Scared to go from Yank SS to the PT
02-23-2009, 01:51 PM
#41
i have ran chris1313 at the track last year & his car screams for cam only.....him & his dad are great guys & very informative!!!! they do things right.
its to bad he red lighted on our 1 run & he got me by a long car length,it would of been an awesome race other wise,i know he just hit the 10s for the first time that night & i ran a 11.08 @ 121 with a 1.48 60' full weight.
i have the FLT lvl4 & pt4000 in a heads & cam car & make 407 rwhp & chris1313 makes 422 rwhp cam only car.
i would say chris1313 is running right where he should be at 10.8x with 422rwhp & lightened up, whats astounding to me is that his car makes 422 rwhp CAM ONLY!!!!!!!!!!
they are obviously doing something right...........................
its to bad he red lighted on our 1 run & he got me by a long car length,it would of been an awesome race other wise,i know he just hit the 10s for the first time that night & i ran a 11.08 @ 121 with a 1.48 60' full weight.
i have the FLT lvl4 & pt4000 in a heads & cam car & make 407 rwhp & chris1313 makes 422 rwhp cam only car.
i would say chris1313 is running right where he should be at 10.8x with 422rwhp & lightened up, whats astounding to me is that his car makes 422 rwhp CAM ONLY!!!!!!!!!!
they are obviously doing something right...........................
02-23-2009, 02:22 PM
#42
Yank told me that my 12-13% was right where it should be for a PT4400-2.5 str,on a 3200lb car with 450hp 4.11 gears.I had no idea it was that high since the last converter i owned was a tt-3000,2.5 and was 96% efficent,4% slip.To high imop for me anyway.I should of gone with a 2.2 but i dont remember them offering both 2 years ago.You can get the 4000 and 4400 in either 2.2 or 2.5 str.Im not bashing Yank at all,i think they have a very good product, we have owned 4 of them between me and Chrs1313 over the last coulple of years,im gonna try a different brand this season to see if i can go a little faster, and if i do ill sell the pt4400.
02-23-2009, 03:22 PM
#43
Yank told me that my 12-13% was right where it should be for a PT4400-2.5 str,on a 3200lb car with 450hp 4.11 gears.I had no idea it was that high since the last converter i owned was a tt-3000,2.5 and was 96% efficent,4% slip.To high imop for me anyway.I should of gone with a 2.2 but i dont remember them offering both 2 years ago.You can get the 4000 and 4400 in either 2.2 or 2.5 str.Im not bashing Yank at all,i think they have a very good product, we have owned 4 of them between me and Chrs1313 over the last coulple of years,im gonna try a different brand this season to see if i can go a little faster, and if i do ill sell the pt4400.
02-23-2009, 05:17 PM
#45
i mph at 122 while he was at 121...so i am making 10rwhp more...so add 1 tenth on my ET...i am at 10.91 at 121 now...he is 11.08 at 121...
now it is apples to apples...or as close as we can get...
you can go the other way too my (10.82 at 122mph) to his added 10rwhp to a 10.98 at 122mph...
Sorry HEYMOEJ didnt mean to use u as the guinea...although u did bring up my red light
that reminds me if you think my 422 is good check out demonicbird's dyno pulls i think he pulled 456 through an m6
Last edited by chrs1313; 02-23-2009 at 05:22 PM.
02-23-2009, 05:22 PM
#46
i think you got that backwards, the SS shines in this comparison...forget the weight just look at the mph...that says how close the cars are in power...
i mph at 122 while he was at 121...so i am making 10rwhp more...so add 1 tenth on my ET...i am at 10.91 at 121 now...he is 11.08 at 121...
now it is apples to apples...or as close as we can get...
you can go the other way too my (10.82 at 122mph) to his added 10rwhp to a 10.98 at 122mph...
Sorry HEYMOEJ didnt mean to use u as the guinea...although u did bring up my red light
i mph at 122 while he was at 121...so i am making 10rwhp more...so add 1 tenth on my ET...i am at 10.91 at 121 now...he is 11.08 at 121...
now it is apples to apples...or as close as we can get...
you can go the other way too my (10.82 at 122mph) to his added 10rwhp to a 10.98 at 122mph...
Sorry HEYMOEJ didnt mean to use u as the guinea...although u did bring up my red light
02-23-2009, 07:37 PM
#47
Yank PT4000 I've got a Yank PT4000 in my 02 Heads/Cam Z-28. 3600 lbs. with me in it. 1.57 Sixty on 27" Tall Hoosier Quick Time Pros running 11.50's through a Moser 12 Bolt w/3.73's. Pulls hard on the big end. Drive it to the track weekly and it's got good street manners. You will hammer that 10 bolt in short order. Get ready for some teeth coming off the ring gear. It's doesn't stall as high as I expected it to. Real satisfied with the product.
02-23-2009, 09:36 PM
#48
I've got a Yank PT4000 in my 02 Heads/Cam Z-28. 3600 lbs. with me in it. 1.57 Sixty on 27" Tall Hoosier Quick Time Pros running 11.50's through a Moser 12 Bolt w/3.73's. Pulls hard on the big end. Drive it to the track weekly and it's got good street manners. You will hammer that 10 bolt in short order. Get ready for some teeth coming off the ring gear. It's doesn't stall as high as I expected it to. Real satisfied with the product.
02-24-2009, 07:57 AM
#49
So now if you apply that to my car and heymoej you get the results I posted…I would be in this case the car that would need to add 100 lbs because my mph is 1 higher…so by adding 100lbs my time would slow down to about 10.91 at 121mph…with that being done both cars are making the same power to weight ratio…he is overcoming his added weight with heads…this is why it was a good example to use to compare the two converters cause both cars are close in mph…so if both converters were equal we would run the same ET…obviously track conditions come into play too…
Also FYI my 60ft would be around a 1.40-1.41 with an added 100lbs…
And full weight for me is around 3600lbs so add 300lbs and I would be at around 11.11 at 119mph…FULL WEIGHT…but this doesn’t compare the two cars apples to apples because heymoej would have a better power to weight ratio, easily seen by the difference in mph from 119 to his 121…
02-24-2009, 11:56 AM
#50
You obviously don’t understand the point I was making…If two cars MPH the same at the track they are putting down the same power to weight ratio…hense why you have to run a higher raceweight when you have a bigger engine or make more power…SO THE CLASS BECOMES EQUAL…
So now if you apply that to my car and heymoej you get the results I posted…I would be in this case the car that would need to add 100 lbs because my mph is 1 higher…so by adding 100lbs my time would slow down to about 10.91 at 121mph…with that being done both cars are making the same power to weight ratio…he is overcoming his added weight with heads…this is why it was a good example to use to compare the two converters cause both cars are close in mph…so if both converters were equal we would run the same ET…obviously track conditions come into play too…
Also FYI my 60ft would be around a 1.40-1.41 with an added 100lbs…
And full weight for me is around 3600lbs so add 300lbs and I would be at around 11.11 at 119mph…FULL WEIGHT…but this doesn’t compare the two cars apples to apples because heymoej would have a better power to weight ratio, easily seen by the difference in mph from 119 to his 121…
So now if you apply that to my car and heymoej you get the results I posted…I would be in this case the car that would need to add 100 lbs because my mph is 1 higher…so by adding 100lbs my time would slow down to about 10.91 at 121mph…with that being done both cars are making the same power to weight ratio…he is overcoming his added weight with heads…this is why it was a good example to use to compare the two converters cause both cars are close in mph…so if both converters were equal we would run the same ET…obviously track conditions come into play too…
Also FYI my 60ft would be around a 1.40-1.41 with an added 100lbs…
And full weight for me is around 3600lbs so add 300lbs and I would be at around 11.11 at 119mph…FULL WEIGHT…but this doesn’t compare the two cars apples to apples because heymoej would have a better power to weight ratio, easily seen by the difference in mph from 119 to his 121…
02-24-2009, 12:13 PM
#51
You obviously don’t understand the point I was making…If two cars MPH the same at the track they are putting down the same power to weight ratio…hense why you have to run a higher raceweight when you have a bigger engine or make more power…SO THE CLASS BECOMES EQUAL…
So now if you apply that to my car and heymoej you get the results I posted…I would be in this case the car that would need to add 100 lbs because my mph is 1 higher…so by adding 100lbs my time would slow down to about 10.91 at 121mph…with that being done both cars are making the same power to weight ratio…he is overcoming his added weight with heads…this is why it was a good example to use to compare the two converters cause both cars are close in mph…so if both converters were equal we would run the same ET…obviously track conditions come into play too…
Also FYI my 60ft would be around a 1.40-1.41 with an added 100lbs…
And full weight for me is around 3600lbs so add 300lbs and I would be at around 11.11 at 119mph…FULL WEIGHT…but this doesn’t compare the two cars apples to apples because heymoej would have a better power to weight ratio, easily seen by the difference in mph from 119 to his 121…
So now if you apply that to my car and heymoej you get the results I posted…I would be in this case the car that would need to add 100 lbs because my mph is 1 higher…so by adding 100lbs my time would slow down to about 10.91 at 121mph…with that being done both cars are making the same power to weight ratio…he is overcoming his added weight with heads…this is why it was a good example to use to compare the two converters cause both cars are close in mph…so if both converters were equal we would run the same ET…obviously track conditions come into play too…
Also FYI my 60ft would be around a 1.40-1.41 with an added 100lbs…
And full weight for me is around 3600lbs so add 300lbs and I would be at around 11.11 at 119mph…FULL WEIGHT…but this doesn’t compare the two cars apples to apples because heymoej would have a better power to weight ratio, easily seen by the difference in mph from 119 to his 121…
How would he have better power to weight ratio if you were both 3600lbs and he dynos 15rwhp less than you. See how stupid that sounds. He just has a more efficient converter. That allows more power to be put to the ground during a pass.
Not to mention that he may or may not have a ram air kit and still I bet you would say that yours is better (unless he has one of yours). Which would skew the results even more in your favor.
And I love how you live by the rule that 100 = .1 = 1 MPH. It's a good rule of thumb but it's not an exact science. Hell, you could put that weight back in your car and it still may be faster.
Get my point?
02-24-2009, 12:26 PM
#52
Racing in a class makes all the more reason to have the most efficient best working parts on your car. Sometimes it might be a hard choice between leaving the line harder or pulling harder on the other end.
Of course you could just get a SS4000 and have the best of both worlds, right?
I wonder why they even make the PT series if the SS performs better in every aspect and is cheaper?
02-24-2009, 12:49 PM
#53
I'm not going to step on any toes here or get involved but Yank told me the PT series is a better N/A converter than the SS series and its very widely known. Maybe they will chime in here and give some insight? I was always myself under the impression that the harder you leave the line the faster you will ET which would infer that the SS4000 (2.6STR) would ET faster than the PT4000 (2.2STR). It was explained to me that the PT4000 will ET better because the shift extension which on the same car is a couple/few hundred rpm higher with the PT4000 over the SS4000 and its more efficient on the mid-range and top-end. I'm no expert but I'm going to go with Yank's recommendation, either way I would be happy tho. The lower STR is going to work out better for my application and the shift extension of the PT is going to be awesome for roll racing.
Last edited by StealthFormula; 02-24-2009 at 12:55 PM.
02-24-2009, 02:24 PM
#54
I'm not going to step on any toes here or get involved but Yank told me the PT series is a better N/A converter than the SS series and its very widely known. Maybe they will chime in here and give some insight? I was always myself under the impression that the harder you leave the line the faster you will ET which would infer that the SS4000 (2.6STR) would ET faster than the PT4000 (2.2STR). It was explained to me that the PT4000 will ET better because the shift extension which on the same car is a couple/few hundred rpm higher with the PT4000 over the SS4000 and its more efficient on the mid-range and top-end. I'm no expert but I'm going to go with Yank's recommendation, either way I would be happy tho. The lower STR is going to work out better for my application and the shift extension of the PT is going to be awesome for roll racing.
02-24-2009, 03:00 PM
#55
I just read this again and I can't help myself but to laugh. You don't have to add more weight just because you make more power. They don't dyno you before a race and they don't go off of MPH.
Racing in a class makes all the more reason to have the most efficient best working parts on your car. Sometimes it might be a hard choice between leaving the line harder or pulling harder on the other end.
Of course you could just get a SS4000 and have the best of both worlds, right? I wonder why they even make the PT series if the SS performs better in every aspect and is cheaper?
Racing in a class makes all the more reason to have the most efficient best working parts on your car. Sometimes it might be a hard choice between leaving the line harder or pulling harder on the other end.
Of course you could just get a SS4000 and have the best of both worlds, right?
I wonder why they even make the PT series if the SS performs better in every aspect and is cheaper?I can dyno at one place and make 422rwhp or another shop and only make 380rwhp, also maybe his converter was not locked and mine was…how can you base anything off of dyno numbers…your whole reasoning by the dyno numbers is flawed…when it should be based off of mph…
My experience that my SS converter is a beast off the line and still makes good mph on the top end…what would you expect to gain mph wise from a 230/230 cam and 85mm lid/maf setup over an aftermarket lid and descreened stock maf…
I gained 7mph (I have trapped 123 in -900 ft DA) apples to apples…
I said I had to add weight to make the cars the same power to weight ratio, and used the example of class racing to why I added the weight…to make the cars even, mph wise…
Maybe my car is slipping really bad on the top end and my SS is eating up a bunch of hp, but how much more do you think I have left in my setup…so if I get a PT I will mph in the 124-125 range…so my gain from SI to CAM ONLY is ~80-90rwhp with a 230/230 cam and 85mm lid/maf…It’s not like my car was on a bad tune SI…
Bottom line- We each have our own opinions I was stating mine with what I have experienced…
02-24-2009, 04:03 PM
#56
You are making one big assumption…dynos prove how much power a car can make, which is wrong when comparing two different cars…
I can dyno at one place and make 422rwhp or another shop and only make 380rwhp, also maybe his converter was not locked and mine was…how can you base anything off of dyno numbers…your whole reasoning by the dyno numbers is flawed…when it should be based off of mph…
I can dyno at one place and make 422rwhp or another shop and only make 380rwhp, also maybe his converter was not locked and mine was…how can you base anything off of dyno numbers…your whole reasoning by the dyno numbers is flawed…when it should be based off of mph…
My experience that my SS converter is a beast off the line and still makes good mph on the top end…what would you expect to gain mph wise from a 230/230 cam and 85mm lid/maf setup over an aftermarket lid and descreened stock maf…
I gained 7mph (I have trapped 123 in -900 ft DA) apples to apples…
I said I had to add weight to make the cars the same power to weight ratio, and used the example of class racing to why I added the weight…to make the cars even, mph wise…
I gained 7mph (I have trapped 123 in -900 ft DA) apples to apples…
I said I had to add weight to make the cars the same power to weight ratio, and used the example of class racing to why I added the weight…to make the cars even, mph wise…
Maybe my car is slipping really bad on the top end and my SS is eating up a bunch of hp, but how much more do you think I have left in my setup…so if I get a PT I will mph in the 124-125 range…so my gain from SI to CAM ONLY is ~80-90rwhp with a 230/230 cam and 85mm lid/maf…It’s not like my car was on a bad tune SI…
, you would be changing the efficiency of the converter. I gained 3mph from the stocker to the PT4000, you think my unlocked dyno number would be 30rwhp more than what it was? It's not about peak hp. It's about the average of how much you are putting down for every inch of the track. Yank seems to think that the PT is more efficient and has bigger shift extensions than the SS.Your experience must even exceed that of the people who make the converters and claim the PT to be the better NA converter.
02-24-2009, 05:58 PM
#59