This is no different than a discussion about a cam or headers, you put it on the dyno and you have a result. They say it handles better, lets see some numbers. The technology exists to show if the product works as described. No reason for anyone to take it personally or get bent because a few of us losers that don't have it don't believe. Take your pick of data systems and do runs in the car with and without the brace, see if there is a difference in G loads or time. btw I did not start this thread and it was started I believe in reference to how it works for racing not on the street.
What got me started? Larry got me started, and it is a slow day at work.
:jester


[Modified by RX7 KLR, 2:01 PM 7/5/2003]


[Modified by RX7 KLR, 2:03 PM 7/5/2003]


[Modified by RX7 KLR, 2:04 PM 7/5/2003]

 

I ran a bumpy local road here in MD with just the camber brace added. It definitely stiffened up the chassis and kept the front tires in contact with the road over bumps. I noted an absence of bump feed back through the steering on that run.

I received the new shocks before my vacation so I put them on. I didn't expect to get into this controversy and have to prove which did the most for the car. I will say that the combo on an FE1 car improves the roadholding enormously. Anyone sitting on the fence should get them both.

But I no longer have a soft ride, I have the Corvette ride everyone knows from the past.

As for solo, I could run a quicker time in my Honda Si than in my Vette, so what exactly is the point?

 

Ah, another lovely day at the Forum. I might as well wade into the discussion.
Vettes are systems of dynamic, interactive parts. From the factory, they are designed for a given level of performance, with each part engineered to be just good enough. Performance is limited by the weakest link.
Change something and often other parts which were good enought for stock show their weakness. The body/frame should be completely rigid for best performance (but not for crash energy absorption). It is often more like a Slinky with the top off. A Roll Cage with extensions to the front suspension would be ideal, but impractical on the street.
I agree that back to back, with and without skidpad and track tests would give an objective data set for evaluation. Driver subjective evaluations of transient, bump, and limit performance would be useful also. No doubt, results would vary between stock and highly modified suspensions. Anybody got a track and a car for testing?
I also agree about the Vette and weight. Why not make the Camber Brace out of aluminum?
Until we test on the track, let me suggest an experiment. Measure the distance between the upper, forward A-Arm pivot bolts with the Vette on the ground. Then jack up the right front tire 6 inches or so off the ground to load the suspension. Remeasure the distance. I'll buy beer at the next DFW meeting if the measurement is the same, meaning no flex. To be fair, redo the measurements with the Camber Brace. I'd bet they are better.
Reduced flex may or may not translate into better lap times, but all the best racers seem to strive for as little flex as possible.

 

:lurk:

 

Allt hose white braces are on my 89 FE1 car (non-Z51)

 

:withstupid:

 

If the camber-brace was just a smoke screen, I don't think R-D Racing would have so many satisfied customers.

 

True, but there are a lot of these on the market too: http://www.tornadoair.com/index.php
:lol:

 

RX7 KLR, for someone so opinionated about the camber-brace being usless. How come you have never had the ballz to start a thread on your doubts? Instead you let someone else stick there head out and possibly get flamed, then you jump in with useless arguments like your last post.

 

*All* of them, Jeff???

Check out those wedge-shaped pieces between the 45* braces and the side frame rails. My car has the 45* braces, but they are longer than the Z51 braces (because I don't have those welded-in wedge-shaped pieces). My braces are a different part # than the Z51 braces, too.

 

I have been debating whether or not to get the Camber Brace for a couple of months now. I am not an autocrosser any longer and wasn't competitive when I was doing it. However, I do 5 or 6 DE's a year on local road courses and have always wondered if this thing might make me a little faster in the corners.

I have a Z07 car with the stock springs with most of the rubber shaved off it, and it sits about as low as any C4 I have ever seen. It has the 30mm solid sway bar up front and the 26mm solid bar in the rear. I had the FX-3 shocks revalved (Moracca valving), all bushings replaced with ES polyurethane bushings and the FX3 controller and chip replaced with the DRM unit.

I only use Kumho Victoracers on the track and it feels like a very neutral car to me. For this reason, I haven't been able to pull the trigger on this thing yet. I know there are a number of people who have nothing but good things to say about it and I respect that. My car gets driven very little on the street any more so I'm not sure if it would be worth it to me.

