Someone's going to go fast next year.....

from other posts its going to be a lt-1 trans with a ls-1 input shaft. I not sure if its got updated internal parts. It definetely sounds like a sweet set up. If it raises the bar then great. Lets see what it will do first.
 
Any details on the rings selected (material, size) and perhaps why? Gapless 1st only?

Satisfied with the trade-offs necessary to fit that girdle? Do we have any option that doesn't have those trade-offs?

Is the idea on skipping the ARP lube with main studs being it isn't necessary, or that it could be detrimental? Or is it just that the torque numbers you like are essentially dry numbers, so leave them dry?
 
Any details on the rings selected (material, size) and perhaps why? Gapless 1st only?

Satisfied with the trade-offs necessary to fit that girdle? Do we have any option that doesn't have those trade-offs?

Is the idea on skipping the ARP lube with main studs being it isn't necessary, or that it could be detrimental? Or is it just that the torque numbers you like are essentially dry numbers, so leave them dry?

Top ring is gapless stainless steel with chrome face.

ARP lube on the main studs seems to result in a variety of problems. We never install any critical fastener dry and in this case 30wt oil is used.
 
Ok, when you said solid axle mustang I was assuming you meant street type Mustang.
No, you are interpreting things to suit your own viewpoints. First of all Mustangs don't weigh 4000lbs, second they already have solid axles, third they have a plethora of aftermarket parts to choose from.

I already said why I'm not posting specific goals. Attempts to explain that position has resulted in people basically arguing with me. Would it be better not to explain? The result is the same, we aren't stating specific goals at this time. :)
 
First of all, people with automatic SC's like to lord over everyone else how quick they manage to run the 1/4, and consequently the people who are asking how fast it will go are going to compare whatever I say to how fast they've run with their cars or how they've seen an auto run. All they want to know is if this car will beat theirs or someone else's. I'm not going to answer that.




.

Its funny, the manual guys like to lord over the auto guys their rwhp numbers on the dyno since they have less drivetrain losses. Cant say how many E mails I have from manual guys telling me about their superior hp. Guess we all have to have something to brag on;):D:D

Ken
 
I really like the overall goal of this project and it seems that it will be inspiring me as I will never go AT in my SC (to each his own) as it has more potential to me than just going in a straight line fast, so an awesome MT setup that sets the tone for everyone else should be great to see!

But dont get me wrong I love HP & TQ. I havent dyno'd mine yet but I love the way it performs for a street car even if it only has barely over 300rwhp. To be honest I may never hit the 1/4mi in my SC.
 
Last edited:
Its funny, the manual guys like to lord over the auto guys their rwhp numbers on the dyno since they have less drivetrain losses. Cant say how many E mails I have from manual guys telling me about their superior hp. Guess we all have to have something to brag on;):D:D

Ken

You guys just don't get it. I already said I'm not making HP or 1/4 mile predictions for this car. I don't know how that equates to bragging and no, we don't all have to brag about something. I'd like to keep this thread on topic about the car build rather than going out on tangents all the time.

I already said, I don't know how much power we are going to make. I don't know how fast the car is going to go. I said it is going to set a benchmark because up to now no one has taken their car this far. That's all I'm saying.

Ok, I'll say this. I expect it to be the fastest manual trans SC. How's that? :cool:
 
hey Dave, did U ever get a good high lift Beehive Spring setup going???
I am doing an ULTIMATE SC BUILD but using SPI Mustangs heads, for my son!

not sure if this is relevant, but my machinist put beehive elliptical springs on my SC heads with .567 lift and 1.8 roller rockers
 
I am not on here all that often anymore, so forgive me for this "pages ago" question:

Dave, you said there are nylong bushings in the upper that need to be replaced as they wear. Which ones? Pic or something?

And for the ARP lube, I guess I am missing something. Did the caps not stay tight on it? Did they loosen or just not torque to where they should have?

Last, is that girdle the only one available for our cars? If so, why would someone get it that is going to have to do that much modding to it? Was it on there when you got the car or did you recomend it?

SWS
 
I am not on here all that often anymore, so forgive me for this "pages ago" question:

Dave, you said there are nylong bushings in the upper that need to be replaced as they wear. Which ones? Pic or something?

And for the ARP lube, I guess I am missing something. Did the caps not stay tight on it? Did they loosen or just not torque to where they should have?

Last, is that girdle the only one available for our cars? If so, why would someone get it that is going to have to do that much modding to it? Was it on there when you got the car or did you recomend it?

SWS

Chris,

Both upper control arm bushings in the rear are actually nylon inserts in a steel housing encased in rubber. They can easily be taken apart with your hands. The rubber/steel portion is pressed into the arm/spindle, but those rarely ever give trouble. It's the nylon inserts that wear out causing play in the upper arm. If you buy new bushings, all you really have to do is slide the nylon inserts out and slide in the new ones. Job complete. You can do this entire job in 15 minutes with no tools other than the wrench to take the bolts out.

Regarding ARP lube, there is much discussion about the purpose and effectiveness of the lube. On rod bolts since it is easy to check stretch, it is easy to check the torque with respect to bolt loading, but on things like main studs it is not so possible. Because of this there is question as to whether or not the bolt/stud actually achieves proper stretch. In back to back testing I have found that the main bearing clearance will be different when torqued according to ARP specs with lube vs. ARP specs without. This can only indicate different loading of the main caps. Furthermore, experience has shown that motors assembled with ARP lube on the main studs have more instance of cap walk than those torqued with oil. It is my suspicion that the ARP lube is allowing the nuts to back off slightly. Oil will provide lubrication during assembly but will eventually press out of the threads leaving dry contact whereas the ARP lube stays in the threads forever. I believe this results in instances of the nuts actually backing off slightly over time. This doesn't happen on rod bolts because as Casey mentioned, they are subject to different forms of stress.

The stud girdle is a Morana piece which is the only currently available girdle. I bought a couple of these to see how they fit/work. In this case it is working well but I wasn't thrilled with the fit. Granted, you can't just assume stuff like this is going to be bolt on. This is where people often assume that an engine is just the sum of the parts that go into it. A race engine builder knows that parts always need massaging and nothing should be taken for granted. That's one of the reasons a race winning engine costs so much to build.
 
Here's an interesting video of different lubes hitting the target torque spec. It's from the show Horsepower. Go to the 5th segment of the time bar at 11:08.

Horsepower TV
 
Back
Top