So here's the question - if you add a whole bunch of bracing to your car, can you set your coilovers to a softer setting? And retain decent handling? Are the two values linked in anyway?
I'd like to ride out bumps a bit better, but don't want to go softer on the coils...
How do you define decent "handling"? If you mean you value fast responses to steering input (eg like a kart) above all else then you probably need the dampers stiff regardless, if you mean nicely balanced and controllable at/over the limit of grip you probably would benefit from stiffening the chassis and softening the dampers. Maybe it's really a combination of both of these and the trick is finding the ideal compromise?
Just my view.
Personally I prefer the Lotus approach, softish springs and firm dampers. I'm not sure what the torsional stiffness of an Elan is, but they seemed to handle nicely with this approach.
Also don't forget that any spring has quite a narrow range of critical damping according to; it's spring rate, the suspension design and the weight of the car. Given that coilovers can have a range of different spring rates fitted, I suspect the full range of damping available isn't really appropriate for use with any single spring rate. For example, if you are using the softest springs available, I personally would only be using the softer end of the damper settings.
Quote from: "jvanzyl"So here's the question -
Q1) if you add a whole bunch of bracing to your car, can you set your coilovers to a softer setting?
Q2) And retain decent handling? Are the two values linked in anyway?
Q3)I'd like to ride out bumps a bit better, but don't want to go softer on the coils...
A1) There are loads of settings, 32 on my BC's. I have a fair amount of bracing, though no rear swaybar.
A2)These things are no doubt linked, but much depends on your preferences and your tyres. You will get a much better explanation from someone other than me.. I guess Matt will be able to explain it all.
A3) Once I got my car to drive the way I liked, the ride was harder/ harsher than ideal -though completely doable. Anyhow I bought great seats which solved the problem
See you tomorrow
Bracing doesn't really affect ride comfort. Cornering maybe but only a few select pieces.
You would be able to run softer springs if you have a shock with better valving that has a more digression curve. If you are running a shock like a BC that has linear pistons you will struggle trying to hold the car at corner entry and dealing with a harsh ride. It's a compromise.
Sooo... say you happen to install these:
m https://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/b252803805 (https://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/b252803805) m
and you had tein mono sports, would that improve the over all ride on every day surfaces as well as improving the cars ability to hold "entry" into a corner?
I don't think those braces do much of anything.
Good tires and suspension do all the work. The monosport should be decent however I haven't tested one yet since they are hard to get in the states.
Quote from: "silversprint"I don't think those braces do much of anything.
Completely disagree.
Cant have enough bracing.
All the braces i have fitted have improved the car.
This may go against the majority but ive never been scared of doing that.
Improved how? They are not going to magically make the ride softer. The strut tower braces and the lower from brace have a specific purpose mainly under cornering load but most of the other braces may have more of a placebo affect.
About 10 years ago we took a spyder with every single brace we could find. Took off each piece one at a time put the car through some track laps and roads use. Then we put each piece on individually and repeated. There was no noticeable difference in laptimes or ride.
Quote from: "silversprint"Improved how? They are not going to magically make the ride softer. The strut tower braces and the lower from brace have a specific purpose mainly under cornering load but most of the other braces may have more of a placebo affect.
Subjectively, reduced scuttle shake and improved ride over poor surfaces are the most obvious improvements. Anything that reduces flex in the shell gives the springs and dampers a more stable, better coupled platform to work from. Not all bracing is made equal either.
Quote from: "silversprint"Improved how? They are not going to magically make the ride softer. The strut tower braces and the lower from brace have a specific purpose mainly under cornering load but most of the other braces may have more of a placebo affect.
About 10 years ago we took a spyder with every single brace we could find. Took off each piece one at a time put the car through some track laps and roads use. Then we put each piece on individually and repeated. There was no noticeable difference in laptimes or ride.
I know what it feels like with and without and feels better with front mid and rear braces.
The braces specified above i have never used.
As i said i am sure people will disagree.
How modified was the car you used?
Coilovers turbo etc etc?
Mine was 1zz turbo with coilovers.
Quote from: "silversprint"The strut tower braces and the lower from brace have a specific purpose mainly under cornering load
Can anyone explain what this specific purpose under cornering actually is?
don't know what the purpose is, but I know what the effect is!
Strut brace removes under steer, steering is way sharper and the general rattle of the cabin etc was reduced. Going over bumps and holes became better and the car absorbed the impacts of the road via the shocks rather than the chassis.
It keeps the suspension consistent so it only moves as designed, if the brace is working well you'll get a more consistent feel to the handling as the suspension loads change (i.e in turn in or over bumps) since the wheels are not pointing in different directions as the chassis flexes
Strut braces work because all the load on the suspension is focused on the shock tower. Under cornering load the shock tower can actually move from the stress. The strut brace keeps the towers in their fixed location. Triangulate braces like the stock rear brace work the best. A brace that just connects the two towers together without attaching to the chassis is effective.
