Is the 1800rpm stall torque converter from an 85 federal 300D interchangeable with the older 1500rpm stall converter? Is there one in the 2000-2300rpm range (from a g@sser?) that will fit?

My transmission is great, but the 1500rpm stall speed makes the VNT surge at lower speeds and I expect the 2359 will be worse.
This guy's converter would be great, if it weren't broken! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FxqTFJK7ns

I think that guy has a CVT!

A higher stall would be nice....

(08-18-2010 09:12 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  Is the 1800rpm stall torque converter from an 85 federal 300D interchangeable with the older 1500rpm stall converter? Is there one in the 2000-2300rpm range (from a g@sser?) that will fit?

My transmission is great, but the 1500rpm stall speed makes the VNT surge at lower speeds and I expect the 2359 will be worse.
This guy's converter would be great, if it weren't broken! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FxqTFJK7ns

Actually the stall speed that I've seen printed for the '85 is around 2400 - 2700 RPMs and the previous years 1450 - 1650 RPMs. This is copy of the 1985 MB service supplement states it's about 2600 RPM.
   

I have an '85 Federal Torque Converter that I tested to make sure it fits an earlier 722.3xx trans. It does... Purchased it with about 150,000 miles about 4 years ago for about 100 bucks. It's just been sitting on the shelf since, but may end up installing it if works out for you and after my turbo change.



.

Is there a place where you can get one? This would greatly help any turbo cars acceleration....

There are trans shops that can rebuild an existing torque converter and change stall speeds. Couldn't tell you which ones at the moment.



.

Hmmm. Something to look into...

(08-18-2010 02:00 PM)Captain America Wrote:  Is there a place where you can get one? ...

Another place would be forum members..... Like dropnosky.... he might have a '85 torque converter he is not using since he's going 5 speed.




.

Quote:Actually the stall speed that I've seen printed for the '85 is around 2400 - 2700 RPMs and the previous years 1450 - 1650 RPMs.

Thats for California models with the weak 722.4. All the youtube videos of 85s show 1800rpm off the line.

There is a federal 85 300D in the yards here thats been pretty well stripped over. Its also got new oil cooler lines, too bad they're such a PITA to remove though.

So what is the part number of the torque converter needed?

(08-18-2010 04:14 PM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  

Quote:Actually the stall speed that I've seen printed for the '85 is around 2400 - 2700 RPMs and the previous years 1450 - 1650 RPMs.

Thats for California models with the weak 722.4. All the youtube videos of 85s show 1800rpm off the line.
....

I believe that copy includes the 722.3 because of the 2.88 diff ratio. If I am not mistaken, I believe Cali and Fed act the same off the line.

---

   
   

(08-18-2010 04:48 PM)Captain America Wrote:  So what is the part number of the torque converter needed?

126 250 2302 4684




.

Well that torque converter was a waste of time. Got it removed, dumped out the fluid and it had chunks in the oil. I was so irritated I forgot to look at its part number, but the vehicle was a 4/85 VIN WDBAB33C3FA261503 with a 722.315.

Whew! I had started reading this from the email on my phone and all I saw was "Well that torque converter was a waste of time." It made me so sad at first...

If there is anything that I hate about this software is the 128char limit or whatever it is on the emails....

FI, it is a shame, I am 99% sure I gave away my 85 TC last year...

Yeah, that junkyard transmission was such a heavy PITA to remove without a jack (not allowed) that I'd rather buy one from somebody.

They dont bring a jack around if you ask for one? Pull a part here will do that. Still much easier to just pony up some extra $$$

so I have one that is 1 number off, would it still be the same stall speed?

Captain was PMing me, and now im interested in seeing if its any different than the number above before I mail it off to him.

the number deliveryvalve posted-
126 250 2302 4684

the one off mine-
126 250 2302 4784

(08-22-2010 08:34 AM)winmutt Wrote:  They dont bring a jack around if you ask for one?

