| [GMCnet] Switch pitch questions [message #184379] |
Thu, 13 September 2012 20:45  |
GMC_LES
Messages: 569
Registered: October 2009
Location: Montreal
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I just finished reading a bunch of interesting stuff about the switch pitch tranny. It apparently has a different pump housing that incorporates a pressure control system for the torque converter. It apparently maintains a lower pressure than the later non SP transmissions.
What I read was all commentary by individuals supposedly well versed in SP technology. If this info is true, then wouldn't a SP tranny provide a reduced risk of engine thrustbearing stress?
This isn't suggesting that all the non SP transmissions are undesirable, It just suggests another advantage of running a SP setup.
Anyone able to confirm any of this as I don't now if the pressure differences are large enough to make a difference.
Les Burt
Montreal
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Les Burt
Montreal
1975 Eleganza 26ft
A work in Progress
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Switch pitch questions [message #184414 is a reply to message #184381] |
Thu, 13 September 2012 23:52  |
sgltrac
Messages: 2797
Registered: April 2011
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thanks for the sp education Gene. I have been curious.
Sully
77 royale
Seattle, wa
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 13, 2012, at 6:50 PM, gene Fisher <mr.erfisher@gmail.com> wrote:
> here is some poop on switch pitch tranny
>
> http://gmcmotorhome.info/SWITCH.html
>
> gene
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Les Burt <gmc.les@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I just finished reading a bunch of interesting stuff about the switch
>> pitch tranny. It apparently has a different pump housing that incorporates
>> a pressure control system for the torque converter. It apparently maintains
>> a lower pressure than the later non SP transmissions.
>>
>> What I read was all commentary by individuals supposedly well versed in SP
>> technology. If this info is true, then wouldn't a SP tranny provide a
>> reduced risk of engine thrustbearing stress?
>>
>> This isn't suggesting that all the non SP transmissions are undesirable,
>> It just suggests another advantage of running a SP setup.
>>
>> Anyone able to confirm any of this as I don't now if the pressure
>> differences are large enough to make a difference.
>>
>> Les Burt
>> Montreal
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Gene Fisher -- 74-23,77PB/ore/ca
> “Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today --- give him a URL and
> -------
> http://gmcmotorhome.info/
> Alternator Protection Cable
> http://gmcmotorhome.info/APC.html
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Sully
77 Royale basket case.
Future motorhome land speed record holder(bucket list)
Seattle, Wa.
|
|
|
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
