subframe connector testimonials
01-30-2007, 10:59 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Brookville, PA
Posts: 715
Are they bad things? No. But I'd be interested in hearing why you need them specifically, because most of the time the bitching is about things like cowl shake, steering column rattling and general quivering from the chassis. And if you have junk shocks (stock, cheap ones, really old one), they need to be dealt with first. Not only is the car a lot more stable and rides better, but most of the jello feeling goes away because better shocks *don't let impacts through to the body, unlike poor shocks*. I'd rather keep them out first than let them in and band-aid things.
Now, there are times for SFC's sooner than later. Seriously dragged cars that really twist the body on launch being the main one. And I don't really care if you install them, but it's kind of like installing better heads with your stock exhaust.... Might help a little, but you don't get the biggest benefit from them and you are missing out on the good things shocks get you. I'll add that in not one signature above does anyone have shocks that are very good at being dampers, and that will certainly color things. Again, it's got to be a good capable damper, not any random shock.
And keep in mind, I sell SFC's. UMI, SLP, Hotchkis, Edelbrock, etc..... I normally sell UMI because they fit great and have many options. So if you want them, I can hook you up with some.... but I always start with shocks first.
Now, there are times for SFC's sooner than later. Seriously dragged cars that really twist the body on launch being the main one. And I don't really care if you install them, but it's kind of like installing better heads with your stock exhaust.... Might help a little, but you don't get the biggest benefit from them and you are missing out on the good things shocks get you. I'll add that in not one signature above does anyone have shocks that are very good at being dampers, and that will certainly color things. Again, it's got to be a good capable damper, not any random shock.
And keep in mind, I sell SFC's. UMI, SLP, Hotchkis, Edelbrock, etc..... I normally sell UMI because they fit great and have many options. So if you want them, I can hook you up with some.... but I always start with shocks first.
01-30-2007, 02:22 PM
#17
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Hamilton,OH
Posts: 355
thanks for the info. The reason I want sfc,s is b/c Ive heard, and read that they help get rid of some of the squeks, and what not. My car is a salvage, that had a bent frame. I just want it to be more solid. Im not as concernsd for the performance advantages. Im going to get shocks, but not right now. I just want something to help stiffen up the body.
Don't hesitate to call if you need some help!
01-30-2007, 03:29 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Saginaw, MI
Posts: 189
On the weld vs bolt. It took 3 tries to get them in just right. The car has to be just right and level. If I did them all the time welding would be fine but when you do them once I liked the do over facter.
I went from slowing down to a crawl over rail road tracks to usually driving right over them. The car doesn't rattle at all now. Shutting the doors even sounds different. It might even handle better.
I went from slowing down to a crawl over rail road tracks to usually driving right over them. The car doesn't rattle at all now. Shutting the doors even sounds different. It might even handle better.
01-30-2007, 03:33 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Brookville, PA
Posts: 715
If you are adding them because you want to stiffen the car, then you need to do it right and do weld-in 3-points. They aren't exactly hard to weld in. Of course you can weld bolt-in connectors later if you are worried about fit. But I know that's one problem we don't have with UMI's SFC's, they fit very, very well.
02-06-2007, 11:27 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Brookville, PA
Posts: 715
I appreciate the concern, but I can't do anything about it for the forseeable future.
Don't hesitate to call me if you have questions....
02-09-2007, 09:25 AM
#29
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,495
Logically, yes, three point would help a lot. A triangle is the strongest shape, so if the connector ties in to the frames and body in three places, that should be stronger than just two, because it eliminates (or at least reduces) another kind of flex.
With two points, there is still some range of motion in which the front and rear subframes can shift laterally (sideways) relative to each other. I suspect that this is more likely with bolt-in connectors than weld-in, assuming good welds. The third connection point should virtually eliminate that lateral flex.
IMO, eliminating body/chassis flex is always good, and the more you can do, the better. General consensus is that a 3-point weld-in connector eliminates the most flex, even though some people will tell you that a 2-point bolt-in eliminates enough flex. Given the small differences in price, I'd go for the strongest one.
02-09-2007, 06:10 PM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 176
I don't know if I'm the only other one left reading this thread, but if anyone else is reading that can actually answer this question based on experience, please do.
Logically, yes, three point would help a lot. A triangle is the strongest shape, so if the connector ties in to the frames and body in three places, that should be stronger than just two, because it eliminates (or at least reduces) another kind of flex.
With two points, there is still some range of motion in which the front and rear subframes can shift laterally (sideways) relative to each other. I suspect that this is more likely with bolt-in connectors than weld-in, assuming good welds. The third connection point should virtually eliminate that lateral flex.
IMO, eliminating body/chassis flex is always good, and the more you can do, the better. General consensus is that a 3-point weld-in connector eliminates the most flex, even though some people will tell you that a 2-point bolt-in eliminates enough flex. Given the small differences in price, I'd go for the strongest one.
Logically, yes, three point would help a lot. A triangle is the strongest shape, so if the connector ties in to the frames and body in three places, that should be stronger than just two, because it eliminates (or at least reduces) another kind of flex.
With two points, there is still some range of motion in which the front and rear subframes can shift laterally (sideways) relative to each other. I suspect that this is more likely with bolt-in connectors than weld-in, assuming good welds. The third connection point should virtually eliminate that lateral flex.
IMO, eliminating body/chassis flex is always good, and the more you can do, the better. General consensus is that a 3-point weld-in connector eliminates the most flex, even though some people will tell you that a 2-point bolt-in eliminates enough flex. Given the small differences in price, I'd go for the strongest one.