I was wondering if anyone is making a strut tower brace for a C6 yet? And/or if it needs one? Just putting this out there because I can't find one and have used them on other cars!! Thanks!

 

Sort of. I have been trying to coax Dave at R-D Racing to make a camber brace, what you are really looking for for this car. He said he fabricated one for my 06 C6Z, last Sep. Never heard from him again.

Maybe if some of the members prodded him, he would crank them out like for the C5s. I could sure use one.

 

I thought only Mustangs used them............

 

And Camaro;s ...

 

...and 350Z's.

Where would you attach one on a C6?

 

Exactly, no strut to mount it to...

Corvettes don't have strut suspensions.

 

No towers, no struts, no place for one, no need for one.

These things are mainly for cars with McPherson (Chapman) struts, where the damper acts as the upper arm of the suspension. There is a long distance between the upper and lower control arm mounts and the upper mounts are usually bolted to some pretty thin sheet metal. Its somewhat dubious that the strut braces actually help in this case, but there is an argument for them.

The C6 uses dual A-arms fastened to a cast subframe and rigid chassis. There is no flex to speak of, so no need to reduce it.

This is (in my opinion) one of the nicest parts of the car - using $500 worth of light-alloy castings rather than $5 worth of sheet metal to hang the suspension on.

 

we don't need them...got pics on c5 i just want to see how they did that....wiht no struts!

 

The camber brace attaches close to the mount of the front pivot of the upper A-arm. It prevents flex, and change in camber unnecessarily, even with the subframe.

There is a better explanation with diagrams at R-D racing's site - please look at that. After reading that and analysing the schematics, I think opinions would carry some weight. I was going to load up a bunch of photos showing how it attaches, but you can see them all there.

http://www.r-dracing.com/Camber-brace.htm

Point being is I am not interested in theory or debate. Like pazzovette, the intention of this thread is procuring this device or getting one of these constructed. So, if anyone knows how to fabricate this, I will pay them for one. R-D dropped the ball on me, and I still want the item, for front and rear.

 

Thanks for the reply...so I guess no one makes one for the C6...not sure it would help my car on the track if they did!!!!

 

Take a look at the "Sharkbar" for a C6 available from Vette Works.

 

The Camber brace was a helpful item for serious track duty cars on the C4 model corvettes since the suspension was attached to the C style frame rails that opend up like the a capital letter H where the outmost parts of the frame on the front and back of the car were not capped off, but opened up, and only had a small amount of sheet metal that acted as the radiator support that tied the two ends of the frame together. Only the front part of the frame was of high strength steel, as this was GM's first attempt to unify the frame and body together in the corvette, actually somewhat eliminating the complete frame assembly of the corvette that was still present in the C3 models. The rear frame support was also high strength steel since it supported the rear suspension and the side B-pillar extensions, since they acted somewhat as the rollbar or protection to the passengers in case of a rollover. This body and frame design was around for 14 years, that is a long time for any one design, and it did not really change much at all, which was fine, but by the end, they were starting to put some power in the damn thing, and that frame couldn't handle it very well. This Camber brace was technically like bolting in a crossmember to the frame to cap off the front of the frame!

Unfortunately the C4 Corvette was totally designed out of the desire to wring as much performance as possible, out of as little horsepower that they were able to put into it. Fuel shortage era was the culprit that started it all, by trying to design fuel effecient cars, and trying to make 200hp cars fast back in the days! The Corvette almost became a Unibody car, and it took forever to start getting power back into our cars. It was a performer when it came to handling, cause it was real light weight, and it had a very modern sophisticated suspension, until you got to speed or to its limits, then it got darty, and unpredictable. But still, would run circles around the older vettes on curvy roads.

