Go Back   6th Gen Accord DIY and Performance Forums > The Garage > Suspension, Brakes, Wheels, and Tires

Register to remove these ads


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #41  
Old 07-28-2013, 09:54 PM
ESP.net ESP.net is offline
Member
Points: 5,299, Level: 21 Points: 5,299, Level: 21 Points: 5,299, Level: 21
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 0
ESP.net is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: ESP.net 98-02 Accord Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit F/H 4 cyl Mo

Originally Posted by HomerJay View Post
Looks great! Definitely on my radar for next year.

One question: It would appear that this completely replaces what the service manual calls the "front beam" which includes the front engine mount and front jack point. Can the car be jacked at the center of the traction bar or would the front need to be jacked one wheel at a time?
All of our Accord/Prelude Traction Bar Systems can be jacked in the middle but we recommend the end plates on each side. Use a 1 foot 2x4 and a rag to protect powder coating and you may jack in the middle or end plates. -John
__________________
www.ExplicitSpeedPerformance.net Custom Engineering/Fabrication/Motor Swaps
Motor Mount Kits/Traction Bar Systems/Solid 2/3/4 Point Strut Bars/ H22/H23/F20/F22
Alternator/Tensioner Kits/H2B compatible...
473 whp 373 ft lb trq @ 15 psi SC61 H23V Turbo Crx Sold
550 whp? DC2 H23V Turbo in works...
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 08-21-2013, 04:01 PM
ESP.net ESP.net is offline
Member
Points: 5,299, Level: 21 Points: 5,299, Level: 21 Points: 5,299, Level: 21
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 0
ESP.net is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: ESP.net 98-02 Accord Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit F/H 4 cyl Mo

Great system guys only way to fly trying to get all the power to the ground!!! Eliminate torque steer and going from A to Z the quickest!!!
__________________
www.ExplicitSpeedPerformance.net Custom Engineering/Fabrication/Motor Swaps
Motor Mount Kits/Traction Bar Systems/Solid 2/3/4 Point Strut Bars/ H22/H23/F20/F22
Alternator/Tensioner Kits/H2B compatible...
473 whp 373 ft lb trq @ 15 psi SC61 H23V Turbo Crx Sold
550 whp? DC2 H23V Turbo in works...
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 08-21-2013, 10:12 PM
xci.ed6's Avatar
xci.ed6 xci.ed6 is offline
Senior Member
Points: 23,020, Level: 46 Points: 23,020, Level: 46 Points: 23,020, Level: 46
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 2,909
Rep Power: 54
xci.ed6 is more helpful than most
Member Photo Albums
Re: ESP.net 98-02 Accord Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit F/H 4 cyl Mo

Originally Posted by AFAccord View Post
Not sure I follow... Are you speaking of the K-frame? I can't imagine that being called flimsy, at least by my recollection.


Me neither. It's heavier duty than any of the 'H' braces sold. Also, if it were in the way of the proper location for the radius rods, why did Honda put it there? Radius rod location is extremely important to suspension function. Having the location incorrect will cause severe problems with dynamic toe, caster, and camber.

While I haven't had the chance to actually measure the caster & toe change during articulation, I have experienced them, and the Accord is nearly free from bump steer and wears the tires pretty damn flat if kept in alignment. That tells me Honda probably got the location correct.


For street use I would highly advise against any product which eliminates structural members which are in place for crash safety and/or chassis integrity. I would also advise against any product which relocates major suspension members with no evidence of suitability for road use.

I don't know if anyone here remembers 5-6 years ago when poorly designed 'traction bar' kits were causing suspension failures on Civics, but I do.

<- ASE Master Technician. Certified by Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Suzuki, Volkswagen, and Hunter (alignment equipment/performance alignments).
__________________
75 CB360-magnum cafe 81 GL1100-mild cafe 83 CB550/650SC- Awesomeness. 03 CB900-the wife's 06 CB600(a)-RIP 06 CB600(b) -led tail, undertail, db bars, shorty levers 00 Accord EX-V6-4d-SSM- 01/02 coupe fr, hitch, radiator push fans,TruHart coilovers, 18x9 & 215/45 tires, Honda CB600 mirrors, fakual trans, PVC CAI, 2x lights
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 08-21-2013, 11:44 PM
ESP.net ESP.net is offline
Member
Points: 5,299, Level: 21 Points: 5,299, Level: 21 Points: 5,299, Level: 21
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 0
ESP.net is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: ESP.net 98-02 Accord Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit F/H 4 cyl Mo

XCI... I appreciate your post. I have been doing this for some time with great success. I also have a 45 year experience Master Mechanic and Welder. With building hot rods ground up. Not just one but hundreds. The knowledge is there.

