Strut Tower brace part numbers

Bernie Benz b.benz at
Thu Feb 24 18:48:09 EST 2005

> From: Peter Schulz <pcschulz at>
> Bernie:
> Semantics aside, your "strut brace" assumes that there is minimum movement
> of the strut towers with respect to the rest of the chassis.
No it doesn't!  The strut brace design accepts the 44 chassis tower
deflection as built, but reduces this deflection by a factor of two by
deviding the deflecting force equally between the two towers.
> It addresses any movement that is not contained by the upper strut
> mount/bearing - 
What???  Deflection requires an applied force.  Forces are not "contained"
by the upper strut mount, they are transmitted through it to the tower, and
in doing so causes the isolator to deflect.
>if the tower moves with respect to the chassis, then the
> strut will move along with it.
Yes, +/- the deflection of the isolator.
> If there is a tear in the metal between the strut tower and firewall, then
> that needs to be addressed FIRST. This metal is the triangulation against
> the firewall.
> I still have great concerns about putting any type of loading on the very
> end of the strut, especially in locations where roads are rough.
> i.e I would like to see what happens after a pothole strike.
Pot hole forces are vertical and longitudinal, and as such contribute little
to the transverse tower forces, IMO.  All of these forces, pot hole and
cornering are exerted by the strut rod on the strut bearing and isolator
anyway, so what's the fear?  Try it!
> Besides, if I am seeing play in the strut mount, I'm going to replace it
> first, because that play is typically 360 degrees.
Are you differentiating between "play" and the normal deflection of the
> ...affects camber,caster and toe. The strut bar arguably only addresses
> camber.
Camber directly and toe indirectly, any change in camber causes a toe

> -Peter
> At 12:01 PM 2/24/2005, Bernie Benz wrote:
>> Scott,
>> Note the change in subject title: This is not a strut brace, rather it is a
>> strut tower bracing system.
>> Add up the total parts cost to see how many times more it is than is that of
>> a real strut brace, not even considering its relative ineffectiveness in
>> camber control and load distribution under tranverse loading.
>> Bernie
> 1991 200 20v Q Avant Titan Grey
> 1991 200 20v Q Avant Indigo Mica
> 1991 90 20v Q Red
> 1990 CQ silver (awaiting S2 engine transplant)
> Chelmsford Ma, USA

More information about the 200q20v mailing list