the two. It is the combo that will be installed on mine come spring.

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

Well, I was actually talking more like something from Wolfe: http://www.wolferacecraft.com/detail.aspx?ID=805

With Wolfe, you actually tie the pan, front, and rear subframes together and have mounting points for a rollcage. But you hack it up pretty bad.

But to be honest, you're still just tacking some extra material onto the existing frame rail. And that's where I have a problem with this. If you've ever worked on an old 30s Ford or 40s Chevy or a Jeep, they are built pretty much the same way. When you want to strengthen the frame, you actually box the frame rails and add cross-members or trusses to increase torsional rigidity. Make the entire frame strong as hell to resist twisting. The problem is there is no room as it is to do anything but tack **** to the bottom of the pan or to the existing subframes without hacking up the floor pan really bad.

These SFCs seem like you're just welding some support beams on the existing frame rails and connecting those to the LCA mount in back and randomly to the subframe rail up front. And that doesn't seem like anything but a way to increase weight and tighten up the pan section of the body. Maybe I'm wrong and torsion stiffness is increased. Just seems like all you've done is reinforced the LCA mounting point and creating a place to jack the car more effectively.

01ssreda4

iTrader: (96)

Well we all know that we have 2 subframes and nothing but floorpans in-between right? I've always heard the rocker panels are stiff, kinda like a makeshift frame more or less. Though less then optimal not bad for a space saving design. There are tons of factors going on here, but to me its simple....its all about the way your car accepts forces. Each and every thing you change effects it, for better or worse depending on application. I don't see one clear right or wrong. Its all preference and application.