Learn Me: Fun Autos - Possible or Blasphemous?

Knurled wrote: With great displacement comes horrible engine feel. YMMV of course.

I dunno about that. Done right, the big motors can have a bit of a split personality. By that, I mean that they like to rev, but still make enough torque down low that they don't really need to rev. So the trans lugging it around feels perfectly fine when you're just cruising, but the motor wakes right up when you pin the throttle and the trans drops a few gears.

If a big displacement motor feels lazy, it's probably under-cammed and has crap flowing heads so it's out of steam by 4000 rpm.

In reply to rslifkin:

That also describes my 13B. I found myself upshifting at 1500rpm in order to keep up with traffic.

It's a pity that nobody really makes an automatic that can handle 10000rpm with reliability. Not that Mazda made a manual trans that could either

Can't you hack the 4l60/65e really easily? Then program your own shifting? Harshness, speed of shift, lag time, etc?

For a while I've been considering using one in a sporty family dd with an ls and a full auto mode but also a good ole manual shift valve body mode.

Edit: and apparently you can control a 4l80e with only some household light switches.

Big strong engines work best with automatics, or I should say automatics work best with big strong engines. Especially American V8s.

I'd look for a GTO, G8 or Mustang. None of those are the greatest car ever, but they sure don't suck, are cheap to keep up and all have terrific aftermarket support. CTS-V as well, if one can be found the budget that isn't trashed.

Big bad German V8 sedans are fantastic, when they aren't emptying your wallet faster than their gas tanks . Personally I couldn't imagine owning one that's out of warranty.

I've never driven a Japanese RWD performance sedan, but Infinity and Lexus do have some stuff that looks good on paper. I think I could really like an M45.

G_Body_Man wrote: What about a Chrysler 300C SRT8? The autostick function isn't very fast, but then again, do you really care with 425 horsepower under your right foot? these are actually pretty fast they do a0-60 in 4 seconds

M030 wrote: Lexus IS300 for the win! Hands-down. All the goodness of a BMW with none of the unreliability. The automatic doesn't suck, either.

What's like the going price for a decent one that's stock with 130k miles or so?

Mitchell wrote: Also: E55 AMG

Yeah, that. I've been a light is best turbo 4 sort my whole career but E55 is simply awesome and I don't really mind this automagic. Locking tq converter really helps.

Knurled wrote:

NickD wrote: Not necessarily. Something with some big displacement doesn't need to rev.

With great displacement comes horrible engine feel. YMMV of course.

Nay, says I. The built 455 in my friend's '69 Firebird felt wonderful. Absolutely thundered at idle, didn't break a sweat cruising at 75mph and it had so much torque the TH400 rarely needed to kick down. Whenever you stood on the throttle, it just went and left you strangling the steering wheel.

The LSx V8s also feel really good. Strangely I preferred the auto 5th-gen Camaro SSs over the 6-speed SSs, which was the opposite of how I thought it'd be. The stock shifter is really notchy and clunky and GM struggles to make a clutch that doesn't work like an on/off switch, so the manual transmission option is really not that enjoyable on those. The auto cars are like a digital camera, just point and shoot.

Robbie wrote: Can't you hack the 4l60/65e really easily? Then program your own shifting? Harshness, speed of shift, lag time, etc?

Well, sort of. There's an inherent lag in the electronics that needs to be accounted for.

For example, on the 4L80 equipped truck that I tuned a year or two ago, if I wanted the WOT 1-2 shift to happen at 60mph, I had to program the computer to shift at 51mph. In the couple moments it took to shift, the thing would accelerate another 9mph. It was actually somewhat fascinating to watch the PCM call for a shift and then see the lagtime between controlling the solenoids and when the shift would actually occur.

This was a major deal to me. And it explained away the number 1 problem I have with manumatics, the lag time between moving the lever and the shift occuring. It's not the computer deciding what to do, it's the actuation in the trans itself. I'm used to manual valvebodies where you move the lever BANG you are in the next gear as soon as the shift cable moves.

That lag can be helped out with some valve body mods most likely. They often set up the accumulator fill paths to be slow from the factory for comfy shifts. Shim the accumulators smaller and drill out some of the feed holes and the shifts get firmer and much faster.

Obviously some of us like big us v8s and some don't. Also, some of us find a us live axle acceptable, some don't. Again, personal preference

Robbie wrote: Can't you hack the 4l60/65e really easily? Then program your own shifting? Harshness, speed of shift, lag time, etc? For a while I've been considering using one in a sporty family dd with an ls and a full auto mode but also a good ole manual shift valve body mode. Edit: and apparently you can control a 4l80e with only some household light switches.

Light switch control is pretty rough (line pressure is locked at max, and lockup needs PWM control), but there is megashift, and numerous $$$ standalone boxes for the 4L60E and 80E. I think this is probably well within the abilities of an Arduino if you want to go full DIY, pretty sure you just need to watch TPS and/or MAP to control the line pressure, shift up/down switch, reverse switch, shift indicator display, 6 simple power transistor drivers for the 6 solenoids(4 digital, two PWM). Software isn't very complicated, especially for full manual.

I don't think you'd need to worry about Reverse... that is something in the valve body, not electronically controlled. In a lot of transmissions, the way the trans grabs, say, 2nd gear, is different depending on if it is done with the shift lever or with electrons and the lever in D. (You can break a 4L60 by dropping it into manual low at just the wrong time)

I found a series of forum posts online where a guy started to make his own manual trans controller for the Volvo implementation of the AW55. It was as simple as you say, although he also took a speed sensor input for rationality matching (no downshift allowed if it would exceed redline). And then he realized, instead of making a controller, he could just tap in to the factory unit and get all of the sensor data from there and use its output drivers.

Unfortunately he abandoned the project and never posted schematics or code.

Good idea on watching speed (tailshaft RPM) for money shift lockout. If you wanted to get all fancy on line pressure and adjust it on RPM and load you could do it from the engine RPM instead.

Would we need to watch the PRNDL switch so it puts the shift solenoids in neutral when you go for reverse? edit: handy shift table here about 2/3 down http://www.msgpio.com/manuals/mshift/wiring.html

Trans output speed and throttle position are the most useful 2 values for determining what gear the trans should be in, I think. Manifold pressure can be a useful one too.

In reply to BrokenYugo:

If I were doing it, I'd only want it to work in D position.

GM trans controllers only look at TPS and MPH for shift scheduling, with some light modifiers for things like coolant temp (alter shift schedule for faster warmup and therefore lower emissions) and trans temp (protection).

<blockquote

penultimeta wrote:

1st gen CTS-V can only be had with a manual. The IS300 is suffering from the one-two punch of a nostalgia halo coupled with low prices. In reality they were pretty terrible "sports" cars. Slow, numb, terrible gas mileage. Certainly more reliable than a Porsche but so is a Camry. Aside from having a backseat, the FR-S/BR-Z are infinitely more engaging cars.

Have you driven an is300? I don't consider a 14 second car "slow" but ok, mileage could be better, mostly low-mid 20s. Numb imho is a super inaccurate description. My experience is that they're everything a 3series should have been. If you want a little more accuracy, do some poly bushings (or spherical rod ends like I did). If you want more power, it's a 2jz, boost it or theyre are a plethora of naturally aspirated mods like cams and headers etc., sky is the limit. I think they're quite special cars. My experience has been that they don't rust unless hit. Oh and they're berking indestructible.

I want an is300 now. A 130k miles ones are like 5-7k now. that seems like a lot of car and something that could last till 250k. They look good with roof racks? Love the look of them too, something about a simple and tasteful sedan.

I need to read about mods for them, so I can spot a stock one as that's what I would want.

From what I've been reading here and elsewhere it sounds like the is300 is somewhere in the middle in terms of sporting nature/feel. It's definitely not Miata or BRZ/FR-S territory, but it's not completely numb either. As noted by sesto I think bushings should help liven the car up some. If that's accurate it could be exactly what I'm looking for. I don't need anything super hardcore as I'm saving that for my next manual. I just want an auto that's not a complete bore and can get on track with minimal mods and do well. By do well I just mean fun, I don't do anything competitive yet.

sesto elemento wrote: Have you driven an is300? I don't consider a 14 second car "slow" but ok, mileage could be better, mostly low-mid 20s. Numb imho is a super inaccurate description. My experience is that they're everything a 3series should have been. If you want a little more accuracy, do some poly bushings (or spherical rod ends like I did). If you want more power, it's a 2jz, boost it or theyre are a plethora of naturally aspirated mods like cams and headers etc., sky is the limit. I think they're quite special cars. My experience has been that they don't rust unless hit. Oh and they're berking indestructible.

Bought one brand new, because I desperately wanted it to be a reliable E46. It wasn't up to the task. Sold it a year and a half later.

When car and driver tested the IS300 it ran an almost 16 second quarter mile:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/lexus-is300-road-test-1

Neither the wife nor I were ever able to break 20mpg, but this was in L.A. stop & go traffic.

I'll admit my definition of communicative steering might be skewed...only 1 of my cars has power steering.

Indestructible? Yes, we can both agree on that.

M030 wrote: Lexus IS300 for the win! Hands-down. All the goodness of a BMW with none of the unreliability. The automatic doesn't suck, either.

The IS300 is a good car but it is int very fast and for 16k you could get something a lot faster.

how about 05-09 mustang gt or 11-14 mustang v6 both are ok speed wise and are in the 16k range

Alternatively, you could build a very fast is3 for 16k. Including purchase of the vehicle, you could do a swift racing technology stage 3 turbo kit with a new from toyota mkiv turbo supra bottom end, full exhaust. That will get you in the mid 600s for wheel horsepower. heim jointed everything from figs, turbo supra brakes, some volks. Kw v3 coils. Etc.

So who's here recently shopped for an IS300? Automatic, don't care. Whats the chances of finding one thats had a regular oil change record and the maintenance done up to 131k or so.

sesto elemento wrote: Alternatively, you could build a very fast is3 for 16k. Including purchase of the vehicle, you could do a swift racing technology stage 3 turbo kit with a new from toyota mkiv turbo supra bottom end, full exhaust. That will get you in the mid 600s for wheel horsepower. heim jointed everything from figs, turbo supra brakes, some volks. Kw v3 coils. Etc.

I never thought of the turbo kit