Radius Rod geometry is perfectly fine. #1 concern is it has to be the same on both sides. This chassis is similar to the 97-01 Prelude. There shall be no issues with alignment, caster, toe etc. This is not our first Traction Bar System we have made. Have sold several thousands.

On the Early Accords the middle cross beam which was designed for impact was a joke and is flimsly and is eliminated with our units.

The gains of our ESP Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit will be clear as night and day. It will prevent wheel hop and torque steer. Which is notorius with Honda/Acura with sloppy rubber bushings in the radius rods etc. The Front Torque Mount Kit will help eliminate unwanted engine movement forcing more power to the ground. It will also improve solid shifts and quicker shifts. This is the only way to fly if trying to get the most out of your car and get from point A to point B fast as you can.

I do agree grandma does not need this in her grocery getter. -John
__________________
www.ExplicitSpeedPerformance.net Custom Engineering/Fabrication/Motor Swaps
Motor Mount Kits/Traction Bar Systems/Solid 2/3/4 Point Strut Bars/ H22/H23/F20/F22
Alternator/Tensioner Kits/H2B compatible...
473 whp 373 ft lb trq @ 15 psi SC61 H23V Turbo Crx Sold
550 whp? DC2 H23V Turbo in works...

Last edited by ESP.net; 08-21-2013 at 11:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08-22-2013, 12:08 AM
xci.ed6's Avatar
xci.ed6 xci.ed6 is offline
Senior Member
Points: 23,020, Level: 46 Points: 23,020, Level: 46 Points: 23,020, Level: 46
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 2,909
Rep Power: 54
xci.ed6 is more helpful than most
Member Photo Albums
Re: ESP.net 98-02 Accord Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit F/H 4 cyl Mo

Originally Posted by ESP.net View Post
On the Early Accords the middle cross beam which was designed for impact was a joke and is flimsly and is eliminated with our units.
Early Accords, maybe, but the 'middle cross beam' on the 6th generation cars is thicker than the main frame rails.

The gains of our ESP Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit will be clear as night and day. It will prevent wheel hop and torque steer. Which is notorius with Honda/Acura with sloppy rubber bushings in the radius rods etc.
It prevents wheel hop by preloading the inner LCA bushings, however you have moved the chassis pivot location of the radius rod. This definitely changes the movement of the lower ball joint during bump and rebound. Combined with the limited freedom of the LCA bushings due to preload this is an invitation to bind and possible failure. Relocating the pivot point to allow the use of cheaper straight bars (vs. bars designed specifically for wheel clearance) is a hack.

The Front Torque Mount Kit will help eliminate unwanted engine movement forcing more power to the ground.
No, it won't. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Every last lb/ft of torque that hits the hub goes to the tire. Movement of the engine is a result of the reaction to this torque. Your mount will limit the movement of the engine, but in no way can it possibly increase the torque at the tire contact patch.

I do agree grandma does not need this in her grocery getter. -John
How about some camber/toe curves to prove product? If it has been properly engineered, I'm sure you have done a study on the lower ball joint movement and checked the effect on camber, toe, and caster during bump & rebound.

I also would like to see some chassis torsional deflection measurements, I'm sure your R&D team checked that when they concluded the 20lbs of metal bracing Honda put under the car was only there to reduce fuel economy.

