Dynamometer Results & Comparisons Dyno Records | Dyno Discussion | Dyno Wars

Converter Efficiency by Dyno Results

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-02-2004, 02:32 PM
  #1  
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
 
jimmyblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 12,605
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts

Default Converter Efficiency by Dyno Results

I'm interested in converter efficiencies but there is not
much data out there other than on Yank's site. I would
like to dig at this using same-car, same-session, locked /
unlocked dyno pull pairs. I have found only a few of these
in my searching but maybe there's more that just isn't
presented or doesn't match my keywords. I'm looking to
develop some charts of efficiency across the RPM band
(not just peak #s) for any converters I can get data on.

If you have back-back, locked-unlocked pulls in graphical
or tabular form can you post them up, or post a link?
Along with converter type.

Last edited by jimmyblue; 11-02-2004 at 02:40 PM.
Old 11-02-2004, 07:08 PM
  #2  
TECH Apprentice
 
Sunset01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mahwah, NJ
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Here you go: (Midwest 3200/2.0):

http://www.vettecaliper.com/TR224ONLYA4.jpg

This, unlike EVERY other graph I have seen, has the rpm scale correct for both (particularly the unlocked) run. I have tried to get files from people with back-to-back locked/unlocked runs with no luck. I am very happy with the very top end loss, but a little concerned about the loss at torque peak (5000)... kind of makes sense, but on the other hand, people talk about the loss should be way down that far past stall rpm, but I have never seen correctly scaled graphs.
Old 11-02-2004, 07:58 PM
  #3  
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
 
jimmyblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 12,605
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts

Default

Thanks. I transcribed the numbers as best I could
eyeball them, and it looks like that converter hits 95%
efficiency at 5500RPM and sees 97% before it's done.
That stall / STR combo seems more like what I'd pick
today, having tried a slightly lower stall / higher STR
myself (no dyno time yet).

Will be interesting to see what else comes around.

Old 11-02-2004, 08:16 PM
  #4  
TECH Apprentice
 
Sunset01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mahwah, NJ
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Hopefully someone else will provide good data.
Old 11-02-2004, 08:30 PM
  #5  
TECH Senior Member
 
2MuchRiceMakesMeSick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

This is a very good thread. I would also like to know side by side comparisons.
Old 11-02-2004, 09:19 PM
  #6  
Teching In
 
1qkta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I would also like to see some more information on this subject. I only put down 371 hp on a 150 shot wet with a 1998 Trans am. The car has a tci ssf3500 stall with a 2.5str (if I remember right), slp lid, true duals (no cats), free mods, and a granetelli maf. Anybody else have any dyno numbers with mods similar to this? Also the converter was unlocked during the dyno runs and the a/f was 11.8 to 11.9.
Old 11-03-2004, 06:48 PM
  #7  
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
 
jimmyblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 12,605
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts

Default

Added TCI 3500 data (thanks, calongoss)
Old 11-04-2004, 11:51 AM
  #8  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (29)
 
ccajun4real's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tampa FL
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

I hate TCI. I burnt a tranny up messing with a TCI SSF 3500. Everyone told me that I should use Yank, PI, or Vigilante in that order, but my hard headed *** went with the cheap converter. I paid the price. My converter slipped constantly, locked and unlocked and acted crazy all the time. I have had ZERO problems with this Yank 2800

Cajun
Old 11-04-2004, 01:16 PM
  #9  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (58)
 
Z'mnypit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by ccajun4real
I hate TCI. I burnt a tranny up messing with a TCI SSF 3500. Everyone told me that I should use Yank, PI, or Vigilante in that order, but my hard headed *** went with the cheap converter. I paid the price. My converter slipped constantly, locked and unlocked and acted crazy all the time. I have had ZERO problems with this Yank 2800

Cajun
I run the TCI SSF3500 in my car with 83,000mi. Never had one problem with locking & unlocking. Its only been in the car for around 20,000 miles & about 100 nitrous passes in a stock trany! Maybe you just got a bad one, or a poor tune..
Old 11-04-2004, 07:55 PM
  #10  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (29)
 
ccajun4real's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tampa FL
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by 99PewterZ28
I run the TCI SSF3500 in my car with 83,000mi. Never had one problem with locking & unlocking. Its only been in the car for around 20,000 miles & about 100 nitrous passes in a stock trany! Maybe you just got a bad one, or a poor tune..
You are right, I guess I shouldnt generalize things, just still have a bad taste in my mouth and a hole in my walet from buying a new tranny, new converter and paying labor twice.
Old 11-04-2004, 10:04 PM
  #11  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
 
BriancWS6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: The Garage
Posts: 3,910
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Here are my results from back in Aug. TCI SSF3500 363rwhp unlocked 369rwhp locked.



Quick Reply: Converter Efficiency by Dyno Results



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:49 PM.