They just felt so soft... even softer than my old eibach springs 
Videos are uploading now
Videos are uploading now
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Phew, this thread has moved on since I last looked at it..
My reasons why I removed the HPAS and fitted the EPAS
Less to remove and refit when engine comes out.
Less to go wrong when it fails - can still steer with no worry about fluid on belts etc
That's about it.
My set up cost me,
£45 for ebay controller
£40 for full EPAS rack (Was £60 had £20 refunded for slight damage to ECU socket)
Take of £30 for the Hyd pipe I've already sold on
Finally a mod that hasn't really cost the earth!!
All fitted fine, though not driven with it yet as the Cup went straight to 519's for a rewire.
My reasons why I removed the HPAS and fitted the EPAS
Less to remove and refit when engine comes out.
Less to go wrong when it fails - can still steer with no worry about fluid on belts etc
That's about it.
My set up cost me,
£45 for ebay controller
£40 for full EPAS rack (Was £60 had £20 refunded for slight damage to ECU socket)
Take of £30 for the Hyd pipe I've already sold on
Finally a mod that hasn't really cost the earth!!
All fitted fine, though not driven with it yet as the Cup went straight to 519's for a rewire.
_WILL_
ClioSport Club Member
172 Cup
I completed the conversion last weekend and have been driving the car on road all but one day since:
This is where I stand on the conversion.
I will start with a quick chassis spec of my car so everyone in on the same page:
Standard Engine with all mounts inc dogbone uprated.
Polybush front wishbones and inner ARB mounts
Whiteline rear ARB
Koni's
Sportlines
OZ F1's 15"
UniRoyal Rainsports (which are crap so I will hold full judgement until these are swapped!)
25mm Spaces on the front
10mm with -1 deg cambrer on the rear
and now ePas including brand new dci Rack.
I will start by saying the setup is not as good as the original hPas system. Steering feel on centre is not as good, particularly if the steering is in a steady state around centre ie on the motorway. TBH I am not too bothered by this and it is very common in most older ePas systems, the newer systems such as the ones in the new Porsche's and Range Rovers seem to have removed this. This seems to be reduced by adjusting the steering weight as well. By weighting up the steering slightly the "deadness" appears to be hidden slightly, it is still there if you look for it but less noticeable.
Off centre and during continuous inputs the system is just as good as the hPas system, I have no complaints. Feel is good enough, not quite as good as hPas system, but I have recently owned a mini cooper S R56 and so am quite accustomed to similar feel from that. For me personally feel is not everything and so as said before I have no complaints.
Feedback from the system is not great. As you all know the rack is solidly mounted, rather than the compliant mounting of the standard setup. This produces a lot of, in my view, unwanted feedback. This is mostly at slow speeds and in traffic etc. It is hard to explain but you are very aware that what you are holding is bolted directly to the subframe. Sometimes I get pretty terrible steering wheel shimmy when in traffic for example. I will video it if anyone is interested. I admit that this is partly down to the uprated engine mounts as well, but I never had the issue on the original set up. As said earlier steering feel is poor in steady state, on centre driving but good on consistent input and / or off centre (cornering etc.).
One thing I have noticed and like is the system, if on the lighter end of the setting allows you to react very quickly, it was something I was worried about, being able to "catch it out" but that has never happened so far and it great for catching a bit of lift off over steer, it is probably no better than the standard system but I am happy it is not worse.
I do sometimes get odd changes in assistance when parking etc. Like it changes assistance randomly every now and then. Its a little odd and not really a problem, just something I have noted. It also take a second or to to switch on after start up, it caught me out this morning when I was in a rush!
The last thing I would say is this and this is my personal view:
I hope this is of interest to people, I am sorry it is a bit rambling and that I have repeated my self a bit but I have just written everything I could think of that I have noticed so far. If you have any questions then let me know.
This is where I stand on the conversion.
I will start with a quick chassis spec of my car so everyone in on the same page:
Standard Engine with all mounts inc dogbone uprated.
Polybush front wishbones and inner ARB mounts
Whiteline rear ARB
Koni's
Sportlines
OZ F1's 15"
UniRoyal Rainsports (which are crap so I will hold full judgement until these are swapped!)
25mm Spaces on the front
10mm with -1 deg cambrer on the rear
and now ePas including brand new dci Rack.
I will start by saying the setup is not as good as the original hPas system. Steering feel on centre is not as good, particularly if the steering is in a steady state around centre ie on the motorway. TBH I am not too bothered by this and it is very common in most older ePas systems, the newer systems such as the ones in the new Porsche's and Range Rovers seem to have removed this. This seems to be reduced by adjusting the steering weight as well. By weighting up the steering slightly the "deadness" appears to be hidden slightly, it is still there if you look for it but less noticeable.
Off centre and during continuous inputs the system is just as good as the hPas system, I have no complaints. Feel is good enough, not quite as good as hPas system, but I have recently owned a mini cooper S R56 and so am quite accustomed to similar feel from that. For me personally feel is not everything and so as said before I have no complaints.
Feedback from the system is not great. As you all know the rack is solidly mounted, rather than the compliant mounting of the standard setup. This produces a lot of, in my view, unwanted feedback. This is mostly at slow speeds and in traffic etc. It is hard to explain but you are very aware that what you are holding is bolted directly to the subframe. Sometimes I get pretty terrible steering wheel shimmy when in traffic for example. I will video it if anyone is interested. I admit that this is partly down to the uprated engine mounts as well, but I never had the issue on the original set up. As said earlier steering feel is poor in steady state, on centre driving but good on consistent input and / or off centre (cornering etc.).
One thing I have noticed and like is the system, if on the lighter end of the setting allows you to react very quickly, it was something I was worried about, being able to "catch it out" but that has never happened so far and it great for catching a bit of lift off over steer, it is probably no better than the standard system but I am happy it is not worse.
I do sometimes get odd changes in assistance when parking etc. Like it changes assistance randomly every now and then. Its a little odd and not really a problem, just something I have noted. It also take a second or to to switch on after start up, it caught me out this morning when I was in a rush!
The last thing I would say is this and this is my personal view:
- If you have a good hPas system with no issues, do not convert it unless you have another reason to (space in engine bay etc.)
- If your rack is good and a pipe / pump has gone do not convert, the pipe / pump change isn't hard enough to warrant this conversion.
- If your rack is buggered (like mine was (and pump leaking)) then do consider it. Its a fairly easy conversion, and it will give you 70% of what a good condition hPas system gives for a lot less money, and it will feel a lot better than the knackered hPas system, plus the adjustability is quite fun. I think it cost me £140 for everything including postage.
I hope this is of interest to people, I am sorry it is a bit rambling and that I have repeated my self a bit but I have just written everything I could think of that I have noticed so far. If you have any questions then let me know.
GrahamS
ClioSport Club Member
335d
Will, not rambly at all, exactly what is needed for people to make the decision. I will add my comments after a month or so of driving in various conditions, a track day and long motorway. My dci standard has epas and does what you have described when in a straight line.
Interesting view points
I have same tyres, same engine mounts, same spacers, same camber, same rear ARB....
I don't class feeling like your holding the wheels as bad feedback - I like feeling more going on in my hands. I've felt absolutely no "shimmy"ing at all either - not on the road to skegness, or on track, or on the slow crawl to work. It's been brilliant.
I do agree with it on the lightest setting it feels a bit dead in the center - but the lightest setting really is supposed to be for slow manouvering. As soon as I get moving I turn it down to around half and it feels spot on
Oh just to add though I do agree with your summary
For 90% of people it's a waste of time, but if you want to shave a little bit of weight and add more track feedback, or your current pipes are all cracked and about ready to give up like mine were then it's well worth doing
For 90% of people it's a waste of time, but if you want to shave a little bit of weight and add more track feedback, or your current pipes are all cracked and about ready to give up like mine were then it's well worth doing
NorthloopCup
ClioSport Moderator
It also free's up a lot of space to run an eaton m45/62 supercharger as well.
It also free's up a lot of space to run an eaton m45/62 supercharger as well.
Certainly very useful for that application
Currently running fine on my car fingers crossed, life saver for £30-00.
Just a note on the Bilsteins, yes as I quoted a little soft but tbh get the geo set up correct and run not far off standard ride height and you'll change your mind!I have but would still like a the springs a little stiffer on the front and rear, mine was set way to low and became even worse after it settled.
I'll be looking at the EPAS as for me any weight saving is a bonus along with the current set up is looking tired, leak from PAS switch and possibly small one near the pump not sure if it's run off.
Glad your happy with the set up, looks like it went ok at cadwell, but get 4 good tyres on and and your away.
Regards Russ......
182FF
Cup_Phil - heavy steering isn't the same as feedback. It's just heavy steering. The reason epas lacks feedback is due to the inertia of the motor and how that smooths out signals in exactly the same way as a car's flywheel does for the engine.
Some epas systems use a rack mounted motor with overall less inertia than a column one. They are bigger as NVH and packaging isn't such a concern. All systems go through a gearing which amplifies the torque going into the column, but also amplifies the inertia of motor by the same amount.
When it comes down to it - epas is lighter, smaller, cheaper, more reliable and easier to install on the line. If it was better for steering feel then it would no doubt have been fitted to our cars from the start.
The only way I can see for epas to be better is when higher torque and lighter motors are used, but that'll be expensive as it would require brushless motors made of exotic materials.
Don't get me wrong guys, I'm not disagreeing with anyone's decision to convert. My point is just heavy steering isn't necessarily steering with good feedback. Even turning off the epas still leaves you with the motors inertia, the flywheel is always there.
Some epas systems use a rack mounted motor with overall less inertia than a column one. They are bigger as NVH and packaging isn't such a concern. All systems go through a gearing which amplifies the torque going into the column, but also amplifies the inertia of motor by the same amount.
When it comes down to it - epas is lighter, smaller, cheaper, more reliable and easier to install on the line. If it was better for steering feel then it would no doubt have been fitted to our cars from the start.
The only way I can see for epas to be better is when higher torque and lighter motors are used, but that'll be expensive as it would require brushless motors made of exotic materials.
Don't get me wrong guys, I'm not disagreeing with anyone's decision to convert. My point is just heavy steering isn't necessarily steering with good feedback. Even turning off the epas still leaves you with the motors inertia, the flywheel is always there.
The corsa one gets used a lot, not greatly different in operation though TBH.
_WILL_
ClioSport Club Member
172 Cup
Motorsport applications will be for sevisability and weight reasons. Feel can be sacrificed for these reasons in Motorsport. In road car applications, cost, ease of fitment and in theory CO2 reductions play a part. If steering feel is not important then a car will have ePas, if not now then in the very near future.
Something I wanted to say from my earlier review is the "bad" feedback I am getting. I think it has been misconstrued that I am getting extra feedback from the wheels because of the removal of the compliant mounting of the rack. This is not true, I am getting feedback from the subframe and as a result the engine, that I do not want. If anything it could easily be masking what "good feedback" is there. I don't think it is as once you get some revs and speed into the car the "bad" feedback disappears.
I am still very happy with the results I have and am still getting used to the car now I have steering that allows me to drive the car properly and confidently. I also think that if I had spent big money on a new hPas system I would not be any happier than the 140 quid and results I have now.
Something I wanted to say from my earlier review is the "bad" feedback I am getting. I think it has been misconstrued that I am getting extra feedback from the wheels because of the removal of the compliant mounting of the rack. This is not true, I am getting feedback from the subframe and as a result the engine, that I do not want. If anything it could easily be masking what "good feedback" is there. I don't think it is as once you get some revs and speed into the car the "bad" feedback disappears.
I am still very happy with the results I have and am still getting used to the car now I have steering that allows me to drive the car properly and confidently. I also think that if I had spent big money on a new hPas system I would not be any happier than the 140 quid and results I have now.
Yeah I didn't bother with it. I think it's only to shield it a bit from water/dirt and I don't use the car that much so didn't bother
mikekean
ClioSport Club Member
996 C4S, 135i, E30x2
Right guys, ive bought the Twingo rack off Cup-Phil. Im going to get mounting tabs on the back of the rack machined by a couple of degrees to change the mounting angle of the rack to get the pinion more centred in the bulkhead, I will then add angled shims to the front to ensure it is bolted on securely. I will also get the pinion machined so that the column will bolt on further down as the Twingo pinion is considerably longer than the Clio one.
I decided against the DCi rack as this is going on my rally car and i cant afford this risk of the DCi one not being upto the job. I will report back once i have some progress.
I decided against the DCi rack as this is going on my rally car and i cant afford this risk of the DCi one not being upto the job. I will report back once i have some progress.
182FF
Why not just leave the standard rack on and "short circuit" the pas pipes?
Glad it made it to you mate
_WILL_
ClioSport Club Member
172 Cup
I just don't see why everyone thinks the Twingo Rack is stronger. I think if it was me I would choose the DCi rack over the Twingo Rack anyway, assuming the twingo rack is no faster. Also if you are mod'ing it I would defiantly choose the DCi rack.
But if the twingo rack is faster the. I do see the point and will be tempted to do it if it all works out.
Last edited:
The twingo rack is WAY stronger.. seriously.
Both mounting points are part of the casing.
The passenger mounting point on the dci rack I could bend with a screwdriver
_WILL_
ClioSport Club Member
172 Cup
It looks more substantial as it has to be as its cast alu not steal.
I got a brand new dci rack, which I think is still used in some mk3's as well for 60 quid delivered.
_WILL_
ClioSport Club Member
172 Cup
I imagine if you looked at the CAE for the two parts you would be surprised. Plus it is being modified in the areas you think are stronger.
The reason you can't bend the mount on the twingo rack is because the cast alu has different properties than the steal. Also the bolt by the pinion is the important one is require the increased stiffness.
Also I would prefer to bend the mount on the dci rack slightly, ten bend it back and maybe weld some stiffening brackets on, than crack and be forced to replace the twingo rack.
You are really REALLY strange
The twingo one is clearly stronger, better built, cheaper to buy with low miles on and proven in a rally scenario
You're argument about the point nearest pinion being key is retarded - that's entirely why the point near the pinion is cast, because it's stronger than a steel bracket - so what's better than one cast point? two cast points.
The DCi one is just cost cutting on a car that's only designed to chuck around with 100bhp.
*sigh*
What does it even matter what people use anyway? I'd of used the twingo rack but didn't have the time/patience to machine some spacers up and machine the pinion down
The twingo one is clearly stronger, better built, cheaper to buy with low miles on and proven in a rally scenario
You're argument about the point nearest pinion being key is retarded - that's entirely why the point near the pinion is cast, because it's stronger than a steel bracket - so what's better than one cast point? two cast points.
The DCi one is just cost cutting on a car that's only designed to chuck around with 100bhp.
*sigh*
What does it even matter what people use anyway? I'd of used the twingo rack but didn't have the time/patience to machine some spacers up and machine the pinion down
mikekean
ClioSport Club Member
996 C4S, 135i, E30x2
Only marginal material will need to be removed from the back of the mounting tabs as the mounting face its actually raised slightly around the bolt hole. This wont be needed once it has been bolted onto the car as the angle shim will spread the load of the bolt across the whole face of the mounting tab. I will discuss this with the engineer when i go to get a quote to have it done and see what he thinks.
Could you measure the OD of the actual rack inside the casing? as i would like to compare between all 3. If i cannot get the Twingo rack to fit safely then a DCi rack with some gusseting is something i might look into.
Could you measure the OD of the actual rack inside the casing? as i would like to compare between all 3. If i cannot get the Twingo rack to fit safely then a DCi rack with some gusseting is something i might look into.
_WILL_
ClioSport Club Member
172 Cup
You don't need to be rude. Just because I disagree with you. You sound like a child, I would appreciate it if you refrain from it in the future.
I am right about the mounting point close to the pinion. I imagine it is cast for manufacturing purposes, it will be easier to cast and then machine the internal surfaces. It will also be stiffer , which will matter a that point, but is less significant at the other mounting point.
The twingo was max 133 hp and lighter(?) than a DCi. The twingo rack might be a little stronger over all, but I believe it will be insignificant. I also will always prefer to run the DCi rack not modified against a machines down twingo rack.
Also proven in rallying point may be valid but that doesn't mean the dci rack is worse. And how many racks had to be changed in this rallying that proved the non modified rack to be so perfect?
182FF
stronger - how do you know that? Different materials, different manufacturing processes, different fatigue behaviour, everything.
better built - how on gods green earth do you determine that?
cheaper to buy - that it may be, I've not looked into it
low miles - you can buy both brand new...
point nearest the pinion - is clearly key - the force comes from the column - that bolt is closest and therefore the majority of the force is reacted with that bolt - the other is further away and therefore less stiff - therefore takes less of the load. In simple terms, the force reacted by the bolt will be proportional to the stiffness between pinion and mount.
cost cutting - you know that a fabricated steel bracket and tube separately attached to a casting is cheaper than just using a bigger casting? And you can corner harder with 133bhp than you can with 100bhp right?
What does it even matter what people use anyway - you are the one arguing about not using the DCI rack.
Cup_Phil, you speak with such authority and arrogance and yet every point you make is flawed.
It might not count for anything, but I would go with the DCI rack because if something breaks it is easier to replace - no modifications needed. And as _WILL_ mentioned, in the case of a severe crash, where aluminium mounts would snap and cause the rack to drop off, the steel bracket would just bend and you may even be able to limp the car home.
It is literally NOT IMPORTANT.
If you want cheap that bolts straight on and you can replace easy - DCi rack.
If you want robustness and strength - Twingo rack.
Clearly I have not a f**king clue what I'm talking about and neither does Fred as he's used a Twingo rack on a 500+bhp turbo'd clio and what the hell would he know
Obviously you all have solidworks models of both racks and degrees in mech engineering.
Fred destroyed a DCi rack in a modded 172 on track, but again what the f**k would he know?
Also you all talk with such authority - have any of you actually held a DCi rack in one hand and a Twingo rack in the other like I have - you'd have to have hit your head f**king hard to not see how much better built the Twingo rack is.
How the f**k am I arguing not to use a DCi rack? I've got a DCi rack on mine, I was the one who gave people part numbers for it.
I'm just saying slating the Twingo rack off saying it's pointless is retarded - it's not pointless if it's needed in the application and when you're rallying or throwing 500bhp through the front wheels it's needed.
Jesus h christ.
This place is so full of stupidity it makes my piss boil.
I'm out.
If you want cheap that bolts straight on and you can replace easy - DCi rack.
If you want robustness and strength - Twingo rack.
Clearly I have not a f**king clue what I'm talking about and neither does Fred as he's used a Twingo rack on a 500+bhp turbo'd clio and what the hell would he know
Obviously you all have solidworks models of both racks and degrees in mech engineering.
Fred destroyed a DCi rack in a modded 172 on track, but again what the f**k would he know?
Also you all talk with such authority - have any of you actually held a DCi rack in one hand and a Twingo rack in the other like I have - you'd have to have hit your head f**king hard to not see how much better built the Twingo rack is.
How the f**k am I arguing not to use a DCi rack? I've got a DCi rack on mine, I was the one who gave people part numbers for it.
I'm just saying slating the Twingo rack off saying it's pointless is retarded - it's not pointless if it's needed in the application and when you're rallying or throwing 500bhp through the front wheels it's needed.
Jesus h christ.
This place is so full of stupidity it makes my piss boil.
I'm out.
mikekean
ClioSport Club Member
996 C4S, 135i, E30x2
Well this got out of hand..
We all have our own opinions at the end of the day, ive never said either is actually stronger. The Twingo rack when applying common sense and some engineering knowledge "looks" to be more sturdy than the DCi rack but this may not be the case. Never the less if i was to use a DCi rack i would gusset the passenger mounting tab and it does looks to be a week point.
Really though if you manage to snap an alloy steering rack off its mounts you will have seriously hit the car hard and i doubt you would be driving it home. Tie rod would more than likely bend/snap before it would even get close to breaking the rack.
We all have our own opinions at the end of the day, ive never said either is actually stronger. The Twingo rack when applying common sense and some engineering knowledge "looks" to be more sturdy than the DCi rack but this may not be the case. Never the less if i was to use a DCi rack i would gusset the passenger mounting tab and it does looks to be a week point.
Really though if you manage to snap an alloy steering rack off its mounts you will have seriously hit the car hard and i doubt you would be driving it home. Tie rod would more than likely bend/snap before it would even get close to breaking the rack.
182FF
The only thing I was questioning is your "knowledge" that you argue with. Not which is better, or Fred's experience, or anything else. All you know is that the twingo one looks stronger, and that Fred is yet to break it.
Obviously I don't have any CAD models, which is why I haven't stated which one is stronger. And yes, a masters.
Stupidity? Am I correct in thinking you are saying I am stupid?
If you feel the need to repond Phil, I suggest you calm down first as you're embarrassing yourself.
The passenger side tab does indeed look a little vulnerable, and for rallying I too would consider beefing it up. Good point about the tie rods, I suspect the fact that they are the weakest points anyway makes the whole discussing rather irrelevant.
_WILL_
ClioSport Club Member
172 Cup
where is your actual proof. Not just what you have read on here?
You don't sound like you do. And you seem to have serious anger issues.
I am not questioning Fred's knowledge, however you followed his advise blindly and the twingo rack didn't fit? If he has a good way to mount it and some good info or proven back to back testing to shows its better then that's great. I would also like his views and experience to explain it. Not just it was used on a 500hp clio so it's must be better / stronger.
i have a mechanical engineering degree and now work as a chassis engineer.
I could destroy any rack, in fact it is done as part of testing, it means nothing if its not done in a controlled way with measurements taken. A dci rack failure prob = bent. A twingo = cracked (most likely). I know which will most likely get you home / to the finish. Also what was the failure. What it even the steel vs. Alu part?
Forgot that was how renault did their engineering.
I am great full for the part number advise etc. It made the conversion much easier for me to do. That is and has not ever been in question and is not relevant to the type of rack you would choose.
i have not said it is pointless, just that assuming and so saying to someone doing the conversion it is better / stronger, when you don't actually know is not helpful. If the twingo rack is stronger and better, even after machining away structural parts of the rack then great, and I will update my car soon with a twingo rack. But I really don't believe it a good idea. I would prefer to mod the dci to be stronger than the twingo to be weaker. There is so many unknowns that you can't just say, oh that one is better / stronger without more info.
Fair enough. I suggest we don't get the thread locked so leave it at that.
Mike,
if it was me I would try and do it without removing material, instead I would see if adding a spacer in some way might do it. Not 100% the best way, but from the sounds of it FRED has done it a few times and so I am sure he will have a good solution.
NorthloopCup
ClioSport Moderator
I run the oe power rack on mine with epas. All I did was drain the fluid out of the rack and blanked off the main pressure feed and return. Obviously there is still some residual oil left in the system but this will just help to lubricate the rack.
For reference though, with the fluid removed the resistance was minimal mate but I applaud the fact that you are prepared to go to the lengths that you are to get the twingo rack to fit. Bravo that man!!
With regards to the dci rack, I personally don't think it looks to be the strongest with regards to the brackets but as you rightly say in your more recent posts it would have to suffer quite a severe knock to bend it, and I share your opinion that the tie rods would bend first.
@Cup_Phil: You need to try and understand that opinions are like arseholes - everybody has one!! But what I do find ironic (and yeah i really do think) from reading your other posts is that your saying the dci rack isn't strong enough (in your opinion), yet you use one???? So before I fully break into the chorus of Alanis Morissette can you clarify? Or am I misreading it? Srs question. I'd like to hear your logic behind it mate. Other people may share your logic too and be in full agreement! Pm me if you like mate.
Oh and for the record I run the original power rack because, a) I've seen this done (and done this myself on other cars) countless amounts of time before with no detrimental effect, and b) I'm to much of a bone idle shite to ***** about swapping racks when I know how much of a pita they are to remove in the first place! Lol!
I run the oe power rack on mine with epas. All I did was drain the fluid out of the rack and blanked off the main pressure feed and return. Obviously there is still some residual oil left in the system but this will just help to lubricate the rack.
For reference though, with the fluid removed the resistance was minimal mate but I applaud the fact that you are prepared to go to the lengths that you are to get the twingo rack to fit. Bravo that man!!
With regards to the dci rack, I personally don't think it looks to be the strongest with regards to the brackets but as you rightly say in your more recent posts it would have to suffer quite a severe knock to bend it, and I share your opinion that the tie rods would bend first.
@Cup_Phil: You need to try and understand that opinions are like arseholes - everybody has one!! But what I do find ironic (and yeah i really do think) from reading your other posts is that your saying the dci rack isn't strong enough (in your opinion), yet you use one???? So before I fully break into the chorus of Alanis Morissette can you clarify? Or am I misreading it? Srs question. I'd like to hear your logic behind it mate. Other people may share your logic too and be in full agreement! Pm me if you like mate.
Oh and for the record I run the original power rack because, a) I've seen this done (and done this myself on other cars) countless amounts of time before with no detrimental effect, and b) I'm to much of a bone idle shite to ***** about swapping racks when I know how much of a pita they are to remove in the first place! Lol!
Very very very very simple answer there mate
It is VERY light, very cheap, very easy to fit (literally bolts straight on) and I wanted to use the car
I have no doubt at all that it's weaker than the cup rack and the Twingo would have been a better solution but I wanted to go hoon it around cadwell not spend time/money maching up shims and pinions
I didn't want to do the cup rack filled with fluid thing because they weigh a lot more than DCi and mine had done 120k and wasn't in great condition
Similar threads
