--

From: owner-stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com (Team3S Digest)
To: stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com
Subject: Team3S Digest V1 #141
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          Friday, April 2 1999          Volume 01 : Number 141




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

Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 14:59:25 -0500 (EST)
From: Dennis Moore <stealth@kiva.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Erebuni ground effects kit -Reply

Anybody know if aerodynamics testing has been performed on these or any
other ground efects kits?  They *look* cool, but do they help/hurt fuel
economy/top speed/etc?

Dennis Moore
stealth@kiva.net

Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.

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

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

Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 15:17:31 -0500
From: Gavin Wallis <WallisG@mwaa.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Erebuni ground effects kit -Reply -Reply

The front has been created with aerodynamics in mind. How much over
stock, I dunno. But upon inspection and review of the unit personally
with Erebuni, I confidently believe it's aerodynamics would only be
relevant at 100mph+ speeds. Not a concern for most people.

IMHO I would guess the front of Erebuni to be better. For 1 it is
fiberglass, not poly-e. Thus it doesn't really flex making its' cut into the
oncoming wind pressure a little more efficient. Additionally the shapes of
Erebuni kit are much sharper. However the air ducts are much larger,
which is wind hitting a flat surface.

Lets review: I know nothing, this letter was just a lot of speculative
rambling.

Gavin
'94 Black VR-4 with some weird thing on the front of the car

>>> Dennis Moore <stealth@kiva.net> 04/01/99 02:59pm >>>
Anybody know if aerodynamics testing has been performed on these or
any
other ground efects kits?  They *look* cool, but do they help/hurt fuel
economy/top speed/etc?

Dennis Moore
stealth@kiva.net

Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.

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: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 20:22:08 -0500
From: William Lynn Larsen <wlarsen@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: K&N Aircharger instead of K&N FIPK

Mark,

Do you or does anyone out there know if this will fit the NA MAS??
I have been considering this, if it will fit my '93 NA DOHC.

Regards,
Lynn

"Wendlandt, Mark (MN51)" wrote:
>
> A while ago, there was a discussion about using an Aircharger from a '95-'98
> Eclipse on our Stealths and VR4s.  Well...I bought the Aircharger for
> 80bucks and installed it. The Aircharger is much larger than the FIPK and I
> had to modify the bracket(drilled one hole) to mount the filter firmly to
> the fender well so it didn't move.  It took me about 1/2hr to install.
>
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

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

Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 21:03:43 -0500
From: Jason and Cristy Barnhart <phnxgld@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Turbo upgrade question

Gavin,
  15gs will flow more air (cfm) than a stock turbo at the same pressure (psi).  Tthis is
very important, you can get more air at equal pressures, requiring more fuel.  It seems
to me that psi is more relevant when comparing 2 identicle setups.  Intake or exhaust
changes can change the psi if I'm not mistaken.  Better flowing exhaust could lower psi,
but raise cfm and power.  I think too many people are depending on psi to make decisions
where psi isn't the important factor.
  This is all information that I've gathered by reading the list, I'm not sure about the
accuracy and have been waiting for the more knowledgable guys to elaborate.

Jason

Gavin Wallis wrote:

> If I were to put 15g's in my car now...without making the necessary fuel
> management mods and boost mods, would I necessarily be hurting
> anything?
>
> I assume that the 15g's will simply hold stock 12.5psi boost to the redline
> and I will not be in any danger of running lean.
>
> So...any benefits? any dangers?
>
> Thanks,
> Gavin
> '94 Black VR-4
> 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: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 22:28:56 -0600
From: "Paul T. Golley" <ptgolley@ro.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Camber fix for lowering springs

>the low down on how to fix the negative camber created by lowering
>springs.
>On the front you must elongate the shock tower mounting holes to give
>extra positive camber. This means make the holes longer toward the
>engine bay, not toward the wheel.

My thinking is different:  Camber angle is the tilt of the centerline of the
wheel with respect to vertical, and that outward tilt of the top of the
wheel is defined as positive camber angle. Unless there's something
askew in my understanding, the mounting holes (the holes in the sheet
metal where the three strut mounting bolts stick through) would have to
be elongated in a direction AWAY from the engine to decrease negative
camber.



>The rear you must elongate the sub frame where the lower control arm
>attaches near the differential. The upper arm has the cam adjuster for
>the camber adjustment and the lower is fixed. Again, don't widen, just
>elongate, this time toward the wheel.

Here,again, if I understand what you are saying, extending the lower
arm toward the wheel would result in increased negative camber by
moving the lower part of the wheel outward.

One of us is mixed up; some one tell us who.
Regards, ptg

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

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 23:40:28 -0600
From: "Paul T. Golley" <ptgolley@ro.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Camber fix for lowering springs

>On the front you must elongate the shock tower mounting holes to give
>extra positive camber. This means make the holes longer toward the
>engine bay, not toward the wheel. The rear you must elongate the sub frame
where the lower control arm
>attaches near the differential.

I believe you may have the polarity of these mods reversed.  If I
understand, both mods would increase negative camber.  You
(or someone) correct me if I'm wrong.
Regards, ptg


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

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

Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 22:33:53 -0600
From: "Paul T. Golley" <ptgolley@ro.com>
Subject: Team3S: Concequences of Cat Removal

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_00C2_01BE7C8F.B8A8F280
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All-
I would like to know what concequences result from removal (or =
gutting)of=20
either the main cat, and/or the pre-cats on a '95 VR-4.  Viz:  What does =
the=20
ECU do differently as a result of the changed 02 sensor outputs?
Much thanks for any explanations.
Regards, ptg

- ------=_NextPart_000_00C2_01BE7C8F.B8A8F280
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.2106.6"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>All-</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>I would like to know what =
concequences result=20
from removal (or gutting)of </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>either the </FONT><FONT =
color=3D#000000=20
size=3D2>main cat, and/or the pre-cats on a '95 VR-4.&nbsp; Viz:&nbsp; =
What does=20
the </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>ECU do </FONT><FONT color=3D#000000=20
size=3D2>differently as a result of the changed 02 sensor =
outputs?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Much thanks for any =
explanations.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Regards, =
ptg</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_00C2_01BE7C8F.B8A8F280--

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

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

Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 22:49:05 -0600
From: xwing <xwing@execpc.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Turbo upgrade question

Jason and Cristy Barnhart wrote:

>   15gs will flow more air (cfm) than stock turbo at  same psi.   you can get more air at
> equal pressures, requiring more fuel.  psi is more relevant comparing 2 identical setups.
> Intake or exhaust
> changes can change the psi.  Better flowing exhaust could lower psi,
> but raise cfm and power.  I think too many people are depending on psi to make decisions
> where psi isn't the important factor.
>   This is all information that I've gathered by reading the list, I'm not sure about the
> accuracy and have been waiting for the more knowledgable guys to elaborate.
>

Jason and Gavin:
1)  15G with 12psi to redline PROBably won't hurt anything dragracing, with short duration
full throttle.
      15G are capable of much more to redline, and stock injectors (360cc) are not big
enough to give enough fuel to support this boost, so will lean out and damage things IF you
go to too high a boost at too high an rpm (airflow value).  You can use 20psi at 3000rpm and
be fine because airflow there is (ROUGHly) the same as 10psi at 6000rpm, so ROUGHly same
fuel requirement.  However, _20psi_ at 6000rpm means filling those 3 liters with air twice
as many times per minute so twice as many cfm so twice as much fuel needed, and so your
injectors get to be too small.  Also, stock fuelpump gets inadequate (though I've never
heard of someone blowing up primarily due to fuelpump; most are smart enough to upgrade it
with the big turbo/injectors move).

2)  The SHORT answer is that 15G do NOT flow any more _cfm_ at the same psi as stock turbos
but they do flow slightly more _AIR_.  Flow = Pressure x Resistance.  Increase pressure 2x =
2x increase flow.  Resistance in engine is represented by ductwork leading from turbo OUTLET
(does NOT include turbo) to the inside of the cylinder.  Changing the TURBO (pressure
source) does NOT change Pressure value (remember we are saying PSI is CONSTANT)...does not
change Resistance...so does not change cfm Flow.

HOW  EVER, where people sometimes make mistake, the cfm Flowed will be COOLER=DENSER AIR
with a bigger/more efficient turbo Compressor section (15G vs stock 9B), so though the cfm
is SAME, that SAME cubic foot of air has more AIR MOLECULES in it (more O2) so DOES give
more power/need a little more fuel to remain at proper Air:Fuel ratio (note "proper" in this
real case is NOT stoichiometric, it is far richer).  The difference in heat is NOT totally
gigantic but is real.   Any gas compressed heats up a predetermined amount at a minimum; the
efficiency of the compressor imparts an ADDITIONAL heat load into the compressed charge.
The more efficient the compressor, the less EXTRA heat added, the denser the charge.

NOTE:  this effect is decreased by INTERCOOLING, because though the smaller turbos heat the
air up more, this greater delta T across the intercooler means the intercoolers SHED more
heat also.  Doesn't quite make up for the lower temps by bigger turbos to begin with, but
effect is mitigated somewhat.

3)  Better flowing exhaust generally will INCREASE boost pressure.  Greater delta P across
turbine wheel means turbo spins faster so compresses MORE air so INCREASES boost so makes
MORE hp so makes MORE airflow/heat out exhaust so makes FASTER turbo spin...etc...    See
for example:   the plugged up catalytic converter car I tested had LOW boost.  Cleaning out
cat (better flowing exhaust) markedly increased boost and performance.

Jack Tertadian

> Gavin Wallis wrote:
> > If I were to put 15g's in my car now...without making the necessary fuel
> > management mods and boost mods, would I necessarily be hurting anything?
> > I assume 15g simply hold stock 12.5psi boost to redline
> > and I will not be in danger of lean. Gavin 94 Black VR-4

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

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

Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 20:53:13 -0700
From: "james berry" <fastmax@home.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Turbo upgrade question

,
>  15gs will flow more air (cfm) than a stock turbo at the same pressure
(psi).  Tthis is
>very important, you can get more air at equal pressures, requiring more
fuel.  It seems
>to me that psi is more relevant when comparing 2 identicle setups.  Intake
or exhaust
>changes can change the psi if I'm not mistaken.  Better flowing exhaust
could lower psi,
>but raise cfm and power.

Your first sentence contains a significent issue --- 15gs WILL flow more
air ---
the real point is that the 15Gs CAN flow more air at a specified pressure.
Whether or not they will flow is dependant on the throttel body, head flow
characteristics,exhaust flow RPM, etc. The stock turbo WILL provide its 15
PSI
untill it reaches its limit of about 300 CFM. The 15G WILL provide its 15
PSI
untill it reaches its limit of 400 CFM. The CFM required WILL be determined
by the engine.

        Jim Berry

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

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

Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 23:04:06 -0600
From: xwing <xwing@execpc.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Turbo upgrade question

xwing wrote:

>   Flow = Pressure x Resistance

Oops. Actual:   Flow = Pressure / Resistance.        Pressure = Flow x Resistance.
JT

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

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

Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 00:21:45 -0500
From: Ron Thompson <rtetetet@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Camber fix for lowering springs

> My thinking is different:  Camber angle is the tilt of the centerline of the wheel with respect to vertical, and that outward tilt of the top of the wheel is defined as positive camber angle.

Yes Paul, but lowering springs cause negative camber, or squat, not
positive camber. Did you actually read my response last time with the
ASCII illustration?
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

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

Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 23:52:11 -0600
From: "Paul T. Golley" <ptgolley@ro.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Camber fix for lowering springs

>> My thinking is different:  Camber angle is the tilt of the centerline of
the wheel with respect to vertical, and that outward tilt of the top of the
wheel is defined as positive camber angle.
>
>Yes Paul, but lowering springs cause negative camber, or squat, not
>positive camber.


Yes, lowering springs frequently cause excessive negative camber.
To reduce excessive negative camber, steps must be taken to move
the top of the wheels AWAY from the engine in front.  In the rear,
the bottom struts must be SHORTENED to reduce the negative camber
The way to do this is to do the OPPOSITE of what you suggest,
and  move the top of the wheel OUTWARD, in front, and the bottom
of the wheel INWARD at the rear.
Regards, ptg

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

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

Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 07:22:19 +0200
From: Matthews <matthews@wiesbaden.netsurf.de>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Erebuni ground effects kit

Gavin Wallis wrote:
>
> The front has been created with aerodynamics in mind. How much over
> stock, I dunno. But upon inspection and review of the unit personally
> with Erebuni, I confidently believe it's aerodynamics would only be
> relevant at 100mph+ speeds. Not a concern for most people.

Ha! :-)


> IMHO I would guess the front of Erebuni to be better. For 1 it is
> fiberglass, not poly-e. Thus it doesn't really flex making its' cut into the
> oncoming wind pressure a little more efficient. Additionally the shapes of
> Erebuni kit are much sharper. However the air ducts are much larger,
> which is wind hitting a flat surface.

