Gear change update

Greg_P wrote:

Mark Miller wrote:Tore,

A 9.87 is good but it seems like the MPH should be better than 130 for that ET?

Later Mark.

I agree, our best of 9.95 came with darn near 136 mph..... 3.89 gear and 29.5" tire.

Greg,i agree to a point with the other guys but wander if he has the fuel he needs at the top end?

Later Mark.

Mark Miller wrote:

Greg_P wrote:

Mark Miller wrote:Tore,

A 9.87 is good but it seems like the MPH should be better than 130 for that ET?

Later Mark.

I agree, our best of 9.95 came with darn near 136 mph..... 3.89 gear and 29.5" tire.

Greg,i agree to a point with the other guys but wander if he has the fuel he needs at the top end?

Later Mark.

I think Jon hit the nail on the head............. (CONVERTER SLIPPAGE)

IDT-572 wrote:

richter69 wrote:

Mark Miller wrote:Tore,

A 9.87 is good but it seems like the MPH should be better than 130 for that ET?

Later Mark.

With the gear swap its happy on the bottom but not so on the top........its laboring in high gear now.

I told him to change the gear to prove that it would pick the car up by reducing his first gear FD ratio. Now he needs to put the standard first gear ratio planetary back in and go back to his 4.30 ring gear. Wit the low planet there is a wider gap between 2nd and high that hurts the car from getting in high gear in the sweet spot. Could be whats up with the mph.

I've heard the "wider gap between 2nd and high" argument before and I don't disagree with it but isn't this an even larger problem with a glide? Second gear with a the wide ratio kit is I believe 1.54:1. First gear with a glide is 1.76:1 I believe. Doesn't that seem like a glide would really fall out of the powerband during the shift? I know they work in light cars but at 3500 lbs. do you all still think a glide is the way to go? I know they also have a lot less rotating mass. How much shorter is a glide than a C-6? On a long wheel base car like around 114" do you need to worry about the drive shaft being too long? Mark Williams has a critical speed calculation for drive shafts and they told a friend of mine that a glide was too short to put in his 67 Fairlane.

512Fairlane wrote:

IDT-572 wrote:

richter69 wrote:

Mark Miller wrote:Tore,

A 9.87 is good but it seems like the MPH should be better than 130 for that ET?

Later Mark.

With the gear swap its happy on the bottom but not so on the top........its laboring in high gear now.

I told him to change the gear to prove that it would pick the car up by reducing his first gear FD ratio. Now he needs to put the standard first gear ratio planetary back in and go back to his 4.30 ring gear. Wit the low planet there is a wider gap between 2nd and high that hurts the car from getting in high gear in the sweet spot. Could be whats up with the mph.

I've heard the "wider gap between 2nd and high" argument before and I don't disagree with it but isn't this an even larger problem with a glide? Second gear with a the wide ratio kit is I believe 1.54:1. First gear with a glide is 1.76:1 I believe. Doesn't that seem like a glide would really fall out of the powerband during the shift? I know they work in light cars but at 3500 lbs. do you all still think a glide is the way to go? I know they also have a lot less rotating mass. How much shorter is a glide than a C-6? On a long wheel base car like around 114" do you need to worry about the drive shaft being too long? Mark Williams has a critical speed calculation for drive shafts and they told a friend of mine that a glide was too short to put in his 67 Fairlane.

You cant get an off the shelf converter from the ACME store, it needs to be a custom deal, just like my avatar............

my glide didnt pick up any et/mph.it did help calm it down so i can go faster,maybe. i dont think a heavy car is a good place for a glide,JMO.

cool40 wrote:my glide didnt pick up any et/mph.it did help calm it down so i can go faster,maybe. i dont think a heavy car is a good place for a glide,JMO.

you still got issues to work out..............and dont Tell Travis a heavy car wont work with a glide.............

richter69 wrote:

cool40 wrote:my glide didnt pick up any et/mph.it did help calm it down so i can go faster,maybe. i dont think a heavy car is a good place for a glide,JMO.

you still got issues to work out..............and dont Tell Travis a heavy car wont work with a glide.............

You'll hurt his feelings.......

richter69 wrote:

cool40 wrote:my glide didnt pick up any et/mph.it did help calm it down so i can go faster,maybe. i dont think a heavy car is a good place for a glide,JMO.

you still got issues to work out..............and dont Tell Travis a heavy car wont work with a glide.............

i didnt say it wouldnt work,i just dont think a glide is better than a 3spd for a heavy car.the converter is what counts either way you go.

512Fairlane wrote:

IDT-572 wrote:

richter69 wrote:

Mark Miller wrote:Tore,

A 9.87 is good but it seems like the MPH should be better than 130 for that ET?

Later Mark.

With the gear swap its happy on the bottom but not so on the top........its laboring in high gear now.

I told him to change the gear to prove that it would pick the car up by reducing his first gear FD ratio. Now he needs to put the standard first gear ratio planetary back in and go back to his 4.30 ring gear. Wit the low planet there is a wider gap between 2nd and high that hurts the car from getting in high gear in the sweet spot. Could be whats up with the mph.

I've heard the "wider gap between 2nd and high" argument before and I don't disagree with it but isn't this an even larger problem with a glide? Second gear with a the wide ratio kit is I believe 1.54:1. First gear with a glide is 1.76:1 I believe. Doesn't that seem like a glide would really fall out of the powerband during the shift? I know they work in light cars but at 3500 lbs. do you all still think a glide is the way to go? I know they also have a lot less rotating mass. How much shorter is a glide than a C-6? On a long wheel base car like around 114" do you need to worry about the drive shaft being too long? Mark Williams has a critical speed calculation for drive shafts and they told a friend of mine that a glide was too short to put in his 67 Fairlane.

Your right a glide does have a greater gap, and I said that could be his problem. But I think it's probably the converter. the extra H.P. made it very obvious now.

cool40 wrote:my glide didnt pick up any et/mph.it did help calm it down so i can go faster,maybe. i dont think a heavy car is a good place for a glide,JMO.

You were trying to run a tater sack race with one leg cut off.................. The glide may have made a good bit difference if all was right on your combo.

You want me to pick up some Q-16 or bring my jets Friday night? or both?

I should have it all buttoned up tonight. I am hoping to go Friday night and I will post results. I will have a standard C-6 ratio tranny and 3.91 gears. I have a feeling I will slow down some. I had 3.91s with the low ratio tranny in there.





Tore

Tore wrote:I should have it all buttoned up tonight. I am hoping to go Friday night and I will post results. I will have a standard C-6 ratio tranny and 3.91 gears. I have a feeling I will slow down some. I had 3.91s with the low ratio tranny in there.





Tore

If it does slow down, you still will have learned something.................. Let me know what it does.

Yes I know. I have 4.30s I can put back in or pull the 4.10s out of the Blue Torino. You have to admit it is interesting even if its a pain in the a$$. Rick and Sooz are coming up maybe I can get them to do it for me. LOL

Tore

Tore, is this the trans and converter you got from me?

No its the tranny out of the Torino and a new converter I had built.


Tore

To my hErO and the great FreemanD.............


Got to have feelings before they can get hurt. As far as not working well in a heavy car, I think you guy's know where I stand. Now if it were a TH400 ........... thats a different story, but I don't and never will make enough power for one of them.

TravisRice wrote:To my hErO and the great FreemanD.............


Got to have feelings before they can get hurt. As far as not working well in a heavy car, I think you guy's know where I stand. Now if it were a TH400 ........... thats a different story, but I don't and never will make enough power for one of them.

AAAAAA MEN

IDT-572 wrote:

cool40 wrote:my glide didnt pick up any et/mph.it did help calm it down so i can go faster,maybe. i dont think a heavy car is a good place for a glide,JMO.

You were trying to run a tater sack race with one leg cut off.................. The glide may have made a good bit difference if all was right on your combo.

You want me to pick up some Q-16 or bring my jets Friday night? or both?

i jetted the carb today so it's good.i'd like to have some Q16 to try,5gallon or so should be enough.i know my motor need some help but it was runnen good as it could and ran pritty dead on the number.i'd thought the glide woulda ran a little faster but it didnt run ANY faster than the c4.i still think to a point,meaning a car that 60's in the 1.30's or so and is a little heavy,a 3spd can out out shine a glide.JMO and i dont care to go back to a c4 either,for the record.

cool40 wrote:

IDT-572 wrote:

cool40 wrote:my glide didnt pick up any et/mph.it did help calm it down so i can go faster,maybe. i dont think a heavy car is a good place for a glide,JMO.

You were trying to run a tater sack race with one leg cut off.................. The glide may have made a good bit difference if all was right on your combo.

You want me to pick up some Q-16 or bring my jets Friday night? or both?

i jetted the carb today so it's good.i'd like to have some Q16 to try,5gallon or so should be enough.i know my motor need some help but it was runnen good as it could and ran pritty dead on the number.i'd thought the glide woulda ran a little faster but it didnt run ANY faster than the c4.i still think to a point,meaning a car that 60's in the 1.30's or so and is a little heavy,a 3spd can out out shine a glide.JMO and i dont care to go back to a c4 either,for the record.

best 60' I ever had with the c4 was a 1.31......best with the glide is a 1.26

I struggled to run in the 5's with the c4, It'll run low to mid 5.70's now in the heat with the glide. Plus I got to work on the c4 a whole bunch.............I'm not even draining the fluid out of the glide while its out............

richter69 wrote:

cool40 wrote:

IDT-572 wrote:

cool40 wrote:my glide didnt pick up any et/mph.it did help calm it down so i can go faster,maybe. i dont think a heavy car is a good place for a glide,JMO.

You were trying to run a tater sack race with one leg cut off.................. The glide may have made a good bit difference if all was right on your combo.

You want me to pick up some Q-16 or bring my jets Friday night? or both?

i jetted the carb today so it's good.i'd like to have some Q16 to try,5gallon or so should be enough.i know my motor need some help but it was runnen good as it could and ran pritty dead on the number.i'd thought the glide woulda ran a little faster but it didnt run ANY faster than the c4.i still think to a point,meaning a car that 60's in the 1.30's or so and is a little heavy,a 3spd can out out shine a glide.JMO and i dont care to go back to a c4 either,for the record.

best 60' I ever had with the c4 was a 1.31......best with the glide is a 1.26

I struggled to run in the 5's with the c4, It'll run low to mid 5.70's now in the heat with the glide. Plus I got to work on the c4 a whole bunch.............I'm not even draining the fluid out of the glide while its out............

i 60'd 1.25 with c4 and went 5.70's,didnt break it anytime but it did have the best parts and the the car aint heavy.the glide ran the same 60'and et.but was a lot better off the line.one thing that works for one car dont always work for another.kinda like the 8"converter deal,a few years ago that was the "must have"race converter but now you see fast cars with 9.5 and 10".

Have to wait till next week for results couldnt get out of work.


Tore

I did'nt know if I would like my glide or not. But,so far I do as long as it holds up good. I'm going to 1.80 straight cuts over the winter,just for piece of mind

bbf-falcon wrote:I did'nt know if I would like my glide or not. But,so far I do as long as it holds up good. I'm going to 1.80 straight cuts over the winter,just for piece of mind

At your performance level, that's probably a good idea Rick! The 1.76 will only live so long. Trust me, I speak from experience.

bbf-falcon wrote:I did'nt know if I would like my glide or not. But,so far I do as long as it holds up good. I'm going to 1.80 straight cuts over the winter,just for piece of mind

I think the Snake is in the same boat lol.

richter69 wrote:

bbf-falcon wrote:I did'nt know if I would like my glide or not. But,so far I do as long as it holds up good. I'm going to 1.80 straight cuts over the winter,just for piece of mind

I think the Snake is in the same boat lol.

Yep, most definitely a planetary change is due for me........... I will probably buy a good case too.