Turbo Kit for Acura TL '04-'08
01-20-2013, 04:16 PM
#5921
always knew i was on borrowed time with the trans so I cant really be mad. bye bye 4th gear.
during a 70mph roll with a piped/cammed z06, caught traction top of 3rd, shift to 4th, 2 car lengths ahead at 115 and I hear some loud grinding and rpms shoot up.
im guessing all the teeth are gone from 4th gear. car drives fine in every other gear but when put into 4th, it just revs lol
im sure the gears are completely covered in debris so instead of cleaning and rebuilding, im just going to buy another trans and swap it over.
during a 70mph roll with a piped/cammed z06, caught traction top of 3rd, shift to 4th, 2 car lengths ahead at 115 and I hear some loud grinding and rpms shoot up.
im guessing all the teeth are gone from 4th gear. car drives fine in every other gear but when put into 4th, it just revs lol
im sure the gears are completely covered in debris so instead of cleaning and rebuilding, im just going to buy another trans and swap it over.
The following users liked this post:
rptls08 (01-21-2013)
01-20-2013, 05:05 PM
#5922
Same exact thing happened to me. I'm curious if you just plan to keep replacing transmissions/gears, dialing down the boost, or are we finally going to have bite the bullet and get an order together for upgraded gears?
01-20-2013, 05:17 PM
#5923
after this I know gears are a must. I was planning on keeping the now broken trans for when I can get some gears and take it from there. Havent heard any new updates regarding the gears though 
boost was around 19psi in 4th when this happened which is a little lower then 22psi ive been running over the past 2 months. the past week i was tweaking the fuel map to lean her out a bit. it was working great till this.
good news, already have a spare trans lined up and local reputable supra shop to do the work. (M&S Performance). may replace the clutch discs since im in there
should be up n running really soon
boost was around 19psi in 4th when this happened which is a little lower then 22psi ive been running over the past 2 months. the past week i was tweaking the fuel map to lean her out a bit. it was working great till this.
good news, already have a spare trans lined up and local reputable supra shop to do the work. (M&S Performance). may replace the clutch discs since im in there
should be up n running really soon
01-20-2013, 11:28 PM
#5924
Team Owner
Sucks about the trans but how was it performing as you leaned it out, spool and power?
01-21-2013, 05:10 PM
#5927
Until either of you find something that'll prevent the gear shredding, I'm going to stay where I am for now and see if I can get the flashpro working on my 06. Ordered an 08-type-s-6mt ECU and will be ordering a fly100 (locksmith) in the next couple days.
I'll see if it'll run on that ECU and then go for the flashpro.
Stay tuned.
I'll see if it'll run on that ECU and then go for the flashpro.
Stay tuned.
The following users liked this post:
TLove It! (01-21-2013)
01-22-2013, 08:50 AM
#5929
It's going to take a couple weeks for the ECU to arrive and I am still trying to figure out what version of interface I need.
I've seen things like the HIM is only good up to 2006 and I don't know for sure what the difference is between the locksmith and full version of the FLY100 except for maybe software.
I've seen things like the HIM is only good up to 2006 and I don't know for sure what the difference is between the locksmith and full version of the FLY100 except for maybe software.
02-01-2013, 08:08 AM
#5931
Patrick is very fast with replies so I'll let you know when I hear back.
02-01-2013, 07:43 PM
#5933
Team Owner
Have you ever thought of doing a trans from something else, something that would take the power without internal mods? I figure the adaptor plate would be easy but the rest would be a total nightmare. It's too bad Honda doesn't make a heavy/powerful fwd car or truck that you could steal the trans out of with a minimum amount of fitting required. These transmissions were never designed for this power but even so, to be breaking on a FWD car on street tires is rediculous. At least the final drive is holding up. It really sucks because we're never going to see what one of these TLs would really do at the strip. They're going to be nearly 2 seconds slower than what they're capable of.
Maybe it's time to put her on a serious weight reduction, that will increase transmission reliability.
Maybe it's time to put her on a serious weight reduction, that will increase transmission reliability.
02-02-2013, 12:10 PM
#5934
I emailed Patrick to see how those worked out for Paul. I know some B2B people have offered to do the selling but if he works for Honda directly, it could be much more trouble that it's worth for him to do so with no gains in return for him personally. I work for a huge corporation and we could never be allowed to do anything like that.
Patrick is very fast with replies so I'll let you know when I hear back.
Patrick is very fast with replies so I'll let you know when I hear back.
Order was placed in early October best I can remember.
Yeah it would be tough for us to sell any of the extra sets. We had a min. order of 10 sets. We have two transmissions waiting for the gears now.
Last edited by hondamaint; 02-02-2013 at 12:12 PM.
02-04-2013, 10:45 AM
#5936
HMA's order is due in next week so we should be hearing from either Paul and/or Patrick on how they worked out.
I informed Patrick that based on the feedback, he may have another run ordered. Didn't think to ask about turnaround, hopefully it'll be less than 4 months.
I informed Patrick that based on the feedback, he may have another run ordered. Didn't think to ask about turnaround, hopefully it'll be less than 4 months.
02-10-2013, 05:22 PM
#5940
We got our first set last week. They look great. We will start building up a new transmission with them in the next few weeks. The timing could have been better. We had ERL freshen up our short block with new pistens and bearings, we had the turbo rebuilt, rebuilt a transmission with stock gears and rebuilt the head with new valves and KMS springs and retainers. We started the engine for the first time the day the new gears arrived. Wish we had got them a few weeks earlier so we could have put them in. As it is we will get the car up and running to put some time on it while we build a second transmission with these new gears and then take it down and swap transmissions. SO it may be a month or so before we have them in a our car running.
We paid for the tooling so the next round should be cheaper for everyone else.
