Team3S: 3000GT & Stealth Friday, August 17
2001 Volume 01 : Number
581
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:
Fri, 17 Aug 2001 01:06:25 EDT
From:
NassiriC@aol.comSubject: Team3S: Q &
A on OBD II scan tools and DSBC accuracy
Subject #1 - OBD II Scan
Tools
I'd like to hear from anybody that had installed and is using an
ODB II scan
tool on their 96+ VR-4. Has anybody found one that
provides enhanced
Chrysler/Asian data? Has anybody used the EASE tool
on a 96+?
Subject #2 - DSBC/Boost gauge accuracy
I think my
little brain may have just figured something out. A number of
people
have commented that their boost gauge does not exactly agree with
their
Blitz DSBC. Everybody I've talked to said that their boost gauge reads
slightly LESS boost than the DSBC. Well I was up at about 5000 feet
the
other day and I got in my car and turned the key to the acc position and
noticed that my boost gauge read LESS than 0 (standard atmospheric
pressure).
I thought about this and realized that it should.
After all when the car
isn't running, the boost gauge is reading atmospheric
pressure (albeit the
pressure in the plenum which should be close to
atmospheric). I then glanced
at the DSBC and it read dead on
0.00. That can't be right! We all know
atmospheric pressure
decreases with altitude. My conclusion: The DSBC
displays
relative pressure, i.e. when it's turned on, it 'zero's itself and
then
reads up or down from there, in other words, it reads how much
pressure/vaccum your turbos/engine make above and beyond current atmospheric
pressure. The boost gauge (a Greddy electronic unit in this case)
displays
absolute pressure, it displays real pressure in the plenum, so
unless you are
in Death Valley (230 feet below sea level) or caught in a
very high pressure
zone of weather at sea level (which is rare, compared to
lows), the absolute
pressure boost gauge will generally read slightly less
than the DSBC.
This means that the boost gauge, (at least one that
reads absolute pressure
like the Greddy) is the more accurate indicator of
the pressure your engine
is seeing. At least in theory. I get
this nagging feeling I'm missing
something though. When I got my
pilots license I always had problems with
pressure and altitude
calculations.
Alright, fire away, tell me where I've goofed in my
thinking. Until I get
better evidence I'm going to trust my Greddy
gauge.
Cyrus
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:27:14
-0700 (PDT)
From: John Christian <
jczoom_619@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Rod bearing preventative maintenance?
Hi Jeff,
Your car is
punishing you for lack of driving.
I just went downstairs and checked #4
& 5 rod bearings
with plastigauge. Limit is .004" Mine checked
.0015
to .002 --- not bad for 93k miles. The last 50k was
drag
racing and road courses.
Started using Mobil 1 at 43k. I change the
Mobil 1
about 4k or every 3 road track events whichever
comes
sooner.
Be of good cheer,
John
[snip]
- --- Jeff
Lucius <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Ahhh, at last the voice of reason and experience.
> Thanks
Cyrus for a
> put it - I do normally only drive the car ~2000
>
miles a year and it
> sits for 6 months).
>
> Thanks for your
post!
>
> Jeff Lucius,
www.stealth316.com>
> -----
Original Message -----
> From: <
NassiriC@aol.com>
> To: <
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 5:35 PM
> Subject: Team3S: RE: Rod bearing
preventative
> maintenance?
> <snip>
>
Cyrus
Please respond to
jczoom@iname.com'93 TT with Porsche
brakes and Supra TT rotors
12.4@109MPH
5/97 almost stock
http://www.geocities.com/motorcity/flats/4538***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:30:35
-0500
From: "Alex Pedenko" <
apedenko@mediaone.net>
Subject:
Team3S: Lack of knowledge
Hi all,
After reading
the posts on this list for a few weeks, i have realized
how little i know
about all of this. The bad part is that the mitsu dealer i
got the car from
(a '95 vr4 w/ 60k on it) wouldn't let me take it to a
mechanic. As you can
probably guess, once I got it, I found out that it
needs a new transmission
and a whole bunch of other things. My question is
this - is there any one in
the Chicago-land area or in the East Lansing, MI
area that would be
interested in/able to help me out and take a look at the
car, lemme know what
else needs to be done.
I live in the northern suburbs
of chicago, but will be at school in
about a week at Michigan State
University, up in East Lansing.
Thanks a lot in
advance
Alex.
Green '95
VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:14:30
-0700
From: "Steven M." <
nws3@winisp.net>
Subject: RE: Team3S:
Lack of knowledge
How long since you've purchased it have the problems
popped up?
Did they expressly deny you a buyer's inspection?
It may
very well be that the dealership has to put up some cash for it.
-
-----Original Message-----
From:
owner-team3s@team3s.com
[mailto:owner-team3s@team3s.com] On Behalf
Of Alex Pedenko
Sent: Thursday,
August 16, 2001 10:31 PM
To:
team3s@stealth-3000gt.stSubject:
Team3S: Lack of knowledge
Hi all,
After reading
the posts on this list for a few weeks, i have
realized
how little i know
about all of this. The bad part is that the mitsu
dealer i
got the car
from (a '95 vr4 w/ 60k on it) wouldn't let me take it to a
mechanic. As you
can probably guess, once I got it, I found out that it
needs a new
transmission and a whole bunch of other things. My question
is
this - is
there any one in the Chicago-land area or in the East Lansing,
MI
area
that would be interested in/able to help me out and take a look
at
the
car, lemme know what else needs to be
done.
I live in the northern suburbs of chicago, but
will be at school in
about a week at Michigan State University, up in East
Lansing.
Thanks a lot in
advance
Alex.
Green '95
VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:50:28
-0500
From: "Willis, Charles E." <
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Rod bearing preventitive maintenance?
You're welcome to every
gallon of "new" carbonized oil I remove from the car
after each event - you
pay shipping from Houston, TX.
You know there are companies that make a
business of re-refining waste oil.
You are also welcome to put the stuff that
comes out of their process back
into your car, like the cheap oil change
places do.
Chuck
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
Zobel, Kurt [SMTP:KURT.ZOBEL@ca.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001
7:30 PM
> To:
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: RE: Team3S: Rod bearing preventitive maintenance?
>
>
Yeah, where do you guys live. I can use all that 'new' oil you're
>
throwing away!
>
> Kurt
>
> -----Original
Message-----
> From: Geoff Mohler
[mailto:gemohler@www.speedtoys.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 4:09
PM
> To: Sean Winker
> Cc: 'Jeff Lucius';
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: RE: Team3S: Rod bearing preventitive maintenance?
>
>
> Every 1k miles is burning money..please, just paypal it to me
instead.
>
> Lets be _reasonable_ here. 1000 miles is barely
warming up the oil. Its
> like washing your hands every 10 minutes
while sitting at home.
>
> Its just not a reasonable thing to
_have_ to do.
>
> 3K is about the minumum anyone should worry
about..even racing. Now..if
> youre HIGHLY modified where you see
20+psi and fuel dilution from blowby
> is an issue. Every race would
be a choice if the motor was built
> extremely loose to make more
power..for racing only.
>
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, Sean Winker
wrote:
>
> > >Mobil 1 every 1000 miles or so.
> >
> > Isn't this overkill to the extreme unless you're racing?
Sounds like
> the
> > damage has already been done. Are you
also changing oil filter at every
> oil
> > change? What
kind of filter are you using?
> >
> > Sean
> > '91
R/T TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:12:15
-0700
From: "Darc" <
wce@telus.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Back
from a drag strip
Philip;
13's are really good for bone stock.
And, "almost" counts in horseshoes but
not at the track. Slight
modifications in our TT's can increase horespower
significantly, so slight
modifications in NA's are likely to give a
significant competitive edge as
well. Be pleased with your times ;-))
Best
Darc
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:57:54
-0500
From: Merritt <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
>13's are really good for bone
stock. And, "almost" counts in horseshoes but
>not at the track.
Slight modifications in our TT's can increase horespower
>significantly,
so slight modifications in NA's are likely to give a
>significant
competitive edge as well. Be pleased with your times ;-))
>
Having
followed a couple of VR4s equipped with boost controllers around the
track, I
wonder just how much improvement there really is. I followed Mike
Willis
around Heartland Park for many laps and, although he pulled away
somewhat on
the straights, I was not impressed by the difference in our
cars. I also got
to ride in Chuck Willis' car, and was similarly not
impressed. Of course,
Chuck was shifting at 5,000, so maybe he wasn't
letting it come up on boost.
Finally, my daughter bought a 91 Stealth with
a boost controller, and I know
I could smoke it if we ran side by side.
She's still trying to figure out the
DSBC settings and doesn't have a boost
gauge, but the results have been
disappointing (to me, anyway. She loves
the car).
My car (94 VR4) has
a K&N and Alamo intercoolers, but is otherwise stock.
