Handling after upgrading suspension

[keith.wilkinson.10]

Dumb question whats the diff between subframe and rear cradle bushings?

[JDP Sales]

Originally Posted by keith.wilkinson.10

Dumb question whats the diff between subframe and rear cradle bushings?

Nothing; Tomato/Tomato - Same thing, different name.

Best regards,

Tyler
888-308-6007

[Powellbr]

Has anyone replaced the bushings for the upper control arms? Is it really worth it or does it not really make that much of a difference?

[keith.wilkinson.10]

I'm curious too. But either way I'm doing upper control and cradle bushing at the same time since the cradle will already be un bolted save me from doing it twice.

Here's a great video of stock vs solid cradles I'm going poly but they too wont flex much....

http://youtu.be/6yOz--DIuIc

[Nighthawk89]

Originally Posted by Powellbr

Has anyone replaced the bushings for the upper control arms? Is it really worth it or does it not really make that much of a difference?

It is deff worth it. I just replaced mine. Unfortunately i didnt put a picture of that portion of the install but the upper control arm bushing stock are very mushy and lax. The ones from BMR or JDP really help. Very easy install if you remove the rear end out from under the car.

[Nighthawk89]

Originally Posted by keith.wilkinson.10

I'm curious too. But either way I'm doing upper control and cradle bushing at the same time since the cradle will already be un bolted save me from doing it twice.

Here's a great video of stock vs solid cradles I'm going poly but they too wont flex much....

http://youtu.be/6yOz--DIuIc

Is it worth saving the $ now to replace them later on anyways? How many times do you plan on paying for the labor or doing it yourself? The rear end is not easy to do and will be time consuming. I recommend doing the solids and if you plan on going supercharger install a ZL1 pump when its down. Jope this helps.

[JDP Sales]

Originally Posted by Powellbr

Has anyone replaced the bushings for the upper control arms? Is it really worth it or does it not really make that much of a difference?

Here are the main area to address in the 5th gen suspension:

Sway bars
Trailing arms w/ outer bushings
Toe links
Upper control arm bushings
Subframe/cradle bushings
Dampers/spring or coilovers
Front radius arm bushings

Notice I left out bracing. The 5th gen is a VERY stiff chassis and IMHO does not need bracing. Save your money and spend it on the lower hanging fruit.










If you would like some real world advice from people that test all the parts we offer and track their 5th gen, feel free to call, PM or email me anytime.

Best regards,

Tyler
888-308-6007

[Powellbr]

Yeah ive seen those images on another thread, guess I should of also mentioned that I'll be going with KW's V3 coilovers also, but with the bracing I'd rather have it and not need it rather than need it one day and SOL, just my opinon tho

[Powellbr]

Ok, so I was going over the numbers on how much power my car will in theory be making when finished and was wondering how much if any the new motor mounts, bushings, the strut tower brace, and the sub frame connectors will allow to be transferred to the wheels?

[KaBoom1701]

Stick with Tyler's recommendations...

[RKCamaro13]

I'd like to see the math behind these theoretical numbers.

[Powellbr]

Originally Posted by RKCamaro13

I'd like to see the math behind these theoretical numbers.

Ok, so how I got these numbers is a while back I googled a formula to calculate intercooler efficiency and found the site for AutoSpeed, most notably their article on intercooler efficiency like I wanted. Mind you, I still can't figure out how he got the .286 exponent for theoretical outlet temp but the rest seems sound. Here's a link to the page: http://www.autospeed.com/cms/article.html?&A=109789. This time around, I only wanted the density difference between ambient and the charge going into the cylinders, so after I got to that equation, I took the number I got from that and then multiplied the base horsepower from the LSX-427 I'll be using, which is 675 horsepower. Then, with some other numbers I found online for the Methanol injection boost (which I know is minimal) and the nitro additive for it from Snow Performance, which on their site And I Quote "will add 50 horsepower on a 500 wheel horsepower car". I know I'll be running 19 psi of boost so on Phastek Performance I went to the chart for the upgrade pulley for the pressure ratio and it's 2.73:1. Since this is in theory, I chose to use 22 *C for the ambient temp instead of 20 *C, which I know is an average day in the summer around where I live. So that is how I got my numbers.
EDIT: Also, because the 70% efficiency is for a turbo, I've googled in the past and recently to satisfy my curious streak about the efficiency of the Whipple W175 supercharger, which is 99% volumetric and 84% adiabatic

[RKCamaro13]

Originally Posted by Powellbr

Ok, so how I got these numbers is a while back I googled a formula to calculate intercooler efficiency and found the site for AutoSpeed, most notably their article on intercooler efficiency like I wanted. Mind you, I still can't figure out how he got the .286 exponent for theoretical outlet temp but the rest seems sound. Here's a link to the page: http://www.autospeed.com/cms/article.html?&A=109789. This time around, I only wanted the density difference between ambient and the charge going into the cylinders, so after I got to that equation, I took the number I got from that and then multiplied the base horsepower from the LSX-427 I'll be using, which is 675 horsepower. Then, with some other numbers I found online for the Methanol injection boost (which I know is minimal) and the nitro additive for it from Snow Performance, which on their site And I Quote "will add 50 horsepower on a 500 wheel horsepower car". I know I'll be running 19 psi of boost so on Phastek Performance I went to the chart for the upgrade pulley for the pressure ratio and it's 2.73:1. Since this is in theory, I chose to use 22 *C for the ambient temp instead of 20 *C, which I know is an average day in the summer around where I live. So that is how I got my numbers.
EDIT: Also, because the 70% efficiency is for a turbo, I've googled in the past and recently to satisfy my curious streak about the efficiency of the Whipple W175 supercharger, which is 99% volumetric and 84% adiabatic

I'm not saying the guy who did the math for the intercooler is wrong, but I would try to find something a little more reliable. The author of that article has a degree in teaching and journalism, not in math, but he could be right. It is also from 7 years ago, things probably have changed. Also I hope you accounted for the claimed 50 rwhp of meth is not at the crank like your calculations with the lsx block. I wouldn't get my hopes of either of making that number either, odds are you won't that's an ideal number with perfect conditions. To answer your previous question of how much motor mounts and other bushings will help to put power down, it's insignificant. You probably won't really be able to tell on a dyno just because of the varied numbers you will get from pull to pull.

[Powellbr]

Originally Posted by RKCamaro13

I'm not saying the guy who did the math for the intercooler is wrong, but I would try to find something a little more reliable. The author of that article has a degree in teaching and journalism, not in math, but he could be right. It is also from 7 years ago, things probably have changed. Also I hope you accounted for the claimed 50 rwhp of meth is not at the crank like your calculations with the lsx block. I wouldn't get my hopes of either of making that number either, odds are you won't that's an ideal number with perfect conditions. To answer your previous question of how much motor mounts and other bushings will help to put power down, it's insignificant. You probably won't really be able to tell on a dyno just because of the varied numbers you will get from pull to pull.

OK, well thats good to know about my other question, and when I found that article I didn't even see that it was 7 yrs old (at the time it was only 6 yrs old so, yeah), and I guess I should of known I was doing something wrong when I was doing my numbers again. However, one thing I always do once I have the final number, there's a converter that I've found online put out by mk5cortinaestate and Frozenmist that I really like and use to get a rough guess of where the numbers at the wheels will be. So, after I get the rough number @ the wheels, I'll add the 10% (50 horsepower on a 500 horsepower car= 10%) to that number so yeah, more info to come.

UPDATE: so I just did that and the number is 1883, and that's at the crank, and the number at the wheels is ~1600, its actually so close it might as well be 1600 @ the wheels.