ams Moustache Bar Eliminator
David, you mention that the mustache bar has nothing to do with the rear diff twisting. What forces are being applied to it then to cause your bar to crack? When the mustache bar fails with what you call "proper" side diff supports what happens to the car and driveability. Does the diff just tweak but the car remains under control?
I'm actually not being a smartass so please keep it on topic and don't resume to name calling for your reply.
I'm actually not being a smartass so please keep it on topic and don't resume to name calling for your reply.
I don't think I've gone to any name calling, maybe implying someone is blind, can't read or has no common sense
The rear end is mounted on rubber, two side points with a lot of rubber and the rear stock mustache bar has rubber bushings in the middle at the diff and the ends. I believe the actual problem with the first bars cracking were because they were not built perfectly and when the rear plate was bolted to the rear end the bolts pulled the thin plating in to the diff cover, stressing it and then eventually cracking it. If the car has the solid bushings on the side supports or the complete billet mount we sell on the side of the differential, first the bar would not fail and if for some freak reason it did, nothing would happen, that is my opinion and you can look through the thread to see why that is my opinion. I've said it about 10 times now (not directly that at you 0xdead) but look at the AMS part and the conversation should be over in this thread. There is NO mustache bar left and other than Tom's car with the stripped bolt, NOBODY with our part or AMS has ever ripped the diff out of the car.
I'd be willing to do a video of my own car, launching with NO mustache bar installed on it at all, NONE. I just need to get the car back together first.
The rear end is mounted on rubber, two side points with a lot of rubber and the rear stock mustache bar has rubber bushings in the middle at the diff and the ends. I believe the actual problem with the first bars cracking were because they were not built perfectly and when the rear plate was bolted to the rear end the bolts pulled the thin plating in to the diff cover, stressing it and then eventually cracking it. If the car has the solid bushings on the side supports or the complete billet mount we sell on the side of the differential, first the bar would not fail and if for some freak reason it did, nothing would happen, that is my opinion and you can look through the thread to see why that is my opinion. I've said it about 10 times now (not directly that at you 0xdead) but look at the AMS part and the conversation should be over in this thread. There is NO mustache bar left and other than Tom's car with the stripped bolt, NOBODY with our part or AMS has ever ripped the diff out of the car.
I'd be willing to do a video of my own car, launching with NO mustache bar installed on it at all, NONE. I just need to get the car back together first.
Farming out the bending and welding does not help you much from a legal standpoint. They're still Buschur Racing moustache bars, offered for sale by you to the general public, and in most states in which the part was sold, you'd be responsible for failure to design, and manufacturing defects like this one. Don't believe me? Call your insurance agent and ask him how much product liability insurance would be for building a suspension part that could kill the driver, vehicle occupants, and oncoming or surrounding drivers when it fails...
Saving 13 lbs is a penny saved and a pound foolish if that's the possible outcome.
Your non-engineering logic makes me wonder why Mitsubishi factory engineers designed the rear factory moustache bar to be so hefty -- 16+ pounds of aluminium to perform a function that you say provided no real utility in the first place... One thing is certainly true -- major car companies don't spend large sums of money designing and installing costly parts that the average buyer can't see unless the company has done the engineering and determined that they are essential to the function of the vehicle...
Saving 13 lbs is a penny saved and a pound foolish if that's the possible outcome.
Your non-engineering logic makes me wonder why Mitsubishi factory engineers designed the rear factory moustache bar to be so hefty -- 16+ pounds of aluminium to perform a function that you say provided no real utility in the first place... One thing is certainly true -- major car companies don't spend large sums of money designing and installing costly parts that the average buyer can't see unless the company has done the engineering and determined that they are essential to the function of the vehicle...
Last edited by Most-Wanted; Oct 11, 2009 at 10:31 AM.
Most Wanted, let's go away from Buschur's part to the big picture for a minute, so it's not so emotionally charged.
The concept is that any part that replaces a factory part should be thought out, designed with the level of engineering appropriate to its use, tested to make sure it does what it should and is safe, and then built to conform to the design. That's basic manufacturing process, whether it's a toaster or a race car part. If you want to home build a part and put it on your car, that's one thing. When you offer it for sale to the general public, you assume other responsibilities. That is the rule that applies to Buschur, AMS, or any other company that makes parts of any kind. That's why products liability is expensive and hard to get for manufacturers of parts that have the potential to cause major problems if they fail. Some companies just skip it and take the risk that they'll go out of business after the first injury...
