Is there a big enough benefit in doing this to justify the cost or fabrication? When I did a search for this it seems its more geared towards drag cars. Is there a benefit for a street/autocross car?

 

I had one one my '86 Iroc and it was noisy, caused vibrations, and didnt 60' and better than my stock TA with a poly mount in a different car making very similar power.

 

Depends what kind of power you are putting down, for a stock app, I 'd say the stock arm w/ polymounts would suffice. If you are running a built engine/ tranny combo, you need something stronger. I run a UMI setup my self and am very happy w/it...

 

I run the UMI setup as well and really like it.

 

I like the idea of the all pressure being off the tailshaft of the tranny especially the t5's.

 

Are they really that much noisier? That may have been caused by the poly tranny mount and not the xmember mounted tq arm.. I've heard this does help with handling and acceleration.

 

When I put in a good one, the first impression that came to me was, I had just taken a giant rubber band or bowl of oatmeal out of something somewhere, and put in some STEEL.

Didn't notice any increased particular noise or vibration, even with a poly mount. Sure made the car feel altogether more SOLID though.

 

I agree. My torque arm makes no additional noise and stiffens the feel of the power delivery. Less delay from pedal down to go.

 

Full length torque arms with a poly mount are generally pretty quiet. Most of the torque arm noise issue comes from tunnel brace mounted ones (think 4th Gen).

As mentioned above, there's very little geometry change with a standard length torque arm. The improvement comes from the upgraded bushing, ability to adjust driveline angle, and most importantly, the upgrade from flimsy to strong material.

Response is improved because the unit is just that much stronger and deflection-free. Just as turbo lag only being a few tenths of a second but seems like forever; a strong T/A with a good mount reacts more quickly. Those few milliseconds just make it feel better.

And the benefits of getting the T/A off the trans; we get a call or two a month with guys relocating while their trans is in the shop getting the tailhousing replaced.

Thanks for the UMI love guys.

ramey

 

I really liked my spohn piece when I had it

I have a BMR drag pack now, and would like to get rid of it. But I'm stuck, since no one makes a double hump x-member for those of us running long tubes and a T56...... lol

 

Not saying it's common, but it's the reason I never went to an x-member mounted torque arm, it can peel the frame rails apart like a can opener:



https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/fabr...hn-torque.html

For a less than 400hp car, I'd keep it on the trans. That car was a bolt on L98 car. For me, I'm running a T56, so that puts the crossmember even farther back, and hanging off the same 4 crossmember bolts. It puts even more stress on those threads than there is already.

That's not the only time of heard of that happening, but it's the only time I've seen pictures of it.

 

If it had that much torque to crack the frame rails, wouldnt it have destroyed the transmission by ripping the tailshaft off?

 

I really like all the products you guys make but think the pricing between your different crossmembers needs to be re thought.
you have a stock style for $120+S/H http://www.ebay.com/itm/360192116307...84.m1423.l2648
you have one with the added plate to attach the torque arm to for double the first price $250+S/H http://www.ebay.com/itm/200387189565...84.m1423.l2648
Then you have the complete package that has the crossmember with the plate and an adjustable torque arm for just over a bill more than the previous crossmember $380+S/H http://www.ebay.com/itm/82-92-Camaro...item2ea806c4d1
I think the crossmeber with the plate added seems abit pricey for the small amount of changes. On the other hand I think the complete set up with the arm and crossmember is a good deal if you price just the adjustable arm by itself.
BY the way, LOVE the subframe connectors I bought from you guys last year!

 

.

 

If you have a T5 it is very important, they have a fairly weak case as it is. Under acceleration the torque arm is trying to twist the case and it does flex. This causes the gears to ride on the edge of the teeth which leads to failure. Getting the torque arm off the tails arm will eliminate that extra stress on the case helping the transmission live longer. All this is extenuated when your launching the car with sticky tires.

 

this has less to do with a crossmember mounted torque arm in general, and more to do with the design of the crossmember and the specific trans. the t56 for example, is a heavy trans, and its mounting location makes the crossmember hang back a lot more than the stock crossmember (almost 2"), all that extra weight hanging that far off the frame rail is what causes damage like that.

 

Was that car also a T56 car?

 

Hard to tell from the pic, could be

There is little info provided on that pic. The bolts are loose, were they before or were they loosened for thb pic, loose bolts will allow the crosssmeber to hammer up and down and that will also cause failures.

 

I keep getting you and the 83 Crossfire TA guy confused... I thought you were the one that took the picture.

 

How the heck can the frame rail break? Must have been a horsepower launching monster.. We should know the specs of the car and how that happened before jumping to any conclusions. I don't launch on drag slicks so that wouldn't concern me really, and I can't this happen during road racing.

 

^^makes no sense since the load on the crossmember is a lifting motion except for braking.

 

The Kenny Brown transmission tunnel frame brace connected that part of the frame with the opposite side, no? Maybe that would have prevented this, sorta like how the wonderbar/steering brace prevents frame rail cracking where the steering box is mounted.

 

The forces on the "frame" depend on the crossmember itself...

A T-56 one locates the trans mount, or the TA bushing if it's a Spohn or similar, about 8 - 10" behind the "frame" bolts; meaning, whenever something tries to raise or lower on the torque arm, it tries to TWIST the x-mem, which in turn tries to pry itself off of the "frame". Not at all like the stock T-5 or 700 application of forces which is more or less perpendicular to the "frame".

 

no, that brace would do nothing to aid this problem. Its mounts at the base of the firewall

 

Ah true, the x-member mounts much farther rear.

 

Were those the front or back bolts pulling out of the frame though?

I've always been a fan of the jegster torque arm. Never let me down.

-- Joe

 

Any pictures of where to mount to torque arm to the x member? Or instructions?

 

I have a few pics...not very good ones since they were taken lying on my garage floor (no, I don't have a lift):

 

Thanks. I heard a poly mount is just fine tho for anything that's up to high 11 sec ride.