And as for your Hot Rods. I can't remember any FWD hot rods, or any known for their handling.
__________________
75 CB360-magnum cafe 81 GL1100-mild cafe 83 CB550/650SC- Awesomeness. 03 CB900-the wife's 06 CB600(a)-RIP 06 CB600(b) -led tail, undertail, db bars, shorty levers 00 Accord EX-V6-4d-SSM- 01/02 coupe fr, hitch, radiator push fans,TruHart coilovers, 18x9 & 215/45 tires, Honda CB600 mirrors, fakual trans, PVC CAI, 2x lights
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 08-22-2013, 02:06 AM
akoutmos's Avatar
akoutmos akoutmos is offline
Senior Member
Points: 15,033, Level: 37 Points: 15,033, Level: 37 Points: 15,033, Level: 37
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 919
Rep Power: 135
akoutmos has their shit togetherakoutmos has their shit togetherakoutmos has their shit togetherakoutmos has their shit togetherakoutmos has their shit together
Send a message via AIM to akoutmos
Re: ESP.net 98-02 Accord Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit F/H 4 cyl Mo

Originally Posted by xci.ed6 View Post
Early Accords, maybe, but the 'middle cross beam' on the 6th generation cars is thicker than the main frame rails.
The frame rails are very thick in comparison to the k-frame connecting arms. If you look at their design, they are very skinny vertically, and will only help during lateral flex which is not as much of a concern. During hard cornering your vertical flex will be more of an issue than your lateral flex. Seeing as they are not very rigid on their vertical axis, while they were providing some chassis stability, it was not a drastic amount of support.

Originally Posted by xci.ed6 View Post
It prevents wheel hop by preloading the inner LCA bushings, however you have moved the chassis pivot location of the radius rod. This definitely changes the movement of the lower ball joint during bump and rebound. Combined with the limited freedom of the LCA bushings due to preload this is an invitation to bind and possible failure. Relocating the pivot point to allow the use of cheaper straight bars (vs. bars designed specifically for wheel clearance) is a hack.
What are you talking about dude. Bind will only be induced if the geometry of the traction bar is misaligned from the center line of the LCA. If the radius rod pivot is in line with the LCA pivot, there will be a negligible amount of camber. In fact there will be less than stock because the radius rod bushing are solid. Think about it like this. Take the LCA with nothing attached. If you spin it 360 degrees (imagine there is nothing in the way). It will make a perfect circle with the radius rod mount point being the circumference. If the radius rod is aligned with the center point of the circle, and you spin that along its circumference you get a cone with the radius rod having a constant length and the axis of the LCA remaining constant. Take a look at Full-Race's white paper http://www.full-race.com/articles/traction_bars.pdf

Originally Posted by xci.ed6 View Post
No, it won't. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Every last lb/ft of torque that hits the hub goes to the tire. Movement of the engine is a result of the reaction to this torque. Your mount will limit the movement of the engine, but in no way can it possibly increase the torque at the tire contact patch.
Energy will travel through the path of least resistance. Before the tires even turn, the motor will pivot on the mounts seeing as that is the path of least resistance. Only once the motor is not able to overcome the resistance of the mounts limiting the motor's pivot, will power be transmitted through the next output...which is the tires. Technically, you will get more area under the torque curve with stiffer mounts and motor braces, because less energy is put forth into pre-loading the mounts. While this is a negligible amount of power, the real benefit is that you get better throttle response seeing as you don't waste time pre-loading the motor mounts.

Originally Posted by xci.ed6 View Post
I also would like to see some chassis torsional deflection measurements, I'm sure your R&D team checked that when they concluded the 20lbs of metal bracing Honda put under the car was only there to reduce fuel economy.
Material and design has for more to do with rigidity and structural integrity than the total weight of metal used.

Originally Posted by xci.ed6 View Post
And as for your Hot Rods. I can't remember any FWD hot rods, or any known for their handling.
I feel like you are just being disrespectful now.
__________________


???whp/???wtq @ 15psi (butt dyno says 260): Turbo Build / DIY Catchcan / Custom Downpipe / DIY Battery Relocate / Suspension Revamp / G23 Build

Last edited by akoutmos; 08-22-2013 at 02:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 08-22-2013, 02:19 PM
ESP.net ESP.net is offline
Member
Points: 5,299, Level: 21 Points: 5,299, Level: 21 Points: 5,299, Level: 21
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 0
ESP.net is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: ESP.net 98-02 Accord Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit F/H 4 cyl Mo

