team3s              Monday, July 10 2000              Volume 01 : Number 194




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

Date: Mon Jul 10 16:32:13 2000
From: StealthCT@aol.com
Subject: Team3S: Dyno Results

I agree on the concept of consecutive Dyno runs as mods are added and that is exactly what AAM has in mind.  I also was base lining my mods as I intend to add some serious new mods within the next few months and will continue to dyno run the car after each new mod is added to try and determine the gain or loss.  Since these mods  are rather extensive it will be difficult to have dyno runs on the same day however every attempt will be made to duplicate the environment from one run to the next. 

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:16:10 -0700
From: "Bob Forrest" <bf@bobforrest.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs

- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dean Knoepfle"
<speedfreek@uswest.net>
> I know this subject has been kicked around a lot lately but
> here it goes again. I have a 1994 VR4 with Eibach 1"
> lowering springs. The place that I am currently taking it
> to get alligned says that they can not get it to spec
> without different eccentrics. They started in the back, then
> went to the front, and by time they got the front perfect
> the back was off about -2.5. Is it impossible to get it
> perfect without buying some different parts? Is there parts
> available for a cheap price? And if not what would be the
> best possible allignment that I should have them do? I use
> my car as a daily driver and just want it to go straight
> down the road without it grabbing every rut and without
> having my steering wheel shimmy at 60+ MPH and with the
> least amount of tire wear. Thanks for all who reply!!

>>>>> First, please change your email settings to "text only", AND make
sure that your internet "send" options do NOT include "Reply to messages
in the format in which they were received".  Even with proper
"text-only" settings required by our rules, if you answer someone else's
post and they have a "user-defined" setting, it will supercede yours and
appear formatted, like yours did.  --Thanks!  <<<<<

Now to answer your question:

The ONLY way to align the Eibach pro-kit rears is to elongate the
original chassis mounting hole (do NOT enlarge, but elongate!)
laterally..., outward towards the side of the car by about 1/8" to
3/16".  Then the washer should be welded over the new extension of the
hole.  I found this out the hard way, last year when I had mine done (do
a Team3S archive search on "Eibach Nightmare").  The technicians managed
to strip the eccentric alignment bolts (which only cost a few $, but
took a day or two for them to get new ones).  If you allow them to try
to force the system into spec without elongating the holes, yours will
be stripped too!  I got help from Ron Thompson and many others on the
list who went through the same thing...

The ideal method involves doing it twice:
1.  Elongate the holes, and complete the install *before* welding the
washers on.
2.  Check that correct alignment is possible with the amount of
elongation that's been done to the original hole.
3.  If alignment is within spec, scribe a mark around the washer, and
then dis-assemble it.
4.  Weld the washer at the scribe marks.
5.  Complete the install..., again.

I can send an illustration and more details for anyone who may be doing
this installation.  Please email me privately, and I'll send them right
over.  I've added part of it, here, below my sig.  Good luck!

Best,

Forrest

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

Eibach Pro-Kit Springs

Look up the correct part # for your car on the Eibach site:
www.eibach.com

Stealth ES & Base Models, 3000GT Base Model use:
Eibach Pro-Kit Part #2813.140

Stealth R/T and 3000GT SL use:
Eibach Pro-Kit Part #2810.140

Stealth RT/TT and 3000GT VR-4 use:
Eibach Pro-Kit Part #2811.140

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

The rear suspension mod for returning the camber to normal after
installing lowering springs is as follows:
The lower control arm has an eccentric head bolt that rides against
the yoke that holds the control arm. Loosening this bolt allows
rotating the bolt head with the eccentric to get camber adjustment.
With lowering springs there may not be enough stock adjustment to
overcome negative camber. From the rear of car, wheels look like
they
are squatting.  /   \   You need extra adjustment. Elongate the
holes, from
center of car towards the wheel, in the upper control arm yokes to
push the top of the wheel out. It will take about an 1/8" to get you
back to 'Zero' if you are between .75 to 1.23 degrees negative
camber.
The bolt that holds the control arm in the yoke is big, 17 mm to 19
mm. Once torqued down, the control arm won't move on you. This
leaves
the lower control arm can then still be used for fine adjustment.
The same can be done with the front with the strut tower mounting
holes. Elongate them towards the wheel.
This must be done carefully, no sloppy "make the hole bigger all
around"
or you will affect other adjustments on your alignment. Nice
straight,
same width 'elongation'.---Ron Thompson




***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:38:14 -0700
From: "Chris Maxwell" <shmacker@home.com>
Subject: Team3S: Starter button

I could probably figure this out if I look at the electical diagrams for the
ignition but I thought it is probably a simple thing so I'd ask first.  How
do you wire in a starter button for our cars?

Thanks,
Chris
92 TT


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:31:14 -0400
From: Ron Thompson <rtetetet@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- --------------8D6867E20305BF22B72AE836
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Try what's in the attached PIC file. Bob Forest got his shop to do
this and several others. It comes from a professional suspension
mechanic and ex McClaren crew chief.

Ron T.



Dean Knoepfle wrote:
>
> I know this subject has been kicked around a lot lately but
> here it goes again.  I have a 1994 VR4 with Eibach 1"
> lowering springs.  The place that I am currently taking it
> to get alligned says that they can not get it to spec
> without different eccentrics. They started in the back, then
> went to the front, and by time they got the front perfect
> the back was off about -2.5.  Is it impossible to get it
> perfect without buying some different parts?  Is there parts
> available for a cheap price?  And if not what would be the
> best possible allignment that I should have them do?  I use
> my car as a daily driver and just want it to go straight
> down the road without it grabbing every rut and without
> having my steering wheel shimmy at 60+ MPH and with the
> least amount of tire wear.    Thanks for all who reply!!
>
> Dean
>
> ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:40:10 -0500
From: "Trevor L. James" <trevor@kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: AWD dyno results (was: Pump gas)

Here's my take on the whole dyno thing and why I don't take the new results as all encompassing. 2WD Dynojet brand dynos have been around for years and they are a definite standard now. They have been tweaked to almost perfection and pretty much only err when incorrect info is
fed to them by the operator or when the pull is done in a numerically superior gear. This AWD Dynojet is a new monster entirely and I've yet to see any low or even stockish numbers. All the numbers that come off that thing seem incredibly high when you think about it. Stealth
CT's 443HP at the wheels is a perfect example. You do realize that our drivelines eat up 20%+ of our power, right? Heck, automatic C5 corvettes loose 18-20% to the tranny & diff, let alone our AWD beasts. 20% driveline loss would put you at 554 crank HP. Of course you might have
the mods to do it but we don't know since you seem to love posting one sentence replies with absolutely no details. :-) With a great launch I could run your 11.9 with 496 crank HP. That's only 10.7% driveline loss...I REALLY doubt that our driveline is that efficient. A stock
weight (3800lbs) 1st gen car would need about 528 crank HP to rip out that 11.9. That's a little closer (16.1% driveline loss) but still too far out to make me a believer. Not like we don't even know what year your friekin' car is anyway!
Remember UPRD's off-brand AWD dyno in Cali? That thing was putting out LOW numbers for the longest time, just because it was new to the guys there and it needed some software and operator tweakage. I think they've got it worked out now. I just don't take these numbers as gosphel
quite yet since it's a new system and probably needs a little work. Also haven't heard any details as to what gear they're doing the pulls  in...

Trev
96 R/T TT
92 GMC Typhoon

Matthews wrote:

> StealthCT@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Roger Gerl wrote:
> >
> > > BTW, it seems that AAM didn't gave any slips as they only tell what figures
> > > they've read (huh ?). I hope that they get the printer working sometimes so
> > > we can compare the curves as well :)
> >
> > It is not true that AAM does not give dyno sheets.  I have six runs on the dyno and I have sheets on each and every run which identifies the boost settings and other pertinent data.  I am not sure why Roger is so ready to dismiss the AAM dyno as not providing acruate info.
>
> I doubt anyone wants to dismiss the AAM dyno as inaccurate; the more
> certified/accurate/reliable/consistent AWD dynos available to 3S owners the
> better!  Which car has the most power is of little consequence (if I put your
> mods on my car, then they would theoretically have similar power output - gee
> whiz!); what's important is determining the power increase resulting from a
> specific modification or a certain combination of modifications.  But to make a
> reasonable comparison, the dynos used must be consistent (ideally the same dyno
> with the same car before and after mods on the same day at the same temperature,
> etc., but it's not realistic to insist on this).  If the AAM dyno is taking
> measurements identical to the government-certified dyno to which we have access
> in Zurich, then we're in good shape.
>
> Roger's skepticism is certainly enhanced by his initial dyno experience with the
> overly optimistic equipment at Digit Power.  It is of course in a tuner's best
> interest to show large horsepower gains for the parts & labor they sell to
> clients.  I don't think anyone suspects AAM of inflating results, but it is
> possible that their dyno readings are inconsistent with those taken by the dyno
> we're using (maybe even on the conservative side!).
>
> Roger's point is that we've seen peak readings reported from AAM dyno testing,
> but we have not been able to get our hands on the actual dyno data sheets to
> compare behavior throughout the RPM band.  Can you make your sheets available to
> us?  This would be of interest to a great many folks.  Even more interesting
> would be a dyno run for a car with exactly the same mods as one of ours that was
> tested on 1 Feb 99.  Mine had (has!) very few mods, so perhaps it wouldn't be
> difficult to find an identical configuration on your side of the pond that could
> be tested...
>
> Thanks!
>                 -Jim
>
> P.S.- WIth all of these AWD dynos popping up, perhaps we should think about
> adding a dyno results page to the Team3S web site?
>
> --
> Jim Matthews - Munich, Germany
> mailto:matthews@bnro.de (64 Kbps ISDN)
> http://www.bnro.de/~matthews
>
> *** 3000GT-Stealth International (3Si) Member #0030 ***
> http://www.bnro.de/~matthews/stealth.html (Europe)
> http://members.stealth-3000gt.st/~matthews/stealth.html  (USA)
> 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 @ 64% BADC)
> A'PEXi Turbo Timer (30 sec), Blitz Blow-Off Valve
> Magnecore spark plug wires, Redline fluids (trans, xfer, diff)
> Porterfield cryo-treated rotors, RS4 pads, braided lines
> Michelin Pilot XGT-Z4 245/45ZR17, Top Speed: 171 mph
> 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
>
> ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:42:44 -0500
From: "Trevor L. James" <trevor@kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Dyno Results

This kills me;

StealthCT@aol.com wrote:

> I also was base lining my mods as I intend to add some serious new mods within the next few months and will continue to dyno run the car after each new mod is added to try and determine the gain or loss.

