--
From: owner-stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com
(Team3S Digest)
To: stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com
Subject:
Team3S Digest V1 #103
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 Wednesday,
February 17 1999 Volume 01 : Number
103
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:
Tue, 16 Feb 1999 18:53:35 -0500
From: "Bob Fontana" <bfontana@securitytechnologies.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Exhaust manifolds / headers
Roger,
Do you think that
your Mitsu contact could do me a small favor and FAX you
the drawings for the
rest of the car? I need 'em BAD!
Thanks,
-
-Bob
Awesome drawings!
> Today I got a FAX from Mitsu whit a
good drawing and the
> important figures for
> the manifolds. I
scanned them and placed them onto the headers page
> http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/9589/headers.html.
>
Please use "view
> image" to get the large picture.
> Check out:
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/9589/3000gt.html
>
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is
> http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
>
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Tue, 16 Feb 1999 19:19:28 -0500
From: "Omar Malik" <ojm@iname.com>
Subject: Team3S: FW: Spark
Plugs/Wires (long)
Here's a post from the starnet list concerning spark
plug wires. Sorry if it
might be off-topic, but it seems like information
that could be used on this
list.
Omar
92 r/t
- -----Original
Message-----
From: Tracy, Austin [mailto:austin.tracy@rez.com]
Sent:
Tuesday, February 16, 1999 2:32 PM
To: 'stealth@starnet.net'
Subject: RE:
Spark Plugs/Wires
"Low-resistance" conductors are an easy sell, as
most people associate all
ignition wire conductors with original equipment
and replacement ignition
wire carbon conductors (which progressively fail as
a result of microscopic
carbon granules burning away and thus reducing the
spark energy to the spark
plugs) and with solid wire zero-resistance
conductors that were used by
racers with no need for suppression. Consumers
are easily led into believing
that if a spiral conductor's resistance is
almost zero, its performance must
be similar to that of a solid metal
conductor all race cars once used.
HOWEVER, NOTHING IS FURTHER FROM THE
TRUTH!
What is not generally understood (or is ignored) is that as a
result of the
laws of electricity, the potential 45,000 plus volts (with
alternating
current characteristics) from the ignition coil (a pulse type
transformer)
does not flow through the entire the length of fine wire used
for a spiral
conductor like the 1 volt DC voltage from a test ohmmeter, but
flows in a
magnetic field surrounding the outermost surface of the spiral
windings
(skin effect). The same skin effect applies equally to the same
pulsating
flow of current passing through carbon and solid metal
conductors.
A spiral conductor with a low electrical resistance measured
by an ohmmeter
indicates, in reality, nothing other than less of the
expensive fine wire is
used for the conductor windings - a construction which
cannot achieve a
clean and efficient current flow through the magnetic field
surrounding the
windings, resulting in poor suppression for RFI and
EMI.
Of course, ignition wire manufacturers save a considerable amount
in
manufacturing costs by using less fine wire, less exotic winding
machinery
and less expertise to make low-resistance spiral conductors. As
an
incentive, they find a lucrative market amongst performance parts
marketers
who advertise their branded ignition wires as having
"low-resistance"
conductors, despite the fact that such "low-resistance"
contributes nothing
to make spiral ignition wires perform better, and RFI and
EMI suppression is
compromised.
In recent years, most ignition wire
manufacturers, to temporarily improve
their spiral conductor's suppression,
have resorted to coating excessively
spaced spiral windings, most of which
are crudely wound around strands of
fiberglass or Kevlar, with a heavy layer
of high-resistance carbon
impregnated conductive latex or silicone compound.
This type of construction
hides the conductive coating's high resistance when
the overall conductor is
measured with a test ohmmeter, which only measures
the lower resistance of
the sparse spirally wound wire (the path of least
resistance) under the
conductive coating and ignores the high resistance of
the outermost
conductive coating in which the spark energy actually travels.
The
conductive coating is rarely shown or mentioned in
advertisement
illustrations.
The suppression achieved by this practice
of coating the windings is only
temporary, as the spark current is forced to
travel through the outermost
high-resistance conductive coating in the same
manner the spark current
travels through the outermost high-resistance
conductive coating of a carbon
conductor used in most original equipment and
stock replacement wires.
In effect, (when new) a coated "low-resistance"
spiral conductor's true
performance is identical to that of a high-resistance
carbon conductor.
Unfortunately, and particularly with the use of
high-output ignitions, the
outermost high-resistance conductive coating over
spiral windings acting as
the conductor will fail from burn out in the same
manner as carbon
conductors, and although in most cases, the spiral conductor
will not cease
to conduct like a high-resistance carbon conductor, any RFI or
EMI
suppression will be lost as a consequence of the coating burning out.
The
worst interference will come from the so-called "super conductors" that
are
wound with copper (alloy) wire.
However, despite the shortcomings
of "low-resistance" spiral conductor
ignition wires, these wires work
satisfactorily on older production vehicles
and race vehicles that do not
rely on electronic engine management systems,
or use on-board electronics
effected by EMI - although with the
lowest-resistance conductor wires, don't
expect much RFI suppression on the
AM band in poor reception
areas.
Some European and Japanese original equipment and replacement
ignition wires
including Bougicord and NGK do have spiral conductors that
provide good
suppression - usually none of these wires are promoted as having
low-
resistance conductors - however, none are ideal for competition use,
as
their conductors and pin-type terminations are fragile and are known
to
rarely last as long as good carbon conductor ignition wires.
