HOME FORUM RULES CONTACT
     
   
   

Go Back   CLASS RACER FORUM > Class Racer Forums > Stock and Super Stock Tech
Register Photo Gallery FAQ Community Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-25-2015, 07:10 AM   #1
Bobby Fazio
VIP Member
 
Bobby Fazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Egg Harbor Township, NJ
Posts: 1,468
Likes: 1,447
Liked 4,365 Times in 501 Posts
Default Footbrake quicker than transbrake

The maverick has better ETs on footbrake than transbrake even though transbrake pops a better wheelie. The ladder bars are in middle hole should they be somewhere else?
__________________
'65 Mustang SS/L & L/SA
DriverInterviews.com | App.DragInsights.com
Bobby Fazio is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2015, 07:43 AM   #2
Alan Roehrich
Veteran Member
 
Alan Roehrich's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 5,106
Likes: 1,564
Liked 1,789 Times in 408 Posts
Default Re: Footbrake quicker than transbrake

Over the years I worked in a transmission shop in Nashville, I worked mainly on racing transmissions, and in around 90% of the Super Stock cars, a foot brake transmission was always measurably quicker, consistently. We even built identical transmissions, except for the valvebody, and in nearly every case, the foot brake setup went quicker, regardless of how the chassis was adjusted, even in 4 link cars. We also tried changing rear end gears and low gears in the transmissions, as well as torque converters. In many cases, I think it may be that the engine is happier with the RPM held well below the flash speed, so that the converter flashes hard/higher and does a better job of multiplying torque. Also, a torque converter really needs to be built for the way you intend to use it, either with a transbrake, or foot braking.


I think the modified cars, and maybe some others with high RPM small displacement engines that need a very high stall speed may be quicker with a transbrake, if the car can be adjusted for it, simply due to how hard it is to make the converter work well. I know they are easier to drive well with a transbrake.
__________________
Alan Roehrich
212A G/S
Alan Roehrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2015, 08:46 AM   #3
Duane Eiskant II
Senior Member
 
Duane Eiskant II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Alexandria, Va
Posts: 501
Likes: 261
Liked 57 Times in 33 Posts
Default Re: Footbrake quicker than transbrake

Bobby I agree with Alan. (yes I know Alan, it is hard to believe). On a side note tho, I will say that I believe you have to take every variable into consideration. Like my car with the Cleveland, it likes to leave off the two-step (haven't tried a transbrake yet).
__________________
Duane Eiskant
1354 Stock/Super Stock
Duane Eiskant II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2015, 12:51 PM   #4
ALMACK
VIP Member
 
ALMACK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bardstown, KY
Posts: 1,937
Likes: 131
Liked 369 Times in 127 Posts
Default Re: Footbrake quicker than transbrake

I have never drove a transbrake car, but does the t.b. preload the car's suspension like foot braking does ?

Or is the suspension relaxed while on the brake ?
__________________
Alan Mackin Stock 3777/ SS 3377
P/SA & SS/PA Fox Thunderbird
I/PS '95 Mustang GT
ALMACK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2015, 12:58 PM   #5
bigfoot584
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: Footbrake quicker than transbrake

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMACK View Post
I have never drove a transbrake car, but does the t.b. preload the car's suspension like foot braking does ?

Or is the suspension relaxed while on the brake ?
It's relaxed.
No power to the output shaft in trans until botton is released.
bigfoot584 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2015, 03:45 PM   #6
ALMACK
VIP Member
 
ALMACK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bardstown, KY
Posts: 1,937
Likes: 131
Liked 369 Times in 127 Posts
Default Re: Footbrake quicker than transbrake

OK.
I can see where the footbrake might be quicker (e.t. wise) than the t.b. then.
__________________
Alan Mackin Stock 3777/ SS 3377
P/SA & SS/PA Fox Thunderbird
I/PS '95 Mustang GT
ALMACK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2015, 06:51 PM   #7
treessavoy
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Dunnellon,FL
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default Re: Footbrake quicker than transbrake

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich View Post
Over the years I worked in a transmission shop in Nashville, I worked mainly on racing transmissions, and in around 90% of the Super Stock cars, a foot brake transmission was always measurably quicker, consistently. We even built identical transmissions, except for the valvebody, and in nearly every case, the foot brake setup went quicker, regardless of how the chassis was adjusted, even in 4 link cars. We also tried changing rear end gears and low gears in the transmissions, as well as torque converters. In many cases, I think it may be that the engine is happier with the RPM held well below the flash speed, so that the converter flashes hard/higher and does a better job of multiplying torque. Also, a torque converter really needs to be built for the way you intend to use it, either with a transbrake, or foot braking.


I think the modified cars, and maybe some others with high RPM small displacement engines that need a very high stall speed may be quicker with a transbrake, if the car can be adjusted for it, simply due to how hard it is to make the converter work well. I know they are easier to drive well with a transbrake.

Alan,

When you say the footbrake was quicker, do you mean footbraking while leaning on the convertor or launching from an idle?

JimR
__________________
Jim Rountree
treessavoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2015, 11:17 PM   #8
Alan Roehrich
Veteran Member
 
Alan Roehrich's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 5,106
Likes: 1,564
Liked 1,789 Times in 408 Posts
Default Re: Footbrake quicker than transbrake

Quote:
Originally Posted by treessavoy View Post
Alan,

When you say the footbrake was quicker, do you mean footbraking while leaning on the convertor or launching from an idle?

JimR
Pretty much various degrees of both. Most guys are "swapping feet", ie, holding the RPM at around 1/2 of the flash RPM (as low as 2000 or so, as high as 4000 or so) while holding the brake down hard, then matting the accelerator pedal while dumping the brakes.

It is extremely important to note that I'm talking about a very well tuned car, if you have a car you just can't get to rev up or flash quick and clean, it's not going to run well foot braking.
__________________
Alan Roehrich
212A G/S
Alan Roehrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 10:02 AM   #9
Dave Cook
Junior Member
 
Dave Cook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: Footbrake quicker than transbrake

Don't forget the rollout difference when comparing your ET's.

If the transbrake launch is picking the fronts straight up out of the beams rather than getting the run at it rolling out, it could be a .03-.05 difference.
Dave Cook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2015, 12:10 PM   #10
Patric Fox
Member
 
Patric Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pottstown,Pa.
Posts: 121
Likes: 24
Liked 11 Times in 8 Posts
Default Re: Footbrake quicker than transbrake

The Carter carburetor in the AMX does not have enough acclerator pump shot to foot brake. That could be a problem in other applications, making the transbrake faster.
Patric Fox is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.