Are human beings this ignorant? A strut brace rant.

[Grandavi]

Great answer! It's what I thought but wasn't sure about.

The targa flex explains why I see rub marks on some Supras near the striker plate.

I have BIC targa bars now, so hopefully that helps. Retorqued the subframe a while back. If your wheels are not perfectly straight and balanced, it's most noticeable at higher speeds with targa off, I have found.

 

[Satan]

I bought my Cusco for the bling factor.

I bought the rears too, for the same reason. I do like the idea about using them as hand rails... I had removed it while working on the intake, but woulda been helpful when she was trying to reconnect my rear knock sensor. I am going to reinstall both, but with grips/tape fo dem hoes.

 

[Terry steward]

I bought my Greddy to give girls something to lean on when bending over the engine bay.

Pmsl,,,thank god I have a reason to leave it on now the reason why I had it in the first place has been blown out of the water !!!!! I guess I was one of those dumb fookers !!!

 

[JPsToyota]

Haha! I bought one because after driving with the targa top off the first time, I figured the more pieces of metal I had tying one side of the car to the other, the better

 

[Dirgle]

I've never really understood the difference between a strut and a shock. Maybe that makes me sound like a car noob, but I thought our cars had struts so if they don't have struts then I obvious don't know the difference lol.

A lot of people are unfamiliar with the difference between the two and often use the words interchangeably, probably because the two devices look so similar.

Shock absorbers have one job in a suspension. To control compression and rebound rates. Thats it. In and of themselves they have no effect on the geometry. The rest of the suspension will have individual dedicated pieces to control all the other forces encountered. This means a lot of parts driving the cost up and why you don't see them on bottom line cars. This is the dampening device our car uses, and IMO the better suspension design.

Struts on the other hand generally preform multiple jobs on a cars suspension. The easiest thing to spot is if the strut is the steering pivot point for the front wheel housing. The strut cartridge literally rotates around the steel piston rod coming out the top of the strut. It is an integrated part of the suspension geometry. And as this one part does several jobs, it makes the suspension cheaper to produce.

I have to admit though, that strut based setup have become incredibly competent in recent years, adjustability can be limited but if the factory designed the geometry correctly from the factory they can be quite good.

Concerning the strut brace, as has been mentioned, all of the suspension components whose geometry can be affected by torsional forces are fully bolted to two very sturdy subframes. Not to the thin metal of the body. As such putting a strut brace on top does nothing.

For the OP, as I avoid Facebook like the plague, I can only assume the kind of insanity that ensued.

 

[Poodles]

Shocks do nothing but dampen the springs, struts are structural.

By that definition, we have struts as the spring is mounted to them making them structural.

We don't have McPherson struts though.

 

[jdmfreak]

Shocks do nothing but dampen the springs, struts are structural.

By that definition, we have struts as the spring is mounted to them making them structural.

We don't have McPherson struts though.

Exactly what I thought but I was not informed enough to post stating this fact

 

[Grandavi]

That's where it gets confusing. Generally if you google it, almost everywhere I look it's referred to as a strut system. However, it isn't set up like a typical "strut" Honda or Corolla, so I refer to our "strut" towers as shock towers. (Or housing)

Regardless, after everything I have read, I wouldn't put on a strut bar unless I wanted bling.

In conversations about it, I stay silent usually because I run coil over suspension, not struts as I envision them. I know Supra storefronts have no problem just referring to them as struts.

 

[Poodles]

One could call them coilovers, but then people confuse them with aftermarket adjustable coilovers

 

[jdmfreak]

I have always made the distinction at the point of

you take the strut out of a car the tire will fall over

a shock will not cause any change (other than your ride bouncing a little more)

and a coil over will bottom out your car but your tire will stay upright

 

[Grandavi]

By definition a strut does not have an upper control arm, which is why a MA70 Supra should not be referred to as having a strut though. And ultimately why we don't need strut bars

 

[Poodles]

No, struts are simply structural, doesn't matter what arms it has (that distinction is where McPherson struts come from)

 

[IJ.]

Coilover Damper...

In theory the car can still be driven without them, a McStrut car can't be as they're an integral part of the suspension structure.

 

[supraguy@aol]

I bought a Greddy bar way back around 1996, when I was alot more gullible.
But to be honest, I might throw it back on for bling...or sell it on Ebay...dunno...

 

[Dirgle]

Shocks do nothing but dampen the springs, struts are structural.

By that definition, we have struts as the spring is mounted to them making them structural.

We don't have McPherson struts though.

Not sure I entirely agree, though I do understand where you are coming from with this. But that is probably due to my loose explanation of how struts and shocks are different than anything. It was a quick and generalized, to help highlight the specific differences, so it left a lot of room for point-of-view interpretation.

I could point out that when you buy shocks you only get the shock absorber. Where as when you buy struts the cartridge usually has various suspension components or mounting points integrated, some as far as having the wheel hub built in. You could then counter argue that the shocks for our car has the coil perch built in. Then I would say coilovers do as well and those are decidedly not struts. You might then say, well by my previous definition they are. And then I would restate that it was a loose explanation, and might even say that the perch being structural is debatable within the confines of the argument.

I could even point out that Toyota refers to the dampening components of our suspension as a shock absorber.

To further clarify my previous statement I would add that if you can adjust camber at some point on the assembly it is a strut, otherwise it is a shock.

But at this point we're just splitting hairs.

As far as MacPherson struts go, at this point it is just a generic brand name applied to most strut types. In the same way most of us call an adjustable open ended wrench, a Crescent wrench. Honestly most labeled MacPherson strut systems are not the same as the design that Earle MacPherson laid out in 1949.

 

[Nick M]

Strut is short for Mac Struts, on a car. As stated, it replaces the upper control arm. The Supra does not have any struts on its suspension. And yes, us gringos call dampers the wrong thing. Because a shock absorber doesn't absorb any shock. It dampens spring oscillation, and nothing more. A strut is a shock that replaces an upper control arm and ball joint.

Having a coil perched on it has nothing to do with it. That is just more internet badness that has spread misinformation, like every other wrong thing the internet spreads. Shocks and struts can be coil overs or not. Those are type 1 and type 2 suspensions. If you like, you can buy papers from SAE and read about it. Our car has coil overs. Any day now you can stop saying you are going to change your struts for coil overs.

Or just keep looking stupid, 'cause a lot of it is funny as we show others the things posted in various automotive forums.

 

[Dan_Gyoba]

Well, at some point, I get tired of 'swimming upstream' just to be right, and just want to convey information, which is where I'll use the term "strut" to refer to a damper on the Supra chassis. (Though I do laugh about the coil-over thing.)

 

[Nick M]

Well, at some point, I get tired of 'swimming upstream' just to be right, and just want to convey information, which is where I'll use the term "strut" to refer to a damper on the Supra chassis. (Though I do laugh about the coil-over thing.)

My comment was not directed to you, or Dirgle who asked about it. It is about things over several years.

 

[Satan]

Strut = The way I walk when I just got me some, or am about to get me some.


Injecting humor, into humorous thread ;-)

 

[Dan_Gyoba]

@Nick: I was more clarifying. No offense taken, or intended. There are many pieces of incorrect information about a great many things in the Supra community, unfortunately. Many of these I will take people to task over, but a simple matter of nomenclature, I have become willing to simply go with the mainstream.