You mean to tell me you're putting out 443HP AT THE WHEELS and you don't have any "serious" mods yet?!?!?! Give me a freikin break...

Trev


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:51:17 EDT
From: DOWNDRIVEN1@cs.com
Subject: Team3S: ticking

Was that 1 quart of transmission fluid in with the oil to stop that annoying
ticking?                                            Alex

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:21:20 -0500
From: Merritt <merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Dyno Results

After the recent TransAm in Cleveland, they put the top three finishing
cars on a portable dyno. The apparatus was set up about 50 ft from our
trailers, so we watched with amusement as they dynoed everything from a
Harley Davidson to a Taurus whilst awaiting the TransAm cars. Allegedly,
this portable dyno could handle 1200 hp.

Dynoing the TransAm cars was a true spectacle. First was Paul Gentilozzi's
Jaguar (Ford). It howled and roared and smoked the rollers. He would shift
it up through the gears until it appeared that it was in fifth, then
floored it. The dyno stand shook, smoke poured off the tires and rollers,
and the Ford V8 sounded like it was pulling 8500 rpm in fifth gear. Our
crew chief just snorted and said, "Hmph. He's not getting it all." They
went through this routine 10 or 12 times.

Next was Johnny Miller's Corvette. Same deal. Lots of thunder and smoke.
Lots and lots of runs. They couldn't seem to get enough traction onto the
rollers, because the Corvette just smoked tires and rollers. I thought it
was going to leap off the stand, but I guess they know what they are doing.

Finally, Brian Simo's Mangusta (Ford) went up there. Simo was the pole
sitter, but was banished to the back of the pack for a minor rules
infraction. He stormed through the field, running a full second a lap
faster than the leaders, and almost pulled off a victory, but ran out of
laps. He finished third. This was definitely the most powerful sounding
beast of the three. Aw, but the tranny was spurting oil all over the
driver, so they couldn't complete any dyno runs "Hmph," says our crew
chief. "How convenient. Hewlands don't spew oil."

Whatever SCCA learned from the dyno tests will remain forever secret. We
plied one of the dyno crew members with a couple of brews, and he said he
couldn't give us any actual numbers, but that the hp figures they got
corresponded to track performance pretty closely.

Our Chevrolet 310 ci engines dyno at about 650 hp, and we are down a full
second per lap and 10-15 mph top end to the leading Fords.  SCCA rules
allow Fords some sort of internal advantage, so several of the top TransAm
teams switched to Fords last year to take advantage of the engine
advantage. Unlike NASCAR, where there is a benevolent dictator to keep
things even, SCCA turns a deaf ear to such problems. If I had to guess, I'd
say the Fords (Gentilozzi and Simo) are running 700+ hp.

Woulda been nice to sneak a peak at the dyno charts, eh?

Rich/94 VR4


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:48:34 +1200
From: Kenneth Wells <k.wells@morganbanks.co.nz>
Subject: RE: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs

The picture you attached suggests elongating the mounting holes for the
front suspension to get more camber adjustment. Does this work? I've had a
look at the front suspension, and it seems that it is held centered by the
big round hole with a lip on the suspension tower. Is the big plastic bit
that sits in this not connected to the suspension?
The reason I ask is that my Castor is out, and if it was possible to move
the top of the suspension around I could solve this.

Regards,
Kenneth W
'91 GTO TT

- -----Original Message-----
From: Ron Thompson [mailto:rtetetet@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, 11 July 2000 12:31 p.m.
To: Dean Knoepfle
Cc: team3s@stealth-3000gt.st
Subject: Re: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs


Try what's in the attached PIC file. Bob Forest got his shop to do
this and several others. It comes from a professional suspension
mechanic and ex McClaren crew chief.

Ron T.



Dean Knoepfle wrote:
>
> I know this subject has been kicked around a lot lately but
> here it goes again.  I have a 1994 VR4 with Eibach 1"
> lowering springs.  The place that I am currently taking it
> to get alligned says that they can not get it to spec
> without different eccentrics. They started in the back, then
> went to the front, and by time they got the front perfect
> the back was off about -2.5.  Is it impossible to get it
> perfect without buying some different parts?  Is there parts
> available for a cheap price?  And if not what would be the
> best possible allignment that I should have them do?  I use
> my car as a daily driver and just want it to go straight
> down the road without it grabbing every rut and without
> having my steering wheel shimmy at 60+ MPH and with the
> least amount of tire wear.    Thanks for all who reply!!
>
> Dean
>
> ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

End of team3s V1 #194
*********************


team3s             Tuesday, July 11 2000             Volume 01 : Number 195




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

Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:16:02 -0500
From: Merritt <merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject: RE: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs

At 03:48 PM 7/11/00 +1200, Kenneth Wells wrote:
>The picture you attached suggests elongating the mounting holes for the
>front suspension to get more camber adjustment. Does this work?

No, it's for the REAR suspension.

 I've had a
>look at the front suspension, and it seems that it is held centered by the
>big round hole with a lip on the suspension tower. Is the big plastic bit
>that sits in this not connected to the suspension?
>The reason I ask is that my Castor is out, and if it was possible to move
>the top of the suspension around I could solve this.

Caster can't be adjusted. You need camber/caster plates from Ground Control.

Rich/old poop/94 VR4


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:05:43 +1200
From: Kenneth Wells <k.wells@morganbanks.co.nz>
Subject: RE: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs

I mean on the right hand side of the picture under the section "Front
Suspension"

- -----Original Message-----
From: Merritt [mailto:merritt@cedar-rapids.net]
Sent: Tuesday, 11 July 2000 4:16 p.m.
To: Kenneth Wells; team3s@stealth-3000gt.st
Subject: RE: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs


At 03:48 PM 7/11/00 +1200, Kenneth Wells wrote:
>The picture you attached suggests elongating the mounting holes for the
>front suspension to get more camber adjustment. Does this work?

No, it's for the REAR suspension.

 I've had a
>look at the front suspension, and it seems that it is held centered by the
>big round hole with a lip on the suspension tower. Is the big plastic bit
>that sits in this not connected to the suspension?
>The reason I ask is that my Castor is out, and if it was possible to move
>the top of the suspension around I could solve this.

Caster can't be adjusted. You need camber/caster plates from Ground Control.

Rich/old poop/94 VR4

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:07:33 +1200
From: Kenneth Wells <k.wells@morganbanks.co.nz>
Subject: RE: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs

Oh, and I would get those camber/caster plates, but according to GC, they
won't fit without the GC suspension setup, which I don't want.
I can't find any other caster adjustment plates for the 3000GT.

Regards,
Kenneth W

- -----Original Message-----
From: Merritt [mailto:merritt@cedar-rapids.net]
Sent: Tuesday, 11 July 2000 4:16 p.m.
To: Kenneth Wells; team3s@stealth-3000gt.st
Subject: RE: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs


At 03:48 PM 7/11/00 +1200, Kenneth Wells wrote:
>The picture you attached suggests elongating the mounting holes for the
>front suspension to get more camber adjustment. Does this work?

No, it's for the REAR suspension.

 I've had a
>look at the front suspension, and it seems that it is held centered by the
>big round hole with a lip on the suspension tower. Is the big plastic bit
>that sits in this not connected to the suspension?
>The reason I ask is that my Castor is out, and if it was possible to move
>the top of the suspension around I could solve this.

Caster can't be adjusted. You need camber/caster plates from Ground Control.

Rich/old poop/94 VR4

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 00:26:47 -0400
From: Rick <melvin@gamewood.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs

 All you need to do is slot the adjusting hole on the strut itself.There are 2
bolts on the strut behind the wheel,one has a cam for adjustment,losen the
other then remove the one with the cam and slot the holes on each side the way
you need to go with the camber.You will need a camless bolt to take it's
place,and after you've got it where you want it you might want to tack weld
it.Don't slot the inner hole  just the outsides where the bolt head and nut
are.Good Luck,
RICK
'91 Red Base
'91 Red R/T
'92 Blue R/T T/T Stealths



Kenneth Wells wrote:

> The picture you attached suggests elongating the mounting holes for the
> front suspension to get more camber adjustment. Does this work? I've had a
> look at the front suspension, and it seems that it is held centered by the
> big round hole with a lip on the suspension tower. Is the big plastic bit
> that sits in this not connected to the suspension?
> The reason I ask is that my Castor is out, and if it was possible to move
> the top of the suspension around I could solve this.
>
> Regards,
> Kenneth W
> '91 GTO TT
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ron Thompson [mailto:rtetetet@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, 11 July 2000 12:31 p.m.
> To: Dean Knoepfle
> Cc: team3s@stealth-3000gt.st
> Subject: Re: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs
>
> Try what's in the attached PIC file. Bob Forest got his shop to do
> this and several others. It comes from a professional suspension
> mechanic and ex McClaren crew chief.
>
> Ron T.
>
> Dean Knoepfle wrote:
> >
> > I know this subject has been kicked around a lot lately but
> > here it goes again.  I have a 1994 VR4 with Eibach 1"
> > lowering springs.  The place that I am currently taking it
> > to get alligned says that they can not get it to spec
> > without different eccentrics. They started in the back, then
> > went to the front, and by time they got the front perfect
> > the back was off about -2.5.  Is it impossible to get it
> > perfect without buying some different parts?  Is there parts
> > available for a cheap price?  And if not what would be the
> > best possible allignment that I should have them do?  I use
> > my car as a daily driver and just want it to go straight
> > down the road without it grabbing every rut and without
> > having my steering wheel shimmy at 60+ MPH and with the
> > least amount of tire wear.    Thanks for all who reply!!
> >
> > Dean
> >
> > ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***
>
> ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 17:55:12 +1200
From: Kenneth Wells <k.wells@morganbanks.co.nz>
Subject: RE: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs

Thanks, but I didn't make it clear that it's CASTER that I need to adjust.
There is no adjustment for caster on these cars, but it looks like mine has
been in a knock at some point in its life, and the caster is out.
Something is causing really bad wear on the outside front left tyre, and
even the really good alignment places havn't been able to sort it yet. They
think it's probably because the caster is out, causing the car to drift
left, making me correct to the right.

