By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
SignUp Now!Chris. Let's not turn this fellows thread into a 'let's get Don's 400 build secrets' thread. And I'm not going to privately email them to anyone, either. Drop it, please. There are some things I experiment with and put into my personal trans only.come on don,send it in an email:biggrin: anyhow there a good episode of the twilite zone on see you later.
TBITT, That is where we install one as well.All forces in the 400 try to push the geartrain out of the back of the case .Supporting of the direct drum up front takes it out of the rear thrust equation and frees up horsepower in 1st and 3rd gears.
Don,
If you reduce the converter feed enough limitting flow to the converter wont you then effect converter efficiency/slippage? Just something people should be aware of. I believe this is whats done to increase stall on the variable stall type transmissions.
Don,
Maybe you misread my post ? My intention is to constrain the drum using a needle thrust washer to reduce woble and instability, not to reduce friction. In the process of doing this, the front and rear thrusts are insulated so it doesn't influence the drum.
I am also under the same impression that CK stated in his ealier post that this has been over engineered for an problem nobody seems to now if it is a real issue. In any case, I will make my own insurance plan and do what I can to reduce drum instability. I am doing this for my own peace of mine and not for some competitive edge that is probably non-existant.
I would like to see data on stable vs. non stable drums and there applications.
Are they restricting, or turning off flow? And if they're restricting, what values (pressure and flow volume) are they restricting too?
The one case that I presented where I restricted cooler line pressure to zero was on a C4 in a mild street performance application. The engine builder and I were trying to figure out why he kept wiping the crank thrust on a SB ford. It turned out that the offshore cranks he was sourcing was the problem. But, I never did need to go back to the trans and increase cooler line pressure. The trans operated fine. Would I suggest that you go to zero? Probably not. I just illustrated that to show everyone that there may be some potential there. Those that like to experiment may find some hp there.
Lazaris. If I remember right, you stated before that you've tried some orifice sizes smaller than my recommendation. What did you find as far as T/C cavitation sensitivity?
Running the direct drum against a bearing takes all the rearward thrust generated up front and stops it at the center support.
Don,
im not sure if they completely turn off flow on the varible stall. When you did the test to reduce the pressure to zero is that the same as turning off flow completely?
I did try 3 different orifice sizes. 7/64 to start. It still started to take out the thrust. Main line pressure was about 235psi and the cooler out was about 55psi. I then went to 3/32 and lowered mainline to 165psi cooler out was about 40psi. Thrust was good then. I have since gone to 9/64 and the converter eff picked up 1% and I raised main line to about 180 now. But I also improved my exhaust pressure in the unit. I was able to raise the main line for improved holding while still making thrust the bearing live.
It isnt a marketing gimmick.It is the differnce between a product that gets the job done marginally and one that gets the job done more efficiently.It is what makes our product unique.We build 400s regularly for over 1200 horsepower.a quick look at the parts on the 400 competition components page should make this evident.Running the drum against the support reduces the front sections rearward thrust load on the rear section.Thrust is a motion.Power is absorbed to generate motion.There shouldnt be any question in anyones mind that a roller bearing installed between 2 parts is more efficient than a washer when the 2 parts are rotating opposite each other or one is stationary and the other is rotating.Rotation is a motion.Power is absorbed to generate motion.Bearing assist rotation and provide free momentum.Running the drum against the support and putting a bearing on the pump support(although thrust is rearward the bearing allows super tight clearances) allows front end play of less than .006".guess what?if the drum is pushed into the support and supported ,wobbling is reduced to close to 0.as far as restricting the cooler feed to 0 and still getiing 1 quart every 20 seconds ,at quick glance it would have to be a cooler bypass circuit doing its job,but who knows .and the 1 % gain in efficiency from converter charge sizing isnt something i would consider to be accurate as it is too small to be proven to be a gain and not test variations,or differentials in temp etc.
Adding one to the front takes any rearward thrust from the front and cancels it at the support.Reducing front end play with the bearings reduces drum wobble by removing drum tilt plane.The bearing reduces power used to accellerate the drum and gives it momentum as it spins.Now the little bearing under the sun gear isnt overloaded,or required to do extra work.The rear sun gear bearing DOES take a beaten in all applications ,especially high powered cars.as for the c4,i dont build many but if you completely closed off the feed to the converter where it pees out the pump gear area the charge volume should be 0 if there is no pressure or oil supply unless it has a bypass .you probably didnt close the feed off completely .