Strut Brace

[BlackTwingo-i]

Would a strut brace fitted to a 172/182 Clio fit a twingo?
And singlespeed... What do you mean by this! They don't do anything?

 

[Karl]

The Twingo one is the same as a Clio 172/182 strut brace

 

[madmatt]

I can imagine it limits the flex inbetween the shocks within the rubber mounts.

But I agree, the brace mounted on top of a rubber mount with nothing more than a single stud seems like a cop out.
A fully adjustable brace underneith the top mount, with the triple stud, would probably be a better mounting.

 

[BlackTwingo-i]

So would it help handling in my 1.2 by much?

 

[Courtney]

I can't imagine it would do much for our cars to be honest. Although aesthetically I think they are very nice!

 

[singlespeed]

I can imagine it limits the flex inbetween the shocks within the rubber mounts.

But I agree, the brace mounted on top of a rubber mount with nothing more than a single stud seems like a cop out.
A fully adjustable brace underneith the top mount, with the triple stud, would probably be a better mounting.

It not as if the shocks play a part in the rear suspension geometry, as the rear is a beam and trailing arms, therefore all the geometry of the rear wheels is dependent on the design of the beam assembly and how it's mounted onto the chassis.

All the shocks are doing is damping the vertical motion of the trailing arms, unlike the front which is Mcpherson struts, therefore the upper shock mounting plays a large part in camber, caster and therefore toe angles.

The rear beam is mounted onto the floor pan therefore, for any improvement the torsional rigidity of the chassis around the rear end would need the chassis itself brasing, not the tops of the shock absorbers


Courtney has it sussed - "Although aesthetically I think they are very nice!"

 

[Al]

I can imagine it limits the flex inbetween the shocks within the rubber mounts.

But I agree, the brace mounted on top of a rubber mount with nothing more than a single stud seems like a cop out.
A fully adjustable brace underneith the top mount, with the triple stud, would probably be a better mounting.

It not as if the shocks play a part in the rear suspension geometry, as the rear is a beam and trailing arms, therefore all the geometry of the rear wheels is dependent on the design of the beam assembly and how it's mounted onto the chassis.

All the shocks are doing is damping the vertical motion of the trailing arms, unlike the front which is Mcpherson struts, therefore the upper shock mounting plays a large part in camber, caster and therefore toe angles.

The rear beam is mounted onto the floor pan therefore, for any improvement the torsional rigidity of the chassis around the rear end would need the chassis itself brasing, not the tops of the shock absorbers


Courtney has it sussed - "Although aesthetically I think they are very nice!"

Exactly! Great and accurate answer!

 

[jra3d]

I can imagine it limits the flex inbetween the shocks within the rubber mounts.

But I agree, the brace mounted on top of a rubber mount with nothing more than a single stud seems like a cop out.
A fully adjustable brace underneith the top mount, with the triple stud, would probably be a better mounting.

It not as if the shocks play a part in the rear suspension geometry, as the rear is a beam and trailing arms, therefore all the geometry of the rear wheels is dependent on the design of the beam assembly and how it's mounted onto the chassis.

All the shocks are doing is damping the vertical motion of the trailing arms, unlike the front which is Mcpherson struts, therefore the upper shock mounting plays a large part in camber, caster and therefore toe angles.

The rear beam is mounted onto the floor pan therefore, for any improvement the torsional rigidity of the chassis around the rear end would need the chassis itself brasing, not the tops of the shock absorbers


Courtney has it sussed - "Although aesthetically I think they are very nice!"

Exactly! Great and accurate answer!

+ 1

I've had some of the same thoughts reading this whole thread!

 

[Al]

And don't get me started on why a front strut would be almost as useless.

 

[TURBO]

And don't get me started on why a front strut would be almost as useless.

please explain

 

[Al]

And don't get me started on why a front strut would be almost as useless.

please explain

Again?! Really?! FFS. lol

 

[TURBO]

And don't get me started on why a front strut would be almost as useless.

please explain

Again?! Really?! FFS. lol

are you trying to imply that the plastic skuttle pannel does not offer much in the way of structural support :lol:

the only benifit of a rear strut brace on a 133 that i can see would be somewhere to loop your front harnesses from but even then im not sure all scrutineers would approve :?

 

[Al]

And don't get me started on why a front strut would be almost as useless.

please explain

Again?! Really?! FFS. lol

are you trying to imply that the plastic skuttle pannel does not offer much in the way of structural support :lol:

the only benifit of a rear strut brace on a 133 that i can see would be somewhere to loop your front harnesses from but even then im not sure all scrutineers would approve :?

Well you can do that. If you don't value your life in a crash when they'd rip the flimsy attachments straight off. Sellotape would be a good alternative.

The main reason a front strut would do nothing is because the front turrets are so close to the firewall that movement would be so minimal.

Struts on Twingos look cool. Struts on Twingos do nothing.

 

[TURBO]

And don't get me started on why a front strut would be almost as useless.

please explain

Again?! Really?! FFS. lol

are you trying to imply that the plastic skuttle pannel does not offer much in the way of structural support :lol:

the only benifit of a rear strut brace on a 133 that i can see would be somewhere to loop your front harnesses from but even then im not sure all scrutineers would approve :?

Well you can do that. If you don't value your life in a crash when they'd rip the flimsy attachments straight off. Sellotape would be a good alternative.

The main reason a front strut would do nothing is because the front turrets are so close to the firewall that movement would be so minimal.

Struts on Twingos look cool. Struts on Twingos do nothing.

i was only yanking your chain mate

sellotape :lol: :lol:

 

[Al]

:lol: I know, but you never know who's reading it.

 

[Daveyb133]

I may not fit mine then after reading this.

 

[BlackTwingo-i]

I ain't getting one! I'll spend 50 dollar on something to please me more than a red pole with 2 holes on it then

 

[singlespeed]

All this begs the question...

What did Renault have in mind when they profiled the trim panel and pre-cut a hole in the carpet

Behind which, theres three studs welded to the chassis

 

[Al]

^Isn't that the different fittings for the different rear seats? Single/double.

 

[singlespeed]

^Isn't that the different fittings for the different rear seats? Single/double.

:idea: Mounts for the rear bench seat. Makes sence realy