To be
effective in carrying the full output from the ignition system
and
suppressing RFI and EMI in particular, spiral conductors need windings
that
are microscopically close to one another and precisely spaced and free
from
conductive coatings. To be more effective, the windings need to be
wound
over a core of magnetic material - a method too costly for wires
sold
through mass-merchandisers and most speed shops who purchase only
the
cheapest (to them) and most heavily promoted products.
-
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff [mailto:jw461@nstar.net]
Sent: Tuesday,
February 16, 1999 12:19 PM
To: stealth@starnet.net
Subject: Re: Spark
Plugs/Wires
I've always been partial to the Accel wires (Part
#7921Y). They seemed to
work well on my previous 3000GT but I haven't
tried them on the Spyder yet.
With a multimeter, I tested them for resistance
and it's MUCH less than
Magnecores and of course much less than stock.
If anyone cares, Magnecores,
tested GREATER resistance than
stock.
jeff
'95 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 Spyder
'90 Mitsubishi
Eclipse GSX
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Tue, 16 Feb 1999 17:17:14 -0800
From: "Errin D. Humphrey" <errin@u.washington.edu>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: SWEDISH DYNOTEST (long)
Mikael Åkesson wrote:
> I
had my car on a DYNO yesterday and let's say that
> I'm a little
disappointed and confused.
>
> I have much lower values than Roger
and the others.
>
> P-norm 228,6 kw (DIN 70020) [
= 306.3 hp, uncorrected]
> P-eng 241,0
kw
[ = 322.9 hp, uncorrected]
> P-wheel
163
[ = 218.3 hp, ...]
> P-loss
78kw
[ = 104.5 hp, ...]
> Max kw 4970 rpm
> So the question now
is: What can be wrong with my car?
Mikael,
(I also address some of
these questions to Roger,
Jim M., and Mike C.)
If my calculations are
correct, you dynoed 218.3 hp (?!) to the wheels,
uncorrected. That is
using Roger Gerl's conversion that he dyno'd
188 kW translating to 252hp,
non-SAE-corrected. This does seem
rather low, especially with the
performance modifications that you
have. But more than that, it seems
like things are really being stretched
in taking you from 218 hp to the
wheels to 323 hp at the flywheel.
Important questions for all of
you:
1) Did you ice the motor?
2) Did you spray the
intercoolers?
* According to dyno experiences I have been reading on the
Supra
mailing list, if you do not do these things your car will get dyno
readings
~far~ below what they should be. Roger, you posted a
measurement
of 188.0 kW to the wheels uncorrected which converts to 252
hp to
the wheels, uncorrected. If so, according to the old hp-->mph
calculation,
this would only be enough to push a 3800 lb car to ~94.7 mph in
the
1/4 mile, far below (at least 15 mph) what your car should be
capable of.
Note: Personally, I am unconcerned with the SAE
corrected figures.
I'm more interested in what the dyno actually
recorded. Likewise with the
flywheel hp calculations to compensate for
frictional loss. Wheel horse-
power is a more reliable figure and more
meaningful on the road. I do
think that frictional loss numbers near
30% are much too high. I have
~never~ heard of any car claiming a loss
this high. Most manufacturers
and car publications claim frictional
losses for any particular car to be
around 12-15%. AWD might make a
difference, but the difference must
be small especially since power to the
front wheels experiences lower
frictional loss in power, most likely
offsetting excess losses at the transfer
case and the rear diff. The
only thing that will change my mind that a 30%
frictional loss is valid is if
somebody pulls the engine and dynos horse-
power at the flywheel and
subsequently dynos the same engine putting
power to the wheels.
Back
to the issue at hand. Allow me to reemphasize: from people I
have
spoken to and many on the Supra list who have dynoed their cars, it
is
absolutely essential with a turbocharged car that you ice the motor
and
spray the intercoolers in order to provide the necessary cooling that
the
engine needs, and which high moving speeds provide when on the road.
A
fan blowing is definitely ~not~ sufficient, especially if not enough air
is
directly blowing onto the intercoolers. These cars were designed to
make
power when they are moving, and every effort must be taken to
com-
pensate as such. A guy on the Supra list just dynoed 295 rwhp /
300 ft-lbs
uncorrected on a stock Supra (except for catback exhaust
system).
Another thing. I feel that since these measures were not
taken, this might
explain for much of the detonation that you guys have been
noticing. You
might have experienced heavy detonation beyond 1.0 bar
when on the
dyno, but I do not believe that has been an issue with my car
running boost
as high as 1.25 bar on stock turbos and fuel system, when
driving on the
road. If it was a problem, I wouldn't have noticed an
increase in trap-
speeds every time I raised the boost higher since timing
retard would act
to prevent this. My highest trapspeed is 109mph on
1.25 bar. That is
at the track, ~not~ with a G-Tech which tends to
inflate mph. If you
noticed detonation beyond 1.0 bar then detonation
at 1.2+ boost levels
should be enough to destroy the engine. But
there are guys out there like
Hau and Mike M. who have run 112+ mph running
1.3bar or wastegates
unplugged. Timing retard should have made such
trapspeeds impossible.
In addition, I remember that a couple guys on stock
turbos with an EGT
gauge noticed low EGT's when running higher boost. I
could be wrong,
but I believe that inadequate cooling (especially to the
intercoolers!) might
be what is causing all the detonation you guys are
noticing on the dyno.
Other important issues/questions:
3)
What is the mileage on the car?
