--
From: owner-stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com
(Team3S Digest)
To: stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com
Subject:
Team3S Digest V1 #208
Reply-To: stealth-3000gt
Sender: owner-stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com
Errors-To:
owner-stealth-3000gt-digest@list.sirius.com
Precedence:
bulk
Team3S Digest
Thursday, June 17 1999 Volume 01
: Number
208
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:
Tue, 15 Jun 1999 20:17:25 +0200
From: Matthews <matthews@wiesbaden.netsurf.de>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: "Goose Sound"
Matt Jannusch wrote:
>
> Oh, and
about the "goose" noise with the stock bypass valve, it is
> definitely
the valve doing it.
Thanx for posting the results of your "test!"
This will save me the
trouble of performing similar experiments here. I
never thought about
valve flutter - that's a great theory! I wonder if
there is a way to
modify the BPV to eliminate this problem...
Would
someone with a stock BPV off the car please take a look and see if
anything
looks adjustable or servicable? Thanx!
- --
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:
Tue, 15 Jun 1999 20:19:26 +0200
From: Matthews <matthews@wiesbaden.netsurf.de>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: TEC warranty on 15Gs
Chris Winkley wrote:
>
>
they'll get us in the end. TEC said some people are sending their 15Gs
in
> for a rebuild every SIX months, as a result of running high boost.
Not a
> good thing, as it costs a HEALTHY chunk of change for the
rebuild.
Not to meantion that it is a ROYAL PITA to remove them and a
huge
inconvenience to have to send them off for who knows how
long...
- --
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:
Wed, 16 Jun 1999 10:14:54 -0700
From: Vect0r0 <vect0r0@ix.netcom.com>
Subject:
Team3S: Bob Fontana's page: GONE
I am looking for Bob's new page, if it
exists. I just purchased an IMP
intake manifold and wanted to install the VPC
hoses etc. like the setup
on his page.
If you remember the setup or
have the new site, I would appreciate the
info! THX
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 16 Jun 1999 12:50:51 -0500
From: "Matt Jannusch" <mattj@fallon.com>
Subject: RE: Team3S:
"Goose Sound"
> Thanx for posting the results of your "test!"
This will save me the
> trouble of performing similar experiments
here. I never thought about
> valve flutter - that's a great
theory! I wonder if there is a way to
> modify the BPV to eliminate
this problem...
>
> Would someone with a stock BPV off the car
please take a look and see if
> anything looks adjustable or
servicable? Thanx!
> Jim Matthews - Wiesbaden, Germany
I
have a spare one that I got from Todd Shelton. Unfortunately the
valves
for all years are not interchangeable as they changed where the outlet
is
for '94 and later to clear the tranny linkages, so I couldn't try it to
see
if the older version makes the noise on my car as well. Looking at
the
valve, there isn't really anything adjustable. There's a hole in
the middle
of the valve disc, but that is plugged by the actuator arm.
It might* be
possible to crush it like the DSM guys do, but I'm not sure
that's really
what we're looking for. More spring pressure might do it,
which crushing
the valve would do. However, it might cause more
compressor surge if the
valve doesn't open as well as it did uncrushed.
It holds boost just fine
all the way up to 17+ psi, which is more than enough
for the street.
As near as I could tell, it would be really tough to
disassemble the valve
and reassemble it as the metal part of the valve is
"crimped" onto the
plastic part. I think uncrimping it would damage it
enough so as to make it
unusable once reassembled.
At some point I'm
going to reconnect the Blitz BOV and plug up the hoses
that went to the stock
CBV, but I'm uncertain as to how I should go about
adjusting the spring on
the Blitz valve (how do I know how much spring
pressure is right?).
-
-Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web
page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 16 Jun 1999 11:00:26 -0700
From: Bruce Body <bbody@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: "Goose Sound"
I note the same observations with my 1995 BPV. The
service spec calls
for it starting to open at 16". Mine starts to open at
15". Could this
be the sign of a weakening spring? Anyway, so far my 1st gen
DSM valve
is still working great. Have about 300 mi. on it
now.
Bruce
Matt Jannusch wrote:
>
> > Thanx for
posting the results of your "test!" This will save me the
> >
trouble of performing similar experiments here. I never thought
about
> > valve flutter - that's a great theory! I wonder if
there is a way to
> > modify the BPV to eliminate this
problem...
> >
> > Would someone with a stock BPV off the car
please take a look and see if
> > anything looks adjustable or
servicable? Thanx!
>
> > Jim Matthews - Wiesbaden,
Germany
>
> I have a spare one that I got from Todd Shelton.
Unfortunately the valves
> for all years are not interchangeable as they
changed where the outlet is
> for '94 and later to clear the tranny
linkages, so I couldn't try it to see
> if the older version makes the
noise on my car as well. Looking at the
> valve, there isn't really
anything adjustable. There's a hole in the middle
> of the valve
disc, but that is plugged by the actuator arm. It might* be
>
possible to crush it like the DSM guys do, but I'm not sure that's
really
> what we're looking for. More spring pressure might do it,
which crushing
> the valve would do. However, it might cause more
compressor surge if the
> valve doesn't open as well as it did
uncrushed. It holds boost just fine
> all the way up to 17+ psi,
which is more than enough for the street.
>
> As near as I could
tell, it would be really tough to disassemble the valve
> and reassemble
it as the metal part of the valve is "crimped" onto the
> plastic
part. I think uncrimping it would damage it enough so as to make
it
> unusable once reassembled.
>
> At some point I'm going
to reconnect the Blitz BOV and plug up the hoses
> that went to the stock
CBV, but I'm uncertain as to how I should go about
> adjusting the spring
on the Blitz valve (how do I know how much spring
> pressure is
right?).
>
> -Matt
> '95 3000GT Spyder VR4
>
>
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, 16 Jun 1999 11:15:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: Sam_Wong@hyperdream.com
Subject:
Team3S: Anyone going to Nexus? I need a drive shaft.
Is anyone
going to visit Nexus Motorsports (for service) anytime soon?
I've been trying
to call and Email them for the past month because I want to
buy the used
drive (Propeller) shaft that they have for sale (I know they
don't do mail
orders anymore but this is an in-stock part so maybe they'll
make an
exception).
If you are going there sometime soon, could you let me
know. I just want
to find out if they still have the drive shaft and if
they want to sell it
to me or not.
Otherwise, anyone know where I can
get a used drive shaft cheap (Its the 3
piece one) from a reputable
shop?
Thanks,
Sam.
- --
Sam_Wong at hyperdream.com | http://www.hyperdream.com/~samw
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 16 Jun 1999 23:09:20 +0200
From: "R.G." <robby@freesurf.ch>
Subject: Team3S:
SplitSecond ARC-GP2 update (veeery long but interesting)
Attention : A
lot of questions, answers and comments... but good stuff (I
hope)
:)
Thanks to George, we got the confirmation that the system works on our
cars
as slight modifications to the ARC system have been made to get it
running
on our cars. As you all know I'm at first skeptical if there are
any
unanswered questions around, so I emailed Eric Nist at SplitSecond
(thanks
Brian for the connection) with my questions. Here are the answers I
got at
the beginning of this week and my comments so far (Q = my question, A
=
Answer, C = my comment)
Q :
- - SplitSecond says the following :
"The alteration or addition of
turbochargers, superchargers, fuel injectors,
fuel regulators, throttle
bodies, intake plenums, Mass Air Flow (MAF) sensors
or Manifold Absolute
Pressure (MAP) sensors changes the air/fuel ratio." Can
you please explain
me why adding a MAP sensor changes the A/F Ratio
?
A :
That statement refers to the conversion from a 1 bar MAP sensor
to a 2 or 3
bar MAP sensor. Systems that are originally MAP based can
stay MAP based
and operate at higher boost levels with an appropriately sized
MAP sensor.
The idea of using an ARC2 in this application is to properly fine
tune an
engine where the MAP sensor and injectors have been changed.
C
:
Ahh, therefore not adding but changing to a MAP with a wider range
is
possible, makes sense. As we don't need this feature on our cars we
can
leave it out.
- -------------------------
Q :
- - The
ARM1 is a necessary tool but it is nothing different than any other
A/F meter
!! It contains one small integrated circuit, 10 LEDs, up to three
resistors
and one or two capacitors. Worth about $10.. but it works. But
what about an
IDC ?? Besides an A/F meter I think EGT and IDC are the most
important values
I need to know to tune the stuff properly. Ok, it's not
necessary to observe
the IDC all the time but I'd like to know what the
current conditions are !
Why do the ARCs not have this feature ?
A1 :
The ARM1 is an air fuel
ratio meter that is specifically designed to provide
useful information to
the driver during driving conditions. It has many
features that combine
to achieve that goal. It has a five color display
that may be viewed
with peripheral vision. It has night dimming so that the
display can be
very bright during the day. It has signal filtering to
optimize
response. It has a differential input circuit for high accuracy in
the
presence of ground noise and DC offsets. These are just the
standard
things that we tell people. There is even more to it than
that. Your
statement above indicates that you don't really understand
what the ARM1 is.
