IHADAV8.com - Turbo Buick Tech, and Nonsense
Tech Area => General Buick Tech => Topic started by: Shimy87 on February 10 2021, 03:33:18 PM
-
Thinking about "handing down" the turbo in my car ( 5931) to my sons and putting larger one in mine. Questions, dont plan on running more than the 24 lbs I run now, so is boost boost? Is a larger turbo at 24 going to make any more power? This one spools quickly so I assume a larger one might be slower spooling.
Looking for guidance here. I have run my current combo to death and cant get into the 11's :icon_eyes: and been reading lots of threads and seems a 6262 is a really common choice.
-
Bigger wheel should move more air mass at similar boost levels, unless it’s way out in no mans land on the compressor map.
I’d think any upgraded turbo should hit 11s - the turbo might not be the issue with the combo if it’s not performing like it should.
-
To expand a bit on what Jeremy just posted-
Boost is a bit meaningless but is is somewhat relevant when boost is the only thing in the equation that changes.
Boost is the resistance to flow rather than a measure of flow. If we put a given turbo on a stock engine with stock ports, cam, etc., as we increase boost the hotter the air temperature will become as it enters the engine. The hotter the air temp, the less dense the air charge will be. The less dense it is, the less air molecules there are going into the cylinder.
If we use a turbo with a larger wheel, it will heat the air less and will put more molecules of air into the cylinder for a more dense mixture and the car will make more power at the same boost.
Now, the 6262 seems to be a "magic bullet" when matched with a converter that matches up with it, but, as Jeremy says, the car should be capable of running solidly into the elevens with the existing turbo. Something is not quite right with the drive train and I don't recall how the mph matches with the rpm, etc. on your runs, etc.
-
You should be deep into the 11's with your combo, Unless your existing turbo is bad the new one wont make much difference.
-
If memory serves I cross the line at 5300ish at 108ish. I was running a 26 inch drag radial and had 60 ft times in the 1.6 area, went to a 28 inch to try to get it to mph out the back.....60 fts went to 1.8ish and mph stayed the same??? Best run was a 12.2. 24 lbs of boost, no knock and 790ish lowest reading. Any lower and I started to see knock. Maybe it's the converter but Chris said it would be really good for my setup???
-
Your 60 ft's need to be 1.60 or better to hit the 11's with your combo. Too many things can cause your issue. I would start with compression check, bad tune setup, crack header, slow spool due to tune or bad turbo, trans and or converter issues. Get some powerlogger readings to post.
-
Thanks, its -21 here today in WI so wont have pl readings for months. No header cracks, compression is good. It spools quickly and no oil in up pipe. Turbo should be fine. Bought it new, maybe has 5000 miles on it.. car shifts good in normal driving and on track.
I dont know how to confirm good or bad tune. I have Eric's tt chip, I leave timing alone, adjust fuel in each parameter to get lowest af without knock. Dont think there is much more to turning that I can improve but that's why I'm asking.
My original goal was a nice street car that could run 11's, my suspicion is this converter is not a good match to my set up but again, dont know enough to figure it out.
Thanks sgain
-
What stall speed is the converter advertised at? What is you footbrake stall rpm's. But before you blame the converter, the engine has to be running correct. A weak cylinder won't allow good converter test results.
-
2800 stall. I dont have the numbers anymore but I did have 1 cylinder that was down about 6 lbs from the rest...didnt think that would be significant enough to matter but maybe.
-
It really does not add up to me. If it is capable of 1.6 short times, it should have no problem going into the elevens from what I have seen.
I am a bit surprised that it is not capable of turning 28" tires as easily as it does 26"--certainly not 2 tenths slower.
108 mph is slow for the combo. I thought maybe the converter was very inefficient but, 5300 rpm is around 11% slip which is not very much for a lock up converter which is not being Locked...Note that I am assuming you are not locking the converter and that 5300 is indeed close to what you were seeing at the top end of third gear crossing the line.