They have big A-frames to remove engines but they won't allow jacks because they're afraid (insurance) somebody will drop a car on themselves moving the wheel rim jackstands.

I came across these that have a very good listing of all the TC.
http://www.kingomatic.com/documents/08_TC_Cat_lo.pdf
http://cvcconverters.com/catalog_pdfs/2009_123to155.pdf

(08-22-2010 09:49 AM)dropnosky Wrote:  so I have one that is 1 number off, would it still be the same stall speed?

Captain was PMing me, and now im interested in seeing if its any different than the number above before I mail it off to him.

the number deliveryvalve posted-
126 250 2302 4684

the one off mine-
126 250 2302 4784

My hunch what's important is the "2302" part. If I am not mistaken the lower stall speed torque converters will have the part number 126 250 1502 XXXX or 126 250 1602 XXXX. I ask Rudolf_Diesel to confirm on an '83 torque converter part number that came with the motor he borrowed from me.




.

(08-23-2010 01:40 PM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  

(08-22-2010 09:49 AM)dropnosky Wrote:  so I have one that is 1 number off, would it still be the same stall speed?

Captain was PMing me, and now im interested in seeing if its any different than the number above before I mail it off to him.

the number deliveryvalve posted-
126 250 2302 4684

the one off mine-
126 250 2302 4784

My hunch what's important is the "2302" part. If I am not mistaken the lower stall speed torque converters will have the part number 126 250 1502 XXXX or 126 250 1602 XXXX. I ask Rudolf_Diesel to confirm on an '83 torque converter part number that came with the motor he borrowed from me.

Confirmed, 126 250 1502 44.2

I think the 2302 part is good to go.



.

Will the pilot fit the older, larger, crank?

(08-26-2010 07:52 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  Will the pilot fit the older, larger, crank?

That is not a problem.



.

Sweet! Dropnosky said that the converter he has, has a little rattle when he shakes it, but the car did drive with it, not far and not over 30mph but it worked. "I have never shook a good empty torque converter either! Could be typical that they rattle! This car drove a grand total of 3 miles never above 30 in my ownership, it seemed to work ok during that limited test. "

Is that OK? or a bad TC?

(08-26-2010 11:56 AM)Captain America Wrote:  Sweet! Dropnosky said that the converter he has, has a little rattle when he shakes it, but the car did drive with it, not far and not over 30mph but it worked. "I have never shook a good empty torque converter either! Could be typical that they rattle! This car drove a grand total of 3 miles never above 30 in my ownership, it seemed to work ok during that limited test. "

Is that OK? or a bad TC?

It's fine. They all do that. When storing, I keep fluid in them. The rattle becomes a low dense knock.




.

F*&$nfj4f489h3838&&3(&$#&*#@)%K Yeah!

(08-26-2010 07:56 AM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  That is not a problem.

You sure? Its a big issue converting to a manual and the TC is supported by the hole.

(08-27-2010 05:33 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  

(08-26-2010 07:56 AM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  That is not a problem.

You sure? Its a big issue converting to a manual and the TC is supported by the hole.

I was thinking that too, but I bet its less of a problem because of the other bolts holding it to the driven plate in addition to being located with a nub in that hole.

This 85 converter going to captain will probably have a little extra play being 1mm smaller, but I think after he bolts it all down, the other 6 bolts might serve to locate it properly.

Maybe to be sure, he should not tighten them until he has his tranny back up and the centering of the converter is pinned on both sides with the input shaft of the automatic and the nub in the crank.

(08-27-2010 06:25 AM)dropnosky Wrote:  

(08-27-2010 05:33 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  

(08-26-2010 07:56 AM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  That is not a problem.

You sure? Its a big issue converting to a manual and the TC is supported by the hole.

I was thinking that too, but I bet its less of a problem because of the other bolts holding it to the driven plate in addition to being located with a nub in that hole.

This 85 converter going to captain will probably have a little extra play being 1mm smaller, but I think after he bolts it all down, the other 6 bolts might serve to locate it properly.

