FAQ |
Members List |
Social Groups |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
Both stock tires and drag radials. The car runs the same.
For the car to really react to a converter it just simply needs "more" converter. It's still kind of boggy even with the 2600 flash stall off the line, much like it does with the stock converter. It needs a converter that gets the engine up into it's peak torque area right from the start. Then it actually might hit the tires harder, requiring a good tire, and then I might see an improvement in 60 foot times. https://youtu.be/er1z7PpqsnY |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
It also has to do with having fun with the car feeling more power, laying rubber and general mayhem! A good convertor can lull your passengers to sleep on a cruise and slam them into the seat under full power from a stop.
__________________
466 Mike Voycey shortblock, 310cfm SD KRE heads, SD "OF 2.0 cam", torker 2 373 gears 3200 Continental Convertor best et 10.679/127.5/1.533 60ft 308 gears best et 10.76/125.64/1.5471 |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
My thought, exactly. Converter swaps are pretty easy.
__________________
---------------------------- '72 Formula 400 Lucerne Blue, Blue Deluxe interior - My first car! '73 Firebird 350/4-speed Black on Black, mix & match. |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
He`s got the converters already. It`s not like he`s going out to spend money on something that`s going to ruin his car. We already know what a stock converter feels like. Why not try the "other" one.
I don`t think that converter is going to "slip down the road". It`s not that small and that motor is not a powerhouse. |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
X10 go with the 10"/higher stall with a trans cooler
__________________
Chris D 69 GTO Liberty Blue/dark blue 467, 850 Holley, T2, Edelbrock Dport 310cfm w Ram Air manifolds, HFT 245/251D .561/.594L, T400, 9" w 3.50s 3905lbs 11.59@ 114, 1.57/ 60' |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
stock or 2000 stall vote
I hate to be the contrarian, but i've had that SAME situation and i sort of hated the 2500 stall with that kind of a 400 with 8.5 compression and 067/068 type cam specs.
I do a lot of street driving and deal with traffic. I dumped the Hughes 2500 and then went with a custom 2000 stall and honestly that was perfect. Lots of fun and just a little bit more tire spinning from even 10 or 15 mph or rolling starts.....but 2500 just moaned like a boat.
__________________
1974 Lemans Sportecoupe GT (daily driver) "Well the girls out there knock me out, you know Cruisin' around in my GTO" Rock 'n' Roll High School Ramones |
The Following User Says Thank You to moontower69 For This Useful Post: | ||
#27
|
||||
|
||||
Stock convertor FTW. No need for higher stall, You'll waste 1500 RM of low end powerband and torgue. Below the stall speed you won't be fully coupled and the car will feel lazy.
__________________
Triple Black 1971 GTO |
#28
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Max Brake Horsepower: 330@ 4800rpm Max Torque: 430 @ 3000 rpm Stroke: 3.75 Bore: 4.1212 Compression: 10.5 Firing Order: 18436572 Camshaft 067 1967-1970 High Output with 4-Barrel Carb Max Brake Horsepower: 335@ 5000rpm Max Torque: 430 @ 3400 rpm Stroke: 3.75 Bore: 4.1212 Compression: 10.5 Firing Order: 18436572 Camshaft 068 1967-1970 Ram Air III with 4-Barrel Carb Max Brake Horsepower: 345@ 5000rpm Max Torque: 430 @ 3400 rpm Stroke: 3.75 Bore: 4.1212 Compression: 10.5 Firing Order: 18436572 Camshaft 744 I am always amazed that people can do a stock rebuild on a low compression engine with equivalent camshaft specs and expect to make more HP than the factory did with high compression heads running 93 octane.
__________________
Triple Black 1971 GTO |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
We have members in our club that have converters that flash to 3,400 to 3,600 RPM and you would never know that driving their cars. Converters were by Continental and some by Munsinger and they simply work great. Acted like a standard converter until the foot was to the floor. I had a 2,800 stall in front of a 200-4R that cruised at 2,200 RPM at 70 MPH and it always felt nicely hooked up at anything less than full throttle.
Getting back to the limited horsepower discussed above, I would rather have 300 foot pounds at 2,600 available than 200 at 2,000 when I nail the throttle.
__________________
Mick Batson 1967 original owner Tyro Blue/black top 4-speed HO GTO with all the original parts stored safely away -- 1965 2+2 survivor AC auto -- 1965 Catalina Safari Wagon in progress. |
#30
|
||||
|
||||
I've had enough converters in my Ventura to easily fill the bed of a full size pick-up truck. Dating clear back into the later 1980's I've been buying and testing them. I've ran B & M, TCI's, Coan, Continental and a variety of "no-name" shelf stuff. I even used the Ventura to test prototypes and 10" variants of the EXCELLENT Continental "Jim Hand" 10" converter.
