[wakespeak]

On my 5th gen it totally made a difference. Noticeable when turning into my driveway the windows would creak and then it stopped with the strut tower brace. The 6th gen is stiffer but could probably benefit. The CT5V (same chassis) has one. The Cadillac would fit but not sure it would clear the Camaro hood.

[ZLRob]

Originally Posted by wakespeak

On my 5th gen it totally made a difference. Noticeable when turning into my driveway the windows would creak and then it stopped with the strut tower brace. The 6th gen is stiffer but could probably benefit. The CT5V (same chassis) has one. The Cadillac would fit but not sure it would clear the Camaro hood.

There is a notable strut tower flexion the moment I take mine off on one side to do some no work beneath it. Both towers flex enough to the point where I need to remove both sides in order to put it back on and even when I do it this way, it's still semi tight going back on even if all of the bolts are started by hand.

Whoever says these cars don't benefit from one is a liar.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by ZLRob

There is a notable strut tower flexion the moment I take mine off on one side to do some no work beneath it. Both towers flex enough to the point where I need to remove both sides in order to put it back on and even when I do it this way, it's still semi tight going back on even if all of the bolts are started by hand.

Whoever says these cars don't benefit from one is a liar.

...even if he's the Camaro's chief engineer?

https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=517935

Don't get me wrong, there is some benefit, but he's saying it wasn't worth the penalty according to their calculations. Also consider that the brace is available as an accessory, so he could've just said "yeah, it's a crucial performance part for you connoisseurs, go out and buy one right now" to generate a little extra revenue, but he didn't.

[IMCWORTH]

I have a convertible. Do i need to say more?

[ZLRob]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

...even if he's the Camaro's chief engineer?

https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=517935

Don't get me wrong, there is some benefit, but he's saying it wasn't worth the penalty according to their calculations. Also consider that the brace is available as an accessory, so he could've just said "yeah, it's a crucial performance part for you connoisseurs, go out and buy one right now" to generate a little extra revenue, but he didn't.

The same engineers that said that the 1LE spoiler actually helps with downforce?

I don't trust GM engineers. The last time I did, I cracked a brand new oil pan, more recently, I snapped a head bolt inside the block of my LT4 following their instructions to the T. Could it be argued that I just got unlucky and got two defective items to use in my situations? Yeah of course, but they really don't help themselves in not taking accountability for the things they say. These are the same guys that gave their stamp of approval on 6.2L engines by saying, "oh yeah, run 0-20 in them" and are causing the mains in every one of them to get cooked inside the engine because of the lack of viscosity.. 10 speeds causing the rear end to lock up on the road, failing LT4 oil pumps (the last one is a basic, critical engine part that has been around for a very long time, so how you mess that up is beyond my comprehension)... I mean I could go on, but I think you see the picture of the engineers and their recommendations that I'm trying to paint here.

I just don't trust them. They have continually shown that they do not have the best interests of the consumer at heart. When I die, I want the GM employees to lower me into my grave, so they can let me down one last time.

[RobZL1]

Originally Posted by ZLRob

The same engineers that said that the 1LE spoiler actually helps with downforce?

I don't trust GM engineers. The last time I did, I cracked a brand new oil pan, more recently, I snapped a head bolt inside the block of my LT4 following their instructions to the T. Could it be argued that I just got unlucky and got two defective items to use in my situations? Yeah of course, but they really don't help themselves in not taking accountability for the things they say. These are the same guys that gave their stamp of approval on 6.2L engines by saying, "oh yeah, run 0-20 in them" and are causing the mains in every one of them to get cooked inside the engine because of the lack of viscosity.. 10 speeds causing the rear end to lock up on the road, failing LT4 oil pumps (the last one is a basic, critical engine part that has been around for a very long time, so how you mess that up is beyond my comprehension)... I mean I could go on, but I think you see the picture of the engineers and their recommendations that I'm trying to paint here.

I just don't trust them. They have continually shown that they do not have the best interests of the consumer at heart. When I die, I want the GM employees to lower me into my grave, so they can let me down one last time.

To be fair, they probably have a great DESIGN engineering staff. They are probably hampered by other departments and don't have the final say. Sure there are mistakes made, but there are other factors as well (such as the fact the engine passed durability testing with the oil pump and then perhaps quality changed at the manufacturer or some other engineer made a bad call downstream when they changed suppliers or some such).

[ZLRob]

Originally Posted by RobZL1

To be fair, they probably have a great DESIGN engineering staff. They are probably hampered by other departments and don't have the final say. Sure there are mistakes made, but there are other factors as well (such as the fact the engine passed durability testing with the oil pump and then perhaps quality changed at the manufacturer or some other engineer made a bad call downstream when they changed suppliers or some such).

That's fair. Their design team is the chefs kiss, as I love the way they styled the Gen 6. Others don't feel that way about it, but they really knocked it out of the park on the looks/ functionality department.

[djctoto]

Originally Posted by Blackrat

Is there a point to one? I remember for my fourth gen the strut bars were pointless. Even people who had them acknowledged they were either just for looks or to give them something to lean on when trying to reach something in the back of the engine since half of it was undwr the cowl.

On a street car I'd agree but on a track driven car they have been proven to work effectively.
Although my experience regarding performance improvements with/without one came from my previous race car. On it the strut towers were heavily tied into the cage, braced with 3 each 1.5" tubing. There was a definite benefit from a strut brace even with this bracing that was specifically designed to keep the towers from moving. Although it's extremely hard to quantify, tire temps and wear were better, more even with it. In talking to others the consensus is that under heavy braking the towers want to flex towards each other inward creating additional and excessive toe in.
I'm planning on adding one to my car, given the weight of the car, braking capability and tire size I'm almost certain the towers are moving so a brace should be beneficial as any movement at all is unwanted.

[djctoto]

Originally Posted by IMCWORTH

Its been awhile If i remember I just mounted the bracket for the tank upside down. or mounted the tank on the bottom of the bracket instead of the top. one of those worked. I looked at my car and it looks like I may have done both you will see when you get to that point

Thanks for the detailed pictures, just what I was looking for. It appears my tank should work with the existing brackets. If not I might have to make a new mounting bracket which is easy.

[pitrott1]

Easy to install

[djctoto]

Originally Posted by pitrott1

Easy to install

The color matched brace on your car looks great.
Did you have it painted or powder coated?