Strut tower bracing & subframe connectors

Suspension, brake, and hydraulic/electric steering discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
Tom Slick
Posts: 559
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:27 pm
Location: Midlothian, TX
Contact:

Strut tower bracing & subframe connectors

Post by Tom Slick »

Anyone looked into strut tower bracing & subframe connectors for their Caprice?

I've thought about the strut tower bracing... have looked at the White Strut Tower Brace (Australia) and the BMR version... I like the White version much better...

Any thoughts, comments, other ideas or solutions?

Later,
Tom Slick
1932 Glassic Ford Model A Roadster Replica - Ford 302/C4, approx. 1400lb... :-)
2015 GMC Sierra SLE Extended Cab - 5.3L
Navy Lifer
Administration Staff
Posts: 1724
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:30 pm
Location: Canton GA

Re: Strut tower bracing & subframe connectors

Post by Navy Lifer »

Tom, I had previously looked into this myself, and came to a realization that, while there MAY be some benefit to it at a very high performance level, the average use of the car, with the size and wear rating of the rubber on the ground, that there is not going to be enough chassis loading to make any benefit that a brace MAY offer even detectable. The Zeta basic chassis structure is significantly stiffer than what I've ever been used to in the past.

My basis/position here is from observing the Gen5 Camaro 1LE/ZL1 model(s) - both receive a front strut brace, and both have MUCH greater contact with the road surface, with larger & relatively "sticky" rubber and very wide wheels--these cars will see much higher chassis loading, and the engineers had to justify it's value to be able to create and fit the tower brace as original equipment on those models.

Back in the mid/late 80's, I owned two different versions of Cavalier with V6 & manual trans. I made a strut brace for the 1985 model, and I did feel that I could tell a difference. Later, on the other car, an 89 RS wagon with V6 & 5-speed manual, I updated the car with the production strut brace GM added to the Z24 model in that same era, and it did make a difference--again, engineering had determined there was a benefit, and that was why a brace became a production part. The J-car, even though a unit-body design, was still fairly flexible compared to many other vehicles.

Now, I do have to say that I'm quite certain that the knowledge gained since that time ('80's) in vehicle design, engineering, vehicle dynamics, computer modeling advancements (CAD/FEA, etc) has made the Zeta platform, in it's multiple variants, a much better engineered and far stiffer platform, with no need for the addition of the brace until the 1LE & ZL1 (and I'm going to assume the new Z/28 will have it, too).

With all that said, my only thought is that we would all be interested in what a tower brace may or may not do, based on manufacturer's claims and/or any observed TRUE benefit that can be detected and validated from a brace on the Caprice. I'm not saying I'm skeptical, and if I thought for a minute that there was a preponderance of evidence to show positive benefits, I would strongly (re)consider doing something in this area myself.

As for sub-frame connectors, I've only looked at the info online at BMR--if I was building a track car, this might be something of value, but I'd want to study this much more than I have. I don't know what BMR's claims are, but if that area of the car IS deficient, I would be looking for any differences in the same area(s) on the updated VF/WN platform(s) to determine whether GM/Holden revised the area to provide some degree of greater stiffness without resorting to set of girders mounted under the vehicle (hanging down, from what I could see), along with the added weight--our cars are already "heavier" to start with--what do the BMR parts actually do, is there anything OE that achieves the same thing, and can it be back-fitted or duplicated on VE/WM?

Right now, I'm more inclined to spend my money elsewhere.
User avatar
storm9c1
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:47 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Strut tower bracing & subframe connectors

Post by storm9c1 »

Hopefully the first mod prior to adding any braces is a programming mod. The stock programming (stability control, traction control, etc) is so conservative on these cars, I wouldn't expect much improvement just by adding braces alone. Similarly, the other mod would be wider, sticky tires. Then maybe do some testing to see if bracing helps or not. The chassis might be up to the task in stock form, but my guess is that as soon as other mods are completed, it may start to push the chassis beyond stock capability, and presumably might need some bracing.

Most of us probably already know this detail, but I'm mentioning this for the benefit of newcomers who are eager to bolt stuff on expecting big gains.

(Just trying to be practical)
Tom (AKA: Storm)
2011 Caprice 9C3: L77, 8K miles, first-owner, purchased July 2011.
1995 Caprice 9C1: LT1, 178K miles, summer car.
1995 Impala SS: LT1, 21K miles.
1995 Caprice Wagon: LT1, 62K miles.
1995 Caprice Wagon: LT1, 128K miles. Rust In Pieces
1994 Caprice 9C1: LT1, beater winter car.
1969 Chevy C30: 383ci stroker, 4L80E, rollback car hauler.
1972 Chrysler Newport: 400ci big block, survivor 27K miles, 2-door hardtop.
1969 Dodge Charger: 383ci big block.
Post Reply