Jump to content
TEAM SHELBY FORUM

STRUT TOWER


1sgt

Recommended Posts

I been looking for a strut tower for my SS 2014 and everyone said none out there . I called and was told to call Josh Davis what he is telling me the part number z13-S7MB 20201-A well work on the SS . He is going to check on that for me and well call me back with a picture .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I been looking for a strut tower for my SS 2014 and everyone said none out there . I called and was told to call Josh Davis what he is telling me the part number z13-S7MB 20201-A well work on the SS . He is going to check on that for me and well call me back with a picture .

 

Do you mean the Strut Tower BRACE???

 

The strut tower itself is part of the unit body construction and would be a real bitch to replace.

 

 

Phill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO the one you put on the Shelby engine strut bar . It goes from one shock to the other .

 

Hmm. It sounds like you're looking for a Strut Tower BRACE (aka. "STB"). It connects the two STRUTS together via the top of the Strut TOWERS.

 

Ford Racing made one that fits the 2010 and up GT500's. They don't make them anymore but you can find them on buyfordracing.com and other such Ford Racing Performance Parts (aka "FRPP") sites.

 

They are a double bar setup with a connecting mid-plate with the FRPP logo embossed on it.

 

Shelby had (has?) one for their Super Shake but I don't think it will fit on a Kenne Bell (KB) blower. I'm not real sure about the newer Ford Mo. Co. 2.3L TVS found on the 5.8L motors in the '13 & '14 GT500 though.

 

 

Phill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hmm. It sounds like you're looking for a Strut Tower BRACE (aka. "STB"). It connects the two STRUTS together via the top of the Strut TOWERS.

 

Ford Racing made one that fits the 2010 and up GT500's. They don't make them anymore but you can find them on buyfordracing.com and other such Ford Racing Performance Parts (aka "FRPP") sites.

 

They are a double bar setup with a connecting mid-plate with the FRPP logo embossed on it.

 

Shelby had (has?) one for their Super Shake but I don't think it will fit on a Kenne Bell (KB) blower. I'm not real sure about the newer Ford Mo. Co. 2.3L TVS found on the 5.8L motors in the '13 & '14 GT500 though.

 

 

Phill

 

 

Phill - The STB that Shelby offered for the Super Snake was specifically designed to clear the KB, but it is the 2.8H KB.

 

Picture1718-2.jpg

 

The issue with the 3.6LC is that it is taller. I have measured my STB and the difference between my 2.8 and 3.6 and the 3.6 will be just under the STB, maybe even touching the bottom of the STB. There really is no upward room for the STB to be spaced "up" for 3.6 clearance. My STB is very close to the hood heat extractors already.

 

Picture1726-8.jpg

 

 

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A possible fix may be to lower the motor.

 

I have a 2.8 Kenne Bell under a stock 2007 hood with 3/4" lowering mounts AND the stock hood blanket w/o issue.

 

It looks like it would be close though as the 3.6 looks to be about an inch taller from the pictures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the old fashion multi link STB that attached to the firewall and also would be in front of the SC pulley assembly with cross members connection to the strut tower. It sort of makes a rectangle around the SC. Not sure if you get a lot of benefit from something like that (with so many potential flex points) but ....

 

Searching for pictures ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A possible fix may be to lower the motor.

 

I have a 2.8 Kenne Bell under a stock 2007 hood with 3/4" lowering mounts AND the stock hood blanket w/o issue.

 

It looks like it would be close though as the 3.6 looks to be about an inch taller from the pictures.

 

 

 

 

 

I think this is an option..............but what about NVH that is introduced with a more solid (poly) mount when the taller oem rubber mount is replaced. I don't want to have the vibration from my engine making its way into my passenger compartment.

 

 

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I think this is an option..............but what about NVH that is introduced with a more solid (poly) mount when the taller oem rubber mount is replaced. I don't want to have the vibration from my engine making its way into my passenger compartment.

 

 

R

 

A valid concern that I too had until I made the swap.

 

Absolutely NO vibration was noticed. The car performed exactly as it had with the stock mounts (to my relief and delight).

 

Very happy with the results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is an option..............but what about NVH that is introduced with a more solid (poly) mount when the taller oem rubber mount is replaced. I don't want to have the vibration from my engine making its way into my passenger compartment.

