Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 37 of 37

Thread: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

  1. #21
    Hybrid booster
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    737

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    Thanks for the input. Enjoyed the street story and perspective of s60 on the street.


    All I know is, in the exact same car, with just changing transmissions (a555 to a413 stock turbo converter) T3T4E 50 trim in a .63 housing was a dog in the a413. With the 5 speed at the track ( on slicks of course) bring the revs up to 5,000 and she would pull like a freight train out of the hole, compared to brake boosting the auto.

    Turbo sizing is going to be more critical in the auto, as I have use the hybrid turbo in a few 5 speed cars and found it a good fit for the street and track.

    greg

  2. #22
    Super Moderator Turbo Mopar Staff contraption22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Havertown, PA
    Posts
    9,517

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    Quote Originally Posted by unluckyty View Post
    Thanks for the input. Enjoyed the street story and perspective of s60 on the street.


    All I know is, in the exact same car, with just changing transmissions (a555 to a413 stock turbo converter) T3T4E 50 trim in a .63 housing was a dog in the a413. With the 5 speed at the track ( on slicks of course) bring the revs up to 5,000 and she would pull like a freight train out of the hole, compared to brake boosting the auto.

    Turbo sizing is going to be more critical in the auto, as I have use the hybrid turbo in a few 5 speed cars and found it a good fit for the street and track.

    greg
    Agreed. If you have a turbo with a higher boost threshold, it's easier to compensate with clutch release RPM, and downshifting if you have a manual trans. With an auto trans, you have to have your torque converter spec'd with the larger turbo in mind.
    Mike Marra
    1986 Plymouth Horizon GLMF "The Contraption" < entertaining sponsorship offers
    Project Log:
    http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/showthread.php?69708-The-Contraption-2013-14&highlight=

  3. #23
    boostaholic
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,265

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    so how do you go about sizing a turbo in regard boost threshold? Is boost threshold on a compressor map?

  4. #24
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pickering, ontario
    Posts
    2,670

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/sh...boost-database

    I still thought this thread had great potential to give solid, accurate information for people who are looking to compare different combinations, but it trailed away and not enough people added enough relevant information. Maybe this thread will be added to, and if not, there's still some decent information in there.

  5. #25
    boostaholic
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,265

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    I still dont get the point of that thread with the boost vs brakes on. I dont know how you would make a decision based on the data... example. I make 9 psi at 2200 rpm dragging brakes. Ok great so what does that mean? What direction does that send me in the future? do I need a bigger or smaller turbo?

  6. #26
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pickering, ontario
    Posts
    2,670

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    In the post I added the link for, I see Cordes request for dragging the breaks to level the playing field and take away vehicles and transmission as factors. That shows what the turbo is capable of with each given combination, so there's some little details you will need to fill in, such as a big factor in this original thread, torque converter selection.

    Regarding your example - - That depends if you find 2200 rpm and 9 psi to be acceptable, or too laggy. I'm sure we have all learned that very responsive turbos give up some top end power. The more information the poster supplies, the more information you can use to make your decision regarding the turbo/ engine combination that best suits your wants. Consider it another tool in correct selection for your needs and wants.

  7. #27
    Moderator Turbo Mopar Staff Vigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    San Antonio,TX
    Posts
    10,798

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    I think the main reason why people don't go with looser-than-stock converters in the autos is because it would make them borderline undrivable. Seriously. The stock turbo converter is already very loose (annoyingly loose if you ask me) and if you put an even looser converter then that without putting LOWER gears (which would suck ---) then you will be right in the converter's SLIP ZONE at normal cruise speeds and the car will drive like ---- and overheat the fluid.

    But, the way you get around that, lockup torque converter conversion, is a pretty big project for most people who know WAY less about transmissions (~150 parts) then they do about turbos (~15 parts). Even with a lockup torque converter, if the converter itself is pretty loose and the converter clutch application is not pulse-width-modulated like on newer transmissions, a modified auto with higher line pressure and an on/off converter clutch circuit is probably going to slam the converter clutch on pretty hard and be annoying.

    I dont think there's one easy solution for how crappy the 3spd non lockup auto is. I think the main thing that would help most people is just to realize and embrace how fast you can go with a stg1/.48/s60 turbo and a good exhaust. Mid-low 12s. 99% of people with automatics just need to stop buying bigger turbos then they will ever use.

    Dont push the red button.You hear me?