I would think that the further the front deviates from a smooth, rounded
shape, the higher the Cd.  If this new front incorporates bigger
ducting, then aerodynamics will certainly suffer.  However, if the
improved ducting gets fresh, cool air to the front brakes and flows more
air through the intercoolers, then the benefits may outweigh the
drawbacks.

Is there a picture of this thing out there anywhere?  I'm curious to see
how it looks.

- --
Jim Matthews - Wiesbaden, Germany
matthews@wiesbaden.netsurf.de (64 Kbps ISDN)
http://rover.wiesbaden.netsurf.de/~matthews

*** 3000GT-Stealth International (3Si) Member #0030 ***
http://rover.wiesbaden.netsurf.de/~matthews/stealth.html
Jet Black '94 Dodge Stealth R/T Twin-Turbo AWD AWS 6-spd
Adjustable Active Suspension, Adjustable Exhaust System
K&N FIPK, A'PEXi Super AVC-R (1.0 bar @ 72% BADC)
A'PEXi Turbo Timer (30 sec), Blitz Blow-Off Valve
Magnecore spark plug wires, Redline ShockProof fluids
Metal Matrix brake pads, custom braided brake lines
Michelin Pilot XGT-Z4 245/45ZR17, Top Speed: 168mph
G-Tech Pro: 0-60 4.79 sec, 1/4 13.16 sec @ 113.9 mph
1 Feb 99 Dyno Session: 406 SAE HP, 354 lb-ft torque

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

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

Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 01:16:56 -0500
From: Ron Thompson <rtetetet@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Camber fix for lowering springs

Yes again Paul, but you are dwelling on the original post I made where
I was correcting for POSITIVE camber, not NEGATIVE. I corrected that
at your urging. I don't recommend "shortening" the control arm, but
rather adding adjustment to the control arm pivot point.
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

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

Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 00:22:36 -0600
From: "Paul T. Golley" <ptgolley@ro.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Camber fix for lowering springs

>Yes Paul, but lowering springs cause negative camber, or squat, not
>positive camber. Did you actually read my response last time with the
>ASCII illustration?

Yes I read your last response.  Lowering springs DO cause negative
camber.  And the mods you describe will add MORE negative camber.
Obviously, if the negative camber resulting from using lowering
springs is excessive,(often the case), you must adjust the geometry to
REDUCE the negative camber, which requires doing the OPPOSITE
of what you suggest.  This is my last comment on this subject! I suggest
you talk to someone who understands suspension geometry and
knows what camber, toe, steering axis inclination, and caster are, and
how they are related.
Regards, ptg
.
Regards, ptg


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

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

Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 11:44:29 +0200
From: "R.G." <robby@swissonline.ch>
Subject: Re: Team3S: g p on the clutch

Ron,

> Roger, are you sure, the RPS link only shows to 94 or 95. If they will
> fit a 96 VR4, I'll sign up.

Yes, these are only two differernt clutches for all years and models.

Let me know what RPS clutch you'd like to have and I sign you up.

Regards,
Roger

- -----------------------
Roger Gerl, Switzerland
93'3000GT TwinTurbo (Animale Rosso)
K&N FIPK,Magnecor wires,Blitz DSBC/gauge/Dual Timer,Apexi AFC,HKS SBOV,
ATR DP/ tespipe,Borla Cat-back,OZ Mito2 rims,Yoko AVS-Z1,braided brake lines,
Bremsa brakes,Pagid RS-R pads

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

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

Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 12:01:32 +0200
From: "R.G." <robby@swissonline.ch>
Subject: Team3S: RPS clutch Group Purchase ! I need more ...

Friends,

The closing date for the Group Purchase on teh RPS clutch comes closer and
closer and we are only about 8 who want to get one :/ Remember, the closing date
is Sunday April 4th 1999 and after this the price will be back to normal price.

Time is limited because the clutches are already on backorder and we hope that
they will be shipped after a month when the order is placed. Any jump onto the
GP after the closing date is not possible. So leave the easter eggs and
chocolate bunnies where tehy are and get an RPS CLutch for your car, hehe.

Check the GP page under
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/9589/group_purchase.html

I hope this helps a little in money saving
Regards,
Roger

- -----------------------
Roger Gerl, Switzerland
93'3000GT TwinTurbo (Animale Rosso)

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

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

Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 10:15:16 -0500
From: William Lynn Larsen <wlarsen@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Turbo upgrade question

Just a technical point, not to get into the debate over which turbos,
but the real bottom line is the total number of oxygen molocules that
are in the combustion chamber, therefore flow and psi are both envolved
since: flow is a measure of volume per time and psi is directly related
to the number of oxygen molucules in a given amount of volume; therefore
as flow rates and psi increase so do the total number of oxygen
molocules in the cylinder at the time the both intake and exhaust valves
close and the compression stroke starts.  It is true that a free flowing
exhaust (one with little back pressure) can make it more difficult to
get the pressure part of the equation up, it will certainly raise the
flow rate side.  So there is a tradeoff going on there. (As an aside-
the timing of feul injector spray in relation to when the valves close
can cause some of the feul load to be lost out of the exhaust before the
exhaust valve closes and this can be made up for by over feuling causing
some loss of feul efficency.)  A true mechanical engineer (I am a
computer engineer, although I had to take all the core physics courses
like any other engineer) would be able to calculate the exact point that
yields the max number of O2 molocules in the chamber while at the same
time balancing the loss of feul with the increase in efficency of the
feul that actually burns.

My $0.02

Regards,
Lynn

Jason and Cristy Barnhart wrote:
>
> Gavin,
>   15gs will flow more air (cfm) than a stock turbo at the same pressure (psi).  Tthis is
> very important, you can get more air at equal pressures, requiring more fuel.  It seems
> to me that psi is more relevant when comparing 2 identicle setups.  Intake or exhaust
> changes can change the psi if I'm not mistaken.  Better flowing exhaust could lower psi,
> but raise cfm and power.  I think too many people are depending on psi to make decisions
> where psi isn't the important factor.
>   This is all information that I've gathered by reading the list, I'm not sure about the
> accuracy and have been waiting for the more knowledgable guys to elaborate.
>
> Jason
>
> Gavin Wallis wrote:
>
> > If I were to put 15g's in my car now...without making the necessary fuel
> > management mods and boost mods, would I necessarily be hurting
> > anything?
> >
> > I assume that the 15g's will simply hold stock 12.5psi boost to the redline
> > and I will not be in any danger of running lean.
> >
> > So...any benefits? any dangers?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Gavin
> > '94 Black VR-4
> > 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
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

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

Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 10:21:33 -0500
From: William Lynn Larsen <wlarsen@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Turbo upgrade question

Boy do I feel silly now -- What Jack said!

Regards,
Lynn

xwing wrote:
>
> Jason and Cristy Barnhart wrote:
>
> >   15gs will flow more air (cfm) than stock turbo at  same psi.   you can get more air at
> > equal pressures, requiring more fuel.  psi is more relevant comparing 2 identical setups.
> > Intake or exhaust
> > changes can change the psi.  Better flowing exhaust could lower psi,
> > but raise cfm and power.  I think too many people are depending on psi to make decisions
> > where psi isn't the important factor.
> >   This is all information that I've gathered by reading the list, I'm not sure about the
> > accuracy and have been waiting for the more knowledgable guys to elaborate.
> >
>
> Jason and Gavin:
> 1)  15G with 12psi to redline PROBably won't hurt anything dragracing, with short duration
> full throttle.
>       15G are capable of much more to redline, and stock injectors (360cc) are not big
> enough to give enough fuel to support this boost, so will lean out and damage things IF you
> go to too high a boost at too high an rpm (airflow value).  You can use 20psi at 3000rpm and
> be fine because airflow there is (ROUGHly) the same as 10psi at 6000rpm, so ROUGHly same
> fuel requirement.  However, _20psi_ at 6000rpm means filling those 3 liters with air twice
> as many times per minute so twice as many cfm so twice as much fuel needed, and so your
> injectors get to be too small.  Also, stock fuelpump gets inadequate (though I've never
> heard of someone blowing up primarily due to fuelpump; most are smart enough to upgrade it
> with the big turbo/injectors move).
>
> 2)  The SHORT answer is that 15G do NOT flow any more _cfm_ at the same psi as stock turbos
> but they do flow slightly more _AIR_.  Flow = Pressure x Resistance.  Increase pressure 2x =
> 2x increase flow.  Resistance in engine is represented by ductwork leading from turbo OUTLET
> (does NOT include turbo) to the inside of the cylinder.  Changing the TURBO (pressure
> source) does NOT change Pressure value (remember we are saying PSI is CONSTANT)...does not
> change Resistance...so does not change cfm Flow.
>
> HOW  EVER, where people sometimes make mistake, the cfm Flowed will be COOLER=DENSER AIR
> with a bigger/more efficient turbo Compressor section (15G vs stock 9B), so though the cfm
> is SAME, that SAME cubic foot of air has more AIR MOLECULES in it (more O2) so DOES give
> more power/need a little more fuel to remain at proper Air:Fuel ratio (note "proper" in this
> real case is NOT stoichiometric, it is far richer).  The difference in heat is NOT totally
> gigantic but is real.   Any gas compressed heats up a predetermined amount at a minimum; the
> efficiency of the compressor imparts an ADDITIONAL heat load into the compressed charge.
> The more efficient the compressor, the less EXTRA heat added, the denser the charge.
>
> NOTE:  this effect is decreased by INTERCOOLING, because though the smaller turbos heat the
> air up more, this greater delta T across the intercooler means the intercoolers SHED more
> heat also.  Doesn't quite make up for the lower temps by bigger turbos to begin with, but
> effect is mitigated somewhat.
>
> 3)  Better flowing exhaust generally will INCREASE boost pressure.  Greater delta P across
> turbine wheel means turbo spins faster so compresses MORE air so INCREASES boost so makes
> MORE hp so makes MORE airflow/heat out exhaust so makes FASTER turbo spin...etc...    See
> for example:   the plugged up catalytic converter car I tested had LOW boost.  Cleaning out
> cat (better flowing exhaust) markedly increased boost and performance.
>
> Jack Tertadian
>
> > Gavin Wallis wrote:
> > > If I were to put 15g's in my car now...without making the necessary fuel
> > > management mods and boost mods, would I necessarily be hurting anything?
> > > I assume 15g simply hold stock 12.5psi boost to redline
> > > and I will not be in danger of lean. Gavin 94 Black VR-4
>
> 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: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 10:37:34 -0500
From: Gavin Wallis <WallisG@mwaa.com>
Subject: Team3S: RPS clutch Group Purchase ! I need more ... -Reply

Did you hear if RPS has a lightweight flywheel yet?  I've heard _more_
horror stories about resurfacing and old flywheel for carbons/kevlars.

Maybe we could just use Bozz Chromolys? Or does anyone know how
much stock is?

Gavin
'94 Black VR-4

>>> "R.G." <robby@swissonline.ch> 04/02/99 05:01am >>>
Friends,

The closing date for the Group Purchase on teh RPS clutch comes closer
and
closer and we are only about 8 who want to get one :/ Remember, the
closing date
is Sunday April 4th 1999 and after this the price will be back to normal
price.

Time is limited because the clutches are already on backorder and we
hope that
they will be shipped after a month when the order is placed. Any jump
onto the
GP after the closing date is not possible. So leave the easter eggs and
chocolate bunnies where tehy are and get an RPS CLutch for your car,
hehe.

Check the GP page under
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/9589/group_purchase.html

I hope this helps a little in money saving
Regards,
Roger

- -----------------------
Roger Gerl, Switzerland
93'3000GT TwinTurbo (Animale Rosso)

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: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 08:34:34 -0800
From: wce@bc.sympatico.ca
Subject: Re: Team3S: RPS clutch Group Purchase ! I need more ... -Reply

Group;

Gavin Wallis wrote:

> Did you hear if RPS has a lightweight flywheel yet?  I've heard _more_
> horror stories about resurfacing and old flywheel for carbons/kevlars.
>

Can anyone else confirm or deny this alleged problem? Has anyone here had this problem
with carbon? Jack? Barry? Todd? Brad? et all....

Best

Darc

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

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

Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 10:39:21 -0600
From: Scott J Cowan <sjc0u812@juno.com>
Subject: Team3S: Woes update -- the never ending saga and questions...

Hello to all:

Many have asked me to update my situation now that I've had the infamous
clutch vacuum booster installed...so here's a brief recap of events and
my take on the friggin' thing.

*June of last year, clutch, throw out bearing, pressure plate and fly
wheel replaced
*Not long after, seized throw out bearing replaced
*Master cylinder diagnosed as leaking, replaced
*Leaking of master cylinder caused vacuum booster failed, it now replaced

IMHO, it is only marginally better at best, still loose pedal pressure
coming out of speed or under hard acceleration. 

