Is Chrome-Moly Necessary for an STB??
is just hype.
People like 4130 chrome moly for
automotive fabrications (like roll
cages and other larger pieces) for
two reasons - strength/weight
(high tensile strength means you
are allowed a thinner-wall tube)
and the fact that you can weld it
up using a variety of fillers that
includes mild steel MIG wire.
However, if the Chrome-Moly one
comes with a nice decal then it's
probably worth it ;p
The BMR site shows they use a
thinner-wall tube in the chrome-moly
version, likely offsetting any gain
in strength from the material. Unless
you go for their "Extreme" STB, which
seems kind of pricey. I bet the thin
wall on the C-M standard brace saves
you a couple of ounces though....
In the immortal words of J. C. Whitney:
"Increase performance! Improve fuel economy!"
They say that the STB helps reduce cowl shake in our cars; though I have to admit that I never drove mine hard before installing the STB, so I can't make any before/after comparisons...
CM seems overkill for that piece. I'd say if you have infinte wealth it'd be cool, but otherwise you can probably spend the money on upgrading other weaker points on the car.
Trending Topics
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
As for a strut tower brace making the car "feel" better, so does having a Victoria's secret model in the passenger seat. But she, like the stb, doesn't do much for the handling of the car.
<strong>i just know what the seat of my pants tell me, part of it could be the age of my shocks and what not. The car seems to corner alot flatter as well, but i know thats not what a stb would do. I just know thats what it feels like</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You're right, a stb has no direct effect on the roll of a car. In fact if they really increased the lateral g capability of your car, it would roll more not less since the roll angle is a function of the roll stiffness of the car (not the chassis stiffness) the weight, CG height, and lateral g.
If SOTP was accurate then CART and F1 wouldn't need all that expensive telemetry that they have.
The fact is that the buttometer is just not accurate enough to measure the performance of an automobile reliably.
I've been modding cars for 20 years, have an engineering degree and flew tactics and weapons test missions for the Air Force and when someone tells me this mod or that mod "feels" faster, I tune him out. Statements like that are a sure sign that individual just doesn't get it. It's the Placebo effect pure and simple.
It's not intended as a flame, but if there was one thing I would do if I owned a site like this is ban the word feel.
Someone mentioned that these cars don't need a 2 point as much as the older strut" cars. The springs are actually mounted under the strut tower brace mounting points and that is where the chassis load is concentrated (the older cars had springs mounted inboard of the shocks) and that is still a potential source of chassis flex.
Anyway...with all that said. It's one of the least expensive mods for these cars and it sure can't hurt anything to support the chassis....expecially with the increased chassis loads of stiffer springs and shocks. Just my opinion (others may not agree). Happy corner carving....
Now correct me if iam wrong, but i think it is positive camber when the top of the tire sticks out farther. Well anyways if you take a corner and your tower moves causing positive camber would this not reduce traction, causing increased handling. And also if there is less weight on the inside of the tire, then due to disperment of the weight on the tire and the angle of the suspension would this not cause more role. Sorry i don't have computers to tell you the exact difference but by yourself one, you shoulod have enough money and tell me if you can't tell a difference. So far everyone who has ridden in the passenger seat says they can tell a difference, even my fiance. I never told her she asked me what i did to make the damn doors rattle less and the front to feel stiffer.
This was not meant as a flame but a perterbed response.
I just took mine off and noticed that the paint has rubbed off around where the edges of the STB bases rest on the STs from shifting slightly & I had the nuts torqued down bigtime. The bases never sat flush, though, so I'm making some steel gaskets to put on the STs to create flatter surfaces for the STB bases.
But back to the original question, no, I wouldn't think CM is necessary- but now you've got me looking into them, dammit! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
<small>[ December 16, 2002, 01:12 PM: Message edited by: hammerhead ]</small>
If so removing a bolt from one side and replacing it with a wood dowl [something fragile] will give a person a really good idea of the deflection between those points.
So if there is someone here willing to try this, it would end some of the puzzlement about this topic.
You missed my point. I'll restate it. Because something feels better is not proof that it is better. I am not saying that a STB will or will not improve the handling of any given car. I am saying you have not proved your case to me. If you wish to prove your case go out to a parking lot somewhere and set up a skid pad and measure the lateral g with and without the STB. All you need besides a large piece of asphalt is a piece of chalk, some string, a tape measure and a stopwatch. If you can repeatably measure more lateral g with the STB than without you will have ended the controversy and endeared yourself to many a STB vendor. It's called the scientific method and it's what distinguishes modern society from medieval society with its alchemists and leeches.


