|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: mshred]
#1526124
11/01/13 09:10 PM
11/01/13 09:10 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,591
Canton, Ohio
Sport440
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,591
Canton, Ohio
|
Post your 1/4 mile numbers again from 60 ft. to the 1/4, I dont see them in this thread. I may of commented in another thread though.  Edit, okay found them! The concensus was that your numbers were in line  IMO, your vert slip is not the culprit. Its just a lack of HP for the desired ET. But its not a bad idea to look for a smoking gun. If I remember your engine is performing like it should for its build, I could be wrong though, as I dont remember All the specifics. You are quite the investigator though
Last edited by Sport440; 11/01/13 09:26 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: 540dust]
#1526126
11/01/13 09:33 PM
11/01/13 09:33 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 656
Kokomo, IN
540dust
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 656
Kokomo, IN
|
Here is a converter compare group of logs comparing a Coan 8" and a Neil Chance 9.5" with 4.30 and 4.56 rear axle gear ratios. Note both converters have the same stall, depending on air would/will stall 5800 - 6000 rpm but both converters behave much differently as far as how hard they want to couple. The Coan is much looser but with same stall, it is a faster and less efficient converter. Again, it all depends on the combination and what it wants, examples may say one thing and be correct, but may be a completely different situation for another combination. You gotta do the work and figure it out is the bottom line. Open attachment and view full screen. Keep in mind the RAT numbers on these logs are eighth mile numbers and the converter will continue to couple the second eighth if your are running it. Therefore these RAT numbers, which are the reciprocal of the efficiency number are much lower since they are eighth mile numbers.
Last edited by 540dust; 11/01/13 09:53 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: Sport440]
#1526128
11/02/13 06:37 AM
11/02/13 06:37 AM
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,210
robin hood country
deaks
master
|
master
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,210
robin hood country
|
Quote:
Post your 1/4 mile numbers again from 60 ft. to the 1/4, I dont see them in this thread. I may of commented in another thread though.
Edit, okay found them! The concensus was that your numbers were in line
IMO, your vert slip is not the culprit. Its just a lack of HP for the desired ET. But its not a bad idea to look for a smoking gun. If I remember your engine is performing like it should for its build, I could be wrong though, as I dont remember All the specifics.
More power is what's needed, more cylinder head, or mill the ones you have down some, or drop the exhaust, lose weight off the car and turn the timing up to where it should be.
Mick
69 Dart GTS 440 mopar .590 cam, Edelbrock heads, 3200#
best et 6.45, 106.78, 10.14, 132.88 mph, 1.47 60ft
best 60ft 1.36
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: SSDart]
#1526129
11/02/13 09:37 AM
11/02/13 09:37 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
mshred
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
nevermind
again questioning how I do things...I just don't know jack apparently in your eyes...
ok .......... How are you checking stall?
You have to understand my frustration........ I see you run at the track and you spin. I go over and talk to you and you tell me the car is slow. You say your playing with jetting...... your engine temp is 180 going into the box.....
Now I tell you you are spinning, loosen up your rear shocks, stage at a cooler temp 100deg if possible and put your jetting back to stock.
You go back to your pit and change carbs , then go back out and spin again.......... and say the carb did nothing. So I once again tell you to look at the ass end of the car. You have almost no rear separation,you need to fix that first. This is not fixed your wasting your time testing.
This car should run 10.80's with ease......but not until it hooks and you make some other small changes.....
You tell people you took my advice but it did not work........
That was my 2nd outing with the car! The suspension is now working! I needed springs and shock tuning (that I did not have that day), which I did and the car 60'ed a 1.42...That is apparently not hooking to you? I was chasing mph to you, and my car DID pick up that day with the 850 carb I swapped to.
Get lost...What people did I tell anything to, other than to you? You come over to my pit and start telling me what to do, when you have no idea what I was TRYING to do...I wasn't concerned with it hooking that day, I was concerned with mph and thats about it! Except that I did listen to your advice, even from years back, and your "tricks" did not work on my car...for some reason, you just can't fathom that not every car is EXACTLY the same, and therefore that makes me the problem?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBsFaYsHTRo&feature=c4-overview&list=UUGI9xNLitjKqjZ3tkoW3XKw
Tell me again though that it doesn't hook...with 35 degrees of timing blowing the tires on DEAD radials I still went a 1.45, 34 degrees going 1.42...But yea, its not hooking...Im all for taking advice, thats all I have ever done is ask for suggestions and ideas and try them (if you saw my log book for my car you would know)...stick to your car and i'll stick to mine
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: mshred]
#1526130
11/02/13 09:48 AM
11/02/13 09:48 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,038
Tulsa OK
Bad340fish
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,038
Tulsa OK
|
So what is your best ET and MPH? Sorry if I missed it. Last I saw it was similiar to mine which has a best of 11.23@119.5 its a pump gas 360 full exhaust street car. Now I see your posting a 1.42 60ft.....mine is 1.62! IMO a 1.42 60ft is pretty killer for what I remember your combo being. I think mine needs more converter and or a low gear 904. My converter slip is 6% on a turbo action 8" 4500.
