View Single Post
Old 04-13-2013, 06:05 AM   #55
Clembo
'Senior' Junior Member
 
Clembo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Drives: 13 FR-S,08 Mustang Bullitt,06 MX-5
Location: Southeastern CT
Posts: 389
Thanks: 117
Thanked 213 Times in 122 Posts
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Just a Thought...

Has anyone contacted the design engineers about the original analysis for the stock triangular bars? What, if any, were the original requirements for the stock triangle bar installation (preload, strut tower position, point at assembley, etc.)? And what were the fastening requirements? When I see mounting studs intentionally painted after fastener installation I assume there was a torque requirement. And does this torque stretch the mounting studs as it does in some cases? If so, these studs may require replacement before reusing them as attachment points. And depending on the new loading forces and directions, they may require resizing as well.

I'm not questioning your present analysis or data, only that without knowing the original parameters, you may be unintentionally altering some of the original design assumptions and/or criterior. I see people yanking parts off their cars all the time (and often replacing them with something else) with little thought as to how or why they were put there in the first place. In most cases and for street use, it probably doesn't matter much. But for the track or extreme conditions it may be a different story.

Sorry for being over-cautious but I come from the nuclear world where engineering often took a huge number of variables into consideration. And without a solid understanding of all these variables, it was easy to get in trouble.
__________________

"You'll never know if you don't try" - Shinroko Momose
Clembo is offline   Reply With Quote