Does anybody with experience want to comment here (https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1138298) about the theory behind frame locks and whether or not this kind of chassis stiffening would be worth the eventual purchase price of $200 or so?

I tried to talk about it some in another thread the other day and got hacked to bits, so I think I'd prefer to try to find opinions from people who might have actually used frame locks in a legal competitive environment.

 

I don't know much, but wouldn't a nice welded roll bar/roll cage have more of a quantifiable effect than those 'frame locks'?

It just seems that there are other, better, more effective ways of accomplishing the same thing.

 

I just know my snake-oil detector was beeping pretty heavily with some of the claims. "TOTALLY ELIMINATES UNDERSTEER!" "4 SECONDS A LAP IMPROVEMENT ON A 1:20 COURSE" "ELIMINATES HARSH RIDE FROM LOWERING"

They seem to have toned down the claims on the website, but when something's marketed like STP or the Tornado, it makes one skeptical. I'm guessing "SLIGHT INCREASE IN CHASSIS RIGIDITY" doesn't sell as well.

 

Let me ask this, then, just to make sure I have it straight.

You have a race car. Let's say it's an older design, say, a 1995 GS-R.

Fully outfitted for racing, including the decent cage and chassis just the way you want it.

Frame locks are suddenly legal.

Would you spend, say, $200 for frame locks, or would you think that it would be a waste of time and money?

 

Its come up here several times in passing. I think you will find several results by searching but the reality is that its probably an unlikely legal addition for most racing series. With that noted, the pool of folks that will be able to make quantitative comments might be small. I would *think* that the greater gains would be made w/in the 8 points of a cage - but I am not too certain of the value of strut/shock tower bars (as been noted before). It might be a good use of 200.00 but I'd think that money toward rollover protection or spherical bearings would be better spent. Certainly not an experienced comment though, just a guess.

(found this: https://honda-tech.com/zero...35942)

To your last question, I would have to know that the 200.00 was an actual improvement - I would not be too inclined to think the gains are that great in front of the front, rear of the rear suspension points. AND one could convince me that the downside of destroying a left headlight bucket while damaging a right headlight bucket makes the 200.00 a bad choice from the get.

 

even if they suddenly became legal I'd invest the money else where. like phatty said, spherical bearings are great, and isn't $200 about what 1 h00sier costs?

on a full blown race car these seem silly.......

 

Thanks. I really should have remembered that thread.

My personal opinion is that it's probably similar to the infamous "SpoonTB 70mm" when you're building a motor. If you've done absolutely everything else, and you're willing to retune the engine to get two horses extra that you can't find any other way, maybe the TB is worth it.

Maybe it's the same way with frame locks, and the couple hundred is only worth it if the car's as sorted out as it can be in every other way.

Clearly an amateur over here. Don't kill me.

 

have you tested the frame locks yourself?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by artifex &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">have you tested the frame locks yourself?</TD></TR></TABLE>

while i believe George hasn't, all the tests i've read about have been entirely too subjective for me to feel confident that the results will be repeatable.......

 

its just that i see him championing these things in a bunch of other threads...

 

I have the first prototypes on my car right now.

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1133873

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by artifex &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">its just that i see him championing these things in a bunch of other threads...</TD></TR></TABLE>

well what do I know anyway? I'm just some hack posting on the intArweb

all I'm saying is I don't have confidence in the testing procedure and results

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by artifex &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">have you tested the frame locks yourself?</TD></TR></TABLE>

No, I have not.

I have talked to NASA friends about their supposed merit or lack thereof, but I have a long way to go with my DC2 ITR before I'd be thinking about frame locks.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by artifex &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">its just that i see him championing these things in a bunch of other threads...</TD></TR></TABLE>

I am not a champion of frame locks.

I am a detractor of automatic derision without due consideration, however.

I understand the theory of it, but I also hear a lot of racing friends saying it would be the last thing they spent money on (that's why I tried to use the 70mm TB analogy).

 

Driver development &gt; 70mm TB's and Framelocks

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RineRacing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I have the first prototypes on my car right now.

