Strut bar opinions
08-11-2005, 11:31 AM
#1
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strut bar opinions
Looking for some advise/opinions here.
I'm going to start working a bit on enhancing the suspension on my NG. I know that eventually I'm going to get springs, shocks, and sways but thought my first 'investment' would be with strut bar replacements.
I've been looking at the MazdaSpeed Front (does anyone know why I don't seem to see one for the rear?) and the Greddy bars. Like the look of the MazdaSpeed, but it is almost double the cost of the Greddy. Anyone have experience with these? and......is this initial suspension 'upgrade' worth it or should I spend my $300 on something else?
Thanks for your response (in advance)
I'm going to start working a bit on enhancing the suspension on my NG. I know that eventually I'm going to get springs, shocks, and sways but thought my first 'investment' would be with strut bar replacements.
I've been looking at the MazdaSpeed Front (does anyone know why I don't seem to see one for the rear?) and the Greddy bars. Like the look of the MazdaSpeed, but it is almost double the cost of the Greddy. Anyone have experience with these? and......is this initial suspension 'upgrade' worth it or should I spend my $300 on something else?
Thanks for your response (in advance)
08-11-2005, 01:44 PM
#2
JIC Magic Marketing
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Downey, CA / Torrance, CA
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can also suggest our JIC Magic Strut tower bar or Strut tower brace. Our Strut tower brace goes to the top strut mounts and then the bar goes to the firewall to add more support. Makes a huge difference.
As for the bars, we have the front and rear as well. The strut tower bars are probably one of the "must haves" if you are planning to do some auto crossing or even agressive daily driving. It makes a big difference.
As for the bars, we have the front and rear as well. The strut tower bars are probably one of the "must haves" if you are planning to do some auto crossing or even agressive daily driving. It makes a big difference.
08-12-2005, 04:51 PM
#4
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TeamRX8
total waste of money and effort, it's all just unneeded marketing fluff to try and part you from your hard earned $$$
08-12-2005, 05:02 PM
#5
JIC Magic Marketing
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Downey, CA / Torrance, CA
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TeamRX8
total waste of money and effort, it's all just unneeded marketing fluff to try and part you from your hard earned $$$
If it's a total waste of money and effort, then you can tell that to the countless number of racing teams, OEM companies, and other suspension related racing companies that have put strut tower bars and other parts on their vehicles.
Ignorance is bliss...
08-12-2005, 05:57 PM
#6
obviously it is, allow me to expand:
the best chassis BMW offers has a chassis stiffness of approx. 19,000 nm/deg torsional twist, and that's only on the newest of one particular model, most vehicles are below 15,000. The BMW Z3 convertible was only a pathetic 5000.
the RX-8 is rated at 30,000 nm/deg-torsional twist, about double of most cars
the RX-8 is one of the torsionally stiffest chassis ever made, rivaling even some race chassis
the problem is nobody really tests this stuff, they just do the same thing that's been done in the past or follow suit by copying their competitors, otherwise let's see them put up the numbers showing how the part was developed and where they eventually ended up achieving. Well, we both know better ...
as racing fabricator great Smokey Yunick used to say, "racing is a monkey see, monkey do business; if the winner has a 5 lb bucket of sh*t located over the right rear wheel and wins you can expect all the other monkeys to have the same thing at the next race regardless of whether or not they understand what they're doing"
furthermore, this is not somebody building a full-on race car with 12" slicks, heim joint suspension, ultra-high rate springs, etc. pulling over 1.5+g, totally not necessary for the appliction presented unless you just want to emulate some F&F bling-bling wannabe. The top RX-8 stock class autox drivers are pulling 1.3g with little more than racing shocks and DOT-R tires coupled with skilled driving. The avg person can't even control their vehicle that well to achieve such levels, so how is adding a strut bar going to assist their situation, particularly on street tires?
It was my intention to talk straight, not knock somebody's product. I regret that you stuck your neck out on it. It's not uncommon for people to show up at an autox with all this stuff plastered all over their car, only to have somebody in a Stock class car oblliterate them. They might be able to hawk that stuff to the wowzer masses at some drift competition or car show, but some of us actually know better.