When we modify our cars, we put on parts that vendors sell to us with the express or implied representation that it will replace the factory part and provide a performance improvement, whether directly, or indirectly (such as weight reduction). The vendor/manufacturer is responsible to us to provide a part that does what it is represented to do, and is not defective either in design or in manufacture.
That is true for all parts, whether you are talking about exhausts, body parts or whatever. The difference is that some of those kinds of parts are not inherently dangerous when they fail. If your exhaust does not do what you expect, you may be frustrated or inconvenienced, but in most circumstances, your safety will not be affected. When it comes to other kinds of parts, like brakes or suspension parts, your safety can very commonly be affected. If you have a defect in the design of a brake system, or a stressed suspension part, and you sell more than a few, it's just a matter of time before one of those failures happens in a context where someone gets hurt.
Back to the specific discussion. I'm happy yours has not failed. It does not follow that other people have not had failures, because that's already a fact. Failures that have not been detected, on cars that are driven spiritedly, are a combination that suggests that sooner or later one will fail in circumstances that hurt someone. That's not dreaming up glorified stories, that's what happens.
The concept is that any part that replaces a factory part should be thought out, designed with the level of engineering appropriate to its use, tested to make sure it does what it should and is safe, and then built to conform to the design. That's basic manufacturing process, whether it's a toaster or a race car part. If you want to home build a part and put it on your car, that's one thing. When you offer it for sale to the general public, you assume other responsibilities. That is the rule that applies to Buschur, AMS, or any other company that makes parts of any kind. That's why products liability is expensive and hard to get for manufacturers of parts that have the potential to cause major problems if they fail. Some companies just skip it and take the risk that they'll go out of business after the first injury...
When we modify our cars, we put on parts that vendors sell to us with the express or implied representation that it will replace the factory part and provide a performance improvement, whether directly, or indirectly (such as weight reduction). The vendor/manufacturer is responsible to us to provide a part that does what it is represented to do, and is not defective either in design or in manufacture.
That is true for all parts, whether you are talking about exhausts, body parts or whatever. The difference is that some of those kinds of parts are not inherently dangerous when they fail. If your exhaust does not do what you expect, you may be frustrated or inconvenienced, but in most circumstances, your safety will not be affected. When it comes to other kinds of parts, like brakes or suspension parts, your safety can very commonly be affected. If you have a defect in the design of a brake system, or a stressed suspension part, and you sell more than a few, it's just a matter of time before one of those failures happens in a context where someone gets hurt.
Back to the specific discussion. I'm happy yours has not failed. It does not follow that other people have not had failures, because that's already a fact. Failures that have not been detected, on cars that are driven spiritedly, are a combination that suggests that sooner or later one will fail in circumstances that hurt someone. That's not dreaming up glorified stories, that's what happens.
Most Wanted, let's go away from Buschur's part to the big picture for a minute, so it's not so emotionally charged.
The concept is that any part that replaces a factory part should be thought out, designed with the level of engineering appropriate to its use, tested to make sure it does what it should and is safe, and then built to conform to the design. That's basic manufacturing process, whether it's a toaster or a race car part. If you want to home build a part and put it on your car, that's one thing. When you offer it for sale to the general public, you assume other responsibilities. That is the rule that applies to Buschur, AMS, or any other company that makes parts of any kind. That's why products liability is expensive and hard to get for manufacturers of parts that have the potential to cause major problems if they fail. Some companies just skip it and take the risk that they'll go out of business after the first injury...
When we modify our cars, we put on parts that vendors sell to us with the express or implied representation that it will replace the factory part and provide a performance improvement, whether directly, or indirectly (such as weight reduction). The vendor/manufacturer is responsible to us to provide a part that does what it is represented to do, and is not defective either in design or in manufacture.
That is true for all parts, whether you are talking about exhausts, body parts or whatever. The difference is that some of those kinds of parts are not inherently dangerous when they fail. If your exhaust does not do what you expect, you may be frustrated or inconvenienced, but in most circumstances, your safety will not be affected. When it comes to other kinds of parts, like brakes or suspension parts, your safety can very commonly be affected. If you have a defect in the design of a brake system, or a stressed suspension part, and you sell more than a few, it's just a matter of time before one of those failures happens in a context where someone gets hurt.
Back to the specific discussion. I'm happy yours has not failed. It does not follow that other people have not had failures, because that's already a fact. Failures that have not been detected, on cars that are driven spiritedly, are a combination that suggests that sooner or later one will fail in circumstances that hurt someone. That's not dreaming up glorified stories, that's what happens.
The concept is that any part that replaces a factory part should be thought out, designed with the level of engineering appropriate to its use, tested to make sure it does what it should and is safe, and then built to conform to the design. That's basic manufacturing process, whether it's a toaster or a race car part. If you want to home build a part and put it on your car, that's one thing. When you offer it for sale to the general public, you assume other responsibilities. That is the rule that applies to Buschur, AMS, or any other company that makes parts of any kind. That's why products liability is expensive and hard to get for manufacturers of parts that have the potential to cause major problems if they fail. Some companies just skip it and take the risk that they'll go out of business after the first injury...
When we modify our cars, we put on parts that vendors sell to us with the express or implied representation that it will replace the factory part and provide a performance improvement, whether directly, or indirectly (such as weight reduction). The vendor/manufacturer is responsible to us to provide a part that does what it is represented to do, and is not defective either in design or in manufacture.
That is true for all parts, whether you are talking about exhausts, body parts or whatever. The difference is that some of those kinds of parts are not inherently dangerous when they fail. If your exhaust does not do what you expect, you may be frustrated or inconvenienced, but in most circumstances, your safety will not be affected. When it comes to other kinds of parts, like brakes or suspension parts, your safety can very commonly be affected. If you have a defect in the design of a brake system, or a stressed suspension part, and you sell more than a few, it's just a matter of time before one of those failures happens in a context where someone gets hurt.
Back to the specific discussion. I'm happy yours has not failed. It does not follow that other people have not had failures, because that's already a fact. Failures that have not been detected, on cars that are driven spiritedly, are a combination that suggests that sooner or later one will fail in circumstances that hurt someone. That's not dreaming up glorified stories, that's what happens.
Last edited by Most-Wanted; Oct 11, 2009 at 12:06 PM.
Look I'm not here to argue on the internet. Mine has not failed nor has anyones that I know that has one. I know of about 10. All these cars are abused beyond belief. People, vendors, companies, whatever build new things and **** breaks. Thats part of the designing process, innovation, and par for the course. He made one, a few broke, they changed the design and nothing has happened since. Your posts had hurtful intent and thats that. Stop this ridiculous safety crap. Its not like this part is going to fail running 70mph steady cruise on the hwy or from a traffic light. If it were to fail it would be at a track because you are pushing the limits of the entire car and thats racing. Modify, race, and assume responsibility. Get off the train, it makes you look foolish.
This thread pi**es me off and let me tell all you BR haters why. I had what I am guessing was proly the 2nd one Dave had produced. I got mine the morning the 1st set came into the shop.
In 08 on the last track day my rearend broke. Let me explain how and why.
First off I am a HUGE maintaince freak. Every other track day I changed my transfer case and rear end oil. Apon changing my rearend oil I notice my Moustache Bar was cracked. I thought well damn that sucks. I called up Dave on his cell and told him about it. He said " Bring it up and I will exchange it" So in the mean while I installed my old CAST IRON bar (not aluminum) to race that nextday.
Now when I was removing the Moustache Bar, the bolt that runs through the diff plate was VERY tight coming out. It was tight coming out because of the UP/DOWN movement of the rear diff... NOT SIDE TO SIDE.
So I installed the bolt anyway in to the diff cover knowing the bolt would not tighten down, and figured it would be OK. Boy was I ever wrong.
9sec9, covr4, and 94AWDcoupe. You are all 3 VERY wrong. When my rearend broke and 9sec9 lent me 1 of his to get home that day (still VERY thankful for 9sec9) when I was under the car installing the new diff, the rear end ONLY moved up and down NOT side to side. The bolts for the diff side mounts were still intact in the rear subframe.
So what I am saying here is that that David is right by all means. The bar DOES NOT have anything to do with side to side movement. I was there and done it.... BOTTOM line. Tom I do beleive I remember you telling me at 42 that day that you did have some trouble with the side mounts installing them, I was there when your rearend broke. COVR4, and 94AWDcoupe, go get lost somewhere cause nether 1 of you are racers, and nerther 1 of you can comment in this thread
In 08 on the last track day my rearend broke. Let me explain how and why.
