http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=7972117079&category=33591

Would that fit a 2002 Cavalier with a 2.2L Ecotec? I did a search and was reading some other post where they said that most strut bars should fit any kind of Cav but this one looks like it goes up a little so I'm not too sure about the hood clearence.

Anybody know what other strut bars are out there that would fit my car? I know the GP forum has vibrant bars shipping free, any other brands I should be aware of?



2002 Cavalier LS Coupe

its not supposed to go up like that, so when you install it you rotate it downwards.

also that looks like a vibrant bar. the older ones atleast.

Touche, now I feel stupid. But do you think it will fit length-wise?



2002 Cavalier LS Coupe

95-05 is the same chassis.

You can use the GM STB, but you might ahve to relocate your pcm. It also adds extra support, since it mounts to the firewall, as well at the struts.

Xian G wrote:You can use the GM STB, but you might ahve to relocate your pcm. It also adds extra support, since it mounts to the firewall, as well at the struts.

dont fool yourself. it mounts to the firewall to keep the brace from chattering on it. not sure if you;ve taken a look at your firewall lately, but its sheet metal.

not exactly a solid mounting point as its thin as hell. i have the screw from my firewall in the living room. its removable by hand.

LOL. True, but I prefer to go with GM parts before going to aftermarket. Not to mention, I get a 50% discount from GM.

Also, I had some vibraions from my poly trans and engine mounts. Can't explain it, but soon as I put on the GM strut bar, most of the vibrations are gone. I might be wrong, but pretty sure it had something to do with mounting the stupid thing to the firewall.

Alot of the time, you have to move the PCM to fit the GM STB. So, it's not nessecarily the best choice.

You wanna try and pull a bolt sideways through that sheetmetal?

Let's not get into this again though... heh...

Also, I have a friend that works in manufacturing of GM cars. He told me that the mount for the firewall, is for what u said, to support the brace. It also is a secondary mounting support. A generic form of "K" brace.

The firewall might be flimsy, but the it still adds some support. If you look at the brace, it is very slightly "V" shaped. Meaning the center mount is slightly convexed.

In geometry; if you have to fixed postions and a 3rd at the center of the convexed point. That will add some stability to the two outer fixed positions. Without a diagram this is very hard to explain.

Just remember that bolting it to the firewall isn't to prevent front to back movement. It's to prevent side to side flex of both strut towers.

I've got an image I made somewhere to demonstrate this.

I know. I was trying to explain that with the geometry thing. Kinda hard to explain without a visual aid.

<img src="http://www.wildweasel.ca/j-body/HowTo/images/strutflex.gif"

Wild Weasel wrote:You wanna try and pull a bolt sideways through that sheetmetal?

Let's not get into this again though... heh...

how do you think i pulled mine out?

side to side the bolt flexes. granted i am strong, but to pull the bolt out straight... in addition to when it pops out, i would ram my hand into the engine & i would def deform part of the firewall.

Quote:

A generic form of "K" brace

not even....a k brace has 4-5 FOUR to FIVE mounting points which are very separate. strut braces at best have three unless custom made to tie into the area above the radiator (some do have front K braces.)

Wease, granted i;ve seen your gif file, a single mounting point isnt gonna stop side to side flex. basically you;ve created a fulcrum "pivot point" out of the bar. ironically near but not even in the middle. this offers just enough flex to move and keep the bar from chattering, but not enough to snap it off.

basically bolt the bar to the firewall, but not to the strut towers... push and pull on the bar laterally (not front to back, but side to side).....it WILL have movement. thats how they proved to me its a weak mounting point and not even centered at that....

any bar thats securely mounted to the firewall is always done so with a solid back plate and alot more than just a single mounting point for two sides.


these are things i;ve been learning from a few local guys in scca who build racecars for locals.

"a mounting point is only as strong as the material used." always remember that when mounting a brace or a swaybar. sheet metal has NEVER been a structural mounting point that resists force. A36, cold rold, even thick aluminum...but not sheet metal.

if one wanted a solid point, theres a way no doubt. 2 inch plate of steel ( like .180 -.250 ) behind it with a bolt sized for the braces "u" shaped mounting area would stiffen up the sheet metal a bit. but with the plate there the bolt wouldnt flex side to side.


also as for the GM name.... i dont hold much water in getting gm vs aftermarket suspension parts from a place that cant develop struts that are barely lasting 12-15k on NEW vehicles. pride in a name can only go so far.

I see your points, and some make sense. If you read, I didn't say it was a "K" brace, I said a generic form.

Just for information purposes, a "K" brace has nothing to do with mounting points at all. The "K" comes from the shape of the brace. There are many forms of "K" braces and I doubt all them have the same amount of mounting points.

