Pierce 6 point brace REVIEW!

[Dpro]

Those look about the same as the weld on my race car's roll cage. I see good penetration and coverage. Cleanup and artisan stack of dimes are not there, but look at the price point. The powder coating is excellent and hides it well.

I think it's pedantic to go after these welds for something that's under the car and perfectly functional.

Wow, you guys just want to turn this into an argument. First off what you accept as good welds or not is on you. Same as it is on me.
Second off, I posted my feelings about the Pierce and offered up an alternative that should be not only be stronger but also lighter and stiffer.
Forged Aluminum tubes are stiffer than Chromoly by nature. Now the whole point of braces is stiffening. One would think in this application it would be favorable as it can be lighter.
In the bike building world makers choose chromoly as a kind of middle ground between steel frame bikes which had flex and aluminum frame bikes which do not.
Aluminum also tended to cost more. So given that if one is looking for stiffening things up then forged tubular aluminum will most likely come out on top every day. Downside is ya it will cost more.

I bought the Pierce based off price and I did not like the weld nothing Pendantic about that and your stement reflects more on you making a judgement of me.
It is out of line so to speak as we were having a discussion of merits of the items.

Now as far as Alex20 goes he just straight seems to be in it for the sake of argument, lol ya he posted a pic of the welds on the SuMMiT brace from the add copy ya the wleds are okay not spectular ... but they are a bit better than the Pierce.
I only discovered more about the SuMMiT after getting the Pierce and not being happy. I am going to to buy a SuMMiT to check it out in the real world vs a picture.

I also did not say the Pierce would not work more so just felt The quailty could have been a a bit better, god forbid I should have that opinion the Pierce Police came out in force. Lol
Funny how its you and alex arguing while the OP actually respected my decision and choice and welcomed me getting it and reviewing it.

I leave it at this I have nothing more to say on the subject as its already way off the rails from the OP’s post and I choose not to carry it on because of that.

 

[LilPartyBox]

just a psa. I've had the 2 pc on for over a year and very early on it took a concrete brick to the face at about 40 mph. welds may be ugly but the bar survived the hit.

but this thread just gave me an excuse to start saving up for the 6pt. thx gents. Especially Jeff for going from the 2 to the 6 and sharing the experience of tangible improvements.





Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[alexrex20]

Aluminum bike frames don't flex? That's news to me. Anybody have weight figures for the Summit 4pt brace and the Pierce 4pt brace?

 

[koozy]

The Summit brace seems to have a better ground clearance though. Hmmmm. Choices, choices.

Here's the best ground clearance I've seen.

They've got a lot of other chassis/suspension offerings for the platform as well.

https://www.dna-racing.it/en/1745-ford-fiesta-mk7-components

 

[alexrex20]

If I remember correctly, DNA racing may have finally found a USA distributor.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[koozy]

If I remember correctly, DNA racing may have finally found a USA distributor.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I think Ron/whoosh was giving hints to that not long ago... not sure if he's pursuing stocking them...

 

[D-resonant]

Here's the best ground clearance I've seen.

They've got a lot of other chassis/suspension offerings for the platform as well.

https://www.dna-racing.it/en/1745-ford-fiesta-mk7-components

Faulty design. No torsion. Little strength in compression. Questionable tensile strength.
(Why the hell would one punch holes through an already thin/weak element AND run hardware through it to deform it?)

Buyer beware.

 

[alexrex20]

Ford used stamp mild steel to brace the unibody to the K-member. This does the same thing but with more attachment points and thus even more rigidity. It also preserves ground clearance and aero which is pretty important on lowered racecars and rally cars. How much deflection do you think there really is among the control arms, crossmember, and unibody? We're talking about millimeters and I'm sure this piece of kit is more than up to the task. It's certainly not any worse than what came (or didn't come) on the car.

Readers beware.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[alexrex20]

Look at a box for example. Remove the top and bottom and there's virtually no rigidity in the walls. Add a bottom and attach it to the sides and voila! You have a box. I'm no scientist but boxes have historically been known to be pretty strong.

This crossmember brace completes the box

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[D-resonant]

Ford used stamp mild steel to brace the unibody to the K-member. This does the same thing but with more attachment points and thus even more rigidity. It also preserves ground clearance and aero which is pretty important on lowered racecars and rally cars. How much deflection do you think there really is among the control arms, crossmember, and unibody? We're talking about millimeters and I'm sure this piece of kit is more than up to the task. It's certainly not any worse than what came (or didn't come) on the car.

Readers beware.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

You bring up Ford stamped parts. Stamped parts are not ever flat. Always curves waves dimples etc.

NOW...back to the original topic.

 

[koozy]

Faulty design. No torsion. Little strength in compression. Questionable tensile strength.
(Why the hell would one punch holes through an already thin/weak element AND run hardware through it to deform it?)

Buyer beware.

The thought crossed my mind and curious if the additional mounting hardware gave them the rigidity they were seeking to go forward with production. Being more towards the center of the car I’m not sure it’s not effective. I want to do some pull ups with it and see how rigid it is [emoji41]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TyphoonFiST]

The thought crossed my mind and curious if the additional mounting hardware gave them the rigidity they were seeking to go forward with production. Being more towards the center of the car I’m not sure it’s not effective. I want to do some pull ups with it and see how rigid it is [emoji41]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd pay to see this...

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Bonesaw]

Aluminum bike frames don't flex? That's news to me. Anybody have weight figures for the Summit 4pt brace and the Pierce 4pt brace?

* EDIT just saw you said 4 point

Pierce 6 point is 12 lbs

The DNA flat brace looks great for clearance and better than stock but dosen't look anywhere near as strong (torsion wise) as the Summit or Pierce braces. If clearance is priority then I'd say the other two are the way. I'm no engineer but looking at the design of the three- I think the "cage" design of the peirce would provide far superior rigidity to the chassis over the other 2. Its one piece that connects three seperate areas where the car can flex. I think of it kind of like a tube frame roll cage just for the the whole front suspension of the car that just locks everything in place. I bet the TB Performance and Summit 2-brace solution( 2pt brace + subframe brace) perform great and give much of the same feel and gains as the peirce. At what percent though... 75%, 80, 90? Just speculating, I have no idea though. Would one be able to decipher a noticeable difference in feel or actual data and or lap times etc. if doing a blind test between the 2 setups?
Anyway I believe variety is the spice of life- its interesting to see different approaches to performance and the more options the better.

There sould be a front bracing shootout LOL!

 

[koozy]

Other than DNA's center brace, their other offerings pique interest.

Rear strut brace.

Negative rear camber plates.

Arms

 

[theblue]

those control arms look nice. the rear strut tower bar probably does something also.

 

[green_henry]

Faulty design. No torsion. Little strength in compression. Questionable tensile strength.
(Why the hell would one punch holes through an already thin/weak element AND run hardware through it to deform it?)

Buyer beware.

How about the Mountune lower chassis brace? Similar design but beefier (and pricier). Is anybody running this?
https://www.mountuneusa.com/mountune-Lower-Chassis-Brace-Fiesta-ST-2013-2017-p/7064-lcb-aa.htm

 

[PartyCar]

*cross-posting from Facebook*

Hi guys, thought I'd jump in with my admittedly inexperienced 2 cents.

So I’m currently running a TB Traction Bar on my FiST at the moment and loving the difference over stock. But in my personal effort to achieve FWD steering nirvana, I’ve began to research what the next step will be. Logic would dictate the TB Crossmember Brace would be next move, but I’ve been reading some really positive reviews about the Peirce 6-Point brace from guys that have upgraded from a 2-point (like the OP's).

Then I got to looking at it closer and noticed that there isn’t something right about the 6-point design. It doesn't tie in the rear LCA mounting point, it only connects the front LCA points to the rear corners of the subframe! Same goes for Pierce's 4-point. Then I looked at the TB Torque Gusset traction bar for the FoST, and sure enough it DOES connect to the rear LCA point. Daniel's design effectively cages the LCA at both mounting locations. This seems to me that it would have a better chance at preventing deflection than the Pierce design. I think it would be interesting to see how the TB 2-point + Crossmember Brace combo vs. the Peirce 6-point does head-to-head for the FiST. It would also be cool to compare the TB Torque Gusset Traction Bar + Crossmember Brace combo vs. the Peirce 6-point on the FoST. Could there be a perceived difference felt between the two? I’m willing to bet yes.

Response from Mr. Check-
“This is precisely why I haven't made a 6 point for the FiST. I've found that there is no need to do
such a thing. The FoST benefited from locking the subframe bushings down and so I did that. Pierce has a history of connect points because they are there not because they are needed….
…..Basically if there is a better way to build a brace, I'll do it. Ego, cost etc doesn't phase me. I just want to build things that work and if it doesn't work, I won't try and sell it to my customers.”

I'll go back and reread through the entire post, but has anyone gotten to test the TB 2-point + Crossmember Brace vs. the Pierce 6-point?

-J

 

[alexrex20]

posts like that is why I got a Pierce and not a TB. js

 

[Bonesaw]

Just throwing this out there... It SEEMS to me that 1 brace connecting 6 points(3 different areas: control arms, subframe and unibody) would be structurally more ridgid than 2 seperate braces connecting the same points(4points with
subframe brace + 2 points with front brace). Wouldn't conventional wisdom be that a single 6 point brace would be stronger/more ridgid than taking same brace and essentially cutting into 2 seperate braces? I understand it MAY be possible that there is "...no need to" make a 1 peice designed 6 point brace as TB Performance states... but does that necessarilly mean that additional chassis stiffining/rigidity of the 1 piece design is unecessary or that more can't be had?

 

[theblue]

It may not help, but it definitely won't hurt.