--

From: owner-stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com (Team3S Digest)
To: stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com
Subject: Team3S Digest V1 #56
Reply-To: stealth-3000gt
Sender: owner-stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com
Errors-To: owner-stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com
Precedence: bulk


Team3S Digest       Thursday, December 24 1998       Volume 01 : Number 056




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 18:30:35 -0800
From: wce@bc.sympatico.ca
Subject: Re: Team3S: plug gap

Thanks Chris for not correcting the obvious (.34 should read .034, etc)  I just looked
up the specs in the shop manual and they actually recommend from .039 to .043, which is
a whole bunch wider than most of us run ours at. So, my comment on Grand Canyon gap
(.045) is apparently a bit off target, as that upper end of the spectrum is indeed used.

Darc

Chris Winkley wrote:

> Todd...
>
> I have Magnecore wires and HKS double platinum plugs gapped at .034...which
> boost controller are you going to buy?
>
>



For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 00:46:24 -0500
From: "Dennis Moore" <stealth@kiva.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Oil survey - revised

1. Vehicle: 93 Stealth ES (DOHC)
2. Current mileage: 102K
3. Oil weight: 10W30
4. Oil brand: Valvoline (non-synthetic)
5. Filter brand: [gulp] whatever The Grease Pit puts in, never checked,
insert favorite chastisement here.
6. Additives: used Slick50 at about 12K, when I first got it, since learned
the error of my ways...
7. Change frequency: Every 3-4K
8. Observations: No unscheduled maintenance (except for a clutch replaced
under warranty), no leaks, only had noticeable (LOUD) lifter noise once
after it had been parked for several weeks, very very light lifter noise now
(at least that's what I assume it is...), still my favoritest car!

For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:36:52 -0500
From: "Meyer" <meyer2@erols.com>
Subject: Team3S: Re: Exhaust for Dodge Stealth

Les,
There are a few possibilities.
1. Use a Borla system which would require cutting out the right side notch
in the rear bumper(I am told there is an outline on the back side of the
bumper cover) Then you would have dual exhaust, nice sound and a few
HP+..Cost=$715
2. Purchase a polished stainless steel muffler with your choice of tip
styles from us for ~$200 and have local shop install on factory pipe if ok
for~$50 or fabricate new pipe for ~$150 also nice sound + few HP cost
$250-350. (retains single side exhaust)
3. Purchase 2 tips and have local shop fabricate dual system with or without
muffler ~$150(we can provide polished muffler for $145 and tips for ~$50 ea.
depending on style and size) Cost=$400 w/muffler mellow sound. Cost w/o
muffler ~$250 pretty loud.
Hope this helps.
Frank
www.acceleratedaccessories.com
- -----Original Message-----
From: Leswhite1@aol.com <Leswhite1@aol.com>
To: meyer2@erols.com <meyer2@erols.com>
Date: Wednesday, December 23, 1998 7:40 AM
Subject: Exhaust for Dodge Stealth


>Gentlemen:
>
>I have a 1992 Dodge Stealth (base model) and am looking for an exhaust
system.
>This is the single exhaust model.  I'm looking for something to give a
slight
>increase in horsepower and sound nice.  Is there anything available?
>
>Thanks,
>Les White
>

For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:35:00 -0600
From: xwing <xwing@execpc.com>
Subject: Team3S: [Fwd: Re: Are the racing unothodox pulleys any good?]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- --------------1460AB2B00
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I thought this would be a good topic for discussion here as well.
Jack T.

- --------------1460AB2B00
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Message-ID: <36811B5A.171C@execpc.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:33:30 -0600
From: xwing <xwing@execpc.com>
Reply-To: xwing@execpc.com
Organization: Exec-PC
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: stealth@starnet.net
Subject: Re: Are the racing unothodox pulleys any good?
References: <7057B516B5F8D11198320080296571A2099F53@EXCHANGE>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Joshua wrote:
Unorthodox Underdrive Pulleys:
> I have heard some people say they aren't any good and other say they are
> great.  Any info would be greatly appreciated.

I would not get one.  Though they are a PULLEY, they are not any longer
HARMONIC DAMPENERS.  The original purpose of that heavy disc on the
front of all car engines is as a harmonic dampener; Mitsu just added a
serpentine belt pulley on its outside aspect as a space-saving effort,
so it does 2 functions at once.  The original and more important
function is still dampening crankshaft harmonics. 

