Whipple 4.0L 967HP/824TQ

[circusboy]

Awesome numbers. Car sounds sick as he'll. Mine did the same thing to the reloc brakets lol. It only takes half the power you have and good traction lol.

 

[mikeysgt]

Dang. I was hoping to see some track times!

 

[sfadchi]

damn... not welded huh!?!?

They were welded, IMO just not very well.

 

[dagamore]

what brand were they?

 

[stkjock]

They were welded, IMO just not very well.

saw the pics after my post, looks like only welded on the backside of the bracket.

 

[TurboPete]

They are welded, but I dont think it has a antiroll bar , so all that torq started to twist the rearend over, and bent the hell out of the bracket.

Pete

 

[19COBRA93]

So not to thread derail, but... Why are those brackets needed? This is a serious question, because I've seen nowhere where they actually help 60', as these car's naturally 60' really well. They all seem to bend under extreme stress whether they're welded or not. So what's the real purpose? I know they're "anti-squat", but I'd think a good set of adjustable shocks would help solve that.

And that was caused by rotational force. An anti roll bar isn't going to fix that. A torque arm of sorts would.

 

[TurboPete]

Very impressive. At what rwhp level did you turn the 9.60?

Paul I was at the track the day he ran that number , He pulled a 1.36 60ft If I remember correctly. That was on the previous motor which is still a well built motor just less compression with a 2.9 whipple and 22 to 23 psi's and a 100 shot.

If I had to guess I would say had to be a little over 800.



Pete

 

[TurboPete]

So not to thread derail, but... Why are those brackets needed? This is a serious question, because I've seen nowhere where they actually help 60', as these car's naturally 60' really well. They all seem to bend under extreme stress whether they're welded or not. So what's the real purpose? I know they're "anti-squat", but I'd think a good set of adjustable shocks would help solve that.

And that was caused by rotational force. An anti roll bar isn't going to fix that. A torque arm of sorts would.

When you lower the car you change the angle of the lower control arm , the bracket re-positions the control arm in its proper angle.
The antiroll bar will plant the suspension down equally therefore eliminating the twist to the rear as per the evidence in his pictures . The rear started to torque over hard and twisted the brackets . With a antiroll bar this would not happen .


Pete

 

[JeremyH]

Serious power man, for some reason I thought superchargers make more torque than turbos, why the gap between HP/TQ?

Def the other way around!
Twin screws make lots of torque down low at low rpms and then holds and drops off up top.

To the op just saw this thread, awesome numbers and build!

 

[dagamore]

who made the weld-on bracket that failed?

 

[fdjizm]

I want my car to eventually have 666hp and 666ft-lbs of torque

 

[Vapour Trails]

. The rear started to torque over hard and twisted the brackets . With a antiroll bar this would not happen .

I agree, the roll bar is essentially a spring that ties each side of the suspension together. The rear end won't rotate (roll) as hard with one in place.

The relocation bracket was twisted out of shape.

 

[19COBRA93]

When you lower the car you change the angle of the lower control arm , the bracket re-positions the control arm in its proper angle.
The antiroll bar will plant the suspension down equally therefore eliminating the twist to the rear as per the evidence in his pictures . The rear started to torque over hard and twisted the brackets . With a antiroll bar this would not happen .


Pete

That makes sense on the brackets. As for the other, I understand the purpose of the anti roll bar, but still don't see how it would have prevented this from happening. Even with an anti roll bar the axle housing is going to twist (rotate) just the same. The only difference being, the body isn't going to roll to the right. That's the only purpose to the anti-roll bar is to keep the car from rolling to the right under hard acceleration. It doesn nothing to control axle rotation (pulling upper control arm backward, thrusting lower control arms forward). About the only thing that can control axle rotation is a torque arm.

 

[viciousride]

The relocation bracket was twisted out of shape.

Yep, it was the bracket itself that failed. Looks like an overall poor design and possibly material hardness. The obvious is that those brackets lack solid structural strength against the monstrous torsional loads he's applying. The welds look good because the bracket did not shift from position.

IMO, the Steeda LCA brackets are the best out there. Then again I haven't seen them on a car making that much power. However, I think they're the only real choice out there as far as quality and strength.

 

[GrnBullitt08]

Tried to run it tonight. Too much power and too much traction!

Thats what 900+rwhp will give yah.

 

[TurboPete]

That makes sense on the brackets. As for the other, I understand the purpose of the anti roll bar, but still don't see how it would have prevented this from happening. Even with an anti roll bar the axle housing is going to twist (rotate) just the same. The only difference being, the body isn't going to roll to the right. That's the only purpose to the anti-roll bar is to keep the car from rolling to the right under hard acceleration. It doesn nothing to control axle rotation (pulling upper control arm backward, thrusting lower control arms forward). About the only thing that can control axle rotation is a torque arm.

Your right I forgot about the axle housing (tubes) . Mine are welded up , I also have a CHE Axle Brace which is also welded on .
My Car made 838 ftlbs of torque and so far so good.

Im not sure if Chris has the axle tubes welded but thats something he will need to do .


Pete

 

[psfracer]

My favorite part of that video is when you can see it go from 40 to 140 in 4 seconds. Insane.

Can't wait to see the ETs

 

[Jared@Lethal]

Yep, it was the bracket itself that failed. Looks like an overall poor design and possibly material hardness. The obvious is that those brackets lack solid structural strength against the monstrous torsional loads he's applying. The welds look good because the bracket did not shift from position.

IMO, the Steeda LCA brackets are the best out there. Then again I haven't seen them on a car making that much power. However, I think they're the only real choice out there as far as quality and strength.

LCA brackets aren't meant for 900+ rwhp cars that run sticky tires at the strip. We have the Steeda's on our car as well and although they're a nice piece we don't expect them to handle the abuse our car see's. Our LCA's are in the stock position and have been for quite a while now. That was a decision made by the person who setup our suspension and I trust his choice as he knows what he's doing.

Jared

 

[TurboPete]

LCA brackets aren't meant for 900+ rwhp cars that run sticky tires at the strip. We have the Steeda's on our car as well and although they're a nice piece we don't expect them to handle the abuse our car see's. Our LCA's are in the stock position and have been for quite a while now. That was a decision made by the person who setup our suspension and I trust his choice as he knows what he's doing.

Jared

Jared is your car lowered?

If not, then you dont need the Relocation brackets. Besides the brackets when making that amount of Hp , well the torque is the bigger factor, you need to weld the axle housing tubes , and a axle brace will also eliminate any flex from hard launches .

Here's an old picture of the axle housing brace along with the Anti Roll bar.

Pete