Ah but Im not trying to get 270 plus lbs , thus why metered I am looking for a 10 to 15 lbs rise overall in 3rd and 4th only mostly for cruise line and I have been data loging my own car and cruising at lets say 55 locked very light throttle the line well is much lower than I would think adequate which i think is one of the leading reasons you see what I call SLOW 3-4 burn up acompanied with some band burning- not extreme on band but notable, This of course could probably be corrected in tune also without making the 2-3 shift more agressive . Ideally the bleed to the boost valve from the 3-4 circuit would be small enough to accomplish this and actually happen not so much during the 2-3 shift but just after a small 10 to 20 lb rise regardless of tune. This way it would apply to all builds regardless of ability to tune and have little if any affect on feel and crivabilty with exception of the 3-4 shift which IMO could always be a little firmer.

 

Your mod with spring into boost valve actually drift all line pressure higher
Standard setting when boost valve achieve 0 PSI from PCS = line about 60 PSI
And no matter if it OEM or Sonnax/Transgo boost - it still be 60 with 0 from PCS (if we not made any mod to pump or PR )
After adding pressure from PCS we achieve pressure according to boost valve dia - at graph it will be rising line from 60 to 170/230 and so on
But your spring mod is like make PR spring stiffer
We move starting point from 60 to ... depends on spring stiffness
So its literally rise pressure line at whole graph up
Like +10 psi from start till end
It will add some bumps while engaging R or D also
No gain without drawbacks

 

Your missunderstanding .Not talking about the little spring I add I am aware it rasises all line, I talking about my old idea of hyjacking the rev boost valve with metered 3-4 cutch oil to raise line in 3rd and 4th only by about 10 to 20 psi. Mostly to correct for what I see as lower than I would like crusing line in 4th gear at light throttle . But as I said I Abandoned since i have to means to deternine meter or real world test. Ideally it would ne metered slow enought not to afect the actual shift but come on just after the 2-3 shift.

 

Frank, have you seen any 1/4 mile gains with the six pinion planetary using the 2.84 first gear? I’m mainly concerned with N/A setups not power adders.

Also, do you see any gains with a 4l60 using a lockup converter in third gear on N/A setups?

 

Definitely not
Nevertheless I'm not a native eng speaker I clearly understood how and what for your mods working
I understand difference between use spring inside boost valve and use rev area boost valve for rising line press at 3 and 4 (but for so little increase you need to make custom boost or use restricted pressure to rev area)

 

Im not Frank but I think 2.84 has advantage over 3.06 only if you have a lot of power or very bad grip

 

While I have installed those gear sets many times over the years. I have peronally never driven one with it. FEEDBACK has been varried . People with 373 or higher numeracle gears in rear seem to like it fopr obvious reasons. However those with low numeracle gears not so much say car became sluggish/ So really mixed and some said little difference at all.


Yes on converter. We noted on dyno that my 2800 FTI picked up 40 ft lbs torque when locked from 3800 rpm up in 2nd and 3rd gears with my 383 LT STROKER. So that is how my trans is set up its locks converter from 3800 up in all gears but first (only because the OPTION to lock in first was not present in my OBD1 pcm I have not yet looked at it in the new ob2 torque head set up . Still working out and learning HP TUNERS.. Of note that was the engine just stroked with cam and stock heads, intake, exhaust . NOW HAS HEADS, EXHAUST, INTAKE and more , But not ready for DYNO just yet will post more about this when i get new numbers. I built my engine arround the idea of keeping and running the stock 3.08 gears, So alot of torque down low .

 

Ahh ok. I have a LS1 still in my 2000 Z28. I bought a lvl 2 performabuilt 4l60 in 2016. It came with an FTI hard hit 4000. I’ve since put heads, cam, and intake. I’ve not dynoed it yet but now that 4000 stall goes to 5300… and I shift at 7000. Rear gear is 4.10 on a 28” tire. So I’ve always wondered if the 2.84 gear and locking the converter would help my et.

 

Locking might indeed , Not sure on the gear set though. Biggest issue with it is a very expensive experiment. Locking at the top of gears however is free. But I do not sugest unless a triple disc and make sure you keep the shift window in tcc tables. WOT SHIFT with TCC on very very bad idea,

 

Ok. I do plan on experimenting one day with the six pinion planetary and locking the converter.

 

Hi all
Measured today AFL feed holes to 1-2 and 2-3 valves
1-2 feed = 0.02 and 2-3= 0.03
Its not exact numbers because my 'tools' were drill bits but pretty close
Before I measured OEM solenoid drain orifice and it close to 0.065
If we convert dia to area it will be 4.8x difference in input and output oil flow for 2-3 solenoid (and for 1-2 is way bigger)
I think it is way excessive
What do you think about it ?
Maybe decrease ratio to 1:3 ? drill feed holes to 0.04

 

I am nit sure I am understanding? Why would you want to feed more or reduce releaase area. Also dont forget to determine how close the the distance with solenoid open the ball is to the hole as that calculates into release area.
If anything I would want a greater ratio between feed and release. However this would have to be done from the solenoid side as the holes as they are , Are so small that without the screen there is high risk of a tiny particle blocking one. I have actually seen this happen with new builds on the dyno and hold up to light to find that one was either dimmer than other or blacked out with something I could not even see till i got magnifying glass out .

