When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
So beyond the glibness, no one here's actually done one or fabricated one and has no actual experience behind their opinions save for bone dust(which is carcinogenic btw). A tad ludditic, no?
There was no mention of bone dust anywhere above that I could see. A presumption on your part?
The video was a decent explanation of fundamental front suspension dynamics and does point out why double wishbone set ups suffer far less shock tower deflection than other types.
Two flaws to the discussion though
1) there is no evidence presented that the shock towers deflect towards each other in a sufficient amplitude to cause a negative effect in handling. More importantly and more likely in extreme manouevers, if the towers were to deflect in parallel, as one strut loads while the other unloads, a strut bar would have no effect.
2) the two strut bars he uses as props are curved somewhat like a bow and not straight. Compressive loads would simply cause them to deflect rather than transmitting the full force to the opposite tower.
Like curb feelers, lots of 'show' but little 'go'.
The problem therein is obtaining unbiased objective data. A double blind test would almost be required involving multiple sessions of before and after.
With most mods, people would rather believe their uncalibrated butt dyno which consistently tells them that no, they didn't just waste $200 on a widget. There's been recent discussions of adding cold air intakes on older XJ cars if you want to see this effect in action.
I think many of us are speaking from years of experience with putting all sorts of 'all show' but not 'go' mods on our cars and wishing we still had the money we wasted on them.
Every now and then recent members make statements based on little knowledge about S-Types as if their previous sometimes sketchy knowledge is relevant to S-Types when it patently isn't. Members generally don't like to say "you are talking out of your @ss" and so we get threads like this. The new members generally haven't bothered to read existing threads or the many detailed technical documents that would have saved them the embarrassment of posting.
By way of ludicrous example, a recent member referred to carbs. Now when did a modern production road car last have carbs? 20+ years ago? 30+?
It's odd, really, because reading existing detailed info provides immediate knowledge and also points to things that DO work, whereas posting has a tendency to make them look lazy, often arrogant, idiots.
um , the s type has a functional three point 7 bolt strut bar that also doubles as a scuttle panel mount . obviously was needed fot the desired rigidity and stiffness from factory.
True but adding another one a little forward of it seems to be what the poster wants/wanted.
As I'm sure people know, Jaguar decided the STR needed some extra bracing above what all other S-Types have, though not in the position the poster wants/wanted.
I think many of us are speaking from years of experience with putting all sorts of 'all show' but not 'go' mods on our cars and wishing we still had the money we wasted on them.
That is why I am not a fan of Harley Davidson's.
I think most people don't know that even on premium brands every compenent is still designed down to the very minimum cost.
Jaguar are no exception this.
Profit is the name of the game.
If you want a laugh, this site covers the very worst of British and some EU car modifications. I think Clarkson mentioned this site. Barryboys.co.uk ? Index page
Barry is urban slang for chav.
Caution there might be some swearing on here. Not work safe.
From a historical perspective, Jaguar significantly changed the front sub-frame and suspension during the gen I to gen II face lift. (2003) You can see differences in the attached images. My “online readings” indicate that they made the front end 10% stiffer. I presume part of this was to handle the STR engine, and to correct some sub-frame flex being passed onto the front suspension. If there was an issue with shock tower stiffness, I am sure Jaguar would have introduced a strut tower cross brace. As far as I can tell, the shock tower’s uni-body sheet metal stayed the same during the change.
Yes. They'd had complaints about suspension, handling and tyre wear with the original cars (those pre-2002.5MY aka 2003MY USA). So they redesigned it all.
The STR has various extra bracing / stronger items as well.