A crank is a long, rigid metal shape; if you tap with a hammer it
"rings" (especially forged cranks; cast cranks have some internal
dampening).  So what?  Well, a hammer hitting it is only ONE way to
cause the crank to RESONATE and exhibit harmonic VIBRATIONS.  Another
way is to RUN the engine!  The engine is a vibration factory (as we all
know)...and if left undamped, crank harmonics can build up at certain
(harmonic) rpms and these vibrations DON'T just disappear, they have to
be DISSIPATED!  The best way to dissipate them is via the
SPECIFICALLY-DESIGNED-TO-DO-THIS "Harmonic Dampener" hanging off the
front of the crank.  It has an elastomeric (rubber) isolator between the
hub and the HEAVY outer ring, and is as a unit, designed to damp
harmonics at the critical frequencies seen by the crank. 

The heavier the outer ring, the better it damps, and the higher its
efficiency at damping.  NASCAR LONGtrack engines use HEAVY dampeners, to
allow the bearings to live the long race length; the shorter the race,
the more often the bearings get changed (after EVERY RACE), the LIGHTER
a dampener can be used because lighter is a little faster to accelerate
the engine due to lower rotational inertia.  You are trading
bearing/crank life for speed.  Where do YOU want to go on this?  Are you
lucky?

The OTHER way to damp harmonic energy (which MUST GO SOMEWHERE) is
through the main bearings, into the main bearing saddles on the BLOCK.
This can cause premature wear/fatigue/flaking of main bearings, and
cracks in the main bearing saddles on the block.  This is a poor
tradeoff for "an underdrive pulley".

Does this ALWAYS happen?  No.  Some people may not push their cars very
hard very often; some may not do longtrack racing; some may not keep
their cars long enough to discover the bearing wear, or to crack
anything; the underlying design may be robust enough to cover over this
MISTAKE in parts selection.  There is a pretty big industry in harmonic
dampeners, different TECHNIQUES for dampening (Fluidampr, ATI, BHJ, "The
Rattler", etc) but they ALL DAMPEN HARMONICS because it is important.
There may be some FREQUENTLY REBUILT race engines (?CART) that are not
using dampeners but IF you think their ENGINEERS have not taken crank
harmonics into account in their multi-multimillion dollar engine design,
THEN there are worthless bridges to be sold to you...and foolish
pennywise-pound foolish _NON DAMPENING_ "PULLEYS" to be sold.

As a person who comes to the hobby from an enginebuilder's standpoint
(not sales/driver/etc) this misinformation about "you don't need a
dampener" or when that fails "our unorthodox pulley does the same thing"
is sad.  It gets down to this.  Do ya feel lucky?  Well, do ya...?
[Clint would say "punk" but that isn't my direction, just a good line
:)  ]  This is an insult to your engine's health.  It MAY take it in
stride; but it is an offense.  I respect my hardworking engine too much
to burden it with the sometimes insane levels of harmonics that can
occur without harmonic dampener protection.  Where else are you going to
cut corners?  What other basic enginebuilding good practices is one
going to spit on, and WHICH will be the straw that breaks the camel's
back...eventually?

Jack Tertadian
This is a hotbutton issue with me.  I never thought having a harmonic
dampener would be considered "conservative enginebuilding" by
some...geez.

ps if anyone is interested in a REAL HARMONIC DAMPENER with underdrive
for our cars, I am looking into having some made, because NHRA rules
require an SFI-approved harmonic balancer for cars going into the 11's.
With all the IDRA etc drag groups out there using NHRA tracks, better to
be legal BEFORE someone challenges it/you and disqualifies you...

- --------------1460AB2B00--

For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 08:50:08 -0800
From: Rich <rleroy@pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: plug gap

Darcy:

For the TT, 0.045" would be too wide/hot.  For the NT cars, however, it
isn't.  I've been running at 0.045" since I did my 60k.

Rich


wce@bc.sympatico.ca wrote:

<snip>

> [...]  I just looked up the specs in the shop manual and
> they actually recommend from .039 to .043, which is a whole
> bunch wider than most of us run ours at. So, my comment on
> Grand Canyon gap (.045) is apparently a bit off target, as
> that upper end of the spectrum is indeed used.
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:58:10 -0500 (EST)
From: Dennis Moore <stealth@kiva.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: [Fwd: Re: Are the racing unothodox pulleys any good?]

Jack,

Thanks for the tome on the pulleys-as-dampeners.  That leads to another
question or two.

Isn't the dynamic balancing done on the crankshaft sufficient to dampen
the vibrations? 

Would it be accurate to describe the pulleys as a "flywheel"?  Is there
any kind of inertial energy storage/recovery involved here?

Thanks.

Dennis Moore
stealth@kiva.net

Change is disruptive - but that's the point!

For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:58:50 -0600
From: xwing <xwing@execpc.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: plug gap

Todd Schmalzried wrote:
> I am going to replace my plugs and wires over Christmas.
> I'm using stock plugs, and Accel premade wires. I don't have any mods yet
> (except K&N). I am planning on putting on a boost controller this spring.
> What is the recommended gap? I've seen .028 up to .045. Most of the
> knowledgeable people seem to have migrated over here, so I trust your
> opinions.
> Todd Schmalzried                

For your situation, .028-.032 ok.  Our ignitions are somewhat weak.
Larger gaps make a tad more power all else equal because they have
better chance of lighting mix...but if so large and boost so high spark
too weak and it DOESN'T light mix you sputter misfire and lose ALOT,
compared to little loss with tighter gap. 
Jack Tertadian
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:15:29 -0600
From: xwing <xwing@execpc.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: [Fwd: Re: Are the racing unothodox pulleys any good?]

Dennis Moore wrote:
> Thanks for the tome on the pulleys-as-dampeners.  That leads to another
> question or two.
> Isn't the dynamic balancing done on the crankshaft sufficient to dampen
> the vibrations?

No.  That is important:  BALANCE of a crankshaft system does not mean it
has no HARMONICS.  An imbalance leads to vibration, the magnitude of
which a function of the amount (mass) of imbalance, the RPM of the
crank, and the moment of inertia of the imbalance (farther away from
crank centerline leads to more vibration amplitude).

HARMONICS is a function of rpm, elastic modulus etc...stiffer/shorter
has higher frequency harmonics than a longer/"looser" less rigid
system.  It can be in perfect balance, but hit it with a hammer and it
still RINGS!

> Would it be accurate to describe the pulleys as a "flywheel"?  Is there
> any kind of inertial energy storage/recovery involved here?

The Unorthodox Racing Pulleys are not harmonic dampeners, they are
simple pulleys.  As a mass spinning along with the crank, they also
serve to store some energy (as does the stock harmonic dampener) so YES,
they also act in part as a flywheel...but with low mass/low diameter,
not a whole LOT of flywheel energy compared to the actual flyweel on the
BACK of the engine.
 
> Thanks.  Dennis Moore

No probs!  Maybe we have some mechanical engieer/physics wonks who can
delve into harmonics more accurately than I...
Jack Tertadian
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:15:31 -0800
From: wce@bc.sympatico.ca
Subject: Re: Team3S: plug gap

 Rich;

I didn't think of the NT as having  a different gap, but then again, I didn't think.
Thanks for clearing it up. The manual makes no mention of a difference between the two
(NT and TT) and only differentials between plugs for SOHC and DOHC... no mention of gap
difference. Since they advise .039-.043 in, >>>>what would you suggest? Consensus from
team (Barry, Roger, Errin, Jim, Mikael, Jack, Bob, Tod, et all ?)

NT   .039-.043 ?
TT    .028-.035 ?

Darc

Please also note an error in a recent post wherein I noted "there are few wise men here"
This should have read "..a few wise men here"....my spell check does not correct missing
words.




For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:55:28 -0800
From: Rich <rleroy@pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: plug gap

Darcy:

In a nutshell, I won't recommend anything other than what the manual
states for an NT, and won't even touch the TT issue.  I'm simply not as
well versed in the boost/gap issue like the noted others.  They've got
the experience with the TT's, not I. 

I opened my NT up to 0.045" specifically looking for a little extra
"oomph" in my attempts to break the 14 second barrier during the season,
(there were those who recommended 0.050", but I thought that might be a
tad hot), and because of laziness, just have never regapped them back to
0.042".  The difference in the gaps, IMO, didn't make an appreciable (to
me) difference in performance, and isn't worth the effort. 

