71-73 Monte Carlo Bar Installed

[Mister 4x4]

Very Nice, OpiemusRex! It reminds me of the one I saw in the car that inspired me to get mine.

 

[Milalynne]

Very Nice, OpiemusRex! It reminds me of the one I saw in the car that inspired me to get mine.
View attachment 86645

I bought the straight Monte Carlo bar and of course it doesn’t fit because the distributor is in the way. I’m trying to make sure I get the right one. The one in this photo would work for me do you know the brand or anything about it where I can find it??? Thx either way

 

[tony-muscle]

I bought the straight Monte Carlo bar and of course it doesn’t fit because the distributor is in the way. I’m trying to make sure I get the right one. The one in this photo would work for me do you know the brand or anything about it where I can find it??? Thx either way

I don't know yours, but it appears that many of these MC bars attach to the apron next to the towers. However, IMO for the bar to be the most effective it should span between the spring mounts at the top of the towers.

 

[Spike Morelli]

Has anyone done any investigating as to what the racers actually used, if anything, for road racing a '71-'73? I think many people, most people, just add the bar for that bad news, " my car really needs this attitude". I CAN tell you however, that when I used to work at a Mustang restoration shop, I was doing some suspension work on an earlier Mustang/Shelby, and I removed the bar with the wheels on the ground, then lifted the car with the wheels off the ground, and found you can't get it back on. The front end unibody flexes enough to prohibit the bolts lining up . The bar is actually necessary on the earlier cars. I know also that the Boss 302 cars had a reinforcement bar added that connected the lower control arm mounts together under the oil pan as well, for additional rigidity. Our cars have a welded-in heavy crossmember under the pan, which may help in this area, I don't know. Some Trans-Am racer likely has the low-down.

 

[tony-muscle]

Has anyone done any investigating as to what the racers actually used, if anything, for road racing a '71-'73? I think many people, most people, just add the bar for that bad news, " my car really needs this attitude". I CAN tell you however, that when I used to work at a Mustang restoration shop, I was doing some suspension work on an earlier Mustang/Shelby, and I removed the bar with the wheels on the ground, then lifted the car with the wheels off the ground, and found you can't get it back on. The front end unibody flexes enough to prohibit the bolts lining up . The bar is actually necessary on the earlier cars. I know also that the Boss 302 cars had a reinforcement bar added that connected the lower control arm mounts together under the oil pan as well, for additional rigidity. Our cars have a welded-in heavy crossmember under the pan, which may help in this area, I don't know. Some Trans-Am racer likely has the low-down.

Without a stress analysis or with/without measurements in a road track it may be hard to know. I think adding a bar between the spring bolts of the tower reinforces that whole assembly (instead of apron to apron). If for some reason the design doesn't need it I can't see how it will hurt. In my thoughts, besides gaining stiffness I am also gaining unibody longevity. These are 50+ year old cars and when you drive them hard in the track you can use the stiffness to reduce the chances of cracking. I use the custom made bar I showed in earlier posts and subframe connectors. I know I need more rigidity because after a track day I sometimes notice that the doors don't close as easy. Eventually they go back to closing properly on their own or after lifting, which is an indication of the body flexing.