PDA

View Full Version : Air Ride/PCW Fender Braces



darren@ridetech
09-17-2008, 10:49 AM
Precision Coachworks along with Air Ride Technologies is now producing fender braces for the 67-69 Camaro, 70-81 Camaro & 68-74 Nova. They are constructed from .625" o.d. x .035" wall 304 Stainless Steel tubing. These TIG welded beauties weigh in at just over 1.5 lbs per set.

67-69 Camaro $199/set
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

70-81 Camaro $149/set
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

68-74 Nova $149/set
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

1969CamaroRS
09-17-2008, 11:36 AM
Looks nice :kewlpics:

paulk68
09-19-2008, 12:30 PM
these are not direct bolt on are they?

darren@ridetech
10-02-2008, 07:35 AM
Yes, direct bolt in. I don't even think that you have to drill any holes.

Chad-1stGen
10-02-2008, 08:30 AM
Yes, direct bolt in. I don't even think that you have to drill any holes.

This first pic for a 1st gen doesn't make sense to me then. The stock radiator core support only uses one bolt hole for the factory setup but the one pictured uses two bolts for the bracket...

paulk68
10-05-2008, 04:18 AM
yeah that is why i was confused it is only 1 bolt to the front fender also.

Chad-1stGen
10-05-2008, 04:28 AM
I think the standard core support does have a 2nd hole near the one used by the factory that isn't threaded and IIRC may not be centered perfectly but they must be using that.

Charley Lillard
10-05-2008, 05:29 PM
Isn't the fender brace meant to stiffen things up ? Won't the heim ends kind of let things pivot or flex easier than just the stock solid bolt on unit ? I have something similar on one of my Mustang track cars.

JT_67Tempest
10-05-2008, 08:04 PM
Probably a dumb question, but is this something that would work on an A-Body, like a 67 Pontiac Tempest?

thanks,
Johnny

Y-TRY
10-05-2008, 09:59 PM
Charley brought-up what I was thinking, sorta, and I'm sure this has been questioned before:

How much bracing is really necessary? Especially if the car has frame connectors and stiff bushings. I can't imagine a whole lot of movement there.

With the price of these, and others, it sure seems to be a lot to pay for 'high-performance bling' (read as oxymoron)

darren@ridetech
10-06-2008, 05:30 AM
This first pic for a 1st gen doesn't make sense to me then. The stock radiator core support only uses one bolt hole for the factory setup but the one pictured uses two bolts for the bracket...

My bad.....there is a hole that must be drilled in the core support and the fender.

darren@ridetech
10-06-2008, 05:34 AM
Probably a dumb question, but is this something that would work on an A-Body, like a 67 Pontiac Tempest?

thanks,
Johnny

A-bodies did not use a fender brace. I am assuming that it is reinforced with the inner fender???

darren@ridetech
10-06-2008, 05:38 AM
Isn't the fender brace meant to stiffen things up ? Won't the heim ends kind of let things pivot or flex easier than just the stock solid bolt on unit ? I have something similar on one of my Mustang track cars.

Even though it can rotate on the heim end, the length can not change, so it will not allow the anlges of the triangle to change.

Charley Lillard
10-06-2008, 06:01 PM
There is no way that setup can be as stiff as the stock steel tube that is bolted solid. Yes the length won't change but it can move around more.

Fuelie Fan
10-07-2008, 07:18 AM
Form over function.

bret
10-07-2008, 03:34 PM
I disagree. The 3 points of the triangle are defined by 1. the connection at the radiator support, 2. the connection at the fender, and 3. the junction of the fender and the radiator support. Unless one of these points can move via a slotted hole [which they can't], the triangle will retain its shape. Is it stronger than the oem brace? Probably not, but it certainly no weaker. It's purpose is to be less ugly than the oem component without any other compromise except price. It can also be adjusted for length to accommodate the varied dimensions of replacement fenders, replacement radiator supports, tweaked cars, and oem GM tolerances.
I AM glad to see so much discussion given to such a simple piece as a fender brace. Good Deal!

Charley Lillard
10-07-2008, 03:47 PM
I disagree.You now have two points of the triangle that have built in pivots, allowing the up and down pivot motion. Yes if is all bolted tight and the car isn't moving it should stay where it is but I contend that when the car is moving, going over bumps etc, the car is trying to flex and it will flex easier because of those heim ends. I contend it can rack easier with those heim ends. This all means nothing more than a point of discussion. I'm not trying to tube sales, just disagreeing that it is as stiff as stock. The whole point of heim ends is to allow angle changes with less resistance. :-)

neu68
10-07-2008, 04:35 PM
I just installed these on my 68 camaro, I had to drill 1 hole in each side of the fender end. The radiator support has the hole the original one went in and another hole that is unused in the stock form. The new bracket lines up perfect.

Fesler built
10-08-2008, 04:19 AM
I dont think most people up here drive cars like us or Bret do and if they hold up and are still on the car and working that says something.

The stock ones suck and you have several companies making replacments now its up to you spend the money on what you like to make your car look better or keep the stock ugly ones.

I have a car with 800HP and the ones we built are still in perfect condition on the car with 250 hard miles on it. Lots of track and street time and they are still holding up.

darren@ridetech
10-08-2008, 07:04 AM
I don't think that the purpose of a fender brace is to resist vertical movenment. It designed to mearly hold the rad. support and the fender at a 90 degree angle to each other.

If the length of the sides of a triangle can not change.... neither can the angles. If I remember right from Geometry class, (which I mostly slept through :) ), it was referred to as the SSS Postulate.

wiedemab
10-08-2008, 08:19 AM
I don't think that the purpose of a fender brace is to resist vertical movenment. It designed to mearly hold the rad. support and the fender at a 90 degree angle to each other.

If the length of the sides of a triangle can not change.... neither can the angles. If I remember right from Geometry class, (which I mostly slept through :) ), it was referred to as the SSS Postulate.

I agree with this in two dimensional space. The heim ends allow for 3d motion though.

It's probably not going to make any difference in this application though because the other ends of the fender and core support are constrained. I think the purpose of these is to just hold the core support in alignment. I doubt whether the stock ones or these add significantly to the rigidity of the vehicle on the whole.

Serpa69
10-08-2008, 11:19 AM
There is only two bolts on a stock fender brace anyway. If it is side to side or up and down movement everyone is concerned about. The stock stuff will not fix it anyway. I think it looks pretty cool. A little $$$ but hey, that is the cost of it.

bret
10-08-2008, 02:21 PM
I am referring to movement in the horizontal plane [looking at things from the top]. I think maybe Charlie is referring to movement in vertical plane [looking at it from the edge]. Neither the oem components nor our fender braces will resist vertical movement. Both units are designed to resist movement in the horizontal plane, and only relative to each other. To resist vertical movement we would have to run a vertical brace to the frame or some other solid mounting point.
The end result is that both the oem units and our stainless fender braces resist fender-radiator support movement relative to each other as intended, and beyond. While I guess it may be possible to incur a problem with vertical movement of the fender/rad support, I have not seen any evidence of such movement on my own car[Velocity]. I am thinking that the vertical cross section and mountings of the fender/rad support/inner fender is adequetly resisting such movement.

Fuelie Fan
10-09-2008, 03:50 PM
FORM OVER FUNCTION.

If you like the way it looks, buy it. If you want a properly engineered solution, i don't think that this is it. It's not critical enough a component that its worth flaring up a huge argument over, but fundamentally this design has a number of flaws.

Steve Chryssos
10-10-2008, 04:38 AM
Tried to stay out of this, but I just can't stand it any more.

Core support bars are designed to keep the fenders from bowing outward at the center of the fender (i.e. bowing away from the hood). The issue is caused by the length of the fenders (i.e. longer than a Nova) combined with the car's unitized platform. The issue is exacerbated by the weight of the wheelhouse. The wheelhouse design is practically free-standing.

-Core support bars are NOT designed to maintain angularity of the nose sheetmetal to cowl/core support. Benefits here are practically non-existent--especially with solid body mounts.
-They are NOT designed to resist chassis flex like a Monte Carlo bar on a Mustang. Here, the Monte bar ties the cowl to the spring towers. F-body core support bars essentially do nothing for handling or torque management.

By resisting the bowing forces, core support bars ARE designed to oppose the weak link in the nose sheetmetal. They work to reinforce secondary mounting points that are sheetmetal to sheetmetal including the lower rear fender bolts and wheelhouse mounting points. You would never actually SEE the bowing forces. Instead, a lack of support would cause lower rear fender hardware to move / loosen causing door to fender gaps to move out of alignment. Funny thing is, the lack of bars (or improper bars) never get the blame.