First off I am a HUGE maintaince freak. Every other track day I changed my transfer case and rear end oil. Apon changing my rearend oil I notice my Moustache Bar was cracked. I thought well damn that sucks. I called up Dave on his cell and told him about it. He said " Bring it up and I will exchange it" So in the mean while I installed my old CAST IRON bar (not aluminum) to race that nextday.
Now when I was removing the Moustache Bar, the bolt that runs through the diff plate was VERY tight coming out. It was tight coming out because of the UP/DOWN movement of the rear diff... NOT SIDE TO SIDE.
So I installed the bolt anyway in to the diff cover knowing the bolt would not tighten down, and figured it would be OK. Boy was I ever wrong.
9sec9, covr4, and 94AWDcoupe. You are all 3 VERY wrong. When my rearend broke and 9sec9 lent me 1 of his to get home that day (still VERY thankful for 9sec9) when I was under the car installing the new diff, the rear end ONLY moved up and down NOT side to side. The bolts for the diff side mounts were still intact in the rear subframe.
So what I am saying here is that that David is right by all means. The bar DOES NOT have anything to do with side to side movement. I was there and done it.... BOTTOM line. Tom I do beleive I remember you telling me at 42 that day that you did have some trouble with the side mounts installing them, I was there when your rearend broke. COVR4, and 94AWDcoupe, go get lost somewhere cause nether 1 of you are racers, and nerther 1 of you can comment in this thread
Most Wanted, let's go away from Buschur's part to the big picture for a minute, so it's not so emotionally charged.
The concept is that any part that replaces a factory part should be thought out, designed with the level of engineering appropriate to its use, tested to make sure it does what it should and is safe, and then built to conform to the design. That's basic manufacturing process, whether it's a toaster or a race car part. If you want to home build a part and put it on your car, that's one thing. When you offer it for sale to the general public, you assume other responsibilities. That is the rule that applies to Buschur, AMS, or any other company that makes parts of any kind. That's why products liability is expensive and hard to get for manufacturers of parts that have the potential to cause major problems if they fail. Some companies just skip it and take the risk that they'll go out of business after the first injury...
When we modify our cars, we put on parts that vendors sell to us with the express or implied representation that it will replace the factory part and provide a performance improvement, whether directly, or indirectly (such as weight reduction). The vendor/manufacturer is responsible to us to provide a part that does what it is represented to do, and is not defective either in design or in manufacture.
That is true for all parts, whether you are talking about exhausts, body parts or whatever. The difference is that some of those kinds of parts are not inherently dangerous when they fail. If your exhaust does not do what you expect, you may be frustrated or inconvenienced, but in most circumstances, your safety will not be affected. When it comes to other kinds of parts, like brakes or suspension parts, your safety can very commonly be affected. If you have a defect in the design of a brake system, or a stressed suspension part, and you sell more than a few, it's just a matter of time before one of those failures happens in a context where someone gets hurt.
Back to the specific discussion. I'm happy yours has not failed. It does not follow that other people have not had failures, because that's already a fact. Failures that have not been detected, on cars that are driven spiritedly, are a combination that suggests that sooner or later one will fail in circumstances that hurt someone. That's not dreaming up glorified stories, that's what happens.
The concept is that any part that replaces a factory part should be thought out, designed with the level of engineering appropriate to its use, tested to make sure it does what it should and is safe, and then built to conform to the design. That's basic manufacturing process, whether it's a toaster or a race car part. If you want to home build a part and put it on your car, that's one thing. When you offer it for sale to the general public, you assume other responsibilities. That is the rule that applies to Buschur, AMS, or any other company that makes parts of any kind. That's why products liability is expensive and hard to get for manufacturers of parts that have the potential to cause major problems if they fail. Some companies just skip it and take the risk that they'll go out of business after the first injury...
When we modify our cars, we put on parts that vendors sell to us with the express or implied representation that it will replace the factory part and provide a performance improvement, whether directly, or indirectly (such as weight reduction). The vendor/manufacturer is responsible to us to provide a part that does what it is represented to do, and is not defective either in design or in manufacture.