We paid for the tooling so the next round should be cheaper for everyone else.
02-10-2013, 05:51 PM
#5941
We got our first set last week. They look great. We will start building up a new transmission with them in the next few weeks. The timing could have been better. We had ERL freshen up our short block with new pistens and bearings, we had the turbo rebuilt, rebuilt a transmission with stock gears and rebuilt the head with new valves and KMS springs and retainers. We started the engine for the first time the day the new gears arrived. Wish we had got them a few weeks earlier so we could have put them in. As it is we will get the car up and running to put some time on it while we build a second transmission with these new gears and then take it down and swap transmissions. SO it may be a month or so before we have them in a our car running.
We paid for the tooling so the next round should be cheaper for everyone else.
We paid for the tooling so the next round should be cheaper for everyone else.
I think the cost is going to be pretty close to the same....$720 a set?
The following users liked this post:
gerzand (02-10-2013)
02-12-2013, 12:38 AM
#5947
Need an expert opinion from one of the few guys who keep this post up and going on deciding which turbo to run on my j35a8. I'm not what you would call thorough on the turbo scene but have a fair amount knowledge about the j-series in general and wanted know before purchasing the turbo if the choice I've made is best suited for what I'm looking for.
What I'm looking for: I don't want over 450-500whp nor am I very inclined to ever exceed that level as this is my dd and have other machines to nurture that desire. I prefer fast response and good sound alongside a respectable state of reliability. That being said, I am attracted to the oem manufacturers as I understand the importance of a quality part which generally yields that of what I listed above as a preference.
I have read some great things about BW and I am leaning towards this brand but before going any further, I wanted to ensure that what I am buying is properly sized. The motor is completely stock, as is the auto. trans. The trans is really not all that bad for traction at the current power level outside of 1st but I run 10.5" tires so this helps a little. I don't launch hardly ever or go from a dig much....I'm more of a run through the gears type of driver. A little boost hopefully won't be too impossible. The car (98 Accord coupe) is a fairly light platform and has been lightened by removing a lot of the interior trim/panels so the light weight may hinder the traction. I'm afraid that the lightness of the car and the auto. trans may prevent me from running fast spool at or around 450-500hp. I have my eyes on the BW Airwerks S362 for a few reasons (I could elaborate if requested) and would like to know if this is an ideal turbo.
I have limited time on choosing the right turbo and appreciate any input that could be given here. You guys are a huge inspiration in taking the initiative to do this (as is a select few members here at Azine) and share a common interest in doing what you guys are doing here. Thanks.
What I'm looking for: I don't want over 450-500whp nor am I very inclined to ever exceed that level as this is my dd and have other machines to nurture that desire. I prefer fast response and good sound alongside a respectable state of reliability. That being said, I am attracted to the oem manufacturers as I understand the importance of a quality part which generally yields that of what I listed above as a preference.
I have read some great things about BW and I am leaning towards this brand but before going any further, I wanted to ensure that what I am buying is properly sized. The motor is completely stock, as is the auto. trans. The trans is really not all that bad for traction at the current power level outside of 1st but I run 10.5" tires so this helps a little. I don't launch hardly ever or go from a dig much....I'm more of a run through the gears type of driver. A little boost hopefully won't be too impossible. The car (98 Accord coupe) is a fairly light platform and has been lightened by removing a lot of the interior trim/panels so the light weight may hinder the traction. I'm afraid that the lightness of the car and the auto. trans may prevent me from running fast spool at or around 450-500hp. I have my eyes on the BW Airwerks S362 for a few reasons (I could elaborate if requested) and would like to know if this is an ideal turbo.
I have limited time on choosing the right turbo and appreciate any input that could be given here. You guys are a huge inspiration in taking the initiative to do this (as is a select few members here at Azine) and share a common interest in doing what you guys are doing here. Thanks.
02-12-2013, 03:18 PM
#5948
Need an expert opinion from one of the few guys who keep this post up and going on deciding which turbo to run on my j35a8. I'm not what you would call thorough on the turbo scene but have a fair amount knowledge about the j-series in general and wanted know before purchasing the turbo if the choice I've made is best suited for what I'm looking for.
What I'm looking for: I don't want over 450-500whp nor am I very inclined to ever exceed that level as this is my dd and have other machines to nurture that desire. I prefer fast response and good sound alongside a respectable state of reliability. That being said, I am attracted to the oem manufacturers as I understand the importance of a quality part which generally yields that of what I listed above as a preference.
I have read some great things about BW and I am leaning towards this brand but before going any further, I wanted to ensure that what I am buying is properly sized. The motor is completely stock, as is the auto. trans. The trans is really not all that bad for traction at the current power level outside of 1st but I run 10.5" tires so this helps a little. I don't launch hardly ever or go from a dig much....I'm more of a run through the gears type of driver. A little boost hopefully won't be too impossible. The car (98 Accord coupe) is a fairly light platform and has been lightened by removing a lot of the interior trim/panels so the light weight may hinder the traction. I'm afraid that the lightness of the car and the auto. trans may prevent me from running fast spool at or around 450-500hp. I have my eyes on the BW Airwerks S362 for a few reasons (I could elaborate if requested) and would like to know if this is an ideal turbo.
I have limited time on choosing the right turbo and appreciate any input that could be given here. You guys are a huge inspiration in taking the initiative to do this (as is a select few members here at Azine) and share a common interest in doing what you guys are doing here. Thanks.
What I'm looking for: I don't want over 450-500whp nor am I very inclined to ever exceed that level as this is my dd and have other machines to nurture that desire. I prefer fast response and good sound alongside a respectable state of reliability. That being said, I am attracted to the oem manufacturers as I understand the importance of a quality part which generally yields that of what I listed above as a preference.
