Having been down under the car on a lift recently, here are my impressions:
there is no way to extend the SFCs behind the axle, but I'm not sure why you'd want to. The stiffening only needs to go back to the area where the rear control arms attach....The rear point of the WS SfCs are what I will use:

it's the little oval jack point (?) in the middle of the pic


as to the front, it's going to be much more difficult than I thought because of the position of the rear bushing for the LCA....any SF brace would have to somehow circumvent it, which would involve some serious bends...can't go over it, because someday you might want to take the LCA off and need to get to the bolts.

the Stage 2 LTB attaches to the bolt in the middle (the rusty one on the rear LCA bushing assembly)...so still not sure how to tie in the front subframe assembly without a hefty front crossbrace and middle-longitudinal bars.




Here's a full shot of the underside, FTW

 

by the way, lets drop the FWD vs. RWD discussion....it's not relevant to what we're talking about here, since we are doing this for MAXIMAs and not for BMWs or anything else..

 

Wasn't the E46 3-series the most torsionally rigid car EVER mass-produced as of its release?

I'd be interested to see just how rigid SFCs would make our chassis, but I doubt it'd come close.

Mind you, chassis rigidity figures are available for the E46. Anyone care to get their car bent before and after SFCs to test??

 

Dr. Klop, are you saying have two tubes running longitudinally, one on either side of the rectangular hollow frame rail things? Otherwise I have no clue what you're trying to show with that diagram. Maybe you could draw it on the underbody diagram I posted.

The oval hole that Irish is talking about is also visible on the diagram I posted, look near the gas tank and you'll see one oval hole on either side. Sounds good.

 

Stage 2 SFCs + stage 2 LTB + JClaw traction bars = the secks

All I need is dem JBars....

 

you need to get your car on a lift and take some pics.

btw, no traction bars for the 5G guys

 

indeed...

I suppose I will actually take pics after I buy and install those JBars. Just need a little more money.

 

one tube will go on the side (original) and the other one will go right under the frame rail. The purpose of adding the second tube is to improve resistance to vertical flex and to stiffen up the whole sfc construction.

 

that just looks like alot of weight....

 

if it'll do it's job, extra 10 - 20 lbs are not ganna make a difference...

 

Why do think that will prevent vertical flex more than say a beefier single tube? That's gonna hurt ground clearance and be much more visible from the side of the car. If we get tubing big and thick enough we shouldn't need a redundant second tube like that, IMO.

 

well, I can't really explain it but think of it this way: cut out a rectangular piece of cardboard which will act as our soft chassis, two long stripes which will act like SFC tubes and six small rectangles which will act like those brackets that hold the tubes.

First, glue the stripes to the side of the main rectangle, like this:

Vertical stiffens was virtually not improved at all.
Now, try gluing it all together like this:

In this case it became alot harder to bend it.

Welding the tubes to the sides of the frame rails will be just like attaching the cardboard stripes to the sides of the rectangle. IMO

 

If the X-brace (Stage II) in the center of the car was solidly welded into the two Stage I tubes, you wouldn't need a second tube. In fact it would be totally redundant. Simply having a solid box with and X inside and a cross brace would be completely solid. It's all in the shape.

 

But then you couldn't remove anything if you needed to get at the undercarriage....

 

OK, take a close look at this picture. Were the SFCs all welded, including the diagonal braces, would it really be that hard to get to the exhaust? No, I do not think so. The center hub of the SFCs is right near the cat (straight pipe in this case). So the catback could easily be removed/installed by unbolting and pulling it back and down. The exhaust in front of the cat could be unbolted and pulled forward and down. I don't think it's really an issue at all!

The only other thing under there that might require access are those hydraulic hard lines (brake lines?). It's pretty unlikely that you would ever have to remove those, but I don't think it would be much harder to remove them either.

Since I've got a new catback, I don't have any need to get at anything under there and I would definitely prefer the added stiffness of complete welding.

 

Those who will be getting a full stage II SFC will probably not need this, but i'm pretty sure that those who want to stay auto-x legal will benefit from using secondary tubes.

 

Well I'm going to try to make a custom one on my car this spring, my objective is to keep it under 50 pounds (The car will weight 2690-2700 + 50 for this so weight isn't that much of an issue. A 2750 lbs maxima with coilovers and some serious chassis stiffening is going to handle awesome).

After looking at it some more I'm 100% sure I can include a lower tie bar into the SFC and have the 2 main tubes run longer, under the gas tank (actually not directly under, so I can still take out the tank if needed), slightly under the rear beam and then be bent up and go directly into the rear frame slightly behind the beam axle. I'm also going to have some light 0.75" square tubing run on either side from the main tubing to along the rocker panels and weld it there. And a crossbrace tube between the rear frame right above the rear beam. The X-brace in the center of the car is going to be welded into the main tubes, Roll-cage style.

