No front anti-sway bar=a better ride

[Hyper4mance2k]

Originally Posted by celica73

As much as I want to LOL with you, that isn't the case here.

965 311 B14 (rear) is a 14mm hollow bar. Stock is a 14mm solid bar. The hollow bar is softer.

Similarly, the front 965 311 A16 is a 16mm hollow bar compared to 18mm solid stock. The hollow bar is softer (and would also be softer if it weren't a hollow bar).

The thickness of the bar is not the only contributing factor. The lever arm length has a much larger affect on roll stiffness than does the size of the bar. Though I don't know, it is 100% possible, and much more likely, that they changed the geometry of the bar and were able to make a much smaller and lighter bar than stock that is also stiffer...

And on that note I actually contacted Cusco to confirm. I'll report back when the information becomes available.

[RobertPaulson]

this thread is almost as funny as the op header/tuning thread.

[cdrazic93]

Originally Posted by celica73

As much as I want to LOL with you, that isn't the case here.

965 311 B14 (rear) is a 14mm hollow bar. Stock is a 14mm solid bar. The hollow bar is softer.

Similarly, the front 965 311 A16 is a 16mm hollow bar compared to 18mm solid stock. The hollow bar is softer (and would also be softer if it weren't a hollow bar).

In no way do they mention stiffer or softer than stock. They have larger sways that are "168-17x% OE" which are both solid. They dont specificy stiffer or softer so its either one or the other with both. From their description and % given, they could only infer stiffer. Both of the larger sways are also the same size as OEM, solid.

[wparsons]

Originally Posted by celica73

As much as I want to LOL with you, that isn't the case here.

965 311 B14 (rear) is a 14mm hollow bar. Stock is a 14mm solid bar. The hollow bar is softer.

Similarly, the front 965 311 A16 is a 16mm hollow bar compared to 18mm solid stock. The hollow bar is softer (and would also be softer if it weren't a hollow bar).

I've read the opposite in a few places, the stock bars are hollow and these smaller diameter Cusco ones are solid.

I can't find anything 100% definitive though.

[chaoskaze]

Guys just google xD

http://www.cusco.co.jp/en/pdf/Toyota...etter_0801.pdf


Look at the top of page 5

[KoolBRZ]

Originally Posted by wparsons

I've read the opposite in a few places, the stock bars are hollow and these smaller diameter Cusco ones are solid.

I can't find anything 100% definitive though.

The stock bars are heavier, and not as musical, (hollow), when compared to the Cusco bars. The car has more body roll also, so they aren't stiffer than stock.

The percentage shown on Cusco's website is the percentage of stock. I.E. 100% is the same strength as stock, NOT 100% stronger than stock. That means that the front bar is 21% softer than stock, and the rear bar is 27% softer than stock. Also, these bars have only one set of holes in the ends, so they aren't adjustable.

[KoolBRZ]

Originally Posted by chaoskaze

Guys just google xD

http://www.cusco.co.jp/en/pdf/Toyota...etter_0801.pdf


Look at the top of page 5

Minor mistake, everybody's right and everybody's wrong. I bought the solid 16mm front, and the hollow 14mm rear bars, so, only the rear bars are hollow. The rear B14 is 27% softer, and the rear B16 is 68% harder than stock, and they are both hollow. The stock rear bar is 14mm, and the stock front bar is 18mm. The front A16 is solid, but 21% softer, and the front A20 is solid, but 74% harder than stock.

[Special_K]

Originally Posted by KoolBRZ

Minor mistake, everybody's right and everybody's wrong. I bought the solid 16mm front, and the hollow 14mm rear bars, so, only the rear bars are hollow. The rear B14 is 27% softer, and the rear B16 is 68% harder than stock, and they are both hollow. The stock rear bar is 14mm, and the stock front bar is 18mm. The front A16 is solid, but 21% softer, and the front A20 is solid, but 74% harder than stock.

I...I... I just don't understand! Whyyyyyyyy? I'm so lost, confused, frustrated, and entertained simultaneously.

[8R6]

you should just get a corolla and then put a BRZ front/rear conversion. itll give you the ride you want and sorta look you want.

[Ultramaroon]

the Borzolla

[Andrew025]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

the Borzolla

Put some hella flush wheels on and it transforms to a Brorolla.

[chaoskaze]

Today I had 3 ppl in the car & Man!!! How it transform the car! Not only it took bumps like a champ, it was also a lot more stable over road imprefections!!










no pun intended. ;p

[autobrz]

KoolBRZ, I understand what you mean by the harsh stock ride. I believe Dezoris also mentioned how his Ohlins on street damping settings ride more composed and less harsh than stock springs and shocks with the stock sway bars.

This may be going off topic but I always disliked the "feel" of the front of the BRZ during turn-in. Yes, it has grip and yes it has steering response but it doesn't have "feel" for the lack of a better word. And now, 1.5 years after selling my car, for some reason it occurred to me that the front sway bar is too stiff compared to the front springs and I do remember specifically with my experience with my MR2 that a stiff front sway bar kills steering feel and the feel of the front suspension.

What I was really interested in was if someone has experimented with running no front sway bar on the BRZ but instead used stiffer springs like Ohlins to give the feel back to the front suspension that Subaru somehow has killed.

I have to say it is not a bad thing to experiment and I don't see why people can't seem to accept the possibility that a stiff front sway bar (like the stock bar when compared to the soft stock springs) can affect ride quality more adversely than people think.

I know for some people, how much faster a car is is the only measure of success in suspension tuning but for a 100% street car, I can see a lot of improvement made to the ride quality and "feel" of the car while also improving grip modestly.

So, the main reason why I sold the BRZ was because it didn't have "feel" and it wasn't involving to drive fast. It was just too easy and too balanced. My only mod was giving the front 2.5* of negative camber to help those poor macpherson struts.

I understand and appreciate many well-meaning warnings people have given you regarding the balance of your car at the limit with only the front sway bar removed. Given the amount of time and money you have spent so far, I do hope you come to a setup that's to your satisfaction. Personally, I would have shelled out the $3k for an Ohlins setup with no sway bars.

[autobrz]

... continued

And play with spring rates until you are happy with the amount of body-roll.

The only reason why the BRZ drivers hate body-roll is because of the macpherson strut front suspension that can't gain enough camber to compensate. But you'd be surprised at the amount of grip a no sway bar setup has despite the amount of body roll. I've experienced this first hand in my MR2 when I disconnected the rear sway bar. That car had macpherson struts on the rear. Yet, the car became so much easier to drive and the breakaway behavior was extremely progressive. Those cars are known for being hard to drive fast and very unforgiving if one were to commit the crime of lift-throttle mid-corner.