4) How recently were the sparkplugs
replaced/regapped?
5) Have you had any valvework done
recently?
The valvetrain is actually a bigger issue than it may seem,
especially for a
high mileage car. My friend Julian just had his entire
valvetrain (lifters and
valves) replaced on his 94 VR4. It has 90k
miles on it, 50k of them under
his ownership. He got the car back
overnight not really expecting to feel
much of a difference. He called
me up frantically that day and told me that
his car had a power increase that
was simply unbelievable. It made a huge
difference.
I'm sure
there are other factors involved, but I'll need to think about it
some more
before I can offer more suggestions. I welcome any
criticisms,
corrections, and comments.
All the best,
- --Errin
Humphrey
Seattle, WA
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is
http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Tue, 16 Feb 1999 20:30:39 -0800
From: wce@bc.sympatico.ca
Subject: Re:
Team3S: FW: Spark Plugs/Wires (long)
Omar;
Your forwarded posting
wasn't off topic at all and might well start a good thread. It's
the type of
well thought out and well supported post we encourage here...not to
imply
there is not room for
debate.
Thanks.
Darc
snip
> Here's a post from
the starnet list concerning spark plug wires. Sorry if it
> might be
off-topic, but it seems like information that could be used on this
>
list.
>
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:39:31 +0100
From: Roger Gerl <robby@swissonline.ch>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Exhaust manifolds / headers
> Do you think that your Mitsu
contact could do me a small favor and FAX you
> the drawings for the rest
of the car? I need 'em BAD!
Ahem, the problem is that they only
have the drawings for parts that
must be registered by the government.
Therefore the exhaust parts are
but the heads not (!) as I wanted to have the
drawings of the heads for
the ports. The contact also was able to find a set
of all the manuals
the importer uses (especially for any rebuilds) for me and
I can get it
at their cost ... but this is damn expensive (gulp) I do not
expect that
the four manuals (engine, tranny, body, electrical) are different
that
those you can get.
I'll try to check with the guy (technical
response for MMC in
Switzerland) if I can get his email address so we can get
in contact
with him directly or mabye onto the list
:)
Regards,
Roger
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is
http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 20:36:51 +1100
From: Andrew Clark <chemist1@ozemail.com.au>
Subject:
Team3S: Ticking noise resolved!!
Just as a matter of interest, I have
resolved the lash adjuster noise on
my VR4.
I had been using Castrol-R
synthetic & at my recent service I had an
engine flush done on the car
then replaced the engine oil again with the
Castrol-R, guess what ...... the
noise was still there. Speaking to the
service manager he suggested to
switching to Mobil-1 synthetic ( which I
realise 99% of this group already
use in their engines ) so he changed
the oil for me again at no cost &
the noise has gone.
I'm not sure if its the same everywhere else but down
here Castrol use
as their advertising slogan- "Oils ain't oils".
I
couldn't agree more.
Andrew
Australia
VR4
For subscribe/unsubscribe
info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 03:03:19 -0700
From: "PHorschel" <phorschel@utah-inter.net>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Transfer case question on the 25 spline model
Arty,
I
recently had to go through with replacing a blown transfer case(no oil
from
dealership service) and have some answers to your questions.
> I know
the tranny on my 5 spd 91VR4 can have either the 18 or 25
> fin
output
> spline & the transfer case needs to match. I already know
mine is
> the smaller
> 18 spline.
Here is what I
know:
5/90-10/91 5spd, small spline(18 teeth)
11/91-5/93 5spd, model#
W5MG1, part# MB936389, large spline(26 teeth)
5/93-99 6spd, model
W6MG1
I do not know too much about the 6spd model but they will not
interchange as
far as I know. The two 5spd transfer cases look
identical except for the
input spline. On the small spline model the
teeth were flush with the top
of the gear. The larger spline model the
teeth are about 1/2" or more down
before they start and the diameter is
noticeably larger. Also the smaller
spline model did not have the metal
driveline(bell shaped thing over the
end) cover on it. It may have just
been missing this piece though. An
interesting note. I took the
cover(say GETRAG) off of both of them in my
garage and the two splines pull
out and interchange with each other. The
seals even seemed to be the
same size. Therefore you can just get the
larger spline gear and insert
it into your small spline transfer case and it
should work if you have
upgraded the transaxle. I have never road tested
this but it fit
perfectly in my garage.
> Is the transfer case the same (if its the 25
fin spline) on both
> the 5 spd and
> the 6 spd later models? In
other words, If I were lucky enough to
> already have
> the 25
spline transfer case could I reuse it with the newer 6 spd tranny?
As far
as I know from comparing transfer cases at the dealership this will
not
work. The 94-up transfer case is a different slightly different
design.
Paul Horschel
- --Copper 93 3000GT TwinTurbo--
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 12:35:34 +0100
From: Roger Gerl <robby@swissonline.ch>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: SWEDISH DYNOTEST (long)
Errin,
Great input !! I think it
will take some posts until everything is
covered/discussed :)
>
> P-eng 241,0
kw
[ = 322.9 hp, uncorrected]
> > P-wheel
163
[ = 218.3 hp, ...]
> > P-loss
78kw
[ = 104.5 hp, ...]
> If my calculations are correct, you dynoed 218.3
hp (?!) to the wheels,
> uncorrected. That is using Roger Gerl's
conversion that he dyno'd
> 188 kW translating to 252hp,
non-SAE-corrected. This does seem
> rather low, especially with the
performance modifications that you
> have.
