JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Any tips, tricks, or advice that would save me time and annoyance would be appreciated.

JamesC

Mongoose

iTrader: (2)

Take the front wheels off when drilling the strut towers and put a towel over the distributor to catch the shavings at the cowl area. If you've got a large cap dist. you may have to remove it when tightening the bolts at the cowl.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Did you remove the hood, use a right-angle drill, or was there sufficient room for a regular drill? Did you use a step drill bit? How crucial are the measurements?

JamesC

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

No measuring....Set it in place, use it to mark the holes...drill from the tops.

You can measure if you want, to get it centered, but your should be able to center it just fine by eye balling it.

Mongoose

iTrader: (2)

I didn't remove the hood, used a right angle drill for the cowl area and used standard length bits starting with a pilot hole and working up. I took measurements to center the cowl mounting point and let the tower points fall as they may which was a perfect fit. You may have issues with your A/C on the drivers side interfering (i.e. Edelbrock's 3 point TBI/carb brace) depending on which brand you're looking to use. I had the Edelbrock TBI brace and when I swapped to TPI I went with their 3 point TPI brace as well and it fell right into place using the same holes. Hope this helps.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Swapped in a GM serpentine conversion kit, so that brace is no longer an issue. Helpful. Thank you.

JamesC

Mongoose

iTrader: (2)

That's cool, I looked at the pics in your Garage and they showed the older v belt setup.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Just completed the swap (though I'm waiting for the garage to charge the AC system and to align the front end). I'm throwing in Spohn's spherical struts mounts as well as the STB. Updated pics in the garage before long.

JamesC

//<86TA>\\

iTrader: (14)

i ran into an issue with my 3 pt brace. Its the carb/TBI one. I have poly mounts and a MSD dizzy. the brace would hit the dizzy if it was installed in the stock form. I dont know is the msd dizzy is just taller or what the deal was but that was an issue i ran into. It didnt matter much, i ended up cutting the bar up and modifying it into a rigid mount piece instead of using the through-bolt mounts that come with it.

Mongoose

iTrader: (2)

I believe the poly mounts are the cause. I've seen several posts about poly mounts causing clearance issues by actually raising the motor.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Thanks for the heads-up on the poly mounts, since that's a factor. I'll have to mock up before I drill.

JamesC

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

I put in a poly trans mount once. It was taller, lifted the tranny & caused driveline vibrations, so I took it back out & went with s new stock rubber one.

So I bet the motor mounts would do the same, in regards to being taller & lifting the engine.

topless89

use a small bit to punch through, and ream it out with a sheet-metal bit.

robertfrank

iTrader: (27)

What I did was take a flat head screw driver to make a groove for the bit to bite in and drilled through. I used a picture off of here as a template and did it that way.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Here's a bit more info:

http://www.fbody.com/tech/details.cgi?id=79

JamesC

I H8 WWD

iTrader: (5)

Prothane states their engine mounts for the SBC are taller and would need shimming on the mounts for proper install...in which case it sounds like nobody on here has even tried shimming the mounts rather than bitching about them and buying new rubber mounts. Set old mount next to poly mount, figure amount needed to shim and shim. Install Poly and no more 'to tall' problems. Same goes for their trans mount, yes I know they should be made to stock size...but not everything is DIRECT FIT, even if it says Direct fit.

So start shimming and enjoying your poly mounts...Take care.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

I finished the install today. I used a right-angle drill with a step bit, which made drilling itself very easy. I had no problems with the dizzy or poly mounts. The only fitment problem was that my under hood lamp interfered a bit. I never use it (open hood at shows), so I simply removed it.

JamesC

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Here're pics (a few more in the Car Details below):

JamesC

Choppycam

Hein !?? why your distibutor is so tall?! sorry, but I can see on picture that you provided to us by fbody.com that there is a lot of clearance... it's strange. What kind of distributor is that?

I H8 WWD

iTrader: (5)

Coil on Distributor...??? Unlike mine which has a separate ignition coil like shown here. Or he does have some oddly tall distributor, but I think its just the coil on the distributor making it seem tall....er.

Twin_Turbo

iTrader: (25)

He has a coil in cap hei, instead of a small cap. You can clearly see the shape of the round coil with the square around it, just like in your pic above. That black is a std. delco large cap HEI:

91_5.7_TPI

iTrader: (2)

Did you notice any difference in the car's performance after the installation of the STB? I've been considering one for a while, but don't know if it's worth the cash.

Choppycam

OH Da.... Twin turbo, it's clear! you rigth. So, ... I will have the same problem the next spring when I will install my Edelbrock STB !? :S oups!!... I must need a new kit of coil, but not on the top of distributor... bad thing... It's a luck for me to see this topic!

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Nah, but I don't drive the car hard enough (most members don't) to truly merit all that we do to our cars. Most of it--with the exception of the Wonderbar and SFC's, which safeguard the car's integrity--is simply hobbyist vanity. That said, I wouldn't change anything.

JamesC

91_5.7_TPI

iTrader: (2)

Lol. Yeah, I really don't need the stuff on my car. But, it's nice driving a car that can do what these cars can with the right mods.

racing geek

iTrader: (5)

I plan to have my Edelbrock STB on my car no later then mid March. That is when I'll have access to a right angle drill and hopefully the snow/salt will be off the roads by then. In other words, I'll know of a difference in about a month.

customblackbird

iTrader: (15)

3pt braces are nice but u have to be careful. the firewall is extrememly thin. not to mention that they dont have them for 4th gens cuz they crack the windsheilds. id say on a 3rd gen they are alil more beefy around the base of the windshield where they attach this brace. still tho im skeptable. im gona make my own 2pt for my HSR with 1.5"x.095 tubing and if i see a better mouthing place i'll make it a 4pt and not a 3pt... just like they have the 4pts on the new racing autoX 2010 camaro.

they do make a diff from what ive heard. even my moms 2008 impala has a form of strut tower brace same as my gf's 2007 ford 500. for a regular driver they are not needed.... but either is anything over 200hp to get the car moving. but SHlT id like to have 500hp and a strut brace just incase i wanna get alil crazy

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Hey, Custom,

I became fatigued reading your post--hey, I'm an old fart. Standard English and a bit of punctuation would be nice.

Remember that the brace isn't fixed to the firewall proper, but to the lip that overlooks it. As far as I know, no thirdgen member has ever complained/mentioned that a 3-point brace has broken his windshield.

JamesC

customblackbird

iTrader: (15)

jamesC my post is full of "periods" (last time i checked thats punctuation and there might be one run on sentence) even broke it up into 2 different paragraphs for ya. ur alittle cranky... miss ur nap? i thought old ppl like to read?

if u actually read my post u will see that i stated that the 4th gens have had cracked windsheilds, not the thirdgens. hence why no 4th gen 3 point strut braces exist. and the firewalls on a 3rd gen are very weak. they are not stronger till u get towards the top "lip" area. i would be weary with a setup like this since the 3 point is suppose to triangulate the front area better than a 2 point. i dont think it would make any noticable difference on any type of driven car, whether daily driver or autoX. as far as the design its concerned its not a bad one but i think there are BETTER and STRONGER areas to do this. areas that dont affect the windsheild support. yes this is long bc i would hope u would have keeled over by now.

racing geek

iTrader: (5)

Wow... you need to back off. Yeah you used periods, but you should also try using the shift key to capitalize the beginning of sentences and words like "I." What about your spelling of the word "you" and your lack of any apostrophes. The last sentence was uncalled for...

If the 3-pt design didn't help any more then the 2-pt, why do some sanctioning bodies such as the SCCA bump drivers up a class for having a 3-pt instead of a 2-pt STB? However, I do agree that the cowl lip could use some extra bracing if someone would be using a 3-pt STB. I would think that adding some metal to connect the lip of the cowl to a lower section of the firewall would help brace the area where the 3rd point would be attached. I don't really know how to better explain my idea without a picture.

Mike

91_5.7_TPI

iTrader: (2)

I don't see the point of a 2-point. It would only make the left side shift if the right side hit a bump and shifted. The 3point is more rigid, but a 4-point would be even better I would think. A point on each strut tower and two on the cowl. I've seen some 1st gens like this.

racing geek

iTrader: (5)

Does anyone have a picture of a 4-pt STB?

customblackbird

iTrader: (15)

i didnt know i was being graded on my writing habits on a INTERNET FORUM! esp one for cars. im here to talk cars and maybe provide some info nothing else. if one wants to bicker about typing/grammar do it sumwhere else, maybe join a writing forum? crazy is talking grammar on a car forum. now can we please get back to the topic ladies?