So: As long as the bars are perfectly straight and in tension, they are effective. Bret's bars satisfy both requirements. End of story. :smashcomp

wiedemab
10-10-2008, 05:13 AM
Tried to stay out of this, but I just can't stand it any more.

Core support bars are designed to keep the fenders from bowing outward at the center of the fender (i.e. bowing away from the hood). The issue is caused by the length of the fenders (i.e. longer than a Nova) combined with the car's unitized platform. The issue is exacerbated by the weight of the wheelhouse. The wheelhouse design is practically free-standing.

-Core support bars are NOT designed to maintain angularity of the nose sheetmetal to cowl/core support. Benefits here are practically non-existent--especially with solid body mounts.
-They are NOT designed to resist chassis flex like a Monte Carlo bar on a Mustang. Here, the Monte bar ties the cowl to the spring towers. F-body core support bars essentially do nothing for handling or torque management.

By resisting the bowing forces, core support bars ARE designed to oppose the weak link in the nose sheetmetal. They work to reinforce secondary mounting points that are sheetmetal to sheetmetal including the lower rear fender bolts and wheelhouse mounting points. You would never actually SEE the bowing forces. Instead, a lack of support would cause lower rear fender hardware to move / loosen causing door to fender gaps to move out of alignment. Funny thing is, the lack of bars (or improper bars) never get the blame.

So: As long as the bars are perfectly straight and in tension, they are effective. Bret's bars satisfy both requirements. End of story. :smashcomp

Agreed! They definitely serve their intended purpose and look good doing it. This is a classic case of over analyzing something.

skatinjay27
10-10-2008, 08:01 AM
This is a classic case of over analyzing something.thats what ive been thinking since the start of this debate... they are a pretty insignifigant piece in the handling aspect...

Steve Chryssos
10-10-2008, 09:38 AM
But that doesn't make them unimportant. They're only insignificant if you like aligning sheetmetal periodically.

wiedemab
10-10-2008, 11:08 AM
Steve - I agree with you that they serve a very important purpose. I think the original beef, if you will, with them was related to their contribution or lack of contribution to the structural rigidity of the chassis - which I would argue is negligible.

I think we're on the same page. Cool product, easily adjusted to help with panel alignment. What's not to like.

Fuelie Fan
10-10-2008, 01:47 PM
Perhaps you missed the brackets at both ends loaded in bending???? The single shear joints that the load must pass through????

Care to beat that gavel any more? The design is not optimal. It's pretty.




So: As long as the bars are perfectly straight and in tension, they are effective. Bret's bars satisfy both requirements. End of story. :smashcomp

Steve Chryssos
10-10-2008, 02:42 PM
Nah. The gavel's been beat.

bret
10-11-2008, 10:43 AM
I'm going to have a beer. With Steevo.

Charley Lillard
10-11-2008, 10:52 AM
I'm coming also.

dontlifttoshift
04-12-2013, 12:56 PM
-Core support bars are NOT designed to maintain angularity of the nose sheetmetal to cowl/core support. Benefits here are practically non-existent--especially with solid body mounts.
By resisting the bowing forces, core support bars ARE designed to oppose the weak link in the nose sheetmetal. They work to reinforce secondary mounting points that are sheetmetal to sheetmetal including the lower rear fender bolts and wheelhouse mounting points. You would never actually SEE the bowing forces. Instead, a lack of support would cause lower rear fender hardware to move / loosen causing door to fender gaps to move out of alignment. Funny thing is, the lack of bars (or improper bars) never get the blame.



Has anybody run with out them? Did the world end becasue they weren't there.....or as strong as a piece of conduit with smashed ends on it.

I ask because they are in my way and I am having a tough time justifying spending any time coming up with a solution when I don't think they are doing much. Solid subframe/core support bushings on this one.

bret
04-13-2013, 07:36 AM
Has anybody run with out them? Did the world end becasue they weren't there.....or as strong as a piece of conduit with smashed ends on it.

I ask because they are in my way and I am having a tough time justifying spending any time coming up with a solution when I don't think they are doing much. Solid subframe/core support bushings on this one.

Go ahead and take them off.

If your frontend falls off you'll know they were important :)

Todd in Vancouver
04-13-2013, 09:08 AM
^^^^ :lol:

dontlifttoshift
04-13-2013, 09:49 AM
Thanks Bret!