68 Barracuda Formula S 340
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: mshred]
#1526131
11/02/13 09:48 AM
11/02/13 09:48 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
mshred
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
|
Guys, I appreciate the help, but please my past threads have NO bearing on this...I have been to the track since I have posted last and the car picked up...I have no interest in posting that information here because I am not looking AGAIN to hear everyone's opinion about what is wrong for my car. I have tested ALOT and I know what needs to be changed as I have gathered ALOT of data...I can make my own decisions. In no way am I trying to be rude, but this thread was just to inquire about some data I have collected in comparison to others. My car went a best of 11.18 at 117.8 with a 1.42 60' foot at 3500lbs and 33/34 degrees of timing on DEAD MT drag radials...It went mid to high 1.4 60's with 35 degrees of timing, probably because the worn out tires couldn't hold it...mph still stayed the same though Thanks to all for trying to help, but please, lets keep this thread on track about SLIP numbers, not about MY car...I have been in contact with some VERY experienced professionals, a couple who have posted in this thread, and I trust that they will lead me the right way
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: 540dust]
#1526132
11/02/13 09:52 AM
11/02/13 09:52 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
mshred
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
|
Quote:
Here is a converter compare group of logs comparing a Coan 8" and a Neil Chance 9.5" with 4.30 and 4.56 rear axle gear ratios. Note both converters have the same stall, depending on air would/will stall 5800 - 6000 rpm but both converters behave much differently as far as how hard they want to couple. The Coan is much looser but with same stall, it is a faster and less efficient converter. Again, it all depends on the combination and what it wants, examples may say one thing and be correct, but may be a completely different situation for another combination. You gotta do the work and figure it out is the bottom line. Open attachment and view full screen. Keep in mind the RAT numbers on these logs are eighth mile numbers and the converter will continue to couple the second eighth if your are running it. Therefore these RAT numbers, which are the reciprocal of the efficiency number are much lower since they are eighth mile numbers.
Cool chart! I am assuming that info is from a data logger?
I figure for where I am at, there is no harm in trying a different converter...Hell I have tried changing every thing else and charting changes from tuning it, so why not try this
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: Hutch]
#1526133
11/02/13 09:58 AM
11/02/13 09:58 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
mshred
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
|
Quote:
A couple of things. You will need a good 650+hp to get a 9.5" (245mm) converter to 5500 and in doing so will have a negative fin angle converter that will have trouble up top. Not really a champ for all out drag racing but you can give it a try.
Have you ever pulled the exhaust to see what difference it would make?
Hutch
Hey Hutch, thanks for that info! I gotta talk with the converter guy, but I have seen some post here and other boards with that stall on a 9-9.5" and their cars work well with it...I will have to speak with him and see though..If it can't be done, it looks like im going to get this one loosened again.
I have not pulled the exhaust, but I am actually thinking of just going to straight collector mufflers and thats it...my exhaust is all straight with an x-pipe, bullets, and dumps...I really really doubt its hurting me...If anything, my headers might actually be a little big for the combo at 1-7/8, but atleast I know they can support more power lol
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: mshred]
#1526134
11/02/13 07:02 PM
11/02/13 07:02 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 168
Moparts
SSDart
member
|
member
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 168
Moparts
|
Quote:
Get lost...
I only tried to help you........ Your probably right. I don't know what I am talking about.......Good luck
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: SSDart]
#1526135
11/02/13 07:06 PM
11/02/13 07:06 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
mshred
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
|
Quote:
Quote:
Get lost...
I only tried to help you........ Your probably right. I don't know what I am talking about.......Good luck
Correction there- I don't know what I am talking about...at all apparently...your words exactly...thanks though!
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: mshred]
#1526136
11/02/13 07:13 PM
11/02/13 07:13 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 168
Moparts
SSDart
member
|
member
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 168
Moparts
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Get lost...
