Thread: Octotat Sub-Frame Connector interest....

Our chassis are "limp noodles" from the factory. The stiffer your chassis, the better your suspension performs. The less flex in the body, the more it makes your springs/dampers do their job properly. Not to mention less squeaks, rattles, and chassis noises.

You cannot get your chassis "too stiff." If it could be CNC machined out of a single chunk of billet adamantium (yes, Wolverines skeletal/claw material) that would be perfect.

See this Interest Thread:

subframe connectors - SR20 Forum

Octotat-built car parts are as high-quality as you can get. Over engineered, built like a brick-sh*t-house, come with all the fasteners/hardware, and they are always extremely well thought out.

These will be a bolt-on application, easy install with no welding required.

This would be a terrific chassis addition to anyone that is serious about how their suspension performs.

My B13 chassis may very well be the stiffest B13 chassis sans in-car bracing on this forum (or any other). I am already figuring out how I can afford a set of these Octotat Sub-Frame Connectors. So my chassis is even stiffer. I'm shooting for zero (0) deflection.

Please post in the thread linked above if you are interested in this product being manufactured and you might purchase a set.

Shawn B

Holy cow this guy is my hero. Looks like its back to counting my pennies, I am eagerly awaiting the arrival of my rear triangulation brace, this would be icing on the cake!

Whatever he comes out with it would behoove all of you to try your damndest to afford it. I know I will.

Dudeman

I'm interested especially because for what they do they are pretty reasonable. I subscribed on the other forum as well.

I love to see new innovation for the classics, but I think I am missing the point of these bars? From my knowledge of statics and dynamics these do little to nothing. What sort of chassis flex do you think these bars will get rid of? Most of the flex occurs near the struts of the car(interface between chassis and load bearing points.)

Imagine you put the chassis of the car in the air. You place a pole across the front of the car. So one point is attached to the drivers side where the wheel would be, the other on the passenger side, and lets say 10 extra feet on the passenger side. You place a load on the extended beam pointing down (perhaps a person standing on this beam). What you see is the driver side strut flexing upwards and the passenger side flexing downwards. This simulates a turning load. The strut tower bars now box in the front, which helps keep the chassis stiff.

The problem is these bars do not combat that force effectively. They have the same exact pitfalls as the typical ladder frame.

Atleast that's my educated opinion, but if you feel I am wrong, please enlighten me.

I know Dan and I disagree sometimes but that's nice for times such as these where I agree with him (because it doesn't look like I'm just his lap dog). Dan brought this thread to my attention and I came to the same conclusion independently. I don't see these supports helping anything.

i would have to agree with Ben and Dan on this. we don't have a giant drive shaft thats trying to twist our frame like a rear drive car. i don't think this will help much. i would bet the money would be better spent on a good cage if you want more chassis stiffness over this. side not how much do they hang lower than the car?

The way they are positioned they wouldn't counteract torsional forces experienced on a front engine, RWD car either. The way they are installed they would help with large forces pushing front to back and back to front, which are almost non-existent on a car except during braking and acceleration which the current unibody is more than adequate to handle.

I'm not knowledgeable enough to argue this brace-system with you three (3) Dan, Ben, and MrSentra_specv, however....I read and reSearch quite a bit.

B13, B14, B15 Suspension Information..... - Page 13 - SR20 Forum



While you may not agree with Octotats current design, subframe connectors work to stiffen the chassis on any vehicle. And apparently Mike Kojima would like a set for his front wheel drive vehicle.

I'd also like Chuck (Octotat himself) to chime in and explain his design, which he has already stated may include a "butterfly" cross piece in the future (much like his 3-point RSTB, extra point optional).

Certainly, those two (2) gentlemen would be able to intelligently discuss this with you.

ive heard of the maxima guys running these, anybody give input?

I have a set (sorta like these, but need to be welded in) not yet installed on my b15.

I'm pretty sure you'll find Mr. Kojima is in favor of something along the lines of this Flying Miata piece. (I would love for Mike to make an appearance here whether he backs me or not.)

While still not as beneficial as a typical upper or lower strut tower brace, it at least boxes in the center tunnel and provides a bit of help in the area most needed (torsional rigidity).

As I see it the Octotat braces as shown don't have that feature. Even Stephen's sub-frame brace has the center portion boxed in. Again, these aren't nearly as helpful as lower and upper strut tower braces but if you're going to do a lower frame brace it at least needs to tie both sides together across the center tunnel.

I'd like to hear what forces Chuck of has in mind that these braces help with.