Yep, you got a problem with that?

Also, Mazda Rev It Up, but the most experience I got is from practicing with my own car – read my original post a little more careful.

I bet you haven’t done even that.

 

I tried this with my Maxima years ago. No difference.

It doesn't make much sense because if this theroy was true, welding on SFCs on a two post lift would be a good idea (It's NOT!!!!!!!). When installing chassis reinforcements you want the car on the ground and in it's natural position.

 

That's interesting that you saw no difference, Dave.

I'm thinking that tightening the STBs with the car raised is simply a way of adding preload that pushes out on the strut towers. This greatly improves the feel of the car on bumps by stopping compression before it starts, but could conceivably reduce handling in turns because the bar isn't adjusted to prevent tension as easily, and by possibly changing camber slightly. I need to go out and do some high speed turns to test that hypothesis.

 

Damn, so that means my Cattman FTSB was useless for the 2 years I had my Maxima since it was installed by myself when the car was on the ground.

 

the jury is not out on this yet. so no, it wasn't useless b/c of install. now whether or not a FSTB has a use on some makes... I know on the 6th gen our towers are right against the wall. the brace does more work the further forward the towers.

any more info on the source's credibility? these bars are designed to be installed with the car on the ground.

 

Haven't even done what? I did the BMW thing, but I was only 18, and was only able to do the driving safety course. Still a lot of fun using a 330i and the instructors were really cool to talk to. I enjoyed it. My dad did the Mazda: Rev It Up a while ago.

 

ok original poster, I put my FSTB on with vehicle *on the ground* and immediately saw a difference in handling response, so if you are so worried that no one has been putting these on right how do you explain that?
Placebo is ruled out, there is way to much of a *Noticeable* difference, I didnt even question it when I drove it for first time after mounting it. This cheap ebay item is by far up there on my list of highly recommended easy, inexpensive mods.

 

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "handling". Also, there will be differences with different strut bars and different cars. When I first installed my OTTO Racing FSTB I noticed only a slight difference in hard turns, which was so slight that I couldn't rule out the placebo effect.

The significant improvement that I've noticed after tightening the STBs while the car is raised are not so much in handling as in chassis stiffness, in other words, the "solidness" of the car over rough surfaces. I can't say at this point whether the readjustment makes the car handle any better in turns (versus a FSTB installed with the car on the ground). But I'm going all-out to improve the chassis stiffness of my Max and so I've been very impressed with this change.

 

VQuick,
you have quite a following for this FSTB install. May resurrect a mod that has been deemed ineffective. Since many are worried about unwanted problems installing while raised, how about getting your alignment checked? You know about the Firestone Lifetime one right? With all the work you're performing on the suspension, I would think you get it aligned enough for the Lifetime deal.

 

here i got wasten my posts just so i can make real ones... i think i got two left..I will be ordering my new fstb tommorow....
i have all the time in the world i will try both ways...as well as get it aligned before and after each way to see if it effects camber at all...and after i am done i will get back with you..

 

Sounds good, toyick!

Yeah, about how much does that cost? Only problem is I'm reaaaally broke for a few months here. Gotta pay off some debt and I'm in school part time so I'm only working part time...bad news. I will keep an eye on my tires, though!

 

Preloading the FTSB while jacked is gonna promote positive camber. Not good.

Isn't there some backwards information from post #4?

The OEM spec is +.5 to -1.0 camber on the A32 (more neg lowered). When you unload the suspension the camber goes more postive. Dropping the car the tire bottoms squat outwards not in.

Again backwards - increasing negative camber helps cornering.

As for the static camber changes you're probably not gonna get much difference between a loaded & unloaded install at a standstill. The FSTB is there to help limit flexing of the chassis/body only under major loads like cornering (and braking). I doubt just loading/unloading the suspension is gonna flex the front subframe/body enough. (Rear door area is another story).

McPherson strut designs do flex positive under 9/10th cornering. You either compensate with larger amounts of static negative camber and/or boxing the struts using FTSB, LTB, and stiff springs/struts,

 

dont' forget beefier strut mounts and control arm bushings help a lot in reducing positive camber gain under hard cornering.

 

When I put on my FSTB it was *on the ground* I noticed a slight difference, on the RSTB it was also *on the ground* and I noticed nothing at all. I will be lowering on s-techs and illuminas within the week, as well as installing H&R camber kit. I will re do my tower braces *in the air*. I will do them(tower braces) before I lower the car and drive it to see if there is any difference. then lower it, then align it. So -1.0degree camber is the most negative camber you want to go with right?

 

Wait, doesn’t positive camber mean that the part of the tire that touches the ground is further away from the center of the car than the upper part?

 

i KNOW the feeling. IIRC, they charge about $100-130. I'm waiting for when I need one. playing with your suspension, I would have it and visit everytime I change something. a benjamin now is cheaper than tires sooner than later.

 

Hmm, so putting on my forthcoming bar while jacked up may eliminate that small bit of negative camber I have from my Sprints?

 

If you can change the camber settings, you would be stressing the living poo-poo out of your unibody chassis. So good luck with that.

 

I'd really like to think that isn't possible lol

 

all i see this doing is creating positive camber....................

 

If the strut towers are flexing (outward?) when the suspension is unloaded, that amount of flex is normal. Let's call the position of the strut towers while loaded X and while unloaded Y. Obviously it doesn't damage the car to lift it off the ground. So if we're simply tightening the bar to hold the strut towers tight at their normal, unloaded distance Y, how is that stressing the unibody chassis any more than at position X? It's simply holding the chassis tight at one of the two positions it is commonly in. It's not pushing the chassis beyond where it would ever go otherwise; it's simply holding that part in the unloaded position rather than the loaded position.

I'd like to add that when I lifted the car and retightened the FSTB, I noticed no difference in fitment. That is, the distance between the strut towers appeared to be exactly the same as it was with the car on the ground and the FSTB fit exactly the same. I did not have to force it or anything. There was no creaking or any kind of noise as I lowered the car to the ground. So any flexing here is pretty minimal.

Another thought: maybe what Tanabe says about installing strut bars explains this all better than camber and chassis flex. They say, "It is always recommended to raise the vehicle when installing so that the load of the shock uppermounts on the shock towers is relieved and balanced out. When raised, and the tower bar is placed onto the vehicle, the preload can be adjusted and set. After it is bolted on and the car is lowered, each shock tower will have equal load and will prevent independent movements of each shock." Basically they're saying that by raising the car and then installing, you are allowing a perfect balance between the two struts and each shock tower will have equal load... I have a hard time picturing exactly what they mean, but maybe someone else can figure that out, if it has any merit.

 

Would positive camber alone make the chassis stiffer?

 

i think your logic of X and Y does not consider the fact the car is supported when lifted and stationary. When on the road, those parts normally in X while down, are now in Y and are supporting weight and flexing.

no expert here of course, just on the fence.

Also, just because things aren't visually and audibly noticeable, doesn't mean they're not occuring. a machine mechanic/weekend modder at work told me "I had my Camaro so stiff it rode like on rails like no other car I've seen. Performance was amazing. But then..... more than once, so much stress was placed where I eliminated flex and my windows burst. Something has to so something WILL give."

 

Reverse it.

 

im confused. should i do this or not? i have a FSTB on my 300ZX and it doesnt make a very noticable difference. I've wondered why. I would like to try this but I dont want to hurt the car.

 

got it, I thought it was the other way around

 

Well, I doubt it would hurt your car to try it for a day or so. Give it a try.

 

Good point. I knew there was something wrong with my reasoning.

 

Tire looks a lil thin. What is that, 195wide? Haha.

I'm curious about the other mods you guys have? It seems like the order of modding is dictated by $ on hand. So people get the FSTB cuz it's like $30 on ebay, much cheaper than rsb, springs/struts, and other suspension mods. I've already gotten springs and struts but nothing else (waiting on stage 5 sfc). If I threw on a fstb now, will the effects be as pronounced as if I only had a fstb?

That comment about "try it on a railroad track". What was the purpose of that statement?

Jae

 

some one needs to make these for the max.

 

What exactly does the second pic show?

 

Hell yes, what are those called, how much of an improvement do they allegedly make, and what kind of a car?

The second pic looks like rear suspension because that's an exhaust hangar, although I don't know the car.

 

Subframe spacer for a 240sx. Mounts at the rear subframe for the differential.

 

Jon, isn't that esentially the same thing as the ES Subframe bushings we have?

http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?t=371682

 

Our ES subframe bushings are on the front "C" brace that holds up the motor mounts. They go around the four bolts that hold it up. We actually tried to correct ES since it has very little to do with the subframe, but they didn't want to change the name.

I saw a front fender support thing for a 240SX and I thought that would be awesome if someone made that for Maximas. The install would be a pain, but it would still probably help a lot.

I still can't really tell what that 2nd pic of the rear subframe spacer is doing. Is it replacing a rubber bushing with something solid? 4th gens don't really have a whole lot of subframe support under there and we don't have a rear differential so I don't know if we could have something just like that, but there is a lot of improvement to be made with the bushings and supports in the beam.

 

On the 240sx, the rear subframe is the whole unit the houses the rear differential, and all the rear suspension components. It is bolted to the rear of the car with rubber bushings to reduce vibration. Of course, these rubber bushings flex and wear out over time, causing sloppy handling at the limit, so people either replace the bushings, which requires removing the whole subframe and a ton of work, or they install the subframe spacers, which compress the old bushings and gets rid of a lot of the slop from the subframe.

 

Would there be any way to increase negative camber on the preload?

For example, putting outward tension on the strut bars?

 

That would be a very bad idea. You would be putting undo stress on the upper mounting hardware only, and still not affecting camber any meaningful amount. Those mounts are meant to sit flush, or flat, against the mounted surface, and the nuts are torqued down to hold them in that position. They could not be misaligned unless an extreme amount of force was placed on the upper mount hardware, and the nuts were not correctly torqued.

 

How does a stiffer chassis feel on a rough road compared to a less
stiff one?

 

Much more solid, less vibration, fewer interior rattles, less clunking, smoother ride because the suspension handles the bumps instead of the chassis flex. There are no drawbacks to a stiff chassis. I'm sure the 6th gen chassis is quite stiff but it can always be improved.