Bracing shock towers?

-
also that orange car above has a rad support bar, does that bar affect the mounting of the radiator?
 
I was just at US cartool's website and I don't see the lower rad bar listed. I'm interested in adding one to my car. Does anyone have a link or info on the bar? Prices? John said he makes them(as in Boxer's car) Thanks for the great thread!!
 
Hi Folks!!

The Frame Rail Lower Raditor Core Support Brace (phew - thats a mouthful, not to self - need a better name for this!!@) is available from us for $129, it is not listed on the web site - we are building a new store and all the products will be better displayed on the new store site.

Here is a look at the early beta version of the store (credit card processing is not hooked up and most products are not there yet, but have a peek)

http://store.uscartool.com

OK. Our Frame Rail Lower Raditor Core Support Brace can be installed two ways. Way one is the method shown on the orange car - with the brace installed behind the original core support. Very hidden this way, but in the way of the lower tank on a stock vertical flow radiator. If you plan to use an aluminum crodd flow raditor, the brace actually makes a great mount for the radiator!!

Here is a link to a picture of us doing just this on a 68 SS Hemi Clone car. You can see an aluminum half tube over the Frame Rail Lower Raditor Core Support Brace which is poainted white and a little hard to see. The raditor mounts ontop of the Aluminum mount and is held in with a similar top mount. Very trick, very solid and very easy to remove (one bolt!)

http://www.uscartool.com/img/68SSDart2/images/Dec01200816.jpg

OK, method 2 for installation is to use the spacers we supply to mount the brace BELOW the OEM core support. Not in the way at all of the raditor, but more visible below the car.

So, there you have it - you can choose to mont the brace behing the OEM core support or you can remove the original core support and just iuse the brace or mount it below. Each has a different look.

Hope that helps!
 
John,can I mount this in front of the rad support. My car is already done,just looking to improve. I have a crossflow alum. rad already installed. Was hoping to tie the rails together in front of rad support. Or will I end up under existing core support? Thanks again for jumping in this thread,your input is valuable to all of us!!:thumbup:
 
Sorry guys,I'm an idiot. Just looked at Boxer's pics again and looked at my car,now it's obvious to me it has to go behind the core support or under! DOH my bad!!
 
Boxer said:
I am just finishing installation of the alterkation and RMS tri 4 link. I used the XV shock tower braces and the radiator brace.
Click to expand...

why did you brace your shcok tower if using an alterK, one of his major selling points is that the shock mounts dont carry any weight. doesnt the frame have its own shock mounts?
 
jamesdart said:
why did you brace your shcok tower if using an alterK, one of his major selling points is that the shock mounts dont carry any weight. doesnt the frame have its own shock mounts?
Click to expand...

You make a valid point , maybe john can chime in because there is NOTHING from the ALTERK that even bolts there .

alterktionsmall.jpg
 
I am not sure how AlterK sells or words his product, but their premise is that they keep the "suspension" is contained within the K Member. There is a significant difference between:
--AlterK setup where the upper shock/coil over mount is made out of a larger gauge steel mount with bracing. The oscillations of the suspension are kept primarily in the K member.
--A stock system that has a somewhat strong upper mount, that is held in place with spot welds, to a sheet metal inner fender. This setup sends the oscillations and vibrations through the sheet metal inner fender.
 
OK -First off, let me inform folks that we (US Car Tool) are a dealer for RMS and sell / install the Alterktion front ends.

And let me clear up a small point - the Alterktion DOES use the shock tower area - the upper control arms still bolt to that spot (as do the OEM UCA's).

My rationale for adding the shock tower bracing is based on the extra forces carried by the front frame rails with a non-torsion bar front suspension. For the record, Bill (maker of the Alterktions) and I differ a bit on this opinion!!

My view is; the OEM torsion bar front suspension distributes some of the front end force via the torsion bar to the torsion bar crossmember and the balance is carried in the frame rail. The front frame rail is "triangulated" by the inner fender to the firewall. (Sidenote: I can tell you from several cars that we have replaced front clips on that the inner fender provides a substantial amount of support to the front frame rails! I have a 70 Challenger in the shop with the inner fenders disconnected from the firewall at the braces so the only thing remaining are the front frame rails. It is scary how much they move without the inner fender bracing!)

Now, when an Alterktion is installed in your A Body, all the suspension forces are carried by the front frame rails. There is no more torsion bar to distribute some of the force to the crossmember and the Alterktion coil over upper shock mount is ultimately connected to the frame rail. All the suspension forces are now carried by the front frame rails (supported by the inner fenders as well).

This is where Bill and I diverge. I believe that reinforcing the top of the shock tower to the firewall helps keep the frame rails from deflecting under serious suspension load, Bill believes the stock frame rail / inner fender is very strong and no extra bracing is needed under that load.

So that's my reasoning for recommending the inner fender bracing. I add them to almost every car we build as I see it as a relatively small expense for the added stiffness, it is practically hidden and has zero tire clearance issues.

