They are of a different material, and the amg solenoids have greater clamping force. 1st-2nd gen Srt8 crowd calls them blue tops. They help the Nag1 handle ~500-600whp. It's built Nag1 after that.

With that trap, I'd have to think you're probably close to even what the OEM 722 can handle?

 

That would explain some of the difference. I actually had my previous 722.6 built by a NAG1 trans builder a very long time ago and it held more power than I'm making now.

If 500-600whp is the limit I'd tend to agree with you. I'm probably somewhere around the top of that range with 93 octane and 15 degrees max timing. Nobody really knows for sure. Everything has a limit. I like to find that limit. Sure some people will say how many X have you blown? That's part of the process (I've blown 2 M113's; not M113K; but have gone faster on those than anybody else). Like you said, people think they can only handle 500-600whp and I'm already close to passing that (presumably based on weight and trap speed. I don't put stock in dynos. People claim 600+whp and go run 11s). How much can a stock M113k hold? My motor still has stock head bolts, cams, heads, etc etc. Maybe I will load the race gas map Jerry made for my built motor setup in the spring and see if she holds. Or just slowly ease the timing up. More info for the community. Sometimes I wish I didn't sell my E55 so I could be the first to put that body in the 9s. Lots of people selling parts but it's rare to see those people back the claims up

 

If it goes like an OEM/VB Nag1 does, you'll start to slip the 2-3 gear change. Next limit will be in the 800whp/tq neighborhood. It'll just flat out refuse to shift reliably above that.

Which is why I laugh when I see some vendors here say they'll deliver a 722 equipped car with 1000 whp/tq. It'll never happen with that trans.

Anycase, keep pushing, someone has to do it, and you have the track record to back up what you find. Well done.

 

It is simple as to why it is not slipping the transmission which it will eventually. But the main thing is he and other mercedes guys do not turn off tq reduction for the shifts. And the transmission can handle 1000hp/tq if set up and tuned properly. We ran mid 9's with SRT8 jeep this year with a stock clutch count transmission. Just a valve body and tuning.
We eventually broke the input shaft and twisted the output shaft pretty badly. This is a heavy pig at around what 4700lbs or more.

 

Congrats. Very impressive. It appears Weistec blower would account for the majority of additional power?

 

Running 1000 wtq a few times before twisting shafts and trashing the trans is not something I'd classify as reliable, which is what I said.

Paramount, who builds nag1's as a large portion of their business, runs a Rossler th400 in their own 8-9 second stripped Jeep. What's that tell you?

 

More than a few times. It probably had somewhere around 100 passes on it down the strip. Probably around 20 at around 10-10.2s and then the rest below 10 in the 9s. My point is that that is in a heavy vehicle with 4 wheel drive and a lot of torque leaving hard with 1.3-1.4 60ft times.
You take that same transmission and leave just as hard or harder in 1000lbs less and it would last forever. And the jeep is probably a bit heavier than I stated since it has a cage and a complete TT setup.
And not all transmission builders/customers setups are the same. What we are doing is very specific to go fast on this transmission. We will have a trans brake next year and a stronger input shaft and set limits on output torque to keep the output shaft from twisting, hopefully if the design comes through as I hope and we will take it to the next step.

 

Also, Blackbenzz way tp keep at it with the clk. Glad you keep playing with it. I just do not have time to finish up my stuff anymore. My car has been sitting for 3 years.

 

Awesome job Ahmad, way to keep pushing the envelope. The way you have that motor running, I don't think it would be hard for you to have a SPRAY-LESS E55 running a 9.XX. I would think pass after pass becomes a bit of Russian Roulette, sooner or later game over.







When you say TQ reduction on shifts, is it safe to say that's the same as torque limits? I have a Eurocharged TCU and I was told it had torque limits removed entirely. It did seem to make a big difference with the same ECU tune allowing the car to put the power down much better. Seeing so many MBs have shift issues with higher power as you mentioned I just assumed the TCU software controlling the Mopar NAG1 was just different and easier to alter.



By the way, take it easy with the heavy pig talk. My car is probably close to 4700 lbs. and sensitive. Hahaha.

