Drive Accord Honda Forums banner

1 - 20 of 106 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Ultra Racing Middle Lower Brace (UR-ML4-2793)

So in the quest to tighten the suspension of my Coupe and not make it rock hard and ruin the ride I ordered this from ThrowDown.

Every since On2 expressed his opinion on this particular piece I wanted to try it. I agree with him in that of all the pieces offered this looks like the most promising in that we have nothing like it on our cars and it should do it's job in that place on our suspension.

Will let all know how it works out.
 

·
'15 Accord EXL Navi Sedan
Joined
·
23 Posts
Looking forward to your analysis on this brace since I had a rear suspension solid X-Brace on a 2011 Sonata 2.0T that was supposed to stiffen the chassis for better balance and handling but I did not notice any difference to the car's handling.

I feel on a front wheel drive car, a larger rear sway bar has a bigger impact vs. adding braces. Plus they are heavy so consider the extra weight.
 

·
Out of Gear
Joined
·
217 Posts
Good thinking, sir.
I have been looking at the same part. My reluctance to purchase is solely based on installation questions(do I have to drill and/or tap).
So, good sir, let us know, please.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks for all the interest guys.

I do not know any of the answers, install. does it work, etc.

As soon as Throw Down gets it to me I will document the install and give thoughts and impressions.

I already have a larger rear sway bar. I now have 2 pc Camber arms on the rear and they are way beefier then what came off.

I am thinking this is the next step. It makes sense to me and since our cars do not have anything like this on them it may improve handling.

This is stemming from my E-Tune with Turbogixxer. Doing WOT runs in 3rd and 4th gear I did not like the car at 80-90-100 MPH with some turns going WOT. It just felt like there was a little wiggle in the rear end in slight turns.

I attribute this a bit to the electronic steering, and WOT is a hand full in these cars on country roads I need to run to be safe in getting these logs.

So will try this out, and let all know how it goes.

If not this then I may go for the front Sway Bar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Being the impatient person I am I was wondering where my brace was :)

Sent an early e-mail and got a very quick response from Throwdown Performance. Before normal business hours for sure.

Anyway they let me know it was being packed and being shipped out end of this week.

Sounds like these things are very heavy. So packing takes more time and effort.

Anyway, chomping at the bit to see how this looks and works. I mean to me it seems like a sound idea and like I said there is nothing on the frame in that area.

I am wondering if the OE strut tower brace is up to the job though? I mean it seems ok but the one I had in my Turbo PT Cruiser blows the OE Accords away. And I would much rather go there next then to the front sway bar.

I have a feeling I will be seeing both of those anyway.

As I have pushed this little I4 Coupe lately to get logs for my E-Tuner, and as the Tune has gotten better and better, the suspension has shown some weakness. Even with the Teins and the rear bar, the car still rolls a bit under power in the twisties. I may go lower, but will keep going on the suspension also.
 

·
'15 6-6
Joined
·
565 Posts
Being the impatient person I am I was wondering where my brace was :)

Sent an early e-mail and got a very quick response from Throwdown Performance. Before normal business hours for sure.

Anyway they let me know it was being packed and being shipped out end of this week.

Sounds like these things are very heavy. So packing takes more time and effort.

Anyway, chomping at the bit to see how this looks and works. I mean to me it seems like a sound idea and like I said there is nothing on the frame in that area.

I am wondering if the OE strut tower brace is up to the job though? I mean it seems ok but the one I had in my Turbo PT Cruiser blows the OE Accords away. And I would much rather go there next then to the front sway bar.

I have a feeling I will be seeing both of those anyway.

As I have pushed this little I4 Coupe lately to get logs for my E-Tuner, and as the Tune has gotten better and better, the suspension has shown some weakness. Even with the Teins and the rear bar, the car still rolls a bit under power in the twisties. I may go lower, but will keep going on the suspension also.
2013 Accord was developed with a torsional rigidity of 16.5kNm/degree, while the S2000 has 7.1kNm/degree. The 2013 Accord is also 40% more rigid than the 2008-2012 Accord.

People laud the S2000 as having a stiff chassis and no one on street tires is adding braces to race at a competitive level. The 2013 Accord does not have a "soft chassis" whatsoever.

In fact I'm going to go ahead and say that on any current fixed roof car, you don't need any chassis stiffening because 2015 safety regulations have essentially forced automotive manufacturers to have chassis stiffness levels that are anywhere from 2 to 5 times as stiff as they were in the 90s.