You want value for your money? Spend it on driving schools ... when it comes to doing anything more than going in a straight line you are the greatest performance potential investment in the entire car.
the best chassis BMW offers has a chassis stiffness of approx. 19,000 nm/deg torsional twist, and that's only on the newest of one particular model, most vehicles are below 15,000. The BMW Z3 convertible was only a pathetic 5000.
the RX-8 is rated at 30,000 nm/deg-torsional twist, about double of most cars
the RX-8 is one of the torsionally stiffest chassis ever made, rivaling even some race chassis
the problem is nobody really tests this stuff, they just do the same thing that's been done in the past or follow suit by copying their competitors, otherwise let's see them put up the numbers showing how the part was developed and where they eventually ended up achieving. Well, we both know better ...
as racing fabricator great Smokey Yunick used to say, "racing is a monkey see, monkey do business; if the winner has a 5 lb bucket of sh*t located over the right rear wheel and wins you can expect all the other monkeys to have the same thing at the next race regardless of whether or not they understand what they're doing"
furthermore, this is not somebody building a full-on race car with 12" slicks, heim joint suspension, ultra-high rate springs, etc. pulling over 1.5+g, totally not necessary for the appliction presented unless you just want to emulate some F&F bling-bling wannabe. The top RX-8 stock class autox drivers are pulling 1.3g with little more than racing shocks and DOT-R tires coupled with skilled driving. The avg person can't even control their vehicle that well to achieve such levels, so how is adding a strut bar going to assist their situation, particularly on street tires?
It was my intention to talk straight, not knock somebody's product. I regret that you stuck your neck out on it. It's not uncommon for people to show up at an autox with all this stuff plastered all over their car, only to have somebody in a Stock class car oblliterate them. They might be able to hawk that stuff to the wowzer masses at some drift competition or car show, but some of us actually know better.
You want value for your money? Spend it on driving schools ... when it comes to doing anything more than going in a straight line you are the greatest performance potential investment in the entire car.
The following 2 users liked this post by TeamRX8:
DrewFehrman (04-26-2020),
TechGeek (11-12-2023)
08-12-2005, 06:24 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Visalia, CA
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And right or wrong you came off as somewhat smartass. Personally I've driven with the stock one removed, with the stock one, and with a Mazdaspeed one. You can feel the difference, so it must be doing something.
Originally Posted by TeamRX8
obviously it is, allow me to expand:
the best chassis BMW offers has a chassis stiffness of approx. 19,000 nm/deg torsional twist, and that's only on the newest of one particular model, most vehicles are below 15,000. The BMW Z3 convertible was only a pathetic 5000.
the RX-8 is rated at 30,000 nm/deg-torsional twist, about double of most cars
the RX-8 is one of the torsionally stiffest chassis ever made, rivaling even some race chassis
the problem is nobody really tests this stuff, they just do the same thing that's been done in the past or follow suit by copying their competitors, otherwise let's see them put up the numbers showing how the part was developed and where they eventually ended up achieving. Well, we both know better ...
as racing fabricator great Smokey Yunick used to say, "racing is a monkey see, monkey do business; if the winner has a 5 lb bucket of sh*t located over the right rear wheel and wins you can expect all the other monkeys to have the same thing at the next race regardless of whether or not they understand what they're doing"
furthermore, this is not somebody building a full-on race car with 12" slicks, heim joint suspension, ultra-high rate springs, etc. pulling over 1.5+g, totally not necessary for the appliction presented unless you just want to emulate some F&F bling-bling wannabe. The top RX-8 stock class autox drivers are pulling 1.3g with little more than racing shocks and DOT-R tires coupled with skilled driving. The avg person can't even control their vehicle that well to achieve such levels, so how is adding a strut bar going to assist their situation, particularly on street tires?
