Rear Brace or Strut bar

[RayD]

I apologise in advance if the strut is only for cosmetic purposes… as a functional item I doubt it will do a great deal. After the holes have been drilled it will do slightly less. If the tops of the suspension legs have a tendency to come closer together, a piece of flat, machined aluminium bar won’t stop them.

If anyone thought there was a need to make it more solid they’d do better to drill a hole in the other corner for a four bolt fixing, and identify the optimum shape of the strut. If someone who knew what they were doing came up with the answer, it would probably be made of two curved steel tubes, and in the extreme it would be anchored to the chassis in the centre.

Thank you to the person who took the original picture, I hope you don’t mind me using it.

Ray

[GeoffSmith]

Welcome fellow sceptic! I raised a similar point about Dave M's strut as I can't see it making too much difference to the rigidity of the chassis U section. Doug claimed torsional rigidity is improved because the rear wheel lifts quicker when jacking at the front jacking point; I am even less convinced about this claim and Algirdas has agreed? to take a before and after photograph/video to convince me!

Geoff

[RayD]

Thanks Geoff,

I hadn’t read the Dave M’s Strut thread until now. My post was only in answer to the question raised by kmckmc.

If the standard chassis is too solid to be improved by a strut, then the reason for the rear wheel lifting sooner when using the front jacking point would be down to the improved fixture between the body and the chassis after a strut bar has been fitted. In other words you could get the same result by just fitting a top flange and increasing the number of fixing bolts.

Ray

[algirdas]

Dear Geoff:

I have agreed to do what?

Sincerely,

Algirdas

[ailwyn]

I have agreed to do what?

Agree that the rear strut is pointless by the sound of it....

[GeoffSmith]

I have agreed to do what?

Not long after me saying this, you said:

I better find out if they make a "long" lens for my camera.

Algirdas (a crotchety old fart in his own right)

I took it that you had agreed to take before and after photographs to prove me wrong and allow the powers-that-be to ceremonially burn this heretic at the stake.

[algirdas]

Dear Geoff:

But are we talking about me on Viagra or M100 on strut bar?

It's Friday. And it has been a long week.

Sincerely,

Algirdas

[GeoffSmith]

If it's Viagra, then you're probably in for a long hard weekend.

[GeoffSmith]

PS Don't forget the pictures.

[Doug]

Thanks Geoff,

I hadn’t read the Dave M’s Strut thread until now. My post was only in answer to the question raised by kmckmc.

If the standard chassis is too solid to be improved by a strut, then the reason for the rear wheel lifting sooner when using the front jacking point would be down to the improved fixture between the body and the chassis after a strut bar has been fitted. In other words you could get the same result by just fitting a top flange and increasing the number of fixing bolts.

Ray

I agree this is the possible reason -- I just pointed out the observation which was definitley different after the bar.

I don't see how the bar would affect the main frame center piece, which would likely be the twisting culprit if any.

Perhaps you could consider the bar as a rear tow bar for when Monty is stuck spun around off the track

[GeoffSmith]

Perhaps you could consider the bar as a rear tow bar for when Monty is stuck spun around off the track