98slols1

Whats the difference between the two? From what Ive found is that the short is more for drag racing and the long is for road racing, is this correct? Also would love if you guys had any pics of a short torque arm, I'm not very familiar with them. THanks

lees02WS6

iTrader: (5)

https://ls1tech.com/forums/gears-axl...ong-short.html

lethal bird

iTrader: (12)

Your correct short is more for drag and long is for road racing. Short TA are easier to put on and come with a bit of road noise. Long can be harder to install if you use the relocation kit to get it off the tail shaft of the transmission but are usually quieter. My short arm made a road noise a little more noticeable but it doesn't bother me. Hope this helps.

tim99ws6

iTrader: (31)

/\Blanket statement/\


Power and weight are the main driving factors in what TA you "need"....Wouldnt it be great if someone made an "adjustable length" ta?!.......


In due time!

UMI Sales

iTrader: (1)

A short torque (usually called tunnel mount) arm moves your car's instant center up and back which in turn plants the rear tires on forward acceleration. An adjustable (usually two way) allows the IC to move up and back a bit further yet.

A standard length, or transmission mount, torque arm (which should actually be called "beside the transmission" in relocated T/A cases) is considered for stock and handling applications.

Benefits of enhanced forward traction with a tunnel mount come at the slight detriment of increased cabin noise, keeping in mind that this doesn't bother some owners.

From a handling standpoint the shorter torque arm makes the car feel twitchy at the limit and contributes to brake hop as well but I doubt it would be a deal breaker say at the occasional local auto-x.

ramey

98slols1

Thanks for the quick responses!! This will be going on a 550-600 hp formula with a MWC fab 9 in. I will probably take the car to the track a max of 10 times a year other wise just cruising. So whats your opinions for me. Im thinking long since its not an all out dragster.

tim99ws6

iTrader: (31)

I'm assuming you're thinking adjustable vertically off the front mounting point?

.....I'm thinking adjustable length; two very different manners of approach. The vertical adjustment on the ta does very little in terms of overall hit on the tires. I fully agree that the length of the TA has a major impact on I/c and therefore the major determining factor is length. It's always amazed me that to this day we are only allowed pinion angle adjustment and some "finite" I/c adjustment via front mounting point vertical location. One would think that the golden ticket would be a true adjustable length TA with the added finite ability to vertically position within that horizontal axis would be ****!


What data do you have to support this? What testing on what car? I would love to see what you have here other than just riding status quo?



Thanks for the input Ramey!!!

tim99ws6

iTrader: (31)

If you're doing a MWC 9", this entire thread is pointless, because it comes with a Torque arm.

FormulaJoe

iTrader: (5)

It is not pointless because they come with your CHOICE of either a tunnel mounted, or tranny crossmember mounted T/A..

98slols1

yep it sure does and i have an option for a long or short torque arm

BMR Sales2

iTrader: (40)

This BMR Suspension customer says a full length torque arm worked at the drag strip for him.

tim99ws6

iTrader: (31)

MY bad, I forgot they came out with that.



Better question: Have you tried calling and talking to Eric? I personally would prefer a long style under my car, but i currently have a short style MWC TA and it's performed excellent!

UMI Sales

iTrader: (1)

I was talking vertical adjustment via link from the nose of the torque arm. Yes, it would be cool to be able to adjust length as well.

We don't have back to back testing with no other variables, trans mount vs tunnel since our upgrades on the three 4th gens we built happened all at once (T/A, shocks, relo brackets, etc). Although it certainly would be interesting to try.

Instant center is just a way to get anti-squat. Anti-squat tends to mechanically lift the car, or at least resist squat, which in turn plants the tires on the ground. After your question I started sketching and my conclusion is T/A length is a way to get the nose position physically higher in the car which allows us to have more anti-squat due to IC. From an engineering standpoint I need to decide what IC height has to do with forward traction as compared to IC location front to rear.

Transmission mount T/A vs tunnel mount T/A and the associated length change is just an industry thing that's understood amongst most aftermarket companies. I agree single variable testing would yield a more clear picture of the benefit.

ramey

tim99ws6

iTrader: (31)

Now we're getting somewhere!

butler

I bought a jeg's adj torque arm. Crappy converter got me 1.42 60'. They are built fairly well. But I have seen so many fight their 60' with the most extravagant setups. I would go with a good quality tunnel mount from umi or bmr.