Regards,
Kenneth W

- -----Original Message-----
From: Rick [mailto:melvin@gamewood.net]
Sent: Tuesday, 11 July 2000 4:27 p.m.
To: Kenneth Wells
Cc: team3s@stealth-3000gt.st
Subject: Re: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs


 All you need to do is slot the adjusting hole on the strut itself.There are
2
bolts on the strut behind the wheel,one has a cam for adjustment,losen the
other then remove the one with the cam and slot the holes on each side the
way
you need to go with the camber.You will need a camless bolt to take it's
place,and after you've got it where you want it you might want to tack weld
it.Don't slot the inner hole  just the outsides where the bolt head and nut
are.Good Luck,
RICK
'91 Red Base
'91 Red R/T
'92 Blue R/T T/T Stealths



***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 01:08:46 -0500
From: xwing <xwing@execpc.com>
Subject: Team3S: Re: track times on the 'net

G Tech and Vericom quartermile times should NOT be entered as "Record Runs" at
all.  We must have track ET slips.  Why?

1)  Some people lie, and it is much harder to steal a fast timeslip with numbers
that are "3000GT VR4-like" and send it in for someone to inspect than to just SAY
"I went 11.15 one day--a box on my dashboard SAID so  ;)  "     I personally have
an (ex) friend who posted just such a false 11 second ET to the old Alamo
Motorsports "Mitsubishi Diamond Star Owners Group" record log a few years back.
He still regularly lies about his times.  YOU don't, and I don't, but WE aren't
the problem--it is human nature for SOME to bullshit others.  Let's NOT "Open the
BS Floodgates" by no longer requiring proper timeslip documentation.

2)  The setup of accelerometer-based devices is CRITICAL to their accuracy, and
there is NO WAY to verify that the person had his device properly LEVELLED; to
verify that they entered the correct DISTANCE; to verify that the stretch of road
they used was about perfectly FLAT; that they entered the proper factors for
ROLLOUT distance (which accelerometer boxes don't do automatically, and can change
ET by .2-.4 seconds).    All of these have MAJOR impact on accuracy!

3)  Sanctioned dragstrips (NHRA, IHRA) have CALIBRATED clocks and distances, with
reputations on the line for being accurate.  A box on the dash is a great TUNING
tool but can be significantly OFF the true track time!

4)  I've had a Vericom computer since 1987, and it IS a good tuning device; I have
taken PAINS to check its accuracy AT THE DRAGSTRIP, by having its time compare to
the SAME run's DRAGSTRIP ET slip.  These devices CAN AND DO vary from track times,
from .00 second to 1+ seconds, and from 0 mph to 7.53 mph in my experience.  My
unit has been drifting with age, and while last year it was reading times
OPTIMISTIC by 0.33 seconds and 3.2mph, THIS year it drifted to 0.59 seconds and
7.5 mph FASTER THAN TRUE TRACK ET.  I am buying a new one.  I have certainly never
claimed its times in public as "truth".
Who else does these calibration/accuracy checks?  I don't know, but I don't trust
MY OWN ET/mph from Vericom enough to post times--I KNOW they can be
inaccurate...so I certainly won't trust anybody else's either.  Believe me, you
can easily get some REALLY FAST ET/MPH's from them!   Good for the ego, bad for
the truth.

5)  ET slips at dragstrip are the STANDARD, everybody uses them and knows them
because they are verified accurate machinery and witnessed by whoever is at the
track with you.  Venture into calling a tuning tool on the dash as equal to ET
slip and you go down the path to madness  :)

Jack Tertadian
Who went 130 mph quartermile,  NO nitrous, on 11/20/1996 with 15 G turbos and PUMP
GAS...on my Vericom!
Get the point?  We can't trust it to set RECORDS because the outlier "fastest
time" IS NOT TRUE.

Brian Geisel wrote:

> Matt,
>     I think that hits it on the head.  If there's a G-tech or a time w/o a
> timeslip, it could get in, but some how denoted as such.  I definitely
> like the top 10 rules.
> We're discussing setting up a 1/4" mi time list
> that we can all get to and works well.
>
> Matt Jannusch wrote:
> > > Yes, point is someone needs to get a site up that is accurate,
> > > up-to-date, and easy to post to.  I think it should require a
> > > time slip (G-force doesn't always work as well as one might like
> > > to think). It definitely needs to be in one place that is kept up well.
> > Yup, that echoes my sentiments exactly.  I don't want to have to be part of
> > a particular club in order to be able to post a time, or exclude anyone
> > because they "aren't part of the team".  I want a list of
> > the fastest/quickest 3/S cars period.  You could add a club
> > affiliations field into the database so that people could see lists based on
> > certain groups.  The idea is to make it flexible and complete so
> > other people don't HAVE to maintain their own lists.
> > GTech might be acceptable for times over 12.0 or something (with a note on
> > the time that it is GTech and not "real" - or in a separate category,
> > because I know not everyone has a dragstrip nearby), but I'd say anything in
> > the top-10 requires a timeslip to be on-file, with another timeslip from the
> > same day showing the same car number for verification.
> > -Matt  '95 3000GT Spyder VR4


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Geoff Mohler <gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject: Team3S: Race car update

Kinda techy..but here goes.

So far in the stripping of the 95 VR4, I have a measured 1.5" of new
wheel clearance on the pass side, and 1.25" on the drivers side..and the
interior is not completely done yet.

You name it..I have it in a pile in the garage...

..and will soon be for sale at fair market prices.


Forrest will be over later this week to help catalog/weigh everything out
so far, pls remove the rest of the interior trim, and help identify scads
of wiring that will end up being removed that leads to things no longer
required.


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:10:17 +0200
From: Roger Gerl <roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject: Re: Team3S: AWD dyno results (news)

I spoke with the dyno specialist as I had the clients car on the drums
yesterday.

He explained me that the Bosch and the new Dynojet AWD dyno (who uses the
Bosch techology !!) are not measuring against mass and therefore the car is
not under full load. With this technique all the hardfware is somewhat
cheaper than with the dynamic mass compensating dynos. This is why on such
a dyno you have to enter the expected hp result (no choke !) that sets up
the friction of the rolls. So if you say I want to see 500hp the result is
different that when you set up to 400hp. The interesting thing is that both
dyno give the same difference result. This means if you install a dp and
dyno the car again you will find on both about 10hp difference. The same
will be o nthe dynojet or the unknown thing at UPRD (why don't know anybody
the brand they use ?). Furthermore the term "power to the wheels" is only
valid if the wheels are removed and the car mounted to the special drums
(some dynojets). The tires are also worth some percentage of loss !

Under the line a measured power of 450hp "to the wheels" represents a
figure of about 370PS DIN to the engine or around 411hp SAE. This is a
figure conversion from the dyno expert who compared the results from an
imported Viper GTS.

Side note : We dynoed the clients car at 386PS and 511Nm (don't have the
converter on this PC) at only 0.86kg/cm2 ! I expected a great result at 1
bar but the water temp rose into the red within 4 seconds and it was too
late when we pressed the clutch. No.4 is damaged :((( We don't know what
this horrible temp jump caused but we assume that there was a big water
bubble around .... is out now :-/ We never ever had this porblem with any
car and temp was only in the 80s. Compression test this afternoon will show
the result.

Roger
93'3000GT TT
www.rtec.ch


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 13:25:02 +0200
From: Roger Gerl <roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Starter button

If you have a TurboTimer you can tap into the wiring of it (one of the
straight through ones) You must provide good thick wires or even a good
high power relay as there is some current flowing through the switch. With
a relay you can use the pup-up ligh switch to start the car, hehe.

>I could probably figure this out if I look at the electical diagrams for the
>ignition but I thought it is probably a simple thing so I'd ask first.  How
>do you wire in a starter button for our cars?


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 07:45:32 -0100
From: Jason Barnhart <phnxgld@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: AWD dyno result doubters (was: Pump gas)

First of all, some of you guys really need to relax a little bit.  I think Roger is skeptical of anything he doesn't understand and I've literally laughed at my monitor several times seeing some of his statements.  I think he means well and this isn't a personal attack, but he
really needs to start some statements with 'I think', or something equivalent.  'VR4s will only spin the front tires' he says to someone who has spun all four.  AAM is pushing the limits on many levels and nonsense like I've read here (by people who don't own or have operated a dyno
before) might encourage some shops to stop doing us huge favors like AAM has.  I doubt any of the skeptics here have ever even talked to AAM much less stopped by to see what kind of work they do.  I've stopped by at random several times and seen 4+ cars that should make over 500hp
at the crank, minimum of 15Gs on each car, StealthCT (Chuck Theiss) being one of them.  This is probably the biggest reason that the only cars dyno'd made impressive numbers, by the way, who in their right friggin' mind would pay what it costs to dyno a stock car?  Did everyone miss
the fact that Mike is trying to get a stock car into the shop to dyno it?  Secondly, and we've gone over this before (unfortunately only speculators pitched in), HP loss is a specific number, whatever that number is will always be the same regardless of total HP (until mods are done
that reduce HP loss like flywheels, driveshafts, rims, even rods and pistons).  A stock car losing 20% of it's HP through the driveline is NOT going to lose 20% of it's power after it's making 700 HP, especially because at that point mods to reduce loss most certainly would have
been performed.  I imagine the only reason they even say XX% is that it's a smaller number than the total HP and it's a little easier to comprehend as a percentage.  I hope you also realize that automatics are less efficient than manuals.