Maybe to be sure, he should not tighten them until he has his tranny back up and the centering of the converter is pinned on both sides with the input shaft of the automatic and the nub in the crank.

The bell housing would be located and torqued before the TC. I would start all bolts first and then work my way around tightening them like you do the lugs of a wheel in several steps.

(08-27-2010 06:25 AM)dropnosky Wrote:  

(08-27-2010 05:33 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  

(08-26-2010 07:56 AM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  That is not a problem.

You sure? Its a big issue converting to a manual and the TC is supported by the hole.

I was thinking that too, but I bet its less of a problem because of the other bolts holding it to the driven plate in addition to being located with a nub in that hole.

This 85 converter going to captain will probably have a little extra play being 1mm smaller, but I think after he bolts it all down, the other 6 bolts might serve to locate it properly.

Maybe to be sure, he should not tighten them until he has his tranny back up and the centering of the converter is pinned on both sides with the input shaft of the automatic and the nub in the crank.

I agree with dropnosky's assessment. The driven/flex plate is taking the load and flexing to align itself to the trans as it rotates, centering will come naturally when the trans is torque down to the engine.

(08-27-2010 10:03 AM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  

(08-27-2010 06:25 AM)dropnosky Wrote:  

(08-27-2010 05:33 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  

(08-26-2010 07:56 AM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  That is not a problem.

You sure? Its a big issue converting to a manual and the TC is supported by the hole.

I was thinking that too, but I bet its less of a problem because of the other bolts holding it to the driven plate in addition to being located with a nub in that hole.

This 85 converter going to captain will probably have a little extra play being 1mm smaller, but I think after he bolts it all down, the other 6 bolts might serve to locate it properly.

Maybe to be sure, he should not tighten them until he has his tranny back up and the centering of the converter is pinned on both sides with the input shaft of the automatic and the nub in the crank.

I agree with dropnosky's assessment. The driven/flex plate is taking the load and flexing to align itself to the trans as it rotates, centering will come naturally when the trans is torque down to the engine.

Bam! Same stuff on my SBC, With an aftermarket TC the nub coming out of it was too big to fit in the crank so I spaced the TC back with a washer or two, requiring the three bolts to do the alignment..... Got about 10k on it with no problems.

(08-27-2010 05:33 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  

(08-26-2010 07:56 AM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  That is not a problem.

You sure? Its a big issue converting to a manual and the TC is supported by the hole.

Well this got me thinking. How did I dry fit this TC out before and it seemed to fit snuggly on the engine.

Well I decided to pull the '85 TC out of storage and dry fit it on my spare '84 617.952.

Answer. The Pilot does not go deep enough to touch the crank pilot hole.

   


It only touches the flywheel.

   
   


I dry fitted the '85 TC and it fits perfectly on the pilot hole of the flywheel with no play.

   





.

(08-29-2010 05:20 PM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  Answer. The Pilot does not go deep enough to touch the crank pilot hole.
It only touches the flywheel.

Excellent! A non issue then.

Aye, you dont even need to remove the Pilot-Bearing from an engine crank from a Manual car!

I'm fairly new to automatics (my 617A conversion being my first). Can someone sum up the value in a higher stall speed?

Here's my stab at it:
higher stall implies more torque is created below the stall speed but at the expense of lost horsepower. The results should be smoother takeoffs, possibly faster takeoffs and lower economy.

For what it's worth, I have the 722.4 with the higher stall speed TC. It handles pretty nicely but I have little to compare against. Haven't seen any problems with the transmission - the truck is way heavier than the donor car but I'm still running at stock tuning.

Stall-Speed is a value which the converter is assigned during manufacture.

Simply put, a certain converter's stall-speed means that with the transmission O/P shaft held stationary (and therefore, the converter's O/P shaft) and the engine in a good state of tune and held at full throttle, will allow the engine to run at the quoted Stall-Speed.
(IF testing for a Stall-Speed, Only test for a Maximum of 10 seconds, as this causes much heating of the fluid inside the converter, and allow a period of idling to allow the fluid to circulate to the cooler....)

