Torque Converters ?

[monza]

My tranny is cooking -

it gets so damn hot that the brakes start to engage (i fig the fluid is heating up and expanding...)

which puts even more load on the tran - so it gets even hotter...

I have a stock C4 - but the 302 has been converted to 351 (previous owner)

a Holley 670dbbl on an EB Performer - nothing extreme.

I *THINK* the extra load from the 351 is killing the Torque Converter.

Any moderate acceleration or slight hill driving and the whole thing starts to cook itself.

It always feels like the drive is way too fluid - it just doesnt ever seem to lock up and drive 1:1.

For sure in town driving it is always slipping and boiling.

I figure replace the Torque Converter - but TC's are a bit of a mystery to me.

I need a real simple *foolproof* spec for a converter which can deal with the 351 and give me good drive from low revs (351 all happens at low -ish revs).

i am sick of putting my foot down - not moving forwards, but boiling the trans.

any help, advice or guidance much appreciated.

thx,

Monza.

 

[Broncobill78]

Torque converters are one of those black magic voodoo sort of things to a lot of guys. It took me a fairly long time before I really began to understand just how they did what they do and to be perfectly honest with Ya I just don't have the smarts or vocabulary to explain it to someone else. Best thing you can do is call someone who DOES have experience explaining these pieces of wierdness to guys without a clue. Now there are certainly other companies out there but from time to time I used to flirt with the Go-Fast crowd and I've always bought my $hit from the guys at TCI so they're the ones I can recommend based on personal experience.

http://www.tciauto.com/Products/Converters/

Call their Tech line and you'll be connected with someone really patient who's used to dealing with people like us.

Sorry it's not more but this is really the best info I can give you.

 

[monza]

hey BB,

yeh I read thru the TCI tech info pages - like 12 times - then i had to go lie down for a while.

so i fig i will be talking to the TCI guys on monday

it always helps to have a recommend tho - at least now i know that TCI are a good outfit.

thx for the tip.

Monza.

 

[rodsteal]

four speed manual with a clutch in my solution to that problem.

 

[Sverrir D. Thorarinsson]

Have you tried installing a cooler for the trans. fluid? A friend of mine installed one in his bronco because his tranny for very hot. The cooler fixed the problem completly! This is just a simple radiator that you place in front of the engine radiator.

 

[monza]

four speed manual with a clutch in my solution to that problem.

Oh brother - u said it.

I cant fkg deal with all this *flash Stall* - *Brake Stall* - floor it and count the revs buggeration.

I appreciate how civil the auto trans makes driving the truck - but i was raised on manual transmission and this auto is making me insane.

BUT - converting auto to man is WAY pricier than upgrading the TC...

*********!!!

Monza

 

[monza]

Have you tried installing a cooler for the trans. fluid? A friend of mine installed one in his bronco because his tranny for very hot. The cooler fixed the problem completly! This is just a simple radiator that you place in front of the engine radiator.

Yeh - i have considered it

BUT iwill still have the problem that the TC is constantly slipping and i just am not getting solid drive - not to mention the gas inefficiency !!!

Monza.

 

[monza]

four speed manual with a clutch in my solution to that problem.

Hey Rodsteal - out of interest which manual ?

i was thinking NV3550 - better ratio spread for on road - which is where most my driving happens...

Monza.

 

[rodsteal]

I know, sorry about the smart a$$ response. I figure since my daily driver is an auto I can have a man. for a toy. I understand about the cost at this point. I have the same problem with my transfer case. Not to change the thread, but to go back to a D20 is too much money, so I will wait until I break my D21. Same with your tranny situation.

I put a tranny cooler on my diesel for pulling my trailer but it almost feels like putting a band-aid on a broke arm. Are you really fixing the core problem or just postponing a major break down for a later date. In my case, I should get a smaller trailer or a bigger truck, but I don

 

[monza]

...I really don

 

[Crude dude]

I dont think you will be racing anybody with a NP 435, NV 3550 or a NP4550. Have you seen the gear ratios on these? They are for crawling or cruising. The 351 would probably shatter the NV3550 anyways. You probably have a higher stall speed converter which will definitely make a lot of heat or a sticky spool valve that will not let you take off in 1st gear, which also creates a lot of heat. I installed a C4 in my 70 with a 3000 RPM Hughes stall converter (dont recommend Hughes), it does make a lot of heat but I installed a remote fan and cooler and now it stays at 190-200 on the freeway and cooler at slower speeds.

 

[monza]

I dont think you will be racing anybody with a NP 435, NV 3550 or a NP4550. Have you seen the gear ratios on these? They are for crawling or cruising. The 351 would probably shatter the NV3550 anyways. You probably have a higher stall speed converter which will definitely make a lot of heat or a sticky spool valve that will not let you take off in 1st gear, which also creates a lot of heat. I installed a C4 in my 70 with a 3000 RPM Hughes stall converter (dont recommend Hughes), it does make a lot of heat but I installed a remote fan and cooler and now it stays at 190-200 on the freeway and cooler at slower speeds.

heh heh,

well 'racing' is relative i guess.

it would just be nice to plant it and *move*

doesnt the 3000 stall bum you out cuz you are always slipping at lower revs ?

my 351 has a lot to offer before it ever reaches 3000 - and i want that power out to the wheels - fast(er).

i need to chat with TCI and see how low stall can be without fkg up stop start driving

i idle at 850rpm - so mbe a 1200 (ish) stall would make me happy ???

gotta stop chasing my ass in circles tho...

>-

Monza.

