Cadillac Owners Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
94 FWB, 93 SDV, 94 FWB (sold), 90 Brougham (sold)
Joined
·
3,730 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Alright, I was wondering if it would be advantageous in any way shape or form to try and brace the front end of the 90 more so than stock. When I first got the 90, I was coming off of an 85 Parisienne, an undoubtable B-body. Driving the Brougham was like driving a Corvette compared to the roll of the Pari. I like the setup the Brougham has in stock form with the bracing arms under the hood, but I'd like to know if it would help to brace over the top of the engine. I can't afford professional equipment, but would a piece of steel tubing over top the engine work?
 

·
Registered
94 Fleetwood Brougham
Joined
·
7,534 Posts
Anything will help increase structural integrity. So it can't hurt. But may be difficult to get some steel that is stiff enough to do some good. And there isn't much to bolt to (at least on my 94).

I added one on my 80 TTA and it helped. I added the front to strut tower braces off of a 87 Deville to my 91 Bonneville, and then added a strut tower brace from a 91 Cadillac too, really helped a lot. Just more responsive at the SOTP.

Take a look for the G Bodies and the "rear seat brace". I am not sure if our cars need it, but if they do, by all means, check into it. I think the Monte SS Aerocoupe came with the RSB factory. The rest didn't. The G Bodies also get some rear suspension bracing too that I haven't seen for the B/D cars that likely could benefit some.
 

·
Registered
94 FWB, 93 SDV, 94 FWB (sold), 90 Brougham (sold)
Joined
·
3,730 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
N0DIH said:
But may be difficult to get some steel that is stiff enough to do some good. And there isn't much to bolt to (at least on my 94)
Hmm, do you think some 1" square tubing would do it? I know I've got at least 1/8th of an an inch, maybe 3/16th of an inch of bolt sticking up through the top of the nut on the bracing now, that would be enough to get some steel in there I would think. I'm gonna take a look, see if it's even possible to remove the stock bolt, maybe I can put some stronger threaded rod in there instead.
 

·
Registered
1991 Cadillac Brougham D'Elegance 5.7 Litre, 1994 DeVille
Joined
·
6,796 Posts
I wouldn't bother. It's not going to make any difference because none of the front suspension is attached to the fenders. The black frame under the hood that all those metal bars are bolted to is part of the frame of the car.
 

·
Registered
94 Fleetwood Brougham
Joined
·
7,534 Posts
I have found on my T/A, the best improvement was to make sure the cross member to lower control arm to frame braces are there. My 94 is welded. My T/A had bolt in ones from the LCA to the frame. B/D Bodies had bolt in that connected all three up.

My T/A had one missing when I got it, you had to remove it to change the oil filter, so someone carelessly left it off. I got one from a subframe a friend of mine had laying on the ground from a rear ended 10 mile Pace Car T/A that was slated for his SD455 T/A. They ended up selling them all.

Upper body helps keep it stiff keeps the body from being to shifty and loose. That is why GM put them in factory. Sorta like the Monte Carlo Bar and Escort Braces of the 60's. But unless you have a unibody car, they don't too too much, but they do offer better structural integrity of the body. But it isn't gonna transform the cars handling into a Corvette corner burner. But the cars should do fairly well.

Honestly, putting in the aluminum bushings in place of the body bushings gains more, but does give you a harsher ride, more like the FWD Unibody cars have. You can't beat the body on frame for road isolation!
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top