Torque Converter for my Ls1 398 stroker
Thread Starter
Teching In
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Torque Converter for my Ls1 398 stroker Hello,
built a new Ls1 engine for my Chevelle and threw it in the car with the original torque converter that came with the engine and trans from a Camaro. As you might now that converter is a bit tight for any thing but the original Ls1.
I dyno the engine with the that converter and and the resault I got was Torque 580.6Nm @ 4460 rpm and Power 414,0hp @ 5720.
So my question is, wich converter do you think I should go with?
I was thinking of something with a stall at about 2800 rpm, the car is made for street use and some cruise nights. Some dragrace may occur....
built a new Ls1 engine for my Chevelle and threw it in the car with the original torque converter that came with the engine and trans from a Camaro. As you might now that converter is a bit tight for any thing but the original Ls1.
I dyno the engine with the that converter and and the resault I got was Torque 580.6Nm @ 4460 rpm and Power 414,0hp @ 5720.
So my question is, wich converter do you think I should go with?
I was thinking of something with a stall at about 2800 rpm, the car is made for street use and some cruise nights. Some dragrace may occur....
Moderator
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 7,323
Likes: 529
From: Ann Arbor, MI
With a 3.51 rear and a torque curve that drops off steeply after 5000, and intended mostly for street driving, a 3200 to 3600 stall is my suggestion. I have had the Circle D and Yank SS and both are very tight for street driving. Avoid the TCI which besides being cheaply built, it very loose and annoying on the street.
To explain tight and loose - with the TCI the car would barely move from a start until RPM hit 2500. With the Circle D or Yank SS, I could accelerate briskly keeping the RPMs below 2500. All this with a 3.42 rear.
To explain tight and loose - with the TCI the car would barely move from a start until RPM hit 2500. With the Circle D or Yank SS, I could accelerate briskly keeping the RPMs below 2500. All this with a 3.42 rear.
Trending Topics
TECH Junkie
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 3,913
Likes: 366
From: White Bear, Mn
With a 3.51 rear and a torque curve that drops off steeply after 5000, and intended mostly for street driving, a 3200 to 3600 stall is my suggestion. I have had the Circle D and Yank SS and both are very tight for street driving. Avoid the TCI which besides being cheaply built, it very loose and annoying on the street.
To explain tight and loose - with the TCI the car would barely move from a start until RPM hit 2500. With the Circle D or Yank SS, I could accelerate briskly keeping the RPMs below 2500. All this with a 3.42 rear.
To explain tight and loose - with the TCI the car would barely move from a start until RPM hit 2500. With the Circle D or Yank SS, I could accelerate briskly keeping the RPMs below 2500. All this with a 3.42 rear.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo Thread Starter
Teching In
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
So just to get your opinion, what do you think about the B&M Holeshot Torque Converters
part# 70442?
I quote: "Stall speed listings are based on engines producing 230lb. ft. of torque at 2,500 rpm. More torque at 2,500 rpm will give you more stall speed, less torque at 2,500 rpm will give you less stall speed than the stall speed ratings indicated."
From the B&M website.
part# 70442?
I quote: "Stall speed listings are based on engines producing 230lb. ft. of torque at 2,500 rpm. More torque at 2,500 rpm will give you more stall speed, less torque at 2,500 rpm will give you less stall speed than the stall speed ratings indicated."
From the B&M website.
My personal opinion, from someone who has had a variety of "off the shelf" and custom built converters...call a reputable place such as Ultimate Converter Concepts, Precision, PTC, Circle D, Freakshow, etc... and tell them what you have, what you want, and what you'll be doing with it. It'll more than likely cost a couple hundred dollars more than buying an off the shelf converter from Summit racing, but you will be SO much happier in the end. A properly built and set up converter from someone is WELL worth the money. Just my two cents for you sir.
im conservative and i wish i'd picked a 3600. my billet 3k stall is fine but i rode in a car with 3:73's & a 3600 and the combo was smoother than mine for normal driving. my 9.5" or 10" (cant remember) is 20 lbs lighter than stock so you rev alot faster.
Referring back to post #1,'As you might now that converter is a bit tight for any thing but the original Ls1.'. The OEM convertor is tight for the original LS1 !
You want performance,if you didn't you wouldn't have put an LS1 in the Chevelle.
3.51 is a good rear end ratio.
NO on the B&M holeshot convertor.
Do it right and correct the first time and you won't be wasting time and money to correct your 1st decision.
No 'off the shelf' convertor,do it right with a CircleD or Yank(or other).
Took your graph and added to it.
The torque curve flattens out at about 3500,so that would be my minimum recommendation.
Now taking 190HP at 2800 and 280HP at 3500,we'll consider those the 'flash' rpms of the two convertors(2800 and 3500). With a 2800,it would flash/jump to 2800rpm @ 190HP,with a 3500 it would flash/jump to 3500rpm @ 280HP. It would put you immediately into to a higher power part of the powerband(90HP more). With the 2800,you'd be climbing(thru the gears) from 2800 to 3500 just to reach that 90 more HP level. Climbing thru the gears at a lower power level does nothing for performance.
My recommendation for minimum would be Yank SS3600(or CircleD equivalent) up to a Yank SS4000(or CircleD equivalent).
You want performance,if you didn't you wouldn't have put an LS1 in the Chevelle.
3.51 is a good rear end ratio.
NO on the B&M holeshot convertor.
Do it right and correct the first time and you won't be wasting time and money to correct your 1st decision.
No 'off the shelf' convertor,do it right with a CircleD or Yank(or other).
Took your graph and added to it.
The torque curve flattens out at about 3500,so that would be my minimum recommendation.
Now taking 190HP at 2800 and 280HP at 3500,we'll consider those the 'flash' rpms of the two convertors(2800 and 3500). With a 2800,it would flash/jump to 2800rpm @ 190HP,with a 3500 it would flash/jump to 3500rpm @ 280HP. It would put you immediately into to a higher power part of the powerband(90HP more). With the 2800,you'd be climbing(thru the gears) from 2800 to 3500 just to reach that 90 more HP level. Climbing thru the gears at a lower power level does nothing for performance.
My recommendation for minimum would be Yank SS3600(or CircleD equivalent) up to a Yank SS4000(or CircleD equivalent).