I agree with you.. but one would also hope that someone who is pushing their car to the limit, is doing so knowingly, and has the ability to do so.
While we all know that's not always the case... let's hope it is, and your words provide good "heads up" information for those pushing the limits of the car, without the ability to handle the results.
That was the entire intent of my comments.
__________________
AKA xmm
First 1000 Order VIN # 000218 - Time Stamp 2:35:20 DEEP with Steel/Sand leather,
72,300+ miles on the odo - Silver side stripes - My wife named my car "Nittany" after Penn State, my Alma Mater
Reborn at the factory at 57,100 miles Proud Member - ICoD EHDoR&M WPASC
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NASSOA
Founding Member #41
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "It's Going To Be A Girl......plus one more on the way!!!"
I would like to make some statements based upon basic physics and over 58k of seat time in my Solstice. Every vehicle has body flex to some degree. The old Mustangs were known to have so much that the owners did everything they could to stiffen their cars. There are still sub-frame kits that look like they are frames for tanks that are made for Mustangs. They all seem to work well on the Mustangs but they do so because the Mustangs are known for extreme body/chassis flex. Our car on the other hand is smaller, and much stiffer than a Mustang. The suspension members and suspension supports on our car could easily have been put on a platform much larger than ours and still have performed quite well. Our car was designed from the ground up as a performance vehicle and was not a morphing of design from previous models which were just thrown together. Not all body/chassis flex is bad. When you go around a sharp bend the suspension is the first to "make up" the centrifical force placed upon the car and the chassis is the second. If the two work together you can push the car beyond the actual limits of what the suspension can do on its own. If you have no chassis flex the suspension does it's job, reaches it's limit and then you start to loose grip on your rear tires very quickly. The end result is you hang out the rear end or your "drift." For my style of driving in western PA, I prefer to have my car have some chassis flex. I have pushed my car a couple of times on winding roads and suddenly found out that the road didn't do what I thought it was going to do. The result was I pushed the suspension to it's limit and it was the flexing of the chassis that kept all four of my tires planted well enough on the pavement to keep me on the pavement. Now don't get me wrong. The idea of a stiffener for the Solstice sounds like a great idea as long as you understand what it is going to do. It will stiffen the rear end but when the rear end decides it's had enough it will no longer be forgiving, it's going to break loose very quickly. For the autocrosser or for the person who drives on roads that have less hills and sharp turns the stiffer rear end will be a dream. Even for the less aggressive driver this will be a great addition to you car's handling. Just be careful if you are an aggressive driver who depends upon your car's chassis flex to "help" you get that little bit of extra speed or performance while driving the twistie back roads. Stiffer may not be better for you. Some of you may have a totally different take on this issue and thats fine. We all have our own opinions. The purpose of my comments aren't to keep anyone from ordering a stiffener for their car, but instead to educate any potential buyers on what to watch for after they have installed it so they don't get themselves into trouble. Impromptu drifting at high speed is not where most of us want to go. JMHO
your explanation is pretty enlightening
I ventured the guess that one of the reasons our car is not too good in the rain was the fact that the chasis was so stiff, that most inconsitancies in the road would be translated directly to the wheels and we would slide more then a conventional car BECAUSE the car was designed to handle so well
counter intutitive but your post explains it very nicely
Hi, Cade Wilson here from Kappasphere, Brandon asked me to chime in on this. My background is primarily with tracking the Lotus Elise, though I have also had a lot of seat time in Miatas, Mustangs, Jeeps, and old Fiats.
Ex-Miata man's point is very accurate to one thing... if you are not comfortable with a car with a very neutral handling dynamic, the reBAR is not for you. The standard chassis is designed with quite a bit of flex, which does allow the suspension points to move. The chassis and structural engineers used this to advantage to put in a lot of understeer to keep the car safe for the average driver. The reBar will take a lot of that understeer out.
I would differ on the technicalities of a couple things, though. In most performance environments, the stiffer you can get the chassis, the better, as it's one more thing that you no longer have to worry about as much in the equation for handling. You can focus all your handling improvements on suspension and alignment adjustments. Keep in mind that once you've installed the reBAR, you can still adjust the chassis to be more or less forgiving by using the proper alignment, suspension, tire choice and tire pressure.
The only other technicality that I would gig you on is centrifugal force. According to your physics textbook, it really doesn't exist. The force that creates what most people see as 'centrifugal' is actually centripetal force, and it operates in a different direction than 'centrifugal' force would suggest. But that's just semantics, I know what you meant.
