A top mounted strut tower brace will not offer any potential protection against tower deformation. Anything mounted above the tower mounting area will not have sufficient leverage against a vertical force. A conventional, commercially available strut brace is only able to resist lateral forces. A wider, stiffer, and thicker reinforcement above the strut and below the tower mounting area has the best chance of helping.

The stock guide supports have short studs that only provide good nut thread purchase when mounted without a strut brace. The stock studs are tapered so there must be at least three threads showing to be sure all available threads on the nut are in contact with viable threads on the guide support studs. Most camber plates have long enough studs or bolts to eliminate this shortcoming (if you must have a strut brace) and provide extra support under the strut mount area where it is needed most.

 

Absolutely! If the OP really wants to lower the car and run 18s, then both camber plates and a STB are needed to offer protection against tower deformation. I have about 3" travel and have hit some relatively small bumps at moderate speeds and the thump is scary!! I have to say I take some solace in knowing that I have a 1/2" and 1/4" sandwich around the tower to keep things in place.

 

And the principle of using washers to spread out force when putting anything together is stupid too? :impatient

A top mounted strut bar with reinforcement plates will most certainly help keep from deformation. It acts as a large washer and spreads out any upward force.

Maybe you don't believe in the benefits of STB's but that certainly doesnt make less valuable.

 

I didn’t say I was a strut brace non-believer when it is expected to perform as the design intended.

You hit the nail on the head when you said it acted as a larger washer in a support function. However, it only acts as a support for an area not much larger than the nut that secures it. The sandwich effect will not keep the metal from stretching because the clamping force is confined to a small area. Remember, that it is held in place by a little nut, on a little stud, with a small amount of torque, and the potentially damaging force is coming from below, not from above, and not from pulling downward where a washer has an effect on the distribution of load.

I’m after critical thinking here, not bubble popping.

 

But Minis are so good at bubble popping. BURBLE BURBLE!

My M7 STB sits flush against a LARGE area atop the strut tower. It's distributing force across that whole area when torqued down properly sandwhiching the strut tower to the strut plate below.

This whole area is now acting as one.

 

[quote=obehave;1276446]At your state of tune the stock IC is not maxxed out.[quote]

I agree with this statement. While some aftermarkets seem to be better at recouping HP compared to the stock unit - IT IS MARGINAL. The stock unit has proven to do a good job.

1) add larger scoop.
2) add a header.
3) left over cash.

 

More off topic leap frogging; there’s no hope of reasoning for the vendor faithful (bubble popping), but here is a good example of critical thinking from another vendor from the U.K., for those that are still able to use reasoning. Rolland of GT Tuning has this to say “...You can make the plate on top 6 inch thick kryptonite,if you like and it will still do very little. If you dont put a larger & stronger plate underneath the tower , then nothing has changed. For every force there is an equal and opposite force,its this 'equal & opposite force' which pulls the tower downwards from the outer perimeter of the tower causing mushrooming. Example ... I have a sheet of hardboard (say 2 feet diameter) and bolted on the FAR side near to the centre of it with 3 bolts is a sheet of paper ,If I then push with my knee in the centre of the hardboard and pull the edge of the hardboard (with my hands ) at the same time the board bends right? Now if we repeat the experiment above but replace the weedy sheet of paper with a 2 inch thick sheet of hardened steel (it can be as big in area as you like,so lets make it 2 feet diameter the same as the hardboard) ......suprise suprise the board bends exactly the same (and as easily) as before. "

 

As for the intercooler subject it seems most of the others have talked you out of it, it’s too bad you don’t want to go into the motor (good gains to be had there), because at my stage of this process after getting most of the other stuff out of the way, a lighter flywheel is sure looking beneficial and methinks it should have been done sooner before the money ran out.

 

I live in South FL...and I got the Ireland fixed 1.25 camber plates. I also had to hammer down both of my strut towers. And you should have seen my stock strut mounts! The passenger side one was shaped like a quarter moon...There are speed bumps in south FL. There are also pot holes that you really can't see at all at night. Also, this problem is commulative. It will happen over time after hitting many bumps. You probably won't know that it has happened until it throws your alignment off.

