Thoughts on front upper and lower bracing
07-24-2006 | 07:41 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,579
Likes: 1
From: sideways with an OWL!
Thoughts on front upper and lower bracing
Giving some serious thoughts to some front bracing after driving Craig's car at the weekend. His car had a much sharper turn in and pretty sure that a lot of that was down to bracing. The car doesn't need it, but it would probably benefit from it. So my questions are for those with front bracing.
Which is the most effective brace, upper tower or lower X brace? What's fitting costs, or alternatively how hard is it to fit?
And finally there are a few different ones out there. Any significant advantages of one over another?
Which is the most effective brace, upper tower or lower X brace? What's fitting costs, or alternatively how hard is it to fit?
And finally there are a few different ones out there. Any significant advantages of one over another?
07-24-2006 | 07:46 AM
#2
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 14,318
Likes: 3
From: West Midlands
I had the top brace on first of all, little difference. When the bottom brace on the difference was marked, although not sure whether this is because they worked in tandem. Theoretically easy to fit, although sometimes it can be hard to get the bolt holes to line up. I've got the Muz because it allows easy access to the oil filter. There was a recent thread on alternatives on S2000 talk IIRC.
07-24-2006 | 08:47 AM
#5
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 31,183
Likes: 58
From: Hertford
Vastly more progressive!
I tend to run minimum toe-in & lots of camber, so my car starts to 'feel' before it goes.
With the Cusco, this is exacerbated, so I really think the car handles very sweetly, wet or dry.
There vastly less rear 'scuttle shake' on bad roads, which must help the geometry. Also, the ride feels firmer & more controlled, meaning the dampers must have something better to work against.
I didn't think the car had a problem, until someone convinced me to try the rear brace!
Once you take the [ - shaped Honda item off, you realise what a piece of tat it is. The Cusco is D - shaped & thicker.
Even so, it's like the front braces; suddenly the whole car 'works' like it should have done out of the box.
Everyone probably assumes I'm nuts to drive it on the limit all the time, but it's now no big deal. It's a pussycat.
I tend to run minimum toe-in & lots of camber, so my car starts to 'feel' before it goes.
With the Cusco, this is exacerbated, so I really think the car handles very sweetly, wet or dry.
There vastly less rear 'scuttle shake' on bad roads, which must help the geometry. Also, the ride feels firmer & more controlled, meaning the dampers must have something better to work against.
I didn't think the car had a problem, until someone convinced me to try the rear brace!
Once you take the [ - shaped Honda item off, you realise what a piece of tat it is. The Cusco is D - shaped & thicker.
Even so, it's like the front braces; suddenly the whole car 'works' like it should have done out of the box.
Everyone probably assumes I'm nuts to drive it on the limit all the time, but it's now no big deal. It's a pussycat.
07-24-2006 | 08:52 AM
#6
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 14,318
Likes: 3
From: West Midlands
Right, following Chilled's comments at Donington yesterday (which I agree with) I'm ordering it today! 
EDIT: Where's a reliable place to order it from? Tokyo Express don't seem to carry the Cusco lower rear bar.
EDIT: Where's a reliable place to order it from? Tokyo Express don't seem to carry the Cusco lower rear bar.
Trending Topics
07-24-2006 | 10:12 AM
#8
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 8,114
Likes: 0
From: Do You have a HoNda?
Originally Posted by Nick Graves,Jul 24 2006, 05:47 PM
Vastly more progressive!
I tend to run minimum toe-in & lots of camber, so my car starts to 'feel' before it goes.
With the Cusco, this is exacerbated, so I really think the car handles very sweetly, wet or dry.
There vastly less rear 'scuttle shake' on bad roads, which must help the geometry. Also, the ride feels firmer & more controlled, meaning the dampers must have something better to work against.
I didn't think the car had a problem, until someone convinced me to try the rear brace!
Once you take the [ - shaped Honda item off, you realise what a piece of tat it is. The Cusco is D - shaped & thicker.
Even so, it's like the front braces; suddenly the whole car 'works' like it should have done out of the box.
Everyone probably assumes I'm nuts to drive it on the limit all the time, but it's now no big deal. It's a pussycat.
I tend to run minimum toe-in & lots of camber, so my car starts to 'feel' before it goes.
With the Cusco, this is exacerbated, so I really think the car handles very sweetly, wet or dry.
There vastly less rear 'scuttle shake' on bad roads, which must help the geometry. Also, the ride feels firmer & more controlled, meaning the dampers must have something better to work against.
I didn't think the car had a problem, until someone convinced me to try the rear brace!
Once you take the [ - shaped Honda item off, you realise what a piece of tat it is. The Cusco is D - shaped & thicker.
Even so, it's like the front braces; suddenly the whole car 'works' like it should have done out of the box.
Everyone probably assumes I'm nuts to drive it on the limit all the time, but it's now no big deal. It's a pussycat.
