Here's a nice test of the need for a stress bar I found on the roadfly mini forum.
He found less than 1/16" movement between the towers under aggressive
cornering and rough roads.
http://www.dpcars.net/mini2.htm

 

Thanks for posting that info.
At least a rudimentary effort was made to provide some type of rough data. It's a shame that companies actually hawking these wares don't voluntarily do the same.

 

Wouldn't think twice about installing a brace. Some cars need it more than others, like my M5 (see pic). The mini is still enhaced by it, just not as much. If you track or autocross there will be a difference. It seems most of the discussion is on just how much that will be. IMHO, this isn't in the first group of enhacements I would do, but the more serious you are the higher on the list it becomes.

 

As we can see, once again, data provided by the vendor is ignored pretty much in full because it's from the vendor, and not an independent source. Yes, I understand you want tests under hard cornering, and if you want, I'll repeat the test from the link. However, I noticed that you had no intention of discussing the scientific process used, and the inherent problems with that test. Not to say I don't appreciate the work, because I think it was creative and i respect that. But I hope you and everyone here sees the double standard you seem intent on applying to what data is presented. I do hope you noticed that he said exactly what I said numerous times. It's not a required addition for every car, and was never meant to be. It's an addition to increase the performance even further beyond the already superb performance of the MINI.

That said, I've rigged up a few test rigs for the trip to the dragon this week, and hopefully I can provide some data to you next week. Not that I think you will accept it, since it will come from a vendor, but maybe you'll be encouraged to provide your own tests to discount what many people have said about the brace actually helping.

 

What data from the vendor? I hope you're not talking about that bit with the floor jack.
It would have been nice.
All I did was post a thanks to the person for posting the info--more useful info than had been posted in this topic so far. Beyond that, this has become a hopeless discussion, given that you
a) refused to provide data and
b) offered only excuses as to why you think data is unncessary
in the first place.

I'm also getting the impression that you're mixing my posts up with those of someone else because you keep coming back at me with the poor-vendor-will-never-be-believed defense when I have never once posted that I would assume that your data is false. If you would go back and read the posts you would see that I merely asked for some data on strut tower movement on a MINI under load and have not stated that you would fabricate your data. In fact, given that my first post in this topic lead with "Last time I looked, no vendor had ever presented test data proving movement of the MINI's strut towers while driving" then one could easily surmise that I was asking for vendor-supplied data.
Of course there are mammoth problems with that test, but at least a test was conducted. I was just thanking the poster for actually posting some type of data at all. However, rather than
a) providing no data,
b) attacking the very idea of providing data, and
c) attacking the rather crude test the user posted,
why not just execute a better test?
And more importantly, it was something--if only a minimal effort.
Either you're repeatedly trying to obfuscate your lack of data with a misrepresentation of what I have posted, or this poor-vendor-will-never-be-believed tack is baggage brought from a previous discussion that did not include me. In either case, please stop posting falsehoods about what I have posted. I simply asked for data on strut tower movement and have received none from a vendor.
Again, I think you've mixed me up with someone else. Please stop attributing the idea that vendors only provide false data to any of my posts.

The pouting and level of defensiveness in your sentence is unnecessary. The purpose of providing test data is not to provide test data specifically "to discount what many people have said about the brace actually helping". That would be unscientific. The purpose is to provide data in general.

No matter how many times you post misrepresentations of what I have posted in this topic, the fact is that I have simply asked for data showing MINI strut tower movement during, say, hard cornering. Obviously significant movement of the towers toward or away from each other during testing, prefererably on several different cars, could make the case for the need for strut tower braces, just as a lack of movement could reveal that strut tower braces are unncessary.

 

I gave you data that showed the strut towers would move if the frame becomes loaded. Whether force is gravity or load transfer, the frame will deflect at least some when loaded. Can we accept that? Because now two tests have shown some movement of the frame.

However, I believe you may be barking up the wrong tree looking for separation of the strut towers as the only explaination of the usefullness of a strut brace. There are two deflections possible. One, which you hold strongly to, is the one that has been showed to you twice now. Do the strut towers move in relation to each other? Obvioulsy the answer is maybe, but at least we know they can.

