Choosing a stall converter

Jump to: navigation, search
m (category tag)
(tidy up, remove first person account, needs Jon's polishing)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
{{cleanup}}
 
−
 
 
'''How to choose a stall converter?'''
 
'''How to choose a stall converter?'''
  
−
I may be not-the-best person to attempt this, but until someone better takes a stab at it, here I go: If you have
+
I may be not-the-best person to attempt this, but until someone better takes a stab at it, here I go: If you have an automatic transmission, then you don't have a clutch pedal. You have a torque converter instead.
−
an automatic transmission, then you don't have a clutch pedal. You have a torque converter instead.
+
 
−
Most of my experience is with V8s, so that's the focus here.
+
−
+
 
Let's start with the "stall". Drive your car to a deserted road, stop, watch the tach, and stand on the gas very abruptly.  
 
Let's start with the "stall". Drive your car to a deserted road, stop, watch the tach, and stand on the gas very abruptly.  
 
Assuming everything is functioning normally, the tach will jump, to at least 1200 RPM, before the car actually
 
Assuming everything is functioning normally, the tach will jump, to at least 1200 RPM, before the car actually
 
begins to jump forward. Or the tires go up in smoke, depending on your combo.
 
begins to jump forward. Or the tires go up in smoke, depending on your combo.
 
That is your "flash stall".
 
That is your "flash stall".
−
Now, repeat, but this time keep your left foot on the brake pedal, hard. But don't do it for more than a couple of
+
Now, repeat, but this time keep your left foot on the brake pedal, hard. But don't do it for more than a couple of seconds to avoid over heating the converter and transmission. Then do a gentle drive afterward to cool down the parts. That was your "foot-brake stall" unless there was tire spin.
−
seconds, then do a gentle drive afterward. Assuming you didn't just shred the tires, that was your "foot-brake
+
−
stall".
+
  
−
Now that I'm started, there's so much to cover that I'm not sure how to proceed without making it confusing. ( I do
+
You can find all sort of descriptions and explanations, but your first interest is in what your stall does for your  car.
−
have A.D.D.) It all inter-relates. I want to make it fascinating and educational.
+
  
−
Anyway, back to stall.
+
Converter stall speed needs mostly center on your camshaft, heads, compression, gearing, and expectations. Tuning and fuel quality are your responsibility. For this  we must assume you got the tune right and run enough octane.
  
−
You can find all sort of descriptions and explanations, but your first interest is in what your stall does for your
+
The best way to proceed is to detail 5 different combos:
−
car.
+
  
−
Need mostly centers on your camshaft, heads, compression, gearing, and expectations. Tuning and fuel quality are
+
The first combo is a 1979 Firebird. 150-HP 301 with a slightly leaky Q-Jet hurting MPG but not driveability, backed by a T-350, a 2.73:1 axle, and on new Firestone 215/75R15 tires. I
−
your responsibility. For this thread we must assume you got the tune right and run enough octane.
+
bought it that way, at too high a cost because it was so cherry, and that used up all the money I was hoping to spend on performance mods. So I paid attention to what I had.
−
I guess the best way to proceed is to detail 5 different combos I've owned and driven, that really stand out in my
+
The converter was an 1800-stall. I could, occasionally, chirp a tire from a dead stop. But i soon got curious about the converter slippage: Cruising along at 55 MPH, lift off the throttle, the RPM instantly dropped 200 RPM. Ease back into it, it came back up by 200 RPM. In later years, I came to learn that this is typical of most stock GM converters, though I doubted, and still doubt, that that converter was stock.
−
recollections:
+
But then I tried it the other way: stomping the gas, RPM climbed another 200 RPM. Did that mean a total of 400 RPM of slippage?  Yes, a total slip at WOT of 400 RPM.
  
−
Trying to keep this in chronological order, the first combo is a '79 Firebird. 150-HP 301 with a slightly leaky
 
−
Q-Jet hurting MPG but not driveability, backed by a TH350, a 2.73:1 axle, and on new Firestone 215/75R15 tires. I
 
−
bought it that way, at too high a cost because it was so cherry, and that used up all the money I was hoping to
 
−
spend on performance mods. So I paid attention to what I had.
 
