traction bars on a 3g?

[Accordtheory]

Has anyone done this yet? I'm considering it, but I don't like open rod ends, ie rod ends without anything keeping the dirt, water, snow, misc shit out of them and keeping the grease in. I'm guessing one would have to be either built from scratch or adapted to fit the 3g.

[MessyHonda]

isnt traction bars for lifted trucks?

[2ndGenGuy]

Yes, you should explain this. The only traction bars I can find online are like radius arms for trucks. I know the 2g has radius arms, per se, that connect the LCA to the front crossmember. I assume the 3g is fairly similar...

[MessyHonda]

yeah we have a full blown independent suspension.....

[EricW]

I've though about it a few times, but i don't need one since I never take my car to the drag strip. When I've looked at it from under the car it looks like it would probably hang down farther every thing else under the car also.

Keep us updated on what you find out, or end up fabing. I'm quite interested in this subject also.

Heres a link for those who don't know what they are.
http://www.modacar.com/products/Honda/Civic/MODATRB/

[88LXi68]

"Traction bars" that the civic/integra guys use is pretty much the SAME set up we already have. My integra does not have radius arms, so they make a set up much like what we already have. Most of the setups do not have bushings so they are quite a bit stiffer.

There used to be a company that made aluminum bushings for our radius arms. I think it was OPM...

[MessyHonda]

looks like justins lower tie bars

[2ndGenGuy]

"Traction bars" that the civic/integra guys use is pretty much the SAME set up we already have. My integra does not have radius arms, so they make a set up much like what we already have. Most of the setups do not have bushings so they are quite a bit stiffer.

There used to be a company that made aluminum bushings for our radius arms. I think it was OPM...

That's probably why I was confused. I wasn't 100% sure on the setup of the 3g suspension, but the 2g and 1g already have front crossmembers with radius rods connected to the lower control arms. I assumed that the 3g was the same way.

I coudln't figure out for the life of me how these traction bar kits are any different. Maybe you would connect them to the rear of the control arm so that there is a radius arm on the front AND back? But I just can't see what that would do...

[military mase]

Yeah that's pretty much like the one justin made. I have that on my car. The same time i get the piping done for the turbo i'm getting another one made from a local race shop.

[Accordtheory]

The traction bar doesn't have any give like the factory radius arm/bushings. It's supposed to dramatically reduce wheelhop and improve 60' times. I'm contemplating the other advantages of being able to replace my front crossmember, like clearance for a down pipe, etc, and the traction bar/crossmember is starting to look more attractive. I don't want to have a part that won't last, though. To me, the idea of having a swiveling joint without any type of boot on it is ridiculous.

[Oldblueaccord]

You have to make something outta of aluminium to repalce the rubber would be the simpliest I could think of. or use nylon. I made some LCA bushings outta of this stuff im testing currently Im thinkink about the strut rods too although Im happy with the moog replacments atm.
http://www.usplastic.com/catalog/pro...C02F50B88F61B5
wp

[Accordtheory]

No way, exposed aluminum grinding on itself and the crossmember!? I'm not sure that you could just replace the rubber with a part that doesn't flex/compress either.

How about using the tie rod ends for a big heavy (american?) car instead of bushings at all?

[89T]

The traction bar doesn't have any give like the factory radius arm/bushings. It's supposed to dramatically reduce wheelhop and improve 60' times. I'm contemplating the other advantages of being able to replace my front crossmember, like clearance for a down pipe, etc, and the traction bar/crossmember is starting to look more attractive. I don't want to have a part that won't last, though. To me, the idea of having a swiveling joint without any type of boot on it is ridiculous.

you'r right it will dramatically reduce wheelhop and improve 60' times, but do you have wheelhop problems.
I dont have any wheel hop on either my 17's on street tires or 14's on bfg 205/50 drag radials.(still on the stock bushings)(as for 60' times i ran a 1.6)
i can understand making more room for like a 4" or a 5" down pipe but unless you are making over 400 hp there is no reason to go that big.
what are you'r intentions? what are you looking for? what are you'r goals?

hyme joints. FTW!

[Accordtheory]

You ran a 1.6 60'? What is your suspension? I never had wheelhop with the stock powertrain, but I could never hook either.

With the b series, I currently can't even run a 3" downpipe.

