turbo + wide tranny
my sister tells me if you're going the turbo route a wide tranny is better (like an ls). cause everytime you shift the turbos gotta spool up again. is that true? or is it still better to be able to keep it in the red?
Honestly the theory behind this is a bit suspect. There are plenty of turbocharged cars out there with close-ratio gearboxes. You will still be quicker with a close-ratio gearbox with a short final drive. The main benefit of an LS box is that since a turbocharged VTEC motor generally widens its powerband compared to a normally aspirated one, a taller overall gearbox can be used to make cruising more relaxed.
If you already have a GSR transmission, stick with the GSR transmission.
If you already have a GSR transmission, stick with the GSR transmission.
Originally Posted by MrFatbooty
Honestly the theory behind this is a bit suspect. There are plenty of turbocharged cars out there with close-ratio gearboxes. You will still be quicker with a close-ratio gearbox with a short final drive. The main benefit of an LS box is that since a turbocharged VTEC motor generally widens its powerband compared to a normally aspirated one, a taller overall gearbox can be used to make cruising more relaxed.
If you already have a GSR transmission, stick with the GSR transmission.
If you already have a GSR transmission, stick with the GSR transmission.
if you significantly increase your power, you end up rowing the gears more than necessary to take full advantage of a power increase. the less you have to shift, the faster you are.
of course too tall is bad, but matching the gears properly to your engine's output is key to increasing efficiency. no use having short ratio gears if you're burning tyres and clutch in first, only to have to shift to 2nd mid burnout... or to feather the gas in 1st and not being able to really open it up for a better launch
I have ran both trannies on my old b18a1 and i have to stay i loved the gsr tranny. The shorter gearing was great off the line, compared to the sluggish ls tranny. Since you have a gsr i would stick with the ls tranny....really i wouldnt ever use an ls tranny on a turbo honda unless you wanted to be some highway loser.
The car I'm currently working with has over 400 HP, and the LS gears are too short for traction. If we could go with taller ratios, we would, just to use all the power available. With shorter gearing, you do get moving quicker, until boost comes in... So in that respect, a mild turbo setup would benefit from shorter gears, but the higher you go in power, the more smoke you'll make unless you make that torque work a bit harder with taller gears.
__________________
-Harry
AIM: NDcissive
CRX and Pre '92 Civic, Engine Tech and Tuning, & Track and Autocross Forum Mod
-Harry
AIM: NDcissive
CRX and Pre '92 Civic, Engine Tech and Tuning, & Track and Autocross Forum Mod
Originally Posted by 1stGenCRXer
The car I'm currently working with has over 400 HP, and the LS gears are too short for traction. If we could go with taller ratios, we would, just to use all the power available. With shorter gearing, you do get moving quicker, until boost comes in... So in that respect, a mild turbo setup would benefit from shorter gears, but the higher you go in power, the more smoke you'll make unless you make that torque work a bit harder with taller gears.
I've had both setups on my boosted LS. In the beginning when I was low boost small power the VTEC tranny was killer for the short stop light race. The traction will always be an issue in 1st gear on a boosted FWD vehical just b/c of the sheer torque, 2nd and 3rd should be your real forward movement gears in a street race.(with in sane/legal speeds). VTEC trannies are well suited to this, the gears are close and and based on performance. The downside however is that with the low LS redline a VTEC tranny an an LS will top out in 5th at about 110~115 depending on tire size and tranny. Also the highway cruise RPM of a VTEC tranny is quite a bit higher in the RPMs than an LS...say goodbye to gas milage and hello the headaches.
When I finally toasted the stock clutch, it gave me an excuse to drop a new heavy duty clutch with an LS tranny. I can honestly say that I wouldn't have a VTEC tranny again if you paid me. The longer gearing helps with wheelspin(not by much on my setup tho), and not having to use 5th in a 1/4 mile run is nice. I've also increased the LS redline to 8000, so theoretically my car would top 5th out around 160~ish. Guess i'm a highway loser, right?
However to the orignial poster this is all based off my LS engine. VTEC engines rev higher from the factory and are geared in way that makes the best use of the power band of that engine...Much as Drift said. I wouldn't swap a VTEC tranny off a VTEC engine in favor or an LS unless I had some SERIOUS hp. I'm talking enough power that you're nearly topping the transmission out in the 1/4 mile, only then would swapping to an LS be a viable option.
Originally Posted by Speed Phreak
I wonder whose car that could be....
It should be noted that the one time Steven's had his car at a full 1/4 mile track, he trapped at 120ish.
__________________
-Harry
AIM: NDcissive
CRX and Pre '92 Civic, Engine Tech and Tuning, & Track and Autocross Forum Mod
-Harry
AIM: NDcissive
CRX and Pre '92 Civic, Engine Tech and Tuning, & Track and Autocross Forum Mod


