TRD Motion Control Beam

[GrimmSpeed]

Okay, these things look pretty cool. Not 900 dollars cool, I don't have scrilla like that, but from a "crazy engineering with a ridiculous budget" design perspective, it's pretty cool.

Like most of TRD's stuff it's not made, designed or developed by them it would appear, it looks like it's made by Aisin. That's good news because we know their design and engineering/testing abilities are legit. But even more so, as they are an OEM supplier, maybe this ends up being a part that turns into something that will be OEM/standard/way cheaper if it actually provides measurable and feel-able differences.

The first thing you have to know about this is that the strut towers definitely have a fore and aft movement. Every time you hit the brakes, every time you hit a bump, and a minor one when cornering the strut towers will move back and forth. Using the firewall to tie the strut towers together kind of gives the OEM a "two-fer" in that they can control that fore and aft movement some, but they also can somewhat control the side to side movement as well. This design is very inexpensive, and also allows easy access to the engine for maintenance, while being good looking. Definitely not optimized for strut to strut connections, which you can read about in some of my other posts on this site.

So when you hit the brakes the strut towers are going to pull the stock brace on the firewall, hit a bump and it's going to push (as well as the opposite movements in recoil). There is constant movement between the strut towers and the firewall, and it leads to flexing at the firewall. That firewall flex is going to be cyclical, and thus fatiguing the material (however gradually). It also is going to be a contributor to NVH as it's pulling and pushing on everything connected to the firewall, which is pretty much everything in the driver's cabin.

Since I know nothing at all, I'm going to assume that these have a high spring rate in them, which allows them to nullify the force going to them by providing the opposing spring force. It's also going to reduce fatigue on the firewall because the spring will now be the object displacing in and out. Just the same it should be able to reduce the majority of these unwanted forces, which means that less of the overall force will make its way to the cabin.

I don't know. The theory is sound, the idea is certainly cool, the price is a bit crazy, but overall I like it. I would have assumed that the door stabilizers did absolutely nothing too, but people seem to like them. That's another example of a "thinking out of the box" idea that is cool to see. To me it seems like these ideas are kind of the "future concepts" of some of these engineering companies/manufacturers, that they're getting to try out, and my find their way on to either production or race vehicles in the future.

Or they'll just die away, and in 15 years we'll see a picture of them on a car at a show and say "hey I remember those."

Just wanted to throw in my useless 2cents because I like to write on the forums sometimes too!

Chase
Engineering

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by venturaII

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]

Originally Posted by GrimmSpeed

Okay, these things look pretty cool. Not 900 dollars cool, I don't have scrilla like that, but from a "crazy engineering with a ridiculous budget" design perspective, it's pretty cool.

Like most of TRD's stuff it's not made, designed or developed by them it would appear, it looks like it's made by Aisin. That's good news because we know their design and engineering/testing abilities are legit. But even more so, as they are an OEM supplier, maybe this ends up being a part that turns into something that will be OEM/standard/way cheaper if it actually provides measurable and feel-able differences.

The first thing you have to know about this is that the strut towers definitely have a fore and aft movement. Every time you hit the brakes, every time you hit a bump, and a minor one when cornering the strut towers will move back and forth. Using the firewall to tie the strut towers together kind of gives the OEM a "two-fer" in that they can control that fore and aft movement some, but they also can somewhat control the side to side movement as well. This design is very inexpensive, and also allows easy access to the engine for maintenance, while being good looking. Definitely not optimized for strut to strut connections, which you can read about in some of my other posts on this site.

So when you hit the brakes the strut towers are going to pull the stock brace on the firewall, hit a bump and it's going to push (as well as the opposite movements in recoil). There is constant movement between the strut towers and the firewall, and it leads to flexing at the firewall. That firewall flex is going to be cyclical, and thus fatiguing the material (however gradually). It also is going to be a contributor to NVH as it's pulling and pushing on everything connected to the firewall, which is pretty much everything in the driver's cabin.

Since I know nothing at all, I'm going to assume that these have a high spring rate in them, which allows them to nullify the force going to them by providing the opposing spring force. It's also going to reduce fatigue on the firewall because the spring will now be the object displacing in and out. Just the same it should be able to reduce the majority of these unwanted forces, which means that less of the overall force will make its way to the cabin.

