02-23-2010, 05:15 PM | #1 |
Drives: Rally Yellow Camaro+Avalanche Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,110
|
Hotchkis versus Pfadt Sway Bars
Can I get some Forum expert opinions?
I was leaning towards the Hotchkis set because their complete package includes that sweet subframe chassis bracket. However, since reading some posts (the one in particular that explains how tubular bars are not as strong and prone to weak points at the bends), I'm having second thoughts. Can the heavy weights on this forum weigh in on my observations/assumptions about these two sway bars and let me know if they are correct? Bar Geometry: The Hotchkis front bar replicates the stock bar (it needs to be re-installed under between the engine and chassis). The Pfadt bar is not as convoluted and is installed in a more traditional sense. My intuition tells me that the bar with fewer bends will be more stable and stronger. Minus one for Hotchkis. Bar Type (hollow vs solid): My initial impression of the Hotchkis bar was that hollow would offer weight savings, but (as was pointed out in another thread) if it only saves <10 lbs, then how much can this matter? Also, as I watched and re-watched the Hotchkis install video, I notice that the major bends in their bar indeed seems to be pinched down and oval (like a poorly made exhaust bend). Even with properly heat treated bending, the bar at this point would not offer the same stability and strength. Minus one for Hotchkis. Bar End: The Pfadt bar shows a welded bar end whereas the Hotchkis is a pressed end. Not entirely certain which is better (if there is a difference). But from reading the forum, it sounds like the welded bar end is the preferred choice. Minus one for Hotchkis. Well, there you have it, no points for the Hotchkis bars (at least the front one). Please make your comments and correct my assumptions if they are erroneous. Thanks |
02-23-2010, 05:44 PM | #2 |
Booooosted.
|
I would love to help. But you said heavyweights.
|
02-23-2010, 07:17 PM | #3 |
Drives: the 2nd amendment home Join Date: May 2008
Location: OK
Posts: 14,707
|
I was wrong once a long time ago, but I think they're both hollow bars.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin |
02-23-2010, 08:13 PM | #4 |
Booooosted.
|
Ya but one is hollowier than the other.
|
02-24-2010, 02:56 AM | #5 |
Drives: 2010 2ss ss/rs abm, 2016 2ss/rs hbm Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: N. Phx, Az
Posts: 1,332
|
both make a great product but in the end i went with the hotchkis track pac. it's a complete package designed to work together. i love my track pac.
|
02-24-2010, 12:51 PM | #6 |
Drives: 2010 Camaro, 2006 Z06 Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 3,370
|
Hi Avalnch,
I hope I'm not intruding on this thread, but since it is specifically mentioning our products, please allow me to explain why we have made specific decisions on the design of our sway bars (If it wasn't your intention to have manufacturers chime in, just let me know). My comments below are meant to be referencing Pfadt Race Engineering products only. We stay away from commenting specifically on the products of a competitor, as often as necessary. Our Pfadt Sport Package swaybars, include the following: A solid front bar with one position attachment machined ends, and a hollow rear bar, with three position (adjustable) attachment machined ends. In both cases, we started with specific rates we wanted to achieve for what we consider an appropriate "balance" of the Camaro chassis, with both stock springs and upgraded drop springs. We chose a solid front bar design because it achieved the rate we wanted, with the geometry we chose, and had a minimum weight disadvantage compared to the hollow front bar we had also designed and tested. Quite simply, using the hollow design (of Pfadt Front sway bars, not speaking for competitors) did not have any monumental advantages, due to the weight decrease not being a large percentage (for the rate Pfadt chose). The rear bar, on the other hand, allowed for hollow bar application on a simpler geometry, to achieve the rate that we wanted and delivered a large weight savings. Quite honestly, some people like light components on their car, some are indifferent. We want to convey that it was very advantageous in the design our our Sport Rear Sway Bar, to have the weight savings over an appropriately sized solid rear bar (achieving the same roll resistance). Since the design options allowed us to achieve the same rate, with a heavier design, or a lighter design, we obviously chose the lighter design. This lighter design carries absolutely no negative effects as a result. Both front and rear bars have our machined ends, welded in, and is just one of those design decisions we make to control tolerances better in our manufacturing process, and produce a better product for the customer. We are looking into adding other Pfadt components to our Pfadt Sport Package, for an added cost savings to the customer. These componetns are all designed to work together. There are a couple of directions we may go in. Look for an announcement very soon for details. Or PM me for more info. Thank you for considering our products, let us know if you have any questions! |
02-24-2010, 02:38 PM | #7 |
Drives: the 2nd amendment home Join Date: May 2008
Location: OK
Posts: 14,707
|
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin |
02-24-2010, 03:03 PM | #8 |
Drives: Rally Yellow Camaro+Avalanche Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,110
|
Thanks Pfadt, your response and comments are exactly what I was looking for.
Do you have a chassis brace in the works? What's your view on this item? In my past SOLO-II days running my '84 Z28, there were lots of folks installing poly (or even solid) sub-frame bushings. I don't want to go that far, but I think a chassis brace would defintely help. Thanks again for your valuable input. |
02-24-2010, 03:07 PM | #9 | |
Search Ninja
Drives: 2010 Black 2SS/RS A6 Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Central Ark
Posts: 7,183
|
Quote:
There, I fixed it for ya. Sorry, couldn't resist.
__________________
2010 Black 2SS/RS A6
Halltech CF 102 fed GPI modded intake manifold Bo (knows) White ported TB Kooks LT's/ Dynomax VT Pfadted (springs/sways) Dyno tuned by Rhino and GPI I once parallel parked a train. |
|
02-25-2010, 12:57 AM | #10 |
Booooosted.
|
Serious question here. All aftermarket part are superior to the OEM equipment correct? (or are supposed to be or there would be no reason to do it) (well...... to get the stickers maybe lol)
Is there really THAT much of a difference in them. I mean if the OEM stuff gets a rating say 60 out of 100, is it really so bad to buy a product that gets you a 90 out of 100 and worry about if you might have gotten 91 out of 100? Basically, are the differences going to be all that much? |
02-25-2010, 08:33 AM | #11 | |
Quote:
Regards |
||
02-25-2010, 08:40 AM | #12 | |
Drives: 2010 Camaro, 2006 Z06 Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 3,370
|
Quote:
To put it simply, some customers when "thin-slicing" a products value, will rate the difference between two products (in the example you mentioned), a 90 and 91. But another customer may have the opinion that certain differences are more valuable, and would rate those same two products at a 65 and 95. So it really just comes down to the customers attitude on the situation and the "resolution" in their scale, if that makes sense. Pfadt likes to supply products to meet the demands of all "scales" being considered. With that said, I think the point you are trying to make is that customers are going to see an improvement from all after market products, and people will not be dissappointed with the decision they come to (as long as its not keeping the stock components ). I will agree with you, but the key is determining the value of "improvement" relative to another product. |
|
03-01-2010, 08:52 PM | #13 |
Drives: 1st through 5th gen Camaros Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sante Fe Springs, CA
Posts: 458
|
Hi Avalnch - Seems like you've already made up your mind based on info in the forums, some of which came from less than neutral sources. Just to clarify - most OEM bars on high performance vehicles are made from hollow-tube high-strength steel. This is the case with the Z06, the SS, Porsches and others. We respect those who go with solid and could easily do so if we thought it was the way to go, but we choose hollow. Since we actually design/manufacture bars for OEs as well as the aftermarket, our parts undergo rigorous durability, performance and track testing.
We feel hollow is just better due to excellent strength and weight savings. Factory Camaro sway bars are hollow, and the bottom line is the necking down does not create a weaker point as others are erroneously claiming. The welded on ends are fine. We like using the same material throughout the sway bar for maximum material consistency. Therefore, we forge our sway bar ends which is a complicated process involving a special furnace, custom tooling and machinery and a metalsmith. As long as sound engineering principals are followed either method works well. We respect the Pfadt products because like us they use sound engineering and meaningful design. Can’t comment on some of the other brands mentioned in this thread because they seem to be perpetually out of stock and claim to be changing the design often. We read that their front bar will be four position adjustable on the next run. We prefer to determine, through track and street testing, the maximum sway bar rate for the front and then fine tune, adjust roll stiffness/ handling balance with the rear sway bar. The method always worked well on our race cars. Bottom line: our parts are designed, track tested, and built for maximum durability, performance, ride comfort and simple installation. The track pack (Chassis Brace, Springs and Sways Bars) is a proven performer that works extremely well with fantastic handling and a ride that won't get old after a few weeks. |
03-01-2010, 09:06 PM | #14 | |
Drives: Blk/Blk 2018 Sierra SLT Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Golden State
Posts: 2,925
|
Quote:
Hey Aaron, I am VERY interested in the additional products you will be adding to the sport package. I just bought some BMR Trailing Arms, but I haven't installed them, and would really like to have a package that is all designed to work together instead of having BMR trailing arms/toe rods and Pfadt springs/sways. Let me know, Im willing to hold out but the wait is killing me!!
__________________
SOLD: 2SS LS3 M6 - MGW - Dynatech LT's HF Cats - Magnaflow Street CB - ADM Race CAI - Pedders Xa Coilovers - Pfadt Sways
TRADED: 2016 2SS M6 |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hotchkis: Tuned Suspension Setups | Springs | Chassis Brace | Sway Bars | FREE S&H | AJ@ECSMotorsports | Suspension / Chassis / Brakes | 80 | 11-17-2010 02:28 PM |
Pfadt Sport Sway Bar Package | PfadtRacing | Wheels and Tires Talk Sponsored by The Tire Rack | 58 | 10-08-2010 01:59 PM |
MTI, Pfadt, Hotchkis or Pedders sway bars | flht99b | Suspension / Brakes / Chassis | 6 | 01-21-2010 01:25 PM |
Pfadt Springs and Sway Bars In Stock! *Package Deal*! | PfadtRacing | Suspension / Chassis / Brakes | 0 | 10-14-2009 05:41 PM |