Who here owns a Subaru?

Soldato
Joined
13 Jun 2007
Posts
13,951
Location
Chesterfield
Need a second job na....

Googling this air intake box and it seems its known as a 'mod' to remove it. Has its positive and negative reviews but a few guys are mentioning remaps are needed for the car to run 100% with it on or off.

Looks a rate **** to remove/fit.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Jun 2007
Posts
13,951
Location
Chesterfield
Its all 1 thing init? Air intake box on the top that goes into the wing.

Got a guy here jacking is car up, wheel off, bumper unclipped, undoing a load of screws n clips n bolts.
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Apr 2004
Posts
19,815
All this talk of strut braces ended up with me doing a bit of googling. I was coming up blank to find a solid brace but liked the Cusco one as it appeared to have some decent meat around the strut towers. Brake stopper element didn't look quite as substantial as the Tegiwa stopper however.

Decided to see what OMP had to offer and found a solid steel brace for £70 so took a punt on it.

I know braces are subjective but I had such good results with solid braces on my Rover, I think it's worth trying a good brace on the Impreza.

Most of the alloy braces I've seen look a bit weedy and I've seen first hand just how much a cheap ally brace can flex.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 May 2008
Posts
3,763
Location
North Wales
I had a pretty naff alloy brace on my widetrack when i bought it, the one that had the pink rings (ooh err) round the strut towers. I took it off after doing a job and didn't notice a single bit of difference on my next track day so never bothered again. I think it's probably a case of go big or go home with braces. I had a genuine Mugen brace on the front of my DC5 and that things was really solidly built and im sure did a good job of stiffening up the front end, the one i had on my scoob however was like match sticks in comparison!
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Apr 2004
Posts
19,815
I think the reason the alloy braces are so popular is because they're 'bling'

Who'd want a dull red or black brace when they could have a chrome one!?

I've seen those eBay specials. Just look at the structural rigidity where the strut bar joins the mounting plates on the strut tops. A thin curve of metal. That's going to be the first place to flex when put under any load.

Compare them to more expensive braces like the Cusco and you'll see what I mean. Now, picture the strut towers flexing inward and it will all make sense.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
12,303
Location
Vvardenfell
There's a good reply here from Damian Harty of Prodrive - who knows a lot more about suspension than anyone here. To quote:

Strutbrace Q: There is an awful lot of mythology around this stuff that goes back to body-on-chassis beam-axled racers in the 20s - I'm not kidding. There are two effects that are important. Basically, the body structure is like a "fifth spring" between the front and rear suspension. If that spring is not stiff enough then the body relaxes out any redictribution of roll moment that the anti-roll bars were trying to make and so the car is unresponsive to handling balance tuning with springs and bars. However, once the body is "stiff enough" then making it stiffer offers no benefits. A good rule of thumb is that the torsional stiffness of the body (between suspension mount points) needs to be about ten times the roll stiffness of the stiffest suspension end (usually the front). If you chase the numbers through you end up with about 5-7 kNn/degree as the requirement for a body structure. Most modern monocoques comfortably exceed that and the Subaru with its bonded screens both ends does too. Somewhere I have a figure but can't recall it right now. Anything over 10 is good, 15-17 is current "state-of-the-art". So in that case, a strut brace does very little. The second effect is a bit more complicated. The body moves on the suspension but the wheel also moves on the tyre - the tyre is in many ways a "secondary" suspension system. That movement is partially controlled by the tyre and partially by the suspension damper and happens 10 to 15 times a second. The body is a flexible thing that has its own resonances and because of the shape of most cars at the front - they need a hole to put the engine in - it can get quite flexible in just about this frequency region. If the body goes flexible - goes into resonance - then the damper just moves with the body and can't contribute to the control of the tyre and in fact can do something bad called "mass loading" where the tyre is carrying not only itself but also part of the body _while it resonates_ (it's important to separate the static 'weight carrying' from dynamic things in your mind). In those cases, the strut brace can help because if it is a good design then it stiffens the front end usefully.

What all of the above means is that the effectiveness of a strut brace is strongly connected to the stiffness of your suspension. So for a Scoob that is fairly standard, the strut brace probably doesn't do a great deal, but as they get modified and stiffened the brace will contribute more to a well controlled feel over less-than-perfect surfaces.

The final point about strut braces relates to the emporor's new clothes - having bought a flash one, not many people will admit they can't really tell the difference.

Sorry for such a long answer but it isn't straightforward, especially when I'm denied my usual engineering shorthand of "Hz" and "modal damping" and so on...
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
9,962
Location
Jupiter
Pointless then.

What all of the above means is that the effectiveness of a strut brace is strongly connected to the stiffness of your suspension. So for a Scoob that is fairly standard, the strut brace probably doesn't do a great deal, but as they get modified and stiffened the brace will contribute more to a well controlled feel over less-than-perfect surfaces.

Not entirely.
 
Back
Top Bottom