It is unique in the industry.
C1 :
Well, the
night dimming is definitely a good feature and also the
differential input to
make sure that there is as less noise as possible is
also good (an additional
OpAmp). But his answer is less than expected. I'd
love to see a picture with
the ARM1 box open !!
A2 :
EGT and IDC are also important parameters to
interpret and monitor when
tuning an engine. The ARM1 provides useful
information over the entire
operating range of the engine.
C2 :
The
ARM1 is a $139 multimeter that reads the O2 sensors. You need an A/F
meter to
tune the stuff in and if the ARM1 is within the kit we have to live
with
it.
- -------------------------
Q :
- - It is not really clear
what the GP style of the ARC is.
A :
The ARC2-GP is a version of the
ARC2 that is specifically designed for the
3000GT.
C :
I guess this
should mean that the hardware in the ARC has been adapted for
the bigger
airflow on our cars.
- -------------------------
Q :
- - A a
good system MUST check the boost pressure in the manifold and adjust
the
signal
automatically that goes to the ECU. We know that the most of our cars
do not
have a MAP sensor and therefore the ECU calculates the boost shown in
the
stock meter. A sophisticated aftermarket fuel control or MAF
conversion
system must take care of this to provide the full advantage but
the ARC
cannot find out on what load the car is just by measuring the air
flow.
This is the advantage of the VPC although it converts your car into
speed
density.
A :
The VPC does not convert your car to a speed
density system. It uses MAP
and RPM to calculate flow
information. It is far better to stay flow based
which is the way the
ECU was designed. In practice an ARC2 based system will
proved more accurate
calibration over the entire engine load range.
C :
After thinking
about the VPC stuff, I must say that Eric is absolutely right
! The VPC does
not convert your car into speed density as it reads three
parameters : Boost,
RPM and Intake air temp. More on that later.
-
-------------------------
Q :
Also the adjustments (VPC) are pretty
close the same way as the ARC.
A :
The operation of the ARC2 is unique
in the industry. No other calibrator
works like it. In other
words, no other calibrator provides the range of
adjustment with such a small
number of controls while providing smooth
response.
C :
This is not
much more information.
- -------------------------
Q :
- -
SplitSecond says : "This package will allow you to raise the boost,
install
larger injectors, even change to larger turbos".
Ok, I think we can
always change to larger turbos without the need for the
ARC ;-)
Anyways,
the first point is not true if the fuel system has not been modified
yet.
A :
Changing the size of the turbo effects spool response and
back pressure
which effects the horsepower gain per pound of boost.
C
:
I think that this means that after installing bigger turbos the ARC can
be
tuned in again to the new variable (sure).
-
-------------------------
Q :
Or how does SplitSecond controls the
engine detonation or how do you know if
the
injectors are at their limit
?
A :
The injectors have to be sized properly for the
application. Once the
turbo, injectors, flow sensor etc. have been
properly specified, the ARC2
can be used to fine tune the
calibration.
C :
Yes, this makes absolutely sense ! I didn't thought
about the fact that we
also have to tell HKS what injectors we have so they
provide the right EPROM
for the $$$ box. Taking the ARC kit means that you
NEED at least bigger
injectors (I'd also upgrade the pump too). There is no
need for bigger
turbos but if you change them later you can recalibrate the
ARC for the
higher flow (of course).
-
-------------------------
Q :
- - I'm missing any idle speed control
for larger injectors (e.g. 720cc) ! It
does sense the TPS and therefore knows
when the throttle is closed but what
is the behaviour during shifting ? Are
the rpms included in the sensing
signals ?
A :
By staying flow
based and using the ARC2 you can accurately tune at idle.
We do not use an
RPM input on the ARC2.
C :
Makes sense again. Air flow is really low
at idle and it seems that the flow
sensor is able to sneak this and the ARC
can give the right frequency to the
ECU in this case. As George had slight
problems with the idle (solved now
??) I guess some slight adjustments for
the lower flow area is necessary. I
still wonder how the thing acts when
shifting hard/soft and the behaivour
under cruise control
conditions.
- -------------------------
Q :
- - How does the
ARC box know when the car is under load and what boost the
car runs on
?
A :
Load and boost are directly related to flow. That is why
we stay flow
based.
C :
Yes, this is absolutely true. There is a
formula that calculates the airflow
rate and includes the boost pressure rate
as a multiplier. The aim of my
question was to find out why SplitSec doesn't
use a MAP sensor and this is
the answer: Both values are in the formula and
changing one affects the
other. More to this interesting topic
later.