On a damp day, with
a slight misting rain, I turned a 13.5 @105 and 5.5
0-60 on the G-Force meter
(because I got great launches with all four
wheels spinning and then hooking
up perfectly -- I could not repeat that on
dry pavement because I won't
launch at 6000 rpm or whatever it takes to
break them loose)
Is it
possible that my Alamo intercoolers have contributed to the
performance of my
car? I thought that intercoolers simply let you keep
boost for extended
periods and eliminated heat sinking in stock
intercoolers, but didn't
actually contribute to performance.
If I add a boost controller,
downpipe, and gut the cats, what performance
gains should I
expect?
Rich/old poop
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:21:20
-0500
From: "Willis, Charles E." <
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Rich,
I don't remember whether
you have a boost gauge on your car. When you come
to Texas in January,
I want to look under the hood. I understand your car
was previously
owned by a drag racer who installed the Alamo intercoolers,
so I am curious
whether he didn't install an aquarium valve or something to
your vacuum
lines.
Also, Mike noted that you were picking up a lot of time in the
corners by
following his line and late braking. Also recall that he
hadn't been on a
track for a year and a half.
I'm sorry you weren't
impressed by the accelleration of my car when you rode
with me.
Remember it was Group 3 and I was really laying off. I think I
drove a
little more aggressively with Flash and Jim in the car. I believe
Flash
was impressed with the car's accelleration properties.
You work your car
very hard, and make it deliver for you through the
corners. Maybe you
should consider that you are a pretty good driver,
instead of wondering why
those less skilled are unable to produce your
results with tricked up
cars!
Chuck
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Merritt
[SMTP:merritt@cedar-rapids.net]
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 9:58
AM
> To: Darc;
stealth@starnet.net;
team3S@stealth-3000gt.st; Philip
V.
> Glazatov
> Subject: Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
>
> >13's are really good for bone stock. And, "almost" counts in
horseshoes
> but
> >not at the track. Slight modifications in our
TT's can increase
> horespower
> >significantly, so slight
modifications in NA's are likely to give a
> >significant competitive
edge as well. Be pleased with your times ;-))
> >
> Having
followed a couple of VR4s equipped with boost controllers around
>
the
> track, I wonder just how much improvement there really is. I
followed Mike
> Willis around Heartland Park for many laps and, although
he pulled away
> somewhat on the straights, I was not impressed by the
difference in our
> cars. I also got to ride in Chuck Willis' car, and was
similarly not
> impressed. Of course, Chuck was shifting at 5,000, so
maybe he wasn't
> letting it come up on boost. Finally, my daughter bought
a 91 Stealth with
> a boost controller, and I know I could smoke it if we
ran side by side.
> She's still trying to figure out the DSBC settings and
doesn't have a
> boost
> gauge, but the results have been
disappointing (to me, anyway. She loves
> the car).
>
> My
car (94 VR4) has a K&N and Alamo intercoolers, but is otherwise
stock.
> On a damp day, with a slight misting rain, I turned a 13.5 @105
and 5.5
> 0-60 on the G-Force meter (because I got great launches with all
four
> wheels spinning and then hooking up perfectly -- I could not repeat
that
> on
> dry pavement because I won't launch at 6000 rpm or
whatever it takes to
> break them loose)
>
> Is it possible
that my Alamo intercoolers have contributed to the
> performance of my
car? I thought that intercoolers simply let you keep
> boost for
extended periods and eliminated heat sinking in stock
> intercoolers, but
didn't actually contribute to performance.
>
> If I add a
boost controller, downpipe, and gut the cats, what performance
> gains
should I expect?
>
> Rich/old poop
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:35:37
-0500
From: "Christopher Deutsch" <
crdeutsch@mn.mediaone.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
I agree with Charles. If you
can't tell the difference between a stock car
and a car boosting at 1 bar
then the stock car is not stock. The difference
is very
noticeable. For me it was like a whole new car. Rich, my bet
is
the previous owner already turned up the boost on your car without
using
electronics.
Christopher
- ----- Original Message
-----
From: "Willis, Charles E." <
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
To:
"'Merritt'" <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>; "Darc"
<
wce@telus.net>;
<
stealth@starnet.net>; <
team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>; "Philip
V. Glazatov"
<
gphilip@umich.edu>
Sent: Friday,
August 17, 2001 10:21 AM
Subject: RE: Team3S: Back from a drag
strip
> Rich,
>
> I don't remember whether you have a
boost gauge on your car. When you
come
> to Texas in January, I
want to look under the hood. I understand your car
> was previously
owned by a drag racer who installed the Alamo intercoolers,
> so I am
curious whether he didn't install an aquarium valve or something
to
>
your vacuum lines.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:41:26
-0500
From: Merritt <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
There is no evidence of a boost
controller or manual valve.
If it's there, it's hid good.
It still has
the hoot, so the BOV is stock.
The exhaust looks stock and untouched. I added
a custom catback, but it's
still pretty quiet, indicating the presence of cat
guts.
I added a boost gauge, and it tops out at 12 psi, stock for 94s.
Of course, I didn't know I had Alamo intercoolers either until I tried
to
replace them.
It has a fuel pressure sending unit, but it's not hooked
up to anything.
I wish we had some VR4 wizards around here who knew what to
look for.
Rich
At 10:35 AM 8/17/01 -0500, Christopher Deutsch
wrote:
>I agree with Charles. If you can't tell the difference
between a stock car
>and a car boosting at 1 bar then the stock car is not
stock. The difference
>is very noticeable. For me it was like
a whole new car. Rich, my bet is
>the previous owner already turned
up the boost on your car without
using
>electronics.
>Christopher
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:59:02
-0500
From: "cody" <
overclck@starband.net>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Question: Upgraded intercoolers
- maybe you've got upgraded turbos
also. I have heard many reports of
larger turbos pulling harder even
with the same boost settings as a smaller
turbo. Possibly could yours
have been replaced with say a 13 or 15G,
and running at 12 psi, pull
almost as hard as a car with the 9B running close
to 15 psi???
- -Cody
- -----Original Message-----
From:
owner-team3s@team3s.com
[mailto:owner-team3s@team3s.com] On Behalf
Of Merritt
Sent: Friday, August
17, 2001 10:41 AM
To: Christopher Deutsch; Willis, Charles E.; Darc;
stealth@starnet.net;
team3S@stealth-3000gt.st; Philip V.
Glazatov
Subject: Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
There is no
evidence of a boost controller or manual valve.
If it's there, it's hid
good.
It still has the hoot, so the BOV is stock.
The exhaust looks stock
and untouched. I added a custom catback, but
it's
still pretty quiet,
indicating the presence of cat guts.
I added a boost gauge, and it
tops out at 12 psi, stock for 94s.
Of course, I didn't know I had Alamo
intercoolers either until I tried
to
replace them.
It has a fuel
pressure sending unit, but it's not hooked up to anything.
I wish we had some
VR4 wizards around here who knew what to look for.
Rich
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:07:39
-0500
From: Merritt <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
If I didn't know I had Alamos, can you
imagine me figuring out if my car
has upgraded turbos? I wouldn't know where
to start.
Rich
At 10:59 AM 8/17/01 -0500, cody
wrote:
>Question: Upgraded intercoolers - maybe you've got upgraded
turbos
>also.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:29:37
-0500
From: Merritt <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Darc says:
>If you do not have a
manual valve
>plumbed in somewhere, I would be surprised.
We
tried to install a manual boost controller last year, but couldn't get
it to
work. No matter how we adjusted it, we kept getting 21 psi and
blowing off
the Y-pipe. (It ran like a sumbitch though until the Y-pipe
blew!). We
eventually gave up.
If there was another manual controller hidden in the
plumbing, would that
account for our problem?
I've been peering at
that plumbing for three years. You'd think I woulda
spotted it by now. The
dealer saw the fuel pressure sending unit, but
didn't see anything else
strange, and I asked him to examine it closely.
I tried to find the
previous owner a coupla times, but there are too many
folks with the same
name in the St.Louis phone book. I left a few messages
here and there, but
nobody returned my calls.
Rich/94 VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:40:12
-0700
From: "Andrew D. Woll" <
awoll1@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Rod bearing preventative maintenance?
John: How did you
check the bearings with Plastigage - Is you engine torn
apart right
now?
Andy
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:41:35
-0500
From: "Oskar" <
osk@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S:
Back from a drag strip
Rich - the answer to your pondering is hidden in
your own statement.
You experienced 'sumbitch' performance when you
increased the boost - thus
the conclusion is that a boost controller
helps.
Oskar
12.6 @ 108 on stock turbos (w. boost controller)
-
----- Original Message -----
From: "Merritt" <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
To:
"Darc" <
wce@telus.net>; <
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Friday, August 17, 2001 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: Team3S: Back from a drag
strip
> Darc says:
> >If you do not have a manual
valve
> >plumbed in somewhere, I would be
surprised.
>
> We tried to install a manual boost controller last
year, but couldn't get
> it to work. No matter how we adjusted it, we kept
getting 21 psi and
> blowing off the Y-pipe. (It ran like a sumbitch
though until the Y-pipe
> blew!). We eventually gave up.