FWIW, the car runs great at 0.045".  Just ask Chris Winkley.  :-)

Rich
Emerald Green 94 R/T

wce@bc.sympatico.ca wrote:
>
>  Rich;
>
<snip>

 >>>>what would you suggest? Consensus from
> team (Barry, Roger, Errin, Jim, Mikael, Jack, Bob, Tod, et all ?)
>
> NT   .039-.043 ?
> TT    .028-.035 ?
>
> Darc
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 13:29:43 -0700
From: "Jeffrey Young" <jefyoung@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: underdrive pulleys

Jack;

I went to the Unorthodox Pulleys site to read up on what they had to say
about there pulleys and harmonic dampening (I know..I know...marketing
B.S.).  They said, and I quote


"Lastly, the misconception that the crank pulleys on these vehicles are
harmonic  dampers. A harmonic damper is a unit bolted to the crankshaft
snout that is completely separate from the belt drive system. An engine that
uses a harmonic damper has the accessory drive crank pulley bolted to it,
they are completely separate pieces that are rarely attached to each other.
None of the vehicles we manufacture pulleys for have harmonic dampers. "

I assume that this is not the case for the 3S?  I haven't pulled the drive
crank pulley off my car to verify, but I WAS considering replacing with one
of the Unorthodox units.....maybe not!


Jeffrey
92 RT/Turbo
www.omega-sw.com/stealth




For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 12:19:13 +0000
From: "R.G." <robby@swissonline.ch>
Subject: Re: Team3S: underdrive pulleys (long)

My $0.02 add here:

I do not know anything about the harmonic balancer/pulley on our cars. But we
had this discussion a long time ago on the Camaro/Firebird forum/lists.

Please keep in mind that the 5.7l f-bodies are having an old fashioned single
cam/pushrod/rocker V8 engine. The harmonic balancer is a part of the accessoires
serpentine belt system. Looking at it shows that the thing is made of four
parts. The inner "star" that bolts to the crank, and the "ring. The last is made
of an inner part,a hard rubber part and the outer ring. With this design, there
is alot mass positioned on a larger radius measured from the crank. But due to
the rubber parts any harmonics are dampened and even more such a three-piece
design is more efficient in balancing the crank.

Now, of course we also had the idea to replace this large, heavy thing by a
small aluminum pulley. Weight was reduced by some lbs but then problems came up
with the crank ! Some had problems with a "more shaking feeling", others
reported some damage (especially 11-12s cars). For the power, no tourque gain
was found but up to 10hp on the dyno. Well, this is very relative as the power
steering pump of the f-bodies are a weak point and together with the alternator
and AC these accessoires are stealing power away. As the LT1 switches A/C off at
WOT, power gain now was only related to the alt and pump(s). The average between
40 or more cars with pulleys was about 5-7hp.

At the end, the consensus was that an underdrive pulley CAN free up some horses
used by the accesoires. The more important was weight saving but here the
problem kicked in. Some companies then designed new harmonic dampening
underdrive pulleys. But they are very expensive and not worth the few horses, if
any. All LT1 with underdrive pulleys (as me too) do now have the design that
still uses the stock blancer, but on top of the new inderdrive pulley :) This
means you have slowed down the acc and still having the good balancing. As
there's some room in the f-bodies this was no problem (only longer bolts).

On my car the underdrive freed up nothing at all :( Furthermore tha alt is
slowed down too much not giving enough power when sitting at the lights. I had
to get an overdrive puelly for the alt then. For me the positive thig was that
the power steering pump was slowed down about 25%. Before the pulley I always
had this anoying whine when turning the wheel. Also some fluid went away to ???
after some times. All these problems are gone now and this is the only reason
why I run the underdrive pulley ! Another proud member has a good website on
this information : http://www.ws6.com/mod-2.htm

Back to our cars, the accessoires do not steal alot hp away. Even more I cannot
see any diff in mileage when I switch A/C on or off. The alt is small a well
designed not to drain to much power into heat like the GM crap (this is fact)
does. Also the pumps are better and I'm sure all these parts counted together
makes the price difference between ours and the f-bodies.

Ok, this leads us to say, an ud pulley does not bring anything than :
a) maybe 2 horses on our cars
b) big hassle to change it
c) less balancing
d) effects of the acc we currently don't know

IMHO, this is not worth the $ you pay for the pulley nor the work you'll have to
do.

Merry Christmas to all
Roger, snow-white Switzerland

- -----------------------
Roger Gerl, Switzerland
93'3000GT TwinTurbo (Animale Rosso)
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

------------------------------

End of Team3S Digest V1 #56
***************************

For unsubscribe info and FAQ, see our web page at http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm