Anybody running Spec St 2 clutch with power adder?
09-30-2010, 12:31 PM
#21
I guess to further your point, I'll ask a question. If a person's car is making 275hp and 305tq to the flywheel.... is this person anymore likely to break a component of his drivetrain with a Spec stage 3 clutch than he is with a lets say King cobra?
The question is, just because the clutch is rated to a higher capacity, does that change the force/shock to the drivetrain when the engine is at a relative hp/tq amount.
The question is, just because the clutch is rated to a higher capacity, does that change the force/shock to the drivetrain when the engine is at a relative hp/tq amount.
09-30-2010, 01:03 PM
#23
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 4,412
I guess I'm not sure if that's right or not. The only way I can see this being true is if you have too much power and your current clutch is slipping, then if you switched up to a stronger clutch, now the entire force is being applied and now you have broken stuff.
09-30-2010, 01:21 PM
#25
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 4,412
As I see it, the reason people would use a weaker clutch than the capability of the trans is they are accepting the fact that the clutch will slip and they are using that as their safety net. They know the clutch will burn up before the point the transmission will break. When you use a higher rated clutch, you don't have that safety net, and then it's the transmission that says uncle.
So I can see the point that you would buy an underrated clutch, but I'd personally run the better clutch and taking 'er until she blows.
So I can see the point that you would buy an underrated clutch, but I'd personally run the better clutch and taking 'er until she blows.
Last edited by amoosenamedhank; 09-30-2010 at 02:03 PM.
09-30-2010, 01:47 PM
#26
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 1,909
I am without a doubt replacing my stock clutch with a centerforce dual friction in a month or so.
I am not worried about breaking my transmission, because I wont be stupid enough to drop the clutch at 4k rpms at the track.
I am not worried about breaking my transmission, because I wont be stupid enough to drop the clutch at 4k rpms at the track.
09-30-2010, 03:56 PM
#27
4th Gear Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,236
As I see it, the reason people would use a weaker clutch than the capability of the trans is they are accepting the fact that the clutch will slip and they are using that as their safety net. They know the clutch will burn up before the point the transmission will break. When you use a higher rated clutch, you don't have that safety net, and then it's the transmission that says uncle.
So I can see the point that you would buy an underrated clutch, but I'd personally run the better clutch and taking 'er until she blows.
So I can see the point that you would buy an underrated clutch, but I'd personally run the better clutch and taking 'er until she blows.
09-30-2010, 04:42 PM
#30
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 4,412
And this is a fine option if you have the funds to buy another trans and have another car, but if you can't afford to drop the cash for a new trans, this route may not be for you. And if you look on AM.com, you'll see the spec and most of the other stage 1 clutches are with the 400ft/lb neighborhood, as well as Ox stating that it did fine for him, and I think we all know that car saw it's fair share of abuse. That and it had over 200hp more than the bolt on and power adder combinations that we're talking about on this thread. So knowing that, with now disrespect Purple, if you or someone you know had a bad experience with a stage 1 clutch on a car within the neighborhood of 400-450hp, what I would assume is that one of the following happened: Either you recieved a defective clutch, the clutch wasn't broken in properly, or it had the ***** beat off of it for almost every inch of that 500-1000 miles.
Last edited by amoosenamedhank; 09-30-2010 at 04:54 PM.