XCI we have several road race and drag race guys that swear by our pieces and have souly given them World Records with just adding our units on top of there existing platforms. Your last post will be deleted if you can't edit it out please.
__________________
www.ExplicitSpeedPerformance.net Custom Engineering/Fabrication/Motor Swaps
Motor Mount Kits/Traction Bar Systems/Solid 2/3/4 Point Strut Bars/ H22/H23/F20/F22
Alternator/Tensioner Kits/H2B compatible...
473 whp 373 ft lb trq @ 15 psi SC61 H23V Turbo Crx Sold
550 whp? DC2 H23V Turbo in works...
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-22-2013, 02:47 PM
RedRyder's Avatar
RedRyder RedRyder is offline
Be a better driver


Points: 71,867, Level: 83 Points: 71,867, Level: 83 Points: 71,867, Level: 83
Activity: 45% Activity: 45% Activity: 45%
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fawking, OH
Posts: 19,007
Rep Power: 138
RedRyder has their shit togetherRedRyder has their shit togetherRedRyder has their shit togetherRedRyder has their shit togetherRedRyder has their shit togetherRedRyder has their shit together
Member Photo Albums
Re: ESP.net 98-02 Accord Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit F/H 4 cyl Mo

Watching this thread...keep it civil, gentlemen.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 08-22-2013, 10:18 PM
xci.ed6's Avatar
xci.ed6 xci.ed6 is offline
Senior Member
Points: 23,020, Level: 46 Points: 23,020, Level: 46 Points: 23,020, Level: 46
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 2,909
Rep Power: 54
xci.ed6 is more helpful than most
Member Photo Albums
Re: ESP.net 98-02 Accord Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit F/H 4 cyl Mo

Originally Posted by akoutmos View Post
The frame rails are very thick in comparison to the k-frame connecting arms. If you look at their design, they are very skinny vertically, and will only help during lateral flex which is not as much of a concern. During hard cornering your vertical flex will be more of an issue than your lateral flex. Seeing as they are not very rigid on their vertical axis, while they were providing some chassis stability, it was not a drastic amount of support.
The chassis is designed to prevent loads in bending as much as possible. Those bars are the lower members of a box structure from the base of the firewall to the radiator support. If it were possible, it would be triangulated there, but there must be a hole for the axle & tie rod. They're primarily stressed in tension & compression.

What are you talking about dude. Bind will only be induced if the geometry of the traction bar is misaligned from the center line of the LCA. If the radius rod pivot is in line with the LCA pivot, there will be a negligible amount of camber. In fact there will be less than stock because the radius rod bushing are solid. Think about it like this. Take the LCA with nothing attached. If you spin it 360 degrees (imagine there is nothing in the way). It will make a perfect circle with the radius rod mount point being the circumference. If the radius rod is aligned with the center point of the circle, and you spin that along its circumference you get a cone with the radius rod having a constant length and the axis of the LCA remaining constant. Take a look at Full-Race's white paper http://www.full-race.com/articles/traction_bars.pdf
This only works if the pivots are aligned on two axis, which is pretty much where the stock radius rod mount is located. Having bushings at the forward mount allows movement in all 3 dimensions, preventing binding. Moving the mount location would induce bind, replacing the mount with a spherical bearing means all movement due to misalignment of the axis will happen at the inboard LCA bushing. Causing stress throughout the LCA and at it's mount location

Energy will travel through the path of least resistance. Before the tires even turn, the motor will pivot on the mounts seeing as that is the path of least resistance. Only once the motor is not able to overcome the resistance of the mounts limiting the motor's pivot, will power be transmitted through the next output...which is the tires. Technically, you will get more area under the torque curve with stiffer mounts and motor braces, because less energy is put forth into pre-loading the mounts. While this is a negligible amount of power, the real benefit is that you get better throttle response seeing as you don't waste time pre-loading the motor mounts.
Electricity will follow the path of least resistance. Mechanical work involves forces, which generate equal and opposite reactionary forces. Rev the engine in gear with the wheels off the ground, the engine moves slightly due to inertia, but if you hold the speed constant the engine returns to neutral. The front and rear mounts are torque mounts, so called because they provide the reactionary force to the wheel torque.

Think of it this way, you are holding a socket on a ratchet. The socket is the tires, the ratchet is the engine, your hand is the mount. If you apply 100lb/ft of torque to the ratchet, the socket is turned with 100lb/ft, and your hand is applying 100lb/ft. If you have soft, girly hands and they squish when you apply 100 lb/ft, is there still 100lb/ft? Yes. Your arm just moved a bit further to account for the squish in your hands.


Material and design has for more to do with rigidity and structural integrity than the total weight of metal used.
You are correct, which is why those beams were formed in the shapes that they were. To provide the necessary strength to reinforce and triangulate the front chassis rails while minimizing weight and material. They are still tubes, and they are a hell of a lot stronger than the 1/16" wall 1" tube H-braces.

An easy example that I have experienced is the beetle convertible. It has a lower engine shield made out of a single layer of 1/8" aluminum sheet that weighs about 3lbs. It's attached to the chassis with 6 8mm bolts at the front, near the radiator support, and 2 12mm bolts at the rear cross member. The standard beetle, based on this same chassis has a plastic undershield. Leave this part off a convertible, and the chassis flex increases to the point where it is scary to drive. You can literally watch the car twist over bumps.

Our car is not a convertible, so I doubt the effect will be as severe, but I have no doubts that the chassis torsional rigidity will decreased by a significant amount. I'll prove it. This weekend I'll jig up my own car and measure rigidity with and without the longitudinal supports. If I don't find at least a 25% increase in chassis deflection I'll apologize and delete my posts.
__________________
75 CB360-magnum cafe 81 GL1100-mild cafe 83 CB550/650SC- Awesomeness. 03 CB900-the wife's 06 CB600(a)-RIP 06 CB600(b) -led tail, undertail, db bars, shorty levers 00 Accord EX-V6-4d-SSM- 01/02 coupe fr, hitch, radiator push fans,TruHart coilovers, 18x9 & 215/45 tires, Honda CB600 mirrors, fakual trans, PVC CAI, 2x lights

Last edited by xci.ed6; 08-22-2013 at 10:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-22-2013, 11:03 PM
AFAccord's Avatar
AFAccord AFAccord is offline
Senior Member
Points: 22,916, Level: 46 Points: 22,916, Level: 46 Points: 22,916, Level: 46
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Spangdahlem, Germany
Posts: 1,911
Rep Power: 200
AFAccord is a name known to allAFAccord is a name known to allAFAccord is a name known to allAFAccord is a name known to allAFAccord is a name known to allAFAccord is a name known to allAFAccord is a name known to all
Re: ESP.net 98-02 Accord Traction Bar System with Front Torque Mount Kit F/H 4 cyl Mo

Originally Posted by AFAccord View Post
Not sure I follow... Are you speaking of the K-frame? I can't imagine that being called flimsy, at least by my recollection.
Originally Posted by xci.ed6 View Post
Those bars are the lower members of a box structure from the base of the firewall to the radiator support...

....They're primarily stressed in tension & compression.

...You are correct, which is why those beams were formed in the shapes that they were. To provide the necessary strength to reinforce and triangulate the front chassis rails while minimizing weight and material...

...Our car is not a convertible, so I doubt the effect will be as severe, but I have no doubts that the chassis torsional rigidity will decreased by a significant amount.
This was my perspective when I originally asked this question. I'm not at the level to speak intelligently on the topic, I'm just going by hillbilly logic. It seems that removing bottom segment of a box would compromise the whole structure to some extent. The LCAs pushing against the lower radiator support under load only seems to exacerbate this newfound "lack of bracing". Right??

Crazy thought here, but what if there was proper geometry to allow bracing of the LCAs from the rear sub frame rather than from an unsupported front member?

Don't mistake my skepticism for lack of interest in this product. I REALLY want a traction bar solution, but I want it to be the best solution.


Originally Posted by xci.ed6 View Post
I'll prove it. This weekend I'll jig up my own car and measure rigidity with and without the longitudinal supports. If I don't find at least a 25% increase in chassis deflection I'll apologize and delete my posts.

I would very much like to see these results.
__________________
2001 CG3 eCtune'd F23 417whp, 398wtq
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


» Featured Ride
CHECK OUT THIS WEEK'S FEATURED RIDE!



Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3