People are confusing body roll with chassis stiffness. The car is rolling relative to the suspension, and it's not the rear of the car but the front, and this is because the car has a soft front suspension, even on the TEIN coilovers. Body roll on a FWD car with a high front weight bias (61/39 in your case) stems from front roll. Front roll stiffness has the highest effect on body roll and turn in, both because of static and dynamic weight distribution.

You need a stiffer front sway bar. You're not going to have power understeer issues on an I4 with a stiffer front bar, and if you get a proper alignment (about -1.5 degrees of camber in the front) and a TLX front bar you'll be thanking me, I promise you. I would also up the front rebound stiffness a bit and see how that alters turn in.
 

·
Car so nice, bought twice
Joined
·
4,708 Posts
Being the impatient person I am I was wondering where my brace was :)

Sent an early e-mail and got a very quick response from Throwdown Performance. Before normal business hours for sure.

Anyway they let me know it was being packed and being shipped out end of this week.

Sounds like these things are very heavy. So packing takes more time and effort.

Anyway, chomping at the bit to see how this looks and works. I mean to me it seems like a sound idea and like I said there is nothing on the frame in that area.

I am wondering if the OE strut tower brace is up to the job though? I mean it seems ok but the one I had in my Turbo PT Cruiser blows the OE Accords away. And I would much rather go there next then to the front sway bar.

I have a feeling I will be seeing both of those anyway.

As I have pushed this little I4 Coupe lately to get logs for my E-Tuner, and as the Tune has gotten better and better, the suspension has shown some weakness. Even with the Teins and the rear bar, the car still rolls a bit under power in the twisties. I may go lower, but will keep going on the suspension also.
I switched from UR to OEM FTSB on my car once I had the 6 bolt hats on my car that would support OEM.

Upgrade your tires to stickier rubber and you'll be amazed at how stupidly fast you can go through sweepers.
 

·
'15 Accord EXL Navi Sedan
Joined
·
23 Posts
I am also looking for a beefier front strut tower brace. Again, I had one on the Sonata from Nameless Performance which was excellent.
2011+ Sonata/Optima FSTB - Nameless Performance

Where did you get the UR FTSB? Don't know if it is true but I heard UR parts are manufactured to fit for Asian versions and don't fit stateside Honda's too well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,778 Posts
Thanks for the order!

Where did you get the UR FTSB? Don't know if it is true but I heard UR parts are manufactured to fit for Asian versions and don't fit stateside Honda's too well.
Purchased from us - Ultra Racing also makes the front strut tower brace for this car listed here as well as many others: Ultra Racing Front Strut Tower Brace - Throwdown Performance - Throwdown Performance - The Race Starts & Finishes Here!

Ultra Racing is headquartered and manufactured out of Malaysia so many of their braces are initially designed on local cars. In 99% of cases there are no differences, in some slight cases mostly due to cars being RHD vs LHD, there have been some small differences that we needed to have them adjust for the US market, but definitely not common and really typically is on the strut tower due to the driving configuration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,914 Posts
Very well said Cournot. Moreover, our Accords already include chassis braces from factory. This product is nothing more than just for show.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
You need a stiffer front sway bar. You're not going to have power understeer issues on an I4 with a stiffer front bar, and if you get a proper alignment (about -1.5 degrees of camber in the front) and a TLX front bar you'll be thanking me, I promise you. I would also up the front rebound stiffness a bit and see how that alters turn in.
what specs do you recommend for a 4 wheel alignment for a dd with some twisties involved?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,778 Posts
Very well said Cournot. Moreover, our Accords already include chassis braces from factory. This product is nothing more than just for show.
I have to disagree there, especially with how well the 8th gen reacted with bracing. Also, larger vehicles like the Accord do have what I would consider a "soft chassis" Looking forward to seeing the review though -- we are only looking to bring the best products out for the Accord and if the platform doesn't like new parts, we won't bring them over here! :) But we certainly hope that is not the case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
First and foremost there probably is no stickier tire to run then what I am running. Look for yourself but liquid rubber is what I am rolling on.

Second I think the car can be stiffened with this mid brace. I am not talking anything else right now just mid brace. Have you crawled under your car and looked? I have.

If the car is so stiff why are we putting on front and rear sway bars of larger size? If the car is so stiff why will I thank someone for a larger front sway bar?

These things are what pisses me off on Forums. Band wagon sing alongs.

Ohh what I am adding is wrong or placebo, but hey do this, and replace this with a bigger bar,rather then work on a area of the car that is not braced in that area side to side at all.

So I have liquid rubber for tires, have the over sized rear bar, going for a mid brace and we will see how it goes.

I will then go for a strut tower brace and then lastly a front sway bar of larger size if I need it.

