I installed a supercharger and a Ford suspension kit and unfortunately I ended up with two new tower braces.(won't fit over the supercharger). PM me and let's talk. Steve

 

My 2011 GT Premium didn't come with one.

 

...and it comes in two sizes!

 

I will. They don't work.

 

They may not do a lot, but they don't do nothing.

There are many types of race cars which use similar designs. They don't just put it in those for looks. Granted, the one in the Mustang GT may not be making a HUGE difference the way it is in there, but it is doing something. For such an inexpensive and easy to install part that looks so dang cool, that's good enough for me.

2¢

 

I can tell you one thing I was informed about STB with elongated holes. Jack up the center of the vehicle and it allows sag in the suspension and installation of the STB at that point will allow even less distortion than installation on the ground.

 

I think I am following but could you elaborate on why that is?

 

From my NON Expert understanding is the reason behind strut tower bars is to prevent inward flex during hard cornering or bumps. If the suspension is drooped when installed, then once lowered it will be at a higher tension already once the weight of the car is on the suspension. I also understand that this really only works for those few bars that have elongated holes. I do know when you come across an ill fitting bar this method helps out also.

Again I am no rocket scientist, I just fix Apaches.. no strut tower bars on those though.

 

If you want to put it on for looks, do it. I agree it looks great, really dresses up the engine bay nice. But it's not really doing anything for performance. If you want proof, read this thread of people who know more than this entire tread combined.
http://corner-carvers.com/forums/sho...=&threadid=448

It seems to me the common themes are 1) they may, possibly, kinda work on an old fox body. But the S-197 chassis is so much stiffer than a fox. And 2) 3 or 4 point braces can work, but the strut tower brace that comes on the mustang really doesn't do much by connecting to only two points.

Look at it this way, you have the radiator support, shock towers, firewall, B-pillars, rear shock towers, in that order. Essentially, you have a series of walls and boxes connected together. Try to imagine two walls (radiator and firewall) with a U shaped piece between them (shock towers), connected on all 4 corners, there just happens to be a missing cross-section in the middle. Now you can grab the ends, and flex this shape. Now imagine you connect the top of the U, what have you done to make this shape stiffer? You can still twist it. Now triangulate the U with the walls fore and aft of it. Suddenly it doesnt twist so well. Make sense? This is an oversimplification of course, but you get the idea.

 

Where can I get one for the 2011 GT?

 

You know I read the beginning of that and it was like most forums. A difference of opinions and a whole bunch of "i know more than you" I would like to see statistical data that Strut Tower Bars provide no improvement over having nothing installed. I agree that having more points of contact would benefit structural integrity but that goes for anything that requires more than a moderate amount of strength.

I agree that the towers themselves are tremendously strong for their intended purpose but what I think matters is not that the towers would flex but that the sheetmetal attached would benefit from having other structures for support. I bet if you measured the distance from one mount stud across to the other, then raised the car and took the same measurement that they would differ.

A strut moving inside a tower is in linear loading motion. When the vehicle turns a corner sharply the "box" of the engine bay will distort. Whether by 1-2mm or on say an older vehicle an inch. Newer vehicles are gaining unbelievable amounts of rigidity with the advancements of materials but there is no way without factual data that I would believe it does nothing.

 

This is much more factual data that I can deal with. And yes I know ricer ricer but tested data non the less.

http://www.jdm-option.com/eng/pr_CUSCO/towerbar.html

 

Nice find! This really cuts through all the hypothetical mumbo-jumbo and shows exactly how a strut tower brace is beneficial.


BTW How is a Nissan Silvia "ricer"? That test car is sick! I bet you it goes and handles like a moth#*-fu#*er. And looks nice too. Sorry off topic lol

 

Well the kicker is with the internet is that they take other peoples word for it.

If you dont know the difference between linear and and shear loads or torsional rigidity then you cant dismiss a theory when those factors apply. I may not be a rocket scientist but I am an airframe and powerplant mechanic so I know more than Steve your grocer.

Any structure firmly secured to another structure will retain a more stable platform vs a solitary structure.

 

And the ricer comment was for the die hard domestics in case the import testing wasnt to standard.. lol You can see from the cars I have listed in my avatar .. I am not Biased

 

It's kind of hard to make fun of JDM cars anyway sitting in a car with a live rear axle lol, no matter how beastly it may be. 2¢

 

Especially my junk.. fail I only have 500WHP and AWD... lol

 

First, that website is no better than the structural engineers and professional racers on CC. They managed to prove there is chassis flex, nobody has ever questioned that. But they didnt show that the STB actually STOPS the flex. The slalom and road course tests are crap, entirely too many variables to be called scientific in any way.

Second, one the BEST Mustang suspension companies out there is Griggs racing. Guess what their $14,000 (before install) suspension package doesn't have...

 

Live rear axle or 4 Banger it dosent matter what it's got in it just the results.

 

Similar to the Brembo package (brakes and wheels), at a minimum you get a nice bonus dress up item for the engine bay for upgrading the wheels. It makes me feel a little bit better about the 1K I dropped...