ac schnitzer rear strut brace installed pics

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by kmarei

well with this bar probably neither compression nor tension
cuz it will be too busy moving on the pivot point around the side mounted screw

The bar will exhibit a combination of bending and tension since the towers will move roughly vertically compared to each other. Great post RJ, by the way. But I'm not entirely sure about the question I just answered. I guess I find arguing with clueless resellers somewhat entertaining and also somewhat valuable to the community...

Originally Posted by kmarei

PM about that cream

Oh yeah!!! Me too.

[J08M3]

I thought sway bar was torsion forces??? Hence the different diameter sway bars having different performance characteristics?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by J08M3

I thought sway bar was torsion forces??? Hence the different diameter sway bars having different performance characteristics?

Yes sway bars act in torsion. They are the bars that connect the arms of your F&R suspension between L&R sides. Even though they act in torsion they have extension arms on their ends that translate the torsion into a linear coupling. These bars are strut tower braces... totally different...

[dcstep]

Why has no one done a blind test of the ACS??? I looks like it'd be easy to take it in and out. Have an assistant take it in and out without telling the driver its status and then the driver can run a slalom course. The driver would have to say whether it's in or out and you could measure his times.

There's a bunch of arguing about the cost and design, but the real question is, "Does it work?"

Dave

[kmarei]

Originally Posted by dcstep

There's a bunch of arguing about the cost and design, but the real question is, "Does it work?"

Dave

well i believe the answer to that question much be known to ACS when they tested at Nurburgring
i am sure they tested with and without
all they have to do is to send us their test data
or a summary even

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by kmarei

well i believe the answer to that question much be known to ACS when they tested at Nurburgring
i am sure they tested with and without
all they have to do is to send us their test data
or a summary even

Well evidently they didn't send it on 4/5. If it's so easy to tell if it's there or not, then a blind test would be very easy to do for validation of that claim. It'd only be slightly harder to set up a slalom and average some blind runs with and without. If it's actually easy to feel, then I suspect that times would easily reflect the change.

Dave

[J08M3]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Yes sway bars act in torsion. They are the bars that connect the arms of your F&R suspension between L&R sides. Even though they act in torsion they have extension arms on their ends that translate the torsion into a linear coupling. These bars are strut tower braces... totally different...

Oh haha... I read the last post wrong. I thought it said sway bars, that's why I was confused.

[FrankieP]

Hello board,

I decided to finish my project this morning. Could not stand to see my car torn apart any longer.

Here are some pictures of the install and the fixing points. The bar, once installed, has NO vertical or horizontal movement. It fits flush on the shelf and does not pivot. The quick release bolts are threaded through the back side of the bracket. A lock nut then locks in the bolt. All hardware is stainless steel. The install was fairly straight forward and can be performed by most with patience and the right tools. The instructions provided by ACS were very helpful and provides additional hints to make the install easier.

I have been wanting to install this bar for quite a while, but opted to go with the ACS racing suspension first. This is a fully adjustable suspension (20 position). I was very comfortable and dialed into (for 5000 miles) a setting (+13 front, +13 rear) that was "perfect for me." I wondered if I would really be able to "feel" a difference with the bar installed.

I am happy to say it makes a world of difference. The bar is immediately noticeable on the corners. The car is flatter on turns, NO DOUBT.

Those that are doubting the function of this bar have obviously never driven a car with it installed. Is it a full race set up? No. Like the M3, It was designed to be the best of both worlds. Does it stiffen the chassis to a point that you can feel. YES. Does it improve flatness on the turns? YES. Though it is more noticeable with a spring kit or stock suspension, the benefits can still be felt with a full coilover suspension.

All of the discussion regarding pivots, torsion, the price of metals, penis creme, lifeless trolls, and truck candy are irrelevant.

The product does what it is supposed to do.

BTW, The bar was tested on the ring along with the other suspension components designed by Manfred Wollgarten. Hope you enjoy the pictures.