It was my intention to talk straight, not knock somebody's product. I regret that you stuck your neck out on it. It's not uncommon for people to show up at an autox with all this stuff plastered all over their car, only to have somebody in a Stock class car oblliterate them. They might be able to hawk that stuff to the wowzer masses at some drift competition or car show, but some of us actually know better.
You want value for your money? Spend it on driving schools ... when it comes to doing anything more than going in a straight line you are the greatest performance potential investment in the entire car.
the best chassis BMW offers has a chassis stiffness of approx. 19,000 nm/deg torsional twist, and that's only on the newest of one particular model, most vehicles are below 15,000. The BMW Z3 convertible was only a pathetic 5000.
the RX-8 is rated at 30,000 nm/deg-torsional twist, about double of most cars
the RX-8 is one of the torsionally stiffest chassis ever made, rivaling even some race chassis
the problem is nobody really tests this stuff, they just do the same thing that's been done in the past or follow suit by copying their competitors, otherwise let's see them put up the numbers showing how the part was developed and where they eventually ended up achieving. Well, we both know better ...
as racing fabricator great Smokey Yunick used to say, "racing is a monkey see, monkey do business; if the winner has a 5 lb bucket of sh*t located over the right rear wheel and wins you can expect all the other monkeys to have the same thing at the next race regardless of whether or not they understand what they're doing"
furthermore, this is not somebody building a full-on race car with 12" slicks, heim joint suspension, ultra-high rate springs, etc. pulling over 1.5+g, totally not necessary for the appliction presented unless you just want to emulate some F&F bling-bling wannabe. The top RX-8 stock class autox drivers are pulling 1.3g with little more than racing shocks and DOT-R tires coupled with skilled driving. The avg person can't even control their vehicle that well to achieve such levels, so how is adding a strut bar going to assist their situation, particularly on street tires?
It was my intention to talk straight, not knock somebody's product. I regret that you stuck your neck out on it. It's not uncommon for people to show up at an autox with all this stuff plastered all over their car, only to have somebody in a Stock class car oblliterate them. They might be able to hawk that stuff to the wowzer masses at some drift competition or car show, but some of us actually know better.
You want value for your money? Spend it on driving schools ... when it comes to doing anything more than going in a straight line you are the greatest performance potential investment in the entire car.
08-12-2005, 06:29 PM
#8
I wanna rock! Rock!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Monterey, CA
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TeamRX8, do you happen to know the torsional rigidity of any other common cars off the top of your head? I'd like to get a feel for where other cars stand.
08-12-2005, 06:32 PM
#9
Originally Posted by QBallz
And right or wrong you came off as somewhat smartass. Personally I've driven with the stock one removed, with the stock one, and with a Mazdaspeed one. You can feel the difference, so it must be doing something.
do you know how many times a seat of the pants judgement was completely proven false by objective measurement? Let's do a blind test where the driver has no idea whether the part is installed or not and then see what the results are, then to really make it interesting tell them it's installed when it's not and vice versa before revealing the facts
and I was being a smartass because I didn't appreciate being called ignorant by someone who didn't offer anything to back their position, I didn't see you banging on them for that offense ...
The following users liked this post:
TechGeek (11-12-2023)
08-12-2005, 06:53 PM
#11
refreshing
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen this posted elsewhere; it's a good explanation of the forces involved and how the bar helps the suspension hold its geometry:
http://e30m3performance.com/myths/St...bar_theory.htm
(It references a BMW though, so you may need to apply appropriate scaling factors based on TeamRX8's post... j/k...)
I'm with MazdaManiac on this -- a bar is better than no bar, but going stiffer than stock is heading into the realm of diminishing returns. Whether or not that little bit extra is worth the money is something only you can answer, since it's your money!
One thing that the Mazdaspeed bar adds is a brace for the master cylinder, but I don't know how much that would improve brake feel over, say, steel braided brake lines. Anybody?
http://e30m3performance.com/myths/St...bar_theory.htm
(It references a BMW though, so you may need to apply appropriate scaling factors based on TeamRX8's post... j/k...
)I'm with MazdaManiac on this -- a bar is better than no bar, but going stiffer than stock is heading into the realm of diminishing returns. Whether or not that little bit extra is worth the money is something only you can answer, since it's your money!
One thing that the Mazdaspeed bar adds is a brace for the master cylinder, but I don't know how much that would improve brake feel over, say, steel braided brake lines. Anybody?
08-12-2005, 07:39 PM
#13
Momentum Keeps Me Going
"Truth is be spoken softly to encourage discussion, opinions are shouted loudly to silence it." <ancient proverb>
Last edited by Spin9k; 08-12-2005 at 07:46 PM.
08-12-2005, 07:46 PM
#14
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MazdaManiac
Strut bars are generally for vehicles with MacPherson struts where the struts themselves are chassis components. "Closing the box" as it were.
There is no rigidity to be gained with anything other than the OEM bar.
There is no rigidity to be gained with anything other than the OEM bar.
First, I appreciate the responses and 'opinions'. I realize that some folks feel that a couple of the responses may be a bit 'agressive'....but....this is what I was hoping to get from this thread, opinions.
Part of the reason I asked about this was because I also was having a difficult time understanding what benefit (or the amount of benefit) I would realize from replacing the OEM bar. I'm definetely not a racer.....just an enthusiast looking to make what I think is a great car a bit better. I think that I agree that using any bar similar to the OEM bar probably wouldn't make noticable difference for the type of driving I do....it would be purely for looks (I.e. - carbon fiber and the big MazdaSpeed decal). Now, going with a bar that also mounts to the firewall would probably make a difference over OEM as there is sure to be more rigidity....but then again, probably not noticable for regular to somewhat agressive street driving. That's why I've kinda tabled this mod for now, and will pursue a couple of the others on my list (I.e. - springs and intake) realizing that the intake is another whole discussion. ($400.00 for maybe 3-4hp and 1-2mpg).
08-12-2005, 08:12 PM
#15
cusco has a Ti front bar out with a brake cylinder stopper. the weight saving and second function might make replacing the std bar worthwhile.
I haven't found a picture of it yet and it might not be suitable for left-hand drive vehicles.
I haven't found a picture of it yet and it might not be suitable for left-hand drive vehicles.
08-12-2005, 10:48 PM
#16
thanks, I forgot to mention that the car already has a strut bar, you're talking about saving several pounds on a car that weighs 3000#, the performance gain is zilch for the avg street car, but I digress
I found these across the internet in a google, 10 yrs ago 15,000 n-m/deg would have been considered outstanding, one of the reasons today’s cars weigh so much is due to increased torsional & bending stiffness, hard to find data on older cars but you can find what few are shown at the bottom of the list, you also have to consider weight and chassis length/width, all else being equal the heavier the car the more torsional stiffness it requires to keep from twisting, the shorter/narrower the chassis the higher the reading for an equivalent chassis strength of a longer/wider car, etc.
the figures shown represent units of N-m/deg torsional twist, the new cars are getting much stiffer, the "old" thinking has yet to reflect the change yet though
2005 Rolls Royce Phantom – 40,000 (but one heavy SOB)
2004 Audi A8 – 36,000
2001 McLaren F1 supercar – 33,500
2004 Mazda RX-8 – 30,000
2005 Koenigseg CRR/CC8S supercar – 28,100
2005 Aston Martin DB9 – 27,000
2004 Aston Martin V12 Vanquish – 25,800
2005 VW Golf Plus (euro) – 25,000
2005 VW Golf RS32 – 24,600
2003 Mini Cooper – 24,500
VW W8 Passat supercar – 24,000
2003 Saab 9-3 – 22,000
2005 Ford Mustang – 20,300 (huge improvement over previous models)
Lamborghini Murcielago - 20,100
2005 Volvo S60 – 20,000
2005 Ford Gt40 – 20,000
Dodge Viper GTS-R 24 hr Lemans racer – 18,200 (see street Viper below)
2003 Audi TT – 19,000
2005 Pagani Zonda C12-S Roadster – 18,000
2001 BMW Z3/M Coupe – 16,700 (compare the hardtop coupe to the convertible roadster below)
2005 BMW 645 Convertible – 15,000
“Club Cobra” Shelby replica – 15,000
2003 BMW Z4 Roadster – 14,500
(?) Porsche 911 – 13,800
2003 Dodge Viper GTS – 12,800
2005 Lotus Elise – 10,100 (lightweight has it’s price)
2003 BMW 330 convertible – 9,000
Ferrari 360 Spyder – 8,370 (think Magnum PI)
2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser convertible – 6,363
1998 BMW 325 convertible – 6,000
1993 Ford Escort RS Cosworth (euro) – 6,000
2001 BMW Z3/M Roadster – 5,900
1980 VW Rabbit 4-dr – 4,900
Lamborghini Contach – 2,600 (WTF?!)