"Trevor L. James" wrote:

> Here's my take on the whole dyno thing and why I don't take the new results as all encompassing. 2WD Dynojet brand dynos have been around for years and they are a definite standard now. They have been tweaked to almost perfection and pretty much only err when incorrect info is
> fed to them by the operator or when the pull is done in a numerically superior gear. This AWD Dynojet is a new monster entirely and I've yet to see any low or even stockish numbers. All the numbers that come off that thing seem incredibly high when you think about it. Stealth
> CT's 443HP at the wheels is a perfect example. You do realize that our drivelines eat up 20%+ of our power, right? Heck, automatic C5 corvettes loose 18-20% to the tranny & diff, let alone our AWD beasts. 20% driveline loss would put you at 554 crank HP. Of course you might have
> the mods to do it but we don't know since you seem to love posting one sentence replies with absolutely no details. :-) With a great launch I could run your 11.9 with 496 crank HP. That's only 10.7% driveline loss...I REALLY doubt that our driveline is that efficient. A stock
> weight (3800lbs) 1st gen car would need about 528 crank HP to rip out that 11.9. That's a little closer (16.1% driveline loss) but still too far out to make me a believer. Not like we don't even know what year your friekin' car is anyway!
> Remember UPRD's off-brand AWD dyno in Cali? That thing was putting out LOW numbers for the longest time, just because it was new to the guys there and it needed some software and operator tweakage. I think they've got it worked out now. I just don't take these numbers as gosphel
> quite yet since it's a new system and probably needs a little work. Also haven't heard any details as to what gear they're doing the pulls  in...
>
> Trev
> 96 R/T TT
> 92 GMC Typhoon
>
> Matthews wrote:
>
> > StealthCT@aol.com wrote:
> > >
> > > Roger Gerl wrote:
> > >
> > > > BTW, it seems that AAM didn't gave any slips as they only tell what figures
> > > > they've read (huh ?). I hope that they get the printer working sometimes so
> > > > we can compare the curves as well :)
> > >
> > > It is not true that AAM does not give dyno sheets.  I have six runs on the dyno and I have sheets on each and every run which identifies the boost settings and other pertinent data.  I am not sure why Roger is so ready to dismiss the AAM dyno as not providing acruate info.
> >
> > I doubt anyone wants to dismiss the AAM dyno as inaccurate; the more
> > certified/accurate/reliable/consistent AWD dynos available to 3S owners the
> > better!  Which car has the most power is of little consequence (if I put your
> > mods on my car, then they would theoretically have similar power output - gee
> > whiz!); what's important is determining the power increase resulting from a
> > specific modification or a certain combination of modifications.  But to make a
> > reasonable comparison, the dynos used must be consistent (ideally the same dyno
> > with the same car before and after mods on the same day at the same temperature,
> > etc., but it's not realistic to insist on this).  If the AAM dyno is taking
> > measurements identical to the government-certified dyno to which we have access
> > in Zurich, then we're in good shape.
> >
> > Roger's skepticism is certainly enhanced by his initial dyno experience with the
> > overly optimistic equipment at Digit Power.  It is of course in a tuner's best
> > interest to show large horsepower gains for the parts & labor they sell to
> > clients.  I don't think anyone suspects AAM of inflating results, but it is
> > possible that their dyno readings are inconsistent with those taken by the dyno
> > we're using (maybe even on the conservative side!).
> >
> > Roger's point is that we've seen peak readings reported from AAM dyno testing,
> > but we have not been able to get our hands on the actual dyno data sheets to
> > compare behavior throughout the RPM band.  Can you make your sheets available to
> > us?  This would be of interest to a great many folks.  Even more interesting
> > would be a dyno run for a car with exactly the same mods as one of ours that was
> > tested on 1 Feb 99.  Mine had (has!) very few mods, so perhaps it wouldn't be
> > difficult to find an identical configuration on your side of the pond that could
> > be tested...
> >
> > Thanks!
> >                 -Jim
> >
> > P.S.- WIth all of these AWD dynos popping up, perhaps we should think about
> > adding a dyno results page to the Team3S web site?
> >
> > --
> > Jim Matthews - Munich, Germany
> > mailto:matthews@bnro.de (64 Kbps ISDN)
> > http://www.bnro.de/~matthews
> >
> > *** 3000GT-Stealth International (3Si) Member #0030 ***
> > http://www.bnro.de/~matthews/stealth.html (Europe)
> > http://members.stealth-3000gt.st/~matthews/stealth.html  (USA)
> > 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 @ 64% BADC)
> > A'PEXi Turbo Timer (30 sec), Blitz Blow-Off Valve
> > Magnecore spark plug wires, Redline fluids (trans, xfer, diff)
> > Porterfield cryo-treated rotors, RS4 pads, braided lines
> > Michelin Pilot XGT-Z4 245/45ZR17, Top Speed: 171 mph
> > 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
> >
> > ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***
>
> ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue Jul 11 08:01:09 2000
From: StealthCT@aol.com
Subject: Team3S: Dyno Results

I did provide a complete list of my mods to the list after I reported my dyno results.  There are several Stealth's/3000gt's in my area that have significantly more mods than I do and are producing much higher dyno results so to suggest that there are quite a few more serious mods I can make to my car is not an overstatement.  By the way I agree with Jack on the time slips.  I think showing up for one of the sponsored events and running with other members of our group is a good way to verify you ET's.  I ran at English Town last year and qualified for the final 8 in my class and so can provide verification of my track times.  Without verification time slips can be misleading.

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:01:33 -0100
From: Jason Barnhart <phnxgld@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...

I don't beleive you've gotten a response yet so here goes.  Supra's come with
bigger turbos, 550cc injectors and a larger fuel pump from the factory.  750hp
is nothing for a modded Supra.  I know a guy that dyno'd his at 780 or so.  You
can download a dyno run of a Supra making 847, I beleive, on
http://www.mkiv.com and that is nowhere near the upper reaches of their engine,
nor ours for that matter.  Unfortunately no one has taken our engine past 60%
of it's potential, mainly because of drivetrain issues, not to mention NO after
market drivetrain parts beyond driveshafts and clutches.  Skylines have been
pushed over 1100hp and they start as a 2.6 liter 6cylinder.  Hopefully this
year some amazing things will begin to happen with our cars and more doors will
open.  Arty should get us a lot of respect shortly.  Until someone takes our
engine to it's potential we'll be laughed at by the big Supras, 300s, RX7s and
Skylines who all run deep into the single digits and have 10 times the number
of parts available to them.

Jason

Sue Smith wrote:

> ... just with a downpipe, bc, and some sort of fuel cut defenser?   Sure,
> that is with 19 psi, but why can they run that without their EGT way into
> the danger zone?  That is their accepted average rwhp with their bpu which
> is what I listed.  I also read on ls1.com where a guy with an RX7 (that ran
> 10.5 at 130) was talking about one Supra that dynoed (with the aid of
> nitrous) at 750 rwhp on pump gas.
>
> ____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________
> Download Now     http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
> Request a CDROM  1-800-333-3633
> ___________________________________________________________
>
> ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:29:36 -0100
From: Jason Barnhart <phnxgld@erols.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Team3S: 1/4 mile times]

> Dude!
>     You were running 13.36 with just an air filter (is that what the
> Weapon-R is)?
> This is an otherwise stock VR-4?  What year man?  What were your 60' and
> what were you doing to shift?
>
>     With an underdrive pulley and a K&N FIPK I'm running 13.61 @ 101.5.
> You
> had me by .3 and 1 mph which is pretty significant considering identical
> mods.
> You were running stock boost, right?
>
> geis

Yup, two 13.3s that day, pump gas and stock boost.  Yes, the Weapon-R is a filter :)
It was cool and I was launching near 7k, I was actually spinning enough that it
probably hurt my times.  Well, on the 13.39 I decided to warm up the tires.  I did my
burnout (showing off a little) and launched at 6k.  The clutch held and the tires
didn't spin at all.  I was sure something broke and I realized about half track that my
windshield wipers were on.  The 13.36 run was a 1.93 60', not sure about the other,
both originals are long lost.  I lifted each shift, the only time I tried speed
shifting I ran slower and I knew of the consequences.  Those times were also with 88k
miles, even on the plugs and wires.  I'd sometimes stumble under hard acceleration.  A
lousy scan of the slip can be seen at http://vr4.crashed.net/1336.gif the site is long
overdue for an update if you check it out.

Jason
94 VR4 with 116k miles
7/10/00:  1.759 60', 8.15 1/8th and coasting past my opponent to a 13.04 at 90 mph on a
12.99 dial in.  I hate bracket racing, would have easily bested my 12.80 personal
record.


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 14:52:25 +0200
From: Roger Gerl <roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject: Re: Team3S: AWD dyno result doubters (was: Pump gas)

>I think Roger is skeptical of anything he doesn't understand and I've
>literally laughed at my monitor several times seeing some of his
>statements.  I think he means well and this isn't a personal attack,

NO, it is !

>I doubt any of the skeptics here have ever even talked to AAM

And where's Mike ... almost never answers emails or says something here
(yes, he's amember) Can someone kick his ass to force him to answer all the
questions ???

>  much less stopped by to see what kind of work they do.  I've stopped by
> at random several times and seen 4+ cars that should make over 500hp at
> the crank,

3s cars ???

>  minimum of 15Gs on each car, StealthCT (Chuck Theiss) being one of
> them.  This is probably the biggest reason that the only cars dyno'd made
> impressive numbers, by the way, who in their right friggin' mind would
> pay what it costs to dyno a stock car?

I pay every dyno , I did for dynoing a stock car some years ago ... I THINK
before you even could count up to 3000, LOL, just kidding !

>Secondly, and we've gone over this before (unfortunately only speculators
>pitched in), HP loss is a specific number, whatever that number is will
>always be the same regardless of total HP (until mods are done that reduce
>HP loss like flywheels, driveshafts, rims, even rods and pistons).

Well, it seems that you know the stuff really good, pfffft. LOSS A SPECIFIC
NUMBER ... I guess you've never seen a dyno sheet. And you call me not to
understand the stuff or not knowing what I'm talking about ? Just think or
do I really have to teach you the basically physics. READ MY DAMN DYNO
SHEETS AND SEE WHAT THE LOSS LOOKS LIKE: Yes, really ! Our dynos are able
to measure the loss as the dyno owner where Bob dynoed his FWD car can
explain very good. This is the way to do it and you'd be very, very
suprised to see a loss of 98.6 PS on one run and 95 PS on another. And what
loss do you think we talk about, huh ? It's the drivetrain when the clutch
is pressed. Yes, this is then everything that is not coupled to the
flywheel anymore. I hope you don't count the rod to the tranny ... do you ??

>   A stock car losing 20% of it's HP through the driveline is NOT going to
> lose 20% of it's power after it's making 700 HP, especially because at
> that point mods to reduce loss most certainly would have been performed.

Why the heck do we have to repeat everything 5 times ? There is no specific
loss here ! The loss is rpm relevant as well as the temp of the tires, the
oil in the tranny the friction level and, and, and. The higher the
speed/rpm the higher the resistance and the more the loss. But it's not
linear (I THINK. you know the difference).

AND IT DOES LOOSE that amount of power !! Just immagine something very
spectacular :

There is a car on the dyno and one measures a freaking, crazy power of
435.675hp. Well, let's assume that we don't look for any SAE or DIN
correction, ok ? How did he measured the power, huh ? Yes, right, he
started the car in the right gear closest to the 1:1 ratio and left the
clutch slipping until it hooked up at 1500. Then WOT up through the rpms
until power drops. And then ?? Yep, got it, pressing the clutch and let the
car roll out. At this time the resistance from the stuff against the
electric drums (not the ones "Saga" used in the early years) can be
measured and ... here it is... tata: we have the power to the drums and the
loss. Now count both together and you are getting the freaking super mega
terra .... ponies at the flywheel. Yeeees and this sum is 100% and the loss
part is between 25-29% on our cars. BUT as said xy-times, this is only
valid at one specific rpm, exactly where we measured peak hp.