>
>
If there was another manual controller hidden in the plumbing, would
that
> account for our problem?
>
> I've been peering at that
plumbing for three years. You'd think I woulda
> spotted it by now. The
dealer saw the fuel pressure sending unit, but
> didn't see anything else
strange, and I asked him to examine it closely.
>
> I tried to find
the previous owner a coupla times, but there are too many
> folks with the
same name in the St.Louis phone book. I left a few messages
> here and
there, but nobody returned my calls.
>
> Rich/94
VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:55:43
-0500
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
> If I didn't know I had Alamos,
can you imagine me figuring
> out if my car has upgraded turbos? I
wouldn't know where to
> start. Rich
One quick and easy way is to
take the intake tube off the front turbo and
look at the compressor
wheel. If it has "sets" of blades grouped together
and not just
uniform-spaced blades then the turbos are upgraded. 15G's are
this way,
and I'm pretty sure 13G's are as well.
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/blucius/b-15g_1n.jpg-
-Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:57:59
-0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff Lucius <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Rich,
It is very easy to tell
if you have upgraded turbos. You need to
remove the intake hose from the
front turbo. Look at the housing and
the part number stamped on it (the
compressor housing is what you are
looking at). Also look at the compressor
wheel itself (in the opening
where the hose was attached). I have the part
number info and many
pictures of different compressor wheels on my turbo
upgrade guide web
page below. But, simply, the stock 9B compressor wheel has
12 blades
all at the same height. 13G and 15G (the most common
upgrades)
compressor wheels have 12 blades but the tips are at two
different
heights, alternating high and low. With some 13G and 15G upgrades
the
housings may look identical to the stock TD04-9B housings, but
the
blades reveal the truth for sure.
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/jlucius2/j2-2-turboguide.htmJeff
Lucius,
www.stealth316.com- ---
Merritt <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
wrote:
> If I didn't know I had Alamos, can you imagine me figuring out
if
> my car
> has upgraded turbos? I wouldn't know where to
start.
> Rich
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:19:41
-0400
From: Joe Gonsowski <
twinturbo@mediaone.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Excellent times Philip, but I'd like
to know what you mean by "Here are my
results net my reaction times:"
Just curious if you took some time off your
ET because of a less than perfect
reaction time (I've seen some do this). If
you didn't, those are very
impressive times given the trap speeds.
Please post your whole time slip
including the 60 ft times.
BTW - FWDs are not running 13s with simple
mods unless "simple" includes
nitrous.
Joe G.
'92 R/T
TT
"Philip V. Glazatov" wrote:
> Here are my results net my
reaction
times:
>
>
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 (Run 3 G-Tech
reading)
> Time, sec 13.927
13.514 13.685 (14.05)
> Speed,
mph 95.24 99.31
98.47 (103.6)
>
> Philip
> '95 R/T
TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:26:28
-0700
From: "Gross, Erik" <
erik.gross@intel.com>
Subject:
Team3S: How to compress brake caliper pistons?
So what do you guys use to
compress your brake caliper pistons when you're
changing brake pads?
The best I've come up with is a small piece of (1/4"
thick) wood to cover the
piston and then using a "C" clamp. Two problems
with this,
though. 1: Have to have the caliper off to do it 2: no
really
good place on the back side of the caliper to put the "C" clamp's
other end.
I know several people change pads trackside, so I know there HAS
to be an
easier way. Can one of the enlightened show me the
way?
- --Erik
'95VR-4 with stock pads/rotors again
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:26:41
-0700
From: "Gross, Erik" <
erik.gross@intel.com>
Subject:
Team3S: Noticing a difference with a boost controller
To add my 2hp to
the thread....
I have a GReddy electronic boost controller that has a
"normal" setting and
a "high boost" setting, adjustable from the driver's
seat. I mainly drive
with the normal setting and switch to the high
setting when I want to play.
I have "normal" set to 0.7bar (about 10psi) and
"high boost" set to 0.9bar
(about 13psi). I definitely notice a big
difference between the two. I
also notice that I hear the turbos more,
especially in 1st and 2nd where the
wind noise is lower.
One
question I have is that with the boost controller at 0.9bar, I notice
a
significant difference in 1st and 2nd gear (as well as other gears where
you
spend more time near peak boost). Since the needle on the boost
gauge
doesn't seem to get very high in 1st gear or 2nd gear by the point
where we
make peak boost (about 4-4.5kRPM), why am I noticing a
difference?
It seems that after 4500RPM, boost is limited by the
turbos' efficiency, not
the boost control solenoid or the boost
controller. So why would there be
a difference? To put it
another way, if boost drops off to 10psi (arbitrary
guess) by 6000RPM, then
it wouldn't matter if the boost controller were set
to 10psi or 14psi.
What am I missing?
- --Erik
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:33:39
-0400
From: "Zobel, Kurt" <
KURT.ZOBEL@ca.com>
Subject: RE:
Team3S: Rod bearing preventitive maintenance?
Sporadic heating problems
can definitely kill a bearing, often without immediately revealing what
happened.
Kurt
- -----Original Message-----
From: Moe Prasad
[mailto:mprasad01@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 7:02
PM
To: Zobel, Kurt;
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.stSubject:
Re: Team3S: Rod bearing preventitive maintenance?
My main bearing
went a little over a year ago. When it went, I had lost
oil
pressure. My car had about 64K on it. Maybe we should change
the oil pump
at 60K service.
I personally think it was an oil additive
that I had in my engine for about
a 100 miles that clogged up the holes for
the oil. I even flushed my engine
and then put cheap oil for 100 miles
and then went back to Mobile 1 but
after a 1000 miles, it was the end of the
bearings.
I have a friend in NY with a 92 VR4 and he does not take car of
his car at
all. He did not do any maintenance on it. His water
pump went at 95K and
that is the only reason he replaced his timing
belt. Oil changes are far
and few in-between. I don't think he
has ever cleaned the engine
compartment. He drives very fast. His
car is a 92 and he has had the car
from when it was new. At the present
time his engine is still running
strong.
Maybe what we should do is
have the holes drilled a little bigger on the
crank, (if there are holes) for
the more oil. When I was young, I had a
pinto (STOP LAUGHING - I paid
less for the pinto then a set of plugs and
wires for my current car) and they
were notorious for the cams going bad.
My friends father who was a
mechanic gave me a cam that he drilled the holes
a little bigger and the
problem when away. Maybe we can do the same with
the crank as my
friend's father did with the cam. I am not a mechanic so I
don't know if this
is possible or just a stupid idea.
Rgd
Moe
- ----- Original
Message -----
From: "Zobel, Kurt" <
KURT.ZOBEL@ca.com>
To: <
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Thursday, August 16, 2001 6:30 PM
Subject: RE: Team3S: Rod bearing
preventitive maintenance?
> Yeah, where do you guys live. I can
use all that 'new' oil you're
throwing away!
>
>
Kurt
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geoff Mohler
[mailto:gemohler@www.speedtoys.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 4:09
PM
> To: Sean Winker
> Cc: 'Jeff Lucius';
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: RE: Team3S: Rod bearing preventitive
maintenance?
>
>
> Every 1k miles is burning money..please,
just paypal it to me instead.
>
> Lets be _reasonable_ here.
1000 miles is barely warming up the oil. Its
> like washing your
hands every 10 minutes while sitting at home.
>
> Its just not a
reasonable thing to _have_ to do.
>
> 3K is about the minumum anyone
should worry about..even racing. Now..if
> youre HIGHLY modified
where you see 20+psi and fuel dilution from blowby
> is an issue.
Every race would be a choice if the motor was built
> extremely loose to
make more power..for racing only.
>
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, Sean
Winker wrote:
>
> > >Mobil 1 every 1000 miles or so.
>
>
> > Isn't this overkill to the extreme unless you're racing?
Sounds like
the
> > damage has already been done. Are you also
changing oil filter at every
oil
> > change? What kind of
filter are you using?
> >
> > Sean
> > '91 R/T
TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:04:21
-0500
From: Merritt <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: How to compress brake caliper pistons?
Ultra simple.
Use a
set of slip-joint pliers. Grab the brake pad and the caliper right at
the
front edge and squeeze. There's a convenient little lip on the
stock
calipers for doing this. This pushes in the pistons on one side. Change
the
pad. Then do the other side. If necessary, to get the last little bit
of
room for a new pad, pry with a big screwdriver between the pad and the
rotor.
Do not attempt to take out both pads at the same time. With
nothing to stop
the pistons from coming out, when you squeeze one side, the
other pistons
extend.
So do it one pad at a time, and you can change
'em in 5 minutes. It also
helps to take the cap off the brake fluid
reservoir, so the fluid can flow
back easily.
We musta changed 47
sets of brake pads last weekend. Or maybe it just
seemed that
way.
When you get Big Reds, it's even easier.