I found these across the internet in a google, 10 yrs ago 15,000 n-m/deg would have been considered outstanding, one of the reasons today’s cars weigh so much is due to increased torsional & bending stiffness, hard to find data on older cars but you can find what few are shown at the bottom of the list, you also have to consider weight and chassis length/width, all else being equal the heavier the car the more torsional stiffness it requires to keep from twisting, the shorter/narrower the chassis the higher the reading for an equivalent chassis strength of a longer/wider car, etc.
the figures shown represent units of N-m/deg torsional twist, the new cars are getting much stiffer, the "old" thinking has yet to reflect the change yet though
2005 Rolls Royce Phantom – 40,000 (but one heavy SOB)
2004 Audi A8 – 36,000
2001 McLaren F1 supercar – 33,500
2004 Mazda RX-8 – 30,000
2005 Koenigseg CRR/CC8S supercar – 28,100
2005 Aston Martin DB9 – 27,000
2004 Aston Martin V12 Vanquish – 25,800
2005 VW Golf Plus (euro) – 25,000
2005 VW Golf RS32 – 24,600
2003 Mini Cooper – 24,500
VW W8 Passat supercar – 24,000
2003 Saab 9-3 – 22,000
2005 Ford Mustang – 20,300 (huge improvement over previous models)
Lamborghini Murcielago - 20,100
2005 Volvo S60 – 20,000
2005 Ford Gt40 – 20,000
Dodge Viper GTS-R 24 hr Lemans racer – 18,200 (see street Viper below)
2003 Audi TT – 19,000
2005 Pagani Zonda C12-S Roadster – 18,000
2001 BMW Z3/M Coupe – 16,700 (compare the hardtop coupe to the convertible roadster below)
2005 BMW 645 Convertible – 15,000
“Club Cobra” Shelby replica – 15,000
2003 BMW Z4 Roadster – 14,500
(?) Porsche 911 – 13,800
2003 Dodge Viper GTS – 12,800
2005 Lotus Elise – 10,100 (lightweight has it’s price)
2003 BMW 330 convertible – 9,000
Ferrari 360 Spyder – 8,370 (think Magnum PI)
2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser convertible – 6,363
1998 BMW 325 convertible – 6,000
1993 Ford Escort RS Cosworth (euro) – 6,000
2001 BMW Z3/M Roadster – 5,900
1980 VW Rabbit 4-dr – 4,900
Lamborghini Contach – 2,600 (WTF?!)
Last edited by TeamRX8; 08-12-2005 at 11:07 PM.
08-12-2005, 11:31 PM
#17
Originally Posted by QBallz
And right or wrong you came off as somewhat smartass. Personally I've driven with the stock one removed, with the stock one, and with a Mazdaspeed one. You can feel the difference, so it must be doing something.
I love it when guys post results from the good old butt dyno. "Just got the new xyz flash from Mazda and boy can I feel the difference."
Lets see some data to back up your findings....
The RX8 is not a true strut suspension, the upper A arms take the load, teamrx8 is 100% correct all fluff to take your money. As far as real race team I could show you a ton of real race cars that do not use one. The reason, the race teams are smart enough to know when they dont have a strut suspension and dont need the bar.