−
The converter was an 1800-stall. I could, occasionally, chirp a tire from a dead stop. But i soon got curious
 
−
about the converter slippage: Cruising along at 55 MPH, lift off the throttle, the RPM instantly dropped 200 RPM. Ease back into it, it came back up by 200 RPM. In later years, I came to learn that this is typical of most stock GM converters, though I doubted, and still doubt, that that converter was stock.
 
−
But then I tried it the other way: stomping the gas, RPM climbed another 200 RPM. Did that mean a total of 400 RPM
 
−
of slippage? I lifted off. Yes, a total slip at WOT of 400 RPM. Again, fairly typical it turns out.
 
 
Lesson learned: normal slip of torque converters. Also applies to lockup style when not locked.
 
Lesson learned: normal slip of torque converters. Also applies to lockup style when not locked.
  
−
Combo 2: '78 Camaro LG3 ( 145-HP 305 ) TH350, swapped stock 1200-stall for B&M TorkMaster 2000 converter, 3.08:1
+
Combo 2: 1978 Camaro LG3 ( 145-HP 305 ) TH350, swapped stock 1200-stall for B&M TorkMaster 2000 converter, 3.08:1
−
axle, 235/70R15 tires.
+
axle, 235/70R15 tires. This converter was stock, it was 1200 RPM flash stall, I know the slippage was the same as my 'bird already described above, and I know it drove fine for granny. But I decided to swap it.
−
I know this converter was stock, I know it was 1200 RPM flash stall, I know the slippage was the same as my 'bird
+
The B&M converter gave my combo a 1700 RPM flash stall. It felt like I had swapped to a 350, when launching. And by launching, I mean flooring the gas the instant the light went from red to green. It pushed me into the seat noticeably more, and I loved it.  I thought I had invested wisely, and I felt I got what I paid for.
−
already described above, and I know it drove fine for granny. But I decided to swap it.
+
−
The B&M gave my combo a 1700 RPM flash stall, the launch felt much better. It felt like I had swapped to a 350, when launching. And by launching, I mean flooring the gas the instant the light went from red to green. It pushed me into the seat noticeably more, and I loved it.  I thought I had invested wisely, and I felt I got what I paid for.
+
 
But I was in for another surprise. I finally stopped playing in traffic and got on the highway. I was so stunned
 
But I was in for another surprise. I finally stopped playing in traffic and got on the highway. I was so stunned
 
to discover my slippage wasn't 200 RPM. It was just 50 RPM! So I stomped the go pedal, the RPM shot up by another
 
to discover my slippage wasn't 200 RPM. It was just 50 RPM! So I stomped the go pedal, the RPM shot up by another
−
350, for a total of 400.
+
350, for a total of 400. After all, my previous 1978 / LG3 / TH350 / 1200 / 2.41:1
−
I didn't bother to check my MPG, this carb was also leaky, and I always did 17 MPG, same as with the 2.41:1 axle
+
−
it had before. But that aside, I know it would help MPG. After all, my previous '78 / LG3 / TH350 / 1200 / 2.41:1
+
 
/ 205-75R14 Camaro did 23 MPG with a best of 26.
 
/ 205-75R14 Camaro did 23 MPG with a best of 26.
 
I can't say the 2000-stall drove better than the 1200-stall in the snow, but I can say it wasn't any worse.
 
I can't say the 2000-stall drove better than the 1200-stall in the snow, but I can say it wasn't any worse.
  
−
Combo 3 was a friend's '65 Mustang. It had an 8.3:1 302 with Roush 200 heads, a Comp Magnum 292 cam, headers,
+
Combo 3 was a 1965 Mustang. It had an 8.3:1 302 with Roush 200 heads, a Comp Magnum 292 cam, headers,
 
intake, carb, 3500-stall, C4, 3.80:1 spool. Tires were 25" diameter.
 
intake, carb, 3500-stall, C4, 3.80:1 spool. Tires were 25" diameter.
 