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1133873</TD></TR></TABLE>

thanks for posting the link, i've already read your review. i've also seen pics of their mounting points, and follow just about every thread there's been on the frame locks. while some of the design points are intuitively sound, the small amount of collegiate physics education i've had tells me that intuition is often glaringly wrong when it comes to matters such as this.

vague claims are easy to substantiate. just read your horoscope.

the proposed benefits are still far outweighed by the enormous cost for something that can be fabbed up for next to nothing. they may be trying to recover their "engineering" costs, however if that is the case, where is the quantitative data one would normally associate with structural engineering?

i'm not disallowing the possibility that these do perform somewhat close to what the manufacturer claims, i just find it rediculous that the only quantitative data that produced was (if i remember correctly) a measured 3% increase in the instantaneous load the airbag accelerometer saw when a frame-lock-equipped car ran over a pothole (again, memory is a bit foggy - too much conveyor crap cluttering the place up). if they can produce that level of data, why can't they produce something showing an definite increase in structural rigidity?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Driver development &gt; 70mm TB's and Framelocks </TD></TR></TABLE>

Completely agree.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I am not a champion of frame locks.

I am a detractor of automatic derision without due consideration, however.

I understand the theory of it, but I also hear a lot of racing friends saying it would be the last thing they spent money on (that's why I tried to use the 70mm TB analogy).</TD></TR></TABLE>

i agree with the need for due consideration. but i have witnessed (in a recent thread) you personally attacking someone, then basically clapping you hands over your ears, looking in the other direction, and screaming "lalalalalala" when the same board member highlighted the fact that korbach has not shown any hard evidence of an improvement (this may or may not be because of past personal differences). the supporting arguements for the "believe the theory because it makes some sense and people who try them like them" have been absolutely horrible.

hard fact is hard to ignore. conjecture is just that, convincing though it may be at times...

 

artifex, sounds like you and I feel the same way.

Wai's breakdown seems to illustrate the negative side effects running the frame locks could have.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">B00st &gt; Framelocks</TD></TR></TABLE>

i agree as well.

 

All very good points Artifex. However, can you provide me with an example of a time where you were considering a product and based your purchase on "quantitative data" from the manufacturer?

Most people see claims from the manufacturer and say "yeah right", and ask their buddies "does this really work?". We all remember when AEM came out with the CAI and claimed a 12hp increase. We all knew it was BS but purchases were made because we knew there would be some gains.

I put my review out there so that people who know me can see my opinion about it. Ultimately that's all anyone really cares about. How many times to you see posts by people looking for "experiences with product (x)?" vs. "exactly how many seconds did product (x) shave off your lap times?".

Do we sit around trying to figure out exactly how much faster Hoosiers are than Kumhos or do we just accept the fact that Hoosiers are faster (A3SO3 vs. V700 for you nitpickers).

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RineRacing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">All very good points Artifex. However, can you provide me with an example of a time where you were considering a product and based your purchase on "quantitative data" from the manufacturer?

Most people see claims from the manufacturer and say "yeah right", and ask their buddies "does this really work?". We all remember when AEM came out with the CAI and claimed a 12hp increase. We all knew it was BS but purchases were made because we knew there would be some gains.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

ive got to agree with this.

besides, when a car company says something like "chassis stiffness was increased XX% over the previous model year", what are you thinking they did, and why do you think they bothered?

unfortunately, it seems korbach and some initial users went a little over the top in their "claims" which they admit they were a bit misleading. but i think with opinions like jeremy's are reasonable. and its plausible the effect of strengthing the crossmember across the nose of the front end could be effective of increasing lateral stiffness which would translate to steering response.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RineRacing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I have the first prototypes on my car right now.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

You are aware that these are illegal on a DSP Intgra, right?

 

I am quite aware of that. I will have them on my car for testing/review purposes but nothing beyond that.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RineRacing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">All very good points Artifex. However, can you provide me with an example of a time where you were considering a product and based your purchase on "quantitative data" from the manufacturer?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

yes. i purchased OTS koni yellows based on the available shock dyno graphs in comparison with others, after reading up on the subject to be able to interpret the graphs. i also purchased ground controls based on the ability to customize spring rates, which i did, based on mathematical calculations of spring rate bias front to rear vs. stock and stock gsr weight distribution (and the effect spring rates can have on the duration of weight transfer, blah blah blah). i went through an identical process with swaybars, evaluating mounting points, methods, and bar thickness to calculate the effects on wheel rate vs. other designs.

i do not own a cold air intake, or any aftermarket engine related parts (yet) as i cannot yet afford to open that can of worms, and i would rather spend available funds driving the car.