I have read some great things about BW and I am leaning towards this brand but before going any further, I wanted to ensure that what I am buying is properly sized. The motor is completely stock, as is the auto. trans. The trans is really not all that bad for traction at the current power level outside of 1st but I run 10.5" tires so this helps a little. I don't launch hardly ever or go from a dig much....I'm more of a run through the gears type of driver. A little boost hopefully won't be too impossible. The car (98 Accord coupe) is a fairly light platform and has been lightened by removing a lot of the interior trim/panels so the light weight may hinder the traction. I'm afraid that the lightness of the car and the auto. trans may prevent me from running fast spool at or around 450-500hp. I have my eyes on the BW Airwerks S362 for a few reasons (I could elaborate if requested) and would like to know if this is an ideal turbo.
I have limited time on choosing the right turbo and appreciate any input that could be given here. You guys are a huge inspiration in taking the initiative to do this (as is a select few members here at Azine) and share a common interest in doing what you guys are doing here. Thanks.
Now if you run a laggier turbo that doesn't come into boost until 4500-5000 it may save your transmission. The other bonus of this is you can make the same power as the smaller turbo's but on less boost so less strain on the motor. Also the larger turbo will be more efficient and free'er flowing when not in the throttle so you will get better gas millage for DD purposes.
The only way I see to avoid this is to play with the line pressure springs. Since there is no aftermarket shift kit for our transmissions and never will be, the only thing I can think of you playing with the auto's internal line pressure springs.
I'm also planning on doing a turbo auto set-up, but to try and save the transmission will be going with a big laggy turbo.
Just something to think about
Last edited by flexer; 02-12-2013 at 03:21 PM.
02-12-2013, 08:40 PM
#5949
Team Owner
A few points... A light car will spin the tires easier, meaning at the same power level. However, a light car will still have more traction for a given acceleration level. Believe it or not, for a given acceleration rate, heavier cars are more likely to spin the tires all else being equal.
Never ever ever go with a laggy turbo on your street car. There are plenty of electronic means, just about any EBC will produce "lag" if you want it. Trust me, it will lose a lot of it's fun if you stomp the pedal and have to wait several seconds for the power to hit. Properly size the turbo and introduce lag with an EBC if necessary or use your foot to control boost.
Reducing low rpm hp and torque will be easier on the engine, specifically the rod bearings since the hydrodynamic film is stronger as rpms go up, it's not going to save the trans. Personally I was always getting creative to make the turbo spool quicker, especially in the '90s. You guys have no idea how lucky you are running a turbo capable of 650hp that spools well on a 3.2L. I have full boost which is sometimes in the 30psi range by 2,800rpm. On any sort of street legal tire I have to backpedal at any street legal speed but the power is so quick it feels almost naturally aspirated and it's so much more fun to "mess around" on the street or coming off the line under full boost at the track.
It's true that a larger turbo will give cooler charge air temps and less exhaust back pressure which gives more power at a given boost level. You can actually lower exhaust back pressure lower than boost pressure especially with newe turbos, I figured it out in the late '90s but that's one of the few things I won't give up. It's already easy to make more power than the stock internals can take with a "properly sized" turbo on pump gas and meth injection which should be considered mandatory with 11:1 compression for the engine's safety at any hp level.
Last, if you don't need very quick spool and you don't want that slam you in the back power delivery you can always use twins if that's easier. Twins usually deliver power a little "softer" but not always.
To sum it up, use what turbo everyone else is using and use an EBC to dial in the lag if need be.
Never ever ever go with a laggy turbo on your street car. There are plenty of electronic means, just about any EBC will produce "lag" if you want it. Trust me, it will lose a lot of it's fun if you stomp the pedal and have to wait several seconds for the power to hit. Properly size the turbo and introduce lag with an EBC if necessary or use your foot to control boost.
Reducing low rpm hp and torque will be easier on the engine, specifically the rod bearings since the hydrodynamic film is stronger as rpms go up, it's not going to save the trans. Personally I was always getting creative to make the turbo spool quicker, especially in the '90s. You guys have no idea how lucky you are running a turbo capable of 650hp that spools well on a 3.2L. I have full boost which is sometimes in the 30psi range by 2,800rpm. On any sort of street legal tire I have to backpedal at any street legal speed but the power is so quick it feels almost naturally aspirated and it's so much more fun to "mess around" on the street or coming off the line under full boost at the track.
It's true that a larger turbo will give cooler charge air temps and less exhaust back pressure which gives more power at a given boost level. You can actually lower exhaust back pressure lower than boost pressure especially with newe turbos, I figured it out in the late '90s but that's one of the few things I won't give up. It's already easy to make more power than the stock internals can take with a "properly sized" turbo on pump gas and meth injection which should be considered mandatory with 11:1 compression for the engine's safety at any hp level.
Last, if you don't need very quick spool and you don't want that slam you in the back power delivery you can always use twins if that's easier. Twins usually deliver power a little "softer" but not always.
To sum it up, use what turbo everyone else is using and use an EBC to dial in the lag if need be.
02-12-2013, 08:43 PM
#5950
Team Owner
Now if you run a laggier turbo that doesn't come into boost until 4500-5000 it may save your transmission. The other bonus of this is you can make the same power as the smaller turbo's but on less boost so less strain on the motor. Also the larger turbo will be more efficient and free'er flowing when not in the throttle so you will get better gas millage for DD purposes.
02-12-2013, 11:13 PM
#5951
Thanks for the help.
Funny Flexer that Ive considered your suggestion as a possible solution for what issues I may possibly face. But then realized this would be taking away from that of which I was looking for in the turbo...response.
