I see the difference and notice that the Gen 1 had more than 2 mounting points on each side for the front bar. More mounting points makes sense that it would be more secure but, the Gen 1 bars had joints. Does the lack of joints alone on the Gen 2 make it more rigid and thus better?

Yes, I am at that point of getting bars.

And yes, I Searched and Read a Crapload of posts on the Strut bar subject and the Mugen bar in particular.

Is the Gen 1 or the Gen 2 better in design and theory?

Don't even mention 3 point bars like Carbing, they aren't legal for SCCA solo 2 competition.


Thanks,


A.

 

but carbing makes a 2 point bar also

 

I know this isn't the most technical evaluation, but it seems to me they wouldn't have stopped making the Gen 1 bars if they were "better". Like you said, the Gen 1 bar had joints and changing to a one piece design may have added enough rigidity that they felt the second mounting point was unnecessary. Buy whichever you like, but I don't think it's worth the extra time to track down a Gen 1 bar...Gen 2 seems to work just fine and they aren't as hard to come by.

 

pretty much my feeling on the diff gen bars. I bought the gen 2.

solid, no hinge design. light, and very rigid.

 

Random Question, sorry for the Off Topic: Why is the Carbing bar illegal in those competitions, i was about to purchase this thing.................

 

Does anyone have any better info on the differences and which is stronger, gen1 or gen2?

 

from the design and mounting points, the gen 2 seems to be much more rigid. the gen 1 mugen tower bars were 8 point, four on each side. Also it had hinges and sat a bit higher than the gen 2 which seems less stable. the gen 2 is just a strait across design with awesome welds and fits perfectly on the stock locations. the gen1 mounted on the stock locations and the struts. guess they thought just a strait bar across was more sturdy.

 

It has a third mount that bolts to the firewall, which is illegal in SCCA competition.

Austin

 

My Gen1 Rear upper strut is two piece (similar to the three piece gen1 front strut) and is most definitely stronger and more straight than then gen2 rear upper strut.

I 'thought' (but do not know) that the Gen1 Front bar bolted onto the shock tower as well as the other mounting points. True?

 

how so? the gen2 rear strut tower bar is STRAIT across design, as where the gen 1 uses those same mounting brackets which make the tower bar sit higher, so how is it stronger?

 

The gen1 rear that i have is straight across. no bend whatsoever. the two pieces bolt together near the Driver's size shock tower. IMO, it looks much more 'meaty'. I could be wrong of course.

Anyhoo, what about the front? Is there an advantage to one over the other?

A good bar would ideally be attached to the shock tower bolts in front, like the spoon bar. This led me to the conclusion that the Gen1 Mugen bar would be more firm.

Chris - confused as usual.

 

if the gen1 is an up-n-over design like the jdm oem rear strutbar, then the gen2 is certainly stronger because it is a straight bar with no joints. however, i doubt the difference is at all detectable for any driver.

chris n, you can't have my shiny new bar!

 

Magic #9 - you can't have my shiny new bar either!

 

actually that is wrong. a tower bar being bolted on the shock bolts will not affect anything. the reason for a tower bar is to decrease flex in the body when making fast turns. so the points where the stock and mugen are located are a much better place to mount than the spoon.

 

so which one is this?

(I'm assuming it's GenII...)

 

Those are gen2.

Gen1 rear looks just about the same, except the left mounting bracket attaches to the bar with two bolts.

 

Anybody who has this setup has to cut the back platic panels of the car right? If so, im glad I got the OEM one...

 

yes you cut teh plastic, i'll post pics, it looks REAL clean

 

The Mugen rear strut tower bars and others like it (that go straight across rather than up and across) are most effective.

If you care at all the aesthetics of the rear bar, you're doing it for the wrong reasons.

 

cheaper to make