Just a couple pics of their new braces. Carbon Fiber!!!
In development:
S2000, AE86, S13, 350Z, Scion, Civic, just to name a few. Will update asap when new produts arrive.

 

what are they going to brace with a joint in the same plane that they are supposed to be bracing?


Modified by slammed_93_hatch at 1:22 PM 2/13/2006

 

? Sorry I do not understand your question.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CoolGuy160 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">? Sorry I do not understand your question.</TD></TR></TABLE>

An upper strut brace is supposed to keep the ends of the brace from moving inwards. Since there's a joint (on each side) connecting the mounts to the brace itself, you could still have some chassis flex with the mounts rotating on the brace, even if the brace itself doesn't flex. Or at least, thats my interpretation of the question. I think there was a typo, my correction of it would be:

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">what are they going to brace with a joint in the same plane that they are supposed to be bracing?</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

thanks didn't notice i missed the e

 

having two bolts in that plane on each end brackey would eliminate the rotating possibilty and possibly make that bar at least somewhat functional. Most bars are one piece, in my opinion best thing to do is get some DOM tubing and weld the towers together.

 

isnt that gonna be flimsy

 

looks similar to the jic bars. they are not flimbsy but that is a good point it should be soild to have 0 flex.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">what are they going to brace with a joint in the same plane that they are supposed to be bracing?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

very true... the moments created by the forces the chassis exerts as the car flexes at those points would seem to make bars with those type of pivots weaker

 

Heh, i didn't even look at the bar from a structural standpoint... it looks to fit into the jdm/showcar/Ibuyracecarlookingstuffbecauseithinkitscool genre.

 

From what I took in, the design was derived from cusco. As far as the pivots are concerned, from what I know from cusco, it was designed this way in order to incorporate those individuals who drive their cars on the street and have older vehicles so they may have some leeway from a "pristine" car that has not ever seen any track action.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CoolGuy160 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">From what I took in, the design was derived from cusco. As far as the pivots are concerned, from what I know from cusco, it was designed this way in order to incorporate those individuals who drive their cars on the street and have older vehicles so they may have some leeway from a "pristine" car that has not ever seen any track action.</TD></TR></TABLE>

That really isn't making alot of sense to me. The fact that it carries over from cusco kinda reinforces my thoughts though, just because of their 6pt bolt in cages O' uslessness.

No offense, I've just seen so many strut bars with flexible joints... which they really shouldn't have. No reason to have any flex points, even for street vs show vs roadrace etc....

 

playing the devils advocate...Once the through bolts are torqued to a reasonable ammount, how would the bar pivot on its bracket since the bracket is crushing the small tube at the end of the bar? Seems like it wouldent move at all to me. You would have to have one strut tower move a signifigant distance up or down (relative to the other one) to put enough torque on that joint to cause it to slip. I would be more concerned with the base plate flexing.

 

you aren't going to get that bolt very tight.

Now after doing alot of research and poking around, there is stress put on certain area's of the chassi from the suspension. But from everything i have seen, (and tested my self) a bar like this wont do anything.

what would be better is to have the bar slip into a metal sleeve and then bolt in in that way. but again im highly skeptical that it would do anything.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bailhatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">playing the devils advocate...Once the through bolts are torqued to a reasonable ammount, how would the bar pivot on its bracket since the bracket is crushing the small tube at the end of the bar? Seems like it wouldent move at all to me. You would have to have one strut tower move a signifigant distance up or down (relative to the other one) to put enough torque on that joint to cause it to slip. I would be more concerned with the base plate flexing.</TD></TR></TABLE>

your still gonna flex it. once it flexes a little bit it serves no purpose.

seems like another bling product to me.. ride the CF bandwagon

 

ya maybe it does suck. Im just throwing ideas around. Seems like it would be exposed to few different types of forces. I think it might work ok for some, not so well on others. As for the style, its most deffinatly not my taste.

 

in my opinion this piece is like any other piece of crap you see on ebay but its real deal cf...puts the bling factor much high props on the nice piece and construction tho love the cf but i think password front brace is much nicer (form and function). ah if only we can get best of both world if only this cf NRG would mate with the password bar and have kids then the final product would be hotness!!!

 

good ****, i have the jic magic carbon fiber bar, and i thought it was the only bar that came in carbon fiber, now hella other company coming out with it