The firewall is a bit more sturdy than a flat piece of sheet metal. First, it is somewhat thicker than standard sheet metal (at least 3 times thicker than sheet metal at hardware store). Also it is formed in ways to make it more durable. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it is a main part of the structural integrity of the car. But, it is designed to protect the vehicle occupants from many serious injuries if in an accident, under hood explosion, or fire was to occur.

As for the fulcrum comment. A fulcrum point is the point at which a lever turns, or a pivoting point with 2 other moving points. (i.e. a see-saw) A GM STB has 3 fixed points which would not make anything there a fulcrum point.

I agree on the worthlessness of GM struts. Technically, most GM struts aren't made by GM. They are made by AC Delco and another company I can't remember the name of.

To compare a solid, non-moving part, to a multi pieced moving part (i.e STB to a strut) is like comparing peanut butter to carburetor.

As for pulling the bolt out... What year is your car, and what year did you pull it out?

First off, AC Delco is a GM brand.

For the brace... I've got a bolt that's the width of the u-shaped opening in the brace. To use anything less would be pointless. I can't remember but I think it's 5/8ths.

OK I worded that wrong, I was meaning that there is a 2nd company that makes struts not just AC Delco.

I work for GM. I know it's a GM company. If you read to, I never said that it wasn't.

Sorry. Misunderstood you I guess.

Xian G wrote:I see your points, and some make sense. If you read, I didn't say it was a "K" brace, I said a generic form.

Just for information purposes, a "K" brace has nothing to do with mounting points at all. The "K" comes from the shape of the brace. There are many forms of "K" braces and I doubt all them have the same amount of mounting points.

i know what a k brace is...had one a while back. and a k brace does have ALOT to do with mounting points.

due to the fact its shaped like a K, in addition to its structure being more solid than 2 points, K braces have 4 mounting points, in the least. basically you are boxing in the area you are trying to brace as well as creating a zone in the middle thats braced so that the box itself cant flex. similar to an X brace. you get the lateral bracing, but also crossbracing from 4 corners.

so yes, mounting points DO make a difference. if something is merely boxed in, that box can flex and make a parrallelogram of the box. when you have bracing inside of a box, it keeps it all constantly the same.

part of the reason mantapart didnt just make a tie bar for the rear trailing axle, they made a rear k brace for the bottom.

Quote:

The firewall is a bit more sturdy than a flat piece of sheet metal. First, it is somewhat thicker than standard sheet metal (at least 3 times thicker than sheet metal at hardware store). Also it is formed in ways to make it more durable. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it is a main part of the structural integrity of the car. But, it is designed to protect the vehicle occupants from many serious injuries if in an accident, under hood explosion, or fire was to occur.

actually its not all that thick. sheet metal comes in a variety of guages, and its actually thinner than sheet metals you can get at home depot....i know. i;ve cut a part of it out to mount my air horn, also drilled through it to mount my msd.

and firewalls are there for the reasons you listed, but to protect, flex helps in collisions... reason...

something the more rigid it is, the easier it is to crack or shatter. the softer and more flexible it is, the easier it is to catch. right there proves my point on the firewall being flexible. its just the anatomy of a car crash and the way firewalls are designed. also the firewall is 2 ply in some areas and spot welded, but oddly enough gm didnt 2 ply the area the bolt is mounted. design flaw, maybe. but notice the ridges in the sheet metal... part of crumple zone

Quote:

As for the fulcrum comment. A fulcrum point is the point at which a lever turns, or a pivoting point with 2 other moving points. (i.e. a see-saw) A GM STB has 3 fixed points which would not make anything there a fulcrum point.

with the center being a flexible point, and the two ends of the strut brace move independent of each other (else if it was really FIXED, there would be no need to brace it to begin with), then the center point is a fulcrum... else you pretty much are saying no movement occurs at all since you claim all 3 points are fixed points... which they are not.. its either one way or the other. and since we have to add strut braces to keep the towers from flexing, then the points in question are moveable.

Quote:

I agree on the worthlessness of GM struts. Technically, most GM struts aren't made by GM. They are made by AC Delco and another company I can't remember the name of.

still parts from GM. its a part of gm.

Quote:

To compare a solid, non-moving part, to a multi pieced moving part (i.e STB to a strut) is like comparing peanut butter to carburetor.

no its not. i am comparing the quality of the parts gm uses. above you said the strut brace was from gm which was part of your choice cause it has the "GM name"... so are the struts pretty much and everything in the car... generally speaking on economy cars, GM didnt exactly pull out all the stops to make this thing perform and or be of high quality. as it stands no strut brace aftermarket or gm can out perform another as they all do the same exact thing. i;ve already ran through most all out there...

also for note, gm makes a brace with 2 mounting points, although rare.

