[FNxR3DNECK]

Title says it all... Worth it or not?

http://marylandspeed.com/bmr-drivesh...05-p-7468.html

[travislambert]

I’d be surprised if it makes even a negligible difference. The chassis seems pretty rigid in stock form. Even the strut braces aren’t providing any noticeable benefit (on the coupe at least).
I’d bet most drivers wouldn't feel the difference between a solid steel brace and a completely removed tunnel brace.

[Dub9]

I wonder if that would offer any benefit for convertibles. Either replacing stock braces (stiffer/lighter) or in addition to them.

[travislambert]

I compared pics with the stock brace... Obviously the BMR is thicker, but it looks to me like the stock brace would resist flex pretty well because of the downward bend around the edge.

The BMR looks cool and is relatively cheap, but my guess is that it'd just be added weight for no functional benefit.

[F1FTY]

Without testing it myself, I can't say for sure, but from looking at what it's actually bracing -- I would have a hard time saying it's necessary or worth doing.

[travislambert]

Put the $70 toward tires... Quality tires are the best bang for your buck upgrade for handling. IMO anyway.

[PolynesianPowerhouse]

I could prob see the only people its gonna benefit on here, are those that drive their cars HARD. not the typical forum only, cars and coffee guys, or drag racing enthusiasts.

anything where the car IS NOT doing anything lateral.

now some high HP drag guys could experience chassis twist, but their car is gonna have a lot of mods to begin with and its one of those, if you build it that far, you already know what ya need.

[travislambert]

Originally Posted by PolynesianPowerhouse

I could prob see the only people its gonna benefit on here, are those that drive their cars HARD. not the typical forum only, cars and coffee guys, or drag racing enthusiasts.

anything where the car IS NOT doing anything lateral.

now some high HP drag guys could experience chassis twist, but their car is gonna have a lot of mods to begin with and its one of those, if you build it that far, you already know what ya need.

I certainly agree generally speaking.

With this particular piece I'm skeptical. I'm thinking the cutout areas in the brace and the lack of a perimeter bend at least give the appearance that it will flex more easily than the stock brace. I get the impression that aesthetics were given priority over function, but it's hard to know for sure without actually testing the flex of each piece.

I'm also skeptical of the overall need for such a brace. Who knows, even a thin brace might qualify for being overbuilt.

[PolynesianPowerhouse]

Originally Posted by travislambert

I certainly agree generally speaking.

With this particular piece I'm skeptical. I'm thinking the cutout areas in the brace and the lack of a perimeter bend at least give the appearance that it will flex more easily than the stock brace. I get the impression that aesthetics were given priority over function, but it's hard to know for sure without actually testing the flex of each piece.

I'm also skeptical of the overall need for such a brace. Who knows, even a thin brace might qualify for being overbuilt.

not skeptical on the open area needing a brace...

in any design, triangulation is prob one of the strongest designs.

its the way monster truck chassis, tube frames, roll cages, etc are built. strut tower braces generally run off the same thing. triangulation.

caveman terms, anytime you make a "valley" in a solid structure (drive shaft tunnel) you'll need to keep it from flexing open and closed. think of two cards in a pent roof situation, or an upside down hotdog bun. bracing the area, with the gap makes it stronger.

braces like these are useful, but only for a handful to get the full experience. our cars ARE stiffer, than the prev generation. I know many harp on that, but we cant be naïve to the fact that these are street cars for the masses, where an acceptable amount of flex is built into the chassis. Meaning for grandpops whos in his later years and wants the nostalgia, or the guy that's gonna load up on stereo, 22's, lights and go for cruises. basically, those that aren't gonna be track guys, and only want the car for styling and comfort and shows.

the guys that will require stiffness, simply have options.

[travislambert]

Originally Posted by PolynesianPowerhouse

not skeptical on the open area needing a brace...

in any design, triangulation is prob one of the strongest designs.

its the way monster truck chassis, tube frames, roll cages, etc are built. strut tower braces generally run off the same thing. triangulation.

caveman terms, anytime you make a "valley" in a solid structure (drive shaft tunnel) you'll need to keep it from flexing open and closed. think of two cards in a pent roof situation, or an upside down hotdog bun. bracing the area, with the gap makes it stronger.

braces like these are useful, but only for a handful to get the full experience. our cars ARE stiffer, than the prev generation. I know many harp on that, but we cant be naïve to the fact that these are street cars for the masses, where an acceptable amount of flex is built into the chassis. Meaning for grandpops whos in his later years and wants the nostalgia, or the guy that's gonna load up on stereo, 22's, lights and go for cruises. basically, those that aren't gonna be track guys, and only want the car for styling and comfort and shows.

the guys that will require stiffness, simply have options.

You certainly bring up some good points for the need for such a brace. I could probably be convinced on some level of need, but as for whether or not this BMR brace really yields any improvement over the stock brace...I'm not so sure about that. Keep in mind the transmission crossmember mounts really close to this brace.

[travislambert]

Originally Posted by travislambert

You certainly bring up some good points for the need for such a brace. I could probably be convinced on some level of need, but as for whether or not this BMR brace really yields any improvement over the stock brace...I'm not so sure about that. Keep in mind the transmission crossmember mounts really close to this brace.

(I just looked at some pictures of the bottom of my car.)

I guess the trans crossmember isn't quite as close as I remembered. So okay... I'm convinced there is a need.

[PolynesianPowerhouse]

Originally Posted by travislambert

(I just looked at some pictures of the bottom of my car.)

I guess the trans crossmember isn't quite as close as I remembered. So okay... I'm convinced there is a need.

yea its a bit away... but the stock is gonna be good for most out there. this is just that, "I might not need it yet, but if I plan on setting some records on a track or dragstrip, then it might be a welcome addition...down the road" part.

are there other parts, more effective at reaching goals... sure.

but its not a super make or break the build part. like the better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it genre

[crankaholic]

The BMR brace is definitely stronger than stock... even with that stamped profile. You can bend the stock unit by placing it into a vice and twisting, the BMR brace resists much better.

Now for the question of needing such a brace, it all depends on what you're looking for and your other mods. If you remove rubber bushings and other points of flex, it's only natural that you'll need to increase overall chassis rigidity to get full benefits of those mods. If you're running stock suspension arms, subframe bushings and braces - you won't feel or need the brace.

[BradfordCamaro]

I gave up after the Hot Dog Bun analogy......