View Single Post
Old 11-16-2016, 12:22 PM   #58
ichitaka05
Site Moderator
 
ichitaka05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Drives: ichi 86 Project
Location: Middle of No where
Posts: 21,053
Thanks: 7,730
Thanked 19,281 Times in 8,389 Posts
Mentioned: 697 Post(s)
Tagged: 28 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by venturaII View Post
Not attacking at all - just discussing.


All these appear to do is prevent the NVH from reaching the passenger compartment at the expense of rigidity. It doesn't prevent the NVH from occurring in the first place. All you'd be doing is isolating the effect to a different area of the chassis. Flex is flex, and allowing the chassis to flex more is going to work the metal harder. Maybe the amount is negligible in terms of practical life, but I rather doubt even that, as you'd see the OEM braces being removed from the cars if only for the benefit of a quieter cabin. Removing chassis braces (or allowing more chassis movement) will not result in a longer lasting chassis, nor will it make the suspension 'work better'; quite the opposite, in fact.
Sorry, "attacking" might not been the right word for it, but early in the morning with Engrish, it's kinda hard to find the right word.

That's the thing, I'm not saying allowing more chassis movement. Like someone posted, this thing only move <0.1mm. Only thing this strut is doing is absorbing the stress/vibration coming from the chassis (front suspension area) while reducing unnecessary flex.

That in "theory" help last chassis life... but how much? Maybe extra day or two than one without it? IDK
__________________
ichitaka05 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ichitaka05 For This Useful Post:
go_a_way1 (11-16-2016)