Still 30-45 days out for the subframe connectors to be shipped. But found a convertible brace there that looks like a pretty good alternative to the spacers Pypes sells.

$165, in stock, listed under the 67-69 Camaro section.

That looks like a better option....wish I had seen this before I elected to go without the X-flow...because of the lack of structural integrity of the spacers.

This one is likely better but would need to be pretty heavy guage to make up for the flexing that may occur in the bends...looks like it may be fairly heavy guage.

From what I can tell, the brace is there to provide extra torsional stiffness to the body. Looking at that design, I'd have to vote "no".

IMHO, It would be an improvement over the spacers - which relegate the brace to doing nothing - but with bent edges like that, the ability to resist body twist is very low. Not zero ... but low. An improvement would be to weld in long, triangular gussets lined up with the diagonal lines that connect the holes in opposing corners

You would probably be better off leaving the brace off and installing connectors than installing either of these two solutions.

Just my 2¢ worth.

Looks like a better than nuttin' solution. (The spacers seem worthless.) Summit sells it for $151.

I disagree, Q. The brace helps the torsional stiffness by making the trans tunnel into a torque tube (completing the tube, so to speak). When the car tries to twist, three of the bolts try to move forward and three try to move backwards. The X portion is transmitting shear, not bending. The way I am visualizing the the function of the brace, this version would work. I think the Pypes spacers would also work. My $.02

I do agree with you on the point that the intention is to turn the trans tunnel into a tube. Howeverrrrrr ... a square tube transmits torque a lot less effectively than a round tube, or a "D" tube. We don't need to have a raging debate here.

No raging debate necessary. I've been long pondering the effectiveness of that small, flimsy piece of metal in stiffening the car and the only way it could function is to be carying shear between both bottom edges of the tunnel. That also follows from the "x" pattern of the stamping. It probably is less effective than the stock plate to some degree but is still better than no plate.

The first gen conv. unibody does have some linear flexing also. Like when the doors hit on the door jambs. That's the purpose of the door jamb spacer/stops. The Hotchkiss plate design looks like it might provide some strengthening to combat linear flexing.

Hotchkis could have easily stamped some ribs in like the factory brace. Plus they could have done that to the side sections rather than weakening it by the fancy name cutout.

It would have cost them less to do that then it did to put the name on it. (Who's going to see it on the car anyway?) Or do both, punch the name on the side as stiffners and highlight it with paint or something.

where can you get this bracket?

Summit Racing has it listed.