When Dave Hill took over, coming from Cadillac, the corvette sales were dismally small, and Chevy wanted results. Dave saved it for us, and returned took the Vette to the supercar it is today, thinking stiffness. Full Three Pronged Hydroformed Steel Boxed Side Rail Frame = 450% stiffer than the C4 chassis, Stiffer than anything on the market, also 250% less torsional flex! This meant almost 0 degrees of deflection of the frame under high G loads from the front corner of the frame to the opposing rear corner. Packaged with a lightweight overall vehicle weight that was 96lbs lighter than the C4, also with a rear transmission that was disigned to promote increased chassis stiffness by bolting into the rear suspension brace, that itself then bolted into the rear part of the frame. Now the suspension components bolt directly into reinforced areas of the dyroformed frame in the front, and to the rear suspension brace in the rear which bolts directly to the frame! This design in theory most closely follows what would be considered a racing chasis or platform, purpose built. All modern componentry for the most part Double A-bone independent suspension front and rear, independent shock control, transverse leaf springs. The only thing I don't know why Chevy hasn't gone too, is coils, or coilover shocks! Which would be the level of pure race cars, the level of Porsche, or Ferrari, Lambo or whatnot, and the Cost difference would be minimal, and would take the cars handling to another level above the incredible level that it already sustains. With leaf springs, even thought excellently designed, there is still a small amount of transference between one side of the suspension to the other, and only by eliminating connection from one side to the other by running specific springs, OR even independent leafs per side can transference be eliminated and give complete control over all road conditions. The only area that the corvette still suffers from compared to other exotic sports cars is that when in mid corner hitting bumps, or uneven road conditions from one side of the vehicle to the other, can upset the overall ballance of the vehicle which can cause loss of control, or unexpected drifting. Unlike say a, Porsche 911, going over a similar transition in the raod, will not be as disturbed in the corner hitting a bump, since one side of the suspension hitting a bump will not transfer any effect to the other sides suspension. This is why so many Corvette race teams have modified their Vettes with Coilover setups on their cars, and why these Vette teams are winning trophies everywhere!

So under even the most severe handling conditions or stress of the suspension components, the design of the platform, or frame is flawless, with no deflection, which lets the suspension do its job, which keeps the car flatter, and all the tires on the road for better grip, better handling, and better braking!

So this is basically my really, really, long way of saying things like strut tower braces, frame supports, subframe connectors, and the whatnot are not needed for this car. The best things you can do to make this car handle better are to upgrade the shocks, bushings, coilovers maybe, stronger leafs maybe, more tire, upgrades swaybars, lowering for lower center of gravity, will give you the better handling and control of the vehicle. With the right setup of swaybars, coilover shocks, rims and tires, and bushings, this car might be the best handling street car in the world or right next to it. Corvette has won LeManns 6 out of 7 times and has beaten the best in the world.

And by the way, the C6 frame is according to Dave Hill is exactly 0% stiffer than the C5 frame because that is how much stiffer he wanted to make it for the newest Corvette!?!

So the Camber brace would offer no effect. The amount of force applied to your front suspension component is not enought to flex the reinforced boxed frame in that area, if it did, it would bend the metal of the frame rail, and your alignment would be off. The C4 which that was designed for was C shaped and had a lot of deflection in it in all areas. If you are worried about your camber changing, and you are actually cornering that hard with your car, you might want to switch out all your a-arm bushings to polyurethane which with a high durometer rating with about 1/4 the deflection, cause I garuntee, that your camber is changing with the deflection of the bushings right now, and by no means the frame flexing! I also garuntee, that your vehicle is leaning more into the corner causing the vehicle to not lay as flat to maintaine a flat tire surface to the ground, causing loss of traction, which can only be improved with increased spring rate, or a stiffer swaybar for flatter cornering. You are completely looking in the wrong areas to improve your handling capabilities of your car. Unless you have already changed out everything I have already recommended and are running competition slicks and are pulling 1.6 G's in the corners running T1 Bars and Solid Nylon bushings, reinforced pillow blocks, and a 6 point rollcage!

 

I am sorry pazzovette and kelp, my thread may have sounded mean or condasending, I just did a bad job of explaining the design of the car, and realized that after reading my own giant post.

The rear suspension is attached to a cast aluminum cradle which holds all the components of the suspension plus the differential, which in turn is bolted to the bottom of an open port area of the rear frame. This is a solid piece. There is no flex or deflection of the cradle itself, all movement besides up and down of the a-arms is taken up by the bushings, and all the impact is absorbed by the shocks and the leaf springs. If the amount of shock would be too great for the cradle to handle the aluminum structure would actually crack apart being that cast aluminum has nearly no measurable flexability at all.