Mike

 

RX7 KLR, for someone so opinionated about the camber-brace being usless. How come you have never had the ballz to start a thread on your doubts? Instead you let someone else stick there head out and possibly get flamed, then you jump in with useless arguments like your last post.

I am sure there are many products that I have an opinion on that I never post about. Not a matter of ballz, just saw a post and jumped in. If I was worried about flames I would have said nothing. However your flames show that you have no data to shut me down with, just your opinion.

 

I have yet to see any data that proves it doesn't work.

 

Oh yeah, good point. :troll

 

I dont think its necessary to flame RX7 KLR, I'm the one who started the thread. He's just expressing his opinion and considering this is the 4th of July week end no one should have to reminded every one has the right to express their opinion. I've spent more hours chassis tuning my cars than most people because I've been doing Solo II or road racing Corvettes, an 86 Z51 and a 90 Z51 (ex SS Solo II national championship car) for 13 years. I've built my own alignment equipment, I've track tested, skid pad tested, etc. and I've learned some lessons. Following the herd is not necessarily the right thing to do. Try it, measure it and if its better, use it. But you can only tell if its better if you measure a difference. This procedure is valid only if you make one change at a time. Its known as the scientific method and its how the factory engineers do it. Drawing a conclussion about the performance benefits of a bolt on part by seat of the pants engineering is pure conjecture. I'm not
dissing the camber bar, R-D or the people who've bought one. I'd just like to see some tangible proof that it really has any appreciable stiffening effect. I believe RX7 KLR is asking the same question. Peace Bro!! :D :D :D

 

:yesnod: :thumbs: :seeya :cheers: :flag

 

If you hit hard enough to bend metal, the vector of the impact force has a lot more to do with whether or not suspension parts break than rubber vs poly bushings. Exhibit A ~25% off center glancing blow; Estimated Speed at impact ~30mph:

 

I figured I would add my own personal observation regarding the camber brace. I have a '87 coupe with poly bushings front and rear. I don't race the car ----------- its my daily driver back and forth to work. My daily commute is on 90% secondary roads with a high crown and lots of poor pavement. I have had the camber brace installed for two months now. There is a definite reduction in hood and cowl shake while driving on these poorly maintained roads. Also --------- the removable top doesn't squeak and rattle near as much as it did prior to the brace installation. So --------- just the fact that the hood doesn't shake as bad and the top is quieter is good enough for me to justify the cost of the brace (which really is not that expensive).

 

Interesting thread, I will base my opinions on years of engineering and a trophy position at the (93) Solo 2 nationals in FP....a car I hand built. BTW, I do not have a camber brace.

Number 1 rule in engineering is assume nothing, test it prove it.... Given that, over the years you can learn some fairly basic principles, and without doing any testing just looking at how Dave is tying the upper a-arm mounts/horns together I don't have any doubt that it will eliminate a certain amount of flex in that area.

To me the whole question is not if the camber brace will eliminate some flex (highly likely it will) but rather is it worth the extra weight in an extremely competitive situation like BSP, or even BP?

larrybsp, you appear to be in the BSP crowd these days...do some testing (slalom, skid pad, use pyrometer) with and without the camber brace & report back.


[Modified by superlund, 11:26 PM 7/5/2003]

 

I have the brace on my car and although I don't have scientific proof that it works, I can tell some changes in the front chassis stiffness. My cowl/hood area doesn't jiggle nearly as much as it once did. When I enter my driveway, at a angle so as not to scrape my bottom feeding chin, I do so with only one rear tire on the ground as the other one is up in the air. My interior lights don't come on over hard bumps any longer either. So the car is stiffer.

Scorp - I have the big bar, two 45* braces on my FE1 '93. I'm not sure about the other two braces, but will look the next time I am under there.

AutoXing; I'm still not a good enough driver to provide any sort of scientific or engineering data to back up my lap times. Hell, if I could get two times within .1 of each other on any given day I would be surprised, including practice days. I've let others drive my car and they beat me by over a second. I'll let you drive it next time Larry and see if you do as well with your Z51 as my FE1. Just don't beat me too bad with my own car. :cheers: