Has anyone replaced their stock swaybar in the front, just curious whats involved it looks pretty tucked up in there.

 

One of the steps requires you to saw off your own arm.

Srsly, it's rather difficult.

 

It's honestly one of the hardest things you can do to a Protege5.

things that have to be removed:
- both shifter rods (the stabilizer and the one that does stuff)
- exhaust midpipe
- that brace that hangs underneath the midpipe
- both front wheels
- front endlinks
- the steering linkage rods
- both front lower control arms (i.e. you'll probably just want to remove the struts and pull the axles, but you shouldn't absolutely need to do gain access)
- the front crossmember (the big honking steel pipe that holds the bottom of the front suspension together, and what the lower control arms and everything else in the world bolts to).

that's not even a complete list..

you need to remove all of that just to change the bushings as well. It's a horrible design from a maintenance perspective.. I don't want to know how many hours of labor a dealership would charge for it...

 

5.1 hours - at least that the quote i got when i asked about having the front mazdaspeed bar installed.

 

yup that's a lot longer than they want for the timing belt.

My estimate that it would take 6 hours wasn't too far off for someone who doesn't have every tool in the universe or a lift.

I'll just put it off for another couple weeks >_< listening to the clatter of a front swaybar that literally has no bushings whatsoever is horrible. If Mazda had just installed the bolts from underneath (with a nut welded on the brackets for the bolt to thread into) we wouldn't have this problem... that much work shouldn't be needed for a bushing change, stupid stupid stupid

Shasta, what bar were you looking at getting?

 

Thats the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Please find the guys name who designed that sway bar on his CAD machine so we can all get in line and systematically kick him in the nuts, one by one.

 

Probably the same guy who designed the motor mounts.

 

They aren't that bad to get to! You don't have to disassemble much of anything to get at any motor mounts.. aside from removing the strut tower brace, battery, and battery tray to do the tranny mount

 

True...but they do suck. Motor mounts suck, front sway bar mounting location sucks, rear sway bar mounting location sucks, rear license plate mounting sucks...

 

The front sway bar mounting location works just fine, it's just not something they designed for easy access at all. I'm going to jack the car up tonight and sit under it and figure out what I can drill to have the bolts go in from the other side.

The motor mounts are so soft because the chassis is so stiff. Most of us have seen how stiff motor mounts make the car feel, and it isn't something even 1% of people (enthusiasts included) will tolerate.

The rear sway bar mounting location, as it was originally designed, works just fine, hence no unmodded Protege5s get 'the clunk'. The mounting locations just don't work for stronger bars. At least there's a no-compromise solution to that one. Mazda should have redesigned the rear subframe to really 'fix' the problem instead of just reinforcing the mounting holes (as they did on the MSP rear subframe).

The rear license plate mounting on the Protege5 only sucks because there's no such thing as a 'u.s. hatch door' so the holes in the actual hatch are for Japanese license plates. Had they been selling the Protege5 here since 1999, I'm sure we would have gotten a revised hatch door with the holes drilled directly into it like on the sedans.

I'm not trying to make excuses, but there's a lot more to it than 'sucks' :P

 

Fairplay, you make some good points that I hastily glossed over, except I'm respectfully calling bullshite on this one:
I've driven plenty of stock front engine/front drive, mtx Hondas/Acuras and VWs (even going back to the mid-80s models) and none of them had the kind of slop our cars come with straight from the factory. Objectively speaking, the engine mounting is way behind the times. There's more to it than just using stiffer materials. The location and design of the mounts themselves has a huge influence on their performance. This is where Mazda dropped the ball.

There are tons of cars with stiffer chassis than ours but don't have this issue; that's not the reason our mounts are soft. They're soft to compensate for poor design elements.

I don't think anyone would argue that having to take the whole fraking car apart to swap out the swaybar does suck, though.

 

What Honda, Acura, or VW has a stiffer chassis? I think you underestimate your BJ-chassis... there's a reason besides the twin trapezoidal link rear suspension that the car handles just so darn good Yeah, the engine mounting is 'old school', none of the hydraulic mounts and such that many cars use. And yes, it retained the mounting locations from the 626 chassis of yore..

You can have your mid-80s-current hondas and vdubs with their mushy chassis, I'll solve my driveline lash the only way I know how.. go RWD so the engine twisting a little bit doesn't totally disrupt your grip.

 

Well, I can't say I know about the newer Hondas. But late-90s GSR I drove seemed plenty stiff. It's a safe bet that they're comparable to Mazda chassis. VWs are and have always been more solid than Mazdas, although Mazda is doing a good job catching up.

But who cares how stiff the VW chassis is when the body looks like a partially-melted jellybean? Or Honda with it's space-invader Civic or ultraconservative made-for-the-masses Accord? I bought Mazda because they have some sense of style and suspension tuning.

 

I don't know what y'all are complaining about. It takes me about 10 minutes to pull the front bar on my car.


Oh, the protege. nvmkthxbye