pfb

I've run the Spoon and Mark's brace back-to-back at the racetrack. Digrappa first, Spoon second. I turned slightly faster lap times with the Spoon, but that might have been due to the fact that I was just driving better as it was my second group of laps. The driver (me) is still the biggest variation in my lap times making true product analysis more difficult.

The Digrappa brace is beautiful, but rarely seen. The Spoon is well priced and has significant company R&D behind it. I have had no problems (yet) with corrosion on my Spoon.

speeeding

No offense, but could someone tell me who Digrappa is and what his background is with the S2000? Spoons reputation is well known, but I've never heard of Digrappa until I joined this forum. thanks

eukwasi

Got and installed my DiGrappa. It looks great and the material matches my Comptech rear and strut tie. Not sure, but I believe that the Spoon one is much thicker (although no stronger). I worry about speed bumps and the such. How about aerodynamics? The fit is perfect! Once again, I am not sure of how the other fit. This is just my opinion.

bjohnston

I got my Digrappa X-brace on this weekend, and I definitely noticed an improvement in rigidity. I used to feel slight vibrations coming from the front of the car when I hit large holes or bumps in the road (which is all the time in the D.C. area), and now they are eliminated on all but the biggest of craters or mounds. So, I would definitely recommend the Digrappa. But, as a caveat, I have had no experience with the Spoon, so I can not make a comparison. Nevertheless, I am totally happy with my purchase, and I feel as though it was worth the money.

On a similar front...I was wondering what people's thoughts were on the rear lower tie bar. I've read that they (or maybe the car) needs to be modified before they will fit. I also understand that there already is some sort of a stock rear lower tie bar that is taken out to accomodate the new piece. Someone on this board previously discussed the adequacy of the stock piece.

Also, I believe Utah mentioned that the S's engine is used to stiffen the chassis. It is my understanding that that is not the case. I do not believe that the engine is a stressed member of the chassis. Like just about every other production automobile out there, I believe the S's engine simply rests on its mounts and is not a stressed member of the chassis. Just about the only production car (if you can really call it that) that has the engine as a stressed member of the chassis is the Ferrari F50. I could be wrong about this, but's its just my $.02 worth.