Again, as to the primary point of the thread, you are RIGHT ON, and I thank you. If you do purchase a bar such as ours, be aware of the changes it makes in your suspension geometry, and take it easy for a while until you're familiar with the differences it makes in your handling. And get out on track/autocross with an instructor and have fun!!!
Cheers,
Cade Wilson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ex-Miata Man
I would like to make some statements based upon basic physics and over 58k of seat time in my Solstice. Every vehicle has body flex to some degree. The old Mustangs were known to have so much that the owners did everything they could to stiffen their cars. There are still sub-frame kits that look like they are frames for tanks that are made for Mustangs. They all seem to work well on the Mustangs but they do so because the Mustangs are known for extreme body/chassis flex. Our car on the other hand is smaller, and much stiffer than a Mustang. The suspension members and suspension supports on our car could easily have been put on a platform much larger than ours and still have performed quite well. Our car was designed from the ground up as a performance vehicle and was not a morphing of design from previous models which were just thrown together. Not all body/chassis flex is bad. When you go around a sharp bend the suspension is the first to "make up" the centrifical force placed upon the car and the chassis is the second. If the two work together you can push the car beyond the actual limits of what the suspension can do on its own. If you have no chassis flex the suspension does it's job, reaches it's limit and then you start to loose grip on your rear tires very quickly. The end result is you hang out the rear end or your "drift." For my style of driving in western PA, I prefer to have my car have some chassis flex. I have pushed my car a couple of times on winding roads and suddenly found out that the road didn't do what I thought it was going to do. The result was I pushed the suspension to it's limit and it was the flexing of the chassis that kept all four of my tires planted well enough on the pavement to keep me on the pavement. Now don't get me wrong. The idea of a stiffener for the Solstice sounds like a great idea as long as you understand what it is going to do. It will stiffen the rear end but when the rear end decides it's had enough it will no longer be forgiving, it's going to break loose very quickly. For the autocrosser or for the person who drives on roads that have less hills and sharp turns the stiffer rear end will be a dream. Even for the less aggressive driver this will be a great addition to you car's handling. Just be careful if you are an aggressive driver who depends upon your car's chassis flex to "help" you get that little bit of extra speed or performance while driving the twistie back roads. Stiffer may not be better for you. Some of you may have a totally different take on this issue and thats fine. We all have our own opinions. The purpose of my comments aren't to keep anyone from ordering a stiffener for their car, but instead to educate any potential buyers on what to watch for after they have installed it so they don't get themselves into trouble. Impromptu drifting at high speed is not where most of us want to go. JMHO
O'kay, I looked under my Sol, and just what I thought, there is a thick black beam that connects both sides of the rear suspension, what extra stiffness would this new brace do?
And can some one post pictures of it installed, looking up from the bottom of the car....
O'kay, I looked under my Sol, and just what I thought, there is a thick black beam that connects both sides of the rear suspension, what extra stiffness would this new brace do?
And can some one post pictures of it installed, looking up from the bottom of the car....
That black beam is the weak link back there, too thin of wall to handle the stresses . The ZOK's have that piece strengthened as does the Red Bull drift car.
I believe the bar you are looking at is the rear sway bar. The sway bar acts to reduce body roll around turns. It doesnt act to strengthen the chassis. Some people will also upgrade the sway bars with Eibach's solution.
Dave a DDM works had the opportunity to talk to GM engineers about the flex in the back bar between the rear suspension and just above the Diff...They said that their test showed unwanted flex and that in some cases the bar bent...this lead them to strengthen the bar in the Turbo car to help combat this. Now the question becomes when in 08 did they strengthen the bar and did they do it enough....point is to add this bar to be sure could be a very big plus for owner's that are adding HP....seal9
My reBAR arrived this afternoon, but I had to laugh -- the box was marked "fragile" but since FEDEX was delivering it it most likely makes sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antonio
haha, they label an automotive chassis support bar as "fragile" haha
When I ordered my Curt hitch (the steel one, not the balsa wood one), it showed up bent. It was in a box that was way to big for it with no other packing material at all, just loose. It was shipped via FedEx and must have been tossed around pretty good. One of the mounting wings on one end was bent, obviously from a good blow to a concrete floor.
It may not be fragile, but I hope they pack it well. The reBar has the same type of mounting 'wings' that could easily be bent given a heavy blow from a good toss or drop.
But that's just semantics, I know what you meant.
My reBAR arrived this afternoon, but I had to laugh -- the box was marked "fragile" but since FEDEX was delivering it it most likely makes sense.