11psi - Clutch can't handle the torque

[TurfBurn]

If you are gonna get a Spec clutch, I suggest going with the one I listed. It is supposed to be streetable like their stage 2 clutch, yet hold massive torque like the stage 4-5.

Missed your post before... so for those who also missed it.. here is the info Ddogg posted:

"Get the SZS943H. It will drive more like the st2 (has great daily street drivability), but have a capacity in the mid 500's. You will not find that unit on the site- it is quite new."

 

[jred321]

turfburn: i just read your sig, do you really have 8 550's? that's a lot of fuel on a small turbo. i just have to ask, why?

 

[Brian MP5T]

Yes stages are completely meaningless... but when referring to certain brands like spec and you say stage 3, it refers to a specific combo. A Stage 1 of another brand may have higher limits, so in that sense it is meaningless, but Spec stage 3 does refer to a specific product by a specific brand, that's all I was indicating toward.


As far as cyro-treating, I asked one of my professors who is a leading metallurgist in the industry (he was asked to do analysis on the bridge in Milwaukee, WI that failed, he has done analysis for several other bridges and metallurgical failures across the nation and has been a speaker and peer reviewer for many scientific journals and seminars) and he had this to say about cryo-treating:

Additionally, there hasn't been any comparison by many of these people and teams with heat tempered, forged, shot peened, or other processign techniques. For all we know the heat tempering done at the end of the cyro process is where the benefit is coming from and a pure plain old heat tempering process would result in even greater benefits in the performance of the parts.

Once upon a time it was believed that bleeding a person out was the way to cure a common cold, not to mention the former belief that drilling holes in your skull was the way to get rid of a headache. What I'm getting at is although I think cryo is a tossup and dont' really have an opinion on it, I don't see any reason to believe in it for real until someone does genuine scientific studies showing why and how and a comparison.

And btw... I can find many happy customers with their 20hp resistor chip modifications. :-D

I hope I"m not coming across as a dick... I"m not trying ot be, just listing off some facts and a bunch of MY opinions.

So Allow me to Paraphrase...

Cryotreating = B.S.​

Thanks for posting that, I was wondering about the process and how much of a diference it actually makes!!!​

 

[TurfBurn]

Yeah I do... I only run 4 of them right now. Just the primary rail. The secondary rail is there in the runners if I need it (aka next year). I haven't looked at whether or not i'll need to switch turbos and intercoolers yet. that's one of those "to-do's" that has little to no priority. Maybe just bump to a 20G turbo if I need to.

 

[TurfBurn]

So Allow me to Paraphrase...

Cryotreating = B.S.​

Thanks for posting that, I was wondering about the process and how much of a diference it actually makes!!!​

B.S. from a scientific standpoint yes. But plenty of people swear by it... so who knows... there is a CHANCE for credibility in it in my opinion, but there isn't anythign scientific that I know of.... so yeah.

 

[Brian MP5T]

Forged gears and a reinforced gear cage in the tranny is probably as much as one can hope for. Then your driveshafts become the weakest link. Ahh Tuning!! Hail To The Spool GOD!!!

 

[TurfBurn]

I actually just checked some compressor maps... and by some rough estimation I'm good to about 20 psi or better on the 16G which is plenty for my plans.

No one has actually sheared a gear or twisted a shaft inside the tranny that I personally know of yet... so the driveshafts are already the weaker link as those HAVE been broken several times. Although supposedly te 460hp puerto rico P5 has torn up some gears... but that's a bit more power than anyone else is making... and he is dragging it all the time... soo....

 

[jred321]

I actually just checked some compressor maps... and by some rough estimation I'm good to about 20 psi or better on the 16G which is plenty for my plans.

cool, i just know in dsm world 550's will max out even a big 16g, but they have lower static compression. 8 just seemed a bit much for a lowly 16g
are you still on stock internals?

 

[TurfBurn]

Yeah I'm still stock internals.. I have the Evo 3 16G with a 7 cm compressor which is essentially a Big 16G but a slightly larger yet compressor. I did realize I made a mistake when I did my pressure ratios... so I'll have to check that again . But it should be close... just a matter of whether I'd go 16, 18 or 20g. I like fast spooling and for my Solo I and Solo II racing that is best.. so I may give up some efficiency for that... but yeah I have way more injector than I need bottom line.

Switching internals this winter though... and trying to plan my clutch out accordingly.

Edit: After checking it, the 18G looks better (about 75% efficiency).. the 20G a weee bit big... but the 16 looks "acceptable" (68% efficiency versus peak of 71%)

Edit2: corrected my turbo specs.

 

[ddogg777]

I hope you don't mind the threadjacking Kooldino, but I did some more searching on the topic of cryotreatment and found this interesting article from 1996: http://www.cryogenicsociety.org/csa_bin/back_issues/spring96/spring96_1.html

Maybe we should start a new thread. Anyways, here's a good quote from the article:
For example, an article that appeared in the August 1982 issue of <CITE>Cryogenics, </CITE>"Cryogenic treatment of metals to improve wear resistance," studied nineteen metals, including 12 tool steels, 3 stainless steels and 4 other steels, subjected to cryogenic treatments to determine the difference between a 189K soak and a 77K soak in improving the abrasive wear resistance. The tool steels exhibited a significant increase in wear resistance after the 77K soak and a less dramatic increase after the 189K soak. There was an increase in wear resistance after the cryotreatment for the stainless steels, but the difference between the two treatments was less than 10%. The plain carbon steel and the cast iron showed no improvement after either cryotreatment. (Are our gears carbon steel or tool steel?)


An article in the January 1992 issue of <CITE>Modern Machine Shop</CITE> summarizes Dr. Barron's explanations of what happens and why: "Researchers are not certain about what happens to materials at 320 degrees below zero (so-called deep cryogenic treatment). Alloy tool steels used to make end mills, twist drills, reamers and other cutting tools have been the object of the most study in this area. Results vary, but a two- to sevenfold improvement over the normal life of these tools is typical. "One of the best explanations was put forth by Dr. Randall Barron, one of the foremost researchers in cryogenic treatment of metal. Two primary mechanisms are at work, he wrote. First, super-cold treatment apparently converts any retained austenite into martensite, and the martensite is tempered as the metal returns to room temperature.

 

[TurfBurn]

I'm not sure what our gears are made out of. They are steel, but what of the many many alloys they are I'm not sure. They shouldn't be tool steel as that is very difficult to machine, but there is also an important factor that should be kept in mind. Toughness. If you have lots of money... and a really nice set of knives take one and lay it on concrete and hit it with a hammer very hard. What do you think will happen? Well... it'll shatter. It won't bend, it won't "rip" it will just flat out shatter. That is why knives chip. That is due to them having a very high martensite content. It makes them hold an edge (aka not wear) much longer because it is a hard steel, but it makes them prone to breaking and chipping. You give up your ability to withstand impact for your ability to retain dimension.

So now think about your transmission. Do you want something that can handle a lot of wear or something that can handle a shock load? You want something somewhere in between (designers of gears would have a much better idea than I could ever claim to have by many times over!). So if you make your gears harder than before you are also in theory making them more brittle. So a shock load (like launching your car, slamming gears, or so forth) will result in brittle fracture much quicker than in a lower martenistic content steel. Yes making your gears harder can be much better for wear, but it may actually in more extreme cases make them more fragile.

I think when people cryo (aka supposedly increasing martenistic content) a turbo or so forth it wears better which is great, as it doesn't see shock loading. but in shock parts it may not be better. For example your rods in your engine would probably be a really BAD thing to cryo if it is making them "harder" which is making them more brittle.

Then the big question left is what kind of steel is in the tranny parts? Is it a high carbon or plain carbon steel? Is it a multi-component alloy (nickel, zinc, etc) or so forth. Lots of questions that none of us have answers for.

EDIT: Fixed to match DDogg's below recommendation.

 

[ddogg777]

Lol, I don't think you had to quote my long post, it was right above you.

 

[TurfBurn]

Lol, I don't think you had to quote my long post, it was right above you.

True

I did find one thing in the article interesting ( responded to your stuff before I had time to read the article). It indicated that the martensite tempers itself on the return to room temp. I find that a little odd, but they do address in the article the fact that martensite is more brittle. So that's interesting. They do pretty much focus throughout though on the ability of cryo treating to improve wear. They don't say anything about it's ability to improve strength. They also mentioned better dimensional stability. But again, nothing to say it would make a part stronger. Stronger and better wearing ARE two different things . But that was a good bit of seemingly pretty credible info. Far more credible than anything I'd say. So I'd certainly defer to the experts or what not in the article and go with that it does make some wear improvement.

We do not have stainless steel gears, so they'd be more likely "plain" carbon steel than anything which it does mention doesn't benefit. But then they turn around and talk about pistons and heads and so forth which are typically plain steel, so I have no idea. I'd have to guess the alloys are not plain then if anything, or they are contradicting themselves in the article.

 

[TurfBurn]

So to be on topic Do we think treating the clutch would help? LOL.. Kidding. Has anyone, or does anyone plan to try out that spec clutch that DDogg listed (and I requoted)? I'm curious as to anyone's impression of it. Or I'll guinea pig if I get to needing a clutch before anyone else.

 

[ddogg777]

I will be getting that clutch, maybe in a couple weeks.

 

[TurfBurn]

ahh.. excellent... I'm sure a lot of us will be very interested! Any chance you can give us a ballpark on the pricing?

 

[KzA]

did they throw you a price for it?

I dont think I will ever touch over what the Stage 3 clutch is supposed to handle, but am considering going with that beefier clutch just for safety, if the price isnt TOO ridiculously different...

 

[ddogg777]

I will post it here as soon as I can! I am outta town at the moment and will call Beau at MAM when I get back.

 

[Kooldino]

Is it On/Off or is it civilised?

civilised for a puck, it's certainly tolerable, but it's not quite as smooth from 0mph as the ACT was.

 

[Kooldino]

i was going to mention something about this but decided against it. i know in this thread for the most part people are talking about a specific brand, and the details are explained in the thread, which is totally cool.
but then if someone goes to another thread and says "you should get a spec stage 3", that'll most likely mean nothing to the person. if they said, "you should get a clutch with a pressure plate that holds xxx torque and has a sprung 6 puck disk, like the spec stage 3", that would mean something. important info is hidden by saying "stage".

it's just a pet peeve of mine when people use "stage" for something and think it means something. like the classic "i have a stage 3 turbo". no, you don't have a stage 3 turbo. there is no such thing as a stage 3 turbo. you are a stage 1 idiot.

and to your professor, i say science schmience

Well, Spec calls my clutch a stage 3. If i want to reccomend the clutch, I'm going to be lazy and call it a Spec stage 3. If they want the info on it, they can go check it out.