machinegun
Active Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2001
What I have been thinking of is a street LENCO setup with a convertor rather than a clutch. Manual shifting up and down but a TC to torque against. Any possibilities of this?
5-speed manual in a TR?
- Thread starter Vendor Defendor
- Start date
It's all in the redline and gears
It's really hard to keep a car in a fairly narrow powerband when your redline is at 6000-6500. If you had an extra 1-2000 rpm to work with like most smaller dohc motors do, you can do more with gearing to keep it in the power band. Heck, there's been Honda's for years with the redline north of 8900. With all of that rpm range to work with, it's a lot easier to keep a close-geared car in the power band. On the other hand, with a low rpm motor and a need to meet corporate fuel economy standards, the gears will be widely spaced and it's much easier to drop out of the power band.
I'm sure that it could all be done with the proper selection of gearing in the transmission and differential. I doubt anyone will really bother to take the time to do it, though. The cost wouldn't be worth the benefits for most of us TR guys.
- Freed
It's really hard to keep a car in a fairly narrow powerband when your redline is at 6000-6500. If you had an extra 1-2000 rpm to work with like most smaller dohc motors do, you can do more with gearing to keep it in the power band. Heck, there's been Honda's for years with the redline north of 8900. With all of that rpm range to work with, it's a lot easier to keep a close-geared car in the power band. On the other hand, with a low rpm motor and a need to meet corporate fuel economy standards, the gears will be widely spaced and it's much easier to drop out of the power band.
I'm sure that it could all be done with the proper selection of gearing in the transmission and differential. I doubt anyone will really bother to take the time to do it, though. The cost wouldn't be worth the benefits for most of us TR guys.
- Freed
Freedster
You hit the nail right on the head
. What most are forgetting about is the low RPM torque design of the Buick motor. It doesn't really make sense to compare race car motors and other engine designs that use sticks and turbos, they are completely different beasts. Got to use the motor that we have, not bits and pieces of bench racing theory. If you want to spend the $$$ redesigning the engine... you probably can make it work
I agree with Lee, and since we are the only two who have actually done it, stepped up and shared our findings... I hope someone else spends the time and money to try it and put this debate to a rest.
Just my 2 cents worth
Paul
You hit the nail right on the head
. What most are forgetting about is the low RPM torque design of the Buick motor. It doesn't really make sense to compare race car motors and other engine designs that use sticks and turbos, they are completely different beasts. Got to use the motor that we have, not bits and pieces of bench racing theory. If you want to spend the $$$ redesigning the engine... you probably can make it work I agree with Lee, and since we are the only two who have actually done it, stepped up and shared our findings... I hope someone else spends the time and money to try it and put this debate to a rest.
Just my 2 cents worth
Paul
To build boost at the line in a stick car you need a two-step. This also lets the boost stay up (not full boost though) between shifts. The WRX has a 2.0L engine, with an absolutely tiny Mitsubishi TD04 turbo. You can get turbo'd manual trans cars fast at the track, just gotta know what you are doing with the tune. There's already one WRX in the US running high 9's in the 1320. Full interior, street tires, etc. Just a FYI. Not saying I'd wanna 5 gear behind a TB, but if you sorted out the logistics of the flywheel housing and trans mounting you "could" make it work. How fast... who's to say? -Chuck
Steve Wood
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2001
Originally posted by GNVAIR
The older Porsche 911 turbo's were much smaller displacement and got away with a small turbo. The newer ones are approx 3.6 liters and use twins for faster spool up. The WRX is only a 4 cylinder of I belive 2.2 liters and as such can use a small turbo.
The only way to do it right with a Buick is if you run twins.
I really wish someone would waste their money and just do it for cryin out loud. It seems like no one wants to listen to those of us that tried it.
I was going to point that out...hence my question. Thanks for doing it for me.
nitrousmike175
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2002
Two years ago i swaped from an F body with nitrous and a six speed to a TR. The one thing i can tell you that is if you take two car set up the same the six will out MPH the auto every time. One of the post said that you would see some lag when you get back in the gas after a shift, well thats a problem there.If you have every thing set right you should be able to shift the car without ever lifting your foot off the gas this should keep the load on the motor and the spoil up on the turbo. BTW my TR is faster than my Ram Air was.
Lots of experts here, but no one that has actually done it save for Sleeper (Paul) and myself.
What we both were trying to point out is that you are dealing with a relatively large displacement 6 cylinder of 3.8 liters with a small, low rpm power band. Not a 4 cylinder or 2.2 liters with a wide power band. You have to face the fact that there will be lag.
Sure you can bandaid it with 2 steps and stutter boxes, etc; but you wont be launching from every traffic light like that.
The other harsh reality is that almost every popular gear box will break including the T56. Many of the LT1/LS1 guys are finding this out. If you dont break gears, you will break the output shaft.
One of the other major issues is electronics. You will not be able to get the car to idle unless you can sit and play with the IAC functions in the chip. Many guys run into the dreaded cold start stall after installing high stall convertors in their automatic TR's.
You will have even worse with the stick since you wont have the load of the torque convertor on the engine.
You will also have to deal with the stalling when coming to a stop since putting the clutch in instantly removes the load from the engine and there was no designed circuitry in the computer to sense neutral.
If anyone does it, it will be for pure uniqueness and not for speed or durability. I am just posting this to let you know what we went through. Its not a cheap or easy proposition. If I were to try it again and have it work flawlessly I would build a twin turbo setup and run some sort of DFI. The twins would make it spool up way faster and the DFI would allow easier, on the fly reprogramming to set the idle where ever you want it with none of the ill effects of the stock computer.
What we both were trying to point out is that you are dealing with a relatively large displacement 6 cylinder of 3.8 liters with a small, low rpm power band. Not a 4 cylinder or 2.2 liters with a wide power band. You have to face the fact that there will be lag.
Sure you can bandaid it with 2 steps and stutter boxes, etc; but you wont be launching from every traffic light like that.
The other harsh reality is that almost every popular gear box will break including the T56. Many of the LT1/LS1 guys are finding this out. If you dont break gears, you will break the output shaft.
One of the other major issues is electronics. You will not be able to get the car to idle unless you can sit and play with the IAC functions in the chip. Many guys run into the dreaded cold start stall after installing high stall convertors in their automatic TR's.
You will have even worse with the stick since you wont have the load of the torque convertor on the engine.
You will also have to deal with the stalling when coming to a stop since putting the clutch in instantly removes the load from the engine and there was no designed circuitry in the computer to sense neutral.
If anyone does it, it will be for pure uniqueness and not for speed or durability. I am just posting this to let you know what we went through. Its not a cheap or easy proposition. If I were to try it again and have it work flawlessly I would build a twin turbo setup and run some sort of DFI. The twins would make it spool up way faster and the DFI would allow easier, on the fly reprogramming to set the idle where ever you want it with none of the ill effects of the stock computer.
BLACK6PACK
1 sec reaction King
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
Nitrousmike175,
Even with speed shifting and not letting off the gas the load will be taken off the engine when you push in the clutch. So you will still lose boost. The amount may be minimal if you are good at speedshifting though.
Even with speed shifting and not letting off the gas the load will be taken off the engine when you push in the clutch. So you will still lose boost. The amount may be minimal if you are good at speedshifting though.
Steve Wood
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2001
Some of us older guys never used the clutch after launch.
We replaced a lot of tranny parts during the week, however.
We replaced a lot of tranny parts during the week, however.
nitrousmike175
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2002
If thats the case when an auto shifts some load is taken off the motor. I do know that on the T56 the gears are close enough that you don't lose much rpm when you shift. And if you do lose some load wouldn't a BOV help.
Lee brings up a point about the no load idle circuitry in the computer that I had not read before. That might be a significant stumbling point. Must have missed it in your other posts on the subject Lee, sorry. That's a good enough argument to sway me to the other side (not an easy/feasible swap side). Some of us 4 cyl guys have swapped to larger turbos (I'm running a Garrett T3/T04E) and have moved the powerband up ~1000 or so RPM, and its not any less fun to drive daily. I can't see where the powerband falls would make such a big difference on the choice of transmissions tho. Maybe depends on application (drag/road race), like was previously mentioned? -Chuck
A blow off valve does not make a turbo spool faster or stop a turbo from losing its spool. Its ONLY job is to remove the load of air from the compressor when the accelerator is released. They are there to extend the life of compressor wheels and bearings as pressurized air backs up against the compressor wheel when the throttle is slammed shut. It really isnt necessary. As a matter of fact, you will find a vast majority of Turbo Buick guys (inlcuding myself) dont find a need for them.
Moving the powerband up is all well and good, but not with a production V6 block crank and rods. Buicks run very tight clearances PLUS these engines when run with a lot of boost can break parts (blocks and cranks). Raising the redline from 5,000 to 6,000 increases the chance of catostrophic failure.
Another thing is the infamous Buick thrust flange failures. Every time you press the clutch in, you are closing up the clearance on the thrust flange to the thrust bearing.
Still feeling lucky?
nitrousmike175
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2002
Lee, your right a BOV isn't going to help a turbo spool, but it will help if your backing off the gas to shift and if thats the case a stick isn't going to help much anyway.
A TE44 spools at 2400 RPM. Below that, nothing.
A stock TR motor revs to about 5100 RPM with a HP peak around 4400 RPM. Above that, nothing.
Adding a larger turbo than a TE44 raises the spool RPM but won't significantly raise the max rev RPM, so the power band is even narrower. Not very exciting. More like a Diesel than a Porsche or WRX.
Port the heads and add a cam to get 6000 RPM, but then you might break the crank.
Now add a 6 speed like a T56. With 3.42 rear gears how fast do you have to be going to achieve 2400 in 6th? 120 - 130?
Do you think the massive 150 lbft of low compression torque will pull a TR at 60 mph and 1200 RPM? I bet money it will buck like a bronco. Try locking the converter and driving around at 30 mph and 1200 RPM on a stock car to see what its like.
Going to 4.11's in back may make 6th useable, but otherwhise its completely wasted.
A stage II motor would be a great manual trans motor because it has 3 things the stock motor lacks:
1) RPM capability in the heads
2) RPM capability in the bottom end
3) a block/crank that can take more thrust
But...you'll have $20K in the drivetrain...
A stock TR motor revs to about 5100 RPM with a HP peak around 4400 RPM. Above that, nothing.
Adding a larger turbo than a TE44 raises the spool RPM but won't significantly raise the max rev RPM, so the power band is even narrower. Not very exciting. More like a Diesel than a Porsche or WRX.
Port the heads and add a cam to get 6000 RPM, but then you might break the crank.
Now add a 6 speed like a T56. With 3.42 rear gears how fast do you have to be going to achieve 2400 in 6th? 120 - 130?
Do you think the massive 150 lbft of low compression torque will pull a TR at 60 mph and 1200 RPM? I bet money it will buck like a bronco. Try locking the converter and driving around at 30 mph and 1200 RPM on a stock car to see what its like.
Going to 4.11's in back may make 6th useable, but otherwhise its completely wasted.
A stage II motor would be a great manual trans motor because it has 3 things the stock motor lacks:
1) RPM capability in the heads
2) RPM capability in the bottom end
3) a block/crank that can take more thrust
But...you'll have $20K in the drivetrain...
I am going to keep my opinions and my intentions about Turbo Regals and manual transmissions to myself... mostly because Lee carries a bit too much NJ 'tude when it comes to this topic, more than I can handle in a public place anyway. We have been through it before. LOL.
I will say this:
Paul (Sleeper) knows about my intentions for creating a false load on the turbo. I'll leave it at that... the rest of you will learn the solution when I am done school in a year or so.
Out!
I will say this:
Paul (Sleeper) knows about my intentions for creating a false load on the turbo. I'll leave it at that... the rest of you will learn the solution when I am done school in a year or so.
Out!
One of the cars I race from time to time is a 500lb open-wheel racer with a suck-through-the-throttle-body turbo setup. When the car spins out trying to apply power out of a corner, and the driver is too slow to grab the hand-clutch, the engine dies immediately. You can actually hear the turbo spin down for about 2-3 seconds.
From this point of view, you'd really think that a large enough BOV would let the compressor free-wheel long enough to speed spoolup a little bit.
OTH, I've tried disabling the BOV on my Talon before though, and the increase in lag was only somewhat noticeable. So the BOV isn't an end-all fix. But apparently its helpful enough that most car makers put them on all blow-through throttle body designs (excepting Buick and Ford). Even Chrysler, known for being cheap, put one on its later 80's turbo 2.2's and 2.5's. So
Mr. T, you've peaked my curiousity Maybe an engine brake?
I agree that it takes too much money and effort to make a manual TR that can at best come close to running with an equally modified automatic TR.
I also agree that a manual full out drag TR is a pretty dumb idea, but I wouldn't mind trying a 6-speed, 9.5:1, twin stock turbo, Stage 2 4.1 block . . . on the street. How many people can launch with boost on REAL street tires anyway? The thrust-bearing issue is a real show-stopper with the stock block though.
From this point of view, you'd really think that a large enough BOV would let the compressor free-wheel long enough to speed spoolup a little bit.
OTH, I've tried disabling the BOV on my Talon before though, and the increase in lag was only somewhat noticeable. So the BOV isn't an end-all fix. But apparently its helpful enough that most car makers put them on all blow-through throttle body designs (excepting Buick and Ford). Even Chrysler, known for being cheap, put one on its later 80's turbo 2.2's and 2.5's. So
Mr. T, you've peaked my curiousity
Maybe an engine brake? I agree that it takes too much money and effort to make a manual TR that can at best come close to running with an equally modified automatic TR.
I also agree that a manual full out drag TR is a pretty dumb idea, but I wouldn't mind trying a 6-speed, 9.5:1, twin stock turbo, Stage 2 4.1 block . . . on the street. How many people can launch with boost on REAL street tires anyway? The thrust-bearing issue is a real show-stopper with the stock block though.
Originally posted by GNVAIR
It will be funny watching you spent $5K to go slower. But again, you are an expert so I am sure you are already trying to reinvent the wheel
And I'll enjoy watching you turn into a bitter and jaded old man.
Oops! Too late.
Similar threads
