Ever wonder why a Stalled Auto will out run the M6
09-06-2010, 01:00 PM
#21
what about the graphs on the site touting high converter efficiency, and it was run with the converter LOCKED 
obviously its going to make power you're taking 30+ pounds of rotating mass away.
not bashing your product, im sure the converters are top notch. but the advertising confuses me... i'd like to see a rpm scaled graph as well as the torque curve, obviously its gonna show a buttload of torque (hp) down low over a stick car!
obviously its going to make power you're taking 30+ pounds of rotating mass away.not bashing your product, im sure the converters are top notch. but the advertising confuses me... i'd like to see a rpm scaled graph as well as the torque curve, obviously its gonna show a buttload of torque (hp) down low over a stick car!
Not sure where you got the converter locked from?( the transmission is locked into 3rd gear)
At no point where any converters LOCKED all tests are unlocked in 3rd gear fron a dead stop to Red line revlimiter
the M6 car was run from 30 mph roll in 3rd gear.
Last edited by Yank; 09-06-2010 at 01:06 PM.
03-07-2011, 09:59 AM
#25
11 Second Club
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: TN
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you go do your on research, and if you can believe the magazines who did the tests, the GXP LS3 A6 with 3.27 rear end gearing is 0.2 tenths of a second quicker in 1/4 mile than the GXP LS3 M6 with 3.70 rear end gearing in their testing.
Thats with a stock converter. GPX A6 doesn't even need a stalled converter to do it.
Again, as stated in my first post I have an A6 with a Yank converter. I have no bone to pick with Yank converters. The GPX comparison is a poor example to use to promote aftermarket stalled converter making your car faster in 1/4 mile than a M6 for the simple reason the A6 with stock stall can already do that.
Thats with a stock converter. GPX A6 doesn't even need a stalled converter to do it.
Again, as stated in my first post I have an A6 with a Yank converter. I have no bone to pick with Yank converters. The GPX comparison is a poor example to use to promote aftermarket stalled converter making your car faster in 1/4 mile than a M6 for the simple reason the A6 with stock stall can already do that.
03-07-2011, 11:05 AM
#27
11 Second Club
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: TN
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But the threads TITLE "Ever wonder why a Stalled Auto will out run the M6" makes your statement's case not relevant too...
In the GPX A6 case it's the gearing splits that make the difference over the M6 in it's ability to compete with it even when both GPXs don't have the same rear end gearing.
A4s need more stall and at least the same rear end gearing to make a run at the M4-M6 transmissions.
Try seening what would happen to A4's against M4-M6, if your A4 had a 3.27 and the M6 has a 3.70 rear gear even with a high STALLed converter.
Quote from another thread about A6. Not my words.
6L80/90
4.03
2.36 -- 58.56% (high) RPM Retention 41.44% RPM DROP
1.53 -- 64.83% (high) RPM Retention 35.17% RPM DROP
1.15 -- 75.16% (high) RPM Retention 24.84% RPM DROP
0.852 -- 74.09% (high) RPM Retention 25.91% RPM DROP
4l65/70
3.06
1.62 -- 52.94% (high) RPM Retention 47.06% RPM DROP
1.00 -- 61.73% (high) RPM Retention 38.27% RPM DROP
4l80/85
2.48
1.48 -- 59.68% (high) RPM Retention 40.32% RPM DROP
1.00 -- 67.57% (high) RPM Retention 32.43% RPM DROP
As you can see the 4l65/70 has the absolute worst ability to keep the engines RPM's high with each shift. That means the engine has to drop to a low RPM and lug itself up to speed again. When you factor in the loss of momentum between shifts due to the transmissions design, you see why it's essential that the transmission BANG into gear to minimize that loss. That however puts a strain on the trans/clutches each bang-shift. It's also why it's more of an ideal transmission for motors that make power lower in the RPMs...a nice broad mid range torque band. Something many guys don't consider when picking their cams, transmissions, rear ratios and torque converters.
Conversely, the 4l80/85 offers the absolute best RPM carry over (or minimum RPM loss) and clutch hand off between gear shifts. However, it's first gear ratio to get the ball rolling offers the LEAST amount of torque multiplication. So in order to equate the same first gear grunt that the 4L65/70 offers you'll have to once again change your rear end ratio and/or torque converter.
Last, and hardly least, is the 6L80/90 which offers the best all around compromise. Second best rating of maintaining RPM levels, highest first gear torque multiplication, gear to gear clutch handoff, an extra stepped forward gear, AND a top gear that multiplies torque 15% greater (1.00 vs 1.15)...and depending on variation...highest torque capacity.
4.03
2.36 -- 58.56% (high) RPM Retention 41.44% RPM DROP
1.53 -- 64.83% (high) RPM Retention 35.17% RPM DROP
1.15 -- 75.16% (high) RPM Retention 24.84% RPM DROP
0.852 -- 74.09% (high) RPM Retention 25.91% RPM DROP
4l65/70
3.06
1.62 -- 52.94% (high) RPM Retention 47.06% RPM DROP
1.00 -- 61.73% (high) RPM Retention 38.27% RPM DROP
4l80/85
2.48
1.48 -- 59.68% (high) RPM Retention 40.32% RPM DROP
1.00 -- 67.57% (high) RPM Retention 32.43% RPM DROP
As you can see the 4l65/70 has the absolute worst ability to keep the engines RPM's high with each shift. That means the engine has to drop to a low RPM and lug itself up to speed again. When you factor in the loss of momentum between shifts due to the transmissions design, you see why it's essential that the transmission BANG into gear to minimize that loss. That however puts a strain on the trans/clutches each bang-shift. It's also why it's more of an ideal transmission for motors that make power lower in the RPMs...a nice broad mid range torque band. Something many guys don't consider when picking their cams, transmissions, rear ratios and torque converters.
Conversely, the 4l80/85 offers the absolute best RPM carry over (or minimum RPM loss) and clutch hand off between gear shifts. However, it's first gear ratio to get the ball rolling offers the LEAST amount of torque multiplication. So in order to equate the same first gear grunt that the 4L65/70 offers you'll have to once again change your rear end ratio and/or torque converter.
Last, and hardly least, is the 6L80/90 which offers the best all around compromise. Second best rating of maintaining RPM levels, highest first gear torque multiplication, gear to gear clutch handoff, an extra stepped forward gear, AND a top gear that multiplies torque 15% greater (1.00 vs 1.15)...and depending on variation...highest torque capacity.
Last edited by poorhousenext; 03-07-2011 at 11:28 AM.
03-07-2011, 11:32 AM
#28
So, Yank is claiming more than 100% converter efficiency?
That is how I understand this thread. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I like Yank but this is kind of silly...
That is how I understand this thread. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I like Yank but this is kind of silly...
03-07-2011, 12:41 PM
#29
11 Second Club
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: TN
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Computer software modeling of A6 compared to 4L65 with LS3 engine, 3.70 rear gear and 3,000 RPM stalls. You can see the greater RPM lost between shifts plays a major part in making the converted look more efficient.
Compare the engine RPM (Red) to Drag (purple) line and clutch speed (green) line of the two transmission and you should be able to see why you might think that, even when all things are equal. The A6's gearing make converter look that way IMHO. Stall the A4 higher and it would look better.
Now remember Like Forrest Gump, "I'm not a smart man."
4L65E
6l80E
4L60E
60' = 1.819
1/8 mile = 7.864
1/8 mile (mph) = 91.0
1/4 mile = 12.279
1/4 mile (mph) = 112.3
0-60 = 4.11 secs
0-100 = 9.81 secs
6L80E
60' = 1.816
1/8 mile = 7.725
1/8 mile (mph) = 93.0
1/4 mile = 11.99
1/4 mile (mph) = 115.4
0-60 = 3.77 secs
0-100 = 8.98 secs
Like I said, "Poor comparsion example". Results might not be the same when comparing A4's to M6's with all things being equeal.
Last edited by poorhousenext; 03-07-2011 at 12:52 PM.
03-07-2011, 12:45 PM
#30
How often do you run across a car exactly like yours with the exact same power, just an automatic instead of a manual?
Same exact driver skill and all?
The automatic won't always outrun the manual.
I know it's just basically an advertisement for yank converters, this is a poor choice of comparisons.
You should ask ever wonder why a stalled auto will outrun a non stalled auto. Direct comparison.
Same exact driver skill and all?
The automatic won't always outrun the manual.
I know it's just basically an advertisement for yank converters, this is a poor choice of comparisons.
You should ask ever wonder why a stalled auto will outrun a non stalled auto. Direct comparison.
03-07-2011, 12:46 PM
#31
A4s need more stall and at least the same rear end gearing to make a run at the M4-M6 transmissions.
Try seening what would happen to A4's against M4-M6, if your A4 had a 3.27 and the M6 has a 3.70 rear gear even with a high STALLed converter.
Quote from another thread about A6. Not my words.
03-07-2011, 01:21 PM
#33
If you look at the graph you will see that the M6 is stock and the A6 cars 3200 and 3600are tuned for the converter.
We did test the A6 car untuned with the stock converter and the M6 produced more power to the ground and the A6 did not do well from the same roll race 40 MPH
to 90 MPH .
Anyway you look at it the stalled A6 beat the M6 and the non stalled car did the worst.
No brag just fact!
We did test the A6 car untuned with the stock converter and the M6 produced more power to the ground and the A6 did not do well from the same roll race 40 MPH
to 90 MPH .
Anyway you look at it the stalled A6 beat the M6 and the non stalled car did the worst.
No brag just fact!
03-07-2011, 01:49 PM
#34
Don't get me wrong, I have an auto and I like it, I'm even getting ready to pull the trigger on a Yank SS4000 for it. It just isn't ever going to dyno or roll on like a manual car. That is not a problem since a real race is from a dig, where a stalled auto REALLY shines!
03-07-2011, 06:10 PM
#35
Teching In
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
since that converter dynoed higher than manual, than it's
efficiency is over 100%.
Can you shed some light on that?
03-08-2011, 05:41 AM
#36
GM did not put the same 3rd gear and rear end ratios in the A6 and M6 cars so the overall ratio you end up with is shorter in the M6.
that is why the top speed of the m6 is lower.
The A6 car was also tuned for the converter, if all ratios and tunes would have been equal as produced the M6 would show a higher HP number.
03-08-2011, 06:00 AM
#37
Not directly, just by showing dyno sheets of "same" cars with trans/stall as the advertised difference and the auto putting more power to the tires. Once one looks more closely at all of the various info you have linked here, it shows the stalled, untuned A6 only put 334.8 to the tires while the bone stock M6 put 352.2 down. These are the charts that should be overlaid in this thread titled "Ever wonder why a Stalled Auto will out run the M6" where the claim is made that the auto put more power down than the manual. Simple fact is, it didn't, doesn't and never will.
Don't get me wrong, I have an auto and I like it, I'm even getting ready to pull the trigger on a Yank SS4000 for it. It just isn't ever going to dyno or roll on like a manual car. That is not a problem since a real race is from a dig, where a stalled auto REALLY shines!
Don't get me wrong, I have an auto and I like it, I'm even getting ready to pull the trigger on a Yank SS4000 for it. It just isn't ever going to dyno or roll on like a manual car. That is not a problem since a real race is from a dig, where a stalled auto REALLY shines!
The Auto put more power to the tires from the begining of the run till the converter went 1 TO 1 and stopped producing extra torque STR.
Please you look at the graph below
https://ls1tech.com/forums/attachmen...e-scan0005.jpg
You can see at 40 MPH a huge gain in HP to around 80 MPH the A6 has great HP gain at the tires and at 60 MPH the gain is over 50 HP.
The point here is that over the usefull range of the gear slection the auto with the correct converter will put more average HP to the wheels.
The amount at peak HP is produced for a small window of time is is not of much importance here.
Thanks for the Questions.
03-08-2011, 10:29 AM
#38
The Auto put more power to the tires from the begining of the run till the converter went 1 TO 1 and stopped producing extra torque STR.
Please you look at the graph below
https://ls1tech.com/forums/attachmen...e-scan0005.jpg
You can see at 40 MPH a huge gain in HP to around 80 MPH the A6 has great HP gain at the tires and at 60 MPH the gain is over 50 HP.
The point here is that over the usefull range of the gear slection the auto with the correct converter will put more average HP to the wheels.
The amount at peak HP is produced for a small window of time is is not of much importance here.
Thanks for the Questions.
Please you look at the graph below
https://ls1tech.com/forums/attachmen...e-scan0005.jpg
You can see at 40 MPH a huge gain in HP to around 80 MPH the A6 has great HP gain at the tires and at 60 MPH the gain is over 50 HP.
The point here is that over the usefull range of the gear slection the auto with the correct converter will put more average HP to the wheels.
The amount at peak HP is produced for a small window of time is is not of much importance here.
Thanks for the Questions.
I want to see either both cars with the custom tune or both cars with the stock tune. I saw this chart you have just referred me back to in your first post and it is what prompted me to post in the fist place. It is an apples to oranges comparison since the automatic car has an engine mod for more power, the custom tune. Looking at the PDF from your website, it is obvious that the custom tune did pick up power in the midrange over just the stall and stock tune.
So, since you have both runs available and just need to use the run files and software to overlay them, can we see the stalled auto with no tune vs. the stock manual? I already know the stalled auto puts out 13.82 less peak hp than the manual but it would be nice to see the area under the curve without extra mods done to the automatic car.
03-08-2011, 11:22 AM
#40
Thanks for the reply. I think you may have misunderstood me however.
I want to see either both cars with the custom tune or both cars with the stock tune. I saw this chart you have just referred me back to in your first post and it is what prompted me to post in the fist place. It is an apples to oranges comparison since the automatic car has an engine mod for more power, the custom tune. Looking at the PDF from your website, it is obvious that the custom tune did pick up power in the midrange over just the stall and stock tune.
So, since you have both runs available and just need to use the run files and software to overlay them, can we see the stalled auto with no tune vs. the stock manual? I already know the stalled auto puts out 13.82 less peak hp than the manual but it would be nice to see the area under the curve without extra mods done to the automatic car.
I want to see either both cars with the custom tune or both cars with the stock tune. I saw this chart you have just referred me back to in your first post and it is what prompted me to post in the fist place. It is an apples to oranges comparison since the automatic car has an engine mod for more power, the custom tune. Looking at the PDF from your website, it is obvious that the custom tune did pick up power in the midrange over just the stall and stock tune.
So, since you have both runs available and just need to use the run files and software to overlay them, can we see the stalled auto with no tune vs. the stock manual? I already know the stalled auto puts out 13.82 less peak hp than the manual but it would be nice to see the area under the curve without extra mods done to the automatic car.
Maybe this has some of your answers as it shows the stock A6 with no tune or converter.
http://www.converter.cc/g8/g8.pdf