Results 1 to 18 of 18
Thread: 1.61 STR too low?
-
03-12-2007, 07:48 AM #1
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Location
- indiana
- Age
- 41
- Posts
- 1,018
black, 05 Roush- black, 99 T/A WS.6
1.61 STR too low?
I picked up a Yank SY 3500 off a local guy. when he got it (LS1Tech) he was told it was 2.5 STR and that is what he told me. I had wrote an email to Yank asking them for any info on this TC but didnt get a response until almost 4 weeks after writing them and I went ahead and picked it up...now they are telling me that it is only 1.61 STR. Is this even worth using? All the TC's I know of are at least 2.0 STR. Let me know I may have to try and get my money back.
-
03-12-2007, 03:15 PM #2
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Cape Coral, FL
- Age
- 39
- Posts
- 3,100
Mystic Teal- 99 Trans Am & 01 CBR 929
ok i am retracting this statement due to conflicting statements elsewhere and I am unablt to find something solid to post in its place on driveability. however this link here MAY explain why some people post information about how streetable there stall converter is. Fuddle racing is a great company and has a ton of good info but as for the best daily driver stall I will still say it is personal preferance and you will have to pick your converter based upon other peoples opinions since the only really consistant information I have found is that companies seem to rate there stall speed and STR however they want. if what is said here is true then that would explain alot of misconceptions such as my own. I have one of Fuddles 2.2 STR converters as I said before and another guy I know had another brand (cant remember which one) with a 2.5 STR and his stall converter was actually tighter and easier to drive than mine but that could be just because it was rated way to high which means that the HIGHER your STR is then the looser your converter will be but will punch harder out of the hole. hope the info I posted helps, i know that visiting a shit ton more links has helped me realize that there is alot of conflicting information out there and makes me want to learn more
http://www.fuddleracing.com/SeeingTh...ndMirrors.htmlLast edited by juiced99ws6; 03-15-2007 at 07:09 PM.
-
03-13-2007, 06:11 AM #3
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Location
- indiana
- Age
- 41
- Posts
- 1,018
black, 05 Roush- black, 99 T/A WS.6
I am confused? on another forum (fastlsx.com) the administrator said that it would be an awesome DD TC.
-
03-14-2007, 05:27 AM #4
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Cape Coral, FL
- Age
- 39
- Posts
- 3,100
Mystic Teal- 99 Trans Am & 01 CBR 929
it is truly just personal preference. the looser your converter is the more shock you will get to the wheels and the harder it will be on everything if you beat on the car. also around here most speed limits arent over 30 and my converter doesnt even wanna lock up until after that so it generates alot of heat in my transmission. I personally would go with a tighter one on my next TC install but you would really have to drive a high stalled car and get a feel for it. When I bought mine everyone was saying to go with around a 1.8 for a daily driver and really no higher than a 2.2 but since I was buying a 12 bolt I didnt have to worry about breaking anything and went with the 2.2 and it still feels pretty loose to me, maybe depends on brand as well
Last edited by juiced99ws6; 03-15-2007 at 06:21 PM.
-
03-14-2007, 03:31 PM #5
I have a little different thinking on stalls. Maybe I'm looking at it wrong too but when I bought mine I asked around and read as much as I could and this was my understanding of STR. After the wheels get rolling STR kind of goes out the window. The stall rating is what will effect driveability the most. For example the stock str is ~1.6 I think and the stall is ~1800. A higher STR will help you get up out of the hole while a higher stall will keep the rpm's up higher. A higher STR will also make the chance of you lighting the tires up greater. The looseness of the verter is determined by the stall rate. You're 1.6 str will still be the same as stock but it will be way looser driving down the road because your stalling twice as high, until it locks up then it drives like stock. I personally went with a 3500 and a str of 1.9. The reasoning was I would rather give a little off the line and be able to hook up than to roast the tires on launch.
-
03-15-2007, 06:12 PM #6
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Cape Coral, FL
- Age
- 39
- Posts
- 3,100
Mystic Teal- 99 Trans Am & 01 CBR 929
ok thats kinda what I was trying to get out in my last post but Orion definatly said it better. personally I run DRs as daily driver tires and have a 12 bolt so I am not afraid to really try and let it hit out of the hole and would not want an STR that low and since you bought something under a misconception then personally I would want my money back.
-
03-15-2007, 06:19 PM #7
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Cape Coral, FL
- Age
- 39
- Posts
- 3,100
Mystic Teal- 99 Trans Am & 01 CBR 929
here are some links with write ups that you may find interesting and will help you learn abotu and understand the torque converters better
http://www.fuddleracing.com/WhatConvertersDo.html
http://www.converter.com/torqueratio.htm
-
03-16-2007, 05:16 AM #8
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
- Location
- n/w chicago
- Age
- 54
- Posts
- 6,932
black- 2000 nhra edition formula
1.6 is will sloppy.
i have a 2.2 1 str which is nice and tight. you really cant tell i have a T/C in the car unless your a gearhead.2000 nhra edition formula
a few bolt ons, 379 rwhp
11.96 @113.25
-
03-16-2007, 05:36 AM #9
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Cape Coral, FL
- Age
- 39
- Posts
- 3,100
Mystic Teal- 99 Trans Am & 01 CBR 929
see this right here is EXACTLY why I retracted my first statement. this is what I had said HOWEVER i found information sayign that the higher the STR the LOOSER your converter will feel and that is why there is more shock to the wheels. but I do keep hearing people say this and it was also my belief before yesterday
-
03-16-2007, 05:54 AM #10
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- England but from TX
- Posts
- 803
Light Pewter Metallic- 2K Camaro Z28
^^ You are right about shock to the wheels. When I ran last night at the track, I only hooked once and managed a 1.8 60' w/ my BFG KDW2s. After that run its all spin city. BTW, my Yank 3500 have 2.5 STR. Its feels like stock w/ normal driving to me but then again I have 3.42s on the back.
-
03-16-2007, 11:59 AM #11
-
03-16-2007, 12:06 PM #12
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Cape Coral, FL
- Age
- 39
- Posts
- 3,100
Mystic Teal- 99 Trans Am & 01 CBR 929
this paragraph right here from Fuddle Racing MAY explain alot on "streetability" from other companies however I am going to try and verify there information as well..
With other companies, you often see wildly exaggerated ratings of stall and STR. There are actually ratings released by General Motors that Fuddle Racing uses to rate its converters. We rate STR lower than many of the inflated numbers you will see by other companies because General Motors rates it lower.
Fuddle Racing has had numerous opportunities to go inside the competition's converters and directly see through their smoke and mirrors. What we saw was no surprise to us, but it might be to you. Two examples from two different companies follow.
The first was rated at 3200/2.5. When we opened it and compared their numbers to General Motors' numbers, the converter actually a 2800/1.8. With a stall speed so low, it is no wonder it felt relatively tight on the street. It is also no wonder it did not perform as well as a 3200 should.
The second, from a large company, was rated at 3500/2.5. When inside, it turned out to be a 3200/2.1 when using more accurate General Motors ratings. The performance would be noticeably different with a lower stall compared to what the customer wanted and expected.
Another great misconception and unethical advertisement that flies around some companies is that big diameter converters create high STR. A larger diameter converter creates LESS STR, not more. Perhaps the best example is a 278mm converter. Advertised at 2.25 STR, this converter won't create anywhere near that kind of STR.
-
03-16-2007, 03:41 PM #13
-
03-16-2007, 08:07 PM #14
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Cape Coral, FL
- Age
- 39
- Posts
- 3,100
Mystic Teal- 99 Trans Am & 01 CBR 929
that is still a different brand though.. no offense to you nhra cause i know you know your stuff and I had also posted the same thing, higher STR= tighter converter but from what I have been reading lately I dont think that is exactly true. I will not quit looking til i find a really good writeup on this topic.
-
03-16-2007, 08:45 PM #15
-
03-16-2007, 08:56 PM #16
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
- Location
- n/w chicago
- Age
- 54
- Posts
- 6,932
black- 2000 nhra edition formula
Originally Posted by SLowETz
a high STR hits the tires harder but a low STR is more efficient up top. lower STR's will also feel less tight and than high STR since less torque is being put down from a stop.
personally, if i were getting a stall, i'd get a lower STR. i don't want to kill my tranny and rear with hard launches or ruin my traction, but i want the benefits of big flashes and higher shift extensions that the stall offers. a lower STR will put down more power once you get into the high rpm range and take less away from your traction.
if you're building a track beast, you'll likely want a high STR because you'll be able to launch hard on sticky tires. for a street car like mine that will rarely see the track and never see sticky tires anytime soon, a lower STR is better. it'll preserve your traction and keep you more efficient up top.
Originally Posted by HD1911
Originally Posted by 98_Formula
Originally Posted by highgear
-
03-17-2007, 03:17 AM #17
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Cape Coral, FL
- Age
- 39
- Posts
- 3,100
Mystic Teal- 99 Trans Am & 01 CBR 929
like I said before, this is about identical to my original statement. I had removed it after checking around some other forums and everything because I didnt want information posted by me that was completely ass backwards. I am finding a whole lot more people that agree with the higher STR the tighter feel though, i just wanted to make sure it wasnt just a misconception.
-
03-17-2007, 03:56 AM #18
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Location
- indiana
- Age
- 41
- Posts
- 1,018
black, 05 Roush- black, 99 T/A WS.6
I Will run this Tc for a while and see how it performs as I only drive on the street mainly. (Yank SY 3500 1.61STR)
1999 T/A WS6 Black -------SOLD
05 mustang Roush sport;
DOB manifold, m122 SC, 47lb injectors, gt500 TB, roush TVS CAI, Detroit rocker SC grind camshafts, Mac LTs, off road x, roush off road mufflers, roush short throw shifter, kenne bell BAP, Brenspeed 93 octane tune. 479rwhp 436ftlbs SAE.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks