cowl shake

will adding a spring tower-to-tower brace reduce the cowl shake on my '06 GT convert? if so, should I get an aftermarket part, or the FoMoCo part? (and if it makes a big difference, why the heck isn't it standard).

I'm not talking about hard use here.....it's just a toy used for normal driving (and 1300 miles in 2 1/2 years).......but the cowl shake is annoying - hit a bump and you have to watch the windshield, dash & fenders dancing. am also not amused since all the magazine reviews crowed about the lack of cowl shake ...... in fact, the 5th covert I've had and the only one where it is a problem.

comments/recommendations appreciated!

Reply to
Itsfrom Click
Loading thread data ...

Yes, absolutely, and it probably doesn't matter which brand you install. But I wonder if there isn't more at play here.

Our original Princessmobile ('88 LX 4-banger) had A-pillars that waved with every passing breeze. CFrog ('93 GT) is much more solid, but will still respond to a hard jolt. I rented an '06 convertible that was absolutely TIGHT, in comparison to the other two. No noticeable cowl shake in the three days I drove it.

I'll join with those magazines. And I have to wonder if there's something wrong with your own setup, other than just the lack of an aftermarket brace.

dwight

Reply to
dwight

It's not going to really help the cowl shake much unless you find one that ties into the firewall, and I don't believe there are any that do that for the S197 Mustang. At best an STB helps in hard cornering. For any other application it's a handy place to grab while working on the motor :). A set of welded subframe connectors would be better for eliminating cowl shake but only a roll cage will truly fix the problem ;).

But I'll echo what dwight observed: why is the shake so bad? The S197 chassis is stiffer than any of the previous Mustang chassis', and Ford was particularly adamant that the 'verts were even more improved. My '03 'vert had very little shake in stock trim and the '05+ cars I've been in have been better than that.

Dan P49Y83+

Reply to
Dan

Thanks for the comments. I'm perplexed too: maybe it's the expectation that there wouldn't be any cowl shake after all the hype. And, seems worse with the top up than down, unlike other cars I've had. "Course, although the suspension is stil mild, it's probably tighter than the V6.

Yes, my past cars had tower-to-cowl braces: doesn't look like a bolt-in is possible with this body. I see braces from $60 to $200......guess it won't hurt to put one on - and I'll have something to lean on when detailing the engine!

BTW.......used to have one of those Continental 4 door converts......beautiful car. Sort of scary when you put the top down and opened all the doors and saw how little structure there was to it. But never a shake, wiggle or rattle. But it weighed 5500 pounds!

Reply to
Itsfrom Click

Edelbrock makes a 3-point for the S197;

formatting link
won't fit the V6, according to a tech support person there: "Thank you for your response, Chris.

I found the listing at AJUSA and supposed it was accurate:

formatting link
Good thing I waited to order, eh?

Thanks again,

Frank S "

"Chris Rowe wrote:

I started with a BMR brace which made significant differences in cowl-shake on a particularly rough section of street near here. I did a before-after-before comparison, and it was clearly worth about 60% reduction in the annoy factor; from "Omeingott is it going to come apart", to barely tolerable.

My second bar is the Shelby eight-nuts model that is affixed to the towers on all studs, four per tower, and "locks-on" to the wrinkle in the tower-mounting surface.

formatting link
I can't tesitfy as to the change in actual shake-reduction over the same surface as the BMR because the City fixed the patch, but it /seems/ tighter yet than the previous brace. It definitely weighs at least twice what the single-bar four-nut version weighs. Previous catalogs listed a 40-dollar cheaper version without the Shelby plate, but I tried to order one and they said "not available".

formatting link
All said and done, I believe the braces - any kind - are worth the trouble on the convertible, but not so much on the coupe.

Reply to
Frank ess

Cool! I hadn't found this one yet. I'll put in my list :). Thanks!

Dan P49Y83+

Reply to
Dan

Just one more word from me, 'cause I didn't make the case as strong as I wanted to :). If all you are going to do is one mod, do the subframe connectors. They *will* help. They are more of a pain because they have to be welded (and you want the welded ones, not the bolt-ons) but it's worth the extra effort. SFC's significantly improve the stiffness of the car.

Then later, when you have some money for bling, get the STB :).

Dan P49Y83+

Reply to
Dan

I did both the STB and SFC (both MM) within two weeks of each other on my 2003 GT vert...

The STB tightened up the front end, made the cowl shake less noticeable and basically gave the car a much more solid feel. In fact, I could feel the difference just backing out the driveway. Truthfully, I was quite surprised because many people claim the STB is a waste, but on a vert I can say it makes a tremendous difference. Maybe it's the MM that makes the difference because it mounts to the firewall in 2 places and is one hell of a solid piece which requires MANY bolts to install.

I've seen other STB with one wimpy connection on the firewall, in the middle, and I doubt they will do as much.

As for the SFC, I got MM full lengths and they seem to effect the rear of the car more. You don't feel that sloppy feeling on turns anymore, but the difference is more subtle than the STB which was a real surprise to me.

For cowl shake test, just suction cup your radar detector/GPS to the middle of the windshield and watch it dance away. With the STB it is much less, still there, but better. I can't say if this holds true for S197 though.

For SFC test jack your car up and notice the space between the doors and the frame change. All gone with the SFC installed.

Enjoy! Steve

Reply to
Habib

I think I might have read one such comment, but I believe that most convertible owners would feel the way I do - a strut tower brace is a blessing. Together with the subframes, they should be mandatory on a Mustang.

dwight

Reply to
dwight

That's not really very noticeable to me. When I jack one rear wheel up the same side front comes up too. Then you know it's getting tight.

Reply to
GILL

Do you have a coupe or a convertible? The convertibles are the ones with the problems.

Reply to
Habib

ANY Mustang can benefit from some good suspension parts. My reply to your SFC test was just to point out a more glaring example of body flex.

Reply to
GILL

No sweat...!!!

I can't say for the S197 verts because Ford did tighten them up quite a bit, but for the SN95 cars, if you jack up the rear on one side and look at the door jams you will see the difference. Some people can't even open the doors with the car jacked up!

To be honest I never noticed it until I went to get tires replaced and the tech pointed it out to me. Mine wasn't too bad but he told me of cars where the doors couldn't be opened with he car jacked on one side.

To be fair, just about any of the verts made do this to some degree. It's just the nature of the beast, but it can be minimized with SFC....

What I can say is that a quality STB and SFC will help the verts tremendously. It's a great first mod.

Reply to
Habib

OK - the STB arrived (factory one) and when I saw how little to it there is (just two bolts on each side) I didn't expect much, but I'd estimate that it reduced cowl shake by more than 50%....fewer rattles.....gives the car a more solid feel, and is all that's needed for m kind of driving.

I agree that it should be standard equipment.........and I can't believe that all those magazines wrote that they were impressed that the new model had no cowl shake ----- they sure must have been paid plenty. Oh well, wasn't Vega Care of the Year?

Reply to
Itsfrom Click

Yes it were. Motor Trend sent me a dozen stickers to put on it, and anything else that held still long enough.

Actually, I owned four Vegas. The only problems I had with them were created by the driver(s), one of whom I refuse to identify. The early ones (1971-72) were better than the later, heavier ones, for my autocross and road-racing uses. Strange that the ones I used on the tracks had what seemed to be bullet-proof engines, while the daily-driven ones failed in notorious ways. Maybe a contribution in the 1971 configuration was the one-barrell carburetor, acting like a restrictor plate to keep it from turning too many revs. It would reach its theoretical red line before the ends of the long straights at Ontario Motor Speedway and Riverside Intrenational Raceway.

I really liked the looks, especially the Kammback wagon, and still think the majors are missing a bet by not offering two-door wagons in the traditional proportions.

See here:

formatting link
One of my friends tells me he thinks I have a thing for underdogs: Vega cars, TR7 convertibles, S197 V6s ...

Reply to
Frank ess

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.