That is true for all parts, whether you are talking about exhausts, body parts or whatever. The difference is that some of those kinds of parts are not inherently dangerous when they fail. If your exhaust does not do what you expect, you may be frustrated or inconvenienced, but in most circumstances, your safety will not be affected. When it comes to other kinds of parts, like brakes or suspension parts, your safety can very commonly be affected. If you have a defect in the design of a brake system, or a stressed suspension part, and you sell more than a few, it's just a matter of time before one of those failures happens in a context where someone gets hurt.
Back to the specific discussion. I'm happy yours has not failed. It does not follow that other people have not had failures, because that's already a fact. Failures that have not been detected, on cars that are driven spiritedly, are a combination that suggests that sooner or later one will fail in circumstances that hurt someone. That's not dreaming up glorified stories, that's what happens.
I'm done here. My Buschur parts have never let me down ever. And if you want to use my data for test info. Heres what ya got. I've got about 200 passes, launches, burnouts, dyno time, street abuse proven at over 800 whp and launches at 7200 rpm including the burnout. Not one, I repeat, not one BR lightweight component has failed. Thats my data... Where is yours???
Look I'm not here to argue on the internet. Mine has not failed nor has anyones that I know that has one. I know of about 10. All these cars are abused beyond belief. People, vendors, companies, whatever build new things and **** breaks. Thats part of the designing process, innovation, and par for the course.
It's frankly amazing to me that you and vwjeff would even attempt to defend a vendor's part that has obviously failed repeatedly. That just shows your blind loyalty to a vendor, no matter what the facts are. If this failure had happened to any other vendor's part, you'd have a different opinion. On the other hand, mine would be exactly the same...
Enough said.
We simply see things differently. You apparently take the position that someone who sells a part is entitled to test the part on your car to see if its adequately designed and built, instead of BEFORE the part is sold to you. I am just telling you that's not how it works in the real world. That doesn't make me a Buschur hater, it's just the reality of the market place...
That's where you're wrong. The part was not engineered, nor was it built properly. That's why they broke. Metal parts can fail all at once, or they can just fatigue from overstress and fail when they reach the end of their strength. That's what parts that crack do, as the crack propagates until eventual failure. That can happen anytime and often does.
My car is heavily modified. I take responsibility for the work I do on the car. If I do something wrong, or forget to torque a fastener, that's my responsibility. If a part I buy from a vendor fails because of a design or manufacturing defect, that's the vendor's responsibility. Why? Because the vendor sells it to enhance performance, and knows that's the use that the customer is going to make of the part. That's common sense. If you hold a vendor to a lesser standard, then you're the one who is foolish.
It's frankly amazing to me that you and vwjeff would even attempt to defend a vendor's part that has obviously failed repeatedly. That just shows your blind loyalty to a vendor, no matter what the facts are. If this failure had happened to any other vendor's part, you'd have a different opinion. On the other hand, mine would be exactly the same...
Enough said.
That's where you're wrong. The part was not engineered, nor was it built properly. That's why they broke. Metal parts can fail all at once, or they can just fatigue from overstress and fail when they reach the end of their strength. That's what parts that crack do, as the crack propagates until eventual failure. That can happen anytime and often does.
My car is heavily modified. I take responsibility for the work I do on the car. If I do something wrong, or forget to torque a fastener, that's my responsibility. If a part I buy from a vendor fails because of a design or manufacturing defect, that's the vendor's responsibility. Why? Because the vendor sells it to enhance performance, and knows that's the use that the customer is going to make of the part. That's common sense. If you hold a vendor to a lesser standard, then you're the one who is foolish.
It's frankly amazing to me that you and vwjeff would even attempt to defend a vendor's part that has obviously failed repeatedly. That just shows your blind loyalty to a vendor, no matter what the facts are. If this failure had happened to any other vendor's part, you'd have a different opinion. On the other hand, mine would be exactly the same...
Enough said.
Last edited by Most-Wanted; Oct 11, 2009 at 01:49 PM.
David, I should have been more specific. What I meant in my text was from the factory the front mounts do not stop diff from twisting. That is the job of rear mustache bar. You can transfer that job to front mounts by making them solid. Ams dosnt have any breaking because they sold the front solid inserts together with bar eliminator. You on the other hand sold plenty of bars to people who didnt have the front locked solid. And obviously from this thread there were plenty that broke. Your weak little bar is flexing when used with factory front mounts. You are the one being ignorant here selling these rear bars to customers who dont have your solid front mounts. You should be selling them together on your website. You are very lucky that no one has been hurt over this yet and dont look good at all getting attitude being called out on it. This is the Dave of old nobody misses.
For anyone considering a Bushur mustage bar it should not be used with the factory front mounts. The factory front mounts do nothing to stop the diff from twisting. The rubber mounted have give to them. The front nose of diff is likely moving around 1/4 of inch even with Davids so called solid rear mount. These bars never should have been sold without buying solid front mounts!
I bet anyone and every one if you mount a camera under the car point at Daves whimpy bar used with factory front mounts we will put an end to this discussion and see that bar flex on a launch.
I can only laugh when people call me wrong as the proof is already in this thread. There have been at least a half dozen of these cracked already. Thats all the proof anyone should need they are flexing and they are cracking as a result of the flexing
For anyone considering a Bushur mustage bar it should not be used with the factory front mounts. The factory front mounts do nothing to stop the diff from twisting. The rubber mounted have give to them. The front nose of diff is likely moving around 1/4 of inch even with Davids so called solid rear mount. These bars never should have been sold without buying solid front mounts!
I bet anyone and every one if you mount a camera under the car point at Daves whimpy bar used with factory front mounts we will put an end to this discussion and see that bar flex on a launch.
I can only laugh when people call me wrong as the proof is already in this thread. There have been at least a half dozen of these cracked already. Thats all the proof anyone should need they are flexing and they are cracking as a result of the flexing
Last edited by 94AWDcoupe; Oct 11, 2009 at 01:49 PM.
David, I should have been more specific. What I meant in my text was from the factory the front mounts do not stop diff from twisting. That is the job of rear mustache bar. You can transfer that job to front mounts by making them solid. Ams dosnt have any breaking because they sold the front solid inserts together with bar eliminator. You on the other hand sold plenty of bars to people who didnt have the front locked solid. And obviously from this thread there were plenty that broke. Your weak little bar is flexing when used with factory front mounts. You are the one being ignorant here selling these rear bars to customers who dont have your solid front mounts. You should be selling them together on your website. You are very lucky that no one has been hurt over this yet and dont look good at all getting attitude being called out on it. This is the Dave of old nobody misses.
For anyone considering a Bushur mustage bar it should not be used with the factory front mounts. The factory front mounts do nothing to stop the diff from twisting. The rubber mounted have give to them. The front nose of diff is likely moving around 1/4 of inch even with Davids so called solid rear mount. These bars never should have been sold without buying solid front mounts!
I bet anyone and every one if you mount a camera under the car point at Daves whimpy bar used with factory front mounts we will put an end to this discussion and see that bar flex on a launch.
I can only laugh when people call me wrong as the proof is already in this thread. There have been at least a half dozen of these cracked already. Thats all the proof anyone should need they are flexing and they are cracking as a result of the flexing
For anyone considering a Bushur mustage bar it should not be used with the factory front mounts. The factory front mounts do nothing to stop the diff from twisting. The rubber mounted have give to them. The front nose of diff is likely moving around 1/4 of inch even with Davids so called solid rear mount. These bars never should have been sold without buying solid front mounts!
I bet anyone and every one if you mount a camera under the car point at Daves whimpy bar used with factory front mounts we will put an end to this discussion and see that bar flex on a launch.
I can only laugh when people call me wrong as the proof is already in this thread. There have been at least a half dozen of these cracked already. Thats all the proof anyone should need they are flexing and they are cracking as a result of the flexing
My post above states... [B]I HAVE BEEN THERE AND DONE THAT.[B]
Bottom line is that the plate was made to thin, Dave stepped up to the plate and replaced EVERYONES bar that had a problem... few and far in between. Tom was the ONLY 1 that had a problem due to him stripping out the bolt for the side mount going into the subframe.
I raced the hell out of my car every weekend, on the track, 40 rolls whatever. My car seen more abuse than anyone that had a problem with there bars. So your solid mount garbage your talking about is not even relevant to the thread.
I don't own the part exactly because of the defect shown in this thread. There are places to save weight, and places to make sure you have more than adequate strength. If the only people that could comment on a part were those who owned it, this site would have about 30 pages, total.
Suspension parts are even more carefully engineered and tested by the major companies that offer them for sale than other performance parts. Why? In any real auto performance environment, the safety of the participants is a factor that is critically protected. That's done by making sure the part will hold up to the intended use and have a margin of safety well above expectations. Does it cost more? Of course. Is it essential? Yep.