Rear Tower brace?

Anyone ever used a Rear strut tower brace? I was thinking of making my own
out of some steel i have laying around and i was wondering if anyone has any input on how much flex they take out of the chassis...is it even worth the effort if i have a 10 pnt. cage already?
 
I was thinking that...i was just going to fabricate an 'X' type brace between the two towers in my trunk. But i probably wont bother now...anyone know about the solid engine mounts? Its a street driven car, about 3 times a week on average.
 
iwashmycar said:
well, would it help to put in a rear shock brace in a car that doesnt even have subframes like my own??

-adam

No.....there a waste of money. I forgot the reasoning.....something to do with not moving lateral?????

Subframe connectors are the ****nit though. Highly recommended. I'm sure you know that though.:nice:
 
88Stangboy said:
I was thinking that...i was just going to fabricate an 'X' type brace between the two towers in my trunk. But i probably wont bother now...anyone know about the solid engine mounts? Its a street driven car, about 3 times a week on average.
I have solids in mine... some people were saying that they'd stress the chassis over time if you do a lot of hard launches and stuff. Be warned though, they do increase the feelable vibrations... mine gets pretty shaky at times.
 
My car shakes plenty anyhow, i was wondering because my engine mounts i have are pretty much shot and i was going to have to replace them and i was thinking of solids, eventually my car will be only a weekend car. So vibrations not really a concern...how bad though?
 
Every bit helps.
Subframes only tie the front frame to the rear. They tighten things up a bit, but they also leave plenty of lateral twist.

I had a set of subframes in a notch that actually made the rear seat framing squeek under accelerating load.

Ever seen a truck frame. They tie the rails together along the whole length of the frame. You don't see that kind of reinforcement in a fox stang ... not anywhere along the shotty (at best) split subframing. :notnice:
 
well its going to weigh about 10 pnds if i make it out of 1 inch square tubing, so im wondering if its worth the weight addition. Remember i already have a 10 point roll cage in the car. So will it even matter if its in there or not?
 
TrophyHead said:
No.....there a waste of money. I forgot the reasoning.....something to do with not moving lateral?????

The rear shocks have no involvement with rear end geometry at all. You can tie them into a 20 point roll cage and it won't really make a difference.

Instead of fabbing up a rear shock brace, you should invest that time into reinforcing the torque boxes.
 
"One of the biggest problems facing the Mustang is the flexing of the rear shock towers. This effect becomes particularly acute when the car is equipped with a coil-over conversion kit. A simple section of tubing welding between the two towers can eliminate this problem. ....the brace can also be welded to the roll bar to provide additional rigidity." - Mustang Performance Handbook 2, William R. Mathis
 
larrendeuce said:
"One of the biggest problems facing the Mustang is the flexing of the rear shock towers. This effect becomes particularly acute when the car is equipped with a coil-over conversion kit. A simple section of tubing welding between the two towers can eliminate this problem. ....the brace can also be welded to the roll bar to provide additional rigidity." - Mustang Performance Handbook 2, William R. Mathis

Well coil-overs are an entirely different animal. Now you are putting heavy loads on something that wasn't designed to take it. You SHOULD brace the rear shock towers with coil overs.