As to stiffness or rigidity, how and where is that being measured? Does that hold up on lateral forces? Again where is the stiffness at? Is it structural? How is that stiffness relating to suspension?

Does anyone bother going to Ultra Racing page and read their literature? Have you looked at the cut bars and how the car twists when not level? Have you seen how far the bars move raising one wheel off the ground a bit? You know they build for racing but also safety reinforcement for street cars to protect people in crashes. It is not all about racing.

As I say I have been under the car looked at where this goes and believe it will help tying side to side together and making the car stiffer in that area. There is no cross brace there now. This will also stop body roll/flexing which is the whole point of bracing.

As I said On2 and I discussed this bar at length and he and I both felt out of all the offerings that that bar, in that position, would be a great addition. Nothing is there now!

For 179.00 bucks to the door I am in.

And did you guys know that your windshield is part of the structural integrity of your car these days? Did not used to be that way. Roof pillars were carrying the weight. Not any longer the urethane and windshield laying on the pinch weld is now part of the strength and stiffness of your car. Structural integrity is how car manufacturers would explain it to us at seminars. I watched this evolve over many years installing auto glass.

Anyone can recite numbers and that is all they are until you can apply them in some meaningful way. So the car is stiffer then it used to be. Where, why, at what points, is that impact testing, is it chassis, is the car still loaded the same such as 60/40 55/45. How much power is running through the car at that measure? Coupe or Sedan? Does lowering affect that measure by stressing members? I can not relate to a S2000 I drive a Honda Accord Coupe that IMHO is sloppy in handling and am working to rectify that.

And as far as alignment I am tits on factory everywhere! Not about, but dead center green, not right or left of just being in, but dead center green on all four corners. No issues there.

Not trying to piss anyone off but damn you quote a number that has no meaning at this point in regards to a brace and all the sudden it is junk, it wont fit, it is a scam. Bunch of damn speculating haters.

And please show me the cross braces on the underside of my Coupe. Other then front and rear sway bar. Show me side to side bracing.

As to fitment if it does not fit it will go back.

As to if it will help only driving the car with it on will tell. It is not going to hurt the car and yes 179 bucks is not a small amount of money but people have blown that in wraps and plastic dips so I am OK with the cash outlay.
 

·
'15 6-6
Joined
·
565 Posts
First and foremost there probably is no stickier tire to run then what I am running. Look for yourself but liquid rubber is what I am rolling on.

Second I think the car can be stiffened with this mid brace. I am not talking anything else right now just mid brace. Have you crawled under your car and looked? I have.

If the car is so stiff why are we putting on front and rear sway bars of larger size? If the car is so stiff why will I thank someone for a larger front sway bar?

These things are what pisses me off on Forums. Band wagon sing alongs.

Ohh what I am adding is wrong or placebo, but hey do this, and replace this with a bigger bar,rather then work on a area of the car that is not braced in that area side to side at all.

So I have liquid rubber for tires, have the over sized rear bar, going for a mid brace and we will see how it goes.

I will then go for a strut tower brace and then lastly a front sway bar of larger size if I need it.

As to stiffness or rigidity, how and where is that being measured? Does that hold up on lateral forces? Again where is the stiffness at? Is it structural? How is that stiffness relating to suspension?

Does anyone bother going to Ultra Racing page and read their literature? Have you looked at the cut bars and how the car twists when not level? Have you seen how far the bars move raising one wheel off the ground a bit? You know they build for racing but also safety reinforcement for street cars to protect people in crashes. It is not all about racing.

As I say I have been under the car looked at where this goes and believe it will help tying side to side together and making the car stiffer in that area. There is no cross brace there now. This will also stop body roll/flexing which is the whole point of bracing.

As I said On2 and I discussed this bar at length and he and I both felt out of all the offerings that that bar, in that position, would be a great addition. Nothing is there now!

For 179.00 bucks to the door I am in.

And did you guys know that your windshield is part of the structural integrity of your car these days? Did not used to be that way. Roof pillars were carrying the weight. Not any longer the urethane and windshield laying on the pinch weld is now part of the strength and stiffness of your car. Structural integrity is how car manufacturers would explain it to us at seminars. I watched this evolve over many years installing auto glass.

Anyone can recite numbers and that is all they are until you can apply them in some meaningful way. So the car is stiffer then it used to be. Where, why, at what points, is that impact testing, is it chassis, is the car still loaded the same such as 60/40 55/45. How much power is running through the car at that measure? Coupe or Sedan? Does lowering affect that measure by stressing members? I can not relate to a S2000 I drive a Honda Accord Coupe that IMHO is sloppy in handling and am working to rectify that.