With the 206 cam, I would expect you to be shifting around 5600 rpm and crossing the line about the same (5600)
Without any other evidence to the contrary, I would wonder about how strong the valve springs are after a few miles have been put on them. Comps have been known to go soft at times. I would like to see a PL log graph of the acceleration in third gear to see if it slows down notably in third on the top end.
Would not hurt to also look at bottom of the lifters to see if any are "scrubbed".
The older I get, the less crucial tuning seems to be on a car that is in good condition. Unless something is way out of whack, fine tuning is often less than a tenth difference on these cars. Yeah, I know that is heresy...
BTW, what IC are you running? Stock downpipe?
-
Found an old post with info from 2017
Car ran ok 12.1 was best. Too many cars showed up so only 4 runs. I think my tire height is holding me back but wanted to ask here. All 4 runs were 107.69 to 107.80 MPH and the times were 12.3, 12.1, 12.3 12.2. short times were best of 1.6 worst of 1.8.
So question is what is the ideal tire height for the 1/4 mile? I'm crossing the line at 3rd at 54XX RPM
My third run I tried leaving it in OD and as you see, same MPH and time but crossed the line at 47XX RPM. Felt like is shifted with about 100 FT left to the line.
running a 3 inch down pipe and stock intercooler.
-
I greatly prefer 28" tires. They provide more contact patch at launch and increase the mph at a given rpm on top end by about 8%.
I would rather run them, increase first gear timing by two or three degrees and spray a little more alky all the way thru the run.
I still wonder if the valve springs are adequate in third gear to counter the boost at higher rpm. I have noticed over the years that more and more guys are running about 105 psi springs on the seats. Brad may have run a bit more with the Pioneer springs he liked.
The stock intercooler is very restrictive and you are probably putting 30 psi of boost into the inlet side to get 24 psi in the plenum. I suspect that is pretty inefficient at high rpm and the air charge is pretty hot even with alky hence my comment about more alky (more cooling). Many don't understand that higher rpm's really increase the strain on turbo output.
I greatly prefer stock location intercoolers and a number of people are knocking on the doors of the 8's with stock location units these days. The problem with them is that most are pretty restrictive on the inlet side which increase pressure drop across the core and the really quick guys are porting heck out of the inlet ala Melissa/Russ Merritt, Rob Ortoski, etc. Sorry, Rob, I forgot to look up the correct spelling of your name before typing this. Still they are knocking on the 8's with much larger turbos, etc.
Most people have figured out that the intercoolers are simply heat sinks and that not much cooling by airflow happens on a run. In fact, a couple of people have demonstrated such by plugging the air intake inlet with a towel and running the same times.
I think the aftermarket slic favorite is by far the PTE in spite of the inlet restriction. Dan (Grumpy) might have additional info on the inlet porting done by Russ/Melissa.
Another question, what was your 1/8th mile speed?
-
A 35yr old stock tired intercooler as Steve mentioned could be half your problem. New one could knock off 4-5 tenths off your et.
-
I researched and GN1 sells a SLIC for $699, PTE asks $1179. I called PTE and asked whats better about theirs....he looked it up and said looks like they copied us, its probably made in China so thats the difference. I'm all about buy American but almost twice the price, ouch!!
I do have 28 inch M&H racemasters on car now, last track day car still ran 108 around 12.3, but 60 foot sucked at 1.9.....I probably just need to learn how to launch the car with these.
For sure I think I'm going to replace the valve springs, cheap and not that difficult.
Considering IC purchase, maybe I can find a used PTE??
Scoob was convinced the converter is crap and its killing me. I called and talked to Art Carr, after a long conversation he agreed ( not shocking, he sells converters) and strongly recomended a 19930 code O......$899. He said he had same converter in a daily driver and was very streetable, drove it to work every day for years but its parked now. Side note on this CK converter. On the freeway at 65 I turn about 2500RPM, Art said his converter will be closer to 2100 and that would be great.
