GOaT Cheese

You do omit the converter by listing it seperatlely from the transmission as the power absorber. When addressing transmission power consumption you MUST INCLUDE the torque converter into the equation. It is a package deal. That would be like saying the engine doesn't produce torque, the crankshaft does. Let's just play your game for a second, how much power (less converter) do you think a TH400 absorbs with 100+ psi. line pressure at 6000+ Rpm's ? At those levels the pump alone would kill 30 h.p..

SLowETz

iTrader: (12)

Since this thread has been hijacked straight to hell, I'll add that.... yes there is such a thing as a LU verter for the TH400.

Electronically activated lock up GearStar rmvb TB'd Th400. I own one.

As far as power loss, I lost 20rwhp/22rwtq going from an M6 to this TH400 on the dyno locked.

BOT..... Holy torque numbers on the 455. Bet that puppy gets the car rollin' off the line qwik!

Hose that w/a 300 hit and hold the ***** on

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

For somebody that has no dyno exp you got all the answers.
The trans and torque converter do act as 2 different entities. The converter absorbs X amount of power. LIKE A SPONGE when its not locked. Lock it and BAM no power ABSORPTION. It still takes some power to turn it, but it is not ABSORBING any power.
A trans, whether auto or manual takes X amount of power to turn. Those numbers can be tracked separately from the numbers of power loss by a TC.
How many other people have to tell you the same thing before it sinks in?
They are not necessarily a package deal either. Ever heard of a clutch turbo?
How about a a bruno? Thats the complete opposite of a clutch turbo. Its a lenco trans with a torque converter.
So, I'll tell ya one more time, so you can let it sink in. They are 2 different things. The power loss for each can be calculated separately.
The power absorption for a th400 with a hi stall, is due primarily to the stall itself. and the TRANS ALONE, the rotating drums, and clutch packs, and pump, are not going to take 75 hp to turn.
Sorry for the hijack but I cant stand it when someone that dont know **** tells me that I'm ignorant.

GOaT Cheese

LOL! You do it to yourself. How can something take power to run, but not take any power to run? Maybe you and I have a simple communication barrier? Perhaps in your book, when power is "absorbed" it is different than when it is consumed? Because if something "takes some power to turn it" (again note the correct quotation), said power is being consumed, but not absorbed? Help me out here.

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

I guess you just need to learn how a torque converter operates.....
They absorb power. A gear box, a trans, a rear end, all take power to turn.
A clutch takes power to turn, yet ABSORBS none.
The power ABSORPTION EFFECT can be seen by simply dynoing a car LOCKED and UNLOCKED. The converter and drivetrain take no more power to turn LOCKED than UNLOCKED. Yet, the power results AT THE WHEELS can be significantly different. Why? Because UNLOCKED THE CONVERTER ABSORBS POWER.
You're just another internet knowitall that dont know ****. You call someone ignorant when it is you that most closely fits the definition. At least in this instance.
You are thick dude.
Go spend some time on a dyno. And learn how a converter operates.
I'm done hijacking this guys thread.

Jefro6996

iTrader: (21)

I think we should just throw the motor in my car and run it on the dyno and well see how it does with a T56 and put it all to rest.

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

Thats awfully generous of you!!

GOaT Cheese

I would like for you to answer one question for me, so I can further educate myself, because obviously, according to you, I know nothing about torque converters and transmissions. If I had an engine that dynoed, on an engine dyno, not chassis, let's say 500 h.p. at the crank, you with me so far? And then I installed a TH400 transmission, torque converter and all, and re-measured the h.p. output with an eddy current dyno at the output shaft of the transmission, what do you say the net loss would be? From the previous crankshaft number, to the new output shaft number? Oh, and to make it interesting lets use a Continental 3200-3500 10 in. with an approximate 3700 rpm flash speed as our control. Again if you'd like, list the converter loss seperate from the transmission loss, that seems to be the way you like to do things, I can add them together myself to obtain a total. And if you list your findings in this thread, and not a private message, eveyone on this board will be able to use your formula for tuning.

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

Man, you dont quit do you. What dont you understand about it?
If you dyno a car locked versus unlocked, and the unlocked numbers are 30 hp less, does the drivetrain take 30 hp more to spin it unlocked than it does locked? The answer is no. dont know how many more times, or ways I can explain it. In this scenario, played out everyday in speed shops around the country, the converter is ABSORBING power, not taking more to turn it.
In your scenario posted above to try and make me look 'IGNORANT' the power loss, from the converter, if you could possibly run it locked versus unlocked, would be in the neighbor hood of a 25 hp difference. As for on an eddy current dyno, I dont know, I dont use one. How much is the total difference from an engine dyno to a chassis dyno? Again I dont know, I dont operate an engine dyno. Regardless of the hp difference, what you seem to have difficulty with, is the difference between what power is required to turn the trans, and the power absorbed by an unlocked converter.
How long do you want to keep this up?
Now you explain something to me. When you dyno a car locked, and then unlocked, what happens to the hp that doesnt seem to be there unlocked? DOES IT TAKE MORE TO TURN THE DRIVETRAIN UNLOCKED?