Rich
At 10:26
AM 8/17/01 -0700, Gross, Erik wrote:
>So what do you guys use to compress
your brake caliper pistons when you're
>changing brake pads?
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:25:38
-0500
From: "Walton C. Gibson" <
kalla@tripoint.org>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Noticing a difference with a boost
controller
>
>
>doesn't seem to get very high in 1st gear
or 2nd gear by the point where we
>make peak boost (about 4-4.5kRPM), why
am I noticing a difference?
>
I know that when I gutted out my
precats, put on a boost controller and
downpipe,
that the turbo spool up
was a lot faster than it had been stock. Even
though the boost
doesn't
get to 0.9+ bar it does come on faster and stronger which is
quite a kick in
the
pants. The improved spool up may explain some of it. For me it is enough
that I'm
afraid to launch the car in first gear sometimes, on the stock
turbos :-)
Walton C. Gibson
kalla@tripoint.org***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:16:30
-0700
From: "Gross, Erik" <
erik.gross@intel.com>
Subject: RE:
Team3S: How to compress brake caliper pistons?
> Ultra simple. Use a
set of slip-joint pliers.
> Grab the brake pad and the caliper right
at
> the front edge and squeeze. There's a convenient little lip
> on the stock calipers for doing this.
Ahhh.... so there
aren't any issues with needing to push the pistons
straight "down" into the
caliper?
> Do not attempt to take out both pads at the same time.
With
> nothing to stop the pistons from coming out,
> when you
squeeze one side, the other pistons extend.
Oops. Really?
This hasn't happened in the 3 times I've changed pads in the
last week
:) Actually, I've used a "C" clamp on each of the 4
pistons
individually each time... I took all the pads out of both front
calipers
and then compressed the pistons... hope I didn't break
anything!
> When you get Big Reds, it's even easier.
Man, the
incentives just keep piling up :-)
- --Erik
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:19:57
-0700
From: "Bob Forrest" <
bf@bobforrest.com>
Subject: Team3S:
Illinois Lemon Law (Was: Lack of knowledge)
Hey, Alex,
A quick
check of the Illinois "Lemon Law" revealed that Used Cars are
not
covered. (This is the URL, FYI:
http://www.ag.state.il.us/publications/lemonlaw.htm
) That means that you'll
have to start making yourself obnoxious at the
dealer. Start by asking them
for the car's maintenance record (they
have it on computer for EVERY car).
And especially make sure that the
(REQUIRED) "60k Service" was done
(~$1000)! Every dealer knows that
this is a MUST, so if they didn't do it,
it's a further indication that they
were trying to scam you. Insist on them
springing for any repairs since
they are required to check out a vehicle
before selling it, and that they
must have known of the faulty components.
This is not exactly the way you
want to spend your last week before going to
school, but get on the net and
on the phone and do a little homework. Or
prepare to come up with a few
thousand dollars...
Do a search on
www.google.com for "Lemon Law"
+Illinois (use the quotes),
and start to read the first few
entries. There are a dozen important
websites and phone numbers
there. Just a few phone calls and emails might
get you started, and you
might even find a lawyer or two willing to make a
call for you. My
guess is that the dealer saw a "young guy" and decided to
take advantage of
you. Don't let them get away with it - go after them.
Good
luck!
Forrest
From: "Alex Pedenko" <
apedenko@mediaone.net>
> Hi
all,
> After reading the posts on this list for a
few weeks, i have realized
how little i know about all of this. The bad part
is that the mitsu dealer i
got the car from (a '95 vr4 w/ 60k on it) wouldn't
let me take it to a
mechanic. As you can probably guess, once I got it,
I found out that it
needs a new transmission and a whole bunch of other
things. My question is
this - is there any one in the Chicago-land area or in
the East Lansing, MI
area that would be interested in/able to help me out and
take a look at the
car, lemme know what else needs to be
done.
> I live in the northern suburbs of chicago,
but will be at school in
about a week at Michigan State University, up in
East Lansing.
> Thanks a lot in
advance
> Alex.
>
Green '95 VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:23:42
-0500
From: "Oskar" <
osk@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S:
How to compress brake caliper pistons?
To make this procedure even
simpler you can install speed bleeders. Simply
attach your brake fluid
bleeding hose to the nipple and open a 1/4 turn or
so.
There are two
benefits to this:
- - Pistons push back easier
- - Pushing one side does
not cause the other side to pop out.
Oskar
- ----- Original
Message -----
From: "Merritt" <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
To:
"Gross, Erik" <
erik.gross@intel.com>; "Team3S List
(E-mail)"
<
team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Friday, August 17, 2001 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: Team3S: How to compress brake
caliper pistons?
> Ultra simple.
> Use a set of slip-joint
pliers. Grab the brake pad and the caliper right
at
> the front edge
and squeeze. There's a convenient little lip on the stock
> calipers
for doing this. This pushes in the pistons on one side. Change
the
>
pad. Then do the other side. If necessary, to get the last little bit of
>
room for a new pad, pry with a big screwdriver between the pad and
the
rotor.
>
> Do not attempt to take out both pads at the same
time. With nothing to
stop
> the pistons from coming out, when you
squeeze one side, the other pistons
> extend.
>
> So do it one
pad at a time, and you can change 'em in 5 minutes. It also
> helps to
take the cap off the brake fluid reservoir, so the fluid can flow
> back
easily.
>
> We musta changed 47 sets of brake pads last weekend. Or
maybe it just
> seemed that way.
>
> When you get Big Reds,
it's even easier.
>
> Rich
>
> At 10:26 AM 8/17/01
-0700, Gross, Erik wrote:
> >So what do you guys use to compress your
brake caliper pistons when
you're
> >changing brake
pads?
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:37:44
-0500
From: "cody" <
overclck@starband.net>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Reaction times have nothing to do with
ET. No one should do that
whatsoever... You could literally have a 30
second reaction time, and a
ET of 9.5 seconds...
- -Cody
-
-----Original Message-----
From:
owner-team3s@team3s.com
[mailto:owner-team3s@team3s.com] On Behalf
Of Joe Gonsowski
Sent: Friday,
August 17, 2001 12:20 PM
To: Philip V. Glazatov
Cc:
team3S@stealth-3000gt.stSubject:
Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Excellent times Philip, but I'd
like to know what you mean by "Here are
my
results net my reaction
times:" Just curious if you took some time off
your
ET because of a
less than perfect reaction time (I've seen some do
this). If
you
didn't, those are very impressive times given the trap speeds.
Please
post your whole time slip including the 60 ft times.
BTW - FWDs are not
running 13s with simple mods unless "simple" includes
nitrous.
Joe
G.
'92 R/T TT
"Philip V. Glazatov" wrote:
> Here are my
results net my reaction
times:
>
>
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 (Run 3 G-Tech
reading)
> Time, sec 13.927
13.514 13.685 (14.05)
> Speed,
mph 95.24 99.31
98.47 (103.6)
>
> Philip
> '95 R/T
TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:36:59
+0300
From: "Oleg Reznik" <
Oleg@3000gt.lv>
Subject: Team3S: Tein
suspension
Hello,
I still wait my Tein HA dampers, but I know the
total weight of package
now - 80lbs. My stock shocks and GC springs are a lot
lighter...
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:34:19
-0500
From: Merritt <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: How to compress brake caliper
pistons?
>
>Ahhh.... so there aren't any issues with
needing to push the pistons
>straight "down" into the caliper?
As
long as you are squeezing the brake pad, you are exerting pressure
evenly
across the pistons.
>
>
>> Do not attempt to take out both
pads at the same time. With
>> nothing to stop the pistons from coming
out,
>> when you squeeze one side, the other pistons extend.
>
>Oops. Really? This hasn't happened in the 3 times
I've changed pads in the
>last week :) Actually, I've used a "C"
clamp on each of the 4 pistons
>individually each time...
Well, of
course they couldn't extend ...not with a c-clamp holding them
down.
I took all the pads out of both front calipers
>and
then compressed the pistons... hope I didn't break anything!
No.
You just did it the hard way.
Changing pads is really very easy and fast.
Rich
>
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:51:31
-0500
From: "Willis, Charles E." <
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: How to compress brake caliper pistons?
Everybody has a
variation, depending on preference and clearance on their
calipers.
Flash uses a HUMONGOUS set of channellocks the likes of which I
had never
seen. I use two C-clamps on the old pad backer plate, but
channellocks
are my backup. There is a tool you can buy at Sears for about
$10 to
spread the pads. All of these can be done without removing the
caliper,
but if a piston gets hung up, you will have to remove the caliper
to get a
good push on the piston. That can STILL be done trackside with
the
fluid hose still attached.
> -----Original Message-----
>
From: Gross, Erik [SMTP:erik.gross@intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 17,
2001 12:26 PM
> To: Team3S List (E-mail)
> Subject: Team3S: How to
compress brake caliper pistons?