I don't know. The theory is sound, the idea is certainly cool, the price is a bit crazy, but overall I like it. I would have assumed that the door stabilizers did absolutely nothing too, but people seem to like them. That's another example of a "thinking out of the box" idea that is cool to see. To me it seems like these ideas are kind of the "future concepts" of some of these engineering companies/manufacturers, that they're getting to try out, and my find their way on to either production or race vehicles in the future.

Or they'll just die away, and in 15 years we'll see a picture of them on a car at a show and say "hey I remember those."

Just wanted to throw in my useless 2cents because I like to write on the forums sometimes too!

Chase
Engineering

That was educational write up/theory.

Thanks for explaining

[EAGLE5]

Originally Posted by go_a_way1

Door stabilizers make a noticeable difference. My rear tire now lifts off the ground when going up an incline like a driveway at a sharp angle

Drive to where the rear tire lifts. Stop the car with said tire lifted. Get out. Open the doors one at a time. See what happens. Open them both. See what happens. Report back.

[go_a_way1]

Originally Posted by jsimon7777

Drive to where the rear tire lifts. Stop the car with said tire lifted. Get out. Open the doors one at a time. See what happens. Open them both. See what happens. Report back.

Haha good idea. Next time you are taking a corner hard push your finger in between the dash and door, you will feel it flex and squish your finger, with TRD door stabilizers this is reduced significantly

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by GrimmSpeed

So when you hit the brakes the strut towers are going to pull the stock brace on the firewall, hit a bump and it's going to push (as well as the opposite movements in recoil). There is constant movement between the strut towers and the firewall, and it leads to flexing at the firewall. That firewall flex is going to be cyclical, and thus fatiguing the material (however gradually). It also is going to be a contributor to NVH as it's pulling and pushing on everything connected to the firewall, which is pretty much everything in the driver's cabin.

All you're doing is moving the flex point from the firewall to a different part of the chassis. The flex and fatigue still occurs, albeit less noticeable to the driver since NVH is presumably reduced in the cabin. Like I said, this additional chassis flex certainly doesn't make the suspension work any better, and can't be better for the chassis itself. Explain to me what I'm missing here, because the only positive thing I see from these is a quieter ride.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by go_a_way1

Haha good idea. Next time you are taking a corner hard push your finger in between the dash and door, you will feel it flex and squish your finger, with TRD door stabilizers this is reduced significantly

Are you God Hand that can drift with one hand?


Not sure bout you, but when I'm taking corner hard, my hands are nowhere near the dash and the door. lol

[go_a_way1]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Are you God Hand that can drift with one hand?


Not sure bout you, but when I'm taking corner hard, my hands are nowhere near the dash and the door. lol

hahaha, just try it on a exit ramp. The effects are more noticeable when your running R compound or similar tires

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by go_a_way1

Haha good idea. Next time you are taking a corner hard push your finger in between the dash and door, you will feel it flex and squish your finger, with TRD door stabilizers this is reduced significantly

why are you sticking your fingers in the doors while hard cornering? I highly doubt that there is that much play removed at the hinge end of the door. If your door is shifting enough at that end to squish your finger then you have bigger issues someplace.

[Tokay444]

Originally Posted by venturaII

That part doesn't make sense. More flex means more wear. There might be less audible NVH transferred to the cabin, but there's no way this could improve chassis life.

Put solid shafts in place of your dampers and see how fast shit breaks.

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by Tokay444

Put solid shafts in place of your dampers and see how fast shit breaks.

Well that's just a terrible analogy. Suspension is supposed to flex. Chassis isn't. Removing chassis bracing WILL increase flex.

[Tokay444]

The chassis is actually supposed to flex.
People think "maximum rigidity!!! Because race car!" That's not the case. The stiffer everything gets, the more of a propencity for the car to slide there is. The key is being able to adjust and position, and the amount of flex at the flex points.
Having raced AWD on-road 1/10 scale electric touring car for a very long time, high end chassis have provisions for these adjustments and tuning.

[strat61caster]

I don't get paid enough to argue about things that move less than the thickness of a sheet of paper at work, much less here. I'm out.

[Tokay444]

It's most certainly more than that. I'm willing to bet it's in the tens of thousandths of an inch. The oem bar has no preload adjustment.