Quote:

As for pulling the bolt out... What year is your car, and what year did you pull it out?

mine is a 99
my girlfriends is a 95.
the gm strut brace i got mine from i only have a 13mm socket wrench, and the 10mm nut was on the covertables firewall bolt. i had no 10mm, but didnt really need it with the firewall being as flexible as it was...

needless to say thats what first sparked my questioning of the strength issue. the bolt flexed out with ease. 2000 i believe (due to headlights) from crazy rays in jesup md. this was a little bit after i joined jbo and the rksport board was still there.

take your pic not much was changed on the chassis throughout the years. i can mail ya mine. i have it sittin on the kitchen counter.

The GM STB was originally designed to add structural support on convertibles, and only convertibles; since it had no roof. I looked all through the GM parts on the comp. at my work, and there was only 2 STB ever made for cavaliers. They both mounted to the firewall; only difference between the two was one had a bracket for cruise control.

In certain years of cars, GM used a company (other than AC Delco) which in turn was not a company owned or ran by GM, to make struts; and shocks for larger sized cars back in the day. Therefore not all struts and shocks were made by GM, nor would those particular ones be an official GM part. AC Delco maybe GM, but they also make parts for Ford, Mitsubishi, Toyota, Honda, etc....

I was looking at a firewall (out of the car) when i posted about the thickness. I went to the parts dept, where i work, and pulled one off the shelf and looked at it. Sorry to say, the thickness is different. Perhaps the thickness has changed over time because this was for 2004 car.

Sorry but when I look at the STB it does not come close to moving like a see-saw. You know a see-saw? One kid sits on one side one on other, and one moves up, when one moves down. The middle point there is a fulcrum point. The STB does not do anything of the sort, therefore it can not be a fulcrum point.

I don't see how you can compare a STB to the many parts that make up a strut assembly. Including the mount, mount bearing, actual gas shock, or the other 8-10 components that make up the whole strut assembly. The STB is one solid part, whereas the strut assembly makes up many parts. Meaning an assembly with over 10 parts not working right is not the same, nor can be compared or contrasted to a one-piece part not working.

To say the STB quality is bad, because the strut quality is bad, is almost like saying the ecotec is a POS because the struts they make are POS. So basically the whole car's quality is bad because GM makes bad struts? That is what it sounds like.

To recap, I never said in any post that the GM STB was better than any other STB. I originally said that I go GM is because I get 50% off all parts. My posts say nothing about using any part for the name brand or quality.
(I don't know how to do the quoting thing you are doing, but look back)

Xian G wrote:The GM STB was originally designed to add structural support on convertibles, and only convertibles; since it had no roof. I looked all through the GM parts on the comp. at my work, and there was only 2 STB ever made for cavaliers. They both mounted to the firewall; only difference between the two was one had a bracket for cruise control.

uummmmm yea, i know why they were made and what they are found on. i;ve been here for some time also you might need to check deeper. Mastin from this forum had one, i actually got a chance to see his before he sold his.

Quote:

Re: Homemade Strut bar Quote Reply

Mastin
Thursday, September 02, 2004 5:05 PM

Sounded like the commercial?
And I was really trying not to.

I wanna know the part number for the GM brace with "2" firewall mounting points.s
Wish I didn't sell it off when I got it FROM ebay at the time.

it exists. i never saw it before that, but low and behold it had two points of mounting. i thought it was a fluke, but i doubt it, didnt seem custom done at all.

Quote:

In certain years of cars, GM used a company (other than AC Delco) which in turn was not a company owned or ran by GM, to make struts; and shocks for larger sized cars back in the day. Therefore not all struts and shocks were made by GM, nor would those particular ones be an official GM part. AC Delco maybe GM, but they also make parts for Ford, Mitsubishi, Toyota, Honda, etc....

you;re only as strong as your weakest link. if they have balls to put their name or ac delco on the package, thats their issues. doesnt matter if gm hand makes em or outsources to people in bangledesh... they sell em as theirs, they take the responsibility as part of their quality.

that part of the reason why high end companies dont sell low end parts. bad quality reflects on them.

