2-pt vs. 3-pt SFC's
07-01-2003, 06:44 PM
#1
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2-pt vs. 3-pt SFC's Has anyone used both? How do the 3-pt SFC's (SLP, Kenny Brown) compare to the others (BMR, G2, etc.)? Does all that extra metal (and $$) make any real difference?
07-01-2003, 07:37 PM
#2
Re: 2-pt vs. 3-pt SFC's The 3 point style triangulate the chassis much better. The third point helps resist "twisting" loads....those that subframe connectors are asked to correct. A subframe connectors main strength is in vertical loading (adding weight to the car and not letting it bend until the floor touches the ground. The "secondary" strength is to act as a torsen bar or a sway bar if you will to keep the front and back of the chassis from twisting in opposite directions. So, to get enough torsional strength, you have to overbuild the connectors. This can either be by using thicker materials (heavier tubing, or larger box section) or adding some type of daigonal bracing. The diagonal bracing helps resist twisting loads. Now, if you build a set of connectors out of fairly strong material and then add diagonal bracing you wind up with SLP connectors or the set made by LG Motorsports (which is an excellent design). My personal opinion of Kenny Brown stuff is not a good one and others on this board have inspected them personally (ordered a set to see how they were built) and found serious issues with the cad plating and weld quality. The Kenny Brown setup is still better than some, but it is low on my list...just my thoughts.
Good luck!
Good luck!
07-05-2003, 05:53 PM
#5
Staging Lane
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 2-pt vs. 3-pt SFC's
My personal opinion of Kenny Brown stuff is not a good one and others on this board have inspected them personally (ordered a set to see how they were built) and found serious issues with the cad plating and weld quality.
Also, the KBDDs attach to the rear subframe at its strongest point, which isn't at the rear control arm mount, but rather the frame rail running more inboard. Last, the way KBDD is designed, its easy to add several more attachment points along the frame rail and the mid-pan.
07-06-2003, 09:50 PM
#6
Re: 2-pt vs. 3-pt SFC's http://corner-carvers.com/forums/sho...p;highlight=kb
This is a thread regarding the response that Kenny Brown gave the tech guys on that message board when they said they didn't like their parts...and this is the reply from one of the boards tech guys (with quotes from the Kenny Brown post). But, anyway...just my thoughts. (I do like the KB design better than most others, so I'm not too inclined to fight about it...I'm not running them and I'm not trying to change the world, I try to help when I can, and that's why I mention that most posts are "just my thoughts").
This is a thread regarding the response that Kenny Brown gave the tech guys on that message board when they said they didn't like their parts...and this is the reply from one of the boards tech guys (with quotes from the Kenny Brown post). But, anyway...just my thoughts. (I do like the KB design better than most others, so I'm not too inclined to fight about it...I'm not running them and I'm not trying to change the world, I try to help when I can, and that's why I mention that most posts are "just my thoughts").
Trending Topics
07-07-2003, 07:12 PM
#8
Staging Lane
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 2-pt vs. 3-pt SFC's trackbird,
I'm just trying to find out what the best SFCs are. I'm going to do some major surgery to my car, so I'm willing to remove KBDD SFCs and replace them with a better set, if they are inferior. I read the cc.com post, and searched for any references to KBDD SFCs for 4th gens. I didn't find any other info specific to our cars which shed any light. However, the cc.com link you gave discussed problems with Mustangs, mainly suspension components. I'm not sure what bearing this has on the f-body setup, except that the company doesn't design very good suspension parts for Mustangs. What specific info do you have about KBDD SFCs to show that they are poor in design? You referred to the quality of the SFCs, is the strength of the material poor? The welds that you inspected, was there full penetration, or was it the type of weld that made them poor. I'm not trying to get into a flame match, I'm just trying to find some more specific info about why you and others find the KBDD design a poor one.
