I think the TQ management thing with respect to 60 ft time is highly
exaggerated. I know of a few people right off the top of my head who are
laying down 1.6 and 1.7 60 ft. times with PCMs that have never been altered
for TQ management. Scott Q, Dan Bennett, Mark Bellisimo come to mind
immediately. Scott and Dan definitely run high stall converters. Not sure
with Mark.
Could probably come up with quite a few more by asking around. The TQ
management thing started out as a question/concern and has taken on a life
of it's own since. I don't think all the facts about it are on the table
just yet.
Bob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net]On Behalf Of Tim Berry
> Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 12:04 PM
> To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
> Subject: RE: DML: Torque management-4.7l auto
>
>
>
> Its designed in there, yes, but its hurting the performance of the ones
> who are looking to get that max performance. The torque management
> really hurts the 60' times at the track due to the PCM killing the power
> on a hard launch if the RPM's get over a specified RPM per Speed
> sort-of-say... with a high stall (in my 97) it actually hurt me b/c the
> bogging was much worse.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Tim Berry
>
>
> Uh Hey guys, I think your torque management problem is by design. Don't
> know that a pcm flash would fix it. But you might want to talk to Bernd
> about a Super Charger & Nos implementation that might thake care of that
> for you. ;D
>
> --
> Kenneth M. Berntsen
> -------------------------------------------------
> 2000 Dakota QC 4x4, 5.9 V8
> 1996 Dakota Sport, 3.9 V6 (Retired)
> 1990 Dakota 2.5 I4 (Retired)
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 06 2004 - 11:47:09 EST