suspension ?- rear lower stress bar?

[amalventano1@comcast.net (Allyn)]

    okok, you got me, i was going on the fact that a 'stress bar' is 99.9% of the time referring to
one that reinforces the chassis (as far as vw nomenclature tends to go). the 0.01% being his weird
'k' bar.
    Sorry, im going 'stress bar' crazy over here. 3 days of designing a tubular frame to replace the
unibody in the front/rear sections of the twin has been creating other 'stresses' for me...
Al

Allyn Malventano, ETC(SS), USN
87 Rieger GTO Scirocco 16v (daily driver, 170k, rocco #6)
86 Kamei Twin 16V Turbo Scirocco GTX ('it has begun', rocco #7)
87 Jetta 8v Wolfsburg 2dr (daily driver, 260k, 0 rattles, original clutch, driveshafts, wheels :)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Bubb" <jdbubb@ix.netcom.com>
To: "Allyn" <amalventano1@comcast.net>
Cc: "brett cooke" <vwscir88@hotmail.com>; <scirocco-l@scirocco.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 7:50 AM
Subject: Re: suspension ?- rear lower stress bar?


> Allyn wrote:
> >
> > anything that attaches to the moving part of the suspension is by definition a sway bar.
>
>
> Really?? 30 years of reading about suspension and I didn't know this!
>
> I hate to be an ass, but this statement is so overly simplistic and does
> a great disservice to less knowledgeable people on the list.
>
> Actually, what Brett described is a stress bar. It's just different in
> that it doesn't brace the chassis, it braces one trailing arm to the
> other. They ARE cantilevered beams and they will deflect laterally under
> load. Whether this addition is a benefit or whether it induces unwanted
> deflections on its own is, perhaps, open to debate.
> It isn't a sway bar!
> Dan