Mach 1 Section This section is for discussions relating to the reincarnation of the Mach 1 trimline.

Mach 1 Engine Questions

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 16, 2009 | 07:36 PM
  #31  
rygi23's Avatar
rygi23
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,503
From: Maryland
Default

Originally Posted by Dave_Man
So does anyone know why the auto's rev limit is set around 1000rpm lower then the manual? I want an auto but I'm affraid it will be WAY slower then the manual and not as fun to drive.
for racing go with the auto. It is only 2-3 tenths slower from everything I've seen at the track and responds well as hell to a set of 4.10s and descent rubber...to the tune of a high 12. Any stock auto by any make will take track abuse for only so long, but the stock one is a descent one and won't break in a short amount of time.
Old Jan 16, 2009 | 08:29 PM
  #32  
Subotai_95's Avatar
Subotai_95
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,447
From: Charlottesville, VA
Default

Originally Posted by rygi23
for racing go with the auto. It is only 2-3 tenths slower from everything I've seen at the track and responds well as hell to a set of 4.10s and descent rubber...to the tune of a high 12. Any stock auto by any make will take track abuse for only so long, but the stock one is a descent one and won't break in a short amount of time.
Any stock tranny will break if you give it enough abuse on the track. The thing about the auto's is that they're just plain easier to launch. BUT, the deal with auto's is that it takes a little more work on the tune to get the shift points right, because as Stonie pointed out, a stock auto with a 6800rpm shift point in 2nd WOULD be all over the road. When you start modding, it's still going to come down to driver mod, especially with a stall. I'll agree with Rygi that the autos do respond well to gears, LCA's and tires. Just my point of view, but it comes down to driver preference and what the driver is good at. Some people just can never get the handle of feathering the clutch and throttle at the same time off the line, and for those guys an auto would work better because it's a little simpler. Some guys are better at working the stick in a manual.

Just depends on what the OP really wants, because performance wise they're both pretty much the same. Even if you go high end, a big dollar borg-warner forged slush box isn't going to shift any faster or any better than a guy that's quick on the stick with a viper-spec T56.. That's just me though.
Old Jan 16, 2009 | 09:12 PM
  #33  
Stone629's Avatar
Stone629
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,302
From: North Carolina
Default

Originally Posted by Dave_Man
Are there lots of people who run to 6800-7000rpm without problems with the auto?

It'll hold it, just not as long as it'll hold up to a stock setting. Just wears the trans out faster basically. Depends too on how often you run it hard, etc. Adding DRs or slicks will shorten the life of the trans further, of course. I've never had any stock trans hold up very long once I started stalling, bumping up shift points, supercharging, etc. I plan on pushing my rev limit up by 4-500 rpms, adjusting the shift points by mph, and leaving the shift pressure itself alone. The auto machs already shift very hard. Anymore will just result in spinning/lower ETs.

+1 to what Sub posted.
Old Jan 17, 2009 | 12:50 AM
  #34  
GTRACER88's Avatar
GTRACER88
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,112
From: Houston, Tx
Default

Originally Posted by Subotai_95
Any stock tranny will break if you give it enough abuse on the track. The thing about the auto's is that they're just plain easier to launch. BUT, the deal with auto's is that it takes a little more work on the tune to get the shift points right, because as Stonie pointed out, a stock auto with a 6800rpm shift point in 2nd WOULD be all over the road. When you start modding, it's still going to come down to driver mod, especially with a stall. I'll agree with Rygi that the autos do respond well to gears, LCA's and tires. Just my point of view, but it comes down to driver preference and what the driver is good at. Some people just can never get the handle of feathering the clutch and throttle at the same time off the line, and for those guys an auto would work better because it's a little simpler. Some guys are better at working the stick in a manual.

