Never had the slide right problem, nor a problem beating Cobras either.;)

 

cant be to hard to make beam plates..

 

Ok...I'm not gonna call anyone out here...

BUT: Anyone with a ZR1 is probably performance minded and will want to add any gimmick they are sold on...then they will swear it made a difference. Especially if the weather was good on the day they ran the track. :D

If GM decided that using hardening silicone on the torque tube provided the correct stiffening of the beam...then that's all it needs. I will go the "I can afford $1.79 for a tube of caulk" route myself next time my rearend is out.

Oh...BTW: My 87 with 108K mi has not problem on shifting when the tires break traction between 1-2 either.

 

and does your car produce 300+ rwhp? How about powershifting 2-3?

 

Hey
I have them on my LT4, I cant say they make as much differnce as the cross bar made, but my theory is this: Anything that makes the frame stiffer is good.
I am also waiting on my camber brace I am hoping the combination works to get even better results. I plan on trying autocross this summer and getting to the track.
As to whether or not they are worth the cost, thats subjective. I have plenty Of friends tell me the car is'nt worth it. But my Humble opinion is this this, I work 60 hours a week and I take care of ALL my finacial obligations first, if I want to spend a hundred bucks on something experimental for my vette, why not its my only hobby, and its my cash.

Gonzo

 

Whoa arn't we getting a little to upset here. BBA I do sell these at work which I do not own. I know Bill and I know everyone is skeptical about these plates. Yes they work, no they are not pretty. If anyone thinks they can make them for less, probably assuming you own a TIG welder and know they layout of the plates. That would not be fair to Bill at ZR51 Performance in that he had the great idea and the knowledge to do this. Also G.M. realized the same thing and if you own a late 96' 6spd Vette yours has them on it. You will not make more horsepower with these, they are a driveline mod. However they do help get the horsepower to the ground, and for those that just can't seem to understand that and it's benifits well I'm sure that you can spend your money on a throttle body spacer instead. As for me my beam plates work and I am glad I have them on my Vette.

 

On hard 1-2 shifts my tail kicks out and I will be buying a set of these to try for my car in the next month or so. My car is pretty much my main obsession - er, I meant hobby... ;) and the $150-$180 I'll spend on the brackets is not much of an issue for me. It won't be the only part I've bought for my car that people think is overpriced for what it is either. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Not a flame but food for thought - using an intake designed for a 305 on the 350ci L98's from 85 to 91 was good enough for GM too, maybe the silicone sealant and OEM bolt arrangement is functional but not the ideal setup...

JMO :)

 

Anybody know when they made the change in 96?

 

I have them on my 89. My car does track straight I have to say. I thought they were a rip off at first but my car does not kick out when I shift hard. With the 396 its hard NOT to break the tires loose even during normal driving.

 

I don't understand the performance issue here. I've had them for a while - from Exotic Muscle in Phoenix/Tempe AZ. They make bolting things back up much easier than the stock nuts because they don't have to be held in place with a wrench in a place so hard to reach. The end result is usually that the beam doesn't come loose (many previous threads about shifter lift - most turn out to be loose beam attachment). They're worth the $$ if you ever remove it again and they make getting it properly tightened much easier. However, compared to properly installed stock beam bolts & nuts, I can't see how there could be a performance difference. To me, they're worth the money, but not as a handling mod. Just my humble opinion and $.02.

 

I have a 90 DRM 450 HP ZR1. even with a roll bar and the Comp TA
315s in back, I noticed a difference with the plates. keep in mind that when you shift hard at high RPMs, the chassis flexes and the rear moves around more. MANY of the C4s have the beam bolts loosen up, and the bolts can dig into the beam too (that's why GM uses the goo under the bolts). on my car with 4.10 gears, the car sidestepped pretty bad on on the 1 -2 and even the 2 - 3 shift when really gettin on it. the plates help the car plant the torque better by minimizing beam flex and helping put the power to the pavement. on my car, I need all the traction I can get!!!

IMHO the plates work very well and are worth doing on any C4. they stiffen the car up, and make installation of the beam much easier.

Contact me if you would like a set, I have a few sets left at the "intro" pricing from 6 months ago.

Ron_Kreigh@hotmail.com

FYI, I've been keeping track of folks that have installed the plates, and so far everyone has noticed an increase in stiffness during hard shifts. many were surprised that this small inexpensive mod could make a difference. but it's just simple engineering (not snakeoil). let me know if you are interested. Happy New Year!!! keep the rpms and the shiney side up!!!