Hey its all good... While your at it order those adjustable camber plates for the RX8 that will not allow you to change your alingment, again because it is not a strut suspension and all the alingment comes from the A arm and not the shock. :D
It is crazy how many parts are on the market that are only good at doing one thing, taking your money.
http://www.shaneracing.com/RX8_Perfo...ion_Parts.html
RX-8 Adjustable Camber Plates
We built these 6063 billet aluminum for our Project RX-8 with great results. Really stiffens up the front end . We now stock these for the latest Mazda RX-8. Comes complete with all needed hardware.
Includes:
( 2 ) Camber Plates
Part Number RX8- Susp-47
$349 Pair
08-12-2005, 11:44 PM
#18
How did I miss this:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yesterday, 11:44 AM
yukio@jic-magic is Offline:
JIC Magic Marketing Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Downey, CA / Torrance, CA
Posts: 23
I can also suggest our JIC Magic Strut tower bar or Strut tower brace. Our Strut tower brace goes to the top strut mounts and then the bar goes to the firewall to add more support. Makes a huge difference.
As for the bars, we have the front and rear as well. The strut tower bars are probably one of the "must haves" if you are planning to do some auto crossing or even agressive daily driving. It makes a big difference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The guy telling you to buy his has the answer right there in his sig.... Not JIC Racing...... but rather JIC Magic Marketing :D Its all smoke and mirrors.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yesterday, 11:44 AM
yukio@jic-magic is Offline:
JIC Magic Marketing Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Downey, CA / Torrance, CA
Posts: 23
I can also suggest our JIC Magic Strut tower bar or Strut tower brace. Our Strut tower brace goes to the top strut mounts and then the bar goes to the firewall to add more support. Makes a huge difference.
As for the bars, we have the front and rear as well. The strut tower bars are probably one of the "must haves" if you are planning to do some auto crossing or even agressive daily driving. It makes a big difference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The guy telling you to buy his has the answer right there in his sig.... Not JIC Racing...... but rather JIC Magic Marketing :D Its all smoke and mirrors.
08-13-2005, 08:50 AM
#19
Momentum Keeps Me Going
It is interesting to note that the posters who pan tower bracing in the RX-8 so completely, not surprisingly, had nothing whatsoever to do with the design and enginneering of the car, because if they had, or even had read publicly available material concering its design, might reconsider their strongly held positions about its uselessness...or not, depending on how open-minded they are.
Discussion of body stiffness is all well and good, but a bit more reasoning behind the numbers used to justify positions taken here is educational. No one is doubting the stiffness of the RX-8 compared to other cars, but one should really consider the facts of how this excellent stiffness was obtained. So let's examine some essential missing parts of the puzzle.
A few quotes from the Jack K. Yamaguchi 'RX-8" book, concerning the development of the car are in order. RX-8 stiffness is not just magically there, it was DESIGNED INTO the car. To wit:
"The spring/shock absorber's top mount has a pre-compressed rubber plate for quicker reaction. Three bolts secure the top mount to the body. A steel tower bar ties the top mounts together. It's primary function is to provide stiffmess to the upper opening of the engine compartment." And so they did add the tower brace.
Why the reason for this exactly is explained under the section entitled "Body has Soul":
"Enter practical consideration: A larger, cold-climate battery has to be fit in this area as does the large-volume, air-cleaner unit. Therefore, the (upper) transverse member ends are bent downward, reducing the effectiveness as a brace. So a tubular rod tying the tops of the sping/shock absorber towers together is standard on all RX-8 models to increase front-end stiffness."
Beyond that, the development of grip at the rear of the car was a serious problem that surfaced and was addressed by - SURPRISE - adding a rear brace!
"Oda discovered that the early M1 (prototype) possesed tremendous rear wheel grip. He surmised this was a result of body stiffness. Removing a large chunk of quarter panel...to simulate the RX-8 profile, grip promtptly deteriorated. Obviously, he concluded, the rear would need to be reinforced. We must have a V-brace to re-inforce the rear bulkhead." And so they did add the 'V' brace.