Hope that helps!
 
John426 said:
OK -First off, let me inform folks that we (US Car Tool) are a dealer for RMS and sell / install the Alterktion front ends.

And let me clear up a small point - the Alterktion DOES use the shock tower area - the upper control arms still bolt to that spot (as do the OEM UCA's).

My rationale for adding the shock tower bracing is based on the extra forces carried by the front frame rails with a non-torsion bar front suspension. For the record, Bill (maker of the Alterktions) and I differ a bit on this opinion!!

My view is; the OEM torsion bar front suspension distributes some of the front end force via the torsion bar to the torsion bar crossmember and the balance is carried in the frame rail. The front frame rail is "triangulated" by the inner fender to the firewall. (Sidenote: I can tell you from several cars that we have replaced front clips on that the inner fender provides a substantial amount of support to the front frame rails! I have a 70 Challenger in the shop with the inner fenders disconnected from the firewall at the braces so the only thing remaining are the front frame rails. It is scary how much they move without the inner fender bracing!)

Now, when an Alterktion is installed in your A Body, all the suspension forces are carried by the front frame rails. There is no more torsion bar to distribute some of the force to the crossmember and the Alterktion coil over upper shock mount is ultimately connected to the frame rail. All the suspension forces are now carried by the front frame rails (supported by the inner fenders as well).

This is where Bill and I diverge. I believe that reinforcing the top of the shock tower to the firewall helps keep the frame rails from deflecting under serious suspension load, Bill believes the stock frame rail / inner fender is very strong and no extra bracing is needed under that load.

So that's my reasoning for recommending the inner fender bracing. I add them to almost every car we build as I see it as a relatively small expense for the added stiffness, it is practically hidden and has zero tire clearance issues.

Hope that helps!
Click to expand...




Have you seen an Alterk that has not been braced have a failure?
 
Have you seen an Alterk that has not been braced have a failure?
Click to expand...

No and I would not expect to see a failure - the bracing issue is more about stiffness than outright failure.

John P.
 
I agree, why not add the stiffness to the body structure? If its a simple addition of welding on the tower braces, why not do it? If universally accepted that if you add frame connectors, you are going to improve the handling of the vehicle. I've never seen a car 'failure' by not haveing them.

To our stock 318/904/7.25 equipted dart sport, we will be intalling:

340/727/8.25, 6 leaf springs, frame connectors, front way bar AND the tower bracing. We have also rewelded the seams of the K frame and will be boxing the LCAs.

The jury is out to lunch on the rad. cross beam support. The front radiator is stock, and I think Cartool make a cross support for infront of the support, so the radiator installs as stock. I think its visible from the front of the car. That's not a big deal.

Any picts of the support in front of the rad. support??

Mike
 
Here is a look at one installed on a 70 Cuda

Feb11200812.jpg


and here is one on a 68 Hemi Dart Super Stock Clone

Sep07200730.jpg
 
John426. That looks very nice. If you were to put that bar in. Could you get away with cutting the lower part of the rad support out? I think I have seen this done. But don't know how safe it is to do. What are your thoughts? Thank you for your time.
 
The US Car Tool lower radiator core support front frail rail brace is a beefy piece and once installed, the original sheetmetal lower core support could be removed with no ill effects.

It is hard to see in the pictures, but the braces come with 90 degree angle brackets already welded onto each end - this makes it very easy to weld the brace into position between the frame rails. The brace is made from 1.75" .120 wall roll bar tube and is wicked strong!

I will upload some better pictures as soon as I can!
 
Hey John; Nice looking piece for sure. The question is, will a stock radiator fit in its stock position, above the new brace? If not, can the brace vertical sections be made slightly longer, so that the top of the new brace would be at the same height as the bottom of the old rad. support?

In that way, everything mounts as stock, the only difference being the brace is visible from the front of the car. Certainly, it wouldn't be any lower than the K frame.

sorry!!! I just read Johns post a few above. 3 way to mount the bars. nice work John!!!
 
Interesting read end to end... I would never cut out unibody parts without adding something to do it's job. If this were an E body site, you'd be reading about cars pulling 1.60 60' times and cracking windshields because they were flexing so much. And that flex is mostly cowl and front end. Place a jack under the left side control arm, and slowly jack up the front end... until just before the tire pulls off the ground. Then open the drivers door and let it rest on the latch bolt. Most cars with no mods the door will not latch on it's own, and with teh left side up that high, the pass side is almost at ride height. All that is body flex. Flex is wasted power, slower reaction times, poor weight transfer, and daaging to the chassis. The factory cared enough to get these cars thru the 5 year payoff term. That's it. Thinking they took much more interest in them beyond that is wishful thinking.
 
Correct me If I'm wrong but isn't the tabs for the upper control arm on an A body welded to the FRAME RAIL ??? The upper shock mount stands alone and has very little loading on it .