I only tried to help you........ Your probably right. I don't know what I am talking about.......Good luck
Correction there- I don't know what I am talking about...at all apparently...your words exactly...thanks though!
10.67 @ 125 COMPARED TO your 11.17 @ 117..........At the end of the day the timeslip tells the tale......... Now aren't you suppose to be somewhere?
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: SSDart]
#1526137
11/02/13 07:20 PM
11/02/13 07:20 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
mshred
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Get lost...
I only tried to help you........ Your probably right. I don't know what I am talking about.......Good luck
Correction there- I don't know what I am talking about...at all apparently...your words exactly...thanks though!
10.67 @ 125 COMPARED TO your 11.17 @ 117..........At the end of the day the timeslip tells the tale......... Now aren't you suppose to be somewhere?
Right, lets compare a stocker to my car, at 200lbs lighter to boot...and what is your point really? There are many faster cars then mine, so get over yourself. Your sig portrays your attitude perfectly...I know that somewhere I should be in your opinion is under your balls, but that isn't happening so stop dreaming and get off my a$$ 
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: mshred]
#1526138
11/02/13 07:31 PM
11/02/13 07:31 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 168
Moparts
SSDart
member
|
member
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 168
Moparts
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Get lost...
I only tried to help you........ Your probably right. I don't know what I am talking about.......Good luck
Correction there- I don't know what I am talking about...at all apparently...your words exactly...thanks though!
10.67 @ 125 COMPARED TO your 11.17 @ 117..........At the end of the day the timeslip tells the tale......... Now aren't you suppose to be somewhere?
Right, lets compare a stocker to my car, at 200lbs lighter to boot...and what is your point really? There are many faster cars then mine, so get over yourself. Your sig portrays your attitude perfectly...I know that somewhere I should be in your opinion is under your balls, but that isn't happening so stop dreaming and get off my a$$
My car was no stocker nor SuperStocker when it ran that time. It was the same as yours minus cal tracs...... but much faster...........
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: SSDart]
#1526139
11/02/13 07:35 PM
11/02/13 07:35 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
mshred
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,427
Toronto
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Get lost...
I only tried to help you........ Your probably right. I don't know what I am talking about.......Good luck
Correction there- I don't know what I am talking about...at all apparently...your words exactly...thanks though!
10.67 @ 125 COMPARED TO your 11.17 @ 117..........At the end of the day the timeslip tells the tale......... Now aren't you suppose to be somewhere?
Right, lets compare a stocker to my car, at 200lbs lighter to boot...and what is your point really? There are many faster cars then mine, so get over yourself. Your sig portrays your attitude perfectly...I know that somewhere I should be in your opinion is under your balls, but that isn't happening so stop dreaming and get off my a$$
My car was no stocker nor SuperStocker when it ran that time. It was the same as yours minus cal tracs...... but much faster...........
Whats that saying??? Oh yea, don't believe everything you read on the interwebz 
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: mshred]
#1526140
11/02/13 07:43 PM
11/02/13 07:43 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 168
Moparts
SSDart
member
|
member
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 168
Moparts
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Get lost...
I only tried to help you........ Your probably right. I don't know what I am talking about.......Good luck
Correction there- I don't know what I am talking about...at all apparently...your words exactly...thanks though!
10.67 @ 125 COMPARED TO your 11.17 @ 117..........At the end of the day the timeslip tells the tale......... Now aren't you suppose to be somewhere?
Right, lets compare a stocker to my car, at 200lbs lighter to boot...and what is your point really? There are many faster cars then mine, so get over yourself. Your sig portrays your attitude perfectly...I know that somewhere I should be in your opinion is under your balls, but that isn't happening so stop dreaming and get off my a$$
My car was no stocker nor SuperStocker when it ran that time. It was the same as yours minus cal tracs...... but much faster...........
Whats that saying??? Oh yea, don't believe everything you read on the interwebz
Easy to verify ..... 2008 GBM OSCA 10.90 first qualifier...... ask Mr. B to see the qualifying sheet.....
|
|
|
Re: Acceptable Converter slip numbers
[Re: mshred]
#1526142
11/02/13 07:48 PM
11/02/13 07:48 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 168
Moparts
SSDart
member
|
member
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 168
Moparts
|
Quote:
Really? What exactly are you still trying to prove? You are faster then me, congrats! Go have a cookie and be happy with yourself now...not sure what else you are looking for
I have Nothing to prove...........
|
|
|
|
|
