PLRX

anciano

And that is exactly the point I was trying -- with apparently unsuccessful satire -- to make. The poster said he couldn't think of any reason NOT to do it, but a lot of us can think of 500 good reasons, and we would need a pretty good reason TO DO it. I don't know why he's offended that I consider him so stinking rich he can spend money like a drunken sailor on shore leave. He ought to be flattered by my obvious envy.

Which is not to say that the contraption is not worth every penny; but for him to casually insinuate that laying out $500 is not even worth a passing thought just strikes me as a little snooty.

But why should anyone at the country club care what a middle-class guy like me thinks? They will only let me in as a caddie; "Hey doctor, I recommend you use your nine iron and stick it up your..."

RUU

I've got 3 DVD players and 2 satellite receivers that I paid $400 each for collecting dust in my basement. I knew a few people whose bar tab for a normal Friday night was $200+. $500 seems like a damn bargain to me!

Vette Daddy

Sounds to me like you have a chip on your shoulder about $$$. You're right, $500 isn't a big deal to me. Rich? Not hardly.

Now, hand me that nine iron so I can stick it up YOUR.......

Sweet 90

red L98

PLRX

anciano

Sorry, I don't golf 'cause, as I said, they won't have me at the country club. Somebody must have told them that my first ride was a Farmall instead of a Lexus.

But I must say, I am very honored that I get to share these pages with such successful and wealthy fellow Corvette owners. I may have to rethink my status in society.

93Rubie

Anciano, I hear ya. $500 is $500. If I'm going to spend $500, I want to KNOW that I am buying WILL work. I want facts/data more evidence then hearsay and one picture.

My Corvette doesn't have the marketing BS stuff on it HP gains or whatever. The adjustable TPS sensors and Air Foils come to mind. I work too hard for my money to just throw it away on a whim. I do spend it, but I do hard research first, then spend on a good product.

Now this product my be very good, but it has not yet proven that to me. Until it does I'm not going to spend $500 on it. More continued use of it and positive reports from others may sway me. However, until more people use it, I'll stay on the fence.

I doubt my car will be any faster 1/4 mile or auto-x with it on compared to it off.

However, the squeak and rattles, it may be worth it.

red L98

So will i lose the squeak and rattles now since i have a 12pt cage in my car ?

pologreen1

Pics or IF you were an established user here I would believe and so would many others. In the mean time it comes across as trolling or nuthugging. These styles work for cars with a subframe, but the car is a frame so it needs cross bracing to stiffen. I don't doubt it helps some what and I don't dispute Kilebrew was a smart guy, he is also all about making money.

Vette Daddy

I've experienced driving a C4 without the brace and then with the brace installed. There is a noticeable difference in reduction of cowl shake. That's what sold me, for what it's worth.

PLRX

Same here, it does makes a difference. Thats the reason I also installed one in The Ghost.

That Camber Brace may be the reason the front end held up when I went airborne back in October.

cv67

The C4 Gordan Kilebrew Vette2Vette Frame stiffener kit addresses only Lack of Beaming frame stiffness in the stock C4 Corvette Coupe Frame.

It does not take care of lack of Torsional stiffness.

I am sure they do work OK the Kilebrew C4 Frame stiffeners for the average C4 owner & driver.

Jacking up a C4 on one corner proves little.

Need to set up a Dial Indicator to check the Beaming & Torsional deflection with bolt on add ons like frame stiffeners & camber braces.
A right angle load of 200lbs at the end of a 6 foot piece of rectangular 3"X2" steel fastened at the front frame horn,
Check frame deflection before & afterwards at the middle & rear of each main frame rail.
Subtract the difference.
You will see results of actual frame deflection improvements.

Only way to address torsional stiffness correct is by adding a 10 to 16 point racing roll cage.
4130 or 4140 Chrome Moly Tubing preferred.
Must be correctly tied into the stock C4 Frame.