[Orb]

Originally Posted by Frank@CEC

Hello board,

I decided to finish my project this morning. Could not stand to see my car torn apart any longer.

Here are some pictures of the install and the fixing points. The bar, once installed, has NO vertical or horizontal movement. It fits flush on the shelf and does not pivot. The quick release bolts are threaded through the back side of the bracket. A lock nut then locks in the bolt. All hardware is stainless steel. The install was fairly straight forward and can be performed by most with patience and the right tools. The instructions provided by ACS were very helpful and provides additional hints to make the install easier.

I have been wanting to install this bar for quite a while, but opted to go with the ACS racing suspension first. This is a fully adjustable suspension (20 position). I was very comfortable and dialed into (for 5000 miles) a setting (+13 front, +13 rear) that was "perfect for me." I wondered if I would really be able to "feel" a difference with the bar installed.

I am happy to say it makes a world of difference. The bar is immediately noticeable on the corners. The car is flatter on turns, NO DOUBT.

Those that are doubting the function of this bar have obviously never driven a car with it installed. Is it a full race set up? No. Like the M3, It was designed to be the best of both worlds. Does it stiffen the chassis to a point that you can feel. YES. Does it improve flatness on the turns? YES. Though it is more noticeable with a spring kit or stock suspension, the benefits can still be felt with a full coilover suspension.

All of the discussion regarding pivots, torsion, the price of metals, penis creme, lifeless trolls, and truck candy are irrelevant.

The product does what it is supposed to do.

BTW, The bar was tested on the ring along with the other suspension components designed by Manfred Wollgarten. Hope you enjoy the pictures.

I think you lost all credibly for the technical people in this forum. What loads do you think the bar will resist and from where? No much happening at the damper for forces. There are loads into the sub frame bushing, rear tension struts and rear spring reaction forces.

The problem I’m having with this:

• Your reinforcing an area that is a box section…it already the strongest and stiffest part of the car. No question about this.
• Your attachment system is not at a load bearing part of the structure. At least it will not hurt anyting.

Also, it is not possible for a bar like this to make a car flatter in corner so I suggest you just don’t say it.

Hopefully, you will ask the right question to Manfred on how this will stiffen the chassis. It not a difficult question to ask but the information should be concise and it not so far.

Orb

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Frank@CEC

The car is flatter on turns, NO DOUBT.

...

Those that are doubting the function of this bar have obviously never driven a car with it installed. Is it a full race set up? No. Does it improve flatness on the turns? YES. Though it is more noticeable with a spring kit or stock suspension, the benefits can still be felt with a full coilover suspension.

What if someone told you that their new exhaust made their car flatter in the corners? To anyone with the least bit on understanding of the way a cars suspension works your statements and this one are just as ridiculous. You would not have to drive the car with the exhaust to know the claim is incorrect, would you? I'll continue to challenge this claim until you can show one iota of data. "Feel" just doesn't cut it. A suitable test could be one showing a performance difference or simply a blind "is the bar present or not?" test. Good luck with that.

Originally Posted by Frank@CEC

All of the discussion regarding pivots, torsion, the price of metals, penis creme, lifeless trolls, and truck candy are irrelevant.

Sorry not so. If you think the critique of a part based on design and engineering principles is irrelevant you're even more clueless than you have already demonstrated.

Originally Posted by Frank@CEC

BTW, The bar was tested on the ring along with the other suspension components designed by Manfred Wollgarten. Hope you enjoy the pictures.

"Tested at" is not equivalent to "R&D-ed". So once again you were not correct on this point.

You should really give up. Your credibility is absolutely shot here. Enjoy your silly little, ABSURDLY priced, "trunk candy" trinkets.




P.S. I hope you paid the 335 price for your bar along with the dealer discount. With all of that you then probably only paid 200-300% of what it cost.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Orb

I think you lost all credibly for the technical people in this forum.

+1

Originally Posted by Orb

What loads do you think the bar will resist and from where? No much happening at the damper for forces. There are loads into the sub frame bushing, rear tension struts and rear spring reaction forces.

The problem I’m having with this:

• Your reinforcing an area that is a box section…it already the strongest and stiffest part of the car. No question about this.
• Your attachment system is not at a load bearing part of the structure. At least it will not hurt anyting.

I agree that most loads are going into the rear subframe, the suspension arm mounting loads and the spring loads. Exactly. However, there are the rear shock damping loads that go directly into the shock mounting locations and then into the chassis near by - right where the mounting plates of the bar attach.

The question of any type of rear shock tower bar is basically one of two springs in parallel (well if you imagine the bar and chassis itself simply as very stiff springs - which they are). The effectiveness of a design to reduce relative movement between these points is then simply about the bars stiffness compared to the stiffness of the chassis itself. This is the key point. And compared to a welded steel contruction like this chassis and the box like nature of this part of the car this puny little aluminum tubing bar with the constrained pivots just is not stiff enough. On top of that even if the bar did have sufficient stiffness to stiffen this part of the chassis the cars roll stiffness would still be dominated by the torsional spring rate of its front and rear sway bars.

Originally Posted by Orb

Also, it is not possible for a bar like this to make a car flatter in corner so I suggest you just don’t say it.

Precisely. Or if it is flatter, is it so by such a miniscule amount, that is would be nearly immeasurable.

Cheers.

[sparkyg]

Maybe we are talking about the difference between feel and real. Maybe the car feels flatter but it prob is not much more. Would the rear of the car feel different, most likely, does it corner better with just the brace, hard to say.

Does changing all the other components under the car make a bigger difference, for sure.

[Orb]

Originally Posted by swamp2

+1



I agree that most loads are going into the rear subframe, the suspension arm mounting loads and the spring loads. Exactly. However, there are the rear shock damping loads that go directly into the shock mounting locations and then into the chassis near by - right where the mounting plates of the bar attach.

The question of any type of rear shock tower bar is basically one of two springs in parallel (well if you imagine the bar and chassis itself simply as very stiff springs - which they are). The effectiveness of a design to reduce relative movement between these points is then simply about the bars stiffness compared to the stiffness of the chassis itself. This is the key point. And compared to a welded steel contruction like this chassis and the box like nature of this part of the car this puny little aluminum tubing bar with the constrained pivots just is not stiff enough. On top of that even if the bar did have sufficient stiffness to stiffen this part of the chassis the cars roll stiffness would still be dominated by the torsional spring rate of its front and rear sway bars.



Precisely. Or if it is flatter, is it so by such a miniscule amount, that is would be nearly immeasurable.

Cheers.

I understand what the concept here but it’s flawed. The reaction load for the damper on race setup will not exceed 350 lbf which is not much of a load when we are talking about deflection.

The reinforcement structure itself is really weak in anything but pure tension. I don’t think the single bolt pivot really makes a difference along with the leadge on the bracket so we can dismiss these items out right, and to be honest, it is not where we should be looking at. If you look at the attachment bracket by itself then you see in pure tension that this is not going to do much other than deflect harmlessly.

The bracket will be extremely weak in bending or torsion so forget about the bar at this point as it seems that not much load would make it to the bar anyways. In pure tension the mounting holes of the bracket will cause a bending load due to their location which will fatigue the car’s structure…maybe an oversight or no analysis was done.

The real focus point really comes down to where the bracket attaches so review this part of the structure which I know will not hold up to tension loads well.

As for use of material, they should use steel which has a much higher modulas for a more space savings.

I still like to see the vendor to come up with a viable explanation for such a simple question as the load case can be explained in 3 sentences. If it can’t be explained then it is just added weight.

Orb

[Big Windy]

I wish I had something to contribute to this thread, but hats off to swamp and the others who have petitioned the actual data from Frank/ACS. I am by no means a technical expert on this subject, but I think that ACS' credibility is really called into question here. Even when asked by one of their own, ACS provided false information and specs about their own product. And sorry, Frank, getting "confused" about their own product is just not good enough.

I sincerely hope that ACS can bring some hard data to the stage. I have never really considered their products before, but if this situation doesn't straighten out, I know that I will never consider it in the future.

[FrankieP]

Why is my credibility in question?

I have never claimed to be an engineer. Nor have I claimed to know everything about every product, like some on this forum seem to do (even with no first hand experience with the product). IMO, your credibility is in question because of this.

My claim is that I am the manufactures rep, and I have access to information directly from the vendor. FACT. I must report what the vendor tells me is so, because they are the developers of the product. FACT. Once I receive the product, if the information does not match, then I will question the vendor (which in this case is necessary pertaining to their claim about the materials used). However, I personally installed this bar on my car. FACT. I personally feel the benefit of the bar, and am willing to bet that anyone else that installs the bar will feel the difference as well.

Now for all of the "scientists" on this forum that are claiming mathematical probability. My advice to you is to put down the calculator and test the product for yourselves before making blanket statements. Coming to a conclusion without all of the information, or first hand experience/testing of the product, is just absurd and NOT scientific.

The facts is that the bar does stiffen the rear. The only way that I can describe the feeling is that the car is flatter around the corners.

If you don't believe me because I am the manufactures rep, fine. But why would you not believe Blake? He is the only other person on this forum that can speak FACTS about the product because he actually has it installed. He has driven his car before and after the install and like me has felt the difference in performance. FACT.

ACS tests and R&D's all of it's suspension components at the ring. Tests are part of the research that leads to the development of the products. I thought all "scientists" knew this.

Now as I have stated before, I am a member of this forum because I myself am an enthusiast and own an M3. I have no problem answering questions about any of my post, but will only do so for members that can "play well with others." Though I may not agree with everyone on this forum, I treat every member here with respect and have never personally attacked anyone on the forums and never will. That behavior is childish, and not becoming of a professional.

[J08M3]

Originally Posted by Frank@CEC

If you don't believe me because I am the manufactures rep, fine. But why would you not believe Blake? He is the only other person on this forum that can speak FACTS about the product because he actually has it installed. He has driven his car before and after the install and like me has felt the difference in performance. FACT.

I don't question your credibility at all. Honestly I do find it very impressive that you decided to install the bar in your own car after it came into question and test it.

But I don't suspect this "feel" argument is not going to hold up well around here. I find this test right alongside the "butt dyno" tests people keep giving their cars where they find it "faster" with a new air filter or faster with intake scoops where dyno readings show 1 - 2hp gains at best. Right up with people who have a loud aftermarket exhaust with minimal hp gains feel their car is faster (when really it's just making more noise). Also the people who feel their car is faster after an oil change (cause somehow it makes the car happy to have fresh oil) I find the power of the mind is stronger than the facts here. Most people want to believe the money they spent is really going to drastically change their car enough they can feel it.

[kmarei]

Originally Posted by Frank@CEC

BTW, The bar was tested on the ring along with the other suspension components designed by Manfred Wollgarten. Hope you enjoy the pictures.

if it was tested at the ring
why can't you get those numbers?
if the tests were the bar and other suspension components
how can you tell what made the differences?
it could be the bar
it could be the other pieces
Ask ACS to send you some numbers from their tests
i am sure you could get a few potential buyers based on the testing data provided

keep in mind the only piece of data that would shred to pieces all the negative comments are lap times
for example
if it did the lap in 8:15 with the bar
and 8:20 without
that's concrete proof right there

[kmarei]

why does this bar make so much differnece in cornering
when right above it is a similar bar that is the rear parcel shelf metal beam??
look at this pic
why does the bar add stiffness when there is a bar right above it that is welded to the chassis?

[Big Windy]

Originally Posted by Frank@CEC

Why is my credibility in question?

I said ACS' credibility, not yours specifically.

