If this really works, why didn't Ford design a strut brace into the front suspension from the factory? I am new to Ford/Mustang (Always owned Camaro's, Firebird's and Vettes), and thinking it may help my '05 GT Convertible.

 

But they have ... there were several models that had triangular braces and others with a simple transverse brace, such as the current GT. There are many locations that could use bracing but it's a matter of cost versus return. If Ford doesn't think it's needed, it will save them a few dollars.

If you want to stiffen the convertible, subframe connectors would be the best place to start. And a triangulated brace between the strut towers and the firewall. That's just my opinion.

 

OK....so does that mean a stiffer, rougher ride? I know this is a mustang not an Escalade, but dont want it too rough. Thanks for the advice about the tie back to the firewall. That makes sense.

 

Stiffening the chassis will not alter the suspension but it will solidify the platform. It will decrease the flex in the chassis and keep the cowl from shaking. I'm sure you've experienced it when you hit a pothole, the car twists instead of tilting. If anything, it should ride better. The chassis acts like a suspension in converting some of the energy into twisting. But the release of the energy is not controlled. The bracing will decrease the amount of energy getting into the chassis and let the suspension do its job, which it to absorb the energy and control its release with the strut/shock.

 

Why did some get the A-Arm brace and others did not.
Ford put them on the SVT COBRA and KR...

The GT500s came with this brace...

This Edelbrock triangulated brace for the S197 Mustang
is the best bang for the buck.

This SHELBY brace uses all 8 of the strut tower attachment bolts...

You wont find the brace shown below in any catalog...
Super Beefy over the stamped OEM brace if you have one from the factory...

 

As mentioned, the strut tower brace was available or part of some models.

Strut tower bars aren't always intended as a performance mod. A chassis that already is fairly stiff in that region will not benefit performancewise from having a STB as much as a car that's less rigid IN THAT REGION.

What STBs do improve is NVH behavior. Even though the STB doesn't add a whole lot of general chassis stiffness, it does add some stiffness locally, and many times it only takes a little stiffness in the right place and in the right direction to chase a few bothersome structural vibrations off to places/frequencies that you don't notice as much. It can certainly feel better, and it's easy to think that all of a sudden the whole chassis got stiffer. You might be interested to know that Buick had STBs on their mid-level sedans, mounted barely 6" ahead of the firewall. I doubt that improved cornering performance (or even the perception of such) weighted very heavily in Buick's decision to include it.

The lower tie bar, between the front "lower arm" attachment points, was apparently made standard fitment at least on the GT models, starting no later than the 2008 models with a late 2007/early 2008 build date. I know this because mine came with one, and this item was never mentioned at the time I was researching and putting my order together.


Norm

 

Yea, I dont see my fender to hood gaps increase during high G turns.
I put a magnetic dial indicator on the hood and referenced it to the fender.
Drove to the skid pad, did some high G runs and the indicator never moved
during high load cornering...
So I would say that the fenders which attach to the strut towers are pretty
darn rigid. At some point, you can brace everything, but the added weight
of said braces can actually hurt performance in the form of unneeded added
weight.

 

As someone earlier said, the STB may actually improve the ride because the suspension absorbs the roughness of the road instead of the body. The body doesn't have shock absorbers, and you feel the twist - think "convertible going over a railroad crossing".