R

 

Didn't the early engine lowering kits consist of spacers that drop the entire K-member down so you still used the OEM motor mounts???

 

I put a Shelby (BMR) K-member with 1/2" lowering mounts in my car that uses a poly bushing for the motor mounts and I don't feel any noticeable NVH with it.

 

 

Phill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Didn't the early engine lowering kits consist of spacers that drop the entire K-member down so you still used the OEM motor mounts???

 

I put a Shelby (BMR) K-member with 1/2" lowering mounts in my car that uses a poly bushing for the motor mounts and I don't feel any noticeable NVH with it.

 

 

Phill

 

Yes, of course you can go that route but from what I've heard, that is where the vibration my arise.

 

Does your's have vibration issues Phill?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does your's have vibration issues Phill?

 

No, none at all. From past experience I was expecting a ton of vibe but to my satisfaction, I don't notice any.

 

The one thing I wondered with lowering the entire K-member is...What happens to the lower A-arm angles? You're lowering the inner connectors by the amount you lower your K-member by thereby making the A-arm angle "up" (from the inside out).

 

 

Phill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 2000 Cobra R had thicker spacers between the body and the k-member for clearance over the 5.4 upper intake. Doesn't this in fact just raise the body? The k-member/engine is still in the same position, it is the body height that is raised and in reality the hood that moves upward with the body for clearance.

 

So with spacers, it would be the body that is raised, not the engine that is lowered..............

 

 

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had to assume that changes were engineered in to the new K-member but fortunately for me I didn't have to go that far and was trying to go the "cheap/easy" way first.

 

 

^^^I would do the same if there are no NVH issues.

 

 

 

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

^^^I would do the same if there are no NVH issues.

 

 

 

R

 

With only the lowering mounts, I had zero drivability issues.

 

If someone else had done the swap and didn't tell me, I would have never notice a difference.

 

BTW, do you have the 3.6 KB now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So with spacers, it would be the body that is raised, not the engine that is lowered..............

 

I see what you're saying but it's all relative. Relative to the frame rails, the engine is being lowered in the engine bay.

 

That's a lot like saying "a Rich air/fuel mixture means there's not enough air and not too much fuel."

 

Does lean mean not enough fuel or too much air?

 

They are both, much like a half full/empty glass of water.

 

The engine position is lowered RELATIVE to the rest of the car, including the rear axle. The front tires don't go lower with the K-member but the inside mounts of the A-arms do.

 

You are essentially dropping the engine lower into the engine bay along with the K-member, the steering rack and the inside a-arm mounts so I personally wouldn't consider that "just moving the hood higher". The fenders move in relationship to the K-member/engine too.

 

6 of 1, a half dozen of another....

 

 

Phill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

With only the lowering mounts, I had zero drivability issues.

 

If someone else had done the swap and didn't tell me, I would have never notice a difference.

 

BTW, do you have the 3.6 KB now?

 

 

 

 

Yes, I bought it as soon as it was an option for the Super Snake, with the correct pulley and logo's/labeling. The 3.6LC was not available when my car went through in early 2009, so any add of this type will be "after the fact".

 

 

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I see what you're saying but it's all relative. Relative to the frame rails, the engine is being lowered in the engine bay.

 

That's a lot like saying "a Rich air/fuel mixture means there's not enough air and not too much fuel."

 

Does lean mean not enough fuel or too much air?

 

They are both, much like a half full/empty glass of water.

 

The engine position is lowered RELATIVE to the rest of the car, including the rear axle. The front tires don't go lower with the K-member but the inside mounts of the A-arms do.

 

You are essentially dropping the engine lower into the engine bay along with the K-member, the steering rack and the inside a-arm mounts so I personally wouldn't consider that "just moving the hood higher". The fenders move in relationship to the K-member/engine too.

 

6 of 1, a half dozen of another....

 

 

Phill

 

 

It is just a matter of the car body itself either staying low, as it was, or sitting taller in the airflow and then having to lower the suspension to compensate. This would be 1/2" higher and maybe more.......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is just a matter of the car body itself either staying low, as it was, or sitting taller in the airflow and then having to lower the suspension to compensate. This would be 1/2" higher and maybe more.......

R

 

Think about this for a second....

