How much did your 4L80E hurt your 60' N/A?
07-07-2010, 10:15 PM
#1
How much did your 4L80E hurt your 60' N/A? I've tried multiple searches but can't seem to find a definitive answer.
Picking up ~80# of weight, and dropping back to a 2.48 first gear, how much does that affect your 60' times?
I understand all the strength and reliability benefits. I was just wondering the affects not including power adders.
Picking up ~80# of weight, and dropping back to a 2.48 first gear, how much does that affect your 60' times?
I understand all the strength and reliability benefits. I was just wondering the affects not including power adders.
07-08-2010, 12:57 AM
#2
First,
You DON'T pick up 80#. I don't know where that myth gets perpetuated but somebody needs to get out the scales. The difference in the trans is about 30-35 lbs.
Converter is going to weigh about the same because you aren't going to use a 13" stock converter in a retrofit.
I don't have any data on a 4L60E to 4L80E swap as far as back to back times.
The best data I have is that we went from a TH400 with an Edge converter in a 2nd Gen Camaro running 6.50s in the 1/8th mile to a 4L80E.
I built both transmissions so internal mods were similar, rollerized internals, etc.
We called Andre at Edge and had him setup the 4L80E converter exactly like the TH400 converter, both 9.5" units with the same stator, fin angle, etc. Same build except the TH400 was a non-lockup and the 4L80E was lockup.
Both converters flashed to 4400 rpm.
The car picked up .02 60'. From a 1.54 to a 1.52.
It also picked up 1-2 mph.
We should have some more data on the same combo with a transbrake soon.
This is inside video of the car with the transbrake recently:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00qx69D-VDY
Car launching pre-transbrake (probably with the TH400 too).
Many consider the 3.06 low gear in a 4L60 too deep for drag racing and on heavy hitters the 4L80E and TH400's often go to a 2.10 ratio low instead of the stock 2.48. Each combo has it's own needs. An "underpowered" combo will need more gear, a pretty stout combo will have traction problems with steep ratios.
You DON'T pick up 80#. I don't know where that myth gets perpetuated but somebody needs to get out the scales. The difference in the trans is about 30-35 lbs.
Converter is going to weigh about the same because you aren't going to use a 13" stock converter in a retrofit.
I don't have any data on a 4L60E to 4L80E swap as far as back to back times.
The best data I have is that we went from a TH400 with an Edge converter in a 2nd Gen Camaro running 6.50s in the 1/8th mile to a 4L80E.
I built both transmissions so internal mods were similar, rollerized internals, etc.
We called Andre at Edge and had him setup the 4L80E converter exactly like the TH400 converter, both 9.5" units with the same stator, fin angle, etc. Same build except the TH400 was a non-lockup and the 4L80E was lockup.
Both converters flashed to 4400 rpm.
The car picked up .02 60'. From a 1.54 to a 1.52.
It also picked up 1-2 mph.
We should have some more data on the same combo with a transbrake soon.
This is inside video of the car with the transbrake recently:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00qx69D-VDY
Car launching pre-transbrake (probably with the TH400 too).
Many consider the 3.06 low gear in a 4L60 too deep for drag racing and on heavy hitters the 4L80E and TH400's often go to a 2.10 ratio low instead of the stock 2.48. Each combo has it's own needs. An "underpowered" combo will need more gear, a pretty stout combo will have traction problems with steep ratios.
07-08-2010, 04:23 AM
#3
My car now does decent with weight and 60', the new converter would be pretty close to the same stall speed. I just wondered if the combination of that extra bit of weight and the difference in 1st gear was very noticable.
As far as the weight rating goes, that seems to be a mild average of the consensus around here between those 2 trannies.
Judging by the physical size difference, and depending on what converters you're comparing (e.g. billet front w/triple disk setup), I can see the upper edge of 60# being believable. For example:
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...l80e-size.html
I've already spent 2400 on one trans, I can't afford do it twice (at least not all in one lump sum again). So the 4L80 I'm gonna have to have a friend of mine that owns a trans shop build with me, over a few months probably. I just have to figure out now what parts I need to replace, and what's good enough to stay. The car puts out 500hp/450tq N/A and is set up for up to a 200 shot, so I shouldn't have any shortage of torque out of the hole.