Despite the good reviews the Hugh's get on here I find them "mushy" for street use. They are even worse behind low compression "mild" engines. Some folks rave about them simply because they just happen to fit the bill nicely for their particular application where some additional torque multiplication helps the engine move the car effectively. At best, for what you are doing here a 25 Hughs would just be OK and I'll bet you'd wished you'd have left the stock converter in after your first tank of fuel. For higher compression engines making great power a converter that locks nearly solid past the flash stall speed is going to be the best one you'll ever have in there. My Continental 10" is the top of the pile for ALL the converters I've had in the Ventura. You would never even know it's in there if you stole the keys and took off with the car. It doesn't even "flash" up anyplace for "normal" driving unless you get into it pretty hard going under 40mph in high gear to climb a hill or steep grade. Even then it barely goes past 2000rpms or so and you might be able to "push" it to 2400rpm's for a second or two till the vehicle speed catches up. Holding the brakes as hard as you can it will overcome the tires at 1900rpm's. So it's nearly as "tight" as a stock full size converter everyplace. Go to the track, heat up the DOT's, stick it hared and it flashes to 3600rpm's on a full throttle launch and yields 1.59-1.61 60' times! Past the stall speed it's locked solid, goes thru the top end around 5300rpm's up near 120mph. It was closer to 5100rpm's when I ran 28" tall tires. Do the math: MPH x GEAR RATIO x 336 divided by TIRE DIAMETER. 120 x 3.42 x 336 divided by 26 is 5303rpm if my calculator is working correctly this early in the morning. Anyhow, as it relates to this thread I'd use the larger converter. 10" units can be a "crap shoot" with this sort of thing and you'll most likely love it pulling away from stoplights at full throttle and hate it everywhere else, at least from what I've seen with this sort of thing........FWIW.......Cliff https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zVdoLR-VzM
__________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a Veteran! https://cliffshighperformance.com/ 73 Ventura, SOLD 455, 3740lbs, 11.30's at 120mph, 1977 Pontiac Q-jet, HO intake, HEI, 10" converter, 3.42 gears, DOT's, 7.20's at 96mph and still WAY under the roll bar rule. Best ET to date 7.18 at 97MPH (1/8th mile), |
#31
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It's apparent there are still quite a few that don't understand how a good converter is supposed to work, and have been victims of very poor coupled converters that drive horrible around town. Surprising as much as everyone has hung around this forum and have seen how much a good converter is preached about around here. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If that's a sloppy converter, you'll hate it. If it's a good converter, you'll love it. My suspicion is that it's a mass-market junker, but I suppose there's no way to tell without installing it and driving the car some. Was it stored properly? No chance that debris fell into the neck? How did it work in your friend's car? Where did he get it? |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Again, thank-you for all the responses. I see some people love them a good converter discussion! The converter is "good" in that I pulled and stored it myself and know it works fine. I think Shurkey nailed, though, about whether or not it's a good one. It is just an "off the shelf" one. I have made a few passes in the car it was in and driven it briefly on the street. It was fun on the track but my recollection from the street it is that it is not as tight as what some of you are describing.
I think my plan is going to be keep the stock one in for now and make sure I get the new motor broken and dialed in before making other changes. My guess is the stock converter should give better tuning feedback. I'll keep the 10" in my back pocket in case I want to try it out later and see the difference. |
The Following User Says Thank You to AJ- For This Useful Post: | ||
#34
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Meanwhile my Formula 60' at 1.6-1.7 on street tires with a Coan and you'd never know it's in there in normal driving.
__________________
---------------------------- '72 Formula 400 Lucerne Blue, Blue Deluxe interior - My first car! '73 Firebird 350/4-speed Black on Black, mix & match. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
I am always amazed that people can do a stock rebuild on a low compression engine with equivalent camshaft specs and expect to make more HP than the factory did with high compression heads running 93 octane.
I do have a bit different cam (Lunati voodoo 701 with .454 lift) and don't know exact specs of the 67 cam referenced. With the stock rebuilt 7k3 heads and .03 over bore block, it was actually whistled at 7.8 comp. Dyno readout is way above the 220 hp stock motor. I was happy to see 310 hp and 400 ft lbs. |
Reply |
|
|