 

[Crude dude]

Sheesh, I just replied and it disappeared. Maybe I will look retarted with two replies now. I like the 3000 stall converter I have because I ony have a 302 with a huge cam so the engine has low torque and the converter actually flashes around 1800-2000 rpm. It sounds like a top fueler but runs like a street sweeper, fun. I hear what you are sayin about chasing your tail, I also have a 78 Bronco. I have a proctologist on call 24/7 cuz sometimes I rearend my own ass! haha. I read another post that you were looking for a 289? For your Bronco? Why do you want to go from a 351 to a 289? 351 has so much more potential for mass power and reliability. 289 will rev to the moon but not for long especially in a 4x4 with big tires. Put some good heads on a 351 and it will act like a 289 with lots more torque.

 

[monza]

i was considering the 289 cuz most *street perf* TC's are for much higher reving motors than the 351...

i figd that *IF* i was going to swap i might as well go all the way to a 289 and save some gas.

but like most things Bronco its just another thing to keep me awake at night.

@-)

Monza

 

[Broncobill78]

i was considering the 289 cuz most *street perf* TC's are for much higher reving motors than the 351...i figd that *IF* i was going to swap i might as well go all the way to a 289 and save some gas.

but like most things Bronco its just another thing to keep me awake at night.

@-)

Monza

The EB's are light, the 289 would be an excellent engine for it. The 351's are nice but as you noticed they use a lot of fuel and they take up a whole lot of real estate under the hood (not to mention all the heat they generate). A well built 289 should give you all the performance you want in a smaller & lighter package. Run a throttle body on it and you should have excellent drivability, reliablilty AND milage.

 

[monza]

BB78,

as ever there are several solutions to a problem.

i like the idea of a high revving EB - and lets face it 289cuin's is still a decent displacement...

but then the 351 i have is a peach and very well cared for by the PO - but the heat, TC slippage, gas guzzling...

and then i check the bank balance - - - misery.....

so i guess like most of us its the moderate cost route that dictates the solution.

If i cant get a TC that works the way i want with the 351

then i rebuild the engine down in size and torque, so maybe it doesnt overwhelm the TC

else i get a manual tran

or i just keep ponying along as is - which costs nothing !

the main prob is that its my daily driver - so i cant take it off the road for any lengthy period...

i recently borrowed a friends 91 F250 - it has a roof - doors and windows that close tight - a heater!!!! and power assisted everything - what a luxury

but after two days i couldnt wait to get back in the Bronco.

It feels like a sport truck compared to the F250

its just so compact - wheels at the corners - a point and shoot pickup - fkn ace !!

Monza. >-

 

[Crude dude]

I wont try to talk you out of a 289, they are a pretty good motor.Mine did have a 289 when I bought it and it completely hauled butt. It also had a very nasty cam and a manual transmission. The engine was not something you would take on the trail and not very reliable. As far as an Early Bronco being light? Mine weighs 4200 lbs with a glass hood and no top. Thats a heavy "muscle car" for a 289. A 302 acts like a totally different motor when it has injection on it. They actually make a lot of torque with very little work. 351s do get crap mileage with the stock intake, carb or injection, because they flow terrible numbers. That is the reason for good torque and no substantial gains in Horsepower over a 302. Everybody wants something different, Im behind you what ever you do., as long as you dont install a Chevrolet motor. Keep Ford in Ford.

 

[Broncobill78]

I wont try to talk you out of a 289, they are a pretty good motor.Mine did have a 289 when I bought it and it completely hauled butt. It also had a very nasty cam and a manual transmission. The engine was not something you would take on the trail and not very reliable. As far as an Early Bronco being light? Mine weighs 4200 lbs with a glass hood and no top. Thats a heavy "muscle car" for a 289. A 302 acts like a totally different motor when it has injection on it. They actually make a lot of torque with very little work. 351s do get crap mileage with the stock intake, carb or injection, because they flow terrible numbers. That is the reason for good torque and no substantial gains in Horsepower over a 302. Everybody wants something different, Im behind you what ever you do., as long as you dont install a Chevrolet motor. Keep Ford in Ford.

Well, I won't argue the point, because I've always been a full-size guy after my 73' pancaked in such an alarming fashion and by the time you add tires, rims, bumpers, rollcages and such most full-size Bronco's are lucky to come in anywhere *under* 6500lbs, so yeah 4200# is a freaking sports car to me (aw ****, the 76-80 Firebird/TA's were 3900lbs, much as it pains me to toss in a Brand-X refrence).

As far as flow numbers, well, heck any engine is just an air pump. The more efficient you make it the better your numbers get. Most 5.0 stuff retros to the 289's and there sure is a TON of 5.0 stuff out there thanks to the Fox bodied Mustangs. Bolt on a good set of heads with a well-chosen cam & fuelie and you've got one **** of an engine.

Now I can appreciate that it's *always* easier & cheaper to live with what you've got and building & swapping a 289 isn't a cheap prospect. Truth be told if the project were *mine* I'd probably just swap to an AOD and call it a day. But, ****, since the 289 swap was tossed onto the table I figured I'd throw in my $0.02, but sure, I can see the wisdom of keeping the setup you already have and just straightening out the tranny probs. Have to say though that a swap to something with an overdrive will probably make a noticable difference in a daily driver.

 

[Crude dude]

The late 70s Firebirds were pigs excluding the 455 in 1976 and that is way more cubes and capability than a 289. I love 289s, in Mavericks or Comets...3000lbs Im guessing? Nice, my wife just called me a car nerd. I totally agree with BroncoBill78 that an overdrive transmission would be a great move. They tend to have a lower first gear for a good launch or crawling. Not to mention overdrive, what a luxury. With text it is hard to read someones emotions, hope I didnt sound rude, wasnt trying to be.