  8. #28
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pickering, ontario
    Posts
    2,670

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    Quote Originally Posted by Vigo View Post
    I think the main thing that would help most people is just to realize and embrace how fast you can go with a stg1/.48/s60 turbo and a good exhaust. Mid-low 12s. 99% of people with automatics just need to stop buying bigger turbos then they will ever use.

    I think you got it there.

  9. #29
    turbo addict Turbo Mopar Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    7,063

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    Quote Originally Posted by Vigo View Post
    I think the main reason why people don't go with looser-than-stock converters in the autos is because it would make them borderline undrivable. Seriously. The stock turbo converter is already very loose (annoyingly loose if you ask me) and if you put an even looser converter then that without putting LOWER gears (which would suck ---) then you will be right in the converter's SLIP ZONE at normal cruise speeds and the car will drive like ---- and overheat the fluid.

    But, the way you get around that, lockup torque converter conversion, is a pretty big project for most people who know WAY less about transmissions (~150 parts) then they do about turbos (~15 parts). Even with a lockup torque converter, if the converter itself is pretty loose and the converter clutch application is not pulse-width-modulated like on newer transmissions, a modified auto with higher line pressure and an on/off converter clutch circuit is probably going to slam the converter clutch on pretty hard and be annoying.

    I dont think there's one easy solution for how crappy the 3spd non lockup auto is. I think the main thing that would help most people is just to realize and embrace how fast you can go with a stg1/.48/s60 turbo and a good exhaust. Mid-low 12s. 99% of people with automatics just need to stop buying bigger turbos then they will ever use.
    So what you are saying is, there is no replacement for displacement? When your motor can burnout 1st gear without boost you don't have to be so picky.

    I sorta feel like boost response is what people are more annoyed by than actual full boost threshold. Racing from the wrong speed in the wrong gear. Even a manual can have these problems. If I wanted to setup a roll race with you, I would chose the MPH that forced you to shift right after the hit or forced you to start in the wrong gear to avoid a shift...as long as that MPH was good for me and bad for you.

    What is the actual situation where people are unhappy with a large turbo and auto? From a stop? From a roll? If you can't get any boost before 3000 rpms and your redline is 6000 you have build a terrible daily driver.


    Any idea what the HP limit is for a lockup converter? I do agree that stockish turbos are plenty for a daily driver. People going big turbo should accept that their car is a drag project when running auto transmission. Don't let me hear one word of complaint about street manners. Going from a stock turbo to a t4 compressor wheel setup is also NOT a small upgrade for a daily driver. That is a nonsense upgrade that will rob over 1000 rpms of spool and then some since its not well matched.
    Brent GREAT DEPRESSION RACING 1992 Duster 3.0T The Junkyard - MS II, OEM 10:1 -[I] Old - 11.5@125 22psi $90 [U]Stock[/U] 3.0 Junk Motor - 1 bar MAP [/I] 1994 Spirit 3.0T - 11.5@120 20 psi - Daily :eyebrows: Holset He351 -FT600 - 393whp 457ft/lb @18psi 1994 Spirit 3.0T a670 - He341, stock fuel, BEGI. Wife's into kid's project. 1990 Lebaron Coupe 2.2 TI/II non IC, a413 1990 Spirit 3.0 E.S. 41TE -- 1993 Spirit 3.0 E.S. 41TE -- 1994 Duster 3.0 A543 1981 Starlet KP61 Potential driver -- 1981 Starlet KP61 Parts -- 1983 Starlet KP61 Drag 2005 Durango Hemi Limited -- 1998 Dodge 12v 47re. AFC mods, No plate, Mack plug, Boost elbow -- 2011 Dodge 6.7 G56

  10. #30
    Super Moderator Turbo Mopar Staff contraption22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Havertown, PA
    Posts
    9,517

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    I think people like to discount how fast they can go on the .48 exhaust housing. I was going 11.70's with Super70/.48. Stock converter. No spray. Good street response. I think it had more left in it. Maybe back pressure was high. Who cares? Still ran the numbers.
    Mike Marra
    1986 Plymouth Horizon GLMF "The Contraption" < entertaining sponsorship offers
    Project Log:
    http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/showthread.php?69708-The-Contraption-2013-14&highlight=

  11. #31
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Prosser WA
    Posts
    2,165

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    Does the turbo need upgraded for his goals? Jay ran low 14s with a relatively stock auto NY. I know my NY was in that ballpark to with roughly the same mods. I would think with a better IC, exhaust, and 20psi his goal would be easily achievable. Put the money in other places and it will spool like a stock turbo... because it is.

  12. #32
    Hybrid booster
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    737

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    I have ran the stock turbo on my previous Shelby Lancer and went 14.1 on street tires. Could a stock turbo meet my goals maybe, but I do not feel easily or consistently. I will stay with a .48 exhaust housing for my choice. Would like to achieve my goal with a lower boost.

  13. #33
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Prosser WA
    Posts
    2,165

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    I guess it comes down to what else has been done to the car. Personally I'd max the basics out before upgrading the turbo, especially since spool is a concern. How much boost did it take to get to the 14.1? How heavy is a SL? I would think they are comparable to a NY. Opening up the exhaust has been dyno proven to make a significant difference and look what GLHSLHT2 was running with stock exhaust and IC on only a 2 bar setup. Open exhaust, a FMIC, and a another 5psi on his NY would have gotten him to your goal.

  14. #34
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Spokane, Wa
    Posts
    9,046

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    I haven't weighed my SL but I bet it's comparable to my ShelbyZ in the 3000-3200lb range. My New Yorker was right around 2800lbs. Suprisingly light for how long it was with all the luxury items. But Ground F/X are heavy.

  15. #35
    Moderator Turbo Mopar Staff Vigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    San Antonio,TX
    Posts
    10,798

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    So what you are saying is, there is no replacement for displacement? When your motor can burnout 1st gear without boost you don't have to be so picky.
    Kind of. I think the 2.2/auto is a pretty crappy combo in a k-car and really limits you on turbo sizing vs a 2.5/auto. I've driven 2.2/auto with log/garrett, 1pc/mitsu, and 2pc/garrett with stock gearing and converter and they all kinda sucked although the mitsu sucked the least. You just don't get a lot of torque to push the tall 3spd gearing with a 2.2 until you're pushing over 15psi of boost and even that is nothing crazy, just pleasing. Vs a 2.5 which at 15psi is making over 300lb ft which does NOT feel slow when the boost comes on.


    I think people like to discount how fast they can go on the .48 exhaust housing. I was going 11.70's with Super70/.48. Stock converter. No spray. Good street response. I think it had more left in it. Maybe back pressure was high. Who cares? Still ran the numbers.

    Completely agree!

    Dont push the red button.You hear me?

  16. #36
    Super Moderator Turbo Mopar Staff contraption22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Havertown, PA
    Posts
    9,517

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    Quote Originally Posted by Vigo View Post
    Kind of. I think the 2.2/auto is a pretty crappy combo in a k-car and really limits you on turbo sizing vs a 2.5/auto. I've driven 2.2/auto with log/garrett, 1pc/mitsu, and 2pc/garrett with stock gearing and converter and they all kinda sucked although the mitsu sucked the least. You just don't get a lot of torque to push the tall 3spd gearing with a 2.2 until you're pushing over 15psi of boost and even that is nothing crazy, just pleasing. Vs a 2.5 which at 15psi is making over 300lb ft which does NOT feel slow when the boost comes on.
    Completely agree!
    The situation is magnified on these engines, because they are pretty lame without boost compared to more modern 4cylinder engines.
    Mike Marra
    1986 Plymouth Horizon GLMF "The Contraption" < entertaining sponsorship offers
    Project Log:
    http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/showthread.php?69708-The-Contraption-2013-14&highlight=

  17. #37
    Moderator Turbo Mopar Staff Vigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    San Antonio,TX
    Posts
    10,798

    Re: Upgraded turbo/ auto trans

    Yeah, a proper running 2.2/auto k-car without boost is a 19-20 second 1/4 mile car. They need boost at all times to achieve any kind of decent acceleration. Having either the lighter l-body or a 5spd opens up your options a lot, but if you have a 2.2/auto in a 3000lb car you need boost at or before the torque converter stall rpm or it's just going to drive like ----.

    Dont push the red button.You hear me?

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. pt cruiser turbo auto motor and trans swap into same year neon ?
    By briceturbosports in forum SRT-4 Neon & PT Cruiser
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-10-2014, 06:18 PM
  2. Spirit 2.5 Turbo/manual trans into a 1991 3liter auto?
    By boerge in forum The Original "Turbo Dodge" Cars
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-23-2010, 01:56 PM
  3. Turbo Auto Trans
    By TonaKid62 in forum Transmission
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 10-11-2008, 08:45 PM
  4. Auto Trans
    By BTB in forum Parts For Sale
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-06-2007, 10:25 PM
  5. 2.5L turbo I and auto trans
    By kwiksilver in forum Parts For Sale
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-20-2007, 10:51 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •