Thanks for the weight info DEJim. Looking forward to seeing what the stock bars weigh.

 

I'm done with the swapout of the Cusco's. The stock bars weigh:

Front: 10.5 lbs
Rear: 3.0 lbs
Total: 13.5 lbs

Cusco's (from my above post): 20.5 lbs

7 lbs additional weight with the Cusco's

BTW, the rear was harder to replace than the front. Endlink bolts were harder to access for torquing and the bar has to go around the exhaust.

 

Thanks DEJim. I'm sure the added 7lbs. is a welcomed sacrifice for the greater stiffness in the Cusco's. Let us know your impressions on the handling with the Cuscos.

 

My Impressions of the Cusco sway bars: Very noticeable improvement! I'm not a big "mod" person, so it was pretty tough for me to part with $395. It was money very well spent.

Since we bought the car ('04 6MT sedan), I've been a little disappointed in how it under-steers when turning, even at moderate speeds. I read many posts on this forum about how stiffer sway bars affect under/over-steer characteristics on a car. I was a little concerned regarding the 170% (to stock) rear bar stiffness because others on the forum feel this is too high and can upset handling compared to the 120%/137% settings of the front. To me, the car now seems VERY neutral now when driving hard through turns, even with my Bridgestone touring tires (stock). Two notes:

1) I selected the 137% setting for the front

2) I test drove it after I installed the rear and before I installed the front and handling was worse than stock. Not sure if this makes sense, but it definitely pushed (under-steered) more. Hot-footed it back to the house to finish the job!

I also expected (from what I read here) that the ride would suffer; I haven’t noticed any change other than the car seems more solid, if anything at all. I know there will be more improvement to be gained from tires, but I’m waiting until these wear out. Don’t get me wrong, the car still rolls some in turns, but I believe that’s due to the spring/damper setup and the fact that I drive harder into curves now. I have the sport suspension and I’ve read that some have switched to the 350Z setup at the sacrifice of the “luxury ride.” I’d bet the 350Z suspension really would improve things if handling was your end-game.

Many people have done many mods and say what a difference they felt. I’ve done a few (z-tube, K-N, grounding kit) and noticed pretty much nothing other than sound. Not so with the sway bars. Bottom line: You will be happy with sway bars, just as I am. I don’t even think I’d be happier with sway bars with less stiffness (EVO350’s, Nismo, etc.).

Background for my disappointment in stock handling: The G35S replaced my wife's S2000 (due to a new family addition) so I was very spoiled. I've read many a post on this forum debating the Honda’s capability, but believe me (and other previous S2000 owners), it handles on rails better than any car I could ever afford. Although I disagree, my wife thinks the S2K was faster than the G. With this much torque, I think the G makes a poor driver better.

 

Many times people replace the front bar with a correspondingly stiffer bar and negate much of the gains on the stiffer rear bar.........as far as shifting the roll stiffness rearward!

Also remember that bars are at most half the TOTAL roll stiffness, usually 25% due to rubber isolation lack of stiffness.
Doubling the rear bar stiffness may only increase the rear total stiffness by <half............120[springs]+40[bar]=160; 120+80=200 pounds per inch wheel rate ........whereas the oem front may be closer to 270-300 pounds per inch wheel rate STOCK.

Don't confuse the bars stiffness with the actual installed stiffness and the geometric couple point [to the lower arm] and it's effect on the wheel/tire roll stiffness [all that counts].

A bar that attaches in the EXACT middle of an arm only transfers 1/4 of the bars stiffness per inch because the bar only move 1/4" for a 1.0" wheel movement.