on an rt? are fronts more effective than rears? do you notice the difference?
thx peeps
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
are strut braces worth the money
- Thread starter tomtom-070526
- Start date
on an rt? are fronts more effective than rears? do you notice the difference?
thx peeps
thats a damn fine point bambam!
Renault Laguna Coupe
I think they do - I bought a ktr rear brace for mine and Im convinced it makes a difference. Just waiting for the front one now.
Renault Laguna Coupe
All of the Clio Cup race cars have them. nuff said.
Mk4 golf gti
surely they make the car stiffer so give less body roll so beeter handling
surely grip and understeer is solely down 2 the tyres how gd they r there size how much thread etc
the tyres are not loaded anymore than the cars been designed to. Manifacturers do not include a floppy chassis setting!
What puyts load on the tyres is the weight of the car (you then have the multiplication of weight due to G force) and the tyres grip with the road. On ice theres very litle loading on the tyres on a super hot track then the surface grip is increased and thus the tyres are loaded more.
The 19s better and has the space for the strut the clio doesnt and as it was designed for pensioners it never got one
Teh stiffer the shell the more effectively the suspension and tyres work due to themn being used as they are meant to be. Thsi results in improved handling.
Grip and understeer are down to more factors than just the tyres.
Jesus!
What a field day!
Chassis rigidity has nothing to do with roll, understeer has nothig t do with strut location or rigidity, clio cup racers run them cause slick can generate higher loadings and thus flex the shell more, creating more unwated geometry changes durnig corners. Eliminate unknown and unwanted geometry changes and your more able to accurately know and setup a car for what you want.
Braces dont load tyres, although you can set the brace to load the strut top if needed.
The whole point of a strut brace is to purely ELIMINATE unknown movements withing the shell. Otherwise known as flex.........if you know the flex, you can work with it to give beneficial geometry changes, but its hard to test and quantify.
Motorbikes during the early 90s were getting massively stiff, Yamaha went bonkers and made a frame that just didnt flex, it was horrid to ride and jsut didnt work. Nxt year they designed a more floppy chassis.
Honda moved form the single swinger as it was heavy and flex was random, the twin rail braced swinger allowed them to engineer in flex for both lef tand right handers, allowing the tyre to sit more upright than the bike itself.
Strut brakes dont do much if you dont know what you want form your suspension. If your car is designed to roll understeer, a stiffer chassis will amplify the designers intentions.
have fun!
LOL Ben youre right. And Chris Im sure you didnt quite say the same thing...especially about the Clio being for pensioners...ROFL considering the 19 is a right grandads old family car, plenty of room for the kids and a couple of picnic hampers in the boot!
Anyway you all forgot the best use for a strutbrace in a Clio - somewhere to lean on when youre working on a hot engine / manifold. I cant even count the number of times Ive needed that. Plus if youre trying to warm up a nitrous bottle you can wedge it between the brace and the bulkhead and use the manifold heat to get it up to pressure without actually putting it too close!
Quote: Originally posted by BenR on 15 July 2003
Chassis rigidity has nothing to do with roll, understeer has nothig t do with strut location or rigidity, clio cup racers run them cause slick can generate higher loadings and thus flex the shell more, creating more unwated geometry changes durnig corners. Eliminate unknown and unwanted geometry changes and your more able to accurately know and setup a car for what you want.
Surley more rigidity would mean stiiffer suspension (The twisting of the chasis would have the same effect as suspension). Stiffer suspension would give more sliding (excess energy is now lost through tyres sliding rather than suspension springs) and hence more understeer if on front. Stiffer should be more responsive though.
I still think it would be good to fit, the suspension could just be adjusted to suit. I heard that large engine cars (cosworth apparently prone) with weak chasis can sag from jumps etc. causing an increase in camber which could be the cause of mine tramlining and that a strut brace should prevent this.
As Chris & Ben said, too many variables, more of an art than a science, so atleast a strut brace would help narrow down the unknown variables when testing.
No, its deffo a science, but the unknown is the twisting values whilst driving, eliminating this unknown allows you more precise control on what you know is happening.
Chassis rigidity, its not going to alter the wheel rate. Stiffer suspension on the wrong surface will lead to more sliding as the primary reason for dampers/springs is to keep the wheel in contact with the rd.......too hard is as you say, too hard.
Cossies dont have the stiffest chassis at all, its old 80s design......
Yeah but imagine a perfectly smooth road, suspension would still help around the bend, nothing to do with wheel rate, unless Im on the completely wrong track.
The unknown will never be eliminated just reduced, the concept of using a torsion bar to stiffen the chassis is a science but in the overall design of the cars handling there are too many interacting variables to simply apply an equation and come out with the perfect handling car. The equation could be applied to a point but the rest is down to testing, compromise and driver preference (which I suppose is also science but to me it seems artisic).
yes, but it helps with the control of weight shift and roll geometry changes.
ANd wheel rate, you related twisting to suspension, stiffer chassis with the same suspension would result in "stiffer suspension" Thus wheel rate being the final suspension rate.
SUre, the variables might never be eliminated, but they basically are with carbon tubs and directional rigidity.
The best handling vehicles (bar aerodynamic aids) are Karts, no matter what anybody says........they are the definitive handling experience (not those pany 4 stroke wankmobiles) and they make do with no suspension at all and an engineered flexi chassis, they used to be stiff, but now they are 2 peice and flexy. which is nice.
Similar threads