>
> So what do you guys use to
compress your brake caliper pistons when you're
> changing brake
pads? The best I've come up with is a small piece of (1/4"
> thick)
wood to cover the piston and then using a "C" clamp. Two problems
>
with this, though. 1: Have to have the caliper off to do it
2: no
> really
> good place on the back side of the caliper to
put the "C" clamp's other
> end.
> I know several people change pads
trackside, so I know there HAS to be an
> easier way. Can one of the
enlightened show me the way?
>
> --Erik
> '95VR-4 with stock
pads/rotors again
>
>
>
>
>
> ***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:55:08
-0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff Lucius <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Tein suspension
For my 1992 TT, each front strut assembly
(complete) weighed ~26 lb,
and each rear shock assembly (complete) weighed
~15 lb (bathroom
scales). That would be ~82 lb without a shipping package,
which could
easily add 5-10 lbs. With the GC kit, the struts weigh ~20 lb and
the
shocks ~12.5 lb - total of ~65 lb.
Looking forward to see how the
Teins work out.
Jeff Lucius,
www.stealth316.com- --- Oleg Reznik
<
Oleg@3000gt.lv> wrote:
>
Hello,
>
> I still wait my Tein HA dampers, but I know the total
weight of
> package
> now - 80lbs. My stock shocks and GC springs
are a lot lighter...
>
> >
____________________________________________________________
> This
messsage was sent using the trial version of the
> 1st Class Mail Server
software.
>
> The 1st Class Mail Server 3.0 has lots of cool new
features.
> Best of all, it's still free! To download the latest
version,
> go to
http://www.1cis.com/download/1cismail.asp>
__________________________________________________
Do You
Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo!
Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:08:47
-0500
From: "Willis, Charles E." <
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Tein suspension
We measured a difference of 22# between the
stock springs and the GC setup
(15# front, 7# rear) with similar bathroom
scale accuracy and that was with
the initial incorrect short rear Eibach
springs.
Jeff's numbers 82-65=17#.
similar numbers, certainly
within the accuracy of our scales and my
uncorrected vision!
>
-----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Lucius
[SMTP:stealthman92@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:55
PM
> To:
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Tein suspension
>
> For my 1992 TT, each front
strut assembly (complete) weighed ~26 lb,
> and each rear shock assembly
(complete) weighed ~15 lb (bathroom
> scales). That would be ~82 lb
without a shipping package, which could
> easily add 5-10 lbs. With the GC
kit, the struts weigh ~20 lb and the
> shocks ~12.5 lb - total of ~65
lb.
>
> Looking forward to see how the Teins work out.
>
> Jeff Lucius,
www.stealth316.com>
> ---
Oleg Reznik <
Oleg@3000gt.lv>
wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I still wait my Tein HA
dampers, but I know the total weight of
> > package
> > now -
80lbs. My stock shocks and GC springs are a lot lighter...
> >
>
> > ____________________________________________________________
>
> This messsage was sent using the trial version of the
> > 1st
Class Mail Server software.
> >
> > The 1st Class Mail Server
3.0 has lots of cool new features.
> > Best of all, it's still free! To
download the latest version,
> > go to
http://www.1cis.com/download/1cismail.asp>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
> Do You
Yahoo!?
> Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo!
Messenger
>
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/>
> *** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:16:44
-0500
From: "Willis, Charles E." <
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
Subject:
Team3S: apologizing in advance to the list and admins ...
this is the
only way I can reach Rich Merritt - all my email directly to him
is getting
bounced as SPAM (maybe appropriate?)
Chuck Willis
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:14:09
-0400
From: "Zobel, Kurt" <
KURT.ZOBEL@ca.com>
Subject: RE:
Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Yes, just to clarify, your reaction time
is time from light goes green til your wheels/car break the timing light, and ET
is break timing light til break finnish line timing light.
The winner is
the first to cross finnish line from green light, so includes both of above, but
is seldom/if ever included as a total time on time slips. Just 'first' or
'winner' is noted.
Gtech times are only ET times, but the Gtech starts as
soon as the car starts, rather than waiting for a break light condition, so time
may be a tenth or two longer than track ET times.
Also, it measures
instantaneous final speed vs trap speed, so will usually report speed higher
than track speeds. Slower time, higher speed with Gtech just as Phillip
indicated.
Kurt
- -----Original Message-----
From: cody
[mailto:overclck@starband.net]
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 11:38 AM
To:
'Joe Gonsowski';
team3s@stealth-3000gt.stSubject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Reaction times have nothing to do
with ET. No one should do that
whatsoever... You could literally have a
30 second reaction time, and a
ET of 9.5 seconds...
- -Cody
-
-----Original Message-----
From:
owner-team3s@team3s.com
[mailto:owner-team3s@team3s.com] On Behalf
Of Joe Gonsowski
Sent: Friday,
August 17, 2001 12:20 PM
To: Philip V. Glazatov
Cc:
team3S@stealth-3000gt.stSubject:
Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Excellent times Philip, but I'd
like to know what you mean by "Here are
my
results net my reaction
times:" Just curious if you took some time off
your
ET because of a
less than perfect reaction time (I've seen some do
this). If
you
didn't, those are very impressive times given the trap speeds.
Please
post your whole time slip including the 60 ft times.
BTW - FWDs are not
running 13s with simple mods unless "simple" includes
nitrous.
Joe
G.
'92 R/T TT
"Philip V. Glazatov" wrote:
> Here are my
results net my reaction
times:
>
>
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 (Run 3 G-Tech
reading)
> Time, sec 13.927
13.514 13.685 (14.05)
> Speed,
mph 95.24 99.31
98.47 (103.6)
>
> Philip
> '95 R/T
TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:23:30
-0400
From: "Zobel, Kurt" <
KURT.ZOBEL@ca.com>
Subject: RE:
Team3S: How to compress brake caliper pistons?
I use a lug nut crowbar
and a large screwdriver or the handle of channel locks, one at each side of an
old pad. This pushes evenly. Just push slow and even don't over do it and you
can push against the rotor w/o any trouble.
Kurt
- -----Original
Message-----
From: Willis, Charles E.
[mailto:cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org]
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001
11:52 AM
To: Team3S List (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Team3S: How to compress
brake caliper pistons?
Everybody has a variation, depending on
preference and clearance on their
calipers. Flash uses a HUMONGOUS set
of channellocks the likes of which I
had never seen. I use two C-clamps
on the old pad backer plate, but
channellocks are my backup. There is a
tool you can buy at Sears for about
$10 to spread the pads. All of
these can be done without removing the
caliper, but if a piston gets hung up,
you will have to remove the caliper
to get a good push on the piston.
That can STILL be done trackside with the
fluid hose still
attached.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gross, Erik
[SMTP:erik.gross@intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 12:26
PM
> To: Team3S List (E-mail)
> Subject: Team3S: How to compress
brake caliper pistons?
>
> So what do you guys use to compress your
brake caliper pistons when you're
> changing brake pads? The best
I've come up with is a small piece of (1/4"
> thick) wood to cover the
piston and then using a "C" clamp. Two problems
> with this,
though. 1: Have to have the caliper off to do it 2:
no
> really
> good place on the back side of the caliper to put the
"C" clamp's other
> end.
> I know several people change pads
trackside, so I know there HAS to be an
> easier way. Can one of the
enlightened show me the way?
>
> --Erik
> '95VR-4 with stock
pads/rotors again
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
End of Team3S: 3000GT &
Stealth V1 #581
***************************************
Team3S: 3000GT & Stealth Saturday, August 18
2001 Volume 01 : Number
582
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:
Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:24:37 -0400
From: "Jason Barnhart" <
phnxgld@erols.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Reaction time does not factor into ET at
all. You can sit at the line
(without tripping the laser ) for 20
seconds and still run 13s.
Philip - These times suggest that you drove
well but the car was down on
power. Sub 13.5s are not uncommon for
stock VR4s but you should be able to
turn traps above 100 mph. Were you
at a high elevation or was it very hot?
Rich - An easy way to tell what
turbos you have is how much boost you can
hold to redline. You'd be
lucky to hold 12 psi to redline even on a very
cold day and low altitudes
with stock turbos. If you can hold 15 psi, then
you've got at least
13Gs.
Jason
13.36 at 102.54 (88k miles, Weapon-R open element filter
and bad plugs and
wires)
12.802 at 107.87 (K&N, boost control,
unbolted downpipe)
12.82 at 109.40 (K&N, boost, downpipe, cat back and
clutch) Actually made 3
back to back passes with no more than 15
minutes between them running
12.82 - 12.89, all over 109 mph.
12.67 at 106
(same mods, better driving and heat) Drove 7 hours to the DSM
shootout
in 2000, hit 117k miles, ran the times and drove home.
- ----- Original
Message -----
From: "Joe Gonsowski" <
twinturbo@mediaone.net>
To:
"Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Cc: <
team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Friday, August 17, 2001 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: Team3S: Back from a drag
strip
> Excellent times Philip, but I'd like to know what you mean by
"Here are my
> results net my reaction times:" Just curious if you
took some time off
your
> ET because of a less than perfect reaction
time (I've seen some do this).
