Chrysler 300C & SRT8 Forums banner
21 - 40 of 43 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
656 Posts
Despite the fact the rest is all valid, this is what needs to be highlighted, as yes, it does take less force to move an object that is already moving. Static friction is what we are dealing with here, and the amount of force required to move an object once it is moving works on a downward curve (assuming the plain we are moving across is indeed flat and level). Our cars already know this. It takes a lot more fuel to accelerate up to cruising speed than it does to maintain cruising speed. Ergo, if we already have a part in motion, adding increasing the amount of force to it will cause less of a peak burst of static friction, thereby decreasing any load pressures.

Again, when it comes to the TC though, it's all moot, since it's hardly the weak point on most people's setups. After doing some price research, the twin screw setup isn't something I'll be going after anymore either.
I think we need to refreshen up on physics 101. It in fact does not take less force to move an object once in motion. The inertia of an object is predicated by its mass not its speed. Without the added forces of wind resistance, rolling resistance, gear friction, all of which compound and increase the forces necessary to accelerate an object, the mass and therefore the force necessary to change that object's speed stays constant. This is within the realm of cars of course and not particle physics. So in our car scenario it will take more force, more torque, to change the cars speed at 50 miles an hour than at 20 miles an hour due the increasing in air, rolling, and gear resistance but the mass and therefore the inertia will stay the same.

And what may I ask is a "peak burst of static friction"? This might be the first double oxymoron I can remember seeing. And how does the static friction of a contact patch impede the rolling of a tire? Wait, I know the answer to this, it doesn't. Static friction or simply friction as it is commonly called allows the rotational force applied to the wheel by the axles to be transfered into forward motion.

But this is beside the point as my original question was related to whether you thought the driveline suffered more stress from a given torque at a lower rpm.

I am curious what has influenced your decision on the twin screw? Was it cost, ease of installation, torque curve, tuning?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter · #22 ·
Midnightsun,
Sorry took so long to get back. Doing some more research on Superchargers and come across my own thread. You'll be happy to know that the new AWD is 100/0 until the back tires slip, then the front wheels kick in. You can totaly disengage the front wheels by going in sport mode when you are in RWD. One of the reasons I picked up the new AWD. When in AWD I don't know if the ratio has changed from the standard 62/38.


Yes a myth in every way. No evidence, lots of speculation, and proof to the contrary...that is pretty much a myth by definition. How many people do you consider a lot? I've only heard of two TC failings, both of which had fairly modest horsepower gains over stock, one with head and cam the other stroked. These failings were without the benefit of slicks, 10" tires, or even sub 12" ETs. With the clarity of hindsight the failings can better be explained with intermittent traction than anything else. The truth of the matter is the cause of failure is unknown, but what is known is that horsepower alone is not the cause.

I've been running over double stock horsepower for some time now with no TC issues. I've destroyed the right front axle tripod on launch without hurting the TC. The TC is not the weakest link on my setup. The OP has a 2010 with that has from what I hear is a 2 wheel drive option so the TC is even less of a concern with high horsepower.

I hope AWD300CYA posts back with some particulars on his 2WD/AWD transfer. If the power transfer is variable, something like a 75/25 split that still uses some front tire traction but delivers the bulk of the force to the rear half would seem to make the sky the limit for horsepower. Turn the boost down for winter and full time AWD at a 60/40 split and the boost up for summer and a 75/25 split.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 ·
Agreed. 2005-2008 5.5 psi is safe. Looks like with the 2009+ you boost to 8 psi and be just as safe.

Very good advise for pre-2009 5.7L engines but may be outdated for 2009 and up. The top ring lands are much improved with the newer engines.



Myth
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
I'm just about at 10 psi with no problems (YET). Ton of HP (568 at the wheels, which means I'm somewhere between 652-682 at the crank) without any hint that the tranny is about to explode.

That said, I do drive in NYC alot, so most of my launches (if you can even call it that in a traffic jam) are under the TC's stall speed. And the only time I get in the Vortech's boost is on the highway. Those two factors are what keep me from worrying about a tranny upgrade. Still, opening up a centrifugal SC on the highway is a thrill that words can't describe.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter · #25 ·
Nice. I am impressed with the V3 set up and am leaning that way just because if you can keep your foot off the gas, your mpg is improved.

I'm just about at 10 psi with no problems (YET). Ton of HP (568 at the wheels, which means I'm somewhere between 652-682 at the crank) without any hint that the tranny is about to explode.

That said, I do drive in NYC alot, so most of my launches (if you can even call it that in a traffic jam) are under the TC's stall speed. And the only time I get in the Vortech's boost is on the highway. Those two factors are what keep me from worrying about a tranny upgrade. Still, opening up a centrifugal SC on the highway is a thrill that words can't describe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,824 Posts
I have a blower on a 5.7 and to be honest ... Buy a strong bottom end first ;d
If he's doing this on the 2010, he's fine. If it's on the 2006, different story...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,824 Posts
2010 or not... the top of the pistons are complete crap and will fall apart.

its not IF but WHEN.
09+ is a lot stronger than the previous models, as in, aftermarket strong. Check with some of the vendors and engine builders who have taken more of these apart than you or I.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
468 Posts
09+ is a lot stronger than the previous models, as in, aftermarket strong. Check with some of the vendors and engine builders who have taken more of these apart than you or I.

You can say or do whatever you want about the 09+ motors dude. Same crap I stand by. Do it right or dont do it at all. The lower end is crap in these cars I dont care what V8 you own.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
656 Posts
Midnightsun,
Sorry took so long to get back. Doing some more research on Superchargers and come across my own thread. You'll be happy to know that the new AWD is 100/0 until the back tires slip, then the front wheels kick in. You can totaly disengage the front wheels by going in sport mode when you are in RWD. One of the reasons I picked up the new AWD. When in AWD I don't know if the ratio has changed from the standard 62/38.
That's kind of funny. I can just picture you on your 3rd or 4th beer and researching your 50th post of the evening and thinking to yourself..."hey, this kind of sounds familiar, and this guy is kinda smart". Then you realize you've been reading your own writing. :)

Glad to hear that the newer AWDs have the option it has. I think a lot more driver friendly for most of the people. I'm still of the mind set to be AWD all the time, but that's just me, stuck in my ways... I may be whistling a completely different tune when my Tcase grenades and I can swap in the new Tcase.

Have you done much investigating on the internal workings of the new Tcase? Are there clutches that make the transfer from the back wheels to the front? Is it electronically controlled. Have you had the car on a lift yet when it is running, not in sport mode, and in drive? I wonder if only the fronts turn?

Agreed. 2005-2008 5.5 psi is safe. Looks like with the 2009+ you boost to 8 psi and be just as safe.
I don't think the upper limits of the new pistons have been tested, not that I've read anyway. The top ring lands look like they could handle a fair amount more. The cast crank...I'm not so sure of.

I'm just about at 10 psi with no problems (YET). Ton of HP (568 at the wheels, which means I'm somewhere between 652-682 at the crank) without any hint that the tranny is about to explode. Good to hear, how long have you been at your current boost level. I think that the shift kit/ valve body is really going to help in preserving the stock tranny.

That said, I do drive in NYC alot, so most of my launches (if you can even call it that in a traffic jam) are under the TC's stall speed. And the only time I get in the Vortech's boost is on the highway. Those two factors are what keep me from worrying about a tranny upgrade. Agreed, sensible driving habits go a long way. Still, opening up a centrifugal SC on the highway is a thrill that words can't describe.
I have a blower on a 5.7 and to be honest ... Buy a strong bottom end first ;d
Not bad advise at all. The cast crank is suspect.

2010 or not... the top of the pistons are complete crap and will fall apart. its not IF but WHEN.
Is this just your suspicion or have you heard of these failing?

You can say or do whatever you want about the 09+ motors dude. Same crap I stand by. Do it right or dont do it at all. The lower end is crap in these cars I dont care what V8 you own.
This seems like an overgeneralization. The stock block PA 6.1s has some pretty impressive times at the track.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter · #32 ·
That's kind of funny. I can just picture you on your 3rd or 4th beer and researching your 50th post of the evening and thinking to yourself..."hey, this kind of sounds familiar, and this guy is kinda smart". Then you realize you've been reading your own writing. :)

I believe it was my 3rd or 4rth crown and cola. You know, I thought he made sense too. :pat:

Glad to hear that the newer AWDs have the option it has. I think a lot more driver friendly for most of the people. I'm still of the mind set to be AWD all the time, but that's just me, stuck in my ways... I may be whistling a completely different tune when my Tcase grenades and I can swap in the new Tcase.

Have you done much investigating on the internal workings of the new Tcase? Are there clutches that make the transfer from the back wheels to the front? Is it electronically controlled. Have you had the car on a lift yet when it is running, not in sport mode, and in drive? I wonder if only the fronts turn?

Haven't, but now you have me wondering. I'll check it out and let you know what I find. Thanks! :You_Rock_
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
256 Posts
Jim Belle of Kenne Belle superchargers says that the 5.7 and 6.1 are the strongest stock engines built.
They have stock engines running 16 psi boost on daily drivers,you can check his write up on the
kenne belle site.I report you decide.On another note Whipple is making superchargers for the mopar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Jim Belle of Kenne Belle superchargers says that the 5.7 and 6.1 are the strongest stock engines built.
They have stock engines running 16 psi boost on daily drivers,you can check his write up on the
kenne belle site.I report you decide.On another note Whipple is making superchargers for the mopar.

Link to this write up, please?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
Jim Belle of Kenne Belle superchargers says that the 5.7 and 6.1 are the strongest stock engines built.
They have stock engines running 16 psi boost on daily drivers,you can check his write up on the
kenne belle site.I report you decide.On another note Whipple is making superchargers for the mopar.
:wtf:

If you run 16psi of boost on a stock 5.7 it WILL grenade... period... even with a gallon of meth a minute shoved up it's nose you're not going to keep it alive for much more than a few pulls. Most ridiculous BS I've ever heard, so you've reported and I've decided... garbage.

If you run 16psi on a 6.1 with plenty of meth addiction for cooling you MAY survive for a short time, may get lucky for a bit but you will pop a ringland very soon. 16psi on a stock 6.1 is 700+whp... just not happening.

Sure hope nobody reads this crap and goes and shoots 16psi at their daily thinking life is good....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1stTimeHemi

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
256 Posts
Hemi 5.7 Supercharger This is what I came across on
the kenne belle 5.7 6.1 site.Please read the whole article.You will have to copy and paste the address
into your browser,.of interest is 'MR NORMS CHALLENGER' -Ray
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
Cheers Ray I'll have a read... But all the reading in the world won't change all the pistons that have chewed themselves up over 10psi on a 6.1 and 8psi on a 5.7...

I run a 9.6psi pulley and tune at the track on a 5.7, but I know what I may have happen at some point. Possible and sensible... Two very different things.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
... And I did... He says clearly under 13 in tech tips that the hemi pistons are weak but they can handle up to 16psi for track use on a 6.1....i don't dispute that some have ran that and survived and currently still are. But... That is not a benchmark for attainability on a stock bottom daily driver.

I stand by if you spool 16psi on either hemi without meth and frequent the loud pedal you are in for disaster. Not all will grenade but far more will than won't...
 
21 - 40 of 43 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top