IHC, Im getting confused with the abbreviations here. In my profession (auto electrical tech) "EBC" means electronic brake control (traction control) but am assuming you mean electronic boost control....? Are you simply implying purposely reducing the boost created by the turbo to help with wheel spin? Splendid idea! I think this is the best...ONLY solution.
As for the tt suggestion, I was under the impression that this setup improved response/lag time due to each bank spinning its own turbo. Especially on a motor where its logical (exhaust port design) to mount each turbo directly to the head...no charge tube to fill before spooling the turbo. Thats what Ive read. As it sits with factory exhaust manifolds bolted to the heads, I have more than enough room on both sides to do this but have "unfortunately" made a commitment with my fabricator/builder to run a single turbo setup. :-)
Turbo build has officially began yesterday. If anyone is interested in what prevails, visit my build thread thats posted in my sig. Appreciate the help and might need somemore before its all said and done!
Funny Flexer that Ive considered your suggestion as a possible solution for what issues I may possibly face. But then realized this would be taking away from that of which I was looking for in the turbo...response.
IHC, Im getting confused with the abbreviations here. In my profession (auto electrical tech) "EBC" means electronic brake control (traction control) but am assuming you mean electronic boost control....? Are you simply implying purposely reducing the boost created by the turbo to help with wheel spin? Splendid idea! I think this is the best...ONLY solution.
As for the tt suggestion, I was under the impression that this setup improved response/lag time due to each bank spinning its own turbo. Especially on a motor where its logical (exhaust port design) to mount each turbo directly to the head...no charge tube to fill before spooling the turbo. Thats what Ive read. As it sits with factory exhaust manifolds bolted to the heads, I have more than enough room on both sides to do this but have "unfortunately" made a commitment with my fabricator/builder to run a single turbo setup. :-)
Turbo build has officially began yesterday. If anyone is interested in what prevails, visit my build thread thats posted in my sig. Appreciate the help and might need somemore before its all said and done!
02-13-2013, 11:45 AM
#5952
Three Wheelin'
iTrader: (3)
Thanks for the help.
Funny Flexer that Ive considered your suggestion as a possible solution for what issues I may possibly face. But then realized this would be taking away from that of which I was looking for in the turbo...response.
IHC, Im getting confused with the abbreviations here. In my profession (auto electrical tech) "EBC" means electronic brake control (traction control) but am assuming you mean electronic boost control....? Are you simply implying purposely reducing the boost created by the turbo to help with wheel spin? Splendid idea! I think this is the best...ONLY solution.
As for the tt suggestion, I was under the impression that this setup improved response/lag time due to each bank spinning its own turbo. Especially on a motor where its logical (exhaust port design) to mount each turbo directly to the head...no charge tube to fill before spooling the turbo. Thats what Ive read. As it sits with factory exhaust manifolds bolted to the heads, I have more than enough room on both sides to do this but have "unfortunately" made a commitment with my fabricator/builder to run a single turbo setup. :-)
Turbo build has officially began yesterday. If anyone is interested in what prevails, visit my build thread thats posted in my sig. Appreciate the help and might need somemore before its all said and done!
Funny Flexer that Ive considered your suggestion as a possible solution for what issues I may possibly face. But then realized this would be taking away from that of which I was looking for in the turbo...response.
IHC, Im getting confused with the abbreviations here. In my profession (auto electrical tech) "EBC" means electronic brake control (traction control) but am assuming you mean electronic boost control....? Are you simply implying purposely reducing the boost created by the turbo to help with wheel spin? Splendid idea! I think this is the best...ONLY solution.
As for the tt suggestion, I was under the impression that this setup improved response/lag time due to each bank spinning its own turbo. Especially on a motor where its logical (exhaust port design) to mount each turbo directly to the head...no charge tube to fill before spooling the turbo. Thats what Ive read. As it sits with factory exhaust manifolds bolted to the heads, I have more than enough room on both sides to do this but have "unfortunately" made a commitment with my fabricator/builder to run a single turbo setup. :-)
Turbo build has officially began yesterday. If anyone is interested in what prevails, visit my build thread thats posted in my sig. Appreciate the help and might need somemore before its all said and done!
Hey bub, so I was right after all? (aside from the estimated AR). s362 it is?
02-13-2013, 01:11 PM
#5953
Team Owner
Thanks for the help.
Funny Flexer that Ive considered your suggestion as a possible solution for what issues I may possibly face. But then realized this would be taking away from that of which I was looking for in the turbo...response.
IHC, Im getting confused with the abbreviations here. In my profession (auto electrical tech) "EBC" means electronic brake control (traction control) but am assuming you mean electronic boost control....? Are you simply implying purposely reducing the boost created by the turbo to help with wheel spin? Splendid idea! I think this is the best...ONLY solution.
As for the tt suggestion, I was under the impression that this setup improved response/lag time due to each bank spinning its own turbo. Especially on a motor where its logical (exhaust port design) to mount each turbo directly to the head...no charge tube to fill before spooling the turbo. Thats what Ive read. As it sits with factory exhaust manifolds bolted to the heads, I have more than enough room on both sides to do this but have "unfortunately" made a commitment with my fabricator/builder to run a single turbo setup. :-)
Turbo build has officially began yesterday. If anyone is interested in what prevails, visit my build thread thats posted in my sig. Appreciate the help and might need somemore before its all said and done!
Funny Flexer that Ive considered your suggestion as a possible solution for what issues I may possibly face. But then realized this would be taking away from that of which I was looking for in the turbo...response.
IHC, Im getting confused with the abbreviations here. In my profession (auto electrical tech) "EBC" means electronic brake control (traction control) but am assuming you mean electronic boost control....? Are you simply implying purposely reducing the boost created by the turbo to help with wheel spin? Splendid idea! I think this is the best...ONLY solution.