If
> you didn't, those are very
impressive times given the trap speeds.
>
> Please post your whole
time slip including the 60 ft times.
>
> BTW - FWDs are not running
13s with simple mods unless "simple" includes
> nitrous.
>
>
Joe G.
> '92 R/T TT
>
> "Philip V. Glazatov"
wrote:
>
> > Here are my results net my reaction times:
>
>
>
>
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 (Run 3 G-Tech
reading)
> > Time, sec 13.927
13.514 13.685 (14.05)
> > Speed,
mph 95.24 99.31
98.47 (103.6)
> >
> > Philip
> > '95 R/T
TT
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "cody" <
overclck@starband.net>
To: "'Joe
Gonsowski'" <
twinturbo@mediaone.net>; <
team3s@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Friday, August 17, 2001 2:37 PM
Subject: RE: Team3S: Back from a drag
strip
> Reaction times have nothing to do with ET. No one should
do that
> whatsoever... You could literally have a 30 second reaction
time, and a
> ET of 9.5 seconds...
>
> -Cody
>
>
-----Original Message-----
> From:
owner-team3s@team3s.com
[mailto:owner-team3s@team3s.com] On Behalf
> Of Joe Gonsowski
>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 12:20 PM
> To: Philip V. Glazatov
>
Cc:
team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
>
>
> Excellent
times Philip, but I'd like to know what you mean by "Here are
> my
>
results net my reaction times:" Just curious if you took some time
off
> your
> ET because of a less than perfect reaction time (I've
seen some do
> this). If
> you didn't, those are very
impressive times given the trap speeds.
>
> Please post your whole
time slip including the 60 ft times.
>
> BTW - FWDs are not running
13s with simple mods unless "simple" includes
> nitrous.
>
>
Joe G.
> '92 R/T TT
>
> "Philip V. Glazatov"
wrote:
>
> > Here are my results net my reaction times:
>
>
>
>
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 (Run 3 G-Tech
reading)
> > Time, sec 13.927
13.514 13.685 (14.05)
> > Speed,
mph 95.24 99.31
98.47 (103.6)
> >
> > Philip
> > '95 R/T
TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:31:40
-0500
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
> Gtech times are only ET times,
but the Gtech starts as soon
> as the car starts, rather than waiting for
a break light
> condition, so time may be a tenth or two longer than
track
> ET times.
My Gtech is usually optimistic by a bit, caused
by the car squatting the
back end and lifting the front under hard
acceleration. It tilts the Gtech
a bit more down, adding a bit to the
acceleration readings resulting in the
optimistic reading.
Your
mileage may vary....
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:28:44
-0400
From: Joe Gonsowski <
twinturbo@mediaone.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Just so everyone is clear, I didn't
recommend subtracting RT from ET. I simply asked if this is what he was
doing because of the following:
1) He stated "Here are my results
net my reaction times:" why did he say "net my reaction times", what does
this mean?
2) 13.5 timeslip is impressive in a stock TT, usually better
than a 98 trap is reported with mid 13 timeslips.
3) he said his car
was feeling slow
4) It was his first time out, perhaps he doesn't know
that RT is completely independant of ET.
I've seen plenty of first timers
run in the 14s at ~98 mph. Just want to make sure he is interpreting his
timeslip correctly. Say he ran a 14.3 ET with a .8 RT @ 98, that means he
ran a
14.3 1/4 mile but he may have interpretted it as the 13.5 he
reported.
I just asked for some clarification.
Joe G.
12.236 @
113
http://people.mw.mediaone.net/twinturbo/homepage.htm"Zobel,
Kurt" wrote:
> Yes, just to clarify, your reaction time is time from
light goes green til your wheels/car break the timing light, and ET is break
timing light til break finnish line timing light.
>
> The winner is
the first to cross finnish line from green light, so includes both of above, but
is seldom/if ever included as a total time on time slips. Just 'first' or
'winner' is noted.
>
> Gtech times are only ET times, but the Gtech
starts as soon as the car starts, rather than waiting for a break light
condition, so time may be a tenth or two longer than track ET times.
>
Also, it measures instantaneous final speed vs trap speed, so will usually
report speed higher than track speeds. Slower time, higher speed with
Gtech just as Phillip indicated.
>
> Kurt
>
>
-----Original Message-----
> From: cody
[mailto:overclck@starband.net]
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 11:38
AM
> To: 'Joe Gonsowski';
team3s@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
>
> Reaction times have
nothing to do with ET. No one should do that
> whatsoever... You
could literally have a 30 second reaction time, and a
> ET of 9.5
seconds...
>
> -Cody
>
> -----Original
Message-----
> From:
owner-team3s@team3s.com
[mailto:owner-team3s@team3s.com] On Behalf
> Of Joe Gonsowski
>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 12:20 PM
> To: Philip V. Glazatov
>
Cc:
team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
>
> Excellent times
Philip, but I'd like to know what you mean by "Here are
> my
>
results net my reaction times:" Just curious if you took some time
off
> your
> ET because of a less than perfect reaction time (I've
seen some do
> this). If
> you didn't, those are very
impressive times given the trap speeds.
>
> Please post your whole
time slip including the 60 ft times.
>
> BTW - FWDs are not running
13s with simple mods unless "simple" includes
> nitrous.
>
>
Joe G.
> '92 R/T TT
>
> "Philip V. Glazatov"
wrote:
>
> > Here are my results net my reaction times:
>
>
>
>
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 (Run 3 G-Tech
reading)
> > Time, sec 13.927
13.514 13.685 (14.05)
> > Speed,
mph 95.24 99.31
98.47 (103.6)
> >
> > Philip
> > '95 R/T
TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:49:00
-0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff Lucius <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
The G-tech measures acceleration in
one direction. Point it up (or
down) and it measures the force of gravity at
your location. Move it
horizontal when it is pointed up and the reading will
not change
because there is no vertical component of the horizontal
movement.
Turn it to face to the sideways (lateral G measurement) and move
the
car forward and the reading will not change (or change very
little).
To measure car acceleration it is best to have the G-tech
horizontal.
If you have it tilted, the horizontal component will be reduced
and
the measured acceleration will be reduced. Distance traveled and
speed
is based on cummulative time at the acceleration rate. With a
tilted meter,
the G-Tech will think it takes you longer to get to 60
mph or 1/4 mile. The
G-Tech will never be optimistic, always
pessimistic.
Jeff Lucius,
www.stealth316.com- --- "Jannusch,
Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
wrote:
<snip>
> My Gtech is usually optimistic by a bit, caused
by the car
> squatting the
> back end and lifting the front under
hard acceleration. It tilts
> the Gtech
> a bit more down,
adding a bit to the acceleration readings
> resulting in the
>
optimistic reading.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:17:26
-0500
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
> To measure car acceleration it is
best to have the G-tech
> horizontal. If you have it tilted, the
horizontal component
> will be reduced and the measured acceleration will
be
> reduced. Distance traveled and speed is based on cummulative
> time at the acceleration rate. With a tilted meter, the
> G-Tech
will think it takes you longer to get to 60 mph or 1/4
> mile. The G-Tech
will never be optimistic, always pessimistic.
The G-Tech starts level,
but the car induces a tilt to the G-Tech when
accelerating. As it does
this, a gravity component is introduced into the
acceleration reading causing
it to think my car is quicker than it is...
Front of
car
Back of
Car
________
----------| G-Tech
|----------
----------
Car at rest = zero gravitationally-induced
acceleration
Car accelerating, with front rising and tail
dropping:
Front of
car
Back of
Car
^
-----\
________
----|
G-Tech |----\
----------
-----
V
Car's acceleration force vector is ----->
Gravitational
force vector is
|
|
V
If G-Tech's measurement vector is: \
(exaggerated)
\
V
Then the two force vectors will read on the measurement vector as a
single
higher acceleration vector.
G-Tech gets tilted along with the
car so "front" is higher than rear.
Gravity causes an increased acceleration
reading on its single-axis
accelerometer causing it to believe the car is
accelerating quicker than
actual.
...so on my car it is typically
optimistic on hard enough launches. It
launches hard enough where the
rear sometimes hits the bumpstops and the
front pulls the struts to full
extension, so the angle of tilt is
significant enough to throw off the
reading.
So, yes, it can read optimistically.
If your car doesn't
sqat as much as mine does (fairly likely due to the
seemingly softer
suspension setup on the Spyder) then maybe this effect
isn't enough to throw
the reading optimistic enough to compensate for the
"roll-out" distance
before you leave the staging beams at the track (which
reduces ET's at the
track since you get a small rolling start before the ET
clock starts
ticking).
????
Probably not very important in the grand scheme of
things though. ;-)
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder
VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:32:17
-0500
From: "Christopher Deutsch" <
crdeutsch@mn.mediaone.net>
Subject:
Alternative Performance Meter (Was: Team3S: Back from a drag strip)
Or
you can get one of these, which you can program to compensate for
different
degrees of squat:
http://www.race-technology.com/WebPage/FlashHome.htmlThis
performance meter should be more accurate than a G-tech, plus you can
hook it
up to your PC to analyze your data. Don't know if it's worth the
price
though. If your interested in getting one, I bought mine
from
Christopher Brown at:
http://www.cb-racing.com/Great
customer service! No were not related or in business together, just
a
great shopping experience!
You can email me privately if you have
any questions about it.
Christopher
- ----- Original Message
-----
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
To:
"'Jeff Lucius'" <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>; <
team3s@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Friday, August 17, 2001 4:17 PM
Subject: RE: Team3S: Back from a drag
strip
> > To measure car acceleration it is best to have the
G-tech
> > horizontal. If you have it tilted, the horizontal
component
> > will be reduced and the measured acceleration will
be
> > reduced. Distance traveled and speed is based on
cummulative
> > time at the acceleration rate. With a tilted meter,
the
> > G-Tech will think it takes you longer to get to 60 mph or
1/4
> > mile. The G-Tech will never be optimistic, always
pessimistic.
>
> The G-Tech starts level, but the car induces a tilt
to the G-Tech when
> accelerating. As it does this, a gravity
component is introduced into the
> acceleration reading causing it to
think my car is quicker than it is...
>
>
> Front of
car
Back of
Car
>
>
________
> ----------| G-Tech
|----------
>
----------
>
> Car at rest = zero gravitationally-induced
acceleration
>
> Car accelerating, with front rising and tail
dropping:
>
> Front of
car
Back of
Car
>
^
> -----\
________
>
----| G-Tech
|----\
>
----------
-----
>
V
>
> Car's acceleration force vector is ----->
>
Gravitational force vector is
|
>
|
>
V
>
> If G-Tech's measurement vector is: \
(exaggerated)
>
\
>
V
>
> Then the two force vectors will read on the measurement vector
as a single
> higher acceleration vector.
>
> G-Tech gets
tilted along with the car so "front" is higher than rear.
> Gravity causes
an increased acceleration reading on its single-axis
> accelerometer
causing it to believe the car is accelerating quicker than
>
actual.
>
> ...so on my car it is typically optimistic on hard
enough launches. It
> launches hard enough where the rear sometimes
hits the bumpstops and the
> front pulls the struts to full extension, so
the angle of tilt is
> significant enough to throw off the
reading.
>
> So, yes, it can read optimistically.
>
> If
your car doesn't sqat as much as mine does (fairly likely due to the
>
seemingly softer suspension setup on the Spyder) then maybe this effect
>
isn't enough to throw the reading optimistic enough to compensate for
the
> "roll-out" distance before you leave the staging beams at the track
(which
> reduces ET's at the track since you get a small rolling start
before the
ET
> clock starts ticking).
>
>
????
>
> Probably not very important in the grand scheme of things
though. ;-)
>
> -Matt
> '95 3000GT Spyder
VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:58:55
-0000
From: "Sam Shelat" <
sshelat@erols.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Rod bearing preventitive maintenance?
It must just be 1st gens
then cause my 95 VR-4 has 96,000 miles hits 15psi
every day, goes to 100mph
and beyond for minutes each day and still does 12
second 1/4 mile times all
on stock motor and turbos (three leaky
transmissions though). I thought
our motors were well built except when you
start upgrading turbos and
such.
Sam
- -----Original Message-----
From: Willis, Charles E.
<
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
To:
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st <
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Date:
Thursday, August 16, 2001 2:07 PM
Subject: RE: Team3S: Rod bearing
preventitive maintenance?
>Jeff,
>
>What sort of TLC
do you think the previous owner gave your car for 53K
>miles? We've
had four of these monsters with various levels of restoration
>required.
Mike's current car has 120K miles - he bought it at about 60K
from
>a
meticulous fellow who always drove it fast, but not hard. Our
other
cars
>have 90K miles and 63K miles currently with (knock on wood)
no bearing
>problems. The first car Mike had was totalled at about
75K miles if my
>memory serves me.
>
>I just can't see
changing the bearings that frequently as a PM. If you go
>to that
much trouble, wouldn't you pop the heads and change out the rods,
>pistons
and rings?
>
>Chuck
>
>> -----Original
Message-----
>> From: Jeff Lucius
[SMTP:stealthman92@yahoo.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:20
AM
>> To:
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Rod bearing preventitive
maintenance?
>>
>> >> Geoff Mohler said:
>>
>> Honestly..this is the first ive heard of this "common
problem".
>>
>> Who said common problem? I didn't. Read
carefully. I said "weakest
>> link".
>>
>> And Roger,
I rarely have heard of our cars breaking rings or gouging
>> pistons
(at least here stateside). The most often *major* engine
>> complaint I
have heard of is rod bearings.
>>
>> While some here would
laughingly accuse our engine builders of being
>> morons (Hi Wayne), I
believe the problem is inherent in the design.
>> Don't blame our
engine builders or people like me who bought a TT
>> used (5 yrs old
and 53K miles, and had the rod bearings spin after
>> only owning it
for 2 months and 1000 miles), and say we either can't
>> build an
engine or don't perform proper maintenance.
>>
>> I do agree
(emphatically) that changing the oil often with a good
>> quality oil,
and preventing detonation, should go a long way to
>> prolong the life
of the bearings. I happen to change my oil (Mobil 1)
>> every 1000
miles or so. I felt bad when I changed it twice after 2000
>> miles
(after driving to Ohio and Norwalk, the DSM shootout, and again
>>
after driving back to Colorado).
>>
>> Jeff Lucius,
www.stealth316.com***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:51:23
-0400 (EDT)
From: Matthew Hull <
mh800597@oak.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject:
Team3S: Stealth info
Hello all,
I had recently put my car up for
sale and I found a buyer for
13,000. I Thought it was worth more but I
was desperate at the time. Two
days before it was suppose to be sold
the ac belt broke off and got caught
in the drive belt and messed up the
timing belt. The final result was
that the engine was totally messed
up. I have the car at a dealership
right now and they are putting in a
used engine for 6K installed. The car
is a 94 Dodge Stealth R/T TT,
everything inside and out is in great
condition despite this belt
thing. I was wondering what you guys thought
it was worth now that it
has a new engine. (more-less)?? The car has 80K
miles on it and the
engine has 30K. I did all the matainance that was
needed the belt that broke
was only 11 months old, if anyone knows
anything about sueing or talking with
the belt company about the damage
that it caused engine. Thanks for all
your help!!
- -Matt
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:20:14
-0500
From: "Mark Wendlandt" <
stealth_tt@hotmail.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
I have to agree with Matt on this
one...both theoretically and empirically.
Because the car squats there
is an addition gravity component added in. To
get an accurate measurement,
you would need 2 accels orthogonal to each
other(vertical and parallel to
the direction of movement). We can then find
each component of
acceleration...integrate it and find our velocity and if
you know time, you
can find distance...etc, etc. I thought that the better
ones (vericom)
had two accels, but I could be wrong.
I'm disappointed with my
g-tech. It is fairly consistent but inaccurate.
I've run it
several times at the track and it is ~.3-.5 sec fast in the 1/4
and about
7mph off(expected because of instantanious instead of the average
of the
last 60').
I put a lot more weight on the times posted from track events
than the times
posted with (g-tech) after them.
Anyone want to buy my
g-tech?
Mark Wendlandt
'91RT/TT
12.61@111 (Rockfalls Dragways)
>From:
"Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
>The
G-Tech starts level, but the car induces a tilt to the G-Tech
when
>accelerating. As it does this, a gravity component is
introduced into the
>acceleration reading causing it to think my car is
quicker than it is...
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:44:43
-0700 (PDT)
From: John Christian <
jczoom_619@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Rod bearing preventative maintenance?
Hi Andy,
Yep, on the
engine stand. Just pulled #4&3 pistons.
#4 is only slightly
cracked near the top land, but is
missing the two lower skirts--found those
in the pan.
Will be pulling the other 4 pistons on Sat.
Can see the
copper thru what is left of the babbitt on
the upper rod bearing
insert. Crank journals still
look good with bright mirror like
finish.
Guess its 'good' I blew a head gasket cause there
wasn't but a
few more miles to go before serious
damage occurred. Currently
93k.
Be of good cheer,
John
- --- "Andrew D. Woll"
<
awoll1@pacbell.net>
wrote:
> John: How did you check the bearings with
>
Plastigage - Is you engine torn
> apart right now?