And as far as alignment I am tits on factory everywhere! Not about, but dead center green, not right or left of just being in, but dead center green on all four corners. No issues there.

Not trying to piss anyone off but damn you quote a number that has no meaning at this point in regards to a brace and all the sudden it is junk, it wont fit, it is a scam. Bunch of damn speculating haters.

And please show me the cross braces on the underside of my Coupe. Other then front and rear sway bar. Show me side to side bracing.

As to fitment if it does not fit it will go back.

As to if it will help only driving the car with it on will tell. It is not going to hurt the car and yes 179 bucks is not a small amount of money but people have blown that in wraps and plastic dips so I am OK with the cash outlay.
1) A "tits on factory" alignment is not what you want at all. Zero camber in the front is not good for performance--you need to be running at least -1 to -1.5.

2) P Zero Nero GTs are not remotely close to the stickiest street rubber you can get, and aren't going to be stressing your chassis. Far stickier street tires exist (Ventus RS3, RE11A, AD08, MPSS, MPSC, etc). I'm not saying this to put down your tires, which are great, but only to clarify.

3) Lowering is going to increase the propensity for the body to roll, all else equal, by lowering the roll center. You need to increase spring rate drastically (both to account for decreased suspension travel and the roll center difference). This is where the larger front sway bar comes in.


4) The torsional rigidity was measured at the strut towers, as it should be (all forces are coming into that region). It measures twisting force. Bending rigidity also increased in both axes at an average of 34% from the 2008 models. Bending rigidity is as it sounds--weld posts to the strut towers and attempt to bend the frame in the X and Y axes.

LAF I'm out after this--I'm just trying to clarify as someone with more knowledge on the topic. There's no reason to get hostile--I'm trying to help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
2013 Accord was developed with a torsional rigidity of 16.5kNm/degree, while the S2000 has 7.1kNm/degree. The 2013 Accord is also 40% more rigid than the 2008-2012 Accord.

People laud the S2000 as having a stiff chassis and no one on street tires is adding braces to race at a competitive level. The 2013 Accord does not have a "soft chassis" whatsoever.

In fact I'm going to go ahead and say that on any current fixed roof car, you don't need any chassis stiffening because 2015 safety regulations have essentially forced automotive manufacturers to have chassis stiffness levels that are anywhere from 2 to 5 times as stiff as they were in the 90s.

People are confusing body roll with chassis stiffness. The car is rolling relative to the suspension, and it's not the rear of the car but the front, and this is because the car has a soft front suspension, even on the TEIN coilovers. Body roll on a FWD car with a high front weight bias (61/39 in your case) stems from front roll. Front roll stiffness has the highest effect on body roll and turn in, both because of static and dynamic weight distribution.

You need a stiffer front sway bar. You're not going to have power understeer issues on an I4 with a stiffer front bar, and if you get a proper alignment (about -1.5 degrees of camber in the front) and a TLX front bar you'll be thanking me, I promise you. I would also up the front rebound stiffness a bit and see how that alters turn in.
The independent measure of this is 12.33 not 16.25.
Also everything relating to this is on structural design for crash not suspension.
"According to Honda, torsional rigidity on the new model is up 42 percent compared with the previous Accord, due largely to 56 percent of the structure being composed of high-strength steel."

Seems that crash testing and suspension are two very different and unique things.

Read this.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/MSS/4-Thomas-Honda_Report.pdf

This is nothing but structural and crash related in regards to torsional rigidity.

Really do not care what anyone thinks of how I spend my money. However I do take exception when one goes on about this or that and it has no relation to the topic of bracing and reducing body roll.

It can be 25.00 on the index but still have body roll like a Yugo with a lift kit and 30 inch wheels.

Lets get some apple to apple stuff related to body roll and not crash ratings.

And again you lower your car and change spring design and weight ratings and all this goes grayer yet.
 

·
'15 6-6
Joined
·
565 Posts
The independent measure of this is 12.33 not 16.25.
Also everything relating to this is on structural design for crash not suspension.
"According to Honda, torsional rigidity on the new model is up 42 percent compared with the previous Accord, due largely to 56 percent of the structure being composed of high-strength steel."

Seems that crash testing and suspension are two very different and unique things.

Read this.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/MSS/4-Thomas-Honda_Report.pdf

This is nothing but structural and crash related in regards to torsional rigidity.

Really do not care what anyone thinks of how I spend my money. However I do take exception when one goes on about this or that and it has no relation to the topic of bracing and reducing body roll.