- -------------------------
Q :
Also how is the load of
the car known and is this
programmable in the ARC ? Is the ARC programmable
anyways ?
A :
The ARC2 is universal. It will operate with
whatever maximum load the
engine is running. The key is for the flow
sensor and injectors to be sized
properly for the application. All
adjustment of the ARC2 is done through
the four front panel
controls.
C :
Full load = full capable boost = air flow@rpm. This
simple equation makes it
easy to tune the ARC in. Once done only response has
to be adjusted to find
teh best gain.
-
-------------------------
Q :
My conclusion is that the larger MAF is
a good thing. It will keep the car
mostly as it is and by adapting the signal
to the ECU it works for a wide
range of cars, but the price is very high for
a "frequency altering
device".
Even more, the thing seems not to be
intelligent and doesn't help in any
situation (it is fully manual) nor does
it know what to do in any boost
situation.
A :
The ARC2 generates a
best fit curve to operate over the entire range of the
engine (every day
driver or weekend warrior). This provides maximum power
while
preserving OEM quality and drivability. The ARC2 works with the
stock
ECU to provide fine tuning and driver adjustability. It is your
best choice
for retaining factory drivability when retaining the stock
ECU.
C :
That means that any programming feature is just not
necessary. The key word
is "every day driver". This is where I think the VPC
is not at its best.
- -------------------------
Q :
The VPC is
also somewhat old fashioned and it's bad to have a new EPROM
burnt for other
injectors. Well, I think I'd the injectors only once :).
Also it converts
air-mass systems to speed-density systems that is not the
most wished thing.
And together with a GCC price is way too high.
Comparing the ARC to an
Apexi S-AFC doesn't make sense at all as the later
is a fine tuning tool and
good for somewhat larger injectors like 550cc.
A :
The ARC2 is unique
in many ways, one being that it does a mass air flow to
Karman Vortex
conversion. The signal conditioning circuitry is very high
performance
and responds very rapidly. This is key to maintaining OEM
quality of
drivability.
- -------------------------
Q :
my point of view,
the three nobs saying Low,Mid and High do almost the same
(like the VPC
knobs)
but with another philosophy and terminology. It does nothing else
but
giving you an alternated fuel curve over the air-flow or rpm
band.
A :
Needless to say the ARC2 does a lot more than that.
The low mid and high
knobs provide a convenient user interface, yet the
functions they serve are
quite sophisticated.
C :
Yes, it does
convert the signal into Karman Vortex style and what I've
asked. But what is
a lot more ?
- -------------------------
Q :
In my point of
view, the ARC as well as the VPC are only half the way to the
right solution.
The TRE MASC was pretty close but maybe too complicated and
finally too
expensive for the market to make real money out of it. What we
need is :
.....
A :
I am confident that the ARC2 is going to provide the
adjustability and
performance you are looking for. If you want a lot of
data logging and
serial interface features, you may want to look at a stand
alone aftermarket
ECU.
C :
Hmm, it seems to be wishful thinking
that we'll get a system that provides
us with all the information on the
parameters the thing is working on. As
said the TRE MASC was a good system
and I wish the thing would have been
continued.
-
-------------------------
Q :
I was also told that the Stealth with
the ARC2-GP runs with limited boost
of 1.15 bars. Why ? The musics starts to
play above 1.2 bars for sure. Also
the 13Gs are able to go over 1.35bars
!!
A :
There is no reason why the ARC2 can't work at higher boost
levels.
- -------------------------
Q :
Also the stock turbos
(or the 13Gs) do not suck more cfm in than the stock
MAS already can deliver
so what is the gain of the MAF ?
A :
The lower restriction of the MAF
sensor makes the turbo more efficient and
enhances spool response.
C
:
I would like to see this directly on the dyno with the stock (13G)
turbos
and the stock fuel system and boost of 1 bar; just to see the
difference.
- -------------------------
Q :
I'd say with a
simple fuel controller (e.g. the ARC without the MAF) you'd
have the same
results with the 550cc injectors. Comments ?
A .
The MAF provides less
pressure drop across the sensor leading to higher
efficiency and therefore
more power.
- -------------------------
Q :
Last thing : We'll
get the real gain when we can increase boost. But we are
limited to the fuel
system and how much fuel the cars need to prevent knock
(wasting energy
!!).
A :
The fuel system must be matched to the requirements for the
amount of boost
you are making.