>
>
Andy
>
=====
Please respond to
jczoom@iname.com'93 TT with Porsche
brakes and Supra TT rotors
12.4@109MPH
5/97 almost stock
http://www.geocities.com/motorcity/flats/4538***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:28:06
-0700
From: "Jim Berry" <
fastmax@home.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S:
Back from a drag strip
The G-tech is great for testing mods ---- do a
roll on before and after a mod
and check max acceleration, you can even watch
the readout and get a
feel for overall performance. If you wish do a ¼
mile run to get the change
in performance, they are great for relative
performance. To think that it would
have an absolute accuracy better than a
track timing light is a bit foolish, on
the other hand it's a major pain to
run to the track every time you want to
check your performance level. With
the G-tech you can also wait to have the
same run conditions --- Temperature
etc.
If you want absolute accuracy go to the track ---- if you want
relative accuracy
and convenience use the
G-tech.
Jim
Berry
====================================================
- -----
Original Message -----
From: Mark Wendlandt <
stealth_tt@hotmail.com>
>
I have to agree with Matt on this one...both theoretically and
empirically.
> Because the car squats there is an addition gravity
component added in.
>
> I'm disappointed with my g-tech. It is
fairly consistent but inaccurate.
> I put a lot more weight on the
times posted from track events than the times
> posted with (g-tech) after
them.
>
> Anyone want to buy my g-tech?
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:50:45
-0500
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Stealth info
> ...the ac belt broke off and got caught in
the drive belt
> and messed up the timing belt. The final result
was
> that the engine was totally messed up.
That's strange.
A broken A/C belt shouldn't be able to hose up the timing
belt since the
timing belt is tucked safely away under a full set of covers.
Seems a little
suspicious to me...
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 00:06:05
-0500
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
> I'm disappointed with my
g-tech. It is fairly consistent
> but inaccurate. I've run it
several times at the track
> and it is ~.3-.5 sec fast in the 1/4 and
about 7mph
> off(expected because of instantanious instead of the average
> of the last 60').
Yeah, I see similar results. My car
posted a 12.2 on the G-Tech, but that's
about the best I think my car
could've hoped for in its then-current set of
mods at the track with race
fuel and more boost. With 17 psi of boost and
pump gas with water
injection that seemed optimistic. But gee, that would
be great if that
was reality. ;-)
The +7 MPH is actually pretty poor accuracy-wise
and can't really be
explained by the 60' averaging. At 110 MPH that
last 60' goes by a lot
quicker than you can accelerate the 7 MPH of
error. The MPH number just
plain isn't accurate.
> I put a
lot more weight on the times posted from track events
> than the times
posted with (g-tech) after them.
Yeah, for sure. The G-Tech is okay
for estimates, and only if you do
several runs and average the runs throwing
out the best and worst. Then of
course you have to find a nearly
perfectly flat road to make the runs on or
the numbers can really get out of
whack. Its better than nothing, but the
numbers aren't necessarily
"real". Hopefully nobody ever really thought
they were.
:-)
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:50:21
-0500
From: "Mark Wendlandt" <
stealth_tt@hotmail.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Thanks for the comments Jim. The
problem is with the claims that G-tech
makes about the accuracy. I
never expected it to be as accurate as timing.
I just expected it to
live up to their claims(does this still make me
"foolish"?)
http://www.gtechpro.com/accu.html+-0.1
sec and +-1 mph
In practice, these just are not true...in my car or
Matt's(this leaves me to
believe others as well). People spend
thousands of dollars to get a half of
second increase in the
1/4...
Now if is was always exactly .4 sec(hypothetical) off then it
would be more
useful. If you put a K&N in or new downpipe that
will probably only give
you a tenth or two...it is in the noise level and
you will not see it in the
gtech(1/4mi run). Nitrous, BC or turbos and
I think that you will notice
this as they give a much larger performance
gain.
I do agree with you that it is more accurate doing roll-ons than
launches
and that you could do testing that way...When I bought it, I had
0-60s and
1/4s on my mind(these are the numbers that many post). Not
accurate enough
for these.
The device just does not live up to its
claims.
Now if you know this when you buy it(I didn't), you won't be
disappointed/surprised when you go to the track and numbers are way off(I
was).
"You get what you pay for"
Mark
Wendlandt
'91RT/TT
>
>The G-tech is great for testing mods
---- do a roll on before and after a
>mod
>and check max
acceleration, you can even watch the readout and get a
>feel for overall
performance. If you wish do a ¼ mile run to get the
>change
>in performance, they are great for relative performance.
To think that it
>would
>have an absolute accuracy better than a
track timing light is a bit
>foolish, on
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 07:15:49
-0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff Lucius <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Yes, I agree Matt. I didn't think it
through - the reduced horizontal
component will be less than the increased
vertical component
(assuming none of our cars accelerate faster than 1 g :) )
so the
total vector will be larger. I should have drawn some little
pictures
or at least had a cup of coffee. :)
Jeff Lucius,
www.stealth316.com- --- "Jannusch,
Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
wrote:
> > To measure car acceleration it is best to have the G-tech
> > horizontal. If you have it tilted, the horizontal component
> > will be reduced and the measured acceleration will be
>
> reduced. Distance traveled and speed is based on cummulative
> >
time at the acceleration rate. With a tilted meter, the
> > G-Tech
will think it takes you longer to get to 60 mph or 1/4
> > mile. The
G-Tech will never be optimistic, always pessimistic.
>
> The G-Tech
starts level, but the car induces a tilt to the G-Tech
> when
>
accelerating. As it does this, a gravity component is introduced
>
into the
> acceleration reading causing it to think my car is quicker than
it
> is...
>
>
> Front of
car
Back of Car
>
>
________
> ----------| G-Tech
|----------
>
----------
>
> Car at rest = zero gravitationally-induced
acceleration
>
> Car accelerating, with front rising and tail
dropping:
>
> Front of
car
Back of
Car
>
^
> -----\
________
>
----| G-Tech |----\
>
----------
-----
>
V
>
> Car's acceleration force vector is ----->
>
Gravitational force vector is
|
>
|
>
V
>
> If G-Tech's measurement vector is: \
(exaggerated)
>
\
>
V
>
> Then the two force vectors will read on the measurement
vector as a
> single
> higher acceleration vector.
>
>
G-Tech gets tilted along with the car so "front" is higher than
>
rear.
> Gravity causes an increased acceleration reading on its
single-axis
> accelerometer causing it to believe the car is accelerating
quicker
> than
> actual.
>
> ...so on my car it is
typically optimistic on hard enough launches.
> It
> launches
hard enough where the rear sometimes hits the bumpstops
> and the
>
front pulls the struts to full extension, so the angle of tilt is
>
significant enough to throw off the reading.
>
> So, yes, it can
read optimistically.
>
> If your car doesn't sqat as much as mine
does (fairly likely due to
> the
> seemingly softer suspension setup
on the Spyder) then maybe this
> effect
> isn't enough to throw the
reading optimistic enough to compensate
> for the
> "roll-out"
distance before you leave the staging beams at the track
> (which
>
reduces ET's at the track since you get a small rolling start
> before the
ET
> clock starts ticking).
>
> ????
>
>
Probably not very important in the grand scheme of things though.
>
;-)
>
> -Matt
> '95 3000GT Spyder VR4
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:08:19
-0700
From: "Jim Berry" <
fastmax@home.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S:
Back from a drag strip
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Mark
Wendlandt <
stealth_tt@hotmail.com>
>
Thanks for the comments Jim. The problem is with the claims that
G-tech
> makes about the accuracy. I never expected it to be as
accurate as timing.
> I just expected it to live up to their claims(does
this still make me
> "foolish"?)
Foolish was an bad choice of words
--- overly optimistic would be a better
choice. I went to their web site and
looked at their advertising hype and would
have to agree that they are
misleading, dive, squat and roll are not mentioned
at all and can have a
significant affect on operation especially if you have a
softly sprung car. I
guess as a result of my engineering background and
cynical view of
advertising I didn't expect too much.
> Now if is was always
exactly .4 sec(hypothetical) off then it would be more
> useful.
If
dive and squat were repeatable I would assume the results would be
repeatable
also --- has anyone kept track of similar ¼ mile runs and the
G-tech
equivalent.
If you put a K&N in or new downpipe that will probably
only give
> you a tenth or two...it is in the noise level and you will not
see it in the
> gtech(1/4mi run).
I think the same applies to ¼ mi
runs also unless you're a serious racer, in
my case if I could get within .3
on consecutive runs I'd be amazed, that's
why I'd use a roll-on to check
mods.
> The device just does not live up to its
claims.
Probably true --- I see they're in LA, not far from me ---- I
might give them
a call and ask about dive and squat and see what they have to
say for
themselves.
Jim
Berry
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:01:59
-0500
From: Gabriel Estrada <
typhoonzz@earthlink.net>
Subject:
Team3S: Stock brake replacement
Ok,
I have never changed the pads
before on my GT, but I can't imagine that is
going to be that hard. But
I'd like some advice on simple stock replacement
pads and what is the best
fluid to use that can be store bought for a car
that is never raced, just
daily driven.
Thanks in advance!
Gabriel Estrada
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 12:54:33
-0500
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Back from a drag strip
May I ask what a "roll-on" is? I could not
find it in the archives