According to everything I have seen, the vast majority of cornering load is focused on the bottom link and the point at which it attaches to the chassis. The strut towers see relatively little sideways load, particularly due to the length of the strut. In addition, the sideways load is running in the same direction for both strut towers during cornering ie what cornering load there is pushing both the towers in the same direction for any given corner (not towards each other as people seem to imagine)! So a strut brace would just move with the towers if there is any movement. That is why I don't understand how connecting them together can make a huge difference to chassis stiffness in cornering. Maybe steering feel is improved though?
I installed both front and rear at different times without any expectations. Especially the rear, check my RR thread. I had no interest.
Just pop open the frunk and remove plastics and you tell me whether you think there's room for torsional stiffness improvements. It's a gaping hole!
The front brace stiffened the front up noticeably. Very noticeably.
So much so that I could do a blind test with someone and they'd know when it went in.
The catch; there has to be little slack in the rest of the suspension for you to notice.
If you're on stock suspension with Toyo tyres I'd dare say you wouldn't notice due to the amount of force being absorbed by the tyre wall flex, suspension, and body flex.
As for the rear. Again,open the engine lid and have a look.
Subframe, anti-roll bar, x-brace, engine in between, firewall, rear crash bar, and the body....
Is adding a little piece of metal between the struts really going to help?
I didn't notice a thing. Not one. I removed the x-brace and left the strut brace. No change.
Maybe on Ohlin dampers on a track with an experienced track driver?... Dunno.
The key point is torsional improvement IN CORNERING. As I say, the towers both move in the same direction under cornering so linking them together with a brace can have little to no impact. I would expect that the force differential, created during cornering, between the two towers is about equivalent to a fairly heavy man pushing on the side of the car. If the towers move in this scenario I'd be very surprised.
Steering feel may be improved but getting more rigidity to resist cornering forces I doubt very much.
I don't think both tower's would move in the same direction to be honest.
But as I have no data to back that up, I'll stick with bum-metrics s:) :) s:)
Quote from: "shnazzle"As for the rear.
Subframe, anti-roll bar, x-brace, engine in between, firewall, rear crash bar, and the body....
Is adding a little piece of metal between the struts really going to help?
You could say, as for the front.
Front subframe, front anti-roll bar (though no impact), no engine (but it's on flexible mounts so has no impact), front firewall, front crash bar, and the body....
Is adding a little piece of metal between the struts really going to help?
They do though, the cornering force pushes both the tyre contact patches in the same direction in a corner, this force rotates the strut assemblies about the inboard lower mounting points which therefore pushes the strut towers in the opposite direction to the cornering force. Thus, in a left hand corner the cornering force pushes onto the both the tyres from the right, this force then tries to rotate both the struts together to the right around their respective bottom inboard mounts.
Understanding this is quite fundamental if you are looking to tune the chassis.
I don't know. I just know it works s:) :) s:)
Well I wish it didn't because I can't afford a strut brace at the moment, so I'll continue to convince myself I don't need one! And I'll thank you to humour me....
Haha! Well if it helps, you can have my rear brace haha
Thanks for nothing!
My views on the subject.
If you look at expensive cars that offer models with both a conventional roof and a convertible, the cars with a roof go round a track quicker. The convertibles also tend to be heavier as a result of extra chassis stiffening, built in by the manufacturer to compensate for the lack of stiffness supplied by a roof. This is true of such exotica as Lambo's and Astons. If you imagine a series of rectangles going through the cross section of a car from front to rear, there is a tendency for the corners of the rectangle to 'lozenge' as sideways forces are applied. This changes the distance between the corners of the rectangles, affecting the geometry of the suspension.
So bracing will improve your lap time. Whether you prefer a stiff or flexible car is a matter of personal taste, but stiff cars go round stuff quicker.
I was a sceptic about under-bracing until I installed one. The car is actually smoother and more pleasant over the rough stuff, as Scotte said.
The front struts have a lot less holding the towers straight than the back ones do, as Patrick (Shnazzle) points out. I have TRD strut braces front and rear. I've tried the car without the front brace and the difference is noticeable. Haven't performed the same experiment with the rear one. When I get the car back on the road, I'll give it a try.
Yes, I accept the front strut brace makes a noticeable difference to the feel of the car, my real question is, what exactly is it improving, steering feel? Static torsional rigidity? Dynamic torsional rigidity?
The point of my constant whining is that the reason usually quoted as being behind the improvement seems so massively unlikely to be correct (reduced flex resulting from cornering forces) that it makes me question the whole thing.