-
I third the converter is the problem.
The whole time slip numbers would help though.
-
Every one of the faster guys that has put sensors to measure pressure drop and temperatures across the IC have determined that the PTE does its job much better. I have also read numerous times that the GN1 does not fit that well and hits things frequently. It is not built as a copy of the PTE unit, if you look at the dimensions, rows and tubes, etc. It is different. It was built to be big, but the PTE unit was designed to work...that is my take on it. I agree, the cost is a big deterrent but I would save my money, take Joe's $1400 or rob a candy store and buy PTE. I think it is not only built with American materials, but it works better.
Honestly, for an eleven second car, it is probably immaterial LOL
A used PTE, or a Used GN1 should be fine if the core does not leak. I have a CAS V4 in my T. Grumpy's daughter went into the 9's on a V4 that was the r version with a few more rows. Given the age, a newer unit might be a better investment.
The Art Carr unit has been the favorite of many for a long time. It's a non lock up converter so it takes a modification to the pump to work. I don't think the mod is hard. Ed may have done one in the past? It will run a bit more rpm but it does not generate much heat going down the road at cruise.
A lock up converter should run close to 2000 rpm at cruise in fourth. Unlocked, it will run about 250-400 rpm faster at cruise than when locked as I recall.
I personally still prefer PTC converters of either ilk. I am not sure that your converter is performing badly without more evidence. Your rpms don't look bad for the mph. A PL log of a run or a street stomp plus one at cruise would be very helpful.
-
It will be quite some time before I can run the car again dead of winter here the last time at the track with 28in tires my time slip has 60-foot 1.879 330 feet 5.10 to 1/8 Mile 7.877 at 88.11 miles per hour 1000 feet 10.296 and the quarter mile 12. 358 and 108.63 miles per hour
Dont know if that tells you much, other than awful 60ft
-
It fell off badly in the last half of the run. It should have been closer to 112 based upon the first half.
Increased timing in first gear may have helped the sixty time.
We don't have to have enuf exact info to really say anything about the converter. Yeah, it's the wrong time of the year for sure. It's supposed to get down to five here for a few days which it has not done since some time in the '80's
-
The mph in the 1/8th is low also for 7.8's.
-
Really cold snap here also, last 4 nights been 20 to 25 below zero with daytime highs of 1 or 2 below
-
Really cold snap here also, last 4 nights been 20 to 25 below zero with daytime highs of 1 or 2 below
water line from my house to the hwy is about a 1/3 mile long and is mostly 50 year old cheap pcv that breaks every time a rock shifts at 25 degs and is less than a foot deep in places. I am sure it will be a devastation zone. The town is not much better off and I suspect few will have water after this passes and the thaw starts. Much of the state will be the same.
We build for summer, not winter smh
-
Frozen pipes are there own sort of hell....good luck!
-
You have municipal water on the farm?
-
Yes. My grandfather laid pipe back into the city limits a 100 years ago.later the city limits were extended and several of others plumbed into the line. I am the last connection and my property is about a quarter mile outside
-
Thinking about this last night. I have been working on this combo for several years and just can't seem to reach my 11's goal. I'm consider starting over, getting a 6262, a slic , new valve springs and a Art Carr converter and having Eric redo the chip Seems to be a proven combination that should easily reach my goal. I figure the parts to be about $3000. Just sold the wifes snowmobile cause she can't ride anymore so got the fun money to spend. What do you guys think of the idea, and the combination?
-
I strongly hesitate to suggest someone spend $3000 on something when I have no idea if it will fix the problem or not.
1) is your current converter a lock up converter or a non lock up converter?
2) Do you have any powerlogger logs of your runs or have you posted them on the board in the past?
-
Its a lock up and I dont have any logs saved to post, dont think I posted any before either.
Your right it is a lot of money. I have read over and over how these cars need a good combination to work well. Thru my own ignorance I didnt research enough as i worked on this one and kind of added parts as I went and didnt have a good plan for what I wanted. I think as a result I find myself tuning and tuning a shitty combo and just getting frustrated cause it just isnt working
I tried to step back and think, ok, if I just bought this car and ran and tuned it as is for the first year with current results , what would I do. I'm sure I would descide to build what I thought would get me into the 11's. I would check all the basic "engine health" stuff, and mine seems all good, good compression, good fuel system, no exhaust troubles, all good numbers on the scanmaster. So what parts would I buy to get it to where I want. The combo I posted to me seems like a good group of parts that I have read about alot that worked really well for others. But obviously I dont know what to put together or i wouldnt be in this situation :)
Also, I have a buddy with a 700 HP Mustang that can only run mid 11's and i would love to beat him :)
Maybe I'm just talking myself into it??
-
I completely agree with and understand your desire to beat your buddy. For 700 hp, he seems damn slow. That makes it all the better, tho LOL
My biggest problem with your car is that it should be faster than it is. I don't think it is the combination of parts as it sits.
IF you were running 108 with a 26" tire AND your rpm was 5400 rpm, I keep getting 11% converter slip which is not bad at all for a lock up converter that is not locked up. I would be very curious to what the speed did with a converter that was locked about 80 mph.
Now that is what it was slipping at the finish line. We don't know how badly it slipped in first and second without some data. Ron pointed out that it was slow in the first 1/8th mile and I noticed that it was slow in speed gain in the last half. Again, something is not right. It may have lost control on the shift points???
Now, I mentioned valve springs. Normally, they will not rev as high as yours did if they are weak. On the other hand, it only takes one weak cylinder to slow the car down. A weak spring that cannot control the intake valve and close it against the boost coming thru will hurt the power noticeably. Me, I wonder about a bad lobe also and would surely look carefully at every lifter base and lobe peak if I were changing springs to make sure the lifter was still convex on the bottom and the lobe peak was not "scrubbed".
If I was buying a converter, I would buy one that was customized for my turbo and Buicks in particular even tho I greatly respect the one you mention that was designed 35 years ago. It has worked well for it's age. I have said this before LOL.
I think I would do a compression test, or even better, a leakdown test if you have a compressor, to compare cylinders on a warm engine to make sure they all look good at this point. Then, I would change the springs as a routine matter just to be sure the cam is not hurt and the springs are all good.
Then I might go for the intercooler next.
This car reminds me way to much of my GN. It had great compression, etc but was slow. I never figured it out. I rebuilt it and it felt like it had twice the power. It still runs good 20 years after that and it bugs the heck out of me that I never knew what changed to make it so. It's not the only one that I have seen like that so go figure.
-
The numbers I've ran don't make much sense to me either Steve.
Say 3600lb race weight it takes about 350rwhp to go low 12s @ 108ish
This is a 600hp turbo so it should make an easy 450rwhp which would push the same 3600lbs to 11.5's@117 which is where I would expect it to be.
So basically where is that hundred hp hiding?
-
That is definitely the question. I don't think it calls for a turbo at the moment. We know it should not.
It's all speculation because we don't have an rpm log to see what the engine is doing compared to what the rear tires are showing.
He changed the cam. I don't know what kind of timing gear he used or if it could be off a tooth and still have compression... .
The contrary part is that it apparently was up around 5400 rpm at the line so where did the speed go. 108 is about 4800 rpm, I think. And I calculate 11 or so % slippage which I don't think is bad unlocked.
-
Missing 100hp or $100 for makeup for a 60yr old women. Spending it in the kitchen would get better results...
new springs, converter and chips won't find the missing 100hp if basic issues aren't found and repaired as Steve mentioned
-
I can get a leakdown tester on amazon for $35. I could roll her into the heated shop and check on the items mentioned. No way to run a log for quite a while but I will
Dont i have to pull the intake to check lifters and lobes?
