TCC lockup - which scheme would give better performance?

[Mike]

>Ok,
>
>I have pretty much disassembled and deciphered the TCC lockup code,
>and I feel I can add some code for a TCC lockup scheme, but I don't
>want to go to the trouble of adding it if it won't help.
>
>Without code changes (only data)
>
>The current lockup occurs at 95 mph, which is way down in my rpm range for
my engine,
>about 4400 before lockup, 4000 after lookup.  I am going to change this so
that it locks
>up just before the end of the 1/4, somewhere around 105 or so.  
>
>No code change required for this:
>The second choice is to lock it up at say 76 in second gear and let it
stayed locked
>through 3rd also.
>
>Here is the scheme that requires code adjustment:
>
>The third choice is to lock it at 76 in 2nd, unlock it in the lower rpms in
3rd and lock
>it back up just before the end of the quarter in 3rd.  The idea is to get
the engine more
>quickly through the lower rpms,
>and lock the converter at the best moment to keep things around the
>power band.  76 mph in 2nd puts me just a bit higher than my HP peak.  The
locking before
>the end of the 1/4 is because the car lurches pretty hard when the
convertor locks, and
>currently after it lurchs the engine hits low rpms and more slowly accelerates.
>
>I know the GN guys had some schemes, are they similar to what I have and
which one worked
>the best?
>
>I am also considering more serious code changes, such as adjustments to
allow less fuel to
>be injected in 1st and 2nd to get a more optimal mixture.
>
>				Roger
>
>

Regarding the TCC, the only thing I'd be careful of is engaging the clutch
too soon and plowing the maximum engine torque through it. Most TCCs aren't
designed to handle the full torque of the stock engine let alone the torque
of a modified motor and may be damaged if locked too soon.

I thought this was a problem for the GN crowd some time back where chips
were engaging the clutch to reduce driveline slippage (and thus get better
ETs/MPH) but the price was wasted converters after only a few runs...

--
Mike