Here's some fun new things that have happened since the booster change:

1.) Somehow, the snake eyes mod is acting bass-akwards.  Now, in order to
get the lights to pop up, I must have the lights turned off.  But, after
I do pop them up, then turn on the lights, I can hit the pop up button,
and when I turn the lights off, the pop ups will go down as if no mod.
In the words of the great sayer of sooth, "what the f....?"

2.) The climate control system seems to have a mind of it's own now.
Literally.  I typically never have it set on auto, always outside air,
and no a/c, I want the hp.  Normally, I set the mode depending if I want
heat or cool air, i.e., to the feet or torso.  Get this, I get in and
start the car, I watch the display, the air for a brief period of time
comes out on the glass, then it moves -- by itself -- to the torso and
feet, the past two days, a red at the feet, blue at the torso.  I've
owned the car going on two years now, I've never see it do this before.
I repeat the infamous words....

3.) Lastly, I had the dealer install a noise suppressor for me a few
weeks ago, and yes they did it twice.  I have one of those flat plate
radios with all the adjustments (I believe you audio aficionados call
that a double-din?), love all the gadgets, but was getting a bad what I
would call alternator whine when using the tape deck.  I noticed after
the first and second time, that the spacial adjustments now worked
completely different whence playing a tape, versus the radio or cd.  I
found this peculiar.  Then one day, it just all shut down, and they redid
it.  To my sup rise, the entire system now "sounds better."  Ibid.  BUT
THERES MORE!  The active aero button now doesn't work as it should.
Normally, all winter and in lousy weather, turn it off.  Now, to my
surprise, at any speed when I simply turn it on (not toggle all the way
to the left, the damn thing activates.......????

So that's my story, and I'm sticking to it.  If anyone can help, or has
better theory, do spill.

Thanks, best regards, happy Easter weekend (let's be careful out there),
etc.,

Scott
'92 VR4

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm

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

Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 14:15:29 -0500
From: "Meyer" <meyer2@erols.com>
Subject: Team3S: Fw: RPS Clutch / flywheel

- -----Original Message-----
From: Meyer <meyer2@erols.com>
To: robby@swissonline.ch <robby@swissonline.ch>
Date: Tuesday, March 30, 1999 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: RPS Clutch / flywheel


>Roger,
>
>No, RPS does not make a flywheel for our cars.  However, I have something
>far superior to any other flywheel on the market.  The Mueller Billet
>Aluminum Flywheel!  This thing is very light, weighing in at 13lbs (custom
>11&12 lb units avail.)  Compared to the stock 25lb+ flywheel.  It is a one
>piece design that is made by mueller fabricators in CA.  I can offer these
>for the TT and the NT cars at $560TT and $550NT.  Prices may vary depending
>on the quantity.  Let me know.
>
>Check them out at: www.muellerfabricators.com
>
>
>Matt
>-----Original Message-----
>From: R.G. <robby@swissonline.ch>
>To: Meyer <meyer2@erols.com>
>Date: Tuesday, March 30, 1999 4:35 PM
>Subject: Re: RPS Clutch / flywheel
>
>
>>Another question came up :
>>
>>Does RPS offer a lighter flywheel as well? I've been interested in
>>this. Besides it would avoid having someone mess up resurfacing the old
>>one, (which i've heard have to be perfect for a kevlar/carbon). Any
>>comments/ideas?
>>
>>Currently 7 have agreed to the Turbo Carbon and 1 to the Carbon Claw !
>>
>>Regards,
>>Roger
>>
>

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

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

Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 14:12:38 -0500
From: Brian Danley <bcdmad@concentric.net>
Subject: Team3S: FW: Oil Filter Study

Got this from our DSM list in Texas .. Kinda interesting



- -----Original Message-----
From: Randy Nuckels [mailto:randynet@ticnet.com]
Sent: Friday, April 02, 1999 11:55 AM
To: ntexdsm@listbot.com
Subject: Oil Filter Study


North Texas DSM List - ntex.dsm.org

http://members.xoom.com/minimopar/oilfilterstudy.html

This is the most exhaustive unbiased oil filter study
I have ever seen.  I found this link on the digest a
few days ago.

It is a big web page with lots of pictures and tables,
but he extensively reviews 23 differant oil filters.

It is worth a read in my opinion.

Randy Nuckels


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, write to ntexdsm-unsubscribe@listbot.com
Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/




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

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

End of Team3S Digest V1 #141
****************************

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