--

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