Header Update
12-14-05, 12:54 PM
#91
Pole Position
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lvangundy
I beleive your rev limited problem in 1st is due to your TC and 3.76 LSD.
I think someone lowered the stall speed and resolved this. Otherwise you'll need to either get rid of the rev limit, remove the 3.76 unit and use the stock 3.23 with the TRD gears, or toss the TC or the 3.76/LSD completely.
I think someone lowered the stall speed and resolved this. Otherwise you'll need to either get rid of the rev limit, remove the 3.76 unit and use the stock 3.23 with the TRD gears, or toss the TC or the 3.76/LSD completely.
I read a different post where someone had the same type of problem which turned out to be from tuning then the weather changed and the AFR got too lean. The weather here has been changing drastically from day to day, so I am planning to have the tuner check this out when the car goes back in.
Is there a way to raise the rev limit on a 1994 SC400?
I made so many changes at once that it is going to be extra hard to figure out. I want to try to address the low-cost variables before swapping the T/C out.
Thank you all again for the helpful ideas and any other input you may have is greatly appreciated.
Last edited by SC & RX; 12-14-05 at 01:06 PM. Reason: Add
12-14-05, 02:47 PM
#92
If you read some of my posts you will see that this was something I had a big problem with - I had the 3.76 with the FC as well. I even had my valvebody upgraded in the hopes of fixing it - but never did. So, I have sold my 3.76 and am going back to stock gearing to see if that helps.
There is a company who makes a controller so you can change your shift points which will help you. The downside is that it is $850 and it makes your CEL go on
But it should fix your problem. Again, search for my posts and you should find the link for that too.
Jonny
There is a company who makes a controller so you can change your shift points which will help you. The downside is that it is $850 and it makes your CEL go on
But it should fix your problem. Again, search for my posts and you should find the link for that too.
Jonny
Originally Posted by SC & RX
Thank you for your input, I believe I read the post you are referring to if it was the one were the guy lowered his stall to 2,600 and changed to synthetic transmission fluid? When I changed the rearend to LSD I used the OEM gears, so I don't know if that is what I need to do just yet. Has anyone else run synthetic transmission fluid?
I read a different post where someone had the same type of problem which turned out to be from tuning then the weather changed and the AFR got too lean. The weather here has been changing drastically from day to day, so I am planning to have the tuner check this out when the car goes back in.
Is there a way to raise the rev limit on a 1994 SC400?
I made so many changes at once that it is going to be extra hard to figure out. I want to try to address the low-cost variables before swapping the T/C out.
Thank you all again for the helpful ideas and any other input you may have is greatly appreciated.
I read a different post where someone had the same type of problem which turned out to be from tuning then the weather changed and the AFR got too lean. The weather here has been changing drastically from day to day, so I am planning to have the tuner check this out when the car goes back in.
Is there a way to raise the rev limit on a 1994 SC400?
I made so many changes at once that it is going to be extra hard to figure out. I want to try to address the low-cost variables before swapping the T/C out.
Thank you all again for the helpful ideas and any other input you may have is greatly appreciated.
12-14-05, 04:06 PM
#93
Pole Position
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dx3
If you read some of my posts you will see that this was something I had a big problem with - I had the 3.76 with the FC as well. I even had my valvebody upgraded in the hopes of fixing it - but never did. So, I have sold my 3.76 and am going back to stock gearing to see if that helps.
There is a company who makes a controller so you can change your shift points which will help you. The downside is that it is $850 and it makes your CEL go on
But it should fix your problem. Again, search for my posts and you should find the link for that too.
Jonny
There is a company who makes a controller so you can change your shift points which will help you. The downside is that it is $850 and it makes your CEL go on
But it should fix your problem. Again, search for my posts and you should find the link for that too.
Jonny
12-15-05, 10:58 AM
#95
Pole Position
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dx3
If you read some of my posts you will see that this was something I had a big problem with - I had the 3.76 with the FC as well. I even had my valvebody upgraded in the hopes of fixing it - but never did. So, I have sold my 3.76 and am going back to stock gearing to see if that helps.
There is a company who makes a controller so you can change your shift points which will help you. The downside is that it is $850 and it makes your CEL go on
But it should fix your problem. Again, search for my posts and you should find the link for that too.
Jonny
There is a company who makes a controller so you can change your shift points which will help you. The downside is that it is $850 and it makes your CEL go on
But it should fix your problem. Again, search for my posts and you should find the link for that too.
Jonny
BTW, I already have a CEL, so the controller throwing that would not be an issue.
12-15-05, 11:09 AM
#96
Pole Position
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jbrady
Hmmm... this while an improvement is less that expected. Do you have any exhaust pictures? Do you have the dyno sheet in a postable form? Did you go with X or Y pipe? You say much wider and smoother can you be more specific. SRQ400 feels a DRAMATIC inprovement in power and torque on his 99. He has not dyno'd but the low speed on up is to him very different with much better throttle response through out. You also made many changes at once. I am interested in the layout of your system.
The system would only allow me to attach 1 file to this message so I will attach the images of the exhaust system in my next email.
12-15-05, 11:16 AM
#98
Pole Position
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jbrady
Hmmm... this while an improvement is less that expected. Do you have any exhaust pictures? Do you have the dyno sheet in a postable form? Did you go with X or Y pipe? You say much wider and smoother can you be more specific. SRQ400 feels a DRAMATIC inprovement in power and torque on his 99. He has not dyno'd but the low speed on up is to him very different with much better throttle response through out. You also made many changes at once. I am interested in the layout of your system.
Rear of cats back to just before X pipe
Last edited by SC & RX; 12-15-05 at 12:15 PM. Reason: Change
12-15-05, 02:34 PM
#103
Lexus Champion
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by SC & RX
OK, I have scanned the dyno sheet. The Runfile_005 numbers were on my 19,000 mile engine that was otherwise stock except for a modified OEM airbox that I opened up the front. The Runfile_006 numbers are after the PI TC, EGR delete, JB headers and exhaust system were added and the S-AFC tuned on the dyno.
The system would only allow me to attach 1 file to this message so I will attach the images of the exhaust system in my next email.
The system would only allow me to attach 1 file to this message so I will attach the images of the exhaust system in my next email.
The dyno chart has me puzzled. The torque and power curves especially down low do not add up. Since it shows MPH instead of RPM I have to guess at the RPM for the various speeds. Guessing 3000rpm at the beginning of the run shows a 10+hp advantage. 10hp at 3000rpm is 17.5tq and yet the graph shows nearly identical torque
Your peak power is up by 15rwhp but the power inprovement from there up is between 20 and 25rwhp to redline. If this is accurate the car will be and feel substantially faster.
12-15-05, 02:50 PM
#104
Pole Position
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jbrady
Overall, very nice. I am not a fan of the Magnaflow X pipe but again, overall very nice.
The dyno chart has me puzzled. The torque and power curves especially down low do not add up. Since it shows MPH instead of RPM I have to guess at the RPM for the various speeds. Guessing 3000rpm at the beginning of the run shows a 10+hp advantage. 10hp at 3000rpm is 17.5tq and yet the graph shows nearly identical torque
Your peak power is up by 15rwhp but the power inprovement from there up is between 20 and 25rwhp to redline. If this is accurate the car will be and feel substantially faster.
The dyno chart has me puzzled. The torque and power curves especially down low do not add up. Since it shows MPH instead of RPM I have to guess at the RPM for the various speeds. Guessing 3000rpm at the beginning of the run shows a 10+hp advantage. 10hp at 3000rpm is 17.5tq and yet the graph shows nearly identical torque
Your peak power is up by 15rwhp but the power inprovement from there up is between 20 and 25rwhp to redline. If this is accurate the car will be and feel substantially faster.
I read an article indicating that the designer of the Magnaflow X pipe patterned it after a Dart racing cylinder head design. The piece looks kind of chunky by itself, but once you see a nice shot of it from under the car you will see how well it actually integrates with the whole system - I was shocked by how good it looked.
Thanks again for making this a reality for me. I am still trying to figure out the vacuum line mystery - tried using an unlit "butane" match around the intake and spraying contact cleaner
on the fitting too but did not notice any big change in the motor's RPM. When I find where the hose goes and feel that it made the car more powerful I will get another dyno run made and then post it.
12-16-05, 08:58 AM
#105
Originally Posted by SC & RX
OK, I have scanned the dyno sheet. The Runfile_005 numbers were on my 19,000 mile engine that was otherwise stock except for a modified OEM airbox that I opened up the front. The Runfile_006 numbers are after the PI TC, EGR delete, JB headers and exhaust system were added and the S-AFC tuned on the dyno.
The system would only allow me to attach 1 file to this message so I will attach the images of the exhaust system in my next email.
The system would only allow me to attach 1 file to this message so I will attach the images of the exhaust system in my next email.
SC & RX,
It is hard to see anythng on the chart.
If you e-mail me your dyno files I can post them with RPM and HP readings and easier to read chart..
www.gillti2@hotmail.com
They did a reallly nice job on your exhaust. It looks bigger than 2.25". I'm surprised that HP &TQ #'s were not higher. Do you know if it was dynoed in 3rd or 4th gear?
Last edited by GILLEXUS; 12-16-05 at 09:04 AM.