thing about 2 point braces is that they shouldnt have pivot points... the one u see by UMI etc have pivot points and are adjustable due to variances in fittment from car to car. a solid strut brace doesnt "shift" when one side hits a bump. it would push on the other side and limit its upward travel... which is its job. not sure how the back bars would limit upward movement anyway of the strut towers... seem that they just reinforce the strut towers for front to back movement.

ive never seen a 4 point. sum guy posted a pic of a 12pt strut brace... it looked like a spider that attached all the points of the engine bay. its was crazy. idk how it worked out tho. theres a pic of a 4pt but u cant see it well in the new HOTROD mag i believe... its on the GM racing 2010 camaro. they stated it was fully caged and had a 4pt strut brace. i would think it was alot alike the 3 pt but attached the bars that go to the windshield farther apart.

drknow90rs_ss@y

iTrader: (3)

The reason they have pivot points is because of manufacturing differences. Even though each car is manufactured on an assembly line, there are no two alike! If they made that a welded union, then lots of people would be calling them and saying "It dosent fit!".

customblackbird

iTrader: (15)

thats what i stated.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

That's what we're all here for. However, disseminating that information in a clear and concise manner, so that all members can easily understand, is a goal that we should strive for (regardless of the forum). I've had my say; I'm done.

Racing Geek, since you race, I'll be interested in knowing what you discover with the Edelbrock 3-point.

JamesC

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

I replaced my Edelbrock 3-pt with a UMI 2-pt.

I noticed NO loss in handling strength. It is just as tight, if not even tighter.

The Edelbrock is made from THIN wall tubing, whereas the UMI one is much thicker & stiffer.

Does 2-pt require thicker wall to be as strong as a 3-pt? Maybe. But my UMI required less work to fit than the Edelbrock did.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

IIRC, however, you were "fitting" the Edelbrock on your car. Did the UMI require any tweaking? Also, are you running spherical strut mounts?

JamesC

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

Because of the underhood bracing of the GTA hoods, yes. Sorta.

It would have required the same "dinging" of one underhood brace, like the Edelbrock did.

See...I had ALMOST clearance it enough for the Edelbrock. The hood would shut good, but still sat up, maybe 1/8", over the fender edge.

With the UMI STB, now my hood sits flat & the UMI STB fits into the same notch I had made for the Edelbrock STB.

So....The UMI fits a GTA hood IF the owner is willing to modify the underhood bracing. But I didn't drill a single hole to put it in, unlike the Edelbrock that required 6 holes to be drilled. There are 2 optional bolts included, so it has 3 bolts holding it down, but I haven't even used them. I'm just using the 2 strut mount studs to hold the UMI unit on. So I'm using 4 of the 6 mount bolts, for the UMI brace, and don't see the need for the other 2.

Wish I had gone UMI first.

Yes...I'm running the rod ended one. UMI STB

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Do you think you're enjoying the full benefit of the STB without spherical strut mounts?

JamesC

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

I do have spherical mounts.....I provided a link to the one I'm running.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

I'm talking about the upper strut mounts themselves, not the STB.

JamesC

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

Nope.....Stock strut mounts. Doubt I'll ever go spherical for the strut mounts. No need for me.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

The rubber in the OE upper strut mounts, to some extent, would seem to negate the positive influence of the STB.

JamesC

Stephen

iTrader: (12)

I suppose if you wanted to look at it negatively, then yeah.

Or look at it as...The STB improves over the stock rubber strut mounts.

BUT...They are totally independent, as far as daily drive is concerned. A solid/spherical strut mounts will transmit ride harshness into the chassis. A STB has no effect on ride quality.

I'm building a strong street car, not a track only car here.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

I noted no difference in harshness of ride. I doubt that the STB can realize its fullest potential without the spherical upper mounts. But perhaps for a street car, both pieces are overkill.

Here's what Vetruck (Dean), our noted suspension guru, has to say about installing an STB without after market mounts:

"You need good solid aftermarket strut mount first before you will aid in any perfomance gain from a STB. Good solid strut mounts are a far better bang for the buck in performance handling. Without them, the STB is basicallly useless."
Dean

JamesC

91_5.7_TPI

iTrader: (2)

I agree with James that proper punctuation, capitalization, and spelling are important on even car forums. It makes what you're trying to say to others easier to determine and gets you point accross more effectively. There have been some posts by a member on Z28.com I didn't even bother to read because I found it hard to even read his collection of run ons, fragments, and lack of any puctuation.