The tower brace would do it if it is the M7, but as far as I know that it the only one that has enough surface area to do anything. However, keep in mind that unless you track your car, you will not reap the benefits of the strut brace. We have such a stiff chassis that you would have to put some crazy strain on the car to have a lot of flex there. I researched it pretty good. It is also up in the air whether putting a reinforcing plate above the tower will be as effective as a thick mount under the plate.

The camber plates are very thick and heavy duty no matter what brand you get. The 1.25 negative camber will give you more cornering grip without throwing your car off balance and giving you oversteer. Tire wear isn't an issue until you go to around 2 negative camber. The ones I got were $180 and not too hard to install. You do have to remove the shocks and springs though. They also have rubber in the middle with reinforcements under so the rubber doesn't crack and break. This will not give you a rougher ride like some other camber plates will.

The towers are thin metal, but the stock mounts are bending as well as they are about as thin as the towers. The $180 camber plates are at least 3x thicker than the stock mounts as well as having MUCH more surface area under the tower.

Bang for the buck mod/fix for this problem is camber plates. You will feel the benefits much more from negative camber than you will from a strut brace. I am paranoid about this problem though, so I will be sandwiching the towers. I will put the M7 plates on top of the towers in addition to the thick camber plates.

 

The top plate will help...but the strut mount is still part of the problem. If you have mushrooming, you will likely have bent mounts. As for the mount, since is not strong enough, it may still be bending if there is too much support above the tower and the mount is receiving ALL of the forces. It may even bend the mount in other places. This will eventually give you a harsh ride from broken rubber in the mounts and throw off your alignment leading to annoying unnecessary tire replacement.

Any deformation in the tower is going to be present in the strut mount as well. This at least shows that the weakness is not only in the tower. The mount is not distributing the forces evenly if it is becoming deformed itself. Once the mount becomes bent, it's strength and ability to distribute forces through the entire tower are gone. It will begin to stretch the tower from the center out.

Since we're off topic already and into thought experiments, think of this one. Get a 1'x1' piece of sheet metal and put it on something soft...like a couch. Put a 6"x6" piece of sheetmetal in the middle of it. Now hit it with a hammer. It will stretch it from the middle and give you a nice imprint (mushroom) of the hammer. If you get a 6"x6" piece of 1/8" billet aluminum and put it in the middle and hit it with the hammer, you will end up with more of an imprint of the 6"x6" piece of metal as opposed to an imprint of the hammer. If the tower was the only problem, we would be getting deformation of the tower similar to the shape of the mount. A mount this weak is not going to stand up to any hard impacts.

 

You hit the nail on the head - it's the strut mount!
There's nou doubt that plates are better than the TB as they offer much more interference with the shock tower. k-huevo points this out very clearly in his posts.
18" wheels & lowering compounds this issue. Many bearing carriers crack before the sheet metal of the shock tower deforms. The worst part is the mount. The bolts that retain the mount are enough since they only need to hold the strut in place. The mount, on the other hand, has a very small foot print on the tower for the amount of force generated in the center.
For some a STB will ad some strength to the mount by adding some strength to the mount. It would ad substantial strength to the mounting surface keeping the mount itself from deforming. If 16" wheels & a softer sidewall tire are used ( 17" rim tops ) and you don't have NE pot holes, frost heaves and the like a good STB with billet mounts would work. This is NOT to say an STB is better than plates. Plates are MUCH better & if you have them in combonation with a good STB = more better + under brace = better yet.

 

I thought this thread was about intercoolers, did I miss the memo when it became a strut tower mushrooming thread?

 

It is called switching gears without engaging the clutch.

 

GRIND CRUNCH GRIND CRUNCH GRIND! Oh ya, and my DFIC rocks, try one for yourself and try to tell me it doesn't.

 

it's for my wife man, if it was mine, it would have a turbo on it, a built lower a ported head with high revving bits and the best suspension/brakes available.

my wife will think it's fast enough.