Carpokes

Pefa wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2026 1:37 am I have the CF 968 TRS replica strutbrace from Patrick (Tielecar) on my 968 TRS replica.

Great product.

chris white wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:38 am Any strut bar with a heim joint is a wasted oppertunity to stiffen the front of the car.
The rear bar is a complete mystery to me - how is supposed to stiffen anything?

chris white wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:38 am Any strut bar with a heim joint is a wasted oppertunity to stiffen the front of the car.
The rear bar is a complete mystery to me - how is supposed to stiffen anything?

MoeMonney wrote: Mon Apr 13, 2026 8:28 am

Pefa wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2026 1:37 am I have the CF 968 TRS replica strutbrace from Patrick (Tielecar) on my 968 TRS replica.

Great product.

I reached out to them by email and WhatsApp but have not heard from them. Nicest out of the bunch in my opinion.

chris white wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2026 8:54 am OK, the only thing that rear bar can do is prevent the C pillars from both bowing outwards or inwards at the same time. Since they are using heim joints at the ends they dont add twisting strength. BTW - over the years I have seen several 944s end up upside down at the track, the roof never has caved in, dosnet even touch the roll cage. So i am very satisfied with the strenght / stiffenss of the C pillars. A bar with articulated mounting points will not do anything.
Stopping hatch rattle?.....sure, maybe it makes you more attactive and skinnier too!

spacecad3t wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2026 7:11 pm Both approaches have their pros and cons, but Ive found a fully welded brace can introduce too much preload and unwanted flex elsewhere. While heim joints have their weaknesses, they will do the job of preventing the towers from pulling apart, and allow control for preloading. Anything short of full triangulation is trade offs...

chris white wrote: Thu Apr 23, 2026 5:13 am

spacecad3t wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2026 7:11 pm Both approaches have their pros and cons, but Ive found a fully welded brace can introduce too much preload and unwanted flex elsewhere. While heim joints have their weaknesses, they will do the job of preventing the towers from pulling apart, and allow control for preloading. Anything short of full triangulation is trade offs...

the front strut bars with heim joints are better than nothing. the factory Cup Car strut brace is a very good design - but requires welding in mounts.
Now the rear 'brace' is just a pretty useless item in my opinion. I really doubt that area flexes and a bar with two heim joints does nothing for twist. Maybe a slight help if you drop the car on its roof for a significant height!

This C pillar brace is specifically designed to stop body flex on the back of the 944. This flex during cornering allows too much weight shift in the rear, destroys the rear window seal, can cause cracks and deform the body. The back windows always come loose up at the top because of the body flex in that area. This supports that area as a compression/tension brace and keeps it from uneven snap load weight distribution.

spacecad3t wrote: Thu Apr 23, 2026 7:38 am
I don't think they are over claiming anything here. I do more or less agree that it's a hyper specific "upgrade". My use case is not a common one, as I road rally and autocross the car, I don't tend to push it hard enough to introduce a roll... I just need something to provide a little compression reduction and carry some spares so they not flying around the car, as that is always a requirement of any event, no loose items...