I have never claimed to be an engineer. Nor have I claimed to know everything about every product, like some on this forum seem to do (even with no first hand experience with the product). IMO, your credibility is in question because of this.

I think that the expectation on the forum is that if you sell, affiliate with, or promote a product, you should be the subject matter expert. You said yourself that you are the manufacturer's rep and that you have access to information directly from ACS. In addition, if you make claims, you have to expect that someone else is going to call you to back it up. When you make a claim and can't back it up, or back it up with false/inaccurate information, it doesn't look good. Certain deductions and determinations can be made scientifically just by seeing a picture of the product and also knowing the forces/affects that are involved in the equation, so first hand experience is not necessarily a critical factor.

My claim is that I am the manufactures rep, and I have access to information directly from the vendor. FACT. I must report what the vendor tells me is so, because they are the developers of the product. FACT. Once I receive the product, if the information does not match, then I will question the vendor (which in this case is necessary pertaining to their claim about the materials used). However, I personally installed this bar on my car. FACT. I personally feel the benefit of the bar, and am willing to bet that anyone else that installs the bar will feel the difference as well.

Instead of betting money why don't you just send the part to somebody for free or let someone borrow your car to run actual tests?

Now for all of the "scientists" on this forum that are claiming mathematical probability. My advice to you is to put down the calculator and test the product for yourselves before making blanket statements. Coming to a conclusion without all of the information, or first hand experience/testing of the product, is just absurd and NOT scientific.

I personally wouldn't want to hedge $750 on this product, seeing that the mathematical and physical evidence is greatly against the likelihood of this product making any difference whatsoever.

The facts is that the bar does stiffen the rear. The only way that I can describe the feeling is that the car is flatter around the corners.

No, that was NOT scientific!

If you don't believe me because I am the manufactures rep, fine. But why would you not believe Blake? He is the only other person on this forum that can speak FACTS about the product because he actually has it installed. He has driven his car before and after the install and like me has felt the difference in performance. FACT.

It is ignorant to think that what somebody feels is in anyway a FACT. We don't believe you because you can't provide data, not because you are the manufacturer's rep. It is also nothing personal with Blake...it is just a matter that "feeling a difference in performance" is a totally irrelevant and immeasurable term.

Now as I have stated before, I am a member of this forum because I myself am an enthusiast and own an M3. I have no problem answering questions about any of my post, but will only do so for members that can "play well with others." Though I may not agree with everyone on this forum, I treat every member here with respect and have never personally attacked anyone on the forums and never will. That behavior is childish, and not becoming of a professional.

Agreed. I think that is the case for most on the forum as well. I don't recall seeing anything out of line on this thread...

[graves4r6]

Love or hate it. Done.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by kmarei

if it did the lap in 8:15 with the bar
and 8:20 without
that's concrete proof right there

Well actually for one the test would need to be blind, and for another it would have to be repeated. The numbers will likely be much smaller than the noise and test to test variation. I would not be satisfied of proof with tw such numbers.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Orb

I understand what the concept here but it’s flawed. The reaction load for the damper on race setup will not exceed 350 lbf which is not much of a load when we are talking about deflection.

Excellent data point. I knew the number would be much smaller than the spring load or mounting loads but putting this ceiling here on this load is an excellent piece of the puzzle. Can you elaborate on where this figure came from. We all need to remember that this is a VERTICAL load as well, not lateral!

Originally Posted by Orb

IThe bracket will be extremely weak in bending or torsion so forget about the bar at this point as it seems that not much load would make it to the bar anyways. In pure tension the mounting holes of the bracket will cause a bending load due to their location which will fatigue the car’s structure…maybe an oversight or no analysis was done.

The real focus point really comes down to where the bracket attaches so review this part of the structure which I know will not hold up to tension loads well.

The bar itself will support both tension and compression, but I absolutely see you point about the huge difference between tension and compression in terms of the effect of the stainless bracket on the surrounding sheet metal. I guess your point is that this surrounding sheet metal does not provide a suitbably strong nor stiff load path?