As for the tt suggestion, I was under the impression that this setup improved response/lag time due to each bank spinning its own turbo. Especially on a motor where its logical (exhaust port design) to mount each turbo directly to the head...no charge tube to fill before spooling the turbo. Thats what Ive read. As it sits with factory exhaust manifolds bolted to the heads, I have more than enough room on both sides to do this but have "unfortunately" made a commitment with my fabricator/builder to run a single turbo setup. :-)
Turbo build has officially began yesterday. If anyone is interested in what prevails, visit my build thread thats posted in my sig. Appreciate the help and might need somemore before its all said and done!
You bring up a good point that's unique to the TL. It's stock head configuration looks like it was meant to hang a turbo off of. It would fit into the exception category where twins have the potential to spool quicker than a single. Generally speaking, twins have more dynamic weight and more friction than a single. You have two shafts instead of one. Double the bearings. And one large wheel will weigh less than two smaller ones.
Having the turbos bolted to each head with no plumbing between the heads and turbo might make up the difference in spool and then some.
One myth that you don't have to worry about is the volume of air on the intake side. While reducing it on the exhaust side helps with spool, increasing volume/pipe length on the intake side will usually produce no measurable difference in spool.
I'm looking forward to your build. The single obviously works fine, just make sure your guy concentrates on keeping the shortest exhaust path to the turbo possible. You'll want the crossover pipe absolutley no larger than 2.25" with 1.75" or 2" being better. With headers, it's usually better to go with larger diameter primaries and have them as short as possible. There's a way to use an undersized crossover in a single setup that will improve spool and cost zero hp up top.
Last edited by I hate cars; 02-13-2013 at 01:19 PM.
02-13-2013, 02:01 PM
#5954
Rule #2 If Andy is wrong, refer to Rule #1
Sorry. I meant electronic boost controller. It's better to have good response and electronically alter it. It's basically creating a variable volume "vacuum leak" to the wastegate to alter the vacuum signal, making the wastegate stay slightly open.
Simplest explanation I've heard yet for wastegate principle/operation. Understood 100%.
You bring up a good point that's unique to the TL. It's stock head configuration looks like it was meant to hang a turbo off of. It would fit into the exception category where twins have the potential to spool quicker than a single. Generally speaking, twins have more dynamic weight and more friction than a single. You have two shafts instead of one. Double the bearings. And one large wheel will weigh less than two smaller ones.
HPD capitalized on that idea with mounting the turbo onto each head but it was sort of yelling at me prior to seeing them do that. It was considered. You speak about the friction concern and I see minimal concern if you're talking about bb shafts as well as smaller wheels inside. Atleast not enough to remove the idea as a viable option...HPD obviously didn't seemed concerned. Nevertheless, friction is more than likely added.
Having the turbos bolted to each head with no plumbing between the heads and turbo might make up the difference in spool and then some.
One myth that you don't have to worry about is the volume of air on the intake side. While reducing it on the exhaust side helps with spool, increasing volume/pipe length on the intake side will usually produce no measurable difference in spool.
What if the entry point to the intercooler is altered to offset the added intake side? Aside from this, wouldn't the engines exhaust gases flow much slower to the turbo than the turbos charge reaching the engines TB? Just a thought/idea...
I'm looking forward to your build. The single obviously works fine, just make sure your guy concentrates on keeping the shortest exhaust path to the turbo possible. You'll want the crossover pipe absolutley no larger than 2.25" with 1.75" or 2" being better. With headers, it's usually better to go with larger diameter primaries and have them as short as possible. There's a way to use an undersized crossover in a single setup that will improve spool and cost zero hp up top.
Simplest explanation I've heard yet for wastegate principle/operation. Understood 100%.
You bring up a good point that's unique to the TL. It's stock head configuration looks like it was meant to hang a turbo off of. It would fit into the exception category where twins have the potential to spool quicker than a single. Generally speaking, twins have more dynamic weight and more friction than a single. You have two shafts instead of one. Double the bearings. And one large wheel will weigh less than two smaller ones.
HPD capitalized on that idea with mounting the turbo onto each head but it was sort of yelling at me prior to seeing them do that. It was considered. You speak about the friction concern and I see minimal concern if you're talking about bb shafts as well as smaller wheels inside. Atleast not enough to remove the idea as a viable option...HPD obviously didn't seemed concerned. Nevertheless, friction is more than likely added.
Having the turbos bolted to each head with no plumbing between the heads and turbo might make up the difference in spool and then some.
One myth that you don't have to worry about is the volume of air on the intake side. While reducing it on the exhaust side helps with spool, increasing volume/pipe length on the intake side will usually produce no measurable difference in spool.
What if the entry point to the intercooler is altered to offset the added intake side? Aside from this, wouldn't the engines exhaust gases flow much slower to the turbo than the turbos charge reaching the engines TB? Just a thought/idea...
I'm looking forward to your build. The single obviously works fine, just make sure your guy concentrates on keeping the shortest exhaust path to the turbo possible. You'll want the crossover pipe absolutley no larger than 2.25" with 1.75" or 2" being better. With headers, it's usually better to go with larger diameter primaries and have them as short as possible. There's a way to use an undersized crossover in a single setup that will improve spool and cost zero hp up top.
02-21-2013, 10:58 AM
#5955
Guys I apologize for posting this in here but I'm trying to get a hold of "I Hate Cars", but his PM box is full and I know he reads this thread. I also believe if he responds it will be beneficial to the Turbo TL guys trying to stay with an automatic transmission.
Dear I Hate Cars :-)
1. Is it possible to add more clutches to a stock transmission since there are no aftermarket clutches available for the TL? Shifts would be firmer, but they are so soft right now if I added just one more clutch to each clutch pack, could I get away with it do you think?