Quote:

I was looking at a firewall (out of the car) when i posted about the thickness. I went to the parts dept, where i work, and pulled one off the shelf and looked at it. Sorry to say, the thickness is different. Perhaps the thickness has changed over time because this was for 2004 car.

you CANT just look at the edge which is where its doubled up and bent back. i;m talking on the middle of the wall where the bolt resides, which is not doubled up. i mentioned that its thicker in some places, but not in others in my past post.

however keep reading i posted the size of the wall as i went out to measure. i also measured on the bolt itself to double up the measurements and make sure they were consistent

Quote:

Sorry but when I look at the STB it does not come close to moving like a see-saw. You know a see-saw? One kid sits on one side one on other, and one moves up, when one moves down. The middle point there is a fulcrum point. The STB does not do anything of the sort, therefore it can not be a fulcrum point.

did i ever say it moved like a seesaw? not all fulcrums like on a seesaw are solid. i do remember that from physics in 11th grade. fulcrum is basically a pivot point. if you have a seesaw, and construction did a crap job of installing it in the ground, then the middle point or the fulcrum will be flimsy. same as the bolt in question being embedded in a flimsy sheet metal.

for counters reasons, i measured the sheet metal by caliper for amusement. .029 thickness. which is basically 22 guage sheet metal. you can check guages here of sheet metal http://www.evergreen.edu/biophysics/technotes/fabric/sheet_metal.htm

a bolt thats spot welded to 22 guage sheet metal is anything but sturdy. doesnt matter where on earth anyone would be from.

heres the example teach gave on solid and weak points.

if you set up a tent, and the pole in the middle is tethered by two cables to a tree...

if you put the post in dirt, it will flex when the wind blows... why? cause the ground is not fully solid. its stiff, no doubt....but not really all that stable. dirt is easy to dig through. the pole will flex around.

so whats stable? ever put a pole in the ground with concrete around it? people build fences with that. and can surely hold up a tent. a pole with reinforcement such as concrete makes for a STURDY non flexing mounting point. thats why people put concrete in for front yard Basketball goals among other things that benefit froma strong mount point.


which is my point. the mounting point that you put a bolt through is only as good as the surface that you put it on. sheet metal flexes, plain and simple.

Quote:

I don't see how you can compare a STB to the many parts that make up a strut assembly. Including the mount, mount bearing, actual gas shock, or the other 8-10 components that make up the whole strut assembly. The STB is one solid part, whereas the strut assembly makes up many parts. Meaning an assembly with over 10 parts not working right is not the same, nor can be compared or contrasted to a one-piece part not working.

for the third time, and hopefully the final. i am not COMPARING THE PARTS themselves... the maker/brands QUALITY is what i am compraing for the 3rd time. and yes both are in the suspenion area. i can add in the drums as well if need be.

COMMON BOND: suspension of the j-body

both parts come from GM (and please omit the "XXXX" makes that part" stuff. gm puts their names on both.) gm isnt exactly known for building a high quality sport compact. and they arent just gonna magically start, or make one outstanding setup and leave the rest crap. atleast i hope not. ever seen the depreciation value of these cars once they are off the showroom floor. ever wonder why the exterior forum has posts asking about why their car creaks and squeaks....

now you know. these cars arent built with high performance in mind. they arent sports cars.

so its understood, no one is comparing struts to braces, however i am comparing the FACT that both parts are from GM and both are suspension components. so for anyone who is picks their parts mainly cause it has a GM or AC DELCO sticker on it, do realize that there are better and lighter parts out there that do the SAME job, and more efficiently.

in my last post i stated

Quote:

i am comparing the quality of the parts gm uses.

Quote:

To say the STB quality is bad, because the strut quality is bad, is almost like saying the ecotec is a POS because the struts they make are POS. So basically the whole car's quality is bad because GM makes bad struts? That is what it sounds like.

1stly, never said the strut brace is bad. i never said the quality of the brace is bad....
you can search, use the archived search as well. i;ve always said they do the same thing, granted a person installs their brace correctly. and i;ve had people say its installed correctly, but when i check, the bolts are looser than jenna jameson at an all-male jail.

what i have and always have said, is the third mounting part is not a sturdy mounting point and even in my last point added a remedy to help out. please read above.

its not what that sounds like, now you are comparing engines to suspension. (refer to your statement of hotdogs and carbureators...this is where it applies ) dont know if you noticed, but gm still uses the same suspension setup on the J as it was on my 83 cimmaron as well. front struts and drum rears, trailing arm....

it gets the job done, but is of a definate cookie cutter status. also more or less technologically remedial to say the least. but effective since its on a low quality economy car. NOT a sports car.

theyve made a few things different over the years, but not much. suspension wise, GM has had the option of making large changes.... but they havent. even borrowing from other cars including opel and vauxhall

how many posts in this forum alone have you seen on the grand am rear end swap? IRS would be a great addition. but they havent done it. the cheaper they are, the easier they can produce lower priced cars that depreciate very quickly. hence lack of change.

point is the quality aspect of the suspension has decreased over the years in relation to the rest of the market.