The last run numbers I gave you were with 28 inch tire and it did cross the line between 5400 and 5450. When I had the 26 inch tires it ran the same mph but I can't find any post where I gave the rpm.
-
That's about 18% then with 28" tires. That is way too much, obviously. Don't know if you converter will hold up to being locked or not, but, we really need that log to see how much it slipped in first and second since the 1/8th was slow mph as well. Third puts more load on it so I would expect it to slip more in third. We also don't know what the slip was right after the shift...I would expect more.
Yes, you have to pull the intake but you are a pro at that!
-
Dont have to pull the intake. Pull off rocker arm assemblies and and check with a dial indicator. Put a pushrod on the shoulder of the lifter and measure total lift of each int and ext. If any are out of wack with the others that's your problem. It could be a lifter, lobe or valve problem. At that point you would have to pull the intake and inspect.
-
yep
-
I have to ask, how is your TV cable and is it adjusted properly?
-
I will get a dial indicator also....really dont want to pull intake....goin g to be pissed if cam has a bad lobe, was very careful with breakin and always used good oil and zinc additive
The tv cable is set correctly..
I dont know how you do the math but what is acceptable converter slip.....and can you mathematically determine what it would be running with an acceptable slippage number?
-
Got out laptop and found an old log I saved of a test on the street before a track day if that shows you anything...….problem is I have no idea when this was
-
This is a complicated subject. Would you believe that?
Before I try to get into that, do you know what your rpm is when you sit in the car, put it in drive, foot on the brake of course, and ease down on the gas until the boost gauge is reading zero (point between vacuum and boost)? I am guessing with that turbo it should be around 2600-2700 rpm. Again, notice that I am asking for the rpm at zero boost, not the rpm when the turbo is making max boost against the foot brake. :)
Okay, slippage is a bit tricky because it can vary. What I am calling slippage in the case is the percentage at the finish line. This is calculated by computing the theoretical rpm required to go (in your case) to go 108 mph as compared to the actual rpm that you saw (say 5425 rpm).
If we have a 28" tire, we can compute circumference which is about 88", and the final gear ratio of the transmission plus the rear diff ratio 3.42, and either mph or rpm we can compute either mph or rpm.
In our case we have both mph and actual rpm so we can calculate, using the mph, what the rpm should be to go that fast and call that theoretical. Then we can compare that to the rpm we actually recorded to go that fast and figure how much we were slipping compared to the theoretical.
Because I am old and lazy, I did not want to do the calculations on a calculator so I used the wallace racing calculators http://www.wallaceracing.com/converter-slip.php and some others from Wallace http://www.wallaceracing.com/calc-gear-tire-rpm-mph.php
I should have done one by hand to verify the correctness of the Wallace apps but I knew it was in the ballpark from just looking at your numbers.
Now, again, this is the slip at the line, it does not tell us how much it slipped on the shifts where it will often be larger because of the "hit" the converter takes when the load of the next gear hits. The "tighter" the converter, the more the rpm drops on the shift. A loose converter will hardly show a rpm drop on the shift whereas a tighter converter may drop 800 rpm or so. I would say I probably expect 400-700 rpm drop.
Turbo cars are difficult to nail down because the more boost/power you make, the looser the converter will be when looking at it's performance.
Okay, using the first Wallace app above, I calculated the slip to be 17.75% at 5425 rpm, 28" tire (88" circumference), etc..
Now, if I go to the second link, and use the mph calculator, and put in 5425, 28" tire, and no slip, I calculated about 132 mph theoretical top speed.
If I put in 12% slip, I get 118 mph as compared to your actual 108 mph.
If I use the data we think we know and change the slip to 22% instead of the 18% the first app gave me. Something is a bit off in their calculations but again, I ain't doing it by hand. There are other apps online that one could use. It seems obvious that the converter is slipping a ton on top end no matter what.