2. Increasing line pressure. So it looks like there are 3 line pressure solenoids, A B and C, on the TL transmission. So there is no mechanical screw or way of turning up the line pressure like you can on some VW transmissions? Does this mean that turning up the line pressure would be impossible? The FSM says it should be between 140-148psi when held at 2,000 RPM and should be serviced if below 130 psi. Could I raise that line pressure somehow? Would it be by playing with the accumulator springs? I would think you want the springs to be stiffer right for harder shifts and more line pressure?
I have read of people turning up the line pressure to between 180-200psi on other automatic ECU's and indicating only slightly stiffer shifts and it actually is better and causes LESS WEAR on the tranny.
What are your thoughts. I'm a tuning and turbo guru, but have no experience with automatic transmissions.
J. R.
Dear I Hate Cars :-)
1. Is it possible to add more clutches to a stock transmission since there are no aftermarket clutches available for the TL? Shifts would be firmer, but they are so soft right now if I added just one more clutch to each clutch pack, could I get away with it do you think?
2. Increasing line pressure. So it looks like there are 3 line pressure solenoids, A B and C, on the TL transmission. So there is no mechanical screw or way of turning up the line pressure like you can on some VW transmissions? Does this mean that turning up the line pressure would be impossible? The FSM says it should be between 140-148psi when held at 2,000 RPM and should be serviced if below 130 psi. Could I raise that line pressure somehow? Would it be by playing with the accumulator springs? I would think you want the springs to be stiffer right for harder shifts and more line pressure?
I have read of people turning up the line pressure to between 180-200psi on other automatic ECU's and indicating only slightly stiffer shifts and it actually is better and causes LESS WEAR on the tranny.
What are your thoughts. I'm a tuning and turbo guru, but have no experience with automatic transmissions.
J. R.
02-21-2013, 11:55 PM
#5956
Guys I apologize for posting this in here but I'm trying to get a hold of "I Hate Cars", but his PM box is full and I know he reads this thread. I also believe if he responds it will be beneficial to the Turbo TL guys trying to stay with an automatic transmission.
Dear I Hate Cars :-)
1. Is it possible to add more clutches to a stock transmission since there are no aftermarket clutches available for the TL? Shifts would be firmer, but they are so soft right now if I added just one more clutch to each clutch pack, could I get away with it do you think?
IMO, I don't see how stronger clutches would increase shift quality in terms firmness UNLESS the stock clutches are slipping under the your current amount of power. As for adding additional clutches, depending on its internal design, this would be possible but would require decreasing the thickness of the clutches already existent. This of course would be counterproductive in regards of solving one problem only to gain another...clutch disc strength. Although I've never seen the TL-S clutch disc, I can imagine it would be very similar to most others which are already about as thin as I wouldn't like. It's also possible that by changing the design material of both the disc and clutch surface to a much stronger one, you may be able to squeeze another 1-2 disc inside the transmission housing. Again, one problem for another...COST. All for a minimal gain that probably wouldn't justify the expense of stronger materials.
2. Increasing line pressure. So it looks like there are 3 line pressure solenoids, A B and C, on the TL transmission. So there is no mechanical screw or way of turning up the line pressure like you can on some VW transmissions? Does this mean that turning up the line pressure would be impossible? The FSM says it should be between 140-148psi when held at 2,000 RPM and should be serviced if below 130 psi. Could I raise that line pressure somehow? Would it be by playing with the accumulator springs? I would think you want the springs to be stiffer right for harder shifts and more line pressure?
Line pressure is 100% entirely controlled by a PWM signal from the ECM...nothing mechanical in the design except the conversion of electrical energy to mechanical energy in the solenoid itself. The torque converter has an internal mechanism called a stator that acts as a ATF pump that directs the fluid towards something called a regulator valve. The purpose of the regulator valve is to maintain a constant pressure for the line pressure control (LPC) solenoids. As you mentioned, there is an operable range of pressure they work with with 150psi being on the higher side of the range (according to Acura). The lower gears will generally receive a higher line pressure to "protect" the transmission clutches from excessive slippage due to low gearing along side the engines power...especially at WOT. This is why you can feel much firmer shifts at lower gears. The ECM is designed to alter the PWM signal differently as the transmission shifts into taller gears and creates that rolling gear change effect. One would need to intercept this PWM signal sent by the ECM at say 1st gear all the way to 5th and establish a chart throughout all 5 gears. Once you see exactly how the ECM controls the line pressure, you could add maybe 5-10psi at each gear (once again, in relation to the chart) until you've reached a pressure of which increases shift response/performance without overheating the transmission due to the higher workload brought on by the increased pressures. I would highly recommend running a much larger ATF cooler maybe with a thermostatically controlled fan to help with the heat. Why would there be additional heat of the clutches are slipping less? As I said, higher pressure within the transmission means the pump would be working much harder to meet the higher fluid demands. Of course this is done by mechanical energy which is generally accompanied by friction...and friction causes heat. This is all useless of course unless the signal can be first analyzed (or there may be a engineering chart that holds the relationship between signals and pressures), intercepted and then modified. This means that a dynamic electronic module would need to be ran but should be a cheap build as PWM is ancient technology. I'd recommend talking to the member here "Euro-R_Spec_TSX". He's a mad genius and has extraordinary capabilities in design and electronics.
I have read of people turning up the line pressure to between 180-200psi on other automatic ECU's and indicating only slightly stiffer shifts and it actually is better and causes LESS WEAR on the tranny.
LESS WEAR on the clutches atleast. :-)
What are your thoughts. I'm a tuning and turbo guru, but have no experience with automatic transmissions.
J. R.
Dear I Hate Cars :-)
1. Is it possible to add more clutches to a stock transmission since there are no aftermarket clutches available for the TL? Shifts would be firmer, but they are so soft right now if I added just one more clutch to each clutch pack, could I get away with it do you think?