If this was too extreme stuff, just think about the air-resistance of a
car. It is very clear that the resistance increases exponentially compared
to the speed of a car. This is the same to the loss of the drivetrain
including bearings, rubber, rabbit around the axle and so on. It's not that
extreme like the air resistance but it is not linear !

>I hope you also realize that automatics are less efficient than manuals.

Yes, I THINK know this ... I got 100 points !!

Ok, I THOUGHT I already wrote something more or less interesting this
morning and hope to added some more confusion to this thread with this very
sarcastic messi. I'm happy that people still can laught about my posts and
as well I do even the engine went south at the dyno yesterday. Or, maybe it
wasn't a dyno, maybe it was a portal washer and I just wondered why I had
oil on the windscreen afterwards, LOL, grin.

Now, go ahead, pick my middle paragraph as well as a dyno sheet and make
your comments !! Read them, read them and feel very freeeee to ask..... I
THINK I can answer the questions, because I THINK I understand a little,
very little bit about that dyno blabla as I got pissed by dyno operators
about 6 years ago and I had to learn... I THINK. I THINK you should also
provide us your analysis of the sheets and maybe also the comparisions
between the three cars where I put the graphs together. Oh, and please
analyse why Mike's car had the smaller power curve ! Now, it's up to you to
provide your part of the information.

Guys, yes we already have seen the mods information from CT. Just put all
the post-dropplets together and you can see the whole picture and I'm sure
his car runs very well. I also only get a printout of the sheets and I have
to scan them in so we may have to wait until one owner of one of the many
dynoed cars will put them onto a scanner. The peak pwoer values are not
compareable but the curve is interesting.

Anyways, can someone of the magnificant "I had my car on the dyno" guys
provide me with the rpm and boost where the car started to retard the
timing ? Come on, why I never ever get any answer on this question and no,
there is no logger needed for that, really, its pretty simply .... hmmm at
least I THINK so ? Where is the limit of your cars and how did you foudn
out (not "I broke the piston at 1.56 bars") CT, how do you know if the car
would have been able to handle one or more pounds of boost to beat the
other modifed cars ?

Friends, please store this message... or better, I do so I can send it
twice a week, ... just kidding ;-))
I hope it was fun again reading my stuff and I made your day.... now I want
something to laugh too... can someone send me a cartoon pleeezzze ?

Roger
93'3000GT TT
www.rtec.ch (do not visit it, it has stuff inside that I don't
understand... and no advertisings)


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 06:22:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff Lucius <stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Dyno Results

I have a question (maybe a dumb one). Because the drivetrain acts as
a torque multiplier and none of our cars have an overall ratio of 1:1
(5th in 5-spd is 2.615 and 6th in 6-spd is 2.279; all others are
higher), is this factor divided out of the dyno results? And if not,
how is it accounted for?

If you forget what our driveline gear reduction ratios are check out
my page:

http://www.3si.org/member-home/jlucius/2-gears.htm

Jeff Lucius, 3SI #476
Red 1992 Stealth TT - modified
  --> http://www.3si.org/member-home/jlucius/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue Jul 11 09:30:25 2000
From: StealthCT@aol.com
Subject: Team3S: Dyno results

You are correct Roger I did not push my car to the limit on the dyno in order to see how much it could take.  I do have NOS in the car but it was not used on the Dyno run.  I also agree with your approach of starting at one bar on the dyno and increasing boost until the HP starts to decline.  I am in the process of installing bigger injectors, bigger fuel lines and a much larger external fuel pump at which time I will dyno again.  During the next dyno run I will use your approach and provide you the data.  AAM wants to build a data bank for our cars that will provide dyno results on the many different mods that are currently available.  Even if you feel their dyno is unreliable the before and after results of a dyno test would provide valuable data on which mods are the most effective at giving you the best bang for the buck.

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:44:50 -0500
From: "cody" <overclck@flash.net>
Subject: RE: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs

I have briefly looked at the rear suspension of a AWD, and I believe that
this picture is a correct representation of the Non-AWD 3/S.  The AWD car
uses an entirely different setup in the rear, that is actually more similar
to the front suspension.  I believe.  It has been a while since I looked at
and studied the rear AWD suspension.

- -Cody

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-team3s@stealth-3000gt.st
[mailto:owner-team3s@stealth-3000gt.st]On Behalf Of Ron Thompson
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 7:31 PM
To: Dean Knoepfle
Cc: team3s@stealth-3000gt.st
Subject: Re: Team3S: allignment with lowing springs


Try what's in the attached PIC file. Bob Forest got his shop to do
this and several others. It comes from a professional suspension
mechanic and ex McClaren crew chief.

Ron T.



Dean Knoepfle wrote:
>
> I know this subject has been kicked around a lot lately but
> here it goes again.  I have a 1994 VR4 with Eibach 1"
> lowering springs.  The place that I am currently taking it
> to get alligned says that they can not get it to spec
> without different eccentrics. They started in the back, then
> went to the front, and by time they got the front perfect
> the back was off about -2.5.  Is it impossible to get it
> perfect without buying some different parts?  Is there parts
> available for a cheap price?  And if not what would be the
> best possible allignment that I should have them do?  I use
> my car as a daily driver and just want it to go straight
> down the road without it grabbing every rut and without
> having my steering wheel shimmy at 60+ MPH and with the
> least amount of tire wear.    Thanks for all who reply!!
>
> Dean
>
> ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:18:49 +0200
From: Roger Gerl <roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Dyno results

Nono, I never said, it is not reliable nor providing valuable data and
especially the result of before and after will be close even the test
method is different. And starting with 1 bar is a little too much as I saw
some older 3k who already had knock (false knock ???) at 0.85 ! On the dyno
I normally use, the data can be stored in their database and I can plot two
runs upon each other for comparisons.

The problem with NOS on our dynos is that if it is activated during the
session, the tourque jump is hard to process and the wheels often slip on
the dyno drums ! This is much easier with the rotaing, non friction rolls
of the dynos used in the US.

>You are correct Roger I did not push my car to the limit on the dyno in
>order to see how much it could take.  I do have NOS in the car but it was
>not used on the Dyno run.  I also agree with your approach of starting at
>one bar on the dyno and increasing boost until the HP starts to
>decline.  I am in the process of installing bigger injectors, bigger fuel
>lines and a much larger external fuel pump at which time I will dyno
>again.  During the next dyno run I will use your approach and provide you
>the data.  AAM wants to build a data bank for our cars that will provide
>dyno results on the many different mods that are currently
>available.  Even if you feel their dyno is unreliable the before and after
>results of a dyno test would provide valuable data on which mods are the
>most effective at giving you the best bang for the buck.

Roger
93'3000GT TT
www.rtec.ch


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:30:05 -0500
From: Merritt <merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...

At 08:01 AM 7/11/00 -0100, Jason Barnhart wrote:
> Supra's come with
>bigger turbos, 550cc injectors and a larger fuel pump from the factory.
750hp
>is nothing for a modded Supra. <snip>Unfortunately no one has taken our
engine past 60%
>of it's potential, mainly because of drivetrain issues,

All this super high horsepower stuff is very interesting for you folks who
make 11 second runs and then let the car cool down for the next two hours.
What about us open track folks, who have to run the engine on full boost
for up to 30 minutes at a time? Has anybody besides Jack T taken one of
these dragstrip queens to a real racetrack and run it hard all weekend?

I'm getting ready to do a Blitz boost controller/water injection
installation with the help of my buddy Curt, and I'd like to hear what you
engine builders think we oughta do to maximize horsepower AND get
reliability for 30 minute on-track sessions. For example, I'm going to use
water injection not because it will let me go to 18 psi, but because it
will let me run 14 psi safely. I am very concerned about running high temps
at summer events, so I'll be doing the Water Wetter stuff this weekend.
What else? Bigger ICs?

Any advice on how to maximize horsepower and preserve the engine at open
track events would be greatly appreciated. I got smoked badly by a modded
Supra at Road America last year, and I'd like to get that sucker back one
of these days.

Rich/old poop/94 VR4




***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 10:51:53 -0400
From: Brian Geisel <brian.geisel@compaq.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Re: track times on the 'net

The more I look at the 3000gt.com page, the more I agree w/ you.  I prefer our list
which is smaller but all times *require* a timeslip.  I received a private e-mail the

other day that informed me that several entries were updated on 3000gt.com very
recently.  If they're going to start keeping it up-to-date, then I'm all for it.
I think
it is a great place to store it, and I do agree after some more thought.  All times
should require a slip.

geis

xwing wrote:

> G Tech and Vericom quartermile times should NOT be entered as "Record Runs" at
> all.  We must have track ET slips.  Why?
>
> 1)  Some people lie, and it is much harder to steal a fast timeslip with numbers
> that are "3000GT VR4-like" and send it in for someone to inspect than to just SAY
> "I went 11.15 one day--a box on my dashboard SAID so  ;)  "     I personally have
> an (ex) friend who posted just such a false 11 second ET to the old Alamo
> Motorsports "Mitsubishi Diamond Star Owners Group" record log a few years back.
> He still regularly lies about his times.  YOU don't, and I don't, but WE aren't
> the problem--it is human nature for SOME to bullshit others.  Let's NOT "Open the
> BS Floodgates" by no longer requiring proper timeslip documentation.
>
> 2)  The setup of accelerometer-based devices is CRITICAL to their accuracy, and
> there is NO WAY to verify that the person had his device properly LEVELLED; to
> verify that they entered the correct DISTANCE; to verify that the stretch of road
> they used was about perfectly FLAT; that they entered the proper factors for
> ROLLOUT distance (which accelerometer boxes don't do automatically, and can change
> ET by .2-.4 seconds).    All of these have MAJOR impact on accuracy!
>
> 3)  Sanctioned dragstrips (NHRA, IHRA) have CALIBRATED clocks and distances, with
> reputations on the line for being accurate.  A box on the dash is a great TUNING
> tool but can be significantly OFF the true track time!
>
> 4)  I've had a Vericom computer since 1987, and it IS a good tuning device; I have
> taken PAINS to check its accuracy AT THE DRAGSTRIP, by having its time compare to
> the SAME run's DRAGSTRIP ET slip.  These devices CAN AND DO vary from track times,
> from .00 second to 1+ seconds, and from 0 mph to 7.53 mph in my experience.  My
> unit has been drifting with age, and while last year it was reading times
> OPTIMISTIC by 0.33 seconds and 3.2mph, THIS year it drifted to 0.59 seconds and
> 7.5 mph FASTER THAN TRUE TRACK ET.  I am buying a new one.  I have certainly never
> claimed its times in public as "truth".
> Who else does these calibration/accuracy checks?  I don't know, but I don't trust
> MY OWN ET/mph from Vericom enough to post times--I KNOW they can be
> inaccurate...so I certainly won't trust anybody else's either.  Believe me, you
> can easily get some REALLY FAST ET/MPH's from them!   Good for the ego, bad for
> the truth.
>
> 5)  ET slips at dragstrip are the STANDARD, everybody uses them and knows them
> because they are verified accurate machinery and witnessed by whoever is at the
> track with you.  Venture into calling a tuning tool on the dash as equal to ET
> slip and you go down the path to madness  :)
>
> Jack Tertadian
> Who went 130 mph quartermile,  NO nitrous, on 11/20/1996 with 15 G turbos and PUMP
> GAS...on my Vericom!
> Get the point?  We can't trust it to set RECORDS because the outlier "fastest
> time" IS NOT TRUE.
>
> Brian Geisel wrote:
>
> > Matt,
> >     I think that hits it on the head.  If there's a G-tech or a time w/o a
> > timeslip, it could get in, but some how denoted as such.  I definitely
> > like the top 10 rules.
> > We're discussing setting up a 1/4" mi time list
> > that we can all get to and works well.
> >
> > Matt Jannusch wrote:
> > > > Yes, point is someone needs to get a site up that is accurate,
> > > > up-to-date, and easy to post to.  I think it should require a
> > > > time slip (G-force doesn't always work as well as one might like
> > > > to think). It definitely needs to be in one place that is kept up well.
> > > Yup, that echoes my sentiments exactly.  I don't want to have to be part of
> > > a particular club in order to be able to post a time, or exclude anyone
> > > because they "aren't part of the team".  I want a list of
> > > the fastest/quickest 3/S cars period.  You could add a club
> > > affiliations field into the database so that people could see lists based on
> > > certain groups.  The idea is to make it flexible and complete so
> > > other people don't HAVE to maintain their own lists.
> > > GTech might be acceptable for times over 12.0 or something (with a note on
> > > the time that it is GTech and not "real" - or in a separate category,
> > > because I know not everyone has a dragstrip nearby), but I'd say anything in
> > > the top-10 requires a timeslip to be on-file, with another timeslip from the
> > > same day showing the same car number for verification.
> > > -Matt  '95 3000GT Spyder VR4
>
> ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

End of team3s V1 #195
*********************


team3s             Tuesday, July 11 2000             Volume 01 : Number 196




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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 17:02:50 +0200
From: Matthews <matthews@bnro.de>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Team3S: 1/4 mile times]

Jason Barnhart wrote:
>
> > Dude!
> >     You were running 13.36 with just an air filter (is that what the
> > Weapon-R is)?
> > This is an otherwise stock VR-4?  What year man?  What were your 60' and
> > what were you doing to shift?
> >
> >     With an underdrive pulley and a K&N FIPK I'm running 13.61 @ 101.5.
> > You
> > had me by .3 and 1 mph which is pretty significant considering identical
> > mods.
> > You were running stock boost, right?
> >
> > geis
>
> Yup, two 13.3s that day, pump gas and stock boost.

Amazing what a leaky boost pressure hose will do...  :-)
Seriously, how do you know you were running stock boost?

That really is VERY impressive!  Congratulations.

Next time you're in Germany, perhaps you could stop by and show me how to drive
my car.  Or drive it for me so I know what it can really do!  I don't know of
any drag strips over here, so we'll have to make due with the G-Tech.  ;-)

- --
Jim Matthews - Munich, Germany
mailto:matthews@bnro.de (64 Kbps ISDN)
http://www.bnro.de/~matthews

*** 3000GT-Stealth International (3Si) Member #0030 ***
http://www.bnro.de/~matthews/stealth.html (Europe)
http://members.stealth-3000gt.st/~matthews/stealth.html  (USA)
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 @ 64% BADC)
A'PEXi Turbo Timer (30 sec), Blitz Blow-Off Valve
Magnecore spark plug wires, Redline fluids (trans, xfer, diff)
Porterfield cryo-treated rotors, RS4 pads, braided lines
Michelin Pilot XGT-Z4 245/45ZR17, Top Speed: 171 mph
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



***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:24:17 -0700
From: "Jim Berry" <fastmax@home.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Re: track times on the 'net

How about your thoughts on corrected timeslips [ altitude ] --- a recent thread
shows that much confusion exists about their accuracy and validity. I am among
those who know little about how they are calculated and how they are accepted
amongst those who race the ¼ mile.

        Jim Berry
=============================================================

> G Tech and Vericom quartermile times should NOT be entered as "Record Runs" at
> all.  We must have track ET slips.  Why?
>
> 1)  Some people lie, and it is much harder to steal a fast timeslip with numbers
> that are "3000GT VR4-like" and send it in for someone to inspect than to just SAY
>   cut
>   cut
> 5)  ET slips at dragstrip are the STANDARD, everybody uses them and knows them
> because they are verified accurate machinery and witnessed by whoever is at the
> track with you.  Venture into calling a tuning tool on the dash as equal to ET
> slip and you go down the path to madness  :)



***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:28:28 -0400
From: Brian Geisel <brian.geisel@compaq.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Team3S: 1/4 mile times]

More Duuude!
    '94 VR-4.  I got a 60' of 1.89, so I guess it wasn't the launch.  Did you do any
aero or wheel mods?  Were you running the stock chrome rims for that run?
The only other thing I can think of is shift points.  I'm shifting right at redline,
should I shift earlier?  I can't imagine 200rpm later would help much :)

tia,
geis

Jason Barnhart wrote:

> > Dude!
> >     You were running 13.36 with just an air filter (is that what the
> > Weapon-R is)?
> > This is an otherwise stock VR-4?  What year man?  What were your 60' and
> > what were you doing to shift?
> >
> >     With an underdrive pulley and a K&N FIPK I'm running 13.61 @ 101.5.
> > You
> > had me by .3 and 1 mph which is pretty significant considering identical
> > mods.
> > You were running stock boost, right?
> >
> > geis
>
> Yup, two 13.3s that day, pump gas and stock boost.  Yes, the Weapon-R is a filter :)
> It was cool and I was launching near 7k, I was actually spinning enough that it
> probably hurt my times.  Well, on the 13.39 I decided to warm up the tires.  I did my
> burnout (showing off a little) and launched at 6k.  The clutch held and the tires
> didn't spin at all.  I was sure something broke and I realized about half track that my
> windshield wipers were on.  The 13.36 run was a 1.93 60', not sure about the other,
> both originals are long lost.  I lifted each shift, the only time I tried speed
> shifting I ran slower and I knew of the consequences.  Those times were also with 88k
> miles, even on the plugs and wires.  I'd sometimes stumble under hard acceleration.  A
> lousy scan of the slip can be seen at http://vr4.crashed.net/1336.gif the site is long
> overdue for an update if you check it out.
>
> Jason
> 94 VR4 with 116k miles
> 7/10/00:  1.759 60', 8.15 1/8th and coasting past my opponent to a 13.04 at 90 mph on a
> 12.99 dial in.  I hate bracket racing, would have easily bested my 12.80 personal
> record.


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 10:29:48 -0500
From: Matt Jannusch <MAJ@BigCharts.com>
Subject: RE: [Fwd: Re: Team3S: 1/4 mile times]

> Amazing what a leaky boost pressure hose will do...  :-)
> Seriously, how do you know you were running stock boost?

> That really is VERY impressive!  Congratulations.

Actually, the VR4's that Car & Driver or Road & Track tested did 13.2's.
All you have to do is have absolutely no respect for your car (or
driveline), rev it to redline and side-step the clutch.  You'll either
grenade the tranny or get a low 13. 

I'm going to assume that most of us here will have too much respect to do
that.  ;-)

- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:36:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff Lucius <stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Dyno Results

(sorry for a possible double post - yahoo has been extremely flaky!)

I have a question (maybe a dumb one). Because the drivetrain acts as
a torque multiplier and none of our cars have an overall ratio of 1:1
(5th in 5-spd is 2.615 and 6th in 6-spd is 2.279; all others are
higher), is this factor divided out of the dyno results? And if not,
how is it accounted for?

If you forget what our driveline gear reduction ratios are check out
my page:

http://www.3si.org/member-home/jlucius/2-gears.htm

Jeff Lucius, 3SI #476
Red 1992 Stealth TT - modified
  --> http://www.3si.org/member-home/jlucius/



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:43:08 -0400
From: Brian Geisel <brian.geisel@compaq.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Team3S: 1/4 mile times]

Matt Jannusch wrote:

> > Amazing what a leaky boost pressure hose will do...  :-)
> > Seriously, how do you know you were running stock boost?
>
> > That really is VERY impressive!  Congratulations.
>
> Actually, the VR4's that Car & Driver or Road & Track tested did 13.2's.
> All you have to do is have absolutely no respect for your car (or
> driveline), rev it to redline and side-step the clutch.  You'll either
> grenade the tranny or get a low 13.
>
> I'm going to assume that most of us here will have too much respect to do
> that.  ;-)
>
> -Matt
> '95 3000GT Spyder VR4
>
> ***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

That's what I would have thought, but I actually ran a faster 60' time, so
it wasn't the launch.  Do you know what year the C&D / R&T tests were?

geis


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 10:42:30 -0500
From: "cody" <overclck@flash.net>
Subject: RE: Team3S: Re: track times on the 'net

I'll answer this one for just about everyone probably...

Corrected time slips don't mean crap.  I mean - I understand that people at
high altitude have a disadvantage.  I hate to discriminate about it also,
but come on - I mean - you can never accurately compensate for altitude.
Sure - you can say that your car can run so and so under exact same track
conditions, etc.  But what about the whole power to the ground thing.  This
is something HUGE that I don't think many people actually think about.  Just
because your engine could -possibly- make XX amount more HP at a lower
altitude, doesn't necessarily mean that you can still get the tires to hook
up quite as good.  Which means you could get the EXACT same time due to
traction limitations...

So, in my book, corrected timeslips are worth about as much as the paper
they are written on.  They may be a good indicator of how a car may perform
closer to sealevel, but not worthy of posting.  Plus - us guys at sealevel
have our own set of problems - like higher temperatures, more humidity, etc.
etc....

- -Cody


#How about your thoughts on corrected timeslips [ altitude ] --- a recent
thread
#shows that much confusion exists about their accuracy and validity. I am
among
#those who know little about how they are calculated and how they are
accepted
#amongst those who race the ¼ mile.

        Jim Berry
=============================================================

> G Tech and Vericom quartermile times should NOT be entered as "Record
Runs" at
> all.  We must have track ET slips.  Why?
>
> 1)  Some people lie, and it is much harder to steal a fast timeslip with
numbers
> that are "3000GT VR4-like" and send it in for someone to inspect than to
just SAY
>   cut
>   cut
> 5)  ET slips at dragstrip are the STANDARD, everybody uses them and knows
them
> because they are verified accurate machinery and witnessed by whoever is
at the
> track with you.  Venture into calling a tuning tool on the dash as equal
to ET
> slip and you go down the path to madness  :)



***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:27:34 -0500
From: "Basol, John" <jbasol@Carlson.com>
Subject: Team3S: OK Time for a breather

I thought it might be appropriate to throw a little water on the fire.
Let's not forget that 99.99% of all the information on this list is
extremely helpful.  Even the incorrect information.  It leads to thought!
:-)

I, myself, had to restrain from sending an email a couple days back about a
theory that was posted that I completely disagreed with.  I found it
difficult to express my disagreement without sounding like a personal
attack, so I sat on the email for a few hours.  I believe that everyone on
the list is of intelligent nature, so I tried to consider under what
conditions the theory might be valid.  Speaking with a local member about it
gave me more thoughts on how I might interpret the theory.

My point is: sometimes clarification is needed.  Sometimes thinking outside
of the box is needed.  In some cases there might be simple translation
issues, let's not forget this is an international list!  In all cases I
believe tolerance is needed.  Let's try not to be making personal attacks.
That's one of the main difference between this list and others.

John Basol
'95 RT/TT ... Tryin' to get along.  :-)



***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 13:10:01 EDT
From: Aso8@aol.com
Subject: Re: Team3S: Re: track times on the 'net

A "Time Slip" should speak for itself. Comments are usually added anyway.
Arty 91 VR-4

In a message dated 7/11/00 9:36:33 AM Pacific Daylight Time, fastmax@home.com
writes:

<< Subj:     Re: Team3S: Re: track times on the 'net
 Date:  7/11/00 9:36:33 AM Pacific Daylight Time
 From:  fastmax@home.com (Jim Berry)
 Reply-to:  stealth@starnet.net
 To:    xwing@execpc.com, stealth@stls.verio.net, Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st
(Team3S)
 
 How about your thoughts on corrected timeslips [ altitude ] --- a recent
thread
 shows that much confusion exists about their accuracy and validity. I am
among
 those who know little about how they are calculated and how they are accepted
 amongst those who race the ¼ mile.
 
         Jim Berry
 = >>

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:20:35 +0200
From: Matthews <matthews@bnro.de>
Subject: Re: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...

Merritt wrote:
>
> All this super high horsepower stuff is very interesting for you folks who
> make 11 second runs and then let the car cool down for the next two hours.
> What about us open track folks, who have to run the engine on full boost
> for up to 30 minutes at a time? Has anybody besides Jack T taken one of
> these dragstrip queens to a real racetrack and run it hard all weekend?
>
> I'm getting ready to do a Blitz boost controller/water injection
> installation with the help of my buddy Curt, and I'd like to hear what you
> engine builders think we oughta do to maximize horsepower AND get
> reliability for 30 minute on-track sessions. For example, I'm going to use
> water injection not because it will let me go to 18 psi, but because it
> will let me run 14 psi safely. I am very concerned about running high temps
> at summer events, so I'll be doing the Water Wetter stuff this weekend.
> What else? Bigger ICs?

Dyno sessions typically last longer than a blast down the strip, but they are
still relatively short compared to a 30 minute track session.  During my dyno
run last year, we first determined the RPM (and therefore the speed in 4th gear)
for max power, then programmed the dyno to hold the car at that speed while I
played with the boost limiter to determine the knock threshold.  This resulted
in 90-120 seconds at 100% power (longer sustained peak boost than would be
experienced at a track event, I would think, and held at the critical RPM the
whole time), and considering that the air flow was much more limited than in a
real-world driving situation (the dyno had a single fan positioned in front of
the radiator - not sure how much flow the intercoolers were seeing), I think the
settings we found were fairly conservative and may serve as a good guideline for
road racers.

I, too, am concerned about holding max boost for long periods of time, as wide
open stints on the Autobahn are demanding on my 9B equipped engine; note that
Euro-spec 3000GTs come with 13Gs stock, presumably to reduce exhaust
temperatures in anticipation of such situations on the faster roads over here.
Mike Chapleski up in Frankfurt has an EGT on his '95 TT w/ 9Bs and Borla
exhaust, and last I heard he was definitely seeing elevated temperatures on the
Autobahn (serious enough that I think he was backing off long before reaching
top speed).  This is definitely cause for concern!  I think an EGT gauge would
be an excellent investment for your car, as that is one of the best indicators
of how close to the limit your engine is operating.

It would be interesting to log RPM, speed (airflow), boost and EGT (and in your
case, WI usage) over the course of a track session...

- --
Jim Matthews - Munich, Germany
mailto:matthews@bnro.de (64 Kbps ISDN)
http://www.bnro.de/~matthews

*** 3000GT-Stealth International (3Si) Member #0030 ***
http://www.bnro.de/~matthews/stealth.html (Europe)
http://members.stealth-3000gt.st/~matthews/stealth.html  (USA)
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 @ 64% BADC)
A'PEXi Turbo Timer (30 sec), Blitz Blow-Off Valve
Magnecore spark plug wires, Redline fluids (trans, xfer, diff)
Porterfield cryo-treated rotors, RS4 pads, braided lines
Michelin Pilot XGT-Z4 245/45ZR17, Top Speed: 171 mph
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

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 10:32:05 -0700
From: "Bob Forrest" <bf@bobforrest.com>
Subject: Team3S: ADMIN: Team3S Track Times Page

To All Members:

Team3S exists to provide the most accurate information to the entire 3/S
community.  Even our archives and search pages are accessible to the
public;  and we don't accept any advertising, so we don't OWE anybody
anything but the truth, and the very best information we can share.

We had previously been designing our Team3S "Best Times" page as part of
our upcoming "Racing" section, but since you guys/gals want something
more prominent, we will make it so...  As always, our website is free
and completely open to everyone, whether they are Team3S members or not,
so ALL properly documented times will be accepted, including those from
non-members.  Since the Team3S website is already in place and gets
between 9,000 and 15,000 hits a month, we expect submissions from all
over the world.  And we already have members in 27 countries.

We will only include fully-documented past record times and times
submitted directly to us.  We will NOT accept times posted on
"commercial" websites like www.3000GT.com unless they are submitted to
us separately, with appropriate documentation.  We will accept times
already documented on "Club" style websites, like www.3Si.org and
www.dsm.org as long as they match our criteria for acceptable
submissions.  We will post any club affiliations and links along with
the track record of that owner.

Guidelines for submissions will follow universally accepted professional
standards for track time pages:

1.  Identical times will be listed in the order they are received.
2.  Readable time slip is required.
3.  Two slips will be required (same car# and date) for new "best"
record.
4.  If NOS is even "in" the car, it is called a NOS run.
5.  Only actual (unadjusted) times will be listed, although a space for
"explanation notes" will be provided.
6.  List is limited to any Stealth 1991-1996 and any 3000GT 1991-1999.
7.  Classes will be (stock= tire & air filter mods only):
    ---Turbo Modified & Stock (including NOS, identified *)
    ---Non-Turbo DOHC & SOHC Modified & Stock
    ---GTec and other "non-track" timing systems.

We hope that anyone submitting a timeslip will also provide us with all
other pertinent information - everything from ambient temperature and
altitude to tires, mods and settings.  The whole reason Team3S exists is
to provide all the technical information we can to every 3S owner we
can - to maximize performance, safety, and the enjoyment of our cars.
And we're very serious about documenting and listing all the parameters
about your winning run that you care to share with other owners.  (We DO
understand that some owners prefer not to divulge ALL their secrets, and
accept their choice).  Every entry will be linked to an explanation and
description that you provide..., hopefully, sent at the time you send in
your slip.  Send any information to TimeSlip@stealth-3000gt.st , along
with a GIF (preferred) or JPG of the slip, or a readable fax to
415-777-4701 for inclusion in our database.

Kudos to all members for pushing us and sending us feedback as to what
you wanted.  Special mention goes out to Amit Patell, and more recently,
Steve Gula, for getting us moving on this over the past several months.
Their "coast" pages, W3SA.com and EC3S.com will undoubtedly bring even
more enjoyment to local 3S owners.  The Team3S pages are for the entire
3S community, so whether you are a member or not, if you have
suggestions for changes, there are prominent links on all our webpages
for you to send us your input.

Best to all,

The Team3S Admins
www.stealth-3000gt.st








***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:08:15 -0700
From: "Chris Maxwell" <shmacker@home.com>
Subject: Team3S: check these turbos out....

For those that know Jimmy Tsai (used to own Outrageous Motorsports in
Fremont, CA), well, here is what he just put in his 3kgt.  Too bad he
doesn't have enough $$ to finish everything else right now.  These are
TD06-20G turbos.  Notice the custom work he needed to do to a few important
pieces.

Oh, the "banana GTO" is David Chen's beast.  It's got the bozzspeed carbon
fiber hood (primed but not painted) and lower lip.

http://www.ravepic.com/pics/3000gt/

Chris
92 TT



***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:08:42 -0500
From: Matt Jannusch <MAJ@BigCharts.com>
Subject: RE: [Fwd: Re: Team3S: 1/4 mile times]

> That's what I would have thought, but I actually ran a faster 60' time, so
> it wasn't the launch.  Do you know what year the C&D / R&T tests were?

I believe it was in either '97 or '98 as the VR4 tested had the "arched"
wing configuration.  The article was something like the "top 10 supercars"
or something similar, with a Viper, NSX, Porsche S4, Lotus Esprit V8,
Corvette, Ferarri 355, Supra, etc.

If I recall correctly, a quote from the article is "rev it up to redline,
sidestep the clutch and the 3000GT's acceleration is so hard it feels like
you've been rearended by a garbage truck, but without all the sheetmetal
damage."

- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:40:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff Lucius <stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject: Team3S: Remanufactured long blocks

PowerPro Automotive Engines says they are a source of engines for us.
Does anyone have any experience with them?

http://www.performanceengines.com/MitsubishiLongblocks.htm

- -----------
Jeff Lucius, 3SI #476
Red 1992 Stealth TT - modified
  --> http://www.3si.org/member-home/jlucius/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 13:47:58 -0500
From: Matt Jannusch <MAJ@BigCharts.com>
Subject: RE: Team3S: check these turbos out....