The second would not even be measureable by such means. It would involve not so much teh frame separating as the geometry of the suspension moving from a right angled |_| geometry to something like /_/ during a hard turn, rather than \_/ or /_\. Yes, rudimentary, but I think you get the idea.

The data you want is whether or not the strut towers separate or come together, deflection in relation to each other. But if the frame remains roughly within tolerances at the towers, you wouldn't measure such a deflection. What the Strut tower brace does, in effect, is complete the square at the top, tying the actual tops of the struts together and keeping them from moving apart or angling to either side. Perhaps they would remain equidistant anyway, but with a brace resisting the bending force they would also remain at right angles to the frame.

I wasn't being defensive, I was simply saying that maybe you'd be encouraged to do some tests on your own. You don't seem to care much for mine.

 

No chance we can see some data involving strain gages and telemetry? (ducking!)

 

Trust me, I'd be more than happy to provide it, if someone can get me some strain gauges and telemetry equipment!

 

...I'll add my two cents, since I've been reading along for a while without comment.

By way of comparison, the very character of a stressed tire at the contact patch is still unknown today. This information comes by way of suspension engineering textbooks - used by both student and professional - and from two other verbal sources. The reason; complexity and cost. The only valubale study performed to date was done in Japan during the 60s and this was performed with bias ply tires.

What's the point? Tire engineers are performing very well using many assumptions...data is not to be found in the black and white range. A pedantic process will not work here.

When available, I've installed upper front strut braces on every automobile that I have owned. In every case the results were noticable...a few alarmingly so. I installed upper and lower, front and rear strut braces on my last three cars. If I were to rate the effectiveness from 1-4, 1 being the most effective; 1 upper front, 2 upper rear, 3 lower front but a close tie with upper rear just different, 4 lower rear.

Unibodys bend. Short of a full roll cage, strut braces will help. The idea that the engine in the Mini acts as a strut brace due to the location of the attachment points works in a limited way to my way of thinking; the bushings are rubber and therefore allow flex.

My M7 upper strut bar should be waiting for me tonight. I've installed the two smaller portions of the Under Strut System. The final USS piece will be installed tomorrow night.

I'll report my impressions of the upper bar tomorrow here.

 

Just my 2 somethings. I installed a STB, and I noticed an improvement. Of course I am an advocate of butt dyno's but that is just for my use. I think it comes down to personal preference.

Here is some "science" on STBs and suspension.
http://e30m3performance.com/myths/St...bar_theory.htm

http://www.quantumraceproducts.com/shock-dyno2.htm

 

FYI: I added the M7 STB primarily for Bling factor and because I drive up to the Yosemite area every few months where the roads are a bit rough... I have a 2004 MCS with sport package and H sport rear sway 17" S-lites and 205/45-17s Nothing all that special.... One big positive... Before the STB I used to bottom out EVEY DAY going in and out of my driveway. Ever since I installed the STB no more draggin/ bumper!!!! and the ride does seem a bit more firm and responsive. IMO worth every penny just getting in and out of the driveway without losing bits of bumper!

 

I installed my M7 stb [one of the first handful made!] months ago, and I noticed a definate change in the character of the car. Simply put, anytime I load the front suspension (particularly over speed bumps, for instance), the front of the car lifts up much more linearly and flatly now than it did before. The effect was similar to that experienced when using a larger sway bar. In fact, I tend to go over speed bumps slower now than before, because it's a little firmer. The difference was immediately noticeable in this respect (and I didn't make any other changes at all at that time). I'm pretty sure that what I'm really feeling is actually less bend being allowed in the chassis and therefore more movement across the car.

