That's not quite true though. For an item to be able to affect flex there has to be relative displacement of the two attachment points. For a front torsion bar, this relative displacement is all but between the two stub axle yokes, where there certainly is flex. For rear torsion bars, this is all but between the two bearing hangers. With these already connected by the rear cross member and the rear axle, I don't see how the rear torsion bar can add much to the equation but I'll give it the benefit of doubt for now.
With seat stays however, if there is flex relative from one stay to the other, which could only be the case if the rear bearing hangers move relative to each other, is anybody suggesting the fibre glass seat is adding anything that the rear axle, rear cross member and rear torsion bar isn't already?
Further, if there is flex between the bearing hanger and the existing seat mount/stay, why wouldn't the additional stay be fitted from hanger to the existing seat mount/stay rather than through a fibre glass seat?
Finally, we have to deal with the little bit of flex from the seat relative to the bearing hanger. If there is any flex in this area, what would the addition of a seat stay achieve? Perhaps an increase in rear load transfer, I'd have to think about it some more, but even if this were so, the affect would be minimal.
|
|