 

No torque limits and torque reduction for shifts are different. There are a lot of things available to tune. There is max engine torque, Max input torque, which is converter multiplied, then there are max output torque per gear for the driveline, then there is torque reduciton for each shift. This is not a limit so much as a reduction % based on input. But there are adaptations for this as well so it changes on the requirements a bit.
If you do not have tq reduction on shifts then it is going to wear out the transmission much faster. They are designed to slip. And if you do not reduce power then it will slip more.
There is a lot more but bottom line is that removing torque reduction is a bad idea. Tuning it for the transmission and shifts etc is fine if you know what you are doing. But it is not cookie cutter.

 

Good job BB

 

I understand your concepts somewhat. It just seems that the same limits that are there to prevent damage on the shifts with slippage also prevent the firm delivery of power or torque causing limp mode. As you mentioned not cookie cutter, and not something we have seen to be successful for higher powered MBs. Are the TCUs that different for the Mopars? How have they been able to make it work? I would think some of it could carry over.

 

You ran a 1000wtq Jeep down the 1/4 mile 100x's with just a VB?
I'm hoping you can push the Nag1 further than anyone has yet, but considering the past and who has tried to do the same in the SRT community until this day ...

Even with the recent advances in TCM tuning and the likes of AJ B. doing the tuning and directing the build, the nag1 has its physical limits above 800wtq.

 

Yes. And a lot of tuning. I know AJ. He is doing good work but so are we. People have different theories on how to make cars fast.
To me the big hurdle is not the transmission but the customer. The idea that a 5000lb vehicle should be cutting 1.3 60' times or less and still be a daily driver is silly. Oh and they insist on it feeling like it is banging a gear like a shift kit from the 60s muscle cars but not to harsh and only on upshifts and I want to launch in 2nd gear and run 3.06 gears.

 

I'm not sure what to make of the above statement. Why can't you make a streetable 1000whp engine cut a 1.3 in a 5k lb Jeep if that is what the customer wants? The idea here is to not numb the performance potential to meet the ability of the trans, is it?


I certainly won't say there is no way it can be done, but from the conversations I have had with these guys personally, it's not just a tuning issue, it's a physical limitation issue.
I wish you nothing but success, I'll be watching.

 

My point is that people do not want to do what is necessary.
Force is only exhibited if there is something to push against. The heavier a vehicle is the more force it takes to move it. The lower the final gear ratios the more force that is exhibited on the driveline and thus the input of the transmission. These things add up in big numbers.
The number one thing people think makes their car go faster is no torque reduction on shifts. And this is simply not true. It just breaks parts. People also want it to be easy and cheap.
That is why I tell people all the time. If I have the car in front of me this is what I can do. I never say anything will handle 1000 hp/tq. Because I have seen people break things over and over at half those numbers. And I have seen enough proof that it can handle more.

 

4500lb LX cars generally don't twist input/output shafts like the Jeep guys. That wasn't the physical limitation of trans I was talking about.

You on any of the LX forums with testing I can look at?

 

I am not personally. All this stuff is through my partner at Ding's Racing. He is on the forums a bit. I do not know which ones exactly.
And we do not normally break shafts in the lx platform. So if your questions was running reliably within the limits of breaking the shafts then we are there and then some. We have run no tq management shifts on a stock transmission in a lx at 10 flat for several years and we are lifting to keep it under 135mph. The cage is not cert for any faster. I think he was lifting before but now we just shut the nitrous off at around the 1000' mark. I do not remember exactly.
It spins a large drag slick going into 4th it shifts so hard.
But the jeep was the real winner. Breaking the shafts before the clutches failed. A couple of minor upgrades in the clutch count and we are going to a stronger input shaft and then see when the output shaft snaps instead of just twists. Problem is I have to cut the apart to get the transmission apart. But a season on one would be more than enough for me.

 

My question of running reliably was one of calling for a shift, at say 6400, and not have it blow thru the shift and run into overspeed\throw limp, which is a big issue in the power range Im talking about, on PD/Turbo builds, but I'm sure you know that. I would also define reliable as trans that can handle the power and last ~20k-40k miles without requiring a rebuild because of toasted clutch packs. All things that a built NAG1 will handle ~800wtq today. That's what most here and in the LX crowd would probably define as a reliable trans that can handle 1000wtq. The racing crowd would more define reliable as shifting when it's programed to shift, not calling for a shift 400-500 rpms sooner in hopes it shifts when you want.


And yes, I'm aware of what it takes for a full weight LX to run 10@135, as I still own one. It doesn't take 800whp/tq to do that. I run 10's@132 with a little Maggie on a built 393@14 psi, which is maybe 700whp/700wtq. Maybe.

You plan is to add clutches to the NAG1? 7/7 8/8?


ANd FTR, I now know who you are. I'm aware you know you stuff, and I respect what you are saying here, just not 100% convinced you can get a NAG1 to handle that type of power. Hopefully, you prove a whole lotta people wrong.

And to be clear, what can you offer via tcm tuning that HPT doesn't currently offer, besides standalone ability?

 

 

Like I said I see no problems at this point with a well setup transmission and our valve body and tuning to handle whatever the hard parts can handle. Engine and transmission tuning together I must clarify. As far as clutches being added I have been doing that for years but I wanted to see what we could do with out that. The Jeep running 9.6s at 145mph did it on the same stock transmission. I plan on upgrading a couple of clutch packs based on the wear in this one. So I have no issues making one handle it in a lighter vehicle. You could probably agree on how much power it takes to run those times in a Jeep. And like I said we are shutting the charger down to keep it below 135mph.

As far as commanding shifts. It is simply there is absolutely no transmission on this earth that commands a shift and it happens at that RPM. There is always a delay. No that delay is a and can be a known factor. So that you command the shift and it happens at the same point every time. At high power levels the reason you have to command the shift quite a bit ahead of the game is that you are accelerating at such a high rate. So time over RPM change is short. For example the shift from 1-2 may have a .2s fill time on the clutch. There is a .1s pre stage. Then there is the shift. So We must command the shift .3s at least before the peak rpm. That time is fairly static. The RPM change in that time is not. That depends on power levels.
The problem in high power cars is time in 1st gear is so short. You put a high stall converter in and it is even shorter. Through some 4.11 gears in and now at 1000whp you have less than the shift time to complete the shift. It will not work. This is a setup problem. Not the transmissions fault. This would be like gearing a t400 with something like a 6.2:1 final gear ratio.
The same goes for any transmission. Now put the nag1 in 2nd gear which is the same as 1st in a t400 and you have time. It will shift reliably. Or do not put gears in the rear end for a 3 speed transmission with the gear split of this one in 2-4. And use 1-4 or 1-5 if you have the power.

As far as tuning capabilities we are just using HPT and of course I use the standalone in cars. But not the factory cars so much anymore. With HPT out it does the job for us. It is not anywhere near complete but we get a satisfactory setup.
And I should add that with a standalone and the proper setup I can reduce fill times a lot. Also that response and fill time are greatly affected by torque reduction.
For example a DCT transmission car. Which everyone holds up as the pinnacle of speed. They rev match. So on an upshift they target the rpm for the next gear. By shutting the engine off. You can do the same thing with an automatic and I do. My car for example runs a flat shift with nag1 and my shifts are commanded and completed in .2s. It is as fast as the engine can drop rpms. The car still jerks forward a little even though the spark plugs are off. And this is due to mass inertia of the engine.

 

Skinnys and 24lb hoosier rears instead of what are those et street radials that weigh 32lbs? Spray methanol......gl

 

It will be hard to cut better 60foots if those are et street street radials.....hoosier for sub 1.5 60ft

 

I've run 9.6 before. This was the first time out on conservative tune on new setup. Thanks though

 

hmm.....long time, how ya been? Sooo......I have an 05 stock E55 shipping on truck from FL to me this week (just bought it).........PM me and let's figure out what should be done to this little side project of mine :-)

I sold the E63S in August and am really really bored with this suv i've been driving