 

The front wheels aren't moving, up or down (just the engine/cradle is). The (front) ride height is determined by the length of the strut and it's static.

 

So the engine & cradle are just being "lowered" (dropped) farther down in the engine bay. The hood line will still be at XXX inches high.

 

 

Phill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Think about this for a second....

 

The front wheels aren't moving, up or down (just the engine/cradle is). The (front) ride height is determined by the length of the strut and it's static.

 

So the engine & cradle are just being "lowered" (dropped) farther down in the engine bay. The hood line will still be at XXX inches high.

 

 

Phill

 

Somewhere that spacer thickness is going to show when placed between the body and the cradle, and the suspension body mounting point and the k-member mounting point, the a-arm (strut between the two ends). Something has to move up when those spacers are added............and we know the front suspension is on the ground mounted to the k-member so it won't move downward with the added spacers.

 

 

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Somewhere that spacer thickness is going to show when placed between the body and the cradle,

 

Yeah, you're going to have less ground clearance under the car, between the K-member and the ground.

 

The wheels stay in the same place, relative to the body. The inside mount on the a-arm moves down with the k-member and the body rests on the struts at the same height as when you have the k-member up all the way.

 

You could drop the k-member all the way onto the ground and the body will still be at the same height.

 

 

Phill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yeah, you're going to have less ground clearance under the car, between the K-member and the ground.

 

The wheels stay in the same place, relative to the body. The inside mount on the a-arm moves down with the k-member and the body rests on the struts at the same height as when you have the k-member up all the way.

 

You could drop the k-member all the way onto the ground and the body will still be at the same height.

 

 

Phill

 

 

 

I guess I was looking at it differently.............

 

With the current suspension in place and the car sitting on the ground with the suspension fully loaded (or it could be on a drive-on 4-post lift), if I were to unbolt all attachment points of the k-member and add spacers, I would have no choice but to lift the body to do so. Without any other alteration to anything, the body is going to sit higher the amount of the spacer thickness? At that point I have a choice in lowering the body back to its original level, either add weight to the front so that the existing coil springs compress enough to lower the car back to its original "no spacer level", adjust the length of the strut through an adj. coilover set-up, or buy shorter coil springs to reduce the height by the amount added by the spacer(s).

 

 

Maybe I am looking at this wrong. I know the cradle can drop all the way to the ground, but we have suspension components in play also, which support the body and connect between the two, k-member and body.

 

 

If a person were to lower the cradle/k-member which would also lower the rack and the control LCA inner attachment points, how does that affect the ball joints which are still going to be at the original spindle level and the tie rod ends which are also at the original spindle level?

 

 

This discussion has gotten way away from the STB that was originally asked about..........but this is all related to gaining space for installing a STB over a 3.6LC.

 

 

 

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question: Besides looking pretty cool, does the STB really do anything on the later Mustangs? I've been talking to a couple suspension people about ways to stiffen up the car and the general consensus seems to be that they will be happy to sell you a STB but the part doesn't do anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question: Besides looking pretty cool, does the STB really do anything on the later Mustangs? I've been talking to a couple suspension people about ways to stiffen up the car and the general consensus seems to be that they will be happy to sell you a STB but the part doesn't do anything.

 

The earlier GT500's had factory installed STB's so I would guess that Ford/SVT felt they were needed on those cars or they would not have spent the extra $$$ to design and install it from the assy. line, but since the earlier GT500's were built there have been changes to the Mustang structure which have added stiffness, so maybe when these improvements were added the need for a STB has become less?

 

The STB shown on my car was the most current design. The earlier test STB's were shown to flex under load and some additional under support was added to the bar.............but then again, this was on the earlier cars.

 

I wonder why Ford Racing offered a STB for the 2013/14 GT500? and then why it is already discontinued??

 

 

 

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The STB shown below was also submitted for testing when Shelby was looking for a STB for the Super Snake. There were options for the text on the bar itself. In the end this design did not win approval..........

 

SuperSnake_STB_Mounted_4040_small.jpg

 

SHELBY_3934.jpg

 

CSsignature_3935.jpg

 

SuperSnake_STB_3978_2.jpg

 

 

^^^^Phill - Remember this? You have been around the Super Snake world for a while.............

 

 

 

 

 

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...
...