JD_AMG

I don't know if you noticed but the Mustang and the fbody are two completely different cars. Mustangs use struts, our cars have coil over shocks, and the upper A arm takes the load that the strut tower would take on a Mustang.

You'll see I have a STB, and I noticed nothing after putting it on. If there is one thing 4th gens "need", its good shocks. /thread

leadfoot4

iTrader: (1)

But, "JD", the upper a-arm mount in the F-bod is at the top of the shock tower. Yes, I realize that this debate will probably go on forever, but IMHO, I don't see how the suspension loading CAN'T help but be transmitted through the shock towers. It's where the springs/upper a-arms mount.....

z28bryan

iTrader: (7)

This is a good thread so far. It's got me thinking.

Basically the wheel is where the force is. Transmits that into the spindle arm. The spindle arm is attached to two points. I guess what the road race guys are saying is that that pretty much all the force goes into the lower connection to the A-arms

Captainofiron

iTrader: (1)

I was drawing it out, and you would have to get some torsional load on the spindle for the upper a-arm to get either a compressive or tension load.

that torsional load would be applied via the tire leaning which could be possible during very hard cornering.

but whether or not the frame successfully deals with the force would take alot more analysis.

and as far as the Mustang goes, the fox body seems like it has always been a product of lean engineering

97ramsst

iTrader: (162)

Hotchkiss makes a really good LOOKING bar. Also its not as "in the way" as some of the other straight bars (I have a BMR bar on my silver TA.) As for added performance...I couldn't really tell a difference at all...but it is SHINEY!



Now I did have the BMR mentioned above on my 2000 WS6 Vert and believe it or not it did make a huge difference when driving over uneven roads. It made the front end feel much more solid and shake less. I wouldnt say it helped cornering because the car was terrible at it even after the brace, but it certainly did make a difference. Much, much more so than on either of my coupes.

mitchntx

iTrader: (14)

No, what we're saying is the tire will slide on the pavement long before the metal deforms.

Captainofiron

iTrader: (1)

that Hotchkis bar is really nice

z28bryan

iTrader: (7)

So what is different about the 3rd gen Camaro that the STB actually does help for that car?

_JB_

iTrader: (33)

Same here. When I hit bumps while turning at 40+MPH I noticed a difference. Other than that I didn't notice a thing.

mitchntx

iTrader: (14)

2 basic design differences ...

3rd gen upper attachment point is an integral part of the suspension geometry.

3rd gen frame rails follow along the trans tunnel, leaving little support for the floor pan.

z28bryan

iTrader: (7)

Thanks. Still kinda leaves me with questions about why. But I guess you'd have to draw it out on a whiteboard for me to understand, and it's kind of hard to write out online.

leadfoot4

iTrader: (1)

I agree!

I've owned F-bods since 1976, so I've had 3 generations of them, and they've all had different "compromises" in terms of front end support.

With respect to the 3rd genners, they used a conentionall mounted coil spring, which fed some of the load into the k-member, but with the McPherson strut instead of an upper a-arm, you still fed a portion of the suspension load into the shock towers. Plus, the upper strut mount also controlled part of the steering load.

With the 4th genners, you have the "coil-overs" and upper a-arms also mounted to the shock towers. Personally, I don't see how it can be said that the suspension loads aren't fed into the towers. Simply put, you hit a bump with the left side of the car, you compress the left spring, but based on the stiffness of the spring, a portion of this force wants to "raise" that corner of the car. This force is counteracted by the anti-roll bar, and the shock tower, since the tower is the upper restraint for the unit......I would say.

mitchntx

iTrader: (14)

On a 3rd gen, it's a straight shot to the inner fender where the camber/caster plates are.

On a 4th gen, it shock is attached, but the upper ball joint pivots on bushing material.

Now, if you bottom the suspension out where the upper A-Arm hit the inner fender, then OK ... an STB will help somewhat. But there are bigger issues to address at that point.

We're discussing normal, every day driving ... not extreme off-road.

wabmorgan

I think a STB does nothing.

STB aka gf bar.

Captainofiron

iTrader: (1)

You could use a stb as a recovery point, haha I know I when my opti went out once, I bolted an engine removal loop from my pontiac 400 to both sides right on the shock mount and left the hood open and towed my T/A home using just that. haha

camarosam22

I think they would help a bit, all cadillacs come with them as well as bmw M series, witch are handling cars, If their putting them on from the factory, they must do something.

mitchntx

iTrader: (14)

Turbo Supras came with a wing. Using that logic, if it works for a Supra ...

It boils down to suspension design. Ms have no factory camber adjustment. I've never looked closely at a Caddy

camarosam22

ya true, my 93 sts came with one, but its a boat, and wouldnt put it past the front end from twisting. It makes sense, cuase if the wheel wells where the struts are move, the fenders would move as well, thank god I read this cause i was going to buy one.