As I had said in the previous post, and as the article you posted had pointed out, the camber brace in that artice was designed for, plus the schematics were of the C4 corvette, and of the open end frame design I talked about. With the open end on the front of the frame, this allowed the front end of the frame to be pushed inward to the other side of the frame. Also with the C shaped frame and thin metal used in that design, the pressures would cause the frame to flex, where this brace came in handy, actually acting as a brace right against the top of the suspension right where the flex was occuring.

If you look up C5 frame pictures, or C6 frame pictures, which you can probably find on this forum, you can see the new full frame design. The metal is literally twice as thick, and boxed all around from one end to the other. Plus it is capped at each end, with full bars running in the middle like a ladder adding extra reinforcement. Also on top of this where the suspension control arms attach, these areas have reinforced double layers of sheet metal to double strengthen the suspension points. The motor is then also layed inbetween the suspension components by the motor mounts, acting like a bridge between the suspension from one side to the other. So now once again all movement besides up and down is then handled by the bushings, and shocks and springs. With the boxed reinforced frame, there is no more deflection of the attachment points of the suspension, or flex of the frame. Also there isn't even room to fit any type of brace if one could have been utilized.

Due to this overall superstrong structure is what gives the great characteristics of super handling with a great ride and super solid feel of the vehicle. And by them increasing the amount of suspension travel of the C6 over the C5, this is what improved the ride without giving up any of the superb handling.

This is why any kind of improvement to handling or ride is completely up to changes in the suspension components themselves, and why we spank every other vehicle out there. Not only do they gotta add 150hp or more to keep up in a straight line, they gotta reinforce everything else to try to just keep the car on the road. Gotta love a purpose built car!

 

Very informative. Thank you. Then the structural rigidity point is mute. moot? from the camber brace thing. I wonder if that's why R-D never got back to me after it was supposedly made and powdercoated.

That brings up a similar topic. What about the chasis reinforcements by Pfadt, etc where they have a large roll bar looking thing in back of the seats which is supposed to help the chasis be stiff. Does that have merit?

 

Not to hijack the thread but ...
Interesting writeup. Looking at the mounting of the leaf springs, it is hard to see how there is more transferrance than say coilovers. Do you have anymore explanation on how this transferrance happens.

I had always understood that race teams use coilovers for quick adjustability. Not because they improve handling.

Any further informaiton to clarify?

Thanks, Lloyd

 

PFADT offers two setups for the car, yes they do actually stiffen things up, and actually they really don't help much either! First the Sharkbar that is mentioned and similar to the PFADT brace, is actually just a mounting point for a 4 or 5 point racing harness, that has mounts that bolt onto the B-Pillars. There are other factors that cause flex in the vehicle body itself that have been addressed in the C6, and any brace tying two parts of the car together will reinforce the vehicle, but the amount of flex that is already present is nominal at best. Correcting it with a limited brace like the Sharkbar will only offer rigidity on direct side to side movement on the upper part of the frame structure that is actually designed as more of a rollbar for protection to the passengers, and as a big U shaped brace from one side of the frame to the other,(part of the ladder bar as described before) but one that is stacked ontop of another bar behind the seats. This is actually the strongest part of the frame assembly as can be seen in diagram
http://www.corvettemuseum.com/specs/2005/detail9.htm
that sees the smallest amount of flex. When there is flex in the vehicles frame from hard cornering this transfers to the body, which in turn causes the body to flex, which causes parts to creak and moan, and wear away overall vehicle structurale integrity over time. If you notice the C6 to C5, you will notice that there is literally 3 times the amount of bolts, and connections from one body panel to the other wich in turn adds overall stronger integrity to the overall body, this then of course adds better integrity to the frame, or should we say less stress to the frame when working hard. Overall increase rigidity of the entire vehicle will make it more solid, and last longer. The frame although stiff as hell, after bolting on 1800lbs in parts, does add extra stress to the factor, and does cause more flexing of the vehicle when transitioning, like say in hard cornering, so don't get me wrong, there is still of course measurable flex in the vehicle, to which if this was not a targa top, and the roof was solid, like in the Z06, the car would again, be much more stiffer. The Z06 with the aluminum frame is a solid bolted on roof for rigidity, and is not as solid as our steel frame C6's. This is why no Targa top is offered in it's model design!

Second the bracing of the frame, by the multipoint harness will add structural integrity, But in itself will act more as a roll bar, or crash protection to the car, with the side benifit reducing more flex. Will it improve handling, maybe not at all, since if you look at it hard, it does not extend to the very front of the vehicle, not tying the two main halves of the vehicle together. How can it prevent any further flex, especially since the rear of the suspension is attached to the girdle, except for the shocks? I have run full roll cages in some of my cars, and it ties the front of the car to the rear of the car, and also acts like a part of the frame, but very intrusive to the passengers. This then cacoons you in metal framing for complete roll over protection, tying the front, middle and rear of the car together. Thus called a 6 point roll cage! The Bracing you see that PFADT racing of course can claim stiffening of the frame, cause it does, wether it provides any structural integrity that will improve handling is doubtfull at best, cause it does nothing to reinforce the frame from the front to the back!

9 outa 10 times you see these on vehicles more due to racing requirments, multi point race belts and roll cages are required in many, and most all race environements held, due to sanctions for safety. But anything thing that ties two parts of a vehicle together can claim to add structural integrity, true, but may be of very little, to no use at all in any real application to the vehicles handling. Most Vehicles that run anything faster than 12 second quarter miles, requires sometimes at least a roll over protection, or roll cage, or even a 4 point seatbelt harness at a lot of tracks. Thats what those items are for more than anything else, and don't let them try to convince you otherwise.

 

True also, on track adjustability is the largest reason for coilovers, Except LGRacing, has pretuned their race cars with Bilstein shocks on their coilovers that are non adjustable, and race with those on their cars. They found a setup that offered them everything they wanted on every type of track they had run. I do believe that they are running an adjustable swaybar setup though.

The transference issue is not as big a deal on the C6 as it was on the C5 due to newer stronger materials used in the new C6 leafs, and better isolation built into the leafs themselves, but transference still can be felt in our cars. The best way to feal this is drive your car, and find a comparable one with the coilover suspension, and take it over a part of road corners that you know have dips, and bumps in the middle of the corners. Take both vehicles over the same road to feel the comparison. Luckily I am in a large corvette association that has very nice members that will let you try out their setups if they get to know you well enough, great for getting to test out some of the setups that are already out on the market. Without you actually driving the vehicle and feeling this for yourself. I do not know if you will be able to fully understand.

The fully independent coilover vehicle will stay more controlled over the bumps, and you will feel them independently per side that the tires go over, as with the leafs you will notice that hitting bumps with lets say the left tires, on a left turn, will cause a rough shake that will roll over to the right side of the vehicle, which will now cause the vehicle to jump, or slightly slide or drift to the right. The coilover hitting that same bumps in that same corner, you will feel the left side suspension shake, but you will notice that the right side maintains flat and smooth still, and no jump of the vehicle and no slide. Also with the smaller setup of the coilover the bumps and shock handled, are isolated to the coilover itself and its mounting points, the A-arm, and the shock mount up top! The leaf is attached to the frame on the bottom of the car at the left and right side of the vehicle, so some of the shock goes into the leaf, and it is absorbed into the frame also at that mounting point, and this is what causes the transference, the shock traveles through the vehicle and is not as isolated. The shock and control are stabalized in a smaller area and this small coil spring is quicker in its response to input and ouput than the rather large leaf spring. This is why when people switch to coilovers, it is an immediate immprovement in ride and handling, and why it is so apperant to the owner on that first drive, feeling instantly more controled and stable! So adjustability is just a part of what is offered in the coilover setup.

 

hodgee: If there is negligible transferance, I don't quite see the difference in the physics that would cause the coilovers to be better.

I will take your advice and try to get a ride in a coilover car for some SOTP experience. Testing will show the difference.

Thanks for the info and discussion. Lloyd

 

What I am saying is that it is not all that negligable. It is not as nearly as bad as it used to be, as in the C5 for instance, not that the C5 was all that bad either, but it was more noticable in the C5 over this vehicle due to the redesign of the leafs. This was even discussed by the GM techs in a few articles that they let out.

 

Understand. Thanks for the clarification. One of the forum members near me just converted. We will be comparing them next weekend.

Thanks, Lloyd