TCS torque converters
Feb 11, 2009 | 10:40 PM
#21
superior kit does not come with .500 boost valve and alot of other things. Billet servos suck???? You are just too cheap to buy them. Billet servos are a MOST in high HP applications. And what the hell did I do to you for you to attack me? I don't even know you. If you have a problem with me, then you can PM me. But like I said, I DON'T KNOW YOU and have never said anything to you. So you have no reason to call me out.
Last edited by sprayed99; Feb 11, 2009 at 11:20 PM.
Feb 11, 2009 | 10:42 PM
#22
Look I am not saying PI are bad they have a great rep. I dont have any info on Circle D and yank well IMO if your NA and stock best you can get for the money IMO but for high Hp apps.. between PI,Yank,TCS for the money TCS wins hands down..I got one hell of a deal on my TCS and have yet to hear a complaint from any TCS owner about them..and have personally seen the results.
I read your long post as what it was...a sales pitch to keep hiim from buying a TCS converter..
As far as danny goes he knows his ****...Him and his dads tranny's have been tested and ran thru the ringers and have held up to extreme abuse..They do not skimp on parts.
Feb 11, 2009 | 10:54 PM
#25
OK what part of slow 60 ft. times and only be good in grandama's car did i misunderstand?
Look I am not saying PI are bad they have a great rep. I dont have any info on Circle D and yank well IMO if your NA and stock best you can get for the money IMO but for high Hp apps.. between PI,Yank,TCS for the money TCS wins hands down..I got one hell of a deal on my TCS and have yet to hear a complaint from any TCS owner about them..and have personally seen the results.
I read your long post as what it was...a sales pitch to keep hiim from buying a TCS converter..
As far as danny goes he knows his ****...Him and his dads tranny's have been tested and ran thru the ringers and have held up to extreme abuse..They do not skimp on parts.
Look I am not saying PI are bad they have a great rep. I dont have any info on Circle D and yank well IMO if your NA and stock best you can get for the money IMO but for high Hp apps.. between PI,Yank,TCS for the money TCS wins hands down..I got one hell of a deal on my TCS and have yet to hear a complaint from any TCS owner about them..and have personally seen the results.
I read your long post as what it was...a sales pitch to keep hiim from buying a TCS converter..
As far as danny goes he knows his ****...Him and his dads tranny's have been tested and ran thru the ringers and have held up to extreme abuse..They do not skimp on parts.
Feb 11, 2009 | 10:56 PM
#26
Straight from P.I. website-
The Truth About The 9-12 and 9-11 Spaceship Type Converters
All late model transmissions regardless of make have a clutch in the torque converter. Precision Industries was the first performance torque converter company to design and successfully manufacture a small diameter clutch assembly that would survive the abuses of high performance late model vehicles. We had to manufacture a special front cover, clutch plate and develop a clutch lining that would handle pulse width modulation. This is the reason we use a special billet front cover not just for the good looks! Our competitors in the performance industry do not have the technical ability or the capability and are just too cheap to follow our lead. They are using all stock front cover and clutch parts designed and built for 4 and 6 cylinder vehicles to compete with Precision Industries. When OBDII appeared they suddenly found out that using these inferior 4 and 6 cylinder front cover and clutch parts was not going to work so they started using 15 year old technology, the so called 9-12 or 9-11 spaceship type of torque converter. What these torque converters consist of are parts from 1- $10.00 and 1- $35.00 wrecking yard torque converter core along with a steel ring to mate the 2 converters together. Using these parts equates to a value for this type of torque converter to no more than $300.00. While this type of torque converter seemed to solve the torque converter clutch problem it instantly created more serious problems. One advantage to using a small diameter torque converter is that it has a lot less rotating mass than the stock 12” torque converter and with the thick steel plate to mount the 2 stock torque converter halves together to make the 9-12 you end up with more rotating mass than the stock 12” torque converter. A more critical problem with the 9-12 spaceship type torque converter is the turbine wash over of this design. The turbine wash over is so strong that the large diameter torque converter clutch is pushed up against the front cover and drags during stall and acceleration. This action kills acceleration and causes undue stress to the torque converter clutch. What this means is this style of torque converter will never accelerate as well as the small diameter torque converter meaning slower 60 ft. and ET times. This style of torque converter would probably work satisfactorily in Grandma’s car but is not something you would want for a performance torque converter. Our competitors must be laughing all the way to the bank selling this inferior product for the price they are asking!
The Truth About The 9-12 and 9-11 Spaceship Type Converters
All late model transmissions regardless of make have a clutch in the torque converter. Precision Industries was the first performance torque converter company to design and successfully manufacture a small diameter clutch assembly that would survive the abuses of high performance late model vehicles. We had to manufacture a special front cover, clutch plate and develop a clutch lining that would handle pulse width modulation. This is the reason we use a special billet front cover not just for the good looks! Our competitors in the performance industry do not have the technical ability or the capability and are just too cheap to follow our lead. They are using all stock front cover and clutch parts designed and built for 4 and 6 cylinder vehicles to compete with Precision Industries. When OBDII appeared they suddenly found out that using these inferior 4 and 6 cylinder front cover and clutch parts was not going to work so they started using 15 year old technology, the so called 9-12 or 9-11 spaceship type of torque converter. What these torque converters consist of are parts from 1- $10.00 and 1- $35.00 wrecking yard torque converter core along with a steel ring to mate the 2 converters together. Using these parts equates to a value for this type of torque converter to no more than $300.00. While this type of torque converter seemed to solve the torque converter clutch problem it instantly created more serious problems. One advantage to using a small diameter torque converter is that it has a lot less rotating mass than the stock 12” torque converter and with the thick steel plate to mount the 2 stock torque converter halves together to make the 9-12 you end up with more rotating mass than the stock 12” torque converter. A more critical problem with the 9-12 spaceship type torque converter is the turbine wash over of this design. The turbine wash over is so strong that the large diameter torque converter clutch is pushed up against the front cover and drags during stall and acceleration. This action kills acceleration and causes undue stress to the torque converter clutch. What this means is this style of torque converter will never accelerate as well as the small diameter torque converter meaning slower 60 ft. and ET times. This style of torque converter would probably work satisfactorily in Grandma’s car but is not something you would want for a performance torque converter. Our competitors must be laughing all the way to the bank selling this inferior product for the price they are asking!
Feb 11, 2009 | 10:58 PM
#28
Feb 12, 2009 | 06:59 AM
#30
LOL..ofcourse it must be fact if its staright from PI's site...If i was selling a product ofcourse i would post BS to try and make mine look surperior and just because its on their site does not make it fact...If TCS had the same statements as that paragraph but sub'd in PI for TCS would that all of a sudden make it fact?