T5 box (split topic)

[TURBO4LT]

Thanks peter

[Venom XR]

The XR8 runs a Tremec TR-3650 box, first used in the T3 cars. Their torque handling is rated at 488Nm, though the TR-3650-2 is rated at 528Nm.

[TURBO4LT]

thanks Venom XR

[edo]

Im still not sure how you produce torque in such a way that you maintain power but dont put undue stress on the gearbox.

That just flies in the face of that equation.

Unless you are bringing boost (& therefore torque & power) on very slowly & only ever getting full boost later in the rev range?

[aps]

  edo said:

Im still not sure how you produce torque in such a way that you maintain power but dont put undue stress on the gearbox.

That just flies in the face of that equation.

Unless you are bringing boost (& therefore torque & power) on very slowly & only ever getting full boost later in the rev range?

I dont have time now to go into a long technical explanation, come to one of the APS unichip tech days in either melbourne or Sydney and we will give you a practical overview of our tuning methods as many of these tuning issuesd will be discussed at length.

Peter

APS

[Cobra]

  Venom XR said:

The XR8 runs a Tremec TR-3650 box, first used in the T3 cars. Their torque handling is rated at 488Nm, though the TR-3650-2 is rated at 528Nm.

the T-3650 has been used in the Mustangs for years but the feedback from the States is that they are a real problem

there are many guys there how have done a T45 swap ... this tranny has much lower ratings than the T3650 but reportedly lasts longer and performs better ..

Ford may have acknowledged this when they fitted the T45 to the Mustangs that came to Australia while the Americans still used up the stockpiles of T3650 in their tangs ...

the T5s have a long and checkered history but there are some strong aftermarket kits available (in the States mostly :( ) .... just pick up any Stang magazine and read the classifieds .... so there is a path through all this ... just might take some time to get here

what I'm getting at is that there is more to a tranny than a "torque capacity"

the T45 is a sophosticated member of the tremec/bw family and slots well ...

and failures are consequently less ... so is it stronger than a T3650 ??

if a box doesn't slot (shift) well then its days are numbered before you start thrashing it

well that's my 2.2c worth

[bcl]

Based on the Stage 3 graph (Engine figures; subtract 60kw for rwkw), published on the APS website, it looks like the power graph has been flattened out to perhaps protect the gearbox.

The car makes only 8lb of boost @3000 revs, going up 13lb @4400 revs.

And compared to the Stage 2 graph on the APS website it looks like the Stage 3 has been detuned compared to the Stage 2, up to 3500 revs.

At 2500 revs, stage 2 is 100 rwkw, stage 3 is 60 rwkw.

At 3000 revs, stage 2 is 160 rwkw, stage 3 is 115rwkw.

At 3500 revs, stage 2 is 180 rwkw, stage 3 is 183rwkw.

At 4000 revs, stage 2 is 224 rwkw, stage 3 is 244rwkw.

The stage 3 end result is a good power level for that boost.

Bottom end is not very good, and not what I’d expect.

Is this Stage 3 detune intentional, for emissions and to protect the gearbox?

Brian

[junior]

  aps said:

Glad you enjoyed todays topic on the 5 speed trans issue, its been a pearler of an issue and entertaining for all I'm sure. :lol:

Well it wouldnt be to difficult to improve on the T56 shift quality I dont see this as a positive step foward and I would investigate the stock T5 as to what has failed and what could be improved to extend durability.

We have designed an improved gear set for the wrx trans and have had great success in improving the durabilty of this 5 spd transmission utilising this strategy.

The other option, though more expensive which APS will use in the future for our 1000HP engine will be the 6 SPD twin turbo Supra trans and we are designing the fitting kit currently.

This offers excellent shift quality and is nearly bulletproof in extremly high torque applications and we have used this transmission behind many very powerful engines with great success.

In any event this only my opinion for what its worth, the proof will be in the pudding.

Peter

APS

See Peter that wasn't so hard was it

Seems as though the thread is changing into a discussion about how you guys get around the torque.

Brian your comments are spot on regarding the dyno graphs.

[edo]

Im not after a long & technical explanation just a simple answer.

Do you bring the boost on very slowly & only ever give full boost at the top end of the rev range so as to manage the torque?

It certainly seems that way from bcl's post above, if anything the stage 2 kit might present more of an issue with gearbox longevity than stage 3.

It would seem that the stage 3 might feel positively laggy compared to the stage 2 with the stronger midrange. Does it?

Thanks for the invitation but Im in brissy so wont be able to get to your tech days

[Guest LOK@ChipTorque]

  bcl said:

Based on the Stage 3 graph (Engine figures; subtract 60kw for rwkw), published on the APS website, it looks like the power graph has been flattened out to perhaps protect the gearbox.

The car makes only 8lb of boost @3000 revs, going up 13lb @4400 revs.

And compared to the Stage 2 graph on the APS website it looks like the Stage 3 has been detuned compared to the Stage 2, up to 3500 revs.

At 2500 revs, stage 2  is 100 rwkw,    stage 3  is  60  rwkw.

At 3000 revs, stage 2  is 160 rwkw,    stage 3  is  115rwkw.

At 3500 revs, stage 2  is 180 rwkw,    stage 3  is  183rwkw.

At 4000 revs, stage 2  is 224 rwkw,    stage 3  is  244rwkw.

The stage 3 end result is a good power level for that boost.

Bottom end is not very good, and not what I’d expect.

Is this Stage 3 detune intentional, for emissions and to protect the gearbox?

Brian

  aps said:

I dont have time now to go into a long technical explanation, come to one of the APS unichip tech days in either melbourne or Sydney and we will give you a practical overview of our tuning methods as many of these tuning issuesd will be discussed at length. 

Peter

APS

Hmm maybe that's an APS engineering method that you shouldn't post Brian

It is all about where the torque (fun factor) is delivered and must include rate of torque change.

As any mechanical engineer knows from first year, the greater the cyclic loading, the more likely the fatigue failure. Check the driveline in any rally car that leaves the ground regularly for signs of extreme cyclic loading causing driveline failure.

Lachlan

P.S. No popcorn needed kids!!!