Rigid Collars - yay or nay?

Joined
Sep 30, 2020
Messages
1,700
Location
Canada, eh?
Yes ( on the industrial counterpart used to field repair worn out or add new alignment points for precision tolerances.)

They work as advertised up to the rating of the part and the ad accurately represents much of the truth of modern manufacturing.

Theres a caveat- it needs to be determined that the fastener and joint ( and everything else) will support this new rigidity without creating new stress risers.
 
Theres a caveat- it needs to be determined that the fastener and joint ( and everything else) will support this new rigidity without creating new stress risers.
So for the average, mass produced econobox, will there be any benefit?
And if there is, will it cause any sort of problems (due to the new stress risers) in the future?
 
So for the average, mass produced econobox, will there be any benefit?
And if there is, will it cause any sort of problems (due to the new stress risers) in the future?
That's impossible for anyone to answer without specifics.

It could help, it could create a failure. ( or anywhere in between)
 
please explain.
from the video, it seems like an issue we all have (at least those of us with mass produced vehicles).
I mean that of the hundreds of cars I've had, I can't say I've experienced the problem that thing is supposed to solve. Maybe on a car driven on a racetrack it might make a difference, but then, why were they using a Prius as a demo?
 
Assuming it's being installed on a totally stock vehicle....
Well, if there is no current looseness issue, I would expect to see no change or benefit.

A lot of these joints are designed to have tolerance in them- I'm leery about just taking that away because of a new gadget when no other issue exists.
 
+1
With those bolts being tight, there shouldn't be any movement. Also, some vehicles have rubber bushings/mounts between the subframe and the body.
But what if there is movement?
i think that's what the offering is proposing. And that by reducing that movement, everything becomes tighter than stock
 
But what if there is movement?
i think that's what the offering is proposing. And that by reducing that movement, everything becomes tighter than stock
I think 99.99% of the cars made with a rigid connection don't have movement between the sub frame and chassis as it would be changing your wheel alignment before and after a hard turn.
More and more cars have a rubber connection between the sub frames and chassis which is supposed to flex a bit to reduce noise and take the edge off bumps and for sure replacing those with solid mounts would sharpen up the handling a little bit. If your not tracking your car with sticky tires, replacing rubber mounts with solid ones will certainly transmit more road feel and maybe not much else.
 
Sorry to bump an old thread, but would love to see a more technical discussion/reasoning.

From reading various forum statements, people are claiming improvements to NVH and a noticeable difference. But how is that possible if when you remove these bolts, you don't see signs or scoring or whatnot on the metal surfaces indicating movement? Is this just a placebo effect?

You would think that if the improvements are significant enough that the mount tolerances would be tighter from factory? I have a hard time believing that the subframe would even be allowed to move slightly around the unibody, of which the metal to metal movements would cause wear over time.
 
Back
Top