 

Do you realize what you just said?

Here...so, if GM used them in 96...how can your friend claim he thought it up?

The biggest problem I have here is your 'bud' at ZR51 or whatever, seems to be a RIP OFF artist. These things are worth MAYBE $25.00...TOPS.

I wonder how much GM charges for the ones on the '96?


Hey...you know, if you REALLY wanted to help out people... you'd have the part number the 96 uses so we can order them straight from Chevy...at what I would think must be a huge savings over the RIP OFF artists price.

But that would be wrong to your 'business ethics' now wouldn't it?

 

"if you own a late 96' 6spd Vette yours has them on it."
Huh? :eek:
This is the first time I've heard of this out of all the post on these things.
I replaced the clucth myself on my 96, did not see anything like mentioned.
Snake, can you explain what they look like? Are they located on top or bottom of the bolt holes? So are you telling me my 96 does not need the beam plates?
Thanks :cheers:

 

I'll only comment on your opinion of the value of these plates with my opinion on their perceived value.

Both RKreigh and Bill Boudreau have sent me pics of these brackets. They are not solid chunks of stainless cut to size and drilled out. They are several pieces of stainless welded together. The process does not look to be a two minute job from start of manufacturing to finish, so to speak.

For me, I will hand over my hard earned $ for a set for the following reasons:
1. I haven't heard a bad thing about the work or products of ZR51 perf. anywhere except in threads on this forum about these plates - the negative comments never come from people who have sampled his wares - only those who haven't.
2. I believe Bill developed these and believe I should support innovators by spending my money with them rather than giving to somone else ripping off their idea or trying to duplicate their idea at home.

As far as these plates being fitted as standard on 96 models - this thread is the first time I've heard that and I'm not too sure if that is the case.

JMO. Peace.

 

Why does everyone think it is such a great innovation to develop these plates? They fulfill a very simple need - to make it easier to put the car the car back together. Then by a stroke of marketing genius someone suggests that "hey, these things improve the structural integretity of the drivetrain" and BAMM another $179 gizmo is born.

They definitely make the car easier to work on. Do they increase the structural rigidity of the drivetrain? NAH, I don't think so. Wishful thinking maybe. I would suspect if there were a problem with torque beam flex then the holes in the torque beam would eventually become elongated. Has anyone EVER noticed that the holes are elongated in their torque beams? I for one, have not. IMHO, if the holes are not elongated, then the torque plates cannot fix a problem that does not exist.

 

The above is an assumption. All I can say is they work and I am not dreaming. They capture the side kick energy and force it down which translates to better traction. Better traction means better ET.

How true!!


[Modified by ericcer, 2:38 PM 12/31/2001]

 

Right...

Like, I'm going to go right out and spend $180 ( which I can imagine the real purpose of this thread is supposed to convince me to do ), just to see if the plates cure a problem my car does not even have?

My bolts seem to be staying quite tight by themselves, thank you. :D

 

OK, I'll buy some of it "MAYBE" but please explain to me how is can be when you have NO PINION DEFLECTION. The main lose of traction in most conventional rears is due to pinion/spring wrap-up, Thats the advantage of IRS, you don't get that condition, so how can this product help????????

 

I am not trying to convince everyone to go out and buy them. :rolleyes: ONLY the people that are experiencing this problem. It is kind of an expensive thing to buy if you really don't have the problem just to try out. If you don't have the problem forget about beam plates.

I understand pinion deflection and angle as it relates to traction. However, this is the first IRS performance car I've had so I am no expert in this matter. I am just telling you guys what I experienced. I suggest you email Bill (billb@zfdoc.com) at Z51 Performance so he can explain.

uh, wrong :smash:


[Modified by ericcer, 3:03 PM 12/31/2001]

 

Based upon what I've read I just ordered a set of these plates. My 93 Vert kicks out to the right with both
the 1/2 as well as the 2/3 shift.But then again I'm running more than 400rwhp. If these babys do the job I'm
happy. If not, only one less dinner out with the wife. No big deal.
When you read what appears to be an ignorant reply to a post from some one who merely wants to read his thoughts
in print consider checking out his background as posted on the forum. It usually answers a lot.
Have a HAPPY NEW YEAR.