Short of typing large portions of the text here, I would wholeheartly recommend a careful reading of this literature. Not only is it entertaining, but very helpful in clearly discovering how a great car like the RX-8 came about. All performance aspects of the car as it was developed are carefully detailed, both the successes, and the failures and how solutions were obtained to produce a relatively no-compromise design.
Now, I think it is reasonable to argue that MORE bracing may be of unknown value until proven. But it is wholesale denial of the facts to suggest that bracing of this type is totally useless in the RX-8. The facts don't bear out this conclusion. And, in fact, I would argue that this indicates that as an area of concern by its own engineers, more bracing in the RX-8 could have a substantial positive effect on handling perfection in other than street applications, specifically on the track.
Discussion of body stiffness is all well and good, but a bit more reasoning behind the numbers used to justify positions taken here is educational. No one is doubting the stiffness of the RX-8 compared to other cars, but one should really consider the facts of how this excellent stiffness was obtained. So let's examine some essential missing parts of the puzzle.
A few quotes from the Jack K. Yamaguchi 'RX-8" book, concerning the development of the car are in order. RX-8 stiffness is not just magically there, it was DESIGNED INTO the car. To wit:
"The spring/shock absorber's top mount has a pre-compressed rubber plate for quicker reaction. Three bolts secure the top mount to the body. A steel tower bar ties the top mounts together. It's primary function is to provide stiffmess to the upper opening of the engine compartment." And so they did add the tower brace.
Why the reason for this exactly is explained under the section entitled "Body has Soul":
"Enter practical consideration: A larger, cold-climate battery has to be fit in this area as does the large-volume, air-cleaner unit. Therefore, the (upper) transverse member ends are bent downward, reducing the effectiveness as a brace. So a tubular rod tying the tops of the sping/shock absorber towers together is standard on all RX-8 models to increase front-end stiffness."
Beyond that, the development of grip at the rear of the car was a serious problem that surfaced and was addressed by - SURPRISE - adding a rear brace!
"Oda discovered that the early M1 (prototype) possesed tremendous rear wheel grip. He surmised this was a result of body stiffness. Removing a large chunk of quarter panel...to simulate the RX-8 profile, grip promtptly deteriorated. Obviously, he concluded, the rear would need to be reinforced. We must have a V-brace to re-inforce the rear bulkhead." And so they did add the 'V' brace.
Short of typing large portions of the text here, I would wholeheartly recommend a careful reading of this literature. Not only is it entertaining, but very helpful in clearly discovering how a great car like the RX-8 came about. All performance aspects of the car as it was developed are carefully detailed, both the successes, and the failures and how solutions were obtained to produce a relatively no-compromise design.
Now, I think it is reasonable to argue that MORE bracing may be of unknown value until proven. But it is wholesale denial of the facts to suggest that bracing of this type is totally useless in the RX-8. The facts don't bear out this conclusion. And, in fact, I would argue that this indicates that as an area of concern by its own engineers, more bracing in the RX-8 could have a substantial positive effect on handling perfection in other than street applications, specifically on the track.
08-14-2005, 12:34 AM
#21
350.00 bucks for camber plates?!?!! holy crap, anyone ever thought of starting a "these mods will just waste your $$$" thread? I for one would like to know what will actually help and what is just fluff. Thanks
08-14-2005, 03:50 AM
#22
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,553
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
uhmm anything that makes the suspension stiffer will make a difference...
i dont see how it cant. it makes the steering more precise and im sure better results on a skidpad and track.
also the mazdaspeed and greddy and probably JIC uses the stronger bigger lugs, while the stock uses those small dinky ones... gahh haha im sry im not using the technical terms but if you look at the MS strut bar DIY you can tell what im tryin to say.
i dont see how it cant. it makes the steering more precise and im sure better results on a skidpad and track.
also the mazdaspeed and greddy and probably JIC uses the stronger bigger lugs, while the stock uses those small dinky ones... gahh haha im sry im not using the technical terms but if you look at the MS strut bar DIY you can tell what im tryin to say.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