[89T]

yea i ran a 1.6 60"....
i put in a few washers on the right side sway bar, areospeed progressive rate springs in the front and areospeed coilovers in the rear. Left rear adjusted slightly higher than the right rear.(it puts more weight on the right front, the tire that spun the most for me.)
after that you tune the tire pressure.
2nd gear burnouts..
205/50/14 bfg's- 18psi tire spin ,15psi tire spin but controlable,12psi no tire spin just all out grab.
once you get it tuned there will be a dramatic differance in 1/4 mile time.
i ran a 1.6 60' and a 14.2 at 85mph. at high altitude. it's like a 13.8 at sea level.

[Accordtheory]

my old setup was probably similar, high 13s, but I never could get traction worth shit.

I've observed and really hate a couple differences between my old setup and my b series. With my old setup, my car would always spin bith front tires evenly, without wheelhop. I really liked that, all the other hondas, integras, whatever I've seen would spin the tires unevenly. My current setup spins the right front way more, and has a much worse tendency to wheelhop. (And the motor vibration in the chassis is worse). I'm working on this though. My suspension is revalved bilsteins and sprint springs, (will be replaced by gc coilovers). The car is extremely stiff and unpleasant to drive on the street. I have to duck and lean sideways to avoid getting tossed out of my seat and smashing my head into the headliner on these rough south dakota country roads.

[89T]

that b series has got to be lighter than the a20.
i would weigh each corner of the car find out where you need to shift weight.
sounds like you need to shift weight from the left rear to the right front.
you want a slight rake to the front.
you wont be able to do it till you get coilovers.
stiff spring's in the rear are good because they keep the car from squating helping traction.
once you get it tunned in correctly you'll see a big differance in traction ,and alote of tourque steer.

lol our paved roads are probably just as bad as you'r country roads.
are you running solid mounts?
what size tires and rim's are you running.

[SQ is the SQUAD]

i am actually working on a design for my setup now. click the link in my sig for my build thread and see the pics (twords the end)

[Oldblueaccord]

yea i ran a 1.6 60"....
i put in a few washers on the right side sway bar, areospeed progressive rate springs in the front and areospeed coilovers in the rear. Left rear adjusted slightly higher than the right rear.(it puts more weight on the right front, the tire that spun the most for me.)
after that you tune the tire pressure.
2nd gear burnouts..
205/50/14 bfg's- 18psi tire spin ,15psi tire spin but controlable,12psi no tire spin just all out grab.
once you get it tuned there will be a dramatic differance in 1/4 mile time.
i ran a 1.6 60' and a 14.2 at 85mph. at high altitude. it's like a 13.8 at sea level.

you understand that a 1.6 60' is like a 11 sec 1/4 mile car right ?

I run a 17.2 at 85 mph for referance and my old Scout runs a 16.0 at 89 mph just to throw out a few numbers.

EDIT: I pulled that off this topic I was reading I wasnt trying to start shit or anything

http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/...=1#Post3326877


wp

[89T]

you understand that a 1.6 60' is like a 11 sec 1/4 mile car right ?
I run a 17.2 at 85 mph for referance and my old Scout runs a 16.0 at 89 mph just to throw out a few numbers.
EDIT: I pulled that off this topic I was reading I wasnt trying to start shit or anything
http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/...=1#Post3326877
wp

here is a thread that i think you will find interesting. Traction VS Trapspeed?? http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread/1906896
i understand where you are coming from, but when you run out of 4th gear 100 to 120 feet before the finish line you tend to get a slower e/t.

i have alway's been told to never hit 5th under full boost, unless i want to pick up trans pieces off the track.
maybe i'll try it this year.

the only way i could hang with those boy's is if i can trap 118 mph or so.
here is another cool link on gearing from tire size.
the thing is if i to with a taller tire i'll lose torque at the tire.

http://www.fatboyraceworks.com/gears...raph&Compare=1

[Oldblueaccord]

Ah its just an observation of mine that was all. And to make another 4th gear at 118mph I think you would be at 6k rpm with an A20 or maybe I havent hit a 110 lately. I think your car is faster then you think esp. with a 1.6 60' the rest is all gravey really.


wp

[89T]

that's cool. I just need to pick it up after the 1/8 mile. 11's would be nice though.