Quote:

To recap, I never said in any post that the GM STB was better than any other STB. I originally said that I go GM is because I get 50% off all parts. My posts say nothing about using any part for the name brand or quality.
(I don't know how to do the quoting thing you are doing, but look back)

yea i read. and thas cool brah, 50% off, cant beat that.

Quote:

LOL. True, but I prefer to go with GM parts before going to aftermarket. Not to mention, I get a 50% discount from GM.

but you did say

Quote:

It also adds extra support, since it mounts to the firewall, as well at the struts.

dont know about you, but in the real world, extra usually means better. if i go to a store and i get extra food, thats a good thing.

but the extra point you stated gave more support ....is flimsy and flexible. so in the store analogy, would be like getting extra food, but having the food be spoiled already.


you get more, but its basically useless in terms for the idea of the usage of either issue.

you can use either, but there are better and more effective choices if you chose to indulge

wildweasle gave one instance, larger bolt cause the bolt thats there is thin as a beetles tweeter, and the area to mount in the middle of the brace is wide open. wease, used a larger bolt, which prob has a bigger head and secures a bit better.

another option and prob the next step up would be to install a plate behind the thin sheet metal.



basically i'm just posting facts and what i;ve learned in the past half a year. and one of those things is that sheet metal in any performance sense should never be used as a mounting point of a suspension force.

keep in mind, when you car hits the turns, you have the force of 2600 lbs+ flexing the strut towers. everyone knows this.

now to add to that, do you really think one single bolt thats mounted in SHEET METAL can resist 2600lbs of force realistically.. 22 guage sheet metal at that. its not even 18 guage. which is the cutoff for most sheet metal nibblers, and even that is thin....


also a side note, if a third mount was truly needed or beneficial, rsmracing.com, mantapart, and many other companies after the 7 years i;ve had my car in the least, would have released a brace similar to what you see on integras and a few other cars to where there is a more solid mounting point and can take advantage of it

i;ve done my research thouroughly on this.

GM STB > Aftermarket STB
The end!




>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----

Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:GM STB > Aftermarket STB
The end!

after the fairy tale ended....later people opened their eyes and then reality set in....

My post still don't say that the "GM STB is better than blah blah". If you read the post you are quoting, it says adds extra support which it does.

The STB was designed to add support to the frame of convertible cavalier. Key word, ADD SUPPORT TO CONVERTIBLES, becuase of no roof to do it. Therefore it does add more support.
Talking to you is pointless, you reword what I am saying to what you think has been said.
Discussion is meanless you are saying I've said things by assuming sentence mean something totally different.

Xian G wrote:My post still don't say that the "GM STB is better than blah blah". If you read the post you are quoting, it says adds extra support which it does.

The STB was designed to add support to the frame of convertible cavalier. Key word, ADD SUPPORT TO CONVERTIBLES, becuase of no roof to do it. Therefore it does add more support.
Talking to you is pointless, you reword what I am saying to what you think has been said.
Discussion is meanless you are saying I've said things by assuming sentence mean something totally different.

i'm not rewording crap.

you said "extra support because it mounts to the firewall"....extra means additional over another similar object. i can post the definition if needed. or are you from canada and dont know the definition of the word you used?

i think it goes WITHOUT mentioning any strut brace, gm or aftermarket adds additional bracing over NO brace...duh. i shouldnt have to point out the obvious. gm is heavier, made out of steel...cheaper. aluminum is lighter, costs slightly more, does the same job. most who race or use em for performance try to cut weight from the car.

however a 3rd point embedded in sheet metal, 22 guage no less, is a flexible point. which is pointless to have structurally, besides keeping the bar from chattering against the wall from being so close to it. you cant have extra support from something if its flexing with the motion due to being structurally insufficient. thats like building a building out of rubber I-beams..... those are just facts.

i;ve already email gm tech support and posted the email on here about it. but believe what you want.

thinking 22 guage sheet metal is a sturdy mounting point.... so much for logic. kinda like your post in performance saying the pacesetter header wont fit together without welding huh? something else you need to read up on before posting giving out incorrect info. but like said believe what you wanna believe...

and just so its known, the canada comment isnt a crack on canadians, but after last night having a 2 hour post on a health and fitness forum with one who was french canadian... using the phrase, "i wanna compete in fitness" when everyone gave him links to go here and there, he kept saying we were wrong.

after two hours, we figured out he wanted to compete in bodybuilding. not fitness. similar but not the same in any degree....