IMO, I don't see how stronger clutches would increase shift quality in terms firmness UNLESS the stock clutches are slipping under the your current amount of power. As for adding additional clutches, depending on its internal design, this would be possible but would require decreasing the thickness of the clutches already existent. This of course would be counterproductive in regards of solving one problem only to gain another...clutch disc strength. Although I've never seen the TL-S clutch disc, I can imagine it would be very similar to most others which are already about as thin as I wouldn't like. It's also possible that by changing the design material of both the disc and clutch surface to a much stronger one, you may be able to squeeze another 1-2 disc inside the transmission housing. Again, one problem for another...COST. All for a minimal gain that probably wouldn't justify the expense of stronger materials.
2. Increasing line pressure. So it looks like there are 3 line pressure solenoids, A B and C, on the TL transmission. So there is no mechanical screw or way of turning up the line pressure like you can on some VW transmissions? Does this mean that turning up the line pressure would be impossible? The FSM says it should be between 140-148psi when held at 2,000 RPM and should be serviced if below 130 psi. Could I raise that line pressure somehow? Would it be by playing with the accumulator springs? I would think you want the springs to be stiffer right for harder shifts and more line pressure?
Line pressure is 100% entirely controlled by a PWM signal from the ECM...nothing mechanical in the design except the conversion of electrical energy to mechanical energy in the solenoid itself. The torque converter has an internal mechanism called a stator that acts as a ATF pump that directs the fluid towards something called a regulator valve. The purpose of the regulator valve is to maintain a constant pressure for the line pressure control (LPC) solenoids. As you mentioned, there is an operable range of pressure they work with with 150psi being on the higher side of the range (according to Acura). The lower gears will generally receive a higher line pressure to "protect" the transmission clutches from excessive slippage due to low gearing along side the engines power...especially at WOT. This is why you can feel much firmer shifts at lower gears. The ECM is designed to alter the PWM signal differently as the transmission shifts into taller gears and creates that rolling gear change effect. One would need to intercept this PWM signal sent by the ECM at say 1st gear all the way to 5th and establish a chart throughout all 5 gears. Once you see exactly how the ECM controls the line pressure, you could add maybe 5-10psi at each gear (once again, in relation to the chart) until you've reached a pressure of which increases shift response/performance without overheating the transmission due to the higher workload brought on by the increased pressures. I would highly recommend running a much larger ATF cooler maybe with a thermostatically controlled fan to help with the heat. Why would there be additional heat of the clutches are slipping less? As I said, higher pressure within the transmission means the pump would be working much harder to meet the higher fluid demands. Of course this is done by mechanical energy which is generally accompanied by friction...and friction causes heat. This is all useless of course unless the signal can be first analyzed (or there may be a engineering chart that holds the relationship between signals and pressures), intercepted and then modified. This means that a dynamic electronic module would need to be ran but should be a cheap build as PWM is ancient technology. I'd recommend talking to the member here "Euro-R_Spec_TSX". He's a mad genius and has extraordinary capabilities in design and electronics.
I have read of people turning up the line pressure to between 180-200psi on other automatic ECU's and indicating only slightly stiffer shifts and it actually is better and causes LESS WEAR on the tranny.
LESS WEAR on the clutches atleast. :-)
What are your thoughts. I'm a tuning and turbo guru, but have no experience with automatic transmissions.
J. R.
The following users liked this post:
flexer (02-22-2013)
02-22-2013, 08:57 AM
#5957
Excellent answer. I will add some more knowledge. I don't know if the Transmission applies more pressure in the lower gears because it mechanically is set-up for it. First gear has 8 clutches. 2nd gear has 7. 3rd gear has 5 clutches. 4th gear has 4 clutches, and 5th gear has 5 clutches.
I would assume they give 5th gear more clutches than 4th because it needs to deal with the extra stress of the torque converter locking and unlocking the most.
This gives me the idea that instead of having different line pressures per gear to deal with the changes in applied torque, the transmission instead mechanically has more clutches in the clutch pack.
Now if we think about what libert said before he ditched his auto, he thought he was slipping the clutches in 3rd and 4th gear. This would make sense because 3rd and 4th have the least amount of clutches. 4th gear really looks like its going to be a problem with only 4 clutches.
Now......I know that on a 1g eclipse transmission there are guys running in the 9's with a stock auto transmission with AWD launches, yet at first everyone said the auto was crap and couldn't hold more than 350 whp. By just increasing the line pressure guys are saying the tranny can handle 600 whp. One guy reported running high 9's low 10's for over 40 passes on a stock 1g transmission with just the line pressure mod. There secret was increasing line pressure in all gears. They have an electronically controlled pressure solenoid, like we do, that raises and lowers the pressure. They call it the "blue wire mod". When the blue wire going to the pressure solenoid is grounded, the solenoid applies full line pressure. If you just did this mod and grounded the sensor all the time than all the shifts were quite violent. When doing wot shifts they report them to not be to bad. Most of the guys then hooked the tranny to a relay hooked to the throttle peddle so that full line pressure is only applied during WOT.
This makes me wonder what the automatic transmission is "really" capable of. Many were surprised to find out that a 1g auto can actually hold more power than a 1g manual transmission when the proper mods are done. While I LOVE the fact that you guys might get custom gear sets made for your manual transmissions......I believe the auto might be able to become the stronger STOCK set-up. I was sad to see libert ditch his auto so fast, only to be stripping gears with the manual.
Anyone want to do some diagnosis work and hook a scope up to the pressure solenoids on the transmission and see what they do? :-)
J. R.
I would assume they give 5th gear more clutches than 4th because it needs to deal with the extra stress of the torque converter locking and unlocking the most.
This gives me the idea that instead of having different line pressures per gear to deal with the changes in applied torque, the transmission instead mechanically has more clutches in the clutch pack.
Now if we think about what libert said before he ditched his auto, he thought he was slipping the clutches in 3rd and 4th gear. This would make sense because 3rd and 4th have the least amount of clutches. 4th gear really looks like its going to be a problem with only 4 clutches.
Now......I know that on a 1g eclipse transmission there are guys running in the 9's with a stock auto transmission with AWD launches, yet at first everyone said the auto was crap and couldn't hold more than 350 whp. By just increasing the line pressure guys are saying the tranny can handle 600 whp. One guy reported running high 9's low 10's for over 40 passes on a stock 1g transmission with just the line pressure mod. There secret was increasing line pressure in all gears. They have an electronically controlled pressure solenoid, like we do, that raises and lowers the pressure. They call it the "blue wire mod". When the blue wire going to the pressure solenoid is grounded, the solenoid applies full line pressure. If you just did this mod and grounded the sensor all the time than all the shifts were quite violent. When doing wot shifts they report them to not be to bad. Most of the guys then hooked the tranny to a relay hooked to the throttle peddle so that full line pressure is only applied during WOT.
This makes me wonder what the automatic transmission is "really" capable of. Many were surprised to find out that a 1g auto can actually hold more power than a 1g manual transmission when the proper mods are done. While I LOVE the fact that you guys might get custom gear sets made for your manual transmissions......I believe the auto might be able to become the stronger STOCK set-up. I was sad to see libert ditch his auto so fast, only to be stripping gears with the manual.
Anyone want to do some diagnosis work and hook a scope up to the pressure solenoids on the transmission and see what they do? :-)
J. R.
02-22-2013, 10:17 AM
#5958
Team Owner
I'll answer this fully when I get back to a computer but there are a couple errors. One of the posts above assumes hard part breakage is an issue. It's not, at least not yet with over 400whp. I don't believe anyone has had a hard part failure because of too much power yet.
Adding another clutch or two is usually a good idea, you're increasing the surface area just like using a larger diameter or dual clutch does for a manual. Sometimes you go with thinner clutches to accomplish this but sometimes you can machine the drum or shell or apply piston for extra clearance and retain stock clutch thickness.
Adding more surface area is good even if the trans is not slipping. It can cut down on shift time and reduce wear on the clutches. It takes a lot more out of the clutches to complete a shift when you have slippage than when they're already applied. Dynamic vs static holding power.
Shift timing is crucial as well. I believe the solenoid adjustments can improve shift timing as long as you know what you're doing. It's easy to go too far and bind it up on a shift. The less the underlap from when one set of clutches releases to when the others apply the better as long as you don't get a bind.
Low gears don't necessarily get more line pressure than high gears. You feel the shifts more in the low gears simply due to the mechanical leverage advantage the engine has on the wheels. To determine what gear gets more apply pressure would mean knowing apply piston surface area, number of clutches and diameter of clutches. Hydraulic pressure is only one factor. It IS the only one you can easily change without tearing the transmission apart.
To be honest I would start by raising overall line pressure (after replacing the pressure sensors and using type F fluid) and see what slips as the power is turned up. If you have a problem gear, start there. Once you get the clutches to start holding the power reliably you address hard parts if they start breaking.
Adding another clutch or two is usually a good idea, you're increasing the surface area just like using a larger diameter or dual clutch does for a manual. Sometimes you go with thinner clutches to accomplish this but sometimes you can machine the drum or shell or apply piston for extra clearance and retain stock clutch thickness.
Adding more surface area is good even if the trans is not slipping. It can cut down on shift time and reduce wear on the clutches. It takes a lot more out of the clutches to complete a shift when you have slippage than when they're already applied. Dynamic vs static holding power.
Shift timing is crucial as well. I believe the solenoid adjustments can improve shift timing as long as you know what you're doing. It's easy to go too far and bind it up on a shift. The less the underlap from when one set of clutches releases to when the others apply the better as long as you don't get a bind.
Low gears don't necessarily get more line pressure than high gears. You feel the shifts more in the low gears simply due to the mechanical leverage advantage the engine has on the wheels. To determine what gear gets more apply pressure would mean knowing apply piston surface area, number of clutches and diameter of clutches. Hydraulic pressure is only one factor. It IS the only one you can easily change without tearing the transmission apart.
To be honest I would start by raising overall line pressure (after replacing the pressure sensors and using type F fluid) and see what slips as the power is turned up. If you have a problem gear, start there. Once you get the clutches to start holding the power reliably you address hard parts if they start breaking.
02-22-2013, 10:23 AM
#5959
Team Owner
I agree with flexer that most of the time the auto is the stronger transmission. Almost always. This bastard child from Honda I'm not sure about. Most autos use planetary gears which are by design quite a bit stronger than the typical manual transmission cogs. You don't have to worry about shaft flex and synchro s and all of that stuff. The auto will allow you to build boost off the line and stay in boost without lifting for shifts. The problem is the Honda unit is sort of like a manual adapted for auto use. I could see it failing at about the same point as the manual but who knows
02-22-2013, 10:53 AM
#5960
I too don't have alot of time to answer here either (at work) but I will expand on the whole higher pressure/lower gears concept and bring some factual information.
As for the statement IHC made about the auto being a stronger unit, I have to agree. I've literally owned a dozen or so j-series AT in my cars without EVER having one issue at all. You take care of them they are actually decent transmissions. Lol...hard to believe...
As for the statement IHC made about the auto being a stronger unit, I have to agree. I've literally owned a dozen or so j-series AT in my cars without EVER having one issue at all. You take care of them they are actually decent transmissions. Lol...hard to believe...