As far as the weight rating goes, that seems to be a mild average of the consensus around here between those 2 trannies.
Judging by the physical size difference, and depending on what converters you're comparing (e.g. billet front w/triple disk setup), I can see the upper edge of 60# being believable. For example:
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...l80e-size.html
I've already spent 2400 on one trans, I can't afford do it twice (at least not all in one lump sum again). So the 4L80 I'm gonna have to have a friend of mine that owns a trans shop build with me, over a few months probably. I just have to figure out now what parts I need to replace, and what's good enough to stay. The car puts out 500hp/450tq N/A and is set up for up to a 200 shot, so I shouldn't have any shortage of torque out of the hole.
Last edited by V-10 Killer; 07-09-2010 at 04:14 PM.
07-08-2010, 08:20 AM
#4
^ Agreed with Jake!
As for the draw backs, yes adding weight can effect things BUT considering that a Stock A4 10 Bolt car has as light of components as your going to get and that meets the bare minimum strength requirements. It's been proven time and time again that these components live on borrowed time.
I had my 10 bolt give out on me at an Event and it sucked and I had to deal with it. Putting in a Moser 12 bolt did not improve my time (actually lost 2 tenths) but never broke it at the track like that again.
So beleive me in my '94 383 LT1 would have loved a 4L80e as I ate 2 4LjunkiE trans in 2 years..... back in 2003 and 2005.
As for the draw backs, yes adding weight can effect things BUT considering that a Stock A4 10 Bolt car has as light of components as your going to get and that meets the bare minimum strength requirements. It's been proven time and time again that these components live on borrowed time.
I had my 10 bolt give out on me at an Event and it sucked and I had to deal with it. Putting in a Moser 12 bolt did not improve my time (actually lost 2 tenths) but never broke it at the track like that again.
So beleive me in my '94 383 LT1 would have loved a 4L80e as I ate 2 4LjunkiE trans in 2 years..... back in 2003 and 2005.
07-08-2010, 11:09 AM
#5
As far as the weight rating goes, that seems to be a mild average of the consensus around here between those 2 trannies.
Judging by the physical size difference, and depending on what converters you're comparing (e.g. billet front w/triple disk setup), I can see the upper edge of 60# being believable. For example:
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...l80e-size.html
Judging by the physical size difference, and depending on what converters you're comparing (e.g. billet front w/triple disk setup), I can see the upper edge of 60# being believable. For example:
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...l80e-size.html
I have personally put both transmissions on a scale, as well as TH350, TH400, and others.
A 4L80E without converter, normal output shaft, stock pan weighs 178 lbs.
A performance 9.5" converter for a 4L80E weighs the same as a 4L60E, they would use the same front cover depending on the customer/converter builders choice, the weight of the converter is irrelevant when discussing how much the transmission weighs
07-09-2010, 12:54 PM
#7
Jake is correct about highly hp applications requiring milder gear ratios. For a very mild application that has no traction problems, going from a 3.06 to a 2.48 will hurt performance. I haven't performed that exact comparison at the track, but I did compare a TCI transbrake 4L80E to one of their 6X transmissions. I used the same car, converter, shift points etc. The corrected altitude was very similar...within 200'.
The car was a 3500 lb G-body with a 375 hp SBC. It went 12.43 @ 108 with the transbrake 4L80E (leaving on footbrake), and 12.29 @ 108 with the 6X. The sixty foot went from 1.71 to 1.64.
The car was a 3500 lb G-body with a 375 hp SBC. It went 12.43 @ 108 with the transbrake 4L80E (leaving on footbrake), and 12.29 @ 108 with the 6X. The sixty foot went from 1.71 to 1.64.
Trending Topics
07-09-2010, 02:16 PM
#8
Thanks for the good information everyone. I'm on the fence right now on beginning this swap. If I do it, I have to take a loan for the $$. I'm trying to find the difference in cores from '97 up (I know I saw a good thread about it covering bellhousing bolts and what not, but I'll be damned if I can find it now), what websites I can buy clutches and hardparts from, etc...
I believe running spray off the line, and capping around 700-750tq, I need a billet input shaft, forward hub, clutches and steels for 1/2/3rd gear and OD/overrun, and I believe the Trans-go 2 shift kit. What would be other parts I should be factoring in for just trans internal upgrades?
I believe running spray off the line, and capping around 700-750tq, I need a billet input shaft, forward hub, clutches and steels for 1/2/3rd gear and OD/overrun, and I believe the Trans-go 2 shift kit. What would be other parts I should be factoring in for just trans internal upgrades?
07-09-2010, 04:17 PM
#9
91-93 cores had a different PCS (pressure control solenoid) and internal harness.
However these parts will be replaced with the newer style on a rebuild so it's not an issue.
94-96 cores were the same as the earlier ones except for the wiring and PCS.
All of the 91-96 cores have the cooler line locations together, in a similar location to most other GM units.
97-up have the "rear lube" update that was supposed to get better lube flow to the rear of the transmission. This moved the cooler return line back towards the rear of the trans. In my experience this did nothing to improve the lube flow in practical application. I've seen more of the 97-up units with lube related planet failures than the early models.
They also "updated" the OD sprag assembly in the later models to a smaller sprag. Once again, on bigger power applications I prefer the earlier style OD sprag.
99-up units have the additional bellhousing bolt hole at the 12 o'clock position to work with the LS style engines.
You can use the 98-back on an LS engine but you will be missing one bellhousing bolt, same as using a TH400, etc.
GM also made the planets beefier on the 99-up models. Slightly wider pinions.
A good change but the earlier style planets have proven themselves in 1500+ HP applications so not a critical point.
700-750 HP/TQ could use stock parts but with the torque spike of the N2O off the line the input shaft and billet hub would be good insurance, particularly with a transbrake as well.
If you know a few tricks you can eliminate the HD-2 kit, it's main feature is that it dual feeds the direct clutch pack (mandatory with any power), gives you a new boost valve and pressure regulator spring, and a HD snap ring for the case. All are excellent upgrades but the same thing can be done for about $30.
I use a new Sonnax boost valve on all builds, the HD snap ring is a 727 Torqueflite part, and dual feeding is easily accomplished internally during a rebuild.
However these parts will be replaced with the newer style on a rebuild so it's not an issue.
94-96 cores were the same as the earlier ones except for the wiring and PCS.
All of the 91-96 cores have the cooler line locations together, in a similar location to most other GM units.
97-up have the "rear lube" update that was supposed to get better lube flow to the rear of the transmission. This moved the cooler return line back towards the rear of the trans. In my experience this did nothing to improve the lube flow in practical application. I've seen more of the 97-up units with lube related planet failures than the early models.
They also "updated" the OD sprag assembly in the later models to a smaller sprag. Once again, on bigger power applications I prefer the earlier style OD sprag.
99-up units have the additional bellhousing bolt hole at the 12 o'clock position to work with the LS style engines.
You can use the 98-back on an LS engine but you will be missing one bellhousing bolt, same as using a TH400, etc.
GM also made the planets beefier on the 99-up models. Slightly wider pinions.
A good change but the earlier style planets have proven themselves in 1500+ HP applications so not a critical point.
700-750 HP/TQ could use stock parts but with the torque spike of the N2O off the line the input shaft and billet hub would be good insurance, particularly with a transbrake as well.
If you know a few tricks you can eliminate the HD-2 kit, it's main feature is that it dual feeds the direct clutch pack (mandatory with any power), gives you a new boost valve and pressure regulator spring, and a HD snap ring for the case. All are excellent upgrades but the same thing can be done for about $30.
I use a new Sonnax boost valve on all builds, the HD snap ring is a 727 Torqueflite part, and dual feeding is easily accomplished internally during a rebuild.
4l80, 4l80e, 95, components, converter, drag, edge, heavier, jake, race, reliability, ring, snap, transbrake, transmissions
