[Supras] R154 short first gear

[Walker, Brian (Rich. Dist)]

Just you wait Geoff, one day I'm gonna set some class records with this
3600lb. sucker :)
(Notice the reason I'm avoiding moving to the highly modded classes?)



-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Mohler [mailto:speedtoys.racing at gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2007 7:13 PM
To: berniek at technicaldevelop.com
Cc: Jim Jobe; Supras at supras.com; Walker, Brian (Rich. Dist)
Subject: Re: [Supras] R154 short first gear

Im gonna get labeled here..but here I go.


"Youre still not near a true performance car".

There..I said it.

But..as much as I love my supras, I mean it.



On Dec 29, 2007 6:10 PM, berniek at technicaldevelop.com
<berniek at technicaldevelop.com> wrote:
> Jim:
>
>
> I have a lot to re-learn regarding driving after being away from a 
> true performace car for so many years.  The '90 was essentially stock 
> so it did not count.
>
>
> Bernie
>
>
> Jim Jobe wrote:
> > Actually I'm running a rather large T4.  It won't spool enough in 
> > first to break the tires without some serious tweaking of the 
> > throttle or launching with anti-lag.  A lot of it is muscle memory 
> > for me too, as datalogs of spirited jaunts around town show first 
> > gear throttle position rarely gets above 60%.  I also have three 
> > settings for boost being the wastegate only (set for .9 bar), 
> > 17.5psi for pump gas, and vehicle speed based for race fuel and good

> > tires that starts around 20psi and ramps up between 30 and 50mph.  
> > Second gear will destroy my old street tires at anything over 12psi 
> > in the cold now so I'm pedeling and short shifting to third with
just the wastegate spring.  Obviously it's not my daily driver.
> >
> > Anyways, I have put a few clipped and non-clipped 57 and 60 trims on

> > various Supras over the years and while they did get a bit squirrely

> > they were usually simple enough to control.  The non-clipped 57-trim

> > is my best choice for the
> > ct26 as the exhaust wheel really can't handle anything more, plus as

> > you've noted the spoolup is pretty good.  However, I really do not 
> > like anything with "CT-XX" cast in to it.  The design is extremely 
> > old and the exhaust side will choke off pretty much anything put on
the other end of the shaft.
> > It will produce some nice spikes on an Ego-JET chart though.
> >
> > The later ECU does have the logic to maintain a constant idle speed 
> > if load induced by the accessories increases or decreases.
> > Just because the components aren't on the PCB doesn't mean that 
> > logic wasn't integrated in to the main IC.  I also recall mine (92T)

> > with the stock ECU would spike to 6500 as the rev limiter cut
ignition.
> > It's been camping out on the work bench for a few years now though.
> >
> > My reason for suggesting suspension is that if you can get the car 
> > to squat more you will increase rear traction.  Since these cars 
> > don't make a lot of low end torque you cannot rely on the old muscle

> > car ways of a stiff rear suspension with torque pulling the front 
> > end up to transfer weight.
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 29, 2007 at 04:30:56AM -0500,
berniek at technicaldevelop.com wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Jim:
> >>
> >>
> >>    Thanks for writing back.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>