Automatic Transmission 2-Speed thru 10-Speed GM Autos | Converters | Shift Kits
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

SS4000 drivability v/s TCI 3500 within!...

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-10-2003 | 01:21 PM
  #21  
2002 Trans Am's Avatar
TECH Addict
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,418
Likes: 0
From: Waldwick, NJ
Default

damn you colonel!!!!!

Just when I was set on either a vig or Tci you have to give me these glowing results.

I might just have to dish out the extra cash for the SS3800 because your description of the converter sounds exactly like what I want....

Oh well, its just money
Old 11-10-2003 | 01:44 PM
  #22  
Dragaholic's Avatar
9 Second Club NA
iTrader: (180)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,943
Likes: 1
From: Houston, TX
Default

Colonel, whats the difference between the SS4000 and the SS4000E? Ive noticed people add the E at the end of the series, but I never really paid any attention to it. I figure there was only one type and that just some people leave out the E. Thanks.
Old 11-10-2003 | 02:23 PM
  #23  
Colonel's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 2
From: Troy, AL
Default

The E converters have the posi lock-up clutch with kevlar linings and six-bolt mounting lugs.

Posi lock-up clutch..."the converter can actually lock-up under the high torque load of a power adder like nitrous oxide or a blower! This positive lock-up action takes place when the engine torque exceeds 475 lb. ft. This will give the racer torque to the tires, close to that of a manual transmission." The 6-bolt mounting lugs "...will spread the load to other points on the flex plate which reduces distortion and adds safety and strength."
Old 11-10-2003 | 02:26 PM
  #24  
Colonel's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 2
From: Troy, AL
Default

That info was taken straight from Yank's website, btw.
Old 11-10-2003 | 02:40 PM
  #25  
Z-Rated's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,782
Likes: 0
From: Friendswood TX
Default

How much more is the E? and is it just better holding power?
Old 11-10-2003 | 02:45 PM
  #26  
Colonel's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 2
From: Troy, AL
Default

The regular version is $895. The E version is $950. This info is straight from Yank's website too. You guys really should read it sometime!

Other than the posi lock-up clutch trying to grab at high TQ levels, the E should perform the same. The reason I didn't go with the E is because it is a little heavier due to the 6-bolt mounting lugs and because I have no plans for a large shot of N2O.
Old 11-10-2003 | 02:51 PM
  #27  
Z-Rated's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,782
Likes: 0
From: Friendswood TX
Default

Colonel me

Thanks
Old 11-10-2003 | 06:21 PM
  #28  
Dragaholic's Avatar
9 Second Club NA
iTrader: (180)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,943
Likes: 1
From: Houston, TX
Default

Heads are going to be the last power adder that Ill be doing, but wont be till later on down the road. I highly doubt that my car will ever see nitrous, so would I need to go with the E version? The car is dynoing at 417 rwhp 388 rwtq, but those numbers are to the wheels with a 6 speed. I highly doubt that the motor will ever put out over 475 rwtq even when I add heads. How do I figure out the hp/tq to the flywheel? Lastly, if I was to decide to add nitrous later on after the heads and I was pushing more than 475 tq or close to it, what kind of risks am I running? Thanks a lot Colonel for your help, dont mean to ask so many questions, but we all know youre the man with the knowledge! (...and know that Im the Question King! )
Old 11-10-2003 | 06:37 PM
  #29  
Colonel's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 2
From: Troy, AL
Default

If you don't plan on at least a fairly large shot of nitrous then don't bother with the E version. It's just more weight and more money. Even if you did end up using nitrous, the regular version would still perform great.

You can get a rough estimate of your FW numbers by taking your RWHP and dividing them by about .83-.85. If you're talking about an M6 then make it .86-.88.
Old 11-10-2003 | 06:46 PM
  #30  
Dragaholic's Avatar
9 Second Club NA
iTrader: (180)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,943
Likes: 1
From: Houston, TX
Default

If I divided 388 by .87, then it would come out to be 445. If I was to add heads, then that would definately put me at 475 or more. So even if I was to leave the nitrous out, I would be pushing the limits on the regular verison wouldnt I? Im not sure if I will ever go with nitrous, but I want to keep it as a possibility. Heads probably wont be in my budget probably until the first few months of next year, so even if I was to get the regular version, I would be set for a good while because nitrous wouldnt be till the middle to end of next year. So should I play it safe and buy for the future, or should I just save the money and go with the regular version? Thanks again!
Old 11-10-2003 | 07:21 PM
  #31  
Colonel's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 2
From: Troy, AL
Default

I have a strong heads/cam package myself. It makes 395 ft/lbs of RWTQ. If we calculate that 475/.85 is 470 then we're still not over 475 at our very peack TQ. See, heads and cam packages do more at high rpms than at lower rpms so the peak TQ figures improve less than the peak HP numbers. Now that I think about it, the dividing by .85 thing is probably best reserved for the HP number only. I think it is inacurated to assume that the TQ peak loss through the drivetrain would be the same percentage as the HP peak loss.

Point being, you DO NOT have to worry about the posi-lock coming into play with a NA heads/cam package. Trust me on that. I had a pos-lock with my ~525 RWHP 422ci engine and I NEVER noticed the posi-lock doing anything, although it may have a little. I don't know but it wasn't noticable if it did.

As far as pushing the limits on the regular version, what does 475 ft/lbs have to do with anything? You could push 600, 700, or probably even 800 ft/lbs through it and not hurt it. The 475 ft/lbs is just the figure that Mike says the posi-lock on the E version starts to engage. It has nothing to do with the strength of anything.

If you might spray a 200 shot or better through this converter, get the E. If not, get the normal version. And please, don't spray a 200 shot on a stock bottomend engine.
Old 11-10-2003 | 07:58 PM
  #32  
Dragaholic's Avatar
9 Second Club NA
iTrader: (180)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,943
Likes: 1
From: Houston, TX
Default

Thanks Colonel for the clarification! It sure does make things a whole lot easier on me. I appreciate you always clearing things up for me. I hate to throw this back in the air, but other than it being tighter and having a bit softer hit off the line than the PS series, what other things differ? Which one is going to have a higher shift extension? As far as the parts that make up the converter, is there anything that the PS series consists of thats better than whats in the SS. If I remember correctly, wasnt there a thing or 2 that the SS series is now coming with for no extra charge? Sorry...Im sure youre thinking oh no...not again! I just want to be 100% sure on which one to get. But the good side about it is that I dont have 3 or 4 to choose from, Ive narrowed it down to 2! I know that the PS is going to be a little looser, but thats not that big of a deal to me. Its also going to hit harder off the line. Is there any other advantages/differences that it has over the SS? Thanks again Colonel, its great to have members as helpful as you are.
Old 11-10-2003 | 08:28 PM
  #33  
Red346's Avatar
11 Second Club
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
From: Nicholls, GA
Default

I did a visual check of the shift extension on the 2-3 shift (I need to Autotap to be sure) and it appears to be about 5350-5400. My TCI 3500 gave me 5000-5050 on the 2-3. This was a large part of my decision to change converters. The dyno graph on this engine told me that I really needed at least 5300 and it looks like I got what I was shooting for.
Track times to come. [/QUOTE]




Hi everyone kinda new to how converters work but I just ordered my TCI 3500 today and I have a question.
What exactly are shift extensions and how do I know what I need for my car.
I plan on goin with Nitrous after Xmas just wondering how this will affect every thing.
Also is a tranny cooler needed when installing over a 3000 converter?
Anyone feel free to chime in here. Thanks.

Last edited by Red346; 11-10-2003 at 08:39 PM.
Old 11-10-2003 | 08:30 PM
  #34  
2002 Trans Am's Avatar
TECH Addict
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,418
Likes: 0
From: Waldwick, NJ
Default

If you go to Yanks web site, they will give you some info.

Especially with what parts are used inside their verters as well as the vig converters.

I maybe wrong, but the SS has a higher shift extension, again I could be wrong, but I believe I read that somewhere...

BTW what I have learned from this board, is almost no matter what converter you choose you'll be happy
Old 11-10-2003 | 09:37 PM
  #35  
Colonel's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 2
From: Troy, AL
Default

"Which one is going to have a higher shift extension?"

How many times are you going to ask me that already??? I think I've answered this question in every single thread you've been in concerning these converters <COLONEL PULLS HIS FREAKIN' HAIR OUT!!!>

Go back and read that detailed thread I posted on the differences in the SS, PS, and PT converters. It's all in there. You read it too 2002 Trans Am, the PS has a higher shift extension and feels looser. The PT has an even higher shift extension and feels looser still. Or you could go and read the dozen or so threads in which people have tried to help NV make up his finicky mind on which converter to get.

The new clutch that the PS has the SS now also has so no, there is nothing better about the PS partswise.

Red, the term shift extension is used to describe what RPM the engine is pulled back to after a shift. Looser feeling converters generally have higher SEs and they MPH better because of it...all else being equal that is.
Old 11-10-2003 | 10:11 PM
  #36  
Dragaholic's Avatar
9 Second Club NA
iTrader: (180)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,943
Likes: 1
From: Houston, TX
Default

I apologize, I gotta be one of the most indecisive persons in the world!!! I do appreciate all your help though!
Old 11-11-2003 | 12:47 PM
  #37  
2002 Trans Am's Avatar
TECH Addict
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,418
Likes: 0
From: Waldwick, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by Colonel
[b]You read it too 2002 Trans Am, the PS has a higher shift extension and feels looser. The PT has an even higher shift extension and feels looser still. Or you could go and read the dozen or so threads in which people have tried to help NV make up his finicky mind on which converter to get.



I knew I had it backwards
Anyhow I am done reading about converters, my decision has come down to how much cash I have. So its either a SS3800 or a Vig3200. Both converters seem to fit my goals.

So which one has a higher shift extension
Old 11-11-2003 | 10:59 PM
  #38  
Gearhead's Avatar
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
From: Henderson, NV
Default

Colonel,

With respect to your approximate-5,300rpm 2-3 shift extension, at what RPM does your car upshift? Are you stock or pulling higher RPMs?
Old 11-12-2003 | 01:06 AM
  #39  
Colonel's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 2
From: Troy, AL
Default

I'm shifting at about 6700-6750. I know what you're thinking...that if the shift point was 6200 then the shift extension would only be 4850. If so, no, it doesn't work that way. If it's 5350 shifting at 6700 then it will probably be about 5150-5200 when shifting at 6200 (just a guess based on previous experiences.)
Old 11-12-2003 | 02:16 AM
  #40  
Gearhead's Avatar
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
From: Henderson, NV
Default

Originally Posted by Colonel
I'm shifting at about 6700-6750. I know what you're thinking...that if the shift point was 6200 then the shift extension would only be 4850. If so, no, it doesn't work that way. If it's 5350 shifting at 6700 then it will probably be about 5150-5200 when shifting at 6200 (just a guess based on previous experiences.)

That's EXACTLY what I was thinking - good call. I guess that train of thought is more accurate for an M6. Thanks.


Quick Reply: SS4000 drivability v/s TCI 3500 within!...



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:52 PM.