Now, like I said, we really need to see what it does all the way thru the run, that's why we use Powerlogger to analyze things,.
How much should a converter provide? How much money can you spend. Really high dollar ones from ATI or such probably provide maybe five% (is that right, Ed?). Lock up converters that are not locked might be more like 14-15%? Lock up converters that are locked should be somwhat less than 10% while they last. Reasonable priced non lock up converters are maybe 10-12% I guessing from a foggy memory.
Some lock up converters endure more abuse than cheaper ones.
I think your car, if mechanically sound, should be in the elevens as it sits and it will pick up a few tenths with a better IC. IF MECHANICALLY SOUND.....
Again, see if you get an opportunity to see what rpm the car is running in drive, foot on the brake, boost gauge showing zero.
-
that file showed 97 mph so I guess it was an early one.
-
I think it would be interesting to do the same kind of calculations using the ET to compare.
picking up 20 mph in the back half and 7.8s in the 1/8.
Something sure don't add up.
-
I read Steve's post several times. My boost gauge doesn't show vacume, just boost. I can do the test and see when the gauge starts to move.
That log was not a full 1/4 mile pull. When I test on the street I only run it up to 100 mph.
From everything guys have posted, if I understand, it's not terrible in the 1/8 but falls apart in the second half of the track. With the slip am I blowing thru the converter in the second half?
The file said saved in 2018 so that a run with 28 inch tires, and pretty much as it sits now, didn't run much last summer so that's a current situation log
On the log how does the rpm look at the shifts?
Sorry if I'm not following you here, trying to understand it
-
I don't know anything about that log...what tires, what converter. Assuming it is a 26 tire and the mph is right on it, it looks like it would be about 5250 rpm at a projected 108.
go ahead and creep upon the boost until you see the needle start to move and see what that rpm is as soon as it moves.
I don't know how anyone knows what shape the engine is in without vacuum info. I use that as one of my main guide lines :)
-
28 inch tire, test pull on the street to 100 mph, not a full 1/4 mile run, all parts are in my signature.
I will try to do the boost test this week.
Got the gauges before I knew better, story of this car, hahaha
-
So do you have the right gear in the transmission to match up with 28" tires????
In other words, when the speedometer reads 97 mph is that for 26" tires or is that 97 mph with 28" tires? IF you did not change the gear in the transmission, that 97 would be 105 with the taller tire on it.
-
I didnt change anything with tranny
-
so that is about 105 mph at a lower rpm than we saw on the track runs....
-
would that be because I cant leave as hard on the street as at the track?
Is it giving us any info about converter? at least how its performing at the shifts?
-
It looked okay on the shifts to me.... it only gains about 400 or so rpm after each shift and looks somewhat flat on the rpm curve as a result.
Not enuf information or data to really make a call in my opinion.
Did you buy this converter from ck or did you buy it used?
-
from CK
-
This looks more normal to me. I think it is one of Tim's from the name of the file.
-
Trying to learn how to read these, looks like he puts it to the floor, when it hits 3000 rpm he let's it go, spins a bit then hooks and pulls down rpm a bit. Looks like it drops 1400 rpm on first shift that over reved to 6000 and 1000 on second shift.
Was this a trans break car?
-
He is picking up rpm after each shift rather than being as flat as your curve is
I think he has a bigger cam capable of more rpm and that is just where it shifted out of first normally.
-
So potentially that's caused by a compression issue with mine? So that's why I need the leakdown test and valve train check to find or eliminate that variable?
-
At this point, I have no idea. A weak cylinder could cause it or it may be a bad converter, a mismatched converter, or a combination of all of the above. I assume the transmission fluid does not smell burned which would indicate a bad transmission.. .
With a small diameter lock up converter, you need to lock it to get it to be more efficient and that might have increased it quite a bit. There are plenty of variables and you have to narrow it down. It is not easy to go fast but having a grip on the data and interpreting it correctly helps.
