When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
GM rates thier current lineup of hydramatics for both engine torque and gearbox torque, with gearbox torque being MUCH higher than engine torque specs.
For example:
4L70:
400 ft/lbs ET
670 ft/lbs GT
4L85:
460 ft/lbs ET
885 ft/lbs GT
6L80
439 ft/lbs ET
664 ft/lbs GT
Sometimes GM puts engines in front of transmissions that exceed the max engine torque #'s but are still well under the max gearbox torque numbers. The 4T65 is a good example imo. Rated at 280 ET / 400 GT, the engine is both in front of the 280 ft/lbs 3.8L s/c engine and the 5.3L LS4 wich puts out 315 ft/lbs torque IIRC.
My guess would be engine torque is the max the transmission is typically used with while the gearbox torque is the max the transmission can physically handle? Or am I completely missing the point? If I'm right, that 4L70 would be lovely for the C3
i really have no idea, but those GT numbers look they are in the range of torque multiplication of a torque converter. maybe the GT values are multiplied by the TC and then reduced by gear losses . . . ??? . . . just guessing
So theoretically, could you run a higher torque engine than specced with a low multiplication converter and still be in the 'safe zone' as long as you stayed under max GT? How would you determine the mutiplication of a TC (higher stall speeds = higher multipliers)?
I wont be doing this, but this is pretty interesting since I was under the impression that TC's didnt increase torque THAT much. I have a LOT to learn about transmissions
Manufacturer should tell you what the multiplication ratio is since it depends on the turbine and stator that they use. This multiplication is why it's called a torque converter instead of a fluid clutch. Early automatics, like the Dynaflow, used a fluid clutch and a four-speed automatic. The 1st gear was extra low since the coupling didn't multiply torque.
but - don't always believe everything the mfg tell's you on torque multiplication!
see this: http://www.converter.com/torqueratio.htm
"They (compertitors) also advertise STR’s (STALL TORQUE RATIO) of 2.7, 2.9, 3.0, 3.2, etc. this is pure BS."
"The formula for STR is EXACT OUTPUT TORQUE ÷ EXACT INPUT TORQUE = STR. This requires a known power source and a data recovery system."
"...the stock torque converter you took out of your car has a STR of 1.9-1.94"