- -------------------------
Q
:
So how do you tune in the stuff without a knock monitor
and without the
ability to see the timing is getting retarded ?
A :
If your ECU is
retarding the timing due to engine knock, the cheap fix is to
throw more fuel
at it. A proper fix would be to address the back pressure
of the
engine's exhaust before and after the turbo.
C :
Of course, the ARM1
is used at first for tuning in the proper A/F ratio.
Then we have to be
careful with increasing the boost. Unfortunately we do
not all have an AWD
dyno a few minutes away :( But this problem do all
systems have and is not
addressing the ARC.
- -------------------------
Well, that's it
(do you have already some headache ?)
I got some headache today thinking
around this stuff as we all know that
bigger turbos flow more air at the same
pressure. Therefore I expected that
the measured air flow with larger
turbines increases while the boost stays
the same. I'd say yes. Therefore
just adding a 15G over the 9B and running
still 15 psi will result in bigger
power due to the more air that is
compressed. Unfortunately, there is a
formula to calculate the airflow rate
:
(in^3 * rpm * 0.5 (const) *
0.9 (vol.efficiency) * Press.Ratio) / 1728
(const) = cfm
And there is
nothing that points to a variable device like the flow or
efficiency of the
turbos. The displacement is still the same as well as the
pressure and
therefore the air flow stays the same with the bigger turbos.
But of course,
the compressed air is denser and the bigger turbos are able
to provide the
desired cfm when the rpm increases. Using this formula on our
car gives us
the following :
Stock Wategates open :
(182in^3 * 7000rpm * 0.5 *0.9 *
1 (0 bars of boost)) / 1728 = 332 cfm
Stock 0.5 bars:
(182in^3 *
7000rpm * 0.5 *0.9 * 1.5 (0.5 bars of boost)) / 1728 = 498 cfm ->
249 cfm
per turbo
Modified 1.3 bars :
(182in^3 * 7000rpm * 0.5 *0.9 * 2.3 (1.3
bars of boost)) / 1728 = 763 cfm ->
382 cfm per
turbo
Modified 1.5 bars :
(182in^3 * 7000rpm * 0.5 *0.9 * 2.5
(1.5 bars of boost)) / 1728 = 829 cfm ->
415 cfm per turbo
Back to
the SplitSecond ARC-2GP System, the formula tells us that with
increasing
boost a much better air flow system as well as fuel upgrade is
needed. The
injectors are easy to calculate :
Say our aim is 400hp => (400 x 0.55)
* 10.5 / 6 = 385cc
Do you remember that we dynoed the cars around 400hp
and that we found out
that the IDC is pretty close or even more than 90%. Now
you know why ! This
only works as the fuel pressure is already pretty high
and I doubt that
increasing the pressure would be healthy for the
injectors.
Now our aim is 500hp => (500 x 0.55) * 10.5 / 6 = 481.25
cc
The next size are the 550cc and should be enough for this purpose. Of
course
the flow needed is not calculating with cooling the chambers .. and
this is
not possible to calculate as there are too much unknown paramters. I
was
told that this can be up to 13% i.e. need of 543cc injectors. The best is
to
watch the IDC to find out where you stay.
The ARC provides now a
better air flow causing the turbos to spool-up more
free and is able to
control the new bigger injectors without a problem.
Having more information
now I think that this is pretty easy with the
SplitSecond stuff. Also due to
the calculations shown above, we see that
there is definitively more air and
better flow needed. A VPC and ARC both
provide us with with these
enhancements while a VPC needs to be programmed
too. And if you see that
there are even bigger injectors needed you have to
get another chip for it
again. This is definitively the weak point and
here's where the ARC wins. I'm
also positive that the low boost area and
idle behaviour is better than with
the VPC. I can't say how much the
influence of intake temperature has as I
don't know if the SS MAF measures
the temp as well. As we do have very
different temps over the seasons I
definitvely need a system that is able to
compensate on this.
That's it for now ... and stay tuned for more
:)
Regards,
Roger
93'3000GT TT
For subscribe/unsubscribe
info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 16 Jun 1999 16:45:15 -0500
From: "Matt Jannusch" <mattj@fallon.com>
Subject: Team3S:
Clutch Recommendations
What are the favorite clutches for these
cars? I previously had a 2600lb
ACT clutch in my '93 Eclipse GSX which
worked very well at holding power,
but the engagement was pretty rough (and
my left leg is a lot stronger than
my right, now!). I'm not looking to
spend a ton of money, and I've seen the
ACT for the VR4 for right around
$400. How does the Turbo Claw or Turbo
Claw Carbon compare to the
ACT. I didn't care for the Centerforce in my
Eclipse and probably
wouldn't consider another one of those (clutch dead in
12,000
miles).
Reply to me directly if this has been hashed out already. I
tried looking
through some of the Archives, but it is difficult to locate
relevant
messages in there.
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
(mattj@fallon.com)
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 00:23:34 +0200
From: "R.G." <robby@freesurf.ch>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: fuel system upgrades
Dave is very right and I second his
statement on our enemy.
To make thing a little bit clearer, with a 3S
having a larger air filter and
boost crnked up in any way fuel cut appears
around 1.25bars / 18 psi. I
never hit FC with 17 psi with a healthy engine.
This became worser and
worser as the the damge was there and some oil has
found its way into the
chamber. Oil in the A/F mixture causes to reduce
the octane rating that
finally results in earlier detonation !! And if the
ECU is not able to
retard the timing anymore and knock still exists it
initiate FC. I finally
got it at 1.07bars :((
Avoid detonation
!
Regards,
Roger
93'3000GT TT
>the temperature of the
intake charge. Set your boost to 17 and you'll get
>your fuelcut as they
advertise, but I'd guess you'd also get severe
> Unfortunately, our
weakest link is NOT fuelcut... it's detonation.
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 01:05:52 EDT
From: TurboDrvn@aol.com
Subject: Re: Team3S:
Strut bushing?
In a message dated 6/15/99 6:26:41 PM Central Daylight
Time,
cwinkley@plaza.ds.adp.com
writes:
<< Well, I ended up having to do that when I changed my
springs. I had the
same
concern, but after spraying with every
compound under the sun (and pounding
the heck out of the nut with a
breaker bar and socket), we gave up and took
a torch to it. Amazingly
enough, the rubber didn't melt, but it did break
loose. All I can say
is, I sure was glad I had it on a rack. I can't imagine
doing that from
on my back.
Looking forward...Chris >>
Hi
Chris,
Thanks for your input, Chris; My buddy (he owns a muffler shop) &
I
have attempted several times to free that rear strut up! But it is
Frozen
solid! We were hesitant to torch it up due to the fact that
we'll melt that
rubber bushing - but you're saying that you were able to
torch it without
melting it? Nobody has JUST the rubber bushing
available? Has anyone else
run into this problem? Should I
just go ahead and torch it? If it melts the
bushing away; I will have
to buy a whole new rear strut assembly!
Any input would be
appreciated,
Ahmed "AL-Crazy" - '92 VR4
GReddy Profec B boost
controller, GReddy turbo timer, Apex'i sequential
b.o.v., SPI motorsport
boost gauge & pillar pod, K&N filtercharger, Alamo
Downpipe, Hi-flow
cat, Borla exhaust, KVR Cross drilled rotors with carbon
fiber pads, Nitto
Power Extreme NT-555 (255/40/17's) tires, Eibach springs &
Enkei RP-O1
17x9 (42mm offset) custom racing wheels (Springs and wheels not
installed
yet).
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 03:07:14 -0700
From: Vect0r0 <vect0r0@ix.netcom.com>
Subject:
Team3S: WTB: Y-pipe and IC pipes
After the instalation of my IMP intake,
nothing fits right. I need (chrome or
pollished) inercooler pipes and a
Y pipe. Please e-mail me with prices. THX!
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 10:08:25 -0500
From: "Dy, Leonard" <DyL@CTT.com>
Subject: Team3S: tire
replacement
Hello guys
I recently purchased a '95 VR4.
Unfortunately the car is due for a new set
of tires. What I noticed on
the car is that the rears are really worn while
the front look fine. I
would believe this is due to a neglection by the
original owner in regards to
tire rotation. The car only has 38K miles so I
believe these are the
original tires which are OE Yoko's. My question, is
it possible to
change only the rear? My concern is that an "all wheel
drive" car is
sensitive to wheel diameter differences, but how sensitive?
FYI the fronts
have about half of the tread left while the rears are about
1/8 left on
them. I know it may be possible that the original owner may
have
replaced the fronts only at some point which would account for the
big
difference in wear. Would replacing only the rears cuase any type
of
drive-train problems? Hate to waste two good
tires.
Thanks
Len '95 VR4
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web
page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 08:14:59 -0700
From: Chris Winkley <cwinkley@plaza.ds.adp.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Strut bushing?
Ahmed...
Perhaps I got lucky, but it
didn't melt. Replacement bushing? How about a
wrecking yard? Also, there's a
number of aftermarket bushing companies
around (should be some on the web).
Quickor Engineering is the one I used to
replace all my rubber bushings with
polyurethane (for a 1967 Mustang). My
guess is, unless we got lucky and found
a size from another make/model that
fits, there isn't (and won't be) enough
volume to get anyone to step up for
mass production. For the swap, you'd need
ID, OD, Thickness and some measure
of density. Outside of that. you're stuck
with a custom part. Spendy.
Good luck with a tough
decision!!!
Looking forward...Chris
- -----Original
Message-----
From: TurboDrvn@aol.com
[mailto:TurboDrvn@aol.com]
Sent:
Wednesday, June 16, 1999 10:06 PM
To: cwinkley@plaza.ds.adp.com
Cc: stealth-3000gt@list.sirius.com
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Strut bushing?
In a message dated 6/15/99 6:26:41 PM
Central Daylight Time,
cwinkley@plaza.ds.adp.com
writes:
<snip>
Hi Chris,
Thanks for your input, Chris; My buddy
(he owns a muffler shop) & I
have attempted several times to free that
rear strut up! But it is Frozen
solid! We were hesitant to torch
it up due to the fact that we'll melt that
rubber bushing - but you're
saying that you were able to torch it without
melting it? Nobody has
JUST the rubber bushing available? Has anyone else
run into
this problem? Should I just go ahead and torch it? If it
melts
the
bushing away; I will have to buy a whole new rear strut
assembly!
Any input would be appreciated, Ahmed "AL-Crazy" - '92
VR4
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 10:22:52 -0500
From: "Gendron, Curt" <Curt.Gendron@westgroup.com>
Subject:
Team3S: knock sensor and A/F guage
Hey everyone,
A buddy of mine
is having a problem and he needs some help from the experts.
He is having
some trouble subscibing to the list so I'll try to explain the
problem and
hopefully some of you can e-mail him privatly with your advice.
Last
night, John and I installed a boost gauge, A/F gauge and a cut little
LED for
a knock indicator. John used some instructions for the knock
indicator
from a DSM website and the scematics for the 3/S. After we
installed
it, the A/F gauge(Autometer) was going all over the place. An the
knock
indicator was staying lite. The DSM instructions said to reset the
ECU
if the LED was staying lite. So we unhooked the battery for 30
minutes.
After that, the indicator would go off when accelerating, but come
back on
at idle. I doubt his car is getting knock at
idle.
Please e-mail John privatly if you can help him out. He is a
good mechanic,
just not very experienced with modifying a 3/S. (like
most of us) His
e-mail is: jbasol@carlson.com
Thanks a
bunch,
Curt G
95 R/T TT
and author of Minnesota 3/S at:
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Shop/1044/
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 11:24:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Dennis G. Bretton " <dbretton@cs.uml.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Strut bushing?
> Hi Chris,
> Thanks for your input,
Chris; My buddy (he owns a muffler shop) & I
> have attempted several
times to free that rear strut up! But it is Frozen
> solid!
We were hesitant to torch it up due to the fact that we'll melt that
>
rubber bushing - but you're saying that you were able to torch it without
> melting it? Nobody has JUST the rubber bushing
available? Has anyone else
Hello,
Quick
question: If you were to install rear (and/or front) struts
without the
rubber bushing, what kind of performance differences would one
expect to
notice?
THank you for your time.
Regards,
Dennis
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 08:25:11 -0700
From: Chris Winkley <cwinkley@plaza.ds.adp.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: tire replacement
Leonard...
Most likely the previous
owner rotated the front to rear, as the fronts
should show more wear than the
rear. My guess is, if you leave them the way
they are now, you should wear
out all four at about the same time. On our
cars, I would NOT mix sizes or
brands. The AWD, AWS steering systems would
likely be thrown out of whack
(technical term :-)) and you'll have more
problems that you need.
Handling would also be adversely affected.
Looking
forward...Chris
1995 Glacier Pearl White VR4 (w/HKS Super Flo intake, TEC
15G turbos, bored
and polished throttle body, RC 560cc injectors, HKS fuel
pump, GReddy PRofec
A boost controller, G-force ECU upgrade, HKS SBOV, custom
intercoolers,
Predator dry cell battery, Magnecore 8.5mm wires, NGK double
platinum plugs
gapped at .030", ATR downpipe and test pipe, GReddy catback
exhaust, GReddy
turbo timer, Eibach 1" drop progressive springs)
-
-----Original Message-----
From: Dy, Leonard [mailto:DyL@CTT.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 17,
1999 8:08 AM
To: stealth-3000gt@list.sirius.com
Subject:
Team3S: tire replacement
Hello guys
I recently purchased a '95
VR4. Unfortunately the car is due for a new set
of tires. What I
noticed on the car is that the rears are really worn while
the front look
fine. I would believe this is due to a neglection by the
original owner
in regards to tire rotation. The car only has 38K miles so I
believe
these are the original tires which are OE Yoko's. My question, is
it
possible to change only the rear? My concern is that an "all
wheel
drive" car is sensitive to wheel diameter differences, but how
sensitive?
FYI the fronts have about half of the tread left while the rears
are about
1/8 left on them. I know it may be possible that the original
owner may
have replaced the fronts only at some point which would account for
the big
difference in wear. Would replacing only the rears cuase any
type of
drive-train problems? Hate to waste two good
tires.
Thanks
Len '95 VR4
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web
page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 17:29:08 +0200
From: "R.G." <robby@freesurf.ch>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: knock sensor and A/F guage
The knock LED mod. does not work on
the 3S !
>installed it, the A/F gauge(Autometer) was going all over
the place.
Normal at idle. How about WOT
??
Regards,
Roger
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web
page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 09:49:28 -0700
From: Chris Winkley <cwinkley@plaza.ds.adp.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Strut bushing?
Dennis...
Well, first off, you'd have
3/4" of free play on both sides of the shaft.
This would rattle and clank
every time you hit the slightest bump. Also, the
jarring, without the
bushing, might actually fracture the mount. It could be
done, but certainly
wouldn't be practical. Better yet, If a person knew how
dense the bushing
material is, and had access to a machine shop and some raw
material (rubber
or polyurethane), they could make one of their own.
Looking
forward...Chris
- -----Original Message-----
From: Dennis G. Bretton
[mailto:dbretton@cs.uml.edu]
Sent:
Thursday, June 17, 1999 8:25 AM
To: TurboDrvn@aol.com
Cc: cwinkley@plaza.ds.adp.com; stealth-3000gt@list.sirius.com
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Strut bushing?
<snip>
Hello,
Quick question: If you were to install rear (and/or front)
struts
without the rubber bushing, what kind of performance differences would
one
expect to notice?
THank you for your time.
Regards,
Dennis
For subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
Date:
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 15:41:25 -0500
From: Merritt <merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject:
Team3S: Wind noise
I just went back and forth to Chicago on I80 & 88,
running at 90-100 mph,
with short blasts up to 120 when conditions permitted
(trucks for screens,
wide open highway, etc.) I go to my office twice a
year, whether I need to
or not.
It's nothing like running on the
autobahn, of course, but I did manage to
cover 247 miles in 3 hr and 10 min,
complete with toll booths,
construction, Chicago-area traffic, and one pee
stop.
At 90 mph, the speedo is straight up, the tach reads 2800 rpm, and
the car
is in the sweet spot between those nasty goose honking sounds at 85
and 95
mph. Surely our cars were designed for 90 mph cruising. In Iowa
(65 mph
speed limit), they take your license for 25 over, which is why I
mostly
cruise at 90 and not 100. I figger if I stab the brakes when the
detector
goes off, it will get me just below 90, avoid the nasty penalty, and
just
get me a speeding ticket.
However, the wind noise at 90-110 mph
is annoying. I hear wind hissing and
blowing around both windows and the roof
glass. Any idea what to do about it?
BTW, only two cars kept up: a 535
BMW, who hung on doggedly, and a
nondescript late-1980s FWD General Motors
pieceashit common as dirt
four-door mid-size sedan of some kind, with big
tires (A Q-ship, if anyone
remembers what that was). He PASSED me whilst I
was cruising at 90 (I
slowed to let him by -- I figgered that anyone who
could catch up to me was
either the police, a drunk, or somebody cruising
faster, and discretion is
the better part of valor). I fell in behind, used
him as a rabbit and a
radar screen, and we ran along together for 25 miles at
110, with me
hanging on 1/4 mile back. I peeled off at the Cedar Rapids
outerbelt, and
watched him continue into the city on I380 at a steady 110.
Whew! Not for
me! I dearly wanted to see what he had in that little Q-ship,
but I need my
license more.
Rich/old poop/94 VR4 commuter car
For
subscribe/unsubscribe info, our web page is http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm
------------------------------
End
of Team3S Digest V1 #208
****************************
For unsubscribe
info and FAQ, see our web page at http://www.bobforrest.com/Team3S.htm