Go Back   American Sedan Forum > Main American Sedan Categories > American Sedan News

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 11-08-2018, 02:19 PM
Danny"TheKid"Richardson Danny"TheKid"Richardson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 428
Default

Thank you Jim. That was the best explanation I have heard so far.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-08-2018, 02:24 PM
Ted Johnson Ted Johnson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 949
Default Is it a transmission issue?

"The wide ratios have been the reason for FP motors that run up close to, or beyond, 8K RPM+ to transcend the power gap on shifts."

What's less expensive? Building a lower rpm engine to last or keep beating your head against a wall breaking transmissions spinning your engines close to 8000 rpm?
And beyond? What's the limit now?

That being said I love my autogear close ratio 4 speed built by Paul Cangliossi at 5speeds.com. Literally wrote the book on rebuilding 4 speed muncies and utilizes autogear components but does his own prep work to many of the components. Mines been flawless but I don't spin my engine above 6300 either. Fwiw.
__________________
.

Last edited by Ted Johnson; 11-08-2018 at 03:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-08-2018, 04:35 PM
Richard Pryor Richard Pryor is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 9
Default RP transmissions

My two cents worth of experience with RP Camaro T56 transmission problems = nothing. No failures over 3 different 4th gen Camaros in T2 since 2001. The only maintenance has been annual oil changes with factory Dextron. The last car that was converted to RP AS specs from T2 specs has over 8000 racing miles on it since it began as a Tom Oates T2 Camaro in 1999 (he won the Runoffs in 2000 with the car). All I've ever done is the oil change. My other T2 Camaros had identical no issue transmissions. And they were abused I'm chagrined to say.

As a point of interest the shift point for us has always been around 6500 rpm with it easily extending another 450 rpm to the cutoff when it was necessary to leave it in 3rd for a specific corner to corner distance. 5th gear has never been used on any west coast track.

This car has a crate LS1 installed in 2004 and ran flawlessly with only spark plugs and fluids each year. A valve spring finally failed this year and we took the occasion to rebuild the engine with new bearings(they still looked like new) pistons, rings, valve springs...total cost in parts under $1000 and no labor as we did it ourselves.

I expect the engine to last longer than I do so the RP idea of cheap racing is very valid in my case. But then I'm out there to have fun on track and I'm not a candidate for the latest and greatest and costliest options. With the plethora of almost spec classes from the P1 and P2 racers to regional Spec Vettes why would any serious competitor choose AS? Too old, too expensive, not enough competition.

Last edited by Richard Pryor; 11-08-2018 at 04:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-09-2018, 09:35 AM
fastandyracing fastandyracing is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Apopka FL
Posts: 539
Default

QUOTE=PbFoot;34970]Here is where I see the benefit.

If you install a 4.30 rear gear then use 3-4-5 (.82) the shift points are about 26 MPH apart as compared to a 3.55 rear gear using 2-3-4, then the shift points are about 35 MPH apart. The top speed is the same.

The TKO 500 has a big gap between 2-3.

I maybe wrong but as I read the current trans rules the TKO 600 (.63 5th) is not a legal trans, only the TKO 500 is. The TKO 600 has a closer ratio 2-3-4 than the TKO 500 does.[/QUOTE]

So this go me thinking about tremec gear ratios, I knew the 1st gear ratio was substantially different in the TKO 600 but thought the rest were pretty close, did some research and here is what I found. TKO500 2,3,4 ratios are 1.97/1.34/1.00 and the TKO600's are 1.89/1.28/1.00. Doing some division, the 2-3 split percentage wise for the 500 is .680, for the 600 its .677 (essentially the same), from 3-4 for the 500 it is .746, for the 600 its .781. So shifting 3-4 at 8000 rpm in the 500 drops you to 5968 rpm, with the 600 ratios it drops you to 6248 rpm, only 300 or so different. The 4-5 drop in a 600 with the .82 overdrive would be more significant, only dropping you to 6560 rpm, so I suppose a 3-4-5 TKO600 with a .82 overdrive could offer some advantage.

But consider what we do, and how many times do we really shift exactly at our redline (mine is around 7000), and how many times do we short shift, or "float" around it depending on what the circumstances of traffic and corners are. You also have to consider the 4-5 shift mechanics for the driver can be challenging, and certainly much more difficult than the 3-4.


I don't know if anyone has any info on transmission losses, But I know intuitively that running straight thru the box in 4 rather than thru the cluster and then 5th has to reduce drivetrain loss, seems like the 3-4-5 vs 2-3-4 would be of minimal value. Its an interesting exercise though.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-09-2018, 12:30 PM
Scott Sanda Scott Sanda is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 451
Default

If my choice, due to cost, was between building or running a non competitive FP motor or putting in a 50Kish Ebay motor and trans, I would do the ebay motor and trans all day long. Now, I have rebuilt the Ebay motors I have bought, but I have the money to do so. But the point is, you do not need to.

I also submit that the people running FP motors they built mostly themselves could easily "rebuild" an ebay FI motor. Hell, I could if I was on the time side of the time vs money chart.

You can buy a crate LS3 from GM performance for 7K. You can buy a coyote for $6700.

Again, my argument isn't that you, especially of you are an engine builder, can't do an FP motor that is reasonably competitive for similar all in numbers.

It is that you can do an FI motor, if you are NOT and engine builder or do not have deep pockets, and end up with a 3-4 year before rebuild competitive package that will require nothing but spark plugs and oil changes.

Over time, it is less expensive then FP. Initially, it is also less expensive than FP depending on what FP you buy.

For a driver who is running an iron head, non competitive FP motor, an ebay drop in is going to be much better than continuing to be non competitive in a straight line.

There is no down side to allowing an FI option based on LS3 and Coyote for all FP cars. You can adapt the current FP trans, or put in a t56/2020.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-09-2018, 02:34 PM
Ken Felice Ken Felice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 88
Default nov. final minutes

We have built many FP engines for AS. Andy Mc will run our engine for two seasons with only oil changes and valve springs every year. We us good parts ,that is one of the most critical parts of building engines that last. After the second year we pull pan and check the bottom end. Leak it down if that is good put back together. The last engine had three seasons before the bearings were changed really didn't need. leak was not what we thought it should be so at that point we put bearings and did valve job. that is the engine that we ran at run offs. We dyno all engines for break in and check all systems. If it is good we are set for next season and future seasons. Look into total price of a fuel inj. engine. to make it competitive your costs will be more than full prep engine. Please don't think I am not in favor of inj. engines /but look at the total cost. ?engine/wirers/computer/trans/ flash computer for raceing
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-09-2018, 03:03 PM
DBailey's Avatar
DBailey DBailey is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 115
Default

My experience with my FP Alum Head 305 Camaro engine is exactly as Ken mentioned--I went through it because of leakdown and found everything else great.
Our RP LS1 would need valve springs every year as a preventative measure--otherwise we found just what Richard found with his. Other components in great condition.

I fully understand Scott's logic and concept, but as one who has prepped multiple cars in FP and RP trim the unknown,hidden costs are what hurt doing an engine transplant as Scott has proposed in the past.

There is much more fabrication, parts purchases, and other factors that go into changing over an engine package.
A better option would be to open up engine choices that fit with existing Car/Drivetrain packages. Less parts to purchase, easier, DIY friendly, and less modifications needed to the rest of the car--(susp. changes,engine location issues, etc.
This is exactly what we are testing and developing here in Calif.
(That is when it's not burning!)
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-09-2018, 03:56 PM
Scott Sanda Scott Sanda is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 451
Default

I love Ken. I deeply respect Ken. If I were buying a FP motor, I would have Ken build it, no expense spared, Andy level.

However, I think that the costs of an FI motor are being overstated. Wiring is simple. I stripped 100% of the stock wiring out of my Caddy when I decided to turn it into a dedicated AS car. I put in an aftermarket, engine swap harness, and used the stock ECU. This same harness, with some plug and play adapters, works for both LS6 and LS2/3.

The programming and tuning is the easy part. All the touring guys do it already as it is.

I feel, and I could be totally wrong, that one of the things affecting AS is the need to run a Carb. No one under 40 knows what those are, unless they have very specific experiences (i.e. Danny)

To grow a class, you need perceived value for your dollar, perceived ease and familiarity, and perceived fun, from the point of view of someone not a fossil (like me)looking for a class to run in.

AS is the perfect combination of tinker and build, and speed/power/noise. Way more so than (again in my opinion) T1 and T2.

We just need to change the perceptions of people looking in from the outside.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-09-2018, 05:00 PM
DBailey's Avatar
DBailey DBailey is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 115
Default

Scott I agree with some of your statements---But you are seriously under estimating the costs involved in fitting these engines---I know--because I have done it--I have the receipts,I've personally done the work.

Just the aftermarket wiring harness starts at $600+ for the LS engines.
The tuning is not simple it is very critical and complicated and must be done correctly--10+ pulls on a chassis dyno--at least an hour of dyno time--($200+)
The tuning license for the ECU--and the tuners time--The tuning alone for our Firebird was over $500.00 (each time--we did it 3 times in 6 years) not including the dyno time costs. And if you change certain sensors--A/F meter--it has to be done all over again.

The new LS3 stuff is different from LS1/2/6 different ECU/ Throttle control,sensors, crank reluctor, I'm afraid it's just not as simple as you are making it out to be. When it comes to electronic engine control systems there just isn't a "cheap"easy solution. I takes time, resources, expertise,and money!

To assume that the "younger" future racer would be driven away by Carbs is not giving them much credit. And If they want to race in A Sedan with a F.I. engine there are several options already out there without stuffing LS3 or Coyote in vintage Pony cars.
How do I know this?--
For the past 8 years My son was the youngest person racing in A Sedan.
He didn't change to P-1 because of fuel injection, or a more technical engine, We left because of the ever-changing cost-adding rules.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-09-2018, 06:24 PM
PbFoot PbFoot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 191
Default

Some perspective. In 1995 AS became a National class. At that time Detroit had not produced a carbureted Pony car for 10 years. To run in AS you had to pitch the FI and the hydraulic cam. Why did the Club do this?

Carbs are cheap, easy to tune, and easy to police. Same for the solid cam. With this step back in technology, AS almost over night became one of the most popular classes in SCCA club racing and stayed that way for years. There was no FI option in AS for many years. If you wanted to run a FI Pony car back in the 90's, SSGT was the class for you.

I'm not smart enough to figure out why AS is not doing well now (we all have our theories), but history does not bear out that carburetors are the problem.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.