Just depends on what the OP really wants, because performance wise they're both pretty much the same. Even if you go high end, a big dollar borg-warner forged slush box isn't going to shift any faster or any better than a guy that's quick on the stick with a viper-spec T56.. That's just me though.
From experience this is absolutly correct

Originally Posted by Stone629
It'll hold it, just not as long as it'll hold up to a stock setting. Just wears the trans out faster basically. Depends too on how often you run it hard, etc. Adding DRs or slicks will shorten the life of the trans further, of course. I've never had any stock trans hold up very long once I started stalling, bumping up shift points, supercharging, etc. I plan on pushing my rev limit up by 4-500 rpms, adjusting the shift points by mph, and leaving the shift pressure itself alone. The auto machs already shift very hard. Anymore will just result in spinning/lower ETs.

+1 to what Sub posted.
To the OP since this is true there are some ways to help sustain the transmission. One way to increase the transmission life believe it or not is to add a shift kit. Perferable the JMOD which is a modification to the valve body. Since the purpose of the shift kit moves fluid faster, it actually increases the life expectancy over that of a stock transmission. It will perform better and just give you that cool hard shift feeling that we all want. A transmission cooler will also help keep temp down, but in reality if your not auto Xing IMO you dont need one. Yes a stall with any sticky tires will really quickly kill any stock transmission. Plus with an auto you can build them so that they can shift so fast that there is no way physically possible that a human can shift that fast .
Old Jan 17, 2009 | 11:43 AM
  #35  
Dave_Man's Avatar
Dave_Man
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 13
From: Alberta
Default

Thanks for all the info guys. From reading I'm pretty sure the auto in these cars are stronger then the 4l60e found in the ls1 f-body's. My friend has a stalled one with stock transmission and it's been runnig strong for 2 years at the track. I think that gives me new hope when looking at these transmissions.

Does anyone know why Ford used a non-forged crank in the autos? Seems really weird.
Old Jan 18, 2009 | 07:15 PM
  #36  
Subotai_95's Avatar
Subotai_95
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,447
From: Charlottesville, VA
Default

Originally Posted by Dave_Man
Thanks for all the info guys. From reading I'm pretty sure the auto in these cars are stronger then the 4l60e found in the ls1 f-body's. My friend has a stalled one with stock transmission and it's been runnig strong for 2 years at the track. I think that gives me new hope when looking at these transmissions.

Does anyone know why Ford used a non-forged crank in the autos? Seems really weird.
I'm not really sure why they went cast vs forged with the crank in the autos.. If I had to guess, I would say ford was betting that people would be more likely mod the manuals vs the autos. Plus the manuals do rev about 500 or so rpms higher than the autos do, so that could've had something to do with it also.
Old Jan 18, 2009 | 08:40 PM
  #37  
Mach1man's Avatar
Mach1man
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 389
From: New Castle, Delaware
Default

Actually, it was a mechanical shortcoming. The auto tranny flexplate would only bolt up to the 6 bolt cast iron crankshaft used in the 2v 4.6 vs the manual transmissions 8 bolt flywheel which would bolt up to the steel forged 8 bolt cranshaft. Evidently Ford felt it would be too expensive to make up a new flexplate given the fewer number of cars ordered with the auto trans, plus it was a limited edition run cars anyway.

Last edited by Mach1man; Jan 18, 2009 at 08:42 PM.
Old Jan 19, 2009 | 09:02 AM
  #38  
Dave_Man's Avatar
Dave_Man
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 13
From: Alberta
Default

Well that explains quite a bit. Thanks guys!

I hope the cast crank holds up good.
Old Jan 19, 2009 | 07:13 PM
  #39  
rygi23's Avatar
rygi23
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,503
From: Maryland
Default

Originally Posted by Dave_Man
Well that explains quite a bit. Thanks guys!

I hope the cast crank holds up good.
You will be just fine...w/o forced induction.
Old Jan 19, 2009 | 09:17 PM
  #40  
GTRACER88's Avatar
GTRACER88
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,112
From: Houston, Tx
Default

Originally Posted by rygi23
You will be just fine...w/o forced induction.
He will be fine even with forced induction.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:37 AM.