Act 2600 V.s. 2100

[JET]

The 2100 is good to about 280 whp, after that I would step up to the 2600 or try one of the other clutches. I loved my 2100 in my first DSM. Felt like stock and held good enough for low 13's.

[CVD]

I would say that if you ever plan on upgrading the turbo, go with a 2600.

[Enes]

Originally posted by JET@Apr 2 2004, 01:59 PM
The 2100 is good to about 280 whp, after that I would step up to the 2600 or try one of the other clutches. I loved my 2100 in my first DSM. Felt like stock and held good enough for low 13's.
well i will be testing that this weekend on my dsm... :) with some stickier tires :)

[illz]

what year is your car?

[Enes]

mine? its 99

[pianoman]

every heard of feramic?? theres 2 options for the clutch,
either it uses a stock pp, or you can use it with a 2100 pound pp.
theres guys running mid 11's pass after pass, with almost stock pedal feel.
the only place i know that carries it is ams, automotosports.com

[Enes]

well lets just say this... stay away from 2100's .. i tried it today on drag raidals and it was the weak link.. good bye

-E

[MustGoFaster]

On the other hand my 1900 held nicely. Even on the 6K launch. Didn't smell it once. It is only 1,000 miles old though.

[Enes]

mine only has 650 .. maybe thats why :( plus it sat all winter.... :( :fworld:

[MustGoFaster]

Originally posted by Enes@Apr 4 2004, 09:21 PM
mine only has 650 .. maybe thats why :(  plus it sat all winter.... :(  :fworld:
John's 2100 that he had in the galant sucked too. I think 2100's are the biggest pices of :censored: :censored: ever made. On the other hand if you were slipping it a lot it might be glazed.