TRD Motion Control Beam

[gramicci101]

Originally Posted by venturaII

None of this makes any sense.

Imagine it from a dollar perspective though. TRD can sell a flashy part with a very technical-sounding description that may or may not have an actual impact on handling, for a mere $850. No one who spends that much on a cool shock absorber-looking part to replace a dinky OEM bar is then going to say "Yeah, that was wasted money." Clearly it must be better. I mean, just look at it. They're going to insist that it makes a huge difference, their car handles tremendously better, it cuts 5 seconds off their time in Forza, gets better mileage, and makes them better in bed. The actual term for this is the "placebo effect," by the way. TRD will certainly tack on an overly technical description to a product that's pure bling in order to make money.

You see the same thing in home audio speaker cables, even though double blind studies have been done showing that they make no difference. But by god, they would love to sell you a $3K speaker cable! And they make a definite and noticeable improvement. To the seller's wallet.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by venturaII

So, Toyota is suggesting improved performance by removing a rigid chassis reinforcement strut and replacing it with a shock absorber which permits some of the flex. Wouldn't this suggest the chassis was designed to allow the flex in the first place? Why supply the car with the OEM braces, if this is the case? How is a flexy chassis going to make the suspension work better? None of this makes any sense.


The only thing I see this part doing is removing some NVH, which might give the impression of a more solid chassis, but wouldn't simply removing the OEM bars do the same thing?

There are different types of rigidity for the chassis/suspension and for the different driving. This is more towards touring and lil bit of spirit driving. Owner who do not want those vibration coming from road conditions like race car.

Don't forget, this v-bar have limit of flex it allow the chassis to do, so without v-bar vs this v-bar is totally different. This also this reduce wear of the chassis.

Hope that make sense.

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Hope that make sense.

No, ichi, it doesn't make sense.

I see what's going on here so I will support my previous statements one last time with the manufacturer's own admission and then politely bow out.

Notice the teeny tiny text in the bottom right corner of that promo video. For the vision impaired, it says "Actual movement is 0.1mm or less."

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

No, ichi, it doesn't make sense.

I see what's going on here so I will support my previous statements one last time with the manufacturer's own admission and then politely bow out.

Notice the teeny tiny text in the bottom right corner of that promo video. For the vision impaired, it says "Actual movement is 0.1mm or less."

Thanks for that. That proves there still IS a movement happening. 0.1mm or 1" movement is a movement.

While, it's expensive AND a bit pointless for some... I still think it do make a difference. Just like door stabilizer and rear window aero stabilizer... it make less 0.01cd and 1% chassis more rigidity. Improvements are improvements.

Don't have to agree with them. That's one of the reason why I haven't bought one yet.

[EAGLE5]

These decrease rigidity. They might drop NVH, but that's easy to test. Take off the braces of the stock car and see if the car is any quieter and more comfortable. That would eliminate all transference of vibration. If it is more comfy without the braces, then there's a case to be made. Otherwise, snake oil.

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by gramicci101

You see the same thing in home audio speaker cables, even though double blind studies have been done showing that they make no difference.

I think the cables between components (like between cd play and amp) are even more funny. These $500 cables are going to help improve the sound even though the signal is 100% digital.

[Calum]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Thanks for that. That proves there still IS a movement happening. 0.1mm or 1" movement is a movement.

While, it's expensive AND a bit pointless for some... I still think it do make a difference. Just like door stabilizer and rear window aero stabilizer... it make less 0.01cd and 1% chassis more rigidity. Improvements are improvements.

Don't have to agree with them. That's one of the reason why I haven't bought one yet.

0.1mm is just a shade under 4 thousands of an inch. Even if those springs are 1000 lbs per inch linear rate springs, and there is zero play in the system, at the very most they will exert 4 lbs of force on the firewall. You could literally make a bigger difference to the rigidity of the car, no bars vs the TRD parts, by pushing your foot on the fire wall. I'd be will to bet a small amount of money that wind resistance, over the area of the fire wall, makes more of a difference to the rigidity of the car.


It's snake oil, man.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Thanks for that. That proves there still IS a movement happening. 0.1mm or 1" movement is a movement.

While, it's expensive AND a bit pointless for some... I still think it do make a difference. Just like door stabilizer and rear window aero stabilizer... it make less 0.01cd and 1% chassis more rigidity. Improvements are improvements.

Don't have to agree with them. That's one of the reason why I haven't bought one yet.

No ichi "Movement is a movement" is not really an accurate statement. Walk a mile and then walk 100 and see if they are the same. I bet the solid bar has .1mm of flex in it no problem. To claim that something is absorbing that much movement is absurd. A hair width is .08mm so it is moving a tad more than a hair if that much (it says "or less"). You factor in all the other components that flex and this is probably closer to .00001% than 1%. At some point improvements just do not have enough effect to be called an improvement.
As Gram pointed out the guys that pay up for these will of course say there is an improvement due to "placebo effect" (technically called confirmation bias) since it was expensive and the theory is sound it MUST make a difference.

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Don't forget, this v-bar have limit of flex it allow the chassis to do, so without v-bar vs this v-bar is totally different. This also this reduce wear of the chassis.

Hope that make sense.

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.

[go_a_way1]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Thanks for that. That proves there still IS a movement happening. 0.1mm or 1" movement is a movement.

While, it's expensive AND a bit pointless for some... I still think it do make a difference. Just like door stabilizer and rear window aero stabilizer... it make less 0.01cd and 1% chassis more rigidity. Improvements are improvements.

Don't have to agree with them. That's one of the reason why I haven't bought one yet.

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

[go_a_way1]

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.

It absorbers vibrations and vibrations are bad for the chassis. However how many more miles will you get before it fails who knows.

[ichitaka05]

Geez, I'm getting attack by everyone here lol

@Calum, enjoyed your example. Foot on firewall... & you're prob right that putting foot on the firewall will prob get more rigidity. At the same time, you can't keep the foot on the firewall all the time or keep same pressure all the time.

@Tcoat, you didn't get the fast & furious pun. I just changed it to mm & inches instead inch & mile, c'mon now. As for 1% vs 0.0001%, are you factoring stock struts & springs w stock tires? Or are you factoring stiffer suspensions with R-Comp tires?
Put the smartass comment a side, I'm pretty sure there are some placebo effect for this part... at the same time, you cannot deny this part from get-go. Because it make less than 0.01mm movement and it cost near $900 doesn't mean, it's POS money sucking part that doesn't do anything. There's a reason TRD made this part (& god damn expensive too), reason prob 1% or less of 86/BRZ will understand.

@venturaII, making the chassis hard doesn't mean it's helping the chassis' life. Important part of chassis is, there need to have spot to absorb/release the stress within the chassis.

Way1, I'm lazing to click "mention". Lol
I'm not saying door stabilizer doesn't work. What I said was, it makes small effect, but it still makes a difference. I know it works, specially on aftermarket suspension.

[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.

[gramicci101]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

I think the cables between components (like between cd play and amp) are even more funny. These $500 cables are going to help improve the sound even though the signal is 100% digital.

All you need is a plausible-sounding reason why it's better, and people with more money than sense will buy it from you. Like buying shock absorbers to go between two parts that don't move.