> For those that know Jimmy Tsai (used to own Outrageous Motorsports in
> Fremont, CA), well, here is what he just put in his 3kgt.  Too bad he
> doesn't have enough $$ to finish everything else right now.  These are
> TD06-20G turbos.  Notice the custom work he needed to do to a few
important
> pieces.

Wow, the rear turbo clearance looks pretty tight.  Was he planning on doing
solid motor mounts or something?  The front clearance looks at least
manageable.  I hope he can get the funds to finish it up and see what it can
do, looks like an interesting project.

- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 14:19:27 -0700
From: jeff.mohler@netapp.com
Subject: RE: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...

Until someone takes our
engine to it's potential we'll be laughed at by the big Supras, 300s, RX7s and
Skylines who all run deep into the single digits and have 10 times the number
of parts available to them.
- ---

Personally I dont take offense at being laughed at by ricer Supra/RX7 owners.

Yes, even with 1000 Hp..I said ricer.

You wanna to play on a real race course..you'll find that a 1.1b VR4 on larger
turbos and all the standard MODs will outperform a LOT of cars with 150-200Hp
more.

Why?

because we dont have 2wd traction control issues.

I had NO problem keeping up with a modified Ferarri F355 and a 550Hp
lingenfelter road-race prepared firebird in our VR4.

Why?

because I could lay down power immediately thru a turn after the car planted
itself in it.


I seriously doubt anyone who builds these massive cars you speak of (and Ive
seen to) have any form of longevity in thier power output.

1320' racing is one thing, but sure gets boring.

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:41:11 -0500
From: Merritt <merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject: RE: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...

>You wanna to play on a real race course..you'll find that a 1.1b VR4 on
larger
>turbos and all the standard MODs will outperform a LOT of cars with 150-200Hp
>more.

Hear, hear.
>
>I had NO problem keeping up with a modified Ferarri F355 and a 550Hp
>lingenfelter road-race prepared firebird in our VR4.

I'm still stock, but I can outrun M3s, 911s, C5s, and 5.0 Mustangs, all
with more hp.

>1320' racing is one thing, but sure gets boring.
>
You tell 'em, Jeff.
BTW, my Kumhos and new wheels oughta be here tomorrow.

Rich/94 VR4


***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 14:39:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kuo <amkreadgto@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...

Ok.. so people who race 1/4mile are ricers?? I dont
get it??  Personally, I'm more into road racing and
don't care much for the 1/4 mile.. but I don't get the
term 'ricer' here..

And I hate to put our car down on the road courses..
but they are not that competitive.. have you seen the
PUMA GTO's on the Jpn GT races?? They get their butts
kicked all the time by RX7s, NSXs, Supras, etc..

I mean.. heck.. i kick a lot of asses on the road
courses here when i run against ferraris, Porches,
Supras, RX7s, etc.. but its all driver's skill.. some
can drive.. some can't.. some can take sweepers at
high speed.. some are afraid~

I love my car.. but hate to say it.. it's just not
very well designed..

/George
'92 RT TT

- --- jeff.mohler@netapp.com wrote:
> Until someone takes our
> engine to it's potential we'll be laughed at by the
> big Supras, 300s, RX7s and
> Skylines who all run deep into the single digits and
> have 10 times the number
> of parts available to them.
> ---
>
> Personally I dont take offense at being laughed at
> by ricer Supra/RX7 owners.
>
> Yes, even with 1000 Hp..I said ricer.
>
> You wanna to play on a real race course..you'll find
> that a 1.1b VR4 on larger
> turbos and all the standard MODs will outperform a
> LOT of cars with 150-200Hp
> more.
>
> Why?
>
> because we dont have 2wd traction control issues.
>
> I had NO problem keeping up with a modified Ferarri
> F355 and a 550Hp
> lingenfelter road-race prepared firebird in our VR4.
>
> Why?
>
> because I could lay down power immediately thru a
> turn after the car planted
> itself in it.
>
>
> I seriously doubt anyone who builds these massive
> cars you speak of (and Ive
> seen to) have any form of longevity in thier power
> output.
>
> 1320' racing is one thing, but sure gets boring.
>
> ***  Info:
> http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 14:43:07 -0700
From: jeff.mohler@netapp.com
Subject: RE: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...

I did NOT say that.

Modding to the exclusion of drag racing gets close in my book however.

Big power is one thing, being able to master big power and beat BIGGER power
with it is another.

Once I hit a certain $$$ amount..I felt like I was throwing away money just for
a hobby, and decided to really race the car.

Whomever likes draggin..thats just fine, but theres more to big power than
stickers, a quick 1320 time, and a nice stereo.

Give course racing a shot..you'll be sold on it.  You actually get to learn
about the other 90% of the car that dragracing never touches.

- -----Original Message-----
From: George Kuo [mailto:amkreadgto@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 2:40 PM
To: team3s@stealth-3000gt.st
Subject: RE: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...


Ok.. so people who race 1/4mile are ricers?? I dont
get it??  Personally, I'm more into road racing and
don't care much for the 1/4 mile.. but I don't get the
term 'ricer' here..

And I hate to put our car down on the road courses..
but they are not that competitive.. have you seen the
PUMA GTO's on the Jpn GT races?? They get their butts
kicked all the time by RX7s, NSXs, Supras, etc..

I mean.. heck.. i kick a lot of asses on the road
courses here when i run against ferraris, Porches,
Supras, RX7s, etc.. but its all driver's skill.. some
can drive.. some can't.. some can take sweepers at
high speed.. some are afraid~

I love my car.. but hate to say it.. it's just not
very well designed..

/George
'92 RT TT

- --- jeff.mohler@netapp.com wrote:
> Until someone takes our
> engine to it's potential we'll be laughed at by the
> big Supras, 300s, RX7s and
> Skylines who all run deep into the single digits and
> have 10 times the number
> of parts available to them.
> ---
>
> Personally I dont take offense at being laughed at
> by ricer Supra/RX7 owners.
>
> Yes, even with 1000 Hp..I said ricer.
>
> You wanna to play on a real race course..you'll find
> that a 1.1b VR4 on larger
> turbos and all the standard MODs will outperform a
> LOT of cars with 150-200Hp
> more.
>
> Why?
>
> because we dont have 2wd traction control issues.
>
> I had NO problem keeping up with a modified Ferarri
> F355 and a 550Hp
> lingenfelter road-race prepared firebird in our VR4.
>
> Why?
>
> because I could lay down power immediately thru a
> turn after the car planted
> itself in it.
>
>
> I seriously doubt anyone who builds these massive
> cars you speak of (and Ive
> seen to) have any form of longevity in thier power
> output.
>
> 1320' racing is one thing, but sure gets boring.
>
> ***  Info:
> http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 17:16:50 -0500
From: Merritt <merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject: RE: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...

>And I hate to put our car down on the road courses..
>but they are not that competitive.. <snip>  i kick a lot of asses on the road
>courses here when i run against ferraris, Porches,
>Supras, RX7s, etc.. but its all driver's skill.. some
>can drive.. some can't.. some can take sweepers at
>high speed.. some are afraid~I love my car.. but hate to say it.. it's
just not
>very well designed..

Boy, I surely do beg to differ with you. OK, maybe for all-out racing at
the professional level we have a weight problem, but for open track racing
at the amateur level we kick butt.

Dr Jack T has probably got the fastest VR4 in the world, and he ain't never
been passed by nobody, no how! (Izzat right, Jack?)

I have a stocker (with some brake and suspension work), and I hold my own
in my run groups. The only cars that give me problems are Vipers, AWD
Porsches and souped-up Supras.

I'm moving up in run groups, so I'll probably see some faster cars and
better drivers, and I might get spanked out there next week in Topeka by a
new M3 or something similar. If so, I'll take a run up to Minneapolis, see
my pal Curt, put in the boost controller and water injection a little
earlier than I intended, and go back there with 400+ hp.

Our cars were designed by a bunch of brilliant engineers in Japan to do
exactly what you (George Kuo), Jack T., John Christian, me and a bunch of
others across the country are doing -- road racing. It's the car, dude.
It's magnificent at road racing. It just needs brakes.
>
Rich/old poop

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Geoff Mohler <gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject: RE: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...

>And I hate to put our car down on the road courses..
>but they are not that competitive..

Whats is your reference material on this?

You'd have said the same thing about Audi 10 years ago too...you'd have
said "What the hell is a 4 door sedan doing on this @#(*@'ing course!
What a joke!!!"

Then of course..as we watched the SCCA basically BAN the Audi's from most
circles because the AWD factor was so much of a factor and nobody else was
able to win..for yearrrrrs.  (Until the Audi wasnt allowed to compete
anymore)

Im not aware of anyone who's gone down the path of completely stripping,
gutting, and torching out a VR4 to remove every pound of non
load-supporting material to race with.



- -------------------------------------------------------------
| Get your FREE Speedtoys.com/net/org Email/WWW account at: |
|   accounts@speedtoys.com.  Include preferred name and     |
| password (hey..its free, no fancy CGI passwd thingie here |
|                plus a 40Mb quota to boot).                |
- -------------------------------------------------------------



***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kuo <amkreadgto@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Team3S: why can Supra's get 410 rwhp on pump gas ...

- --- Geoff Mohler <gemohler@www.speedtoys.com> wrote:

>
> Im not aware of anyone who's gone down the path of
> completely stripping,
> gutting, and torching out a VR4 to remove every
> pound of non
> load-supporting material to race with.

>
- ----------------------------------------------------


Go to a local Jpn video rental place and check out
some Jpn GT races videos..

Full-race prep Puma GTOs get their butts kicks left
and right...

I love my AWD TT.. love the occational ass whooping on
the local road courses.. i would even say I'm usually
am the guy who passes other cars on the road courses..

Bottom line.. no 3S TT in the world is capable of
competing for the King of the Hill spot.. or even
Prince of the Hill..

All due respect to Jack T and his 10sec TT.. I know
he's the king of our little hill... but aren't there
Supras, RX7s, 300Zs, etc. that runs like 8's??

You know in Japan.. the GTO is not even considered a
sports car... its a grand touring car?? When ppl there
think performance.. the GTO wouldn't even make top 5!!

I hope yal dont all hate me now.. but I'm just facing
the reality.  Steet car.. yes.. GTO is one of the best
cars on the road.. Race machines??? hmmm... not by
far... unless someone can't point me to a winning
GTO..

And Geoff, when u made the statement above.. u should
ask yourself why u haven't seen one.. (well, atleast
outside Jpn.)

/George



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

***  Info:  http://www.stealth-3000gt.st/Team3S-Rules.htm  ***

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

End of team3s V1 #196
*********************