Also I'm not convinced about the relative rigidity of the rear v front towers. The strut towers are welded on to the firewall at the front (about the best place they could possibly be for rigidity) and they are set back separated away from the firewall at the rear so there is potential for movement between the firewall and the towers. This may be a reason Toyota only fitted a rear brace?
The two are not mutually exclusive; "better" steering feel can only come from reducing any dampening of the feedback from the wheels to the steering wheel. I.e....stiffer front end.
And oem cars are built with that flex in mind anyway.
Toyota obviously did realise they made a mistake on the front end when they released the facelift, as they added more bracing to stiffen the front.
Agreed, but yet they still didn't think it was necessary to fit a strut brace. Even though that would have been the easiest one to do....?
Yet Toyota Racing Development, who are proper engineers (not just aftermarket bling producers) saw fit to make very strong front and rear strut braces. Unfortunately, you have to cut the front plastics to get the thing in. There's a knock-on effect on production if it were to be included in the production car. There was no knock-on consequence from the change to the front under-brace.
It's not so much 'Toyota made a mistake' as they made an economics based production decision.
I suggest you follow the scientific method. Come up with an hypothesis and then conduct the experiment. Hypothesis you have. Others have conducted the experiment and you seem to be the lone voice, so far.
All I can say is; 'try it you'll like it'.
And a knock on effect for added stiffness in the steering s:) :) s:)
Most people don't want "steering feel". They want smooth, bump-free, almost feelingless steering.
To be honest, I desire this from out family car. I just want it to get me from a to b in the most amount of comfort and safety with as little input from me as possible.
As C says, try it... All the cool kids are doing it s:) :) s:) haha
Just as an aside - I got my UR front strut brace for £50 off of gumtree.. I'm sure if you call around the breakers (Andy, Deano, D1ck & maybe that guy in Birmingham) they will more than likely have one they can offer you for similar money.
I added it to my car when it had the tired old front suspension, front polys and Toyos and it was phenomenal in terms of the difference it made.
One day I'll try one out and see how it goes.
And then we will all point and laugh at you s:) :) s:)
My trd braces look nice! Does this help????
In all seriousness I put an ultra racing front brace on kates car and the difference in corning/turn in was very noticeable. The matts/tte mid brace also makes a massive difference. As Carolyn suggests, try it with and without and see what you think. I'm sure someone would let you borrow a front brace to put on your car (only takes 5 mins to swap) then you can see for yourself.
Quote from: "shnazzle"And then we will all point and laugh at you s:) :) s:)
That's brave talk from the man who thinks the struts lean in opposite directions going round a corner s:shock: :shock: s:shock:
I never said that!
Quote from: "lamcote"The key point is torsional improvement IN CORNERING. As I say, the towers both move in the same direction under cornering so linking them together with a brace can have little to no impact. I would expect that the force differential, created during cornering, between the two towers is about equivalent to a fairly heavy man pushing on the side of the car. If the towers move in this scenario I'd be very surprised.
Steering feel may be improved but getting more rigidity to resist cornering forces I doubt very much.
Although you are correct that the towers deflect in the same direct. You are assuming they deflect equally. The inside and the outside wheels see different loads in different stages of a corner. Linking the towers reduces the difference.
The amount the towers move is absolutely tiny. We are talking mms. However the stiffer the suspension, stickier the tires, higher the cornering loads, the greater the force on the tower.
Also under braking the towers can move towards each other.
I'm not assuming they deflect equally, I am assuming there is a variance of deflection that is somewhat "equivalent to a fairly heavy man pushing on the side of the car". If they deflected equally there would be no "force differential" at all. The point I am making is that the level of this force is so low that it can't need extra bracing to deal with it, otherwise you would be able to move the towers by pushing them, I don't know about you but I can't do that.
As I have said, I accept that the brace makes a difference to feel but it is not due to additional cornering rigidity for the towers.
On a side note, you know what I feel is the biggest impact on handling?
Temperature.
The difference in how taught the body feels between a hot and a cold day is phenomenal.
It ranges from bouncing off every bump to feeling like I need to put my damping up a good 10 notches
Interesting article.
Pretty much sums up my thoughts.
m http://news.bimmerworld.com/is-a-strut-brace-worth-it/ (http://news.bimmerworld.com/is-a-strut-brace-worth-it/) m
In my opinion the mr2 is a car that needs it. Especially after 65k+ miles on the clock and 10 years of metal fatiguing, on top of the structural rigidity built into the car
That is very interesting. I also noticed an article on the new BRZ STI today in which Subaru talked about chassis bracing specifically being added to improve steering feel.
Also I hadn't linked temperature to the feel of the car but now you mention it I think there could be something in that.