They use 1.75" tubing for roll cages, but with .120 thickness. To cut the weight some, I'm going to use .83 thickness for the 2 main tubes (that weights 1.47 lbs/foot) and 1.5" tubing for the rest of the structure. Total weight should be around 50 lbs flat.

 

Just an update:
Corey (Redlinemax) spoke to Piper Motorsports (one of the TOP frame/roll cage/roll bar fabricators in the mid-atlantic), and my car will be going in in roughly 2 weeks to be fitted for the "prototype" RedlineMax SFCs, it looks like.

Interestingly, Mitch Piper suggested to Corey that they build BOLT-ON SFCs, instead of welded. I'm not sure why they say this, but these guys KNOW THEIR **** and are HIGHLY respected in the racing community (they have a few GT cars running in pro-level races and a ton of Spec Miatas that they "built" - one of which was at the DC auto show).

so if that's what they suggest, I'm game. We can speculate all we want, but I'll defer to guys who have built SFCs hundreds of times on different cars....

so, hopefully by the end of the month we will know something

 

So Piper in Virginia is making the prototype, and then RedlineMax will take that design? And RedlineMax's shop is in NYC or where?

You'd better make sure that they actually have a structural reason to suggest bolt-on, not a "practical"/cost reason. I don't think that bolt-on could come close to the stiffness of weld-on without 15+ pounds of bolts.

 

no....Piper will make the prototype, and then Corey and Piper will discuss pricing for Piper making more of them (to be sold through RedlineMax). If it is a price he thinks he can sell them at, Piper will make them. If not, who knows.

RedlineMax's shop is in Maryland, near DC.

As to the "practical"/cost issue - trust me, Piper does NOT have a reputation for doing ANYTHING "cheaply." They do it right or don't do it at all. Cost is not an issue for me - they quoted me "around $200" for a Stage I setup, installed, a couple months ago.

Like i said though - I am more inclined to trust their expertise at frame stiffening (which is considerable) rather than the ORG's collective expertise at frame stiffening (it is debatable as to whether anyone in this thread actually has ANY expertise in this)....

also remember - if it is a bolt-up SFC, you could always have it welded on at your local shop. It gives more options to guys who maybe don't want to weld onto their car (since that makes it more or less permanent)...and more of a prospective group of buyers for Redline. They're not going to make them if only 4 people are going to buy them.

 

btw, bolt-on CERTAINLY costs more to make than weld-on, so I doubt it is a "cost" issue.....

 

I suspect it could be a beefier version of something like this:

http://www.flyinmiata.com/index.php?...umber=13-69010

we will work out the design details with them when I bring the car in. I'm obviously not going to let them do anything to my car that I don't think will be effective.

 

so, this is going to run BELOW your RSB?

still not sure why there is a need to tie in the subframe BEHIND the back wheels....there is no twist there. The twist is between the axles.

 

How bout tying into the front subframe, like the LTB would.

Sorry I havent been around I am reasearching what it would take to put a LS1 in a 1986-1988 Rx7.

 

well in either case, the $200 quote was for a single person...I am sure that if many people buy these...in addition that 200 dollar quote included installation which would make them actually very affordable I would think...

 

I have no RSB.

I know that the twist is between the axles, it's just that it's more practical to have the two tubes go 2-3" behind the rear axle than 2-3" in front. It does the same job. And it should be a serious improvement, especially since I'm planning on replacing all possible bushings with polyurethane.

 

trust me, I'm trying to find a way....but look at the pics and tell me how exactly I can do this WITHOUT using a front lateral crossmember (not SCCA legal)...and take into consideration what I mentioned earlier about clearing the back mount of the LCA..

That quote was also for a built-on-the-car Stage I similar to the WS setup - basic, ugly, and only single bars.

I have no idea how much it will be, but I'm sure corey will only get them made if the price is what cheap-a s s org'ers are willing to pay for

why not? If you're looking to flatten out the rear of the car, that will be WAY more effective than will extended SFCs, IMO..

 

I doubt that. But I meant rear sway bar. I will get a Rear strut bar (the one that goes between the two shock towers), but no sway bar. To reduce understeer I'm simply going to run 215's in the rear and 235's up front.

 

RSBs are a pretty stupid mod. Not only are you adding a bunch of unsprung weight to make your car ride worse, you're inviting snap oversteer and a potentially very dangerous situation. There are tons of threads on the Org to this effect. If you want true oversteer get RWD.

 

with all due respect...