Some C4's were better built than others.
C4 Verts had some of the stiffest platform frames.
That undercarriage X brace does little.
Just a backup.
Real improvements are well hidden from the average eye.
Stronger bracing behind the dash on a C4 Vert vs a coupe.
Double steel wall rear bulkhead is another hidden improvement on C4 Verts only too.
All together there are 13 additional braces on C4 Verts only Vs the coupes.
Ended up weighing only 20 lbs more average than the coupe.
And a much stiffer chassis too.

Real test one can make on there own is drive there C4 over a set of railroad tracks at 20 to 40 mph.
Feel the cowl shake & listen to squeaks & rattles.
Then add the Kilebrew frame stiffeners.
Drive over the same tracks at speed & notice difference or not.

A C4 Vert You can drive over a set of railroad tracks at 100 mph & it feels like no big deal at all.
Total control of the car & no squeaks or rattles at all.
Just scrape up the front lower air dam once again.
But worth the quick thrill of fun.

Tom400CFI

Man....not the one that I drove (an '88). It was a wet noodle. SOTP, it felt preety much identical to my '92 with it's top off.

gsvette

I recently installed the vette2vette bars on my 95 ZR-1. I purchased the car with 465 original miles back in January....it is basically new, and I wanted to keep it feeling that way. This is my third and last C4, so I have some experience with these cars.

I am also the Engineering VP for my company and I manage 50+ Engineers on a day-to-day basis across a wide variety of projects. Data determines everything in my business. Data does not lie or need to "feel" good about something. It simply is.

As such, when I purchase anything, the item is evaluated based on the measurable value it has to me which is in turn based on real data. These chassis bars are no different.

After installing them, the subjective difference in the way the car drives with the top off is very noticeable. With the top on, the difference is not as much, but, still noticeable. Reduced cowl shake, fewer squeaks/rattles (95's and 96's are pretty good in this regard already), doors shutting feel more precise.....and just an overall tighter feel.

Of course actual data is needed to back up the subjective impression.

The first "test instrument" I used was my wife. It is a simple matter to loosen the bars and tighten them. She guessed correctly 5 out of 5 test drives when the bars were tightened with the top out. With the top in she was 4 out of 5.

The second test instrument was a $1M Infinity XMS laser alignment system used by one of our military clients. This system was upgraded with the latest green short wavelength lasers resulting in a dimensional accuracy of .0015 in across a distance of 40 feet. After setting up the car inside the frame jig and attaching targets, a 3 dimensional baseline scan was done. The car was well within factory specification.

Then we started to tighten the torsion bars. As we watched the display, it was easy to see why the bars are effective in 2 primary areas:

1) Eliminate deflection in the side beams.

2) Pre-tension the front, middle, and rear structural areas.

The bars under full tension compress 3-5 mm of slop (and this is a new car) out of the front and rear of the car. By pulling the front and rear of the car closer together, fore-aft tension is created, along with torsional tension from front-left to rear-right and left-rear to front-right.

The kit works as advertised. The data does not lie. The kit will stay on my car.

anciano

Your "test instrument" (how does she like being called that?) results sound impressive and I would never contradict wifely judgement.

But I'm not sure I understand the other test. You mention that the car was attached to a jig. How, then, did you test torsional deflection in this static setup -- or for that matter even flex along a linear plane?

I'm also a little unsure of what you mean by "and this is a new car" when it was earlier described as a '95. Perhaps this is just a semantic error.

Anyway, I think we can all agree that this is a worthwhile addition for some, while others may think $500 can be better spent on other improvements.

krackenvette

Nope, its a C4 and its part of its character. But a loud stereo or foamy ear plugs cures the squeaks and rattles.
On the other hand, the 12 pt will definitely stiffen that chassis up.

Zix

The car is described as "new" because it has at, or under, 500 miles on it as stated in the original post. While not "new" it's as close as we're going to realistically get!

93Rubie

Now this is hard to argue with!