To be honest, I expected
a few ponies more as my earlier test showed
334hp at the wheels but with a
drivetrain loss of only 50hp (always raw
wheel hp). The test was on a
different dyno at a different shop. Today
it is well known to show too
optimistic values !
> But more than that, it seems like things are
really being stretched
> in taking you from 218 hp to the wheels to 323 hp
at the flywheel.
Due to the same amount of loss we measured in Switz. and
Sweden this
seems to be correct !
> 1) Did you ice the
motor?
> 2) Did you spray the intercoolers?
No to both
!
> * According to dyno experiences I have been reading on the
Supra
> mailing list, if you do not do these things your car will get
dyno
> readings ~far~ below what they should be.
Well, the intake
temperatures measured in the y-pipe showed between 94°C
(on mine) and 104°C
(on the Stealths) and I think this is somewhat high.
Does someone else have
these temperatures handy for comparison ? If this
temperature drops
significantly when driving then I'm sure power
increases.
> Roger,
you posted a measurement of 188.0 kW to the wheels
> uncorrected which
converts to 252 hp to the wheels, uncorrected.
> If so, according to the
old hp-->mph calculation, this would only be
> enough to push a 3800 lb
car to ~94.7 mph in the 1/4 mile, far below
> (at least 15 mph) what your
car should be capable of.
Usually, the hp-mph conversion comes from 2WD
cars and does not look
onto the torque. Unfortunately, I do not have the URL
handy but I
entered the data into a only track calculator and got the times I
found
with the G-Tech, although the trap speed was too high with the
G-Tech
due to the different measurment.
> Wheel horse-power is a
more reliable figure and more meaningful on
> the road.
I do not
fully agree as for myself the torque plays an important rule
below the 10mph
mark and tells you where to shift into next gear.
> I do think that
frictional loss numbers near 30% are much too high.
It is high !
Interestingly enough I got only half of the loss on the
Bosch dyno compared
the Maha.
> I have ~never~ heard of any car claiming a loss this
high.
I saw an M3 with 20% loss and an Audi Quattro with 22%. Ours is
much and
I'm investigating this for myself too.
> absolutely
essential with a turbocharged car that you ice the motor
> and spray the
intercoolers in order to provide the necessary cooling
> that the engine
needs, and which high moving speeds provide when on
> the
road.
Especially the Supra lacks of good cooling due to the only one
small IC
! I agree with you if the car will be dynoed in Summer but not with
an
ambient temp of 10°C or lower. IMHO, the blower at the dyno was
really
small and it could be better but only the next sessions will show
more
information as we'll measure the intake temperature again.
> A
guy on the Supra list just dynoed 295 rwhp / 300 ft-lbs
> uncorrected on a
stock Supra (except for catback exhaust system).
Well, here the confusion
kicks in. 99% of all dynos in the States
measure hp by accelerating a roll
that has a specific weight. This leads
to a hp rating that comes more close
to a conversion for trap speed at
the 1/4 mile as there will also be a mass
accellerated. I'd call this
accelerated horsepower.
Our dynos measure
brake-horsepower as they have big e-motors that can
apply a controlled
resistance as well as the drivetrain loss can be
achieved. Therefore the best
idea is to calculate back from our 400 SAE
hp and you'll find the proper
times and speeds.
> You might have experienced heavy detonation beyond
1.0 bar when on
> the dyno, but I do not believe that has been an issue
with my car
> running boost as high as 1.25 bar on stock turbos and fuel
system,
> when driving on the road.
Then I like to ask you what the
IDC is then ! Also what octane you are
running. For this amount of boost pump
gas is not able to keep the
protection up. I'm sure it is an issue on your
car too. Believe me I was
very ignorant as I felt the car runs like hell
around 1.2bars. I got no
fuel cut until 1.26bars and often peaked up to 1.34
without noticing the
problem.
Remember, I dynoed the car earlier the
last year with pushing out 468
DIN hp of the monster ! But right after the
peak the timing got retarded
and the power dropped while boost remained at
1.25bars. So we tried just
to go up to 5500 where the max power was and
decreased boost until knock
or retard dissapeard and this was at 1.05bars :(
We also made several
pulls where we tried not to go over 5500 but the car
always started to
retard the timing as knock was always detected. Please note
that torque
and power on the lower area increases with more boost. Also the
ECU
needs some time until it say taht the noise detected is really knock
and
then retards the timing until it activates fuel cut. Our cars run up
the
rpms so quick that you'll run faster into fuel cut than noticing
a
hesitation caused by the retard.
> If it was a problem, I
wouldn't have noticed an increase in trap-
> speeds every time I raised
the boost higher since timing retard
> would act to prevent
this.
Not necessarily, the explanation is on the paragraph before. You
can
crank up boost and get a more aggressive power and especially
torque
curve what leads in better et's and trap speeds. But have you
already
stored the money for the rebuild ? Your engine is as strong as mine
was
and I was at around 12.70@118 G-tech with 1.25bars before this. I
just
don't want to know what EGT or IDC I had then. Even more I runned
this
with 93 octane fuel ! I lost the formula but I think for 1.2bars
116
octance are necessary to go the safe way.
> My highest
trapspeed is 109mph on 1.25 bar. That is
> at the track, ~not~ with
a G-Tech which tends to inflate mph.
No G-Tech does not inflate speed but
it measures speed different as it
aproximate the end-speed of the 1/4 mile
and is not a trap speed
measured within a distance.