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

By this statement, the trans takes 75 hp to run, whats it gonna take once you 'add accordingly' for the slippery stall?
So, behind you 500 crank HP motor, on a chassis dyno, the trans/converter combo would account for damn near a 20% loss all by itself. Right? How much for the rest of the drivetrain? Another 10?
What exactly is draggin inside of the case of this th400 to make it require 75 hp to turn? Before even adding in the stall?

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

I know in a stock 6-speed MN6, not M12, and the stock Getrag differential in a C5 Vette will knock an engine dyno down approx 55rwhp. A built 3.90 rearend it will knock power down close to 75rwhp.

That's at stock levels or 800FWHP - doesn't matter. It's not a percentage. Autos are a bit different of course with the torque converter. But what this does demonstrate to me is that the drivetrain does "use" a set amount of mechanical energy through heat and friction losses. Why would the same rearend and transmission suddenly require 100rwhp to move if 55rwhp would work before? Of course, with 1000FWHP vs. 350FWHP, the heat and friction could be a lot more depending on the test.

But anyway, if you lock up the transmission or use the same converter from test to test, you should be able to tell how much more a given transmission will use or "eat" through parasitic losses.

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

Just a FYI to the OP and everyone else, I tried to take this debate to the PMs last night, goat head cheese decided to bring it back out here to try and make me look ignorant (post # 64).
To goat head cheese, why dont you go back and read several of the other posts that seem to agree with me. There are several.

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

some of that is my point exactly. theres nothing extra-ordinary about a th400 that would require 75 hp to turn it, excluding the POWER ABSORPTION of the converter, which even included seems way out in left field.
PS I am also of the belief the power consumption on a chassis dyno is somewhat a set amount as opposed to a percentage.

GOaT Cheese

Why do you insist on latching on to this statement. I never said that. Did someone else? I have always said it was a package deal, here we go again with your reading comrehension problem. All else aside, you just said you don't know about eddy current engine dynos. This is an important progression in our relationship. Eddy current dynos are not open to "manipulation", for lack of a better term, as chassis dynos are. Chassis dyno's can be skewed to suit the desires of the dyno opperator,or to a lesser extent the customer. For example, how tight the tie downs are, hood open or closed, cooling fan near or far, SAE correction factor or none at all, that's just a few. Engine dynos are very simple, they are more difficult to trick into possibly showing more power than there actually is. As stated before, you know nothing about me, or my level of experience or knowledge. Do some research on your own, don't take my word for it, but look into it, and you will learn that a TH400 (including an average stall, non-lock up converter), will "absorb" about 75 h.p. AS A PACKAGE on an eddy current engine dyno. as measured at the output shaft.

GOaT Cheese

I thought you said I shouldn't believe internet B.S.? Now which is it?

tcr98taws6

I think it's a good thing you guys live 3,000 miles apart....

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

Your exact statement. In print.

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

Every eddy current chassis dyno can be manipulated simply because they have operator entered correction factors.


Just post your info. And thats not what you posted earlier. And thats not the point you been arguing this whole time. you've tried to make me appear 'ignorant' because you cant comprehend the difference between the power it takes to turn something, and the power thats 'absorbed' or disappears thru an unlocked TC. Simple as that. Because there is a 75HP loss at the tailshaft of your eddy current dyno, does not mean that set up takes 75 hp tp turn it. If you are doing any kind of engineering, R&D, anything, you have to know and understand the difference between the 2. Its not being nitpicky, its understanding fundamentally, whats going on. Thats why I say you need to go learn how a TC operates. If you loose 35 HP from locked to unlocked, it doesnt take that much more HP to turn. And you are incorrectly stating that 'it takes that much to run'. And then on top of that 'add accordingly for slippery converters'. See my point?
No matter how you look at it you're the one thats wrong.

JL ws-6

iTrader: (50)

fwiw, a friend of mine had a 383 setup and with the m6 his car made 497 to the tires... he pulled the M6 and put a th400 in the car, after the conversion was done the car made 435 on the dyno. Car had a converter that flashed to about 4800 or so..... that's a 62 hp difference.

But, the car went a 1/2 second faster, and a TON more consistant at the track, where it matters.

NA$TY-TA

iTrader: (21)

This got waaayyyy off track.

Regal,

Just start a new thread when ya have the Dyno pic's / sheets and or an update on your set-up.

Kyle