Footbrake vs. Transbrake

-

9secRR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2010
Messages
559
Reaction score
727
Location
Saskatchewan
I was getting **** on a different thread about this so I’ll post up some time slips from footbrake to transbrake that I experienced in my car.

Every car is different, every combo is different, every track is different.

I hope I make B3422W5 happy now that I have posted 2 more time slips.

IMG_0092.png


IMG_0093.png
 
Maybe you should attempt a discussion rather than a carryover argument. Just sayin'.
 
Don’t like it don’t read it or comment. Just saying
Yea I figured you'd be a like that. Saw the bs in the other post that you ruined. I thought the discussion would be interesting but you're just looking for an argument. I won't be the only one to pass.
 
Move on. Nobody asked you to comment so why comment if you have nothing to add? I’m guessing you have never raced and drive a smart car to match your intelligence.

Real time slips and pictures to compare footbrake to transbrake that’s all.
 
You give our Canadian brothers a bad name. We know all yall aren't buttholes.
 
Thanks. Now is a good time to ask your husband to pass you a cold water and have a seat on the couch to check your blood pressure.
LOL. Right on time. You're so controllable. Moron. You made the list. What a hoot!
 
My problem with foot brake is that the preload involved. We’ve worked hard to get our car to leave off the brake properly. I can’t imagine the FB numbers would compare. Last weekend we were 1.27-1.29 60 leaving off a 3800 setting and not even lifting a front tire.
 
I was getting **** on a different thread about this so I’ll post up some time slips from footbrake to transbrake that I experienced in my car.

Every car is different, every combo is different, every track is different.

I hope I make B3422W5 happy now that I have posted 2 more time slips.

View attachment 1716154894

View attachment 1716154895


If you are off that much foot braking something is wrong. I’m guessing you carb tuning abilities
 
I’m 100% sure it’s not the carb. I run a toilet

Then you were throwing a lot of fuel for a footbrake car. With the transbrake you were getting away with it. I’ve seen a lot of combos that run pretty close both ways. My duster goes red on the third yellow when I footbrake so I put a long throw button in my car but never tried it yet.
 
Where is the "other " thread?
....for what its worth, my car runs about the same, fb or tb. Staging is easier with a tb, and the driver is better (me) with a tb.
On a good day, I can cut a light either way. On a bad day, footbrake lights are all over the place, tb lights are still pretty good.
 
Then you were throwing a lot of fuel for a footbrake car. With the transbrake you were getting away with it. I’ve seen a lot of combos that run pretty close both ways. My duster goes red on the third yellow when I footbrake so I put a long throw button in my car but never tried it yet.
According to the plugs it was not rich.
 
According to the plugs it was not rich.

I really don’t care if you believe me or not but there should not be that much difference between footbrake and transbrake. I won’t go into it any deeper because I’m thinking it’s not sinking in. If the combo from engine, transmission, converter, to rear gear isn’t right then maybe.
 
My opinion is it shouldn't vary by much if leaving at the same RPM. The only real difference being suspension loaded (FB) or not loaded (TB) and how your car reacts to that difference.
 
My opinion is it shouldn't vary by much if leaving at the same RPM. The only real difference being suspension loaded (FB) or not loaded (TB) and how your car reacts to that difference.
Yes the rpm changed going to transbrake.
 
My opinion is it shouldn't vary by much if leaving at the same RPM. The only real difference being suspension loaded (FB) or not loaded (TB) and how your car reacts to that difference.

Just my personal experience, but leaving off the foot, I always try and leave at a low enough rpm to where the suspension isn’t preloaded up.
I leave at 1500-2000, usually 2000. It’s “ relaxed” at that rpm.
If you have a 5 k converter, the instant you mat it, it’s going right to that point pretty much instantly.
If you’re using a brake and have the chip set at say 3600, when you let go of the button it’s still instantly going to 5k where the vert flashes at.
The biggest difference I have seen either way is reaction time, off the foot your reaction time is obviously going to be a bit slower, but that isn’t going to effect the ET, just the reaction time.
I posted this on here before, I used to have non minitubbed 70 Duster, 002/003 leafs, ran well into the 9’s at 3350 pounds.
Many on here who know me remember the car.
For about 4 or 5 seasons I was in a 10 flat index race series with it. 400 pro tree. Had a Griner brake in it ran 1.34-1.35 consistently, always wheels up.
The same nights they had the index race, they also had a footbrake bracket race. I always entered both classes.
5400 vert, launched it at 2k off the foot, around 3800-3900 off the brake. The time slips were always virtually identical, more air off the brake, less off the foot, but same ET slip.
Know plenty of guys going high 8’s low 9’s off the foot in 3200-3300 pound cars..way wheels up 1.2xx 60 foots( NSS cars)
Not saying there can’t be a difference, but its extremely unusual if it’s more than a couple numbers one way or the other. Some cars are actually faster off the foot. Less line pressure= less parasitic loss
 
Just so I can confirm I am dumb, a transbrake is used only with an automatic transmission, correct? For 4 speed guys, you are looking at a 2 step rev limiter for launch rpm control (or your foot) but it is still a footbrake race for us 4 speed guys, correct?
 
-
Back
Top