StangDreamin'
Founding Member
+1 Yeah, Jay; how come guys with "Big Stangs" (and Cats) don't get to play in your sandbox all that often?
Any plans for a 71 Mustang? I wouldn't mind paying for a custom made piece,
the system might be newer, but in my opinion it is worse than the stock system since you introduce several flex points into the system at each rod end. save your money and stick with the odl school stuff. if the new school stuff was so good then why dont they use it on race cars? because it allows too much flexing.
you know what? I don't remember if they mentioned this in the instructions, but if you do the TCP export brace and MC bar, you can set those rod end members under tension, pushing against the top of the shock tower tabs and the firewall brace and the MC bar about 1/3 of the way in on either side. .
The TCP and MPG systems offer the user the possibility of removing one of the braces in the event you need to pop the valve covers. This means that you do not have to remove the entire brace in order to get to your valve train. Even with the rod ends, they are plenty stiff. Unless you are really putting a lot of stress on your car at the track, you won't notice the tiny extra bit of flex.
These rod end versions simply do not hold the vertical plane. If you currently have an original style aftermarket export brace and monte carlo bar, and you switch to a rod end version, you will notice the car loosens up quite a bit. I mean to the point that you would probably switch it back. Vertical articulation of the shock towers is not favorable unibody movement.
Jerry S. gets the concept here. It's not the resistance to bending of a solid member that keeps everything in place, it's the tension or preload put on the rods that go to the firewall and the MC on either side. Kind of like a bicycle spoke in reverse.
I design trusses for a living. The model and assumptions used for their design differs considerably from the real-world properties. Trusses are normally modeled as a collection of simple members that come together in pinned joints, when in fact the members are continuous and rigidly connected. However, testing has proven the analysis to be close enough to work. There is no significant advantage to analyzing trusses with continuous members rigidly connected to each other.
An export brace is a form of truss. Using rod-ended bars instead of a single stamped piece will cost you little if anything in performance.
Adding a MC bar is not futile. It strengthens the truss. It changes the load path in certain conditions. And, a curved MC bar, though technically not as effective as a straigth one, is far from useless. It's still alot better than no bar at all.
He stated that an export brace with rod ends might lose a few percentage points of stiffness compared to a one-piece unit but that it any loss was negligible.
Also, not to sound hypocritical, but I currently have the rod end version on Sinister because nothing else worked with the Paxton unit. That is changing very soon. We're designing one to work with Paxton's SC system within a couple of weeks.
Let me reiterate, the 71-73 Mustangs also need some LOVE!
Any plans? What would it take to make it happen?
What is the difference between the two Maier braces ($240 vs $140)? I am guessing tube thickness but what is right for a street-driven car?
Please more info (price, address) on the mdjay set up. Looks great.
Hipobuzz
It's when one side of the frame tries to twist "UP" that the original export brace really shows it's superior engineering. That "twisting" motion is very noticable, and not controlled with a Heim joint style brace.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?