The only differences I noticed in the J&M mounts and the stock was the fact the steering felt more sure and the front end didn't hop around on hard bumps lol.

The point I was trying to make about the 2-pts is that if there is a force acting on the driver's side that exerts enough force to lift the driver's side strut tower then the force is trasnfered to STB who's only other mounting point is the other strut tower (assuming that both towers are weak enough to flex), then that tower would be forced to move as well. That's what the STB is supposed to limiting, not encouraging. I would think that a 3 or 4-pt would transfer that energy to the firewall more than the other tower. At any rate, my car's TBI and UMI only has TPI....

customblackbird

iTrader: (15)

thank-you stephen. glad to see someones listening. Theres one account saying he noticed no diff and if there was it was better! most ppl wont ever push a car to ever need the 3pt.... when really its a bad design. attaches to a weak part of the car. If you want to be technical then yes... the "lip" area is stronger than the firewall but weaker than many other areas of the engine bay area. no need for the 3pt over a 2 pt. sry guys... and if your gona need more than a 2pt ur prob doing more with the car that most ppl do. Which will prob require something that isnt a 3pt... as stated it will prob be a 4pt or something custom. That attaches to stronger parts of the car. maybe even attached to a Thru firewall CAGE. still 3pt seems to be a more of a gimick. why drill holes in the firewall when not needed...

some guy made this on here. and its insane and prob attaches all the points of the engine bay. overkill.... yes but glad to see someone thinking out of the box. bet u its strong tho i see a very promising 6pt in there. minus the perimter bars.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Common board wisdom would seem to agree with Jason Scott that the 3-point is the superior design.

The following is from his How to Tune & Modify Your Carmaro 1982-1998:

"A better solution [than the two-point brace] is a brace that not only ties the strut towers to each other, but also ties the braces into the firewall/cowl area. By triangulating the front end, movement of the right front corner is suppresed by not only the tower-to-tower cross brace, but by the tower-to-cowl brace. And since the opposite (left-hand) strut tower is also tied to the cowl with a brace, that tower is better able to withstand flexing forces, too. In this way, only the most severe forces (accidents) cause the front end to flex."

Scott later mentions that the STB really isn't necessary even for high performance street driving.

JamesC

customblackbird

iTrader: (15)

so then the 1/2" of flex that occurs while taking a corner is a good thing? its a known fact that the strut towers of our cars flexes up to about 1/2 " during cornering/driving. and that this has a negative affect on handling... which is why they produced the 2pt and 3pt strut tower braces. i just fixed a huge rust hole right behind the passenger strut tower that went all the way from the fender support to the actual front subframe/attachment for Kmember... the whole back half of the tower wasnt connected to the firewall at all. That metal is super thin and im surprised the strut towers dont flex more than a 1/2". Which they prob do.

any support or rigidy that can be used to strength these cars is definitly a positive, a rigid frame/chassis will allow the suspension to do all the work in which it is designed to do. a car flexing does not have a positive affect on handling even in a street car. Yes the driving comfort will suffer but wont also cause stress cracks in the car body/frame.

If the front end only flexes during an accident then why do all AutoX racers usually employ some type of strut tower brace(front or rear). Even on 3rd gens. Everyone that ive seen/heard/read a thread who installed a strut tower brace whether a 2pt or 3pt has felt improvement over stock setup. And these are on street cars. If anything street cars see more violent roads then racers/autox ever will. An uneven road or bumps/sudden dips/potholes would cause the towers to flex a good bit.

im not dissagreeing that a 3pt would triangulate the front end and add rigidy over a 2pt... thats obvious. but i believe our cars dont have a strong enough place to connect (aka where the edelbrock does). and i think a 4pt or something would offer more rigidy than a 2pt/3pt. and give you more room around the distributer/plenum/carb. thats it. A 2pt will make a difference and if you need more i say screw the 3pt and go for a 4pt. i wouldnt take the risk of cracking my windsheild. dad had to replace his windshield in our 86TA from just leaning on the middle bottom right above where the edelbrock attaches bc it cracked about 6"... from just leaning over the fender and putting his hand on it.

wats next, 4pt cages are stronger than 8pts