Dick,
I read those HP loss figures with some questions in my mind. I have been
wrong before, but it does not make sense to me that that much HP is lost
in the automatic trans. I suspect those figures were with converter.
Torque Converters give good reduction at low speed, but eat HP in high
gear. We run a direct drive setup.
The reason I have this opinion is because there is really no gear loss
in top gear. Unless the pump eats lots of power, where is the loss? This
is an issue that I would like to get solid answers. Years ago Lou
Bingham, from SDRC ran an Olds powered roadster with a Hydramatic trans
which he often switched out for a three speed late in the week. This
usually gave him a couple of MPH. If you remember, these transmissions
weighed a bunch, just the reduction in weight could have improve speeds.
Going to remain "shiftless" for now.
Tom, Redding CA (just returned from a trip to Iowa so I am sifting
through 230 emails.) - #216 D/GCC
Dick J wrote:
>
> After reading all that stuff on automatic
> transmissions and standards, I'm starting to
> think again - - -which one. That's a lot of HP
> to go to the tranny. Doesn't HP = Speed? Why is
> anybody running an auto? Like Tom Bryant, don't
> you use a powerglide?
>
> =====
> Dick J
> In East Texas
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
> a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
///
/// land-speed@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe land-speed
///
///
|