 

Feed more of course
To increase speed of shifters engagement

 

I only ask because the 1-2 is actuallly a release of the 1-2 solenoid and the 2-3 a release of the 2-3 solenoid. 4th is an apply .
So you are looking for quicker downshifts ?
The only place I have ever seen that moving the valve quicker helps with a shift is the 2-3 valve with no spring as its AFL at both ends which is why i add the little stiff spring,
In my case I kinda like the dellayed 3-2 downshift as it helps mediate the downshift bump with my overun mod.
I will however tell you a story, YEARS ago I worked with a company as tech support and design builds. We suddenly had an issue with NO 2-3 at WOT whats worse randomly . Took a week to solve. A guy that worked tehre took it unpon himself to enlarge those two holes literally by 1 dril bit size in a 32nds set , Just looking you would not notice with both drilled.
He thought it would make the trans shift faster. It didnt, It flooded the 2-3 soeboid intermitantly and caused the elusiive random no 2-3 at wot
I have also seen this happen when the presure in tune is taken above 95 percent.

 

Yes

It different story
First off -its not percentage
Its desired pressure under boost valve aka torque sig and its equal AFL pressure (and GM adjusted it +- to 96 psi)
Second -pressure table has 90 and 96psi same current for pressure solenoid and it means that resulting pressure will be same
There is no need to make it 100 because it will go above map and resulting pressure will be 0 for torque sig and 80-100 line -same as idle

 

I use percentage as that is how i have it shown in the tuning software I use, It has several ways to dispplay , I make changes by percentage points. Same with shifts If I want to raise them over all or individually I use plus or minus X percent . Just easier for me in my head,
Yes I am aware of the 100 is 0 .
In any case on multiple occassions doing tech support over the years , I have run into instance where someone was having issues with the WOT 2-3 in particular with multiple different vendors and they had tried riaisng line, setting at 99 etc to no avail. The first thing I ask is what if you barley let off does it shift, If the reply yes I have them lower the WOT afl and 99 percent of the time boom its fixed .

Hmm quicker downshift on kick down. This I could see but my fear would be enlarging the feeds would have adverse effect on upshifts . As mentioned we had the guy who took it on himself to increase these just one bit size in a 32nd increment bit size with adverse effects .
But I did at one time try and enlarge the vent side on the soenoid to quicken the release to speed up the 2-3 shift from command to actual shift but failed miserably. Never could get solenoid to work right after disasembly and reassemble or perhaps the little ball didnt work right with the larger hole , So gave up on it and that is when I went to the little stiff spring added to the 2-3 valve which indeed was imediatly notable on the dyno and in car, As one of the people here posted that got my shift kit said the result was the quckest 2-3 they had experienced and in data log was actually quicker than the 1-2 which i have noted in my own car also with data log the 2-3 even at wot is always quicker as measured by the PCM.

I remember talking with SONNAX tech when he was at shop and they had considered making the feed smaller to the solenoid to do this but came to conclusion I did to much risk of the hole becoming blocked with some small particle.
I still think the best way to go would be a way to increase the area for release on the solenoid side . Just not sure of a way to accomplish that end. Amazed no company ever made and marketed a performance QUICK RELEASE solenoid perhaps with a larger release hole and larger ball .

 

I reassembled mine with ease
Drilled from OEM 0.065 to 0.086 and it works flawlessly
Im planning now redrill to 0.100 and increase feed from AFL to 0.04 or maybe 0.045
It will be still big difference in areas of feed and drain so I think it will be good
One problem here - to drill feed holes I need to take off VB and if I take it off I will wanna do some planned mods also and it will ruined results of experiment ) And Im too lazy to make only one difference in tuning because every time you need to wait all oil flush off after VB removed
__________________________
HPT also has 100 column and some people thinks its 100% but it actually not

 

HPT also has 100 column and some people thinks its 100% but it actually not[/QUOTE]

Yes I have HP TUNERS now with the torqhead swap on the Impala , The most interesting thing is I thought it would have more parametors than my OB1 CATS TUNER and in fact a number just are not there in HP I guess omited as not nessesary ?
Like I wanted to turn off my 3-2 solenoid as its the wrong ohm load and type for the 2002 pcm (1995) but cant find where. It was an option in the old system and cats tuners .
Though thus far its caused no issues or codes, so guess no biggie ,
Course it may be there and i have just not found it yet, Mostly been concentrating on engine tuning which we have doing decent now was a disater at first . (wrong firing order- wrong injector order- bad O2 - bad TPS) But worked all that out and mixtures pretty good , good enough till can get wideband on it and install flex fuels sensor .

 

Use Universal Patcher or TunerPro
With corresponding XDF so much parameters ....
HPT has good diagnostic and logging suite but very limited access to parameters

 

Frank, how new is the version of HP Tuners that you are using?

I've heard that the latest versions of the software have a lot of parameters missing because of "emissions compliance issues."

I might be wrong, so hopefully someone more knowledgeable can add some details.