That thing needed 10.5:1 compression, but a full summer of tuning got it driveable. To the point that he swapped
 
That thing needed 10.5:1 compression, but a full summer of tuning got it driveable. To the point that he swapped
Line 58: Line 38:
 
If you've ever felt a jet plane on takeoff, this puts them all to shame. Nothing you've ever experienced at any
 
If you've ever felt a jet plane on takeoff, this puts them all to shame. Nothing you've ever experienced at any
 
amusement park even comes close, either. This was like God's own pillow-covered sledgehammer to the heiney.
 
amusement park even comes close, either. This was like God's own pillow-covered sledgehammer to the heiney.
−
First experiences are always more vivid than follow-ups, and that's the case here. This wasn't to be my last
+
First experiences are always more vivid than follow-ups, and that's the case here.  
−
experience with race converters, but it was an eye-opener.
+
  
−
Following that, I was playing with an '85 Camaro with a mildly modified L69, 700R-4, 3.42:1, and sticky 215/60R15s. I decided on a B&M TorkMaster 2400. It drove pretty stock, until I swapped the heads. Finally it all came together:
+
Following that, I was playing with an 1985 Camaro with a mildly modified L69, 700R-4, 3.42:1, and sticky 215/60R15s. I decided on a B&M TorkMaster 2400. It drove pretty stock, until I swapped the heads. Finally it all came together:
 
No traction in first gear, very very fun!
 
No traction in first gear, very very fun!
 
Driveability? Not annoying, not irritating, not aggravating. Snow? no clue. Rain? easy to drive, but stomp the fun
 
Driveability? Not annoying, not irritating, not aggravating. Snow? no clue. Rain? easy to drive, but stomp the fun
 
pedal, and no traction in first or second gears.  
 
pedal, and no traction in first or second gears.  
−
But I took the car apart, saved some parts, and a year later I was putting that converter in a '95 Z28 convertible
+
But I took the car apart, saved some parts, and a year later I was putting that converter in a 1995 Z28 convertible
 
with the LT1, 4L60E, 2.73:1, and 235/55R16s.  
 
with the LT1, 4L60E, 2.73:1, and 235/55R16s.  
 
How to describe this? My flash stall was now 2400, twin black stripes became effortless, from a rolling 5 MPH
 
How to describe this? My flash stall was now 2400, twin black stripes became effortless, from a rolling 5 MPH
Line 71: Line 50:
 
turning took like half throttle.  
 
turning took like half throttle.  
 
But the driveability? It was hell. My slippage was always 1200, maybe because someone or something had caused it
 
But the driveability? It was hell. My slippage was always 1200, maybe because someone or something had caused it
−
to fall off a workbench some weeks prior. But no denting was found. Still, lockup no longer worked. I replaced the
+
to fall off a workbench some weeks prior. But no denting was found. Still, lockup no longer worked. I replaced the trans, and still no lockup.  
−
trans, and still no lockup.  
+
−
One late night, taking dad home, I was at a light, and along came a Porsche Boxster.  Killed his fool junk!
+
 
Great converter for playing, needs some rear gear.  
 
Great converter for playing, needs some rear gear.  
−
Great tragedy I never tried it in any snow, in either car.
 
−
So, the combo is everything.
 
  
−
If you're studying the COMP CAMS catalog, for example, you'll note that once you look past the smallest cams, they
+
If you're studying the COMP CAMS catalog, for example, you'll note that once you look past the smallest cams, they begin noting stall speeds. But as with all things camshaft, these are for the popular engine.   
−
begin noting stall speeds. But as with all things camshaft, these are for the popular engine.   
+
 
If you're gonna pick a cam for a lesser-displacement version, read the notes for the next larger cam.
 
If you're gonna pick a cam for a lesser-displacement version, read the notes for the next larger cam.
 
   
 
   
Line 89: Line 63:
 
referring to the outer diameter of the whole converter.  
 
referring to the outer diameter of the whole converter.  
 
Why it matters?  
 
Why it matters?  
−
My TM2400, above, was a loose 12". That looseness is most of why it was able to slip 1200 RPM all the time. Had it
+
My TM2400, above, was a loose 12". That looseness is most of why it was able to slip 1200 RPM all the time. Had it been a tight 10.5", still 2400 flash stall, it would have been much less slip, and much less irritating.
−
been a tight 10.5", still 2400 flash stall, it would have been much less slip, and much less irritating.
+
 
   
 
   
−
So, this bit about loose or tight:
 
 
Loose converters are great when your static compression is way low, or way high. Way high, a loose converter helps
 
Loose converters are great when your static compression is way low, or way high. Way high, a loose converter helps
 
reduce detonation. Way low, it covers the soggy off-idle. And a cam that's way too big is the same soggy feel as
 
reduce detonation. Way low, it covers the soggy off-idle. And a cam that's way too big is the same soggy feel as
 
way low compression.
 
way low compression.
 