> If you
noticed detonation beyond 1.0 bar then detonation at 1.2+
> boost
levels should be enough to destroy the engine.
Yes, absolutey correct ...
but it will take some time ;-) I think it is
a good idea to measure
compression more often.
> But there are guys out there like Hau and
Mike M. who have run 112+
> mph running 1.3bar or wastegates unplugged.
Timing retard should
> have made such trapspeeds impossible.
So
let's ask them for the mods and kind of fuel they ran. Also what rpm
they
runned as the retarding on mine was from 5450 to 5680 and then
power came
back. This was noticeable as power went away a little. Just
note how fast
this are was passed at the 1/4 mile.
> In addition, I remember that a
couple guys on stock turbos with an
> EGT gauge noticed low EGT's when
running higher boost. I could be
> wrong, but I believe that
inadequate cooling (especially to the
> intercoolers!) might be what is
causing all the detonation you guys
> are noticing on the dyno.
My
long runs on the german Autobahns is exactly what I got on the dyno
...
detonation. I was able to hold the car at 1.20bars around 250km/h
(5400rpm)
without flooring it. When I then opened the throttle a little
more detonation
was very hearable but the car did not speed down then.
But when accelerating
heavily the rpms are passed much quicker and the
ECU probably does not act
that quick. But detonation IS there and will
kill your engine if you don't
run appropriate fuel (octane level).
> 3) What is the mileage on
the car?
11.5 - 13.5 l/100km
> 4) How recently were the
sparkplugs replaced/regapped?
I replaced them last summer, right after
the dyno then.
> 5) Have you had any valvework done
recently?
None, only cleaning the system as there was some carbon
build-up on the
valves. During the compression test we noticed a difference
with the
leak down test after runnign the acid through the
system.
> He called me up frantically that day and told me that his
car had a
> power increase that was simply unbelievable. It made a
huge
> difference.
I remember Mikael from Sweden told the same when
he made an engine flush
and cleaned the system. He was able to turn down the
Blitz settings to
achieve the same boost. Maybe only cleaning the valvetrain
would have
the same effect ! During the rebuild we inspected the valvetrain
and
measured the play. Everything was very good and very close to
the
factory specs. I expected much more wear with 60k miles and some
very
high speeds on the Autobahn.
> I'm sure there are other
factors involved, but I'll need to think
> about it some more before I can
offer more suggestions. I welcome
> any criticisms, corrections, and
comments.
No critsim nor corrections but many thanks. This discussion
will
hopefully bring some light into the shade.
Regards,
Roger,
Switzerland
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 12:41:19 +0100
From: Roger Gerl <robby@swissonline.ch>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Ticking noise resolved!!
Hi Andrew,
> I had been using
Castrol-R synthetic & at my recent service I had an
....
> the oil
for me again at no cost & the noise has gone.
For me it was the
opposite. I had more ticking with the Mobil 1 5W-40.
but please note that oil
isn't the same oil in every country ! Did you
use the same xW-xx of the oils
? Since I run a mixture of Castrol TXT
5W-30 and Castrol RS 10W-60 and I'm
happy with the little ticking I
always had. Just check the ticking sound
after 1000 miles again. The
mixture is just due to the cold weather we
have.
Regards,
Roger, Switzerland
For subscribe/unsubscribe info,
our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:28:44 EST
From: Aso8@aol.com
Subject: Re: Team3S: Transfer
case question on the 25 spline model
Thanks for info...This confirms what
Brad had said too.
That the 25 fin transfer case on the 5spd will not work on
the 25 fin 6spd.
arty
In a message dated 2/17/99 2:02:27 AM Pacific
Standard Time, phorschel@utah-
inter.net writes:
<< ubj: RE:
Team3S: Transfer case question on the 25 spline model
Date: 2/17/99
2:02:27 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: phorschel@utah-inter.net
(PHorschel)
Sender: owner-stealth-3000gt@list.sirius.com
Reply-to:
stealth-3000gt@list.sirius.com
To:
stealth-3000gt@list.sirius.com
Arty,
I
recently had to go through with replacing a blown transfer case(no
oil
from dealership service) and have some answers to your
questions.
> I know the tranny on my 5 spd 91VR4 can have
either the 18 or 25
> fin output
> spline & the
transfer case needs to match. I already know mine is
> the
smaller
> 18 spline.
Here is what I
know:
5/90-10/91 5spd, small spline(18 teeth)
11/91-5/93 5spd,
model# W5MG1, part# MB936389, large spline(26 teeth)
5/93-99 6spd,
model W6MG1
I do not know too much about the 6spd model but
they will not interchange as
far as I know. The two 5spd transfer
cases look identical except for the
input spline. On the small
spline model the teeth were flush with the top
of the gear. The
larger spline model the teeth are about 1/2" or more down
before they
start and the diameter is noticeably larger. Also the
smaller
spline model did not have the metal driveline(bell shaped thing
over the
end) cover on it. It may have just been missing this
piece though. An
interesting note. I took the cover(say
GETRAG) off of both of them in my
garage and the two splines pull out
and interchange with each other. The
seals even seemed to be the
same size. Therefore you can just get the
larger spline gear and
insert it into your small spline transfer case and it
should work if
you have upgraded the transaxle. I have never road tested
this
but it fit perfectly in my garage.
> Is the transfer case
the same (if its the 25 fin spline) on both
> the 5 spd
and
> the 6 spd later models? In other words, If I were lucky enough
to
> already have
> the 25 spline transfer case could I
reuse it with the newer 6 spd tranny?
