40 replies to this topic

[Afdharley]

2010KonaBlueGT, on 17 July 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

Those are the ones ya learn from, bro!


Phill

He's into nano tube technology. Don't even get him started on that stuff.

He wanted a set of scales for a car he atutocrosses. Found a set with one broken for dirt cheap. Built his own transducer for it it like 20 minutes and works like new. I'd still be scratching my head

[vapor08GT500]

Actually Phil, because of the less reciprocating mass, there is a few more rear wheel HP to be had. I have seen anywhere from 7-15 RWHP on the same car, same dyno, same temp, same day etc, just from going with the light weight driveshafts and nothign else. I did have a problem with one of the early PST one piece carbon fiber shafts breaking on one of my own Shelby's back in 07 or 08, but have not had one break since.

Alex

[2010KonaBlueGT]

vapor08GT500, on 17 July 2012 - 09:49 PM, said:

Actually Phil, because of the less reciprocating mass, there is a few more rear wheel HP to be had.

LMAO!

That's too funny. "Riciprocating Mass"....on a driveshaft! LOL


Phill

[patrickshelby]

You've seen it yourself?
7-15 RWHP?
Whoa, I would have never thought that could be expected...
I like the clean factor of a one piece, the high tech look (and no rust) of the CF shaft but the HP gains make me wonder if I am going to get one finally...!

[2010KonaBlueGT]

patrickshelby, on 18 July 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:

7-15 RWHP?
Whoa, I would have never thought that could be expected...
I like the clean factor of a one piece, the high tech look (and no rust) of the CF shaft but the HP gains make me wonder if I am going to get one finally...!

If you believe that, I have a bridge for sale.


Phill

[Tob]

As Tom Wilson put it...

Quote

It is lighter, stiffer, and transmits torque better than the two-piece  aluminum (his error - should have said steel) shaft it replaces.

The new shaft (also according to Wilson):

- is almost 15 lbs lighter than the shaft it replaces

- can transmit 36% more torque

- says goodbye to the friction of the center support bearing that the two-piece shaft used from '07-'12 created

No need to sell a bridge that doesn't exist, Phill. This shaft allows more power - period.

[patrickshelby]

2010KonaBlueGT, on 18 July 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

If you believe that, I have a bridge for sale.
Phill

[05mustangman]

I've had the DSS Carbon shaft in mine for about 3 months now and it is DEFINITELY an improvement over the stock shaft.  Soon as I drove the car I could feel a difference.  Feels like the car is able to shift and grab the next gear better and the RPM's don't drop way down between shifts.  It grabs immediately.  Like Alex said, definitely feels like more power is there.  After having the Carbon shaft I would NEVER go back to a two-piece shaft again.  I'm telling you, even with just regular driving the car just drives smoother.  If you can do the Carbon shaft I would definitely recommend it!

[2010KonaBlueGT]

Tob, on 18 July 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

As Tom Wilson put it...
<snip>
- can transmit 36% more torque

No need to sell a bridge that doesn't exist, Phill. This shaft allows more power - period.

Tob,

You *do* realize what "can transmit 36% more torque" means, right?

It means it is 36% stronger, not that it increases torque by 36%.

Torque is defined as Twisting Force...if anyone thinks that changing from a heavy shaft to a lighter shaft can increase TWISTING FORCE, let alone by 36%, they might want to take a basic physics class.

You'll get *no* argument from me that the new Carbon Fiber 1-pc. driveshaft is lighter and stronger than the previous steel 2-pc w/center carrier bearing. That's a given. I can't say if it's 36% stronger but I'll take "Tom Wilson's" (whoever that may be) word for it.

My argument is that it will give you enough horsepower increase to be measureable.

The way a dyno works is by timing how long it takes to spin a drum up so the faster you spin the drum up, the more HP the vehicle is producing (in theroy). A lighter DS will allow the engine to spin the drum up faster, but not so much faster as to be measurable.

Alex says he has seen anywhere from 7-15 HP increase. That's well within the 'fudge factor' on any dyno out there. And I've yet to see the comparison dyno sheets.

In fact, I've yet to see ANY scientific evidence that says a 1-pc carbon fiber driveshaft will give you ANY increase in horsepower, let alone any measureable increase and that would be easy to do, if it were possible.


Phill

[vapor08GT500]

I have seen the gains myself, it does transmit more power to the rear wheels.

Alex

[Snoopy49]

2010KonaBlueGT, on 19 July 2012 - 07:16 AM, said:

Tob,

The way a dyno works is by timing how long it takes to spin a drum up so the faster you spin the drum up, the more HP the vehicle is producing (in theory). A lighter DS will allow the engine to spin the drum up faster, but not so much faster as to be measurable.

Phill

The last dyno I played with measured power through resistance, the resistance was either by an electrical load or a hydraulic load, not speed. The higher the load the more power required to turn the rollers.

[2010KonaBlueGT]

Snoopy49, on 19 July 2012 - 12:20 PM, said:

The last dyno I played with measured power through resistance, the resistance was either by an electrical load or a hydraulic load, not speed. The higher the load the more power required to turn the rollers.

That's a Eddy dyno.


Phill

[Tob]

2010KonaBlueGT, on 19 July 2012 - 07:16 AM, said:

Tob,

You *do* realize what "can transmit 36% more torque" means, right?

It means it is 36% stronger, not that it increases torque by 36%.

Torque is defined as Twisting Force...if anyone thinks that changing from a heavy shaft to a lighter shaft can increase TWISTING FORCE, let alone by 36%, they might want to take a basic physics class.

... I can't say if it's 36% stronger but I'll take "Tom Wilson's" (whoever that may be) word for it.

Phill

You don't have to ask me what I realize. I'm adept enough to understand the quote for what it is as well as present it for everyone's perusal in the context in which it was originally stated. The increased ability to transmit torque by using this shaft is fundamental. It allows the car to transmit power more efficiently than the stock two-piece.

And if you've never read any of Wilson's work you've missed quite a bit from one of the best there is.

[Snoopy49]

I wonder if any power saved by using the one piece CF driveshaft has more to do with more efficient constant velocity joints and any loss of power due to vibration associated with the two piece driveshaft?

[patrickshelby]

So what is the end of the story?
Does an 13' OEM CF shaft swap on our old models?

[2007tungstenGT500]

my understanding is "no".

[Bill Hamilton]

Kinda off subject but then related in a small way (LOL) ...... But, after you've changed the stock driveshaft could the old one be used in V-6 Mustang? I recently swapped mine out and the stock GT-500 driveshaft appeared to be exactly like the Mustang GT's driveshaft except for an adapter plate. I know there have been some newer V-6 Mustang's lightweight driveshaft’s coming apart on dyno's or during drag racing/high speed events. The 3.7 V-6 cars are limited to 114 mph and I was told one of the reasons is the driveshaft.  Perhaps there’s a market out there for our old stock driveshaft’s?

[Tob]

patrickshelby, on 02 August 2012 - 06:54 AM, said:

So what is the end of the story?
Does an 13' OEM CF shaft swap on our old models?

A custom flange at the transmission output shaft is needed. FRPP is working on a solution as well as some gutsy GT500 aficionados. Keep your fingers crossed that at least one of them makes it happen.

[patrickshelby]

Tob, on 02 August 2012 - 06:33 PM, said:

A custom flange at the transmission output shaft is needed. FRPP is working on a solution as well as some gutsy GT500 aficionados. Keep your fingers crossed that at least one of them makes it happen.

Thank's for the update Tob!

[- Aj -]

Any updates to this topic?