[GTIanZ28]

I remember seeing a Chevy diagram for suspension and chassis stiffening components included with the different models. The convertible had quite a few more than both the SS and the LT.

I don't remember seeing a strut tower brace for any of them.

All you gen 5 guys, or better yet ATS/CTS owners, have you installed a strut tower brace? How did it impact the steering and handling of the car?

Good part to add for a canyon carver or unnecessary unless planning to hit the track?

What other suspension or chassis components should we be looking for to improve handling?

Found them:

[neal_zack]

Awesome i was wondering about under body bracing.

[Tr6]

Reviews already say handling is great and not a whole lot of yaw during turns, but you can easily add the tower brace and an X brace. I am open to adding both but I don't think there is a NEED for it.

[JaxChris]

Tower to tower brace = strut tower bar

[GTIanZ28]

Originally Posted by JaxChris

Tower to tower brace = strut tower bar

Yep. According to the chart it's only on the 2SS convertible.

TR6. I agree. I bet they do already handle great. Even the video of the Chevy employee drifting the turbo 4 displayed good handling. Maybe it won't be needed.

[fastball]

I seriously cannot imagine a performance car without a strut tower brace. I was wondering why I hadn't seen one in all the pictures of the gen 6 and I just thought that since these are all pre-production cars GM had simply left them off so media could have clear pictures of the engine bay.

I really can't believe only the convertible gets the strut tower brace.

How much is this going to cost me now? Because all trims of the Camaro should have it, but the SS NEEDS it. No matter how good the handling is. That brace always improves it.

All you have to do is look under the hood of any real performance or race car.

[Tr6]

Originally Posted by GTIanZ28

Yep. According to the chart it's only on the 2SS convertible.

TR6. I agree. I bet they do already handle great. Even the video of the Chevy employee drifting the turbo 4 displayed good handling. Maybe it won't be needed.

Yeah, it seems like it did not need any chassis enhancements at all.

Originally Posted by fastball

I seriously cannot imagine a performance car without a strut tower brace. I was wondering why I hadn't seen one in all the pictures of the gen 6 and I just thought that since these are all pre-production cars GM had simply left them off so media could have clear pictures of the engine bay.

I really can't believe only the convertible gets the strut tower brace.

How much is this going to cost me now? Because all trims of the Camaro should have it, but the SS NEEDS it. No matter how good the handling is. That brace always improves it.

All you have to do is look under the hood of any real performance or race car.

Tower brace is relatively cheap. $150-250 range, depending on brands and quality. The reason why the convertible comes with it, well... it's a convertible, unlike the coupe it doesn't have the entire roof to stabilize and make it more rigid so it makes sense.

They do have a gen 6 strut brace, so if Chevy engineers saw fit they would've put it on the coupe. Once you get the to drive the coupe, it will became a personal preference if you want to add the xbrace and/or tower strut bar.

[drivingagain]

This will be interesting as people start to track their camaro's we will find out if they are needed. If so then they are already built

[joemosfet]

Originally Posted by drivingagain

we will find out if they are needed

What do you mean by needed? Without them, the car can still go around the track. With them, it will stiffen things up and improve performance. But do you need them?

I think more the question would be, would the performance improvements gained by the tower brace be negligible or statistically measurable or dramatically noticeable.

[GTIanZ28]

Originally Posted by joemosfet

What do you mean by needed? Without them, the car can still go around the track. With them, it will stiffen things up and improve performance. But do you need them?

I think more the question would be, would the performance improvements gained by the tower brace be negligible or statistically measurable or dramatically noticeable.

That is what I'm wondering.

Was also thinking that some of the bracing may have been left off to achieve the dramatic weight loss (and reduce cost of course).

[joemosfet]

Ooh, good thinking, I hadn't considered what might have been sacrificed in order to meet a weight loss goal.

[mcsoul]

I can't wait for Pfadt to get ahold of this car and show us what's effective to upgrade.

[BradfordCamaro]

Anyone that says their car handles better after they put on a strut tower brace should be laughed out of the room.

Braces fix something that is missing or wrong.

The cars Without Roofs need the Bracing! So they get it.


Your fancy expensive exotics need bracing otherwise all the carbon fiber would twist and shatter.

[LesserO2Evils]

Originally Posted by BradfordCamaro

Anyone that says their car handles better after they put on a strut tower brace should be laughed out of the room.

Braces fix something that is missing or wrong.

The cars Without Roofs need the Bracing! So they get it.

Exactly. They are a crutch for an inadequate design. When was the last time you saw a strut brace on a Corvette? I never see them on anything but Hondas and other BoyRacer cars.
And, logically, Convertibles bc they are more prone to twist w/out a roof.