   
 
   
−
Efficiency: This is difficult to discuss. Look back at my '78 Camaro. The TM2k was much more efficient than
+
Efficiency: This is difficult to discuss. The TM2k was much more efficient than
−
the stock converter it replaced, and was also more efficient than what was in my '79 Firebird.  
+
the stock converter it replaced, and was also more efficient than what was in my 1979 Firebird.  
 
But how to tell, the reduced slip at cruise? Partly.  That it had that plus the better launch? Mostly.  
 
But how to tell, the reduced slip at cruise? Partly.  That it had that plus the better launch? Mostly.  
−
So my TM2400 wasn't efficient? Correct.
+
 
−
+
 
Are all converters rated by the same standards? NO!
 
Are all converters rated by the same standards? NO!
 
Watch some vids on You-Tube where guys have recorded their gauges while driving around. I watched mostly LS1 F-car
 
Watch some vids on You-Tube where guys have recorded their gauges while driving around. I watched mostly LS1 F-car
Line 107: Line 78:
 
a 4000-stall drive tighter than  my 2400 stall. And at 4000 stall, it's not just the smaller diameter.
 
a 4000-stall drive tighter than  my 2400 stall. And at 4000 stall, it's not just the smaller diameter.
 
   
 
   
−
Gas mileage: My 2400 most definitely did hurt my LT1's MPG, in town and on the highway. But would that 2000
+
Gas mileage: A 2400 RPM stall most definitely will hurt MPG, in town and on the highway. But would that 2000 have helped the 1978 in town, had the carb been repaired ?
−
have helped my '78 in town, had I fixed the carb, and acted mature when lights went green? Probably.
+
 
It's not as simple as less stall = more MPG.  
 
It's not as simple as less stall = more MPG.  
−
Engines can lug to the point it's un-mistakeable, but like detonation, there are lesser levels where the driver
+
Engines can lug to the point it's un-mistakeable, but like detonation, there are lesser levels where the driver really can't tell. And if your converter is too tight, it will hurt your MPG.
−
really can't tell. And if your converter is too tight, it will hurt your MPG.
+
 
   
 
   
−
Performance: Is it all in the launch? Nope. The instant after an upshift is called the shift recovery. And
+
Performance: Is it all in the launch? Nope. The instant after an upshift is called the shift recovery. With an automatic, how much the RPM drops from the upshift isn't controlled by gear ratios alone. The converter and it's effect on performance after the upshift is more pronounced with a wide-ratio 700R-4
−
with an automatic, how much the RPM drops from the upshift isn't controlled by gear ratios alone. Yep, we're back
+
−
to the converter. And it's effect on performance after the upshift is more pronounced with a wide-ratio 700R-4
+
 
than with a close-ratio TH350. With the TH350, the launch is what the converter helps most.  
 
than with a close-ratio TH350. With the TH350, the launch is what the converter helps most.  
 
But with more gear, you need more stall.  
 
But with more gear, you need more stall.  
 
Torque converters are much more sensitive to load than to engine torque.  
 
Torque converters are much more sensitive to load than to engine torque.  
−
More gear reduces the load that the converter feels. Same with taking weight out of the car. But not only that,
+
More gear reduces the load that the converter feels. Same with taking weight out of the car. But not only that, having more gear also takes load off the transmission.
−
having more gear also takes load off the transmission, helping it survive stoplight antics.
+
 
 
When to buy what?
 
When to buy what?
 
Should this be an early mod? Or later, after everything else?
 
Should this be an early mod? Or later, after everything else?
−
The first mod in the drivetrain should be making sure you're not running a 2.73:1 axle ratio with 26" tires. With
+
The first mod in the drivetrain should be making sure you're not running a 2.73:1 axle ratio with 26" tires. With taller tires, a bit more than 2.73 gear ratio.  
−
taller tires, a bit more than 2.73.  
+
  
  
 
[[Category:Transmission]]
 
[[Category:Transmission]]
 
[[Category:Undeveloped articles]]
 
[[Category:Undeveloped articles]]

Revision as of 00:24, 1 January 2012

Retrieved from "https://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/index.php?title=Choosing_a_stall_converter&oldid=20072"
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Categories
Toolbox
 
Terms of Use
Copyright
Privacy Policy