I'm just trying to find out what the best SFCs are. I'm going to do some major surgery to my car, so I'm willing to remove KBDD SFCs and replace them with a better set, if they are inferior. I read the cc.com post, and searched for any references to KBDD SFCs for 4th gens. I didn't find any other info specific to our cars which shed any light. However, the cc.com link you gave discussed problems with Mustangs, mainly suspension components. I'm not sure what bearing this has on the f-body setup, except that the company doesn't design very good suspension parts for Mustangs. What specific info do you have about KBDD SFCs to show that they are poor in design? You referred to the quality of the SFCs, is the strength of the material poor? The welds that you inspected, was there full penetration, or was it the type of weld that made them poor. I'm not trying to get into a flame match, I'm just trying to find some more specific info about why you and others find the KBDD design a poor one.
07-07-2003, 08:20 PM
#9
Re: 2-pt vs. 3-pt SFC's Good points.
I referenced the CC.com post to shed light on what seems to be the Kenny Brown Philisophy (I believe he said something to the effect of "it's good enough" in there somewhere. And, I'd not go through the hassle of removing a set of welded connectors for the gains of a better design (I'm not referencing any one specific design....just a general reference). I consider them to be somewhat "under-built". With that said, I often lean towards overkill, but I also prefer light weight.
https://ls1tech.com/threads/showflat...art=2&vc=1
On this post, Sawedoff said:
This pretty much sums up my thoughts on Kenny Brown Subframes. I don't think they are designed as well as the kit from LG Motorsports or the SLP connectors, but they are better than most of the others. They would be my 3rd choice behind LG and SLP, but I'd likely reweld (after removing the plating...welding cad plated steel can kill you...) and modify them as I was installing them (cross bracing, gussets etc). Like I said, I would not take the time to remove a set that are already installed...I think that would be more trouble than it is actually worth.
I referenced the CC.com post to shed light on what seems to be the Kenny Brown Philisophy (I believe he said something to the effect of "it's good enough" in there somewhere. And, I'd not go through the hassle of removing a set of welded connectors for the gains of a better design (I'm not referencing any one specific design....just a general reference). I consider them to be somewhat "under-built". With that said, I often lean towards overkill, but I also prefer light weight.
https://ls1tech.com/threads/showflat...art=2&vc=1
On this post, Sawedoff said:
I have bought a set of just about every make of subframe, and the majority of them are absolute garbage.Most are made of low grade materials that just were maximizing the profit of the maker, to rush em' to the market, just to have something out there. The last and recent purchase was a set of Kenny Brown double diamonds. These are absolute junk, and will be cut and sold for scrap. I had talked to some engineers for a race team, and they laughed when I showed them the designs that are out there currently. Don't get me wrong they will stiffen up a car, a little, but they aren't the best they could be either.
Well, they're higher up at the top of the food chain, design wise, compared to something from BMR. Most of em' don't really triangulate all that well, and some don't do it all. These Kenny Brown's that I'm sitting here looking at, and thinking about using as a trellis for tomato plants in the garden, are brand *** new. They are already having heavy corrosion from a chemical reaction of the welding and the cadmium plating they used, in the weld joints. Big no-no here.
How come yours cost five hundred? Mine cost $267, they're basically about $5 worth of low grade metal boxed tubing, with a hardware store quality cad-plating job . I'm not mad about these, I've bought all kinds of crap for these cars, just to look at the design work, so I can design my own stuff.
Well, they're higher up at the top of the food chain, design wise, compared to something from BMR. Most of em' don't really triangulate all that well, and some don't do it all. These Kenny Brown's that I'm sitting here looking at, and thinking about using as a trellis for tomato plants in the garden, are brand *** new. They are already having heavy corrosion from a chemical reaction of the welding and the cadmium plating they used, in the weld joints. Big no-no here.
How come yours cost five hundred? Mine cost $267, they're basically about $5 worth of low grade metal boxed tubing, with a hardware store quality cad-plating job . I'm not mad about these, I've bought all kinds of crap for these cars, just to look at the design work, so I can design my own stuff.