-
Thanks Steve, I will check all that stuff next week and let you know what I find.
Hope your water hasn't given you any troubles!!
-
The problem with most cars I have come across lies within owners who bought parts to make them go faster without being sure there were no inherent problems in the drive train to begin with.
I know of at least three cars that ran 10.4 on a factory stock original cam. Most have no trouble running low 11's on a stock cam if it is in good condition with good valve springs and lifters. Yet, the number one engine mod most guys want to make is a bigger cam because they are used to non boosted engines and think a cam will make more power on a turbo car.
Others buy a big azz turbo and stick it on a engine with factory, unported heads and wonder why they did not double their power.
Then they put a loose converter on it trying to make it spool faster and the car does not get faster, it gets more unstreetable and they have a hard time getting away from a light without suddenly nailing the car in front of them.
Quoting Lawrence Conley again. There are no magic parts. The faster you want to go, the more it costs and the faster you go, the more you will have to work on it. It's all about combination no matter how much money you want to spend.
A solid foundation is what it is all about. Then well matched parts will work optimally.
-
Steve posted a log from my car, that’s running 28 in tires. It’s a solid 11.5 car. And very street able.
I can understand your frustration, but remember it’s a 3.8 liter not 6 liter V8 and a little bit of discrepancy is big. 25 lb boost is up there on a 100 lb spring. I have not done the math but on 1.7 valve it is trying to push through. I have not crunched your the numbers on the Wallace calculator, it a good tool. I like the one that breaks the entire 1/4 down to speed and time. It has taken me 10 years and around a 100 passes to get to 11.5 you can’t hit it hard this year skip a few and expect to start off where you left off. Scooby was at It every weekend for several years to get his car to ET and be on the number every time. I’m convinced these cars need total dedication and attention to detail. I’m up to it because I truly like this car. This is just a pep talk you can do it.
-
Thanks Tim, ya I love these cars and I love to tinker so that's a good thing. I will get it one way or another :)
-
Snow melted so I can't snowmobile anymore so I got the buick out. Need to do the leakdown test and check cams health. I did do the test for rpm when boost starts.....nee dle just starts to show boost at 3100. This was with car up to temp but no heat in tranny if that matters.
-
Way loose, imo, for your current turbo I would definitely lock it up after it shifts into third.
-
Maybe time for bigger turbo :rock:
-
except that you have a stock IC and stock heads so you have two bottle necks preventing it from doing any good. I would look for a deal on an IC
Other than that, locking the converter and turning some of those rpms into mph looks like the best possible alternative
-
A stock intercooler is good for 115 mph untouched screen in. However, maybe a pressure drop test might be good info to have.
-
Could a larger exhaust housing help that converter. assuming a 63 now.
Also maybe some tractor fluid would tighten up that converter. but I agree 3100 at 0 boost cold is way too loose.
-
http://www.vortexbuicks-etc.com/bob_dick.htm
See stock IC pressure drop
-
that was some good reading Steve.
Would you happen to have any articles, information, or maybe a page pic of the painted black BGC 23 solid core from their old catalog? not the one with stock cores welded together and not the one that is not painted with the lowered angled inlet neck that has a radiator looking outlet tank.
Hers a pic.
-
Nope, never had any of the BGC stuff
-
the BGC 23 length and height is bigger than the CAS V4 but they share the same thickness of 2.75". I sold all my catalogs years ago like a fool and now I cant find any info.
It was worth a try asking you Steve. Maybe someone else on here might have something.
this is all I could find on TB.com. I don't know which of the 2 new core IC's they made this refers to....
"A new state of the art intercooler core called a stagger core is used. It has cooling fins inside the tubes that move the air in and out for better heat transfer. Although it is 6" longer than stock, it is almost undetectable when installed. This high tech core uses a new technology called fuse bonding which helps transfer heat more efficiently. Core has twelve fins per inch (stock is eight) and contains 23 tubes versus 17 when putting two stock units together. Also shroud is adjustable for max flow."
-
I was thinking more along the lines of testing for leaks in the core first, then if you need an intercooler, go to the theory.
-
I will get a slic, on the converter, in some of my reading I saw some places will re-stall a converter....w ould that "tighten" it up to match my turbo better? Sorry. This stuff is way above my pay grade. If it would help what should I ask them to do? Thank you!!!
-
First, you need to decide what your goals are.
If you want to break into the elevens, simply wire up a switch to lock your converter and flip it in third gear-I would say flip it at 80 mph. This is very easy and very cheap. Some of Eric's chips will allow you to do it in the chip settings, but the 5.7 does not have the feature.
If you want to approach 11.5, first buy a bigger slic. With luck, you will find someone selling one. Ask Grumpy if they have one sitting in the corner :)
If you want to get closer to 11.0, buy a bigger turbo.
Now to answer your question about restalling the converter, yes, it can be done but before doing that, I would lock it up and see how it performs-does it get you where you want to be? If you want to go closer to 11.0 with a bigger turbo, it may need to be tightened less than if you want to go 11.5... does that make sense? My real question is if a CK converter is worth more money or should you go to someone more Buick specialized?
-
I think for now I will get a slic and contact CK about locking converter...I though he said before that's not a good idea. Question. For the limited racing I do...a couple times a year....how can I tell if locking it is causing trouble?
-
I'm sure he knows his product. I would not lock it.
-
If you are getting a converter anyway, get 1 you ''can'' lock.
Pressurize your stock intercooler to 25 psi using a regulator and see if it holds pressure and for how long?
A new 1 is good but I'd want to know how good the old 1 was if it was me.
-
I plan on putting in a locking switch, my question is how will know if its trashing something?
-
I meant get a converter that was designed to be locked. not just a switch.
triple disc. 5 disc.
It will put trash in the fluid and eventually need a transmission.
-
You will know it is trashed if the rpm drop when you lock it and then jump back up. The transmission fluid will be dark and stink, and the pan will be full of clutch material.
If he told you it would not be good, you can bet it would not be good. I don't know who he buys his converters from but a 9.5" converter does not have a lot of clutch area in it due to it's size but some are built like the 911 converter which has the clutch area of an 11" converter tacked on to the back or like the vigilante that I have that has multiple clutches in it to handle the load.
You ignore his advice you might be in for a transmission rebuild. Usually on a 11" converter, they will last a long time on an 11 sec car.
-
https://www.converter.cc/Yank_SS_Series_Converters_p/ss-buick%20gn.htm
This is just 1 option.
Navigate through this site for lots of info.
-
I have decided to try to find a used slic and have a Dave Husek 3021 converter on order. Read tons of positive stuff on them and talked to him quite a while.
-
should be an improvement. Should be about right your needs
-
As far as I know, this is still the required procedure to modify your lock up transmission to a NLU converter https://www.gnttype.org/techarea/transmission/cvt_to_nonlockup.html
I don't pay much attention to transmissions so things may have changed.
Never mind, you probably ordered the Lock up version so you don't have to do anything
-
Well, got the new converter installed yesterday. Really like how the car drives now, and turns less rpm at highway cruise also. Did the brake til boost test and its 2572 rpm. On the street it spools very quickly so so far very happy. Hope all this goodness keep going when the track opens!!
-
Sounds good. Can you tell a difference in how solid the lock up feels? Asking because you said it pulls less rpm.
-
It seems like its strong. In relaxed driving, somewhere between 50 and 60 it locks and rpm drops from about 2200 down to 1800-1900....hard to be exact with the digital tach and didn't watch on sm.
-
the lock up speed is programmed into your chip. The ecm grounds the wire at the programmed speed and locks the converter.
It sounds like it has a good firm lock up compared to your old one which is good. I think the car is going to run much better now.