FRONT Chassis bar or Strut bar?

[RtN]

Which one would be better and I think a lot of people are getting confused about them being the same thing?

for e.g a private seller was telling me that this is a strut tower bar, but not blaming him coz sites call it a "strut tower bar" too. This is not a strut tower bar am I correct? but a front chassis bar?

http://tunerzine.com/coverage/194/images/_MG_1937.jpg

maybe should sticky it so people don't get confused.

[string]

Same thing different mounting holes. Who cares.

I'd call that a "front upper strut bar" because everyone instantly knows what and where it is, and what it's purpose is. "Front chassis brace" leads to confusion (this thread case in point) - we all love clarity.

[RtN]

are you sure same thing? one directly mounts onto the tower and one onto the body and doesn't actually sit on the struts?

[chargeR]

Well that car doesn't have struts in the Mcpherson strut sense, only springs and dampers. So one might consider 'strut brace' a misnomer.

As far as braces for Hondas go Mugen are among the best as they are usualy one piece and nearly indestructable unlike some of the other flimsy garbage on the market. Their benefits on a street car are still dubious however.

[JohnL]

are you sure same thing?

I have to say I haven't heard them called 'front chassis bars', but the two things you describe are more or less the same thing, just slightly different in mounting detail.

I call them tower braces (suspension towers), largely because they don't brace the 'struts' because the Honda double wishbone suspension doesn't have struts, it has 'coilovers' (i.e. spring / damper units). Even with McPherson Strut suspensions the braces don't brace the struts, they brace the towers to which the struts are fitted...


one directly mounts onto the tower and one onto the body and doesn't actually sit on the struts?

It doesn't matter, they 'both' mount onto the sheet metal of the tower, just in slightly different places on the towers.

[JohnL]

So one might consider 'strut brace' a misnomer.

Like me, but I'm rather pedantic...


Their benefits on a street car are still dubious however.

I beg to differ...

[chargeR]

I beg to differ...

I knew you were going to call me on that one :p. I think that I could tell the difference in driving feel when I installed my Mugen front strut bar, the front end felt slightly more crisp. This is with very high spring rates btw. I only call the benefits dubious because I don't think it made my car faster on track and I doubt that the average street user really benefits from their use except as bling and in the way they change driving feel.

[trism]

They may be different things, and even though the double wishbone suspension doesnt have a strut per-say, people still know what you are talking about when you mention a strut tower. Everything knows that it is the two things either side of the engine bay that the suspension mounts too


then there are two types of braces. one that mounts directly to the top of the suspension, like this
http://www.mz3.net/articles/images/164-dinan_strut_brace_c.jpg
and one that mounts to the tower itself, like the pic above

no matter where you look they will be called a strutbrace, even if it isnt 100% correct, people still know the meaning

a chassis bar will conjure images of something similar to this

http://www.corsportusa.com/store/catalog/images/dc5lowfront.jpg

[Chi]

Just call it an Engine bay brace.

Done...

[55EXX]

i say tomato mates say tomato

same thing

but if i were to say one or the other strut brace = top of coilover
chassis brace tower holes.

brace equals less chassis flex therefore increasing effective spring rate and geometry = good plus bling says me as i read though US ebay trying to source a rear x brace

[RtN]

oh haha i see i think i've used my terminology wrong when I said strut but yeh what I meant was the top of the dampers? but ah i see so there isnt much of a difference of one holding onto the actual shock and one just on a bare sheet of metal on the chassis.

and yeh i see where you're coming from johnL but yeh it hink i've seen places and even JDM Concept for CUSCO has 2 types:

+ CUSCO CHASSIS BRACE (FRONT) - EG EK DC2

+ CUSCO STRUT BRACE (FRONT) - EG EK DC2

But yeh I see... so shouldn't be much of a difference just maybe if they were holding the actual dampers it would be beneficial or not?

[JohnL]

i say tomato mates say tomato

If I say tomato and you say tomato, then I'm right and you're wrong. Just needed to clear that up...

[JohnL]

I knew you were going to call me on that one :p. I think that I could tell the difference in driving feel when I installed my Mugen front strut bar, the front end felt slightly more crisp.

Have you fitted a rear tower brace as well?

I can certainly feel the difference with / without either the front or rear braces (my CB7 has OE springs with Koni yellows set fairly firm). The car is definitely more responsive to change of direction with braces...


This is with very high spring rates btw. I only call the benefits dubious because I don't think it made my car faster on track and I doubt that the average street user really benefits from their use except as bling and in the way they change driving feel.

On road cars, the real benefit of 90% of what we do to the car is to change the driving feel (other than that most cars are perfectly adequate and safe from factory). They are road cars not racers, it doesn't really matter how fast they are or how many 'G' they can pull, only whether or not they put a smile on your face.

On the racetrack you can't make statements like; "I don't think it made my car faster". Only the stopwatch can say if you were faster or slower, and it's not uncommon for change X to make the car feel faster but to actually be slower...

Even so, change X may make no change to lap times, but if it makes the car feel a little more responsive / more controllable / more comfortable to drive (less tiring) / easier on it's tyres / etc, then it's worth having.

[chargeR]

Have you fitted a rear tower brace as well?


Nope. I feel that I should though if only to prevent the rear of my car from folding up like a tin can under the pressure of my silly spring rates.



On road cars, the real benefit of 90% of what we do to the car is to change the driving feel (other than that most cars are perfectly adequate and safe from factory). They are road cars not racers, it doesn't really matter how fast they are or how many 'G' they can pull, only whether or not they put a smile on your face.

On the racetrack you can't make statements like; "I don't think it made my car faster". Only the stopwatch can say if you were faster or slower, and it's not uncommon for change X to make the car feel faster but to actually be slower...

Even so, change X may make no change to lap times, but if it makes the car feel a little more responsive / more controllable / more comfortable to drive (less tiring) / easier on it's tyres / etc, then it's worth having.

I agree with what you have said here. For most the improved feel from a strut brace is a good enough reason to fit one, not for me.

Unfortunately I couldn't test the car back to back with and without strut brace because I fitted coilovers at the same time, and I am too lazy to swap the bar on and off at the track. The reason I doubt it made me any faster is that even if it did make a measurable difference in stiffness of the front end, and I assume it does, I doubt my driving skill would be adequate to take advantage of this improved feel. I don't believe that the stiffness added by the bar would have been enough to significantly affect dynamic alignment when cornering.