Maximum Torque Multiplication happens in this state, and is often in the magnitude of 2:1 depending on the requirements and design
Torque multiplication is continuously variable between this 'designed in' value and 1:1
1:1 would occur when the O/P shaft of the converter is running the same-speed as the flywheel, no torque actually being transmitted....

A higher stall-speed converter will mean the engine will develop more torque-(as it will be turning faster) and more torque multiplication can occur, so the vehicle will accelerate faster off the line....

The downside is that a high-stall converter will have more 'slip' during cruise conditions, and therefore will affect economy, and possibly top-speed....
Manufacturers developed Locking converters that have an additional clutch Inside the converter which acts like another gear--sorta-- to give the best of both worlds. This clutch is controlled by the valve-block and operated hydraulically, and has the effect of connecting the engine flywheel direct to the transmission shaft....

When you accelerate, the engine revvs up to a set minimum rpm regardless of the mph. Thats stall speed.

Stock is 1500rpm, the torque peak with the stock turbo is at 2500rpm, that means there is a delay in torque as the turbo wakes up. With the 1800rpm converter the engine starts at a faster RPM which means more exhaust energy output (more exhaust strokes per second) to get the turbo going and less rpm until the torque peak.

My goal with the higher stall speed is to reduce turbo surge with my VNT turbo by getting the engine closer to 2000rpm (where the turbo doesn't surge at any pressure).

Forced is right, The engine will always come up to at least the stall speed of the converter when you are at 0 mph, If the brakes will hold the wheels. Now generally I find that the torque multiplication is so high that the brakes will not hold the wheels even before you hit the stall speed. For example, I have a 2400 rpm stall converter in my sprint but I cannot keep from doing a burnout at anything above 1800rpm because the brakes are overpowered. You can easily tell if a car has a high stall TC because the engine will rev up higher right off the line when pulling away from a stop. Also the car will not idle forward when in gear at all, or not as fast.

Thanks Alastair and FI for the great explanations - makes lots of sense now.

Alastair, notice how RPMs rise to the stall speed then stay steady while MPH increases from 22mph to 30mph.




Why?

captain, did you end up installing the high stall torque converter?

Nope. Now the leg is broke.... Wa Wa Wa! The motor Has got to be rebuilt.... I will install the converter when that happens, soon I hope.

My 87 300sdl dose that same think but at 2900rpm is that normal?

Dose the same think huh? Lol

You got me it was early lol

Hey forced do you know what the stall speed is supposed be on the 87 300sdl trans? It seams to be 2900rpm either that or my trans slips like a mofo

Should be 1800 from what I can find.

Weird Ill take a video!

Thumbs up!

Here's the video I made of the car staying at 3k from 35-70mph under partial throttle 50-70% evan through a shift point
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRLlJb7gDNI

At full throttle the rpm are normal going up and down with the shifts up 4900rpm!

(10-31-2010 02:08 PM)willbhere4u Wrote:  Here's the video I made of the car staying at 3k from 35-70mph under partial throttle 50-70% evan through a shift point
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRLlJb7gDNI
....

I don't think that is normal. But I would choose the following scenarios....

1) You don't have a 722 trans and a Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT) was installed in it's place.

or

2) Tach is faulty.

or

3) Trans or torque converter is slipping. (my vote torque converter)






.

It doesn't slip with full throttle applied? My thought was low line pressure from being out of adjustment or a bad modulator? Until the bowden cable is activated! I was going to replace the fluid and see if that helps

It did shift up in to 4th in the video at around 55mph

If I floor it the rpm goes from 1000rpm to 4900 then shift's down to 3500 and pulls back up to 4900rpm and so on through all of the gears!

It really feels like the trans is slipping under partial load between 3-4 gear