The change in cornering is a little less readily appreciated (and I think this has a LOT to do with the fact that I'm going, ahem, a tad bit faster and I can pay less attention ). But, there is a definate change here, too. The car is particularly more controlled in situations where I've been making a few turns in quick succession. Again, this stands to figure given the proposed ability of the bar to control flexion. I really think that this is a point which has been missed so far in the discussion. When I'm on the track or on the twisties, if my car bends even just 1/16", it will move at least that much more if I immediately load the car in the opposite direction. It's like a pendulum. Thankfully, the M7 STB presumably really reduced this resonance-like effect, because the car is much easier to handle in these situations.

I believe that measuring suspension/body movement over bumps might be a good way to test the static improvement in body stiffness. Further, I think that any test of the STB's efffectiveness in cornering must consider dynamic situations like twisties where the car must load in one direction and then set up for a turn where it will load in the opposite direction. This is where my STB was really noticeable.

One last thing: since installing the STB, I've been through some rather heavy bumps at high speed , bumps which should have bent my towers and unsettled my car, with nary any evidence of either. I can remember one occasion in particular when I half expected to end up in massive oversteer because of an unknown bump mid-apex, and yet the car stayed straight and controlled. I had never been happier with my STB .

 

The bit with the jack.
We can accept that the strut towers could be made to move if the frame is loaded directly. But the goal should be to prove or disprove strut tower movement while the frame is under the type of load it would be while the car is in motion.

That's why I originally asked for some kind of measurement of movement along X, Y, and Z axes. The point is to look for any movement of the towers.
You repeatedly misrepresented what I had posted as reflecting that I would not believe any of your data because you are a vendor, when I had posted no such indication. If not from defensiveness, where would such misrepresentations on your part have come?
Your what? You would have had to have actually performed a test and posted the data for me to not care for it.

 

Please leave the man alone. For every bit of "divisiveness" you suppose on his part, I see at least as much from your end. Perhaps this is just one progressive misunderstanding, in which case the proper thing to do would be to try to clarify things, not exacerbate them... .

 

We can accept that the strut towers could be made to move if the frame is loaded directly. But the goal should be to prove or disprove strut tower movement while the frame is under the type of load it would be while the car is in motion.

mcs22004,

How much do you want to pay for a strut bar, $200.00 or $1,000.00? Personally, I'm willing to go on a little faith and past experience and pay $200.00. You're slamming Will without regard for the time and cost necessary to give you the answer you are looking for.

May I suggest you try to set up a procedure for testing flex. Then, you'll know exactly what to do with your $200.00. You can potentially make money if you wish to sell your results. Strut bars have always made improvements in my experience...solid strut bars, not hinged strut bars. Perhaps your efforts should be directed toward the relative effectivness of a hinged SB as opposed to a solid SB.

Either way, in my opinion, we've reached a point of diminished return.

 

Sometimes it is appropriate for a vendor to not respond anymore or take it offline, since it is apparent anything they say will not be a good enough answer. That's one of the problems with some of these threads. People get carried away.

 

All I asked for was data on MINI strut tower movement on X, Y, and Z axes, something that might expose the very need for a strut tower brace. Not much to misunderstand.

 

MCS22004 this is going on forever . About 20 people have stated in this thread alone that they have had positive results from a variety of strut tower braces.Do you think this is some mass conspiracy against you ?You even have a vendor that is wiling to come to you and prove to you that he can tell if YOUR car is handling better with or without one and you ignore his offer and still want to see numbers. Have you asked JCW for numbers or do you think they are just another vendor out to scam the people? If you haven't figured it out yet most people want performance not charts and graphs . Awhile back there was another guy that had a hard time realizing that and thankfully he is gone. Its not a conspiracy ! For many Mini owners the brace works and that is all that matters. If you want a crusade go pick on the vendor that claims 210 WHP for a ecu upgrade, intake and exhaust. Now that is worth looking into.

 

Yeah, it could have been really short if someone had just dropped in with some data instead of four extra pages of opinion.
Terrific, but I was just asking for data on strut tower movement.
Never said that.
Exactly, because the data for which I asked was of strut tower movement on three axes, not anything else.
I have not stated that the vendor participating in this topic is out to "scam the people". I asked for data and received four pages of anything but.
Performance is often measured in charts and graphs.
What did he do, ask for data?
Asking for data does not constitute a crusade.