I'll have to crawl under my dart and look at it closely but bracing the top of the shock tower is pretty much useless if you ask me . I would think a bar that goes down to the frame rail just ahead of the front upper control arm mount would be more beneficial .

On the flip side I had a 69 Dart GTS 440 car that was turned into a full on drag car back in the early 80's by a previous owner , the only think between the cowl and the core support was the FRONT FENDERS , just the shock tower sticking up , NO INNER FENDERS what so ever and NO ADDED SUPPORTS . The car only had a BOLT IN 6 point bar . The windshield was the original best I could tell and nothing APPEARED to be bent , doors opened fine and the gaps looked ok . Jim Rhinehart has the car now , I traded it toward my 383 GTS .

I expected the car to be trashed because of that , it was raced for years like that . I would NOT have done something like that though .

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3144/3091276429_2458157bf0.jpg?v=0
 
We reinforce the top of the shock tower and brace it to the firewall not to add strength to the shock mount (which carries small suspension load), but rather to triangulate the frame rail to the firewall and stop it (the frame rail) from flexing.

Look at it from the side - the shock tower is a fairly stout brace, made from formed 1/8 (or so) inch thick plate. But it is connected to the firewall by relatively thin 16 gauge sheetmetal (inner fender). So, we add a nice sturdy brace from the top of the shock tower to a plate welded onto the firewall.

This adds quite a bit of stiffness to the front frame rails, I may have to take some before and after shots of an A-body to show how much front frame rail flex is avoided by adding the shock tower / firewall brace. Factory added them to the E-bodies, later model B and F bodies had tubular versions under the hood so they must have figured out something!

And yeah, we all know folks who drove a slant six without oil for 100 miles or raced the car with 400hp and no frame rail connectors and it never twisted. Still doesn't mean it is a good idea! (chuckle). Hey JohnRR, I'll bet that Dart was quick in a straightline - anybody every try driving it on the street around a corner?? (giggle)

John P.
 
John426 said:
We reinforce the top of the shock tower and brace it to the firewall not to add strength to the shock mount (which carries small suspension load), but rather to triangulate the frame rail to the firewall and stop it (the frame rail) from flexing.

Look at it from the side - the shock tower is a fairly stout brace, made from formed 1/8 (or so) inch thick plate. But it is connected to the firewall by relatively thin 16 gauge sheetmetal (inner fender). So, we add a nice sturdy brace from the top of the shock tower to a plate welded onto the firewall.

This adds quite a bit of stiffness to the front frame rails, I may have to take some before and after shots of an A-body to show how much front frame rail flex is avoided by adding the shock tower / firewall brace. Factory added them to the E-bodies, later model B and F bodies had tubular versions under the hood so they must have figured out something!

And yeah, we all know folks who drove a slant six without oil for 100 miles or raced the car with 400hp and no frame rail connectors and it never twisted. Still doesn't mean it is a good idea! (chuckle). Hey JohnRR, I'll bet that Dart was quick in a straightline - anybody every try driving it on the street around a corner?? (giggle)

John P.
Click to expand...



Would snout bars do the same thing?
 
By "snout bars" I believe you are referring to the front bars normally seen on 12 point roll cages - yes?

We put them in and tie the top of the shock tower into them when we install cages.

So the short answer is "yes", they help reinforce the front frame rail!
 
John426 said:
And yeah, we all know folks who drove a slant six without oil for 100 miles or raced the car with 400hp and no frame rail connectors and it never twisted. Still doesn't mean it is a good idea! (chuckle). Hey JohnRR, I'll bet that Dart was quick in a straightline - anybody every try driving it on the street around a corner?? (giggle)

John P.
Click to expand...

Like I said John it's not something I would have done or something I am telling people to do , I'm sure the fact that it was retired from street duty was a big reason it wasn't folded up .
 
i am one of "those guys" that doesnt have frame connectors. funny part is, i planned on doing them before i even pulled the /6. there really is no reason i dont have them. i am a welder. have the tools, have the ability. i even have the tube in my garage. my car went 11.80 lifting the front tire. with a big block. yeah i should have them, but dont. there is not one sign of damage to my car from flex though. i have seen plenty of big block cars with no fenderwells, and no down bars. nothing added. it looks scary. some day ill do frame connectors and torque boxes.
 
"went 11.80 lifting the front tire. with a big block. yeah i should have them, but dont. there is not one sign of damage to my car from flex though"

Lifting the one front tire IS a very visible sign. If you're a fabricator, you know what happens if you flex a piece of steel enough in the same directions... It fractures. It take a lot to show hard signs of the problem. I know several cars that had no visible damage, but when torn down, under the seam sealer, were popped spot welds and cracks. Panel and door alignment, or having to correct the steeering as the car launches are signs too, but there are a lot of people who pay them no mind. Obviously it's up to the individual to decide to go thru the 60 minutes of fitting and welding. Some will want it, some won't care, and will simply be ignorant of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top