Need help with trany types for DOHC 3.4

[Smittro]

Sorry if this is the wrong section.. I have a 92z34, and I know that the getrag 284 5spd will work but I cant find one. I also know the 4t60e will work got an old one but I dont think it will hold @ least not long.

My questions: Are there any other trans that I can use that will hold a twin boosted 3.4 TDC? If so can someone tell me what they are. I would prefer a manual trans. But I'm not limited to the manual. The last thing I want to do is have to pull my new TT 3.4 (when finished) back out because the trans cant hold its new power.

Question 2: can I use the 282 manual, and if so can it be built to hold say 400ish fwhp?


Thanks in advance.

[robertisaar]

any trans that was attached to a 60*V6 or even 90*V6 will match the bellhousing, its the mounting to the frame thats a pain. to do it the easy way, you'll need to get a trans from a W(since it matches), but if not, you'll need to make your own mounts.

the 284 is the strongest FWD manual tranny that GM has made, after that is either the 282 or F40, i'm not sure about that. for automatics, the super3.8 cars until like 1996 had a HD version of the 4t60e. if you don't want to or can't run a e tranny, the TGP and allantes came with a 4t60HD.

a good investment with this kind of power would be a LSD, that way you don't pegleg the tranny and destroy it. the other(and main) benefit is that you'll pick up a lot of forward traction as well and should remove a lot of torque steer.

the easiest option(and probably cheapest and most likely to happen) is to get a 282, a good clutch, LSD and run tires that aren't very sticky that way the tires don't hop on a hard launch.

[Smittro]

any trans that was attached to a 60*V6 or even 90*V6 will match the bellhousing, its the mounting to the frame thats a pain. to do it the easy way, you'll need to get a trans from a W(since it matches), but if not, you'll need to make your own mounts.

the 284 is the strongest FWD manual tranny that GM has made, after that is either the 282 or F40, i'm not sure about that. for automatics, the super3.8 cars until like 1996 had a HD version of the 4t60e. if you don't want to or can't run a e tranny, the TGP and allantes came with a 4t60HD.

a good investment with this kind of power would be a LSD, that way you don't pegleg the tranny and destroy it. the other(and main) benefit is that you'll pick up a lot of forward traction as well and should remove a lot of torque steer.

the easiest option(and probably cheapest and most likely to happen) is to get a 282, a good clutch, LSD and run tires that aren't very sticky that way the tires don't hop on a hard launch.

Thank you! I've been trying to hunt up a 284, but with little or no luck. I think I'll look into the 4t60eHD, or maybe beefing up the 282 getrag 5spd.
Thanks for all your help and taking the time to respond I appreciate it..

[robertisaar]

question: how are you accounting for fuel and spark?

[Smittro]

question: how are you accounting for fuel and spark?

Yes, I am with a total engine management system. That's what the stand alone (not a piggy back) is for. 43.5-45 injectors and high volume fuel pump. Plus an sx performance reg. The stand alone I'm using (Megasquirt II) is for emissions free applications of which I am exempt from. If I need anything else I'll just buy it.
My budget is flexable, any suggestions are welcome.


Onboard MAP sensor for NA or boosted engines up to 21psi.
Speed density or Alpha-N.
Use any injector - High or Low impedance.
Compatible with output from narrowband and wideband O2 sensors.
Log data on your laptop for later analysis.
Tuning software is free for download and regularly updated with new features.
Open Source design - all code and hardware information is available online.
Includes proper female DB37 connector and shell for your wiring harness.

Additional Features new to the MegaSquirt-II
•24 MHz HCS12 processor,
•Fuel control to 1 µsec (100 times more resolution than MegaSquirt-I),
•Ignition control (full spark timing advance control, dwell control, etc) for one coil/distributor (7 pin HEI for example) and Ford's EDIS systems,
•On-board stepper motor driver for IAC stepper control (this requires a few jumpers, included in this kit, to be added on the MegaSquirt PCB to connect the socket jumpers to the DB37 connector),
•Ford PWM idle valve firmware support,
•Built-in rev limiter, either 'fuel cut' or 'spark retard',
•All tables are now 12×12 in size,
•WBO2 AFR target table (in AFR units),
•Independent dual-tables for VE and AFR target,
•EGO feedback in wide-band mode is proportional to the difference between the measured AFR and the target AFR, the bigger the difference, the bigger the feedback step,
•Spark advance table can have different rpm and kpa bins than VE and AFR tables,
•115,200 baud serial interface with MegaTune2.25+,
•CANbus networking
•Barometric correction amount and direction configurable in software, and provisions for:
◦barometric correction based on initial MAP reading,
◦independent 2nd barometric MAP sensor for continuous real-time baro correction, or
◦no baro correction.
•TPS values for open loop and flood clear mode are user configurable,
•MAP based open loop can be set as well as TPS,
•Both TPS and MAP based accel enrichment is built into the code, you can configure the ratio of each,
•Blended Alpha-N and speed density is an option,
•2 spare I/O lines for custom controls. (This is in addition to 4 lines for Idle stepper control if you don't need this, or the Fast idle solenoid then becomes a spare if you do use a stepper motor.)

[HayesPerformance]

I can find you a 284 if you want one.

Where are you located?

And what can you afford?

[robertisaar]

i don't like the MS for a few reasons, 1 being no knock sensing, 2 being that the fuel and spark tables are a lot smaller than most GM ECMs...

[Smittro]

i don't like the MS for a few reasons, 1 being no knock sensing, 2 being that the fuel and spark tables are a lot smaller than most GM ECMs...

The mega II can be set up for knock sensor. Their tech suport is great as well. You may be thinking of the Mega I. The mega II is more advanced than the mega I and far more usefull than obdI ECMs.

http://www.megamanual.com/ms2/Ignition.htm

[Smittro]

I can find you a 284 if you want one.

Where are you located?

And what can you afford?

I'm in the US. I'd rather not deal with customs or private sellers thanks anyway.

[robertisaar]

"Note: the knock sensing feedback system has been tested on the bench, but not in a vehicle. Do not use this system except for experimental purposes. Test your setting on the bench first."

you're serious? you're going to try and run a TT LQ1 on an unproven system that only has 12X12 Fuel and Spark Tables? say goodbye to whatever work you put into it, because you're either going to kill the motor, or never see the full benefit of it.

here are some examples from VERY well documented GM ECUs

[Smittro]

"Note: the knock sensing feedback system has been tested on the bench, but not in a vehicle. Do not use this system except for experimental purposes. Test your setting on the bench first."

you're serious? you're going to try and run a TT LQ1 on an unproven system that only has 12X12 Fuel and Spark Tables? say goodbye to whatever work you put into it, because you're either going to kill the motor, or never see the full benefit of it.

here are some examples from VERY well documented GM ECUs

Really? Then how are stand alones used on engines not equiped with a knock sensors? Also this is'nt a drag car I'm building. My goal is in the lower boost ranges. I'm only looking @ a target FWHP of 325-375.. The megaII is fully expandable aswell I can purchase a seperate board for operating a knock sensor if need be and hard wire that to the megaII then create a seperate set of perameters to control knock.. Quite frankly I'm breaking new ground with a TDCTT so the whole thing is an experimental project.. When the cards are down it will go or it will blow. I can always start over with another motor cant make an omlet without busting a few eggs so to speak. I'm not trying to be a d*&k but I'm not a youngster with a limited cash flow..The main idea here is to come up with a basic system that works and can be expanded later for use with other types of TDC apps. I've taken known implimentations (tried and true) off the table, your taking about things that have already been done. Though I respect where you're comming from. However i'm comming @ it from a totaly different view point.

[robertisaar]

they have to rely on plug cuts alone and hope that their tuning is good enough from one day to the next to either not lose efficiency or for the motor to start knocking when they aren't checking it.

and 325WHP is around 360-370Crank with a manual. with an auto it would be around 380-390.

and especially with boost, you are always going to need to make sure that knock is not happening, because if it starts happening under boost, it can take less than a second to lose a piston.

[robertisaar]

TTTDC isn't brand new, it has been done before, though i'm not sure who at the moment. but you can be assured they were using a GM ECM....

think of it this way: GM spent millions developing ECMs, certain ones much more advanced/elaborate than others. certain codemasks have been COMPLETELY disassembled/commented/hacked, meaning anything the engineers at GM were able to adjust, we can do it too. then you have the masterminds that know how to patch them, adding support for Wide-Band O2s, 27X15 fuel tables, nitrous activation, wastegate control, etc...

what i'm saying is: GM gave us a great starting point, expecting that we wouldn't have the capability or interest to modify it to our pleasure. but we can. we do. we will continue to do it until we feel the need to move onto something bigger and better. i don't see a reason to "downgrade" to a completely different ECU and give up the ability to do so much more...

[Smittro]

I've researched a TDCTT for roughly four years and have never once come across one. Maybe they are out there. I've never seen or heard of more than a single turbine used.

[Smittro]

Turbos and superchargers have been around for a very very long time. WWII aircraft were using them before there was even a such think as a "knock sensor". How was this done when higher rpms were a constant and a nessesity to maintain safe flight? It's still an internal combustion engine, and is built in pretty much the same way they were then. Even fuel injection has been around since the 1930s in volkswagons. I'm not sure you're getting where I'm comming from. Throw all we know aside for one second, and look @ it like this.
Bare motor, no electronics, nothing to make it run, design a system to achieve a goal. Once and or if the goal is achieved you now have a basis for new ideas. Not just in tunning, but in other areas of internal combustion as well.