As far as I know from
comparing transfer cases at the dealership this will
not work.
The 94-up transfer case is a different slightly different
design.
Paul Horschel
--Copper 93 3000GT
TwinTurbo--
>>
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page
is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 07:28:45 -0800
From: Chris Winkley <cwinkley@plaza.ds.adp.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Ticking noise resolved!!
- -----Original
Message-----
From: Andrew Clark [mailto:chemist1@ozemail.com.au]
Sent:
Wednesday, February 17, 1999 1:37 AM
To: stealth-3000gt@list.sirius.com
Subject:
Team3S: Ticking noise resolved!!
<snip> Speaking to the
service
manager he suggested to switching to Mobil-1 synthetic ( which I
realise 99%
of this group already use in their engines ) so he changed
the oil for me
again at no cost & the noise has gone.<more
snip>
Andrew
Australia
VR4
=====================================
Andrew...
What
weight Castrol were you using? What weight Mobil-1 did the shop put
in?
BTW...in the responses about oil a few months ago, 92% of the
respondents
said they are using synthetic oil. Out of those, about 1/2 were
using
Mobil-1, half were using Castrol or other brands.
Looking
forward...Chris
1995 Glacier Pearl White VR4 (w/HKS Super Flo intake, HKS
SBOV, Predator dry
cell battery, bored and polished throttle body, Magnecore
8.5mm wires, HKS
double platinum plugs gapped at .034", GReddy PRofec A boost
controller,
GReddy turbo timer, ATR downpipe and test pipe, GReddy catback
exhaust,
Eibach 1" drop progressive springs)
For subscribe/unsubscribe
info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 13:39:38 EST
From: MikeVR4@aol.com
Subject: Team3S: Ground
Control to Major Tom
For those not interested in road-racing or
adjustable ride height springs,
please delete. This is a long message,
but should prove VERY helpful to those
interested:
Well, we just
finished installing the Ground Control adjustable ride height
kit with Eibach
springs on our two '93 VR4's. It took us five days, for a
variety of
reasons, but should really take only about four hours to install
on one
vehicle. Each car lost 22 pounds worth of stock parts. The kit
has
some really nice features: you can adjust the ride height with the
wheels
on by jacking the car up, loosening a hex key, and
rotating the lower
spring perch (" adjustable spacer" or "2 piece adjuster",
in Ground Control
terms). You can use the ride height to adjust corner
weight, if you like.
Since the new springs are not compressed without the
weight of the car, you
can disassemble the entire modified setup WITHOUT the
aid of a spring
compressor. We didn't select the Eibach Spring
constants: we just took what
Ground Control shipped. I have the
markings on the springs written down
somewhere, but not with me here.
The result is that the car is very
neutral: no more "rearing up" on
accelleration, no dive during braking, and
no more body roll on turns.
We're going to drive both cars with the Porche
Club this weekend at Texas
World Speedway, so we'll know more next week.
1. Installation
instructions from Ground Control consisted of two drawings
with annotations
by hand. Their nomenclature didn't follow the names in the
Mitsubishi
shop manuals. There were some discrepancies between the drawings
and the
parts supplied. The drawings didn't show the complete,
final
assemblies. Some of the advice in annotations was unclear or
just
inaccurate. You shouldn't have to be an engineer to install these
things,
however the instructions were not obvious to two engineers and one
master
machinist.
2. I tried to clarify things by talking to
Ground Control. They don't
usually answer the phone: you leave a
message or fax. Tony called me after
getting my fax and was friendly,
but not helpful. He seemed unfamiliar with
the VR4. They never
responded to subsequent fax/calls. I got the
impression that they get
cars into their shop and then just make the kits
work. They also seemed
more familiar with other cars.
3. There is nothing unusual about
our cars: they both had stock struts and
shocks and
springs.
4. Front struts. Ground control provided 8 O-rings
intended for the rear
shocks to keep the threaded sleeve from rattling around
the shock cylinder.
We found that we need to use 2 O-rings on each front
strut for the same
purpose. Ground Control said to remove/discard the
stock upper spring perch
(spring upper seat assembly) and provided two
washers to make up for that
thickness. We found that the strut was
unstable without the spring upper
seat assembly, although we did go ahead and
remove and discard the rubber
insulator. You also have to be careful
(as shown in the shop manual) to
line up a hole in the upper seat assembly
with one in the lower spring perch
(welded to the strut), before you torque
the self-locking nut. In order to
torque the self-locking nut, you have
to install the strut assembly and then
use the weight of the car to compress
the spring and keep the strut piston
from turning. We used a hydrallic
jack to raise the strut, but you could
also put the tire on and lower the
car.
5. Rear shocks. Be careful removing the upper
mounting hardware: it's
easy to drop stuff behind the trim panels and
difficult to retrieve! One of
our cars has a moonroof, and it has an extra
bracket to remove under the
access panel. Note the orientation of the
arrow on the large gold keyed
washer just beneath the self locking nut on top
of the shock. On
reinstallation, the shaft must be oriented the same
way in order for the ECS
to work. Also note that the lower bushing
sticks out farther on the
outboard side of the shock than the inboard side to
help you keep track of
which side is which. Putting the keyed
washer in a vise allows you to torque
the self locking nut with the whole
assembly off the car. The real
frustration was the bump stop (bump
rubber). Ground Control supplied a rubber
insulator and "fender washer"
and said to cut the stock bump stop in half.
Actually, the lower half of the
stock bump stop fits snugly inside the new
rubber insulator and keeps the new
spring upright. Otherwise, the new spring
gets cocked against the stock
cup
assembly and can scrape the shock piston(BAD!). You might need to
trim the
old
bump rubber OD a little, but you don't need to cut it in
half. The fender
washers the kit came with make nice shot glass
coasters - we are still
clueless as to what Ground Control intended for
these. Their hole prevents
them travelling farther south than the
narrow part of the shock piston, which
is not near where the new rubber
insulator and the top of the spring sits.
6. It's worth your time
while all this stuff is off the car to degrease the
struts and shocks and to
clean the contacts on the ECS connectors with
contact cleaner (of all
things!). We had to use a crowbar to remove two
rear shocks because of
corrosion. High temperature brake grease or
anti-seize compound will
make later repairs easier.
7. If we had $700 apiece, we would've
replaced the shocks/struts at the
same time. It won't be that difficult
later, but would've been nice. We
have about 60K miles on each
car.
8. Anybody out there have a FWD 3000GT base or SL and want
stiffer springs?
We think you might like to use our stock springs at least on
one end. Check
the shop manual for the spring constant
difference, the diameters/lengths are
the same so they should
fit.
Also a quick note, the threaded sleeves that Ground Control provide
sit fairly
low on the stock lower spring perch, and as a consequence you
can't get the
full threaded travel out of the front suspension, because the
shock's lower
"splashguard" interferes with the last 1/3 of the
threads. So, you can lower
the front of the car no more than 2 inches
at the most. A solution would be
to cut away the splashguard or raise
where the threaded sleeve sits on the
shock.
For adjustment, it
works out to 10 revolutions per inch of lowering for both
ends. We'll
tell ya how the live fire goes this weekend at TWS!
Mike Willis
'93
Pearl White VR-4(sunroof)
Chuck Willis
'93 Pearl White VR-4(no
sunroof)
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 21:00:33
From: Mark Creekmore <mcreekmore@usa.net>
Subject: Re:
[Team3S: Ground Control to Major Tom]
Thanks for the
info. I just ordered a set of Ground Control adj. springs. I ordered
550 front and 400 rear based on an earlier thread and what was actually
available. :) Could you let us know what your spring rates are? I
also ordered the adjustable camber plates. I would appreciate any hints/tips for
the camber plate installation if anyone has experience installing those. Looking
forward to hearing about this weekends results.
Thanks,
Mark
92' Black R/T
owner-stealth-3000gt@list.sirius.com
wrote:
> For those not interested in road-racing or adjustable ride height
springs,
> please delete. This is a long message, but should prove
VERY helpful to those
> interested:
>
> Well, we just
finished installing the Ground Control adjustable ride height
> kit with
Eibach springs on our two '93 VR4's.
<snip>
We'll tell
ya how the live fire goes this weekend at TWS!
>
> Mike
Willis
> '93 Pearl White VR-4(sunroof)
>
> Chuck
Willis
> '93 Pearl White VR-4(no
sunroof)
____________________________________________________________________
Get
free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 13:15:11 -0800
From: wce@bc.sympatico.ca
Subject: Team3S:
Water Injection
Roger, Barry (and newly subscribed Austin)
How
about reviving the water injection option/thread here? Has any new
tecnical
information come to the fore since your inquirey Roger? Barry?
Past opinion
was to avoid such bandaid solutions to Turbos, but that was
nearly
prehistoric in the fast changing technologies of the automotive
world. What's
up with this guys?
Best
Darc
For subscribe/unsubscribe
info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 13:38:43 -0700
From: "james berry" <fastmax@home.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S:
Ground Control to Major Tom
- ----- You can use the ride height to adjust
corner weight, if you like.
>Since the new springs are not compressed
without the weight of the car, you
>can disassemble the entire modified
setup WITHOUT the aid of a spring
>compressor
I plan on using
the ground control setup [550# front 400# rear with GAB
shocks] and one of
the questions I have is, what happens if/when the car
gets airborne. What
keeps the springs in place on the perch? Is it possible
to have the spring
misaligned when the suspension is compressed back to
normal
???????
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 14:10:54 -0700
From: "james berry" <fastmax@home.com>
Subject: Team3S:
drive shaft center support bearing(s)
while my car was up on a rack I
noticed what I consider a lot of play [ 3\8
in ] in the rubber isolation
bushing that surrounds the center support
bearings. The front support bearing
had dropped down 1\4 in or so as a
result of the rubber bushing having
collapsed under the weight of the shaft.
In addition there seemed to be an
excess amount of play in all
directions.The rear bearing is similar but
not quite as bad. Anyone know
how rigid these isolation bushings should
be.
In what is possibly a related issue when I put pressure on the gear
shift
knob while the engine is under load I can feel a rather heavy vibration
in
the shifter. Possible vibration from the driveshaft ? Or perhaps just
normal
feedback from the drivetrain. I don't notice any other unusual
vibrations or
noises.
93 stealth TT 36K miles
Jim
Berry
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 23:24:48 +0000
From: "R.G." <robby@swissonline.ch>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Water Injection
> How about reviving the water injection
option/thread here? Has any new
> tecnical information come to the fore
since your inquirey Roger? Barry?
> Past opinion was to avoid such bandaid
solutions to Turbos, but that was
> nearly prehistoric in the fast
changing technologies of the automotive
> world. What's up with this
guys?
