Pacifist pinko. You must be Canadian.

 

 

First I apologize for not being clear enough. The first link was to show a part ASM also makes. The second link was to show a product J's racing makes which is why I titled it J's racing.

Now heres the problem(s):

1. It (the piece made by Cusco which attaches to the subframe) doesnt matter if the material is the same; the part is useless and doesnt improve ANYTHING. Besides material and color I dont know how they are different.

2. Fender braces are useless; admit. Regardless of design they dont do sh1t.

 

Tonight on the Daily Show.

Stewart: What do you suggest we do? (about leban)
Jason Jones: What we? I'm Canadian, everyone loves us.... That's right john.... That's right, we're like the worlds gay friend...

 

All I know is that after I added my STB, I could take freeway ramps at double the posted speed and hit speedbumps at 45mph without feeling it. I don't care what sort of double collarbone suspension my car has, companies wouldn't simply make identical parts for every single car knowing people will buy them, even for the vehicles they do nothing for...

[/sarcasm]

Come on guys, STBs are pretty, fairly cheap, and keep you from leaning on important parts of the engine when you're working under the hood. Heck, even if the extra bracing has a .5% impact on rigidity, that's still more use than 90% of the crap people put under the hood to dress things up.

I think it's LONG been proven they yield less results than x-braces, sway bars, coilovers, or just about anything else handling related. Can we please just stop fighting?

 

Krazik, just buy a STB so when it comes time for someone to buy it, they have a new excuse.... "krazik has one, it means it works."

 

Notice the complete absence of any cross brace from wheel well to wheel well? The Type R needs the bar to be the top of its four sided box. As is obvious by the picture, it cannot have the same type of direct bracing the S2000 does as it would run straight through the engine. It's only the mid-ship (i.e. behind the front wheels) placement of the F20C that allows the S2000 to have this brace.

 

It already exists out there on the web (and this guy had much more time on his hands than me ) :



In this image, F1 is the force of the wheel on the Road, F3 is the force needed to balance the moment around the lower joint (M = Fd => Fd = Fd => F1*L2 = F4*L1), and F2 is the force that oposses F1 and F3, to keep everything from flying apart.

The diagram leaves out the strut forces, which add additional components to both F3 and F2. The total horizontal force at the top of the strut then works to bend the chassis over the moment arm of L1. A deflection here changes the angle of the strut. Since the strut actually defines the top of the suspension geometry here (versus the upper a-arm doing so in double wishbone), this changes the suspension geometry. In this case, having a strut bar to resist that deflection would be very beneficial.

 

Thank you for providing the explanation.

I'm new here but reading this thread gives me the sense that a few of you "veterans" have the typical racing ego that comes with seat time. If you guys don't want to answer the question, please don't. Your sarcasm really deters questions being asked (perhaps that is the idea here and maybe the new comers should just leave and let you guys play amongst yourself).

 

It's the arrogant jerks who make this forum useful. Otherwise it would quickly become "S2000 Talk" or "Street Encounters".