It can be 25.00 on the index but still have body roll like a Yugo with a lift kit and 30 inch wheels.

Lets get some apple to apple stuff related to body roll and not crash ratings.
I'm intimately familiar with that report and I would recommend you look at it in depth more, as Honda notes that the 12.65 result was conducted on the lightweight prototype and was measured at the wrong force points. The chassis was strengthened and weight was readded in critical areas for the production model.

I digress--lord knows I'm not trying to get banned over some "Ultra Racing Braces"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
In the spirit of modding and trying new things, let's just hit the permanent pause button on this argument. I tend to agree that this brace will be fairly un-noticeable but at the same time this is a fairly inexpensive mod that's easy to bolt-on and unbolt. Sell it in the FS section and make a little money back. No big deal if it doesn't work out. But...maybe it does make a different. (Lets not start a new argument on here on the placebo effect of a given mod either). Either way, LAF still had the fun of shopping for a new part and trying it out.

Thumbs up to LAF for being the first (to my knowledge) to try this out and share their experience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
1) A "tits on factory" alignment is not what you want at all. Zero camber in the front is not good for performance--you need to be running at least -1 to -1.5.

2) P Zero Nero GTs are not remotely close to the stickiest street rubber you can get, and aren't going to be stressing your chassis. Far stickier street tires exist (Ventus RS3, RE11A, AD08, MPSS, MPSC, etc). I'm not saying this to put down your tires, which are great, but only to clarify.

3) Lowering is going to increase the propensity for the body to roll, all else equal, by lowering the roll center. You need to increase spring rate drastically (both to account for decreased suspension travel and the roll center difference). This is where the larger front sway bar comes in.


4) The torsional rigidity was measured at the strut towers, as it should be (all forces are coming into that region). It measures twisting force. Bending rigidity also increased in both axes at an average of 34% from the 2008 models. Bending rigidity is as it sounds--weld posts to the strut towers and attempt to bend the frame in the X and Y axes.

LAF I'm out after this--I'm just trying to clarify as someone with more knowledge on the topic. There's no reason to get hostile--I'm trying to help.
Well for tires I know there are stickier tires but I can not afford tires every 3 or 4 thousand miles. So a compromise had to made. I do believe I can outrun the body of my car on these tires.

When lowering on coil overs do you not also increase spring tension/stiffness? Pretty sure spring type changed and tension changed when I lowered it.

Again I am still unclear on how making a car in 2013 more ridge then a car in 2008 makes cross bracing something that will not help with body roll? And if you read the PDF I linked there is a lot of debate on just how much more rigid the 9th Gen is. It also shows how the gas fill became an issue. Again from the car moving around and stressed the gas fill.

I will take your word for the alignment. Again I admit I can not understand why alignment changes for performance? I would think you would want it aligned for good/great tire wear. And after looking at my alignment spec sheet I am at -0.7 camber on both fronts. Front calls for -0.8 to 0.2. I do remember him asking me if I wanted more but I just said do what you think is right but keep it in the green.

I do appreciate your information and knowledge I just can not wrap my head around this particular brace not working when nothing else is there on the car? What I am hearing you are saying the car does not give at all at those points so a brace will do no good. So following that logic why would moving to a larger sway bar front or back do any good. I mean same logic the car is so rigid it does not need it. But we both know that is not true, in fact larger rear and front bars add immensely to improving handling characteristics of these cars.

I do appreciate your input but I get defensive when someone says this will not work or has no benefit and can not tell me why.

I still hear no reason why this brace in that position will not help?

And bottom line this is not a full race car but a daily driver. I may see 10% or 15% at any performance levels where most of these things come into play. The body roll showed from pushing the car hard for tuning logs in 3rd and 4th gear WOT on some twisty roads.

Like I said I will go the front sway bar if this does not help.

And after you explain to me why I want more camber I am going to use my 3 year all you can eat alignment card and have him set it at 1.5 if I am not going to chew up tires in the other 85% of my driving.

Thanks for any more learning you can help me with, especially on camber for sure.
 

·
CITIUS::INFERIUS::FORTIUS
Joined
·
1,471 Posts
I like this thread. Less bashing and good healthy argument is good for the boards. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure camber adjustment suits different needs regarding performance and tire wear. That's why a good alignment shop would ask you that beforehand... how are you intending to drive the car? It seems to me that if you want greater performance, you will need to sacrifice on tire wear with the increased negative camber. (I'm just guessing that the negative camber would have the most impact on turns) The degree that you would want to sacrifice is all based on the driver's needs/wants. Feel free to correct. I'm here to learn as well.
 
1 - 20 of 106 Posts
Top