I can only speak for myself in this point. Corky Bell says in his
book that you
should not touch this stuff when there are other possibilities
and if everything
is setup properly it should not be used. Other books say
that it is a good
alternative.
I did some deeper research in this area
and met a guy who already installed
several water injection systems as well
provides save NO2 systems for racing.
The later is somewhat a ride on the
H-bomb and I'd never want to have this
bottle in the car when cruising around
!
In his earlier years, Nextek (the company in Switzerland) had their own
water
injection systems and use today the Aquamist WAIS System 1 and 2 in
their cars.
The injection of distilled water mixed with methanol provides
knock resistance
up to 160 octane when running with normal pump gas. I think
this is way enough
we all need :) The mixture will be sprayed into the air
stream before the
throttle body. They also installed the jet before an
intercooler as with the
lower temperatures the IC efficiency was better and
provided better cooling.
This is not necessary on our systems as the air
temperatures is not that big as
in the Porsche Turbos.
The System 1
comes with a high pressure magnetic pump (27 bars, 390psi),
different spray
jets, any size of tank and a boost sensor with activation
switch. With this
the water/alcohol injection is automatically activated when a
specific boost
is reached (say 1.00bars) to provide a defined amount of the
mixture. System
2 consists of an additional computer with a variable injection
pressure
controller. This allows you to get a fully controllable 3D setup for
your
desires. It's easy to upgrade from 1 to 2 without any loss of parts.
The
typical flow is around 125ml per minute at WOT.
The prices are
good for the System 1 (see the aquamist homepage to see prices
and dealer
location) if you do the job by yourself. For myself I plan to do such
an
installation to prevent the damn knock !
I'll let the shop do the
installation and to add or to change the tank. We'll
probably use the
windshield water tank as it is big enough. As I still have the
headlight
washer tank in the front bumper I can route the windshield washer hose
to
this smaller tank. We will use the larger pump than used in System 1 to
be
prepared for the next system and big hp figures. The system will be tuned
in on
the dyno to get the right mixture level and to determine the jet size
for the
desired amount of the injected liquid. The whole setup including
installation
and dyno costs about $1200 here in Switzerland while the dyno
session as well
the installation is the most expensive part. I think the
System 1 should be
available for around $600.
In my point of view the
stuff is not cheap as the pump and the boost
sensor/activator are the most
expensive parts. But it will remove the headache
about where to get high
octane racing fuel in Europe as well as to be able to
crank up boost to the
peak of the Mt.Matterhorn (in Switzerland) without much
danger of getting
detonation and retarded timing.
A last note : We know that the higher
boost the more fuel is needed. But a lot
just do this to cool down the
combustion chamber and therefore will waist the
energy in the fuel. With the
water/alcohol injection the chamber will be cold
down by the mixture and the
additional fuel can be used to produce power ! As
the stock injectors will be
maxed out after 1.00 bars, it is necessary to
upgrade the fuel system at
first ! When I'm back from the States, the fuel parts
will be installed
immediately and tuned in. After this the ERL system will find
it's way into
the car for sure (mid April 99) ! Then I'm prepared for the big
turbos,
hehe.
Link to Aquamist :
http://www.aquamist.co.uk/
A link
to a System 1 user (MX5 Supercharged):
http://www.avatar.com/~kory/h2o-injection.htm
A
good link to a System 2 user (Celica Turbo):
http://extra.newsguy.com/~gtfour/modERL.htm
-
-----------------------
Roger Gerl, Switzerland
93'3000GT TwinTurbo
(Animale Rosso)
not wet ... yet
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our
web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 17:44:40 -0600
From: Wayne <wala@hypertech-inc.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: drive shaft center support bearing(s)
I think this is normal.
Iv'e come in contact with 3 or 4 of these cars
driveshafts, they all have a
lot of play in the bushings. The shafts are
balanced, so i don't think it's
an issue..
Wayne
At 02:10 PM 2/17/99 -0700, you
wrote:
>while my car was up on a rack I noticed what I consider a lot of
play [ 3\8
>in ] in the rubber isolation bushing that surrounds the center
support
>bearings. The front support bearing had dropped down 1\4 in or so
as a
>result of the rubber bushing having collapsed under the weight of
the shaft.
>In addition there seemed to be an excess amount of play in
all
>directions.The rear bearing is similar but not quite as bad.
Anyone know
>how rigid these isolation bushings should
be.
>
>In what is possibly a related issue when I put pressure on
the gear shift
>knob while the engine is under load I can feel a rather
heavy vibration in
>the shifter. Possible vibration from the driveshaft ?
Or perhaps just normal
>feedback from the drivetrain. I don't notice any
other unusual vibrations or
>noises.
>
>93 stealth TT
36K miles
>
>
>Jim Berry
For subscribe/unsubscribe
info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 19:11:46 -0500
From: "BRADLEY A COCKS." <BRADCOCKS@prodigy.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Wheel trigger for the
profec
Hello
All,
Has anyone used the stearing wheel trigger for the profec?
any idea how much
it might be?a good place to get it? is it worth
it?....
Thanks to
all that reply,
Brad
Cocks bradcocks@prodigy.net
12.80
1/4 mile times all day long on stock turbos, no vpc,no nos,stock
ecu,stock
cat,4000lbs,
,
just a little boost and you will be flying.....atr
downpipe, magnicore
wires,are planed next...
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
End
of Team3S Digest V1 #103
****************************
For unsubscribe
info and FAQ, see our web page at http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm