This looked interesting http://www.fordmuscleforums.com/suspension-articles/495912-monte-carlo-bar.html. I just noticed this pic. Here's how to hold somtihng flat in a vice
Just seems to me that kink in the middle weakens it considerably...I'd love to check that angle after a year of it being driven
for no more than what the bar does, that thing will last for ever... if the towers flex enough to break that bar, you have big structure problems... come to think of it...could someone post some pics of different cars (more than one) that the...shock towers have collapsed... I have heard different reasons why you should run one but have never seen pics. of what will happen if you don't...
I am wondering, what is the original distance between the shock towers. Does anyone have a length? if not how about we all measure the distance between the two inside nuts on the towers and come up with an average distance before we lock the towers in position and they are sagging in out leaning out.
30.81" from inside of the shock hole on top of the tower to the inside of the hole on the other side. http://1bad6t.com/diagrams/Maverickframerail.jpg
If I understand correctly, the brace isn't to keep the towers from colapsing in but to stiffen the chassis for better handling and control. I had one on the mazda, miata that I owned a few years ago, and it did help. If there was a gusset welded to the inside of the bend, it would probably help avoid any movement or flex there. It wouldn't take a very big or long one to eliminate any flex. You could even go with more angle if needed with a small gusset.
I think those are one in the same. In order to stiffen the chassis, you reduce the inward deflection of the top of the towers during suspension travel. I guess collapsing is a strong word for that.
I had no idea that such detailed tecg drawings were available. 30,81" it is. Now to go measure mine thanks RT