 

But harassing people ad nauseum over parts that you don't even seem to be considering sure seems suspect. Seriously, if you're not happy with the good word of many of your fellow NAMers and you don't accept the response you get from a vendor, leave it be. This is a 200 dollar POTENTIAL investment and one which, again, you don't seem to be considering in the first place. I fail to see how this circular dance is worth the time. What IS your intention and what do you hope to gain?

If I were Will, I'd be beating my head against a wall. He has better things to do, I know for sure. So, leave him be.

 

All of those who are responding to mcs22004 are showing an amazing amount of restraint and patience, something very lacking on some threads, Kudos. I, for one, am biting my tongue til it bleeds.

 

Funny thing...this thread makes me want to buy an M7 strut bar...

 

I installed my M7 Strut bar last night

The change in feel are subtle in some ways and more so in others; turn-in is much more responsive...I think I can actually dial down one more notch on the Megans with respect to the back - there is a little more understeer with the new SB. The feel while driving over rough roads is more solid and controlled. A very worth while investment.

I cut and removed the lining under the bonnet in the area that contacts the SB. I then used very sticky black duct tape to seal the insulation and hold some of the lining in place.

I imagaine that those of us with higher spring and damping rates will notice a bigger difference.

One more very nice product from M7 - the USS will be installed tonight...

 

Reading my posts before responding would have revealed to you that I haven't been "harassing" anyone and that most of my replies have been in defense of the mischaracterizations other users have made of my posts.
Similarly, reading my posts before responding would have revealed to you that I did not ask for "the good word" of anyone. I just asked for data on MINI strut tower movement.
Again, reading the posts before responding would have revealed to you that the "response" from the vendor was "The car handeling better is what the brace is all about not necessarily numbers"--a non-answer--and later the inexplicable "A strut tower doesn't need to move to need support so how can it be measured ?" instead of a simple honest answer such as
a) "Here's the data: <data>" or
b) "No. I don't have that data".
A read of my posts before responding would have revealed to you that I have not said I was not interested in a STB. Logical deduction would have revealed that if I was asking if the strut towers actually move while the MINI is under load then I was inquiring about the need for an STB in the first place. Carrying that logic further to its obvious end would have revealed that if a definite need had been demonstrated by the data, then I certainly would have considered a STB.
It wouldn't have been circular if I had been given a straight answer.
Had you read even one of my posts you would have seen that I asked for data on MINI strut tower movement. Having realized several posts ago that that data will probably never come from this vendor, the remainder of my posts have merely been in defense the misrepresentations other users have posted about my posts. It appears that I've even been misquoted.
Yes, it would have been a lot easier just to have given a straight answer in the first place.

 

You seem to be holding to the same unstated premise that andy@rosstech did - that scientific experimentation with measurable results is the only valuable way to know that something works. Based on this premise it is quite easy to systematically discredit what someone else is saying by questioning the integrity of their experiment. If I might speculate on your purpose for doing this, it seems to me that you're simply enjoying the debate, perhaps with no intention of even buying this product. So we have just suffered through several pages of people genuinely trying to help you make a buying decision based on their subjective experience with you shooting down their attempts.

"Scientific" experimentation may be the only objective way of knowing, but that does not imply it's the only valuable way of knowing. Only the high-dollar race teams have the budget for telemetry equipment to analyze each lap according to the numbers and tune the chassis accordingly. Even then, the driver must subjectively experience the results of the engineer's tuning decisions to pronounce it good. One chassis setup might look better by the numbers but cause the driver to lose time vs. a previous, less ideal setup. Less fortunate racers, although they start with a basis in scientific theory, rely primarily on their subjective experience to setup their cars. So the point is that "scientific" methods are effective, subjective methods are effective, and they are most effective when used together. Discrediting anything subjective, as you seem to be doing, does not accomplish anything except prolonging the argument. You asked for data, and have not been provided with any that meets your expectations. Please accept this and move on.