1. that is only the case for someone who ONLY has an RSB on stock suspension and tires. My car is set up with slight understeer at the moment (even with RSB), and have NEVER experienced snap oversteer in any driving conditions with the current setup, even when I've TRIED to do so in an empty parking lot. the only way I can throw the tail out is heavy trail braking, doing it on purpose

2. there are also tons of threads on the org about how the FSTB makes a "night and day difference in handling" on the org ...don't believe everything every 18-year old who doesn't know how to drive says about how is car is "unsafe". Usually it's these guys' driving habits and lack of experience in handling a large car that is unsafe.

3. I like your website, the design is pretty sweet. However I do NOT notice in your carefully chronicled summary of your car's life any place where you personally installed and/or tested a RSB on your car with springs/struts/LTB or other suspension mods at the same time.

I actually HAVE an RSB with the LTB/Springs/struts/etc....so I think maybe, just maybe, my FIRSTHAND knowledge of the handling characteristics > your quoting of "lots of guys on the org" '


btw, not trying to be a smarta.ss here....

I do ALOT of driving, and there is no way I would do ANYTHING that would make the car unsafe. My #1 goal (over performance and looks and anything else car-related) is safety first....I simply do not feel that with my particular setup there is ANY risk of snap oversteer whatsoever.

 

I don't think it's correct. If you tune your FWD car for a slight oversteer it will be quite predictable. I also know that professional tuners do recommend RSB for FWD cars. Of course it depends on your cars initial behavior, which is why I still haven't bough RSB.

Edit: +1 to what irish said. Irish, I think I started typing before you posted this.

 

Exactly, and check out the stickies on suspension setups in this forum. This section on the org is certainly home to the most handling-knowledgeable folks here, and almost all of them are running RSBs....

 

If I remember correctly, when Motor Trend drove 2 Stillen Maximas, one with, and one without a RSB, they said the one without put up better numbers. Obviously this won't translate exactly to a specific handling characteristic, but it's gotta mean something.
I've never had a RSB on my car, but from what I've read it seems to be far more beneficial for un-lowered Maximas, with much more body roll. A lowered Maxima rolls far less in the corners than stock, and thus I feel takes away most of the purpose of a RSB. Then when you add SFC's, the added weight and stiffness of a RSB really can have negative effects, or at least not any beneficial ones. I believe this would be different for 3rd/6th gens however, due to different rear suspension designs. Our beam already has a RSB in it.
That being said, I would love to try out somebodys RSB for a week and see what it does.

 

Josh, I'm not just going by "lots of guys" on the Org , I'm going specifically by Dave B's advice re the RSB, a guy who knows Maxima mods and cars in general, and it makes a lot of sense to me, hence I won't be getting one. The stock rear sway bar (which 95maxrider just mentioned) and beam tie the rear wheels together PLENTY in my very very humble opinion. 4th and 5th genners complain about not having IRS and then they get RSBs, which I find somewhat ironic. But I'm glad you like your RSB. A friend of mine couldn't stop praising his RSB and how it "transformed" the feel of his car. I nonetheless remain skeptical. Further, I suspect that the RSB might make such a noticeable difference on a Maxima because of the sloppy chassis...which brings us back to SFCs.

BTW thanks for the kudos; the website's closer to where I want it to be than the car...you notice how I have all these photos and description glorifying the pretty basic mods I've done. I haven't been able to do anything more due to severe time and money constraints...but that's life, I'll keep on modding slowly.

 

True.....it will remain to be seen what the situation will be post-SFCs...could change my opinion. I'm just saying that RSBs are not a "stupid mod" in certain setups. Of course, with certain setups it very well may be stupid...

at least you don't have a ghetto cardomain page with like 350 photos on it like I do. Wish I had the time/patience to set up my own custom page (for car and for other things)

 

Yep, I didn't have justification enough to call it a stupid mod, don't know why I said that. It's just one of those few mods like UDP that I decided long ago was definitely not worth it for me.

If the bolt-on Stage 1 was similar to those Miata ones, maybe a similar butterfly-type brace would be in the works for Stage 2? That would be nice.

 

The Addco RSB that I added to my car was the best suspension mod I did. It made the car more neutral at the limits. You can adjust the RSB's placement under the beam to make it oversteer or understeer. No offense to Dave B, but he is a drag racing guy. I tracked my Maxima and so have Nealoc87. Do a search, I am sure you can find his opinion. It's definetly worth it if you are a handling guy.

 

Also, I think that people complaining of oversteer with RSB's don't know how to drive They are probably experiencing lift throttle oversteer and don't even know it.

 

ding ding ding! FTW!

 

It can possibly explain why inexperienced guys complain about oversteer.

I also suspect that "snap oversteer" they are talking about is caused by doing Scandinavian flick (technique used by rally drivers to induce oversteer by first steering away from the turn and preloading the springs) while changing lanes, without even realizing that.