Has anyone had any experience with a front strut brace, one that goes between the front suspension at the top. I have scuttle shake and I want to fit a brace under the plastic cover.
ebay is your best friend. Ultra I think is the manufacture. There about £120
I might have my Trd front brace for sale soon if your interested.
Do you have a mid brace fitted?
TTE, Corkys or Matts?
Any of the above are the best way of improving chassis stiffness.
My front brace is TRD which I am happy with although they are pricey.
How much difference do front strut braces make to the overall feel/ handling of the car?
I have just fitted my tein 30mm lowering springs and have not only been impressed with the reduced arch gap s:D :D s:D but also the conering speeds. So i have been thinking about the next handling modification to make.
First stop for handling mods should always be a mid brace. I think matt still sells his type of 120. They're brilliant should have been fitted from the factory.
Quote from: "1979scotte"First stop for handling mods should always be a mid brace. I think matt still sells his type of 120. They're brilliant should have been fitted from the factory.
How easy are they to fit and what kind of difference does the extra stifness translate into on the road? Apologies for my engineering ignorance s:lol: :lol: s:lol:
Matts braces are fantastic the car feels so much nicer on the road one off the best mods for the money
Front strut brace does improve handling and perhaps makes the steering feel quicker or more direct but it isn't in the same league as a mid brace.
If you have a pfl a new cheap mod is to up grade you under brace to a fl one did mine for £40 lots better but on mine I have front and rear top braces matts brace and a fl under brace feels very solid now money well spent
Can't have too much bracing!
Law of diminishing returns applies though.
Quote from: "connorap"Quote from: "1979scotte"First stop for handling mods should always be a mid brace. I think matt still sells his type of 120. They're brilliant should have been fitted from the factory.
How easy are they to fit and what kind of difference does the extra stifness translate into on the road? Apologies for my engineering ignorance s:lol: :lol: s:lol:
I've never fitted one tbh.
Matt did mine at the same time as my turbo.
Think it is just a few bolts and maybe a tiny bit of drilling if it doesn't line up 100%.
Less scuttle shake whole car feels more rigid.
Combine with lowered springs and fresh shocks handles like a dream.
I have to say that I'm not convinced by the need for a front strut brace on our cars for a few reasons.
1) The strut towers are welded directly to the front bulkhead so if the towers can move relative to the bulkhead the addition of a strut brace isn't going to make any improvement because the bulkhead is going to be way stiffer than any strut brace
2) By my estimation, the maximum lateral load that the top of the strut towers will experience during cornering is about 120 kilograms of force. That means that if the strut towers do move during cornering it would actually be possible to move the towers relative to each other by simply pulling hard on one of the strut towers by hand
3) The 3 bolts that hold the struts and any strut brace in place are only, I think, 8 millimetres in diameter which indicates that the designer clearly wasn't expecting any significant lateral loads at this point, which supports point 2 above
4) Any cornering load on the two towers acts in the same direction on both towers so if there was any movement of towers they're actually both trying to move same way as each other so the strut brace actually doesn't have anything to brace against and the brace could simply move along with the strut tops
Just my thoughts, interested to what others think.
I have the Trd front brace and I can say there is a difference in the drive. Less rigid and sharper on cornering.
This might sound weird but I feel the hardtop itself also stiffen the 2.
Quote from: "IO2"I have the Trd front brace and I can say there is a difference in the drive. Less rigid and sharper on cornering.
This might sound weird but I feel the hardtop itself also stiffen the 2.
Hardtop stiffens it more than anything in my opinion, mine is so much better with it on. Made more difference than the chassis brace.
I have a Matt's mid brace & then both front & rear strut braces & still get scuttle shake, I can visibly see the screen shaking.
Hard top bracing is the best s:) :) s:) when i take mine off, i always think something is broken, the shake is crazy, hard top on, nothing at all, i rarely take the hard top off unless its a really nice day because i prefer the drive with the hard top on
Thanks guys.
IO2, how much and how does it fit, does it fit under the plastic cover.
I usually use my car without the hard top fitted and do not drive it hard, just a special day car. With my background I just feel that it could benefit.
No front strut brace I have come across goes under the front plastics.
Quote from: "1979scotte"No front strut brace I have come across goes under the front plastics.
Beg to differ, there was a very nice installation of one from somebody on Facebook which he'd taken time to cut the front plastics to cover the strut tops but had the brace above it.
So it doesnt go under a standard frunk plastic without modification does it?
My ultra has modified plastics.
This is a random one I found on Google
(http://i1247.photobucket.com/albums/gg638/Naths-project/Bracing%20Mods/IMG_1331.jpg)
(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/07/04/78c3d40eb864a7124cd5d4dd3c1dac71.jpg)
Looks like a de stickered ultra
Ps that is the ultra and its one of my cars s;) ;) s;)
Our ideas of fitting under the funk plastics differ.
Obviously where it connects to the struts it has to.
Quote from: "lamcote"I have to say that I'm not convinced by the need for a front strut brace on our cars for a few reasons.
1) The strut towers are welded directly to the front bulkhead so if the towers can move relative to the bulkhead the addition of a strut brace isn't going to make any improvement because the bulkhead is going to be way stiffer than any strut brace
2) By my estimation, the maximum lateral load that the top of the strut towers will experience during cornering is about 120 kilograms of force. That means that if the strut towers do move during cornering it would actually be possible to move the towers relative to each other by simply pulling hard on one of the strut towers by hand
3) The 3 bolts that hold the struts and any strut brace in place are only, I think, 8 millimetres in diameter which indicates that the designer clearly wasn't expecting any significant lateral loads at this point, which supports point 2 above
4) Any cornering load on the two towers acts in the same direction on both towers so if there was any movement of towers they're actually both trying to move same way as each other so the strut brace actually doesn't have anything to brace against and the brace could simply move along with the strut tops
Just my thoughts, interested to what others think.
Have to say I was sceptical about the front brace, for some of the reasons you have listed. I had a 'Corky breastplate' on my car for a few years before I was persuaded to add the tower brace, based on others' experiences on here. I only added a cheap no-name strut from ebay, but there was an immediate reduction in the amount of shake felt through the steering wheel once fitted, allowing much cleaner feedback from the front tyres.
It was surprising how much difference it made - as you can see from the picture, it is very close to the bulkhead - but it really does make a difference.
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2396/5740105153_01dc4ee370_b.jpg)
Note - It is not necessary to remove frunk and radiator to fit the brace s:lol: :lol: s:lol:
My late 2005 car has no additional bracing and runs standard suspension. I experience very little scuttle shake and the car feels great in the corners. Are the later cars different to the earlier ones as I can't imagine a new front or rear strut improving the handling and feel.
I am going to fit coil overs or lowering springs at some stage and wonder if lowered stiffened suspension makes enough changes to the standard set up to warrant additional bracing? Just thinking that stiffer suspension will alter the way the whole chassis moves under force VS the standard set up which may distribute the forces differently.
Cheers
8.8 Spec M8 ISO bolt or stud has a single shear of 3,181Kg, but in the strut configuration it would be subject to double shear loading so would have a shear of 6,362Kg.
The moments of inertia for the towers would be changing depending on a huge number of factors and on whether there is notable transmission of force between the tyres and the towers (although that's going to be subject to mass,velocity,angle,MOI and time)
In effect if you lock something down tight so no movement is possible you won't reduce the forces, all you will do is relocate them somewhere else. (a lesson a few youthful boy racers every year learn at cost of their lives)
So is that a vote for or against a strut brace?
I still can't see how one could be required based on my post above but I am happy to be proved wrong with a good bit of engineering theory, if I can understand it!
hehehehe s:) :) s:)
I'm for them being fitted by the factory or firms who have the required equipment to test stress loads but against just buying them and bolting them on in the garage at home s:) :) s:)
So I am going to assume that I am right and that if there was any benefit to be had on our car, Toyota would have fitted one up front as they did at the back.
TRD did produce one if that adds to your equation.
But TRD exists to make profits whether or not their products actually make any difference is kind of irrelevant to them really, if we buy stuff they are happy.
IMHO all the braces make some difference.
Matt and Corkys seem to be regarded as must haves.
Front strut braces are less universally praised.
Rears even less.
I have Matt and a front TRD and will eventually get rear TRD too.
I have meister r coil overs and the general consensus seems to be the stiffer your springs the more bracing you need.
It's the functional difference between hard and tough,any type of bracing needs to have similar structural properties to the item it is bracing. If the reinforcement is stiff and rigid the forces it exerts are transferred rather than lost+transferred,if the thing it is fixed to isn't built to with stand that transfer of energy then things will bend or break (or otherwise not perform how they should)
It's surprising how much stuff we rely on in a car is designed to move and bend rather than be fully hard and rigid s:) :) s:)
That is sort of one of my points. When you go round a left hand corner the force on the outer (right) tower is pushing it to the right but the force created on the inner (left) tower is also pulling that one to the right.
This means that either the whole brace bar simply moves to the right and has no (or minimal) effect or you could argue that the force from the left tower is now transferred to the right tower (which didn't happen before you fitted the brace) and makes the right tower move more than before!
Quoteand makes the right tower move more than before!
In effect that's what braces should do, it's the equalisation of forces that makes the car behave more laterally stable.The front brace in particular will just equalise the force of the outside tower (right tower on a left hand bend) with the lower forces exerted on the inside tower (hence the reason some front braces have a pivot point.The clamps stay flat and the force/movement is equalised by the fixed distance between the ends.
There is a price though (there always in in Physics) the higher lateral force will make the tyres work harder by transference of those fixed forces that would have been nulled out by the chassis. Grip - grip - grip - grip - ditch with a lot less feedback to the steering wheel to warn the driver. A bit like having wheels adjusted to negative camber, better handing...right up until it doesn't.
Must admit I'm not a huge fan of mucking about with body forces, sure it can make a car handle better....until that fraction goes over the edge and it stops handling at all. Stems back to my time at Janspeed before I shipped off to Uni, The late Keith Odor was a real clever lad when it came to setting up the suspension systems but even he never pushed it too far without double checking everything.
Quote from: "kentsmudger"Have to say I was sceptical about the front brace, for some of the reasons you have listed. I had a 'Corky breastplate' on my car for a few years before I was persuaded to add the tower brace, based on others' experiences on here. I only added a cheap no-name strut from ebay, but there was an immediate reduction in the amount of shake felt through the steering wheel once fitted, allowing much cleaner feedback from the front tyres.
It was surprising how much difference it made - as you can see from the picture, it is very close to the bulkhead - but it really does make a difference.
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2396/5740105153_01dc4ee370_b.jpg)
Note - It is not necessary to remove frunk and radiator to fit the brace s:lol: :lol: s:lol:
Would that not fit the other way around and be a little further from the bulkhead?
Would that make a difference to the rigidity?
HFB
Anybody had issues with installation of the Ultra brace (front strut)? On my 2001 it did not seemed to fit by almost 5cm and no, that car is straight, no accident damage...
Quote from: "PET77"Anybody had issues with installation of the Ultra brace (front strut)? On my 2001 it did not seemed to fit by almost 5cm and no, that car is straight, no accident damage...
If it's that far out it sounds like they may have sent the wrong one?
Quote from: "HFB"Would that not fit the other way around and be a little further from the bulkhead?
Would that make a difference to the rigidity?
HFB
The drilled holes in the brace are not symmetrical and therefore wont line up with the bolts into the towers.
I don't understand the doubt in the function of the front strut braces. Or maybe it only "works" in conjunction with coilovers or aftermarket dampers. But it made such a noticeable difference that I've had to change my steering input to not over-steer. It's crazy direct steering with a front brace.
I've got a nice ultra racing front strut brace- make sure you torque it to the right setting.
I'd totally recommend fitting one, steering was unbelievably sharper and massively reduced the impact of our rubbish roads..
I don't keep the frunk plastic on as I don't want to cut it.
interesting points above - i'm quite new to "modern" sports car having been rallying in the 80's and 90's in basically modified family saloons (Escorts / Sunbeam etc) and driving estate cars and vans on the road! Only 2 exceptions being an Integrale and 911 both of which needed nothing doing!!
I would always use a top and bottom brace in conjunction with each other - In my very unscientific mind the theory was to keep the car "flat" and eliminate the roll / twist effect when cornering ie if the front was twisting under hard cornering the top brace and bottom would work together in minimising it.
Whether i was correct or not, i've no idea but i always found turn in was more precise and more neutral as opposed to understeer then oversteer then tree!! Oversteer seemed less dramatic and more predictable.
I know we're talking mid engine RWD here but i guess the theory is the same
The front upper brace helped my car massively.
It may be more of a "feel" than a actual improvement, although i suspect the grip levels have also increased, but i see it as giving a similar effect to a harder tyre sidewall - the response improves greatly as the flex transfers the forces directly to the tyres, once you are turned and the chassis has flexed it would stop flexing, so loaded grip is similar, it makes most difference in transitions/mid turn undulations.....
Quote from: "lamcote"So is that a vote for or against a strut brace?
I still can't see how one could be required based on my post above but I am happy to be proved wrong with a good bit of engineering theory, if I can understand it!
The worst that can happen is the OP spends £100 and doesn't notice a difference - or feels the difference is not worth £100.
I have a front strut brace which I honestly consider to be a shiny ornament without practical use. It remains on my car purely because I can't be bothered to take it off.
If you want one buy it, and if it works for you great!
Quote from: "MR TWO"Quote from: "lamcote"So is that a vote for or against a strut brace?
I still can't see how one could be required based on my post above but I am happy to be proved wrong with a good bit of engineering theory, if I can understand it!
The worst that can happen is the OP spends £100 and doesn't notice a difference - or feels the difference is not worth £100.
I have a front strut brace which I honestly consider to be a shiny ornament without practical use. It remains on my car purely because I can't be bothered to take it off.
If you want one buy it, and if it works for you great!
If it doesn't, sell it on! You'll probably get 90% back on it
Patrick (Lamcote) came to visit and drove my MRS with TRD strut braces front and rear. He found quite a difference. TRD braces attach at all six points on the strut and are very rigid.
Prob the front he felt.
Rear did absolutely nothing. Could be because of the BCs but genuinely... Had a run before, put it on, then a run after... Nothing.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
Quote from: "Carolyn"Patrick (Lamcote) came to visit and drove my MRS with TRD strut braces front and rear. He found quite a difference. TRD braces attach at all six points on the strut and are very rigid.
He found quite a difference between driving your car and his? Did you drive his car? Is the front strut brace the major difference between your cars?
He didn't come in his car. Mine is a PFL JDM MRS. His is a europsec fl, I believe. you'll have to ask him as I have no comparison. He thought mine steered better,. Could be down to tyres of course. Mt other car is a PFL eurospec bog standard. Does not corner quite as well, but it's not enough of a difference to make up for driver talent.
Carolyn its too bad you didn't get to try his car as the comparison would have been interesting.
But you are right about the difficulty of ascertaining what makes the difference. My strut brace might not be making a difference due to all the other mods/ braces on my car, whilst if it were used in isolation I might feel differently.
It was very interesting to drive Carolyn's car. Mine is a standard facelift car. The pfl felt very much more wobbly with scuttle shake going over bumps etc but it turned very crisply (pretty much the same as mine) in response to steering inputs which surprised me given the very noticeably reduced overall body stiffness which I expected would dull the steering response. I therefore assumed this may be due to the suspension braces helping specifically with steering inputs, rightly or wrongly? I have decent Dunlop tyres all round, although they are 5 years old. I have never driven a pfl without braces, so again I don't have all the reference points covered.
Duh - I misunderstood the implications Carolyn's earlier post...
Lamcote I believe your Fl car is stiffer than a pfl due to brace design improvements. Someone on here will know all the details.
I don't think, given the difference in tyres, that anything can be inferred. The only way to know is to put my braces on Patrick's car and drive it. Or take the braces off my car and drive it.
I'm definitely going to brace mine underneath. I'll make my own 'Mattbrace' and report back.
I still think that driver ability has far more effect than any amount of tweaking.
I couldn't agree more Carolyn. Wouldn't it be great if we could all bolt on some extra skill!
OK Carolyn, put your braces on my car and I'll drive it....... (home)....!!
Compare apples to apples. If you had the time, means and will it would be epic to take the pre-fl and the FL and do a stage by stage review of each. It would take allll day, but it would be amazing to know what each brace does, and try combinations
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
Sounds tempting
Quote from: "lamcote"OK Carolyn, put your braces on my car and I'll drive it....... (home)....!!
I suppose you want me to throw in my gearbox too?
The only way it would mean anything would be to run the same tyres on each car. Which could be done
Ooh yes that lovely gear shift, now you're talking.
So it would mean fitting the braces and swapping the wheels would it? Not the end of the world?
Having played this weekend with my braces quite a bit i have some input to put into this -
However i am on my way out the door to work now, but will update the thread later with my findings s:D :D s:D
You tease...
So my experimentation was as follows this weekend:
No braces - Less initial bite, more screeching from the tyres, neutral handling pushing into understeer.
Front brace only - Lots more initial bite and "feel" on the front end which allowed you to push harder. The rear end felt less planted than the front, almost as though it was being pulled by the front end as opposed to the other way round. Additionally the rear would break traction easier than the front.
I took the front brace off for a control run which made the car back to the first stage.
Front and rear - More neutral handling, even more feel, easier to steer on the throttle controlably. Less oversteer i would say, certainly you could control the back end more delicately.
Front and rear and a hard top - this was a bit strange. The hard top didnt seem to do anything to the handling that I can see however it completely eradicates scuttle shake, which i am sure does have a handling effect but not one i could actively tell.
I will be interested to try the matt brace now, my thoughts are that bracing will have diminishing returns. - so i may be at a good point of stiffness already (stop giggling at the back!)
What suspension are you running? Stock?
The big difference we've seen on the forum is impact of bracing between those on coilovers and thsoe on stock shocks.
Regardless, great findings!
Really interesting information, cheers.
I was a bit skeptical about it since in a coupe-world it doesn't do much (at least so is my experience/cars).
But after reading this I'm intrigued to install front brace. There's no question to me if mr2 needs additional bracing. Will report once I get to it s;) ;) s;)
makes perfect sense - be interesting to hear what suspension and tyre sizes you're on.
I think it also has to be noted that the rigidity of the brace in question is a major factor. This TRD brace has double cross braces (with a plate between them) and very rigid attachment to the strut tops bolting at all three points and with a stiffening cap. It does not have cross bolts at each end of the bar (which must allow some flex).
I suspect that some aftermarket braces are a bit cosmetic.
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae71/CarolynneK/20160705_100106.jpg) (http://s959.photobucket.com/user/CarolynneK/media/20160705_100106.jpg.html)
thats a piece of kit!! I think braces are next on my list!
TRD rear brace. Also built like a stiff stiff-thing.
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae71/CarolynneK/20160705_104550.jpg) (http://s959.photobucket.com/user/CarolynneK/media/20160705_104550.jpg.html)
In the eyes of a professional I think all of the stuff we do is pretty cringe-worthy to be honest.
The question is, at what point does it become more of a detriment to day to day handling?
I've never considered going fully polybushed for example as, well, I don't track the car and it has to deal with normal road undulations, potholes and occasional dead squirrel. And preferably not rattle my fillings out.
Could argue that adding adjustable coilovers with stiffer progressive springs, polybushing, Yoko AD08R tyres and bracing the living crap out of the car makes it all absolutely great for a flat track with designed, controlled and cambered bends with no debris, but you're actually making it less effective for hooning on public B-roads.
I've definitely had moments where my brakes haven't been as effective because of a bad road surface, due to my coilovers. And I've had the back break out because of a bump in the road and the stiffness of the car. The stock car would have performed better in these two very specific situations.
Put it this way, changing my damping on certain b-roads from 16 to 7 points from soft makes the car go from damn near uncontrollable to smooth, steady and stuck on the road.
Road changes to smooth with long sweeping bends and all of a sudden 7 clicks from soft is causing loss of total grip and I have to stop pushing.
So, what's the best compromise? What bracing/suspension/damping setting/tyres/pressures/alignment makes the car suitable for all conditions?
I think the answer is... stock. But taking on the chin perhaps that certain situations are going to be less optimal, what's the best setup to gain handling performance in situations you want it?
This car came with loads of TRD stuff already fitted (probably by a Japanese owner). Would I have bought any of it? Probably not.
I tend to agree that stock is just fine for everyday road use. You can mess with these cars much too much.
With mine being completely standard I think i'll stick with the braces and standard suspension / bushes.
I enjoy it as it is but find it just a bit unpredictable which hopefully the bracing will sort out!!
Quote from: "Carolyn"You can mess with these cars much too much.
LOL. I have certainly found that its been easy ro convince myself to spend time and money changing all kinds of things!
My car -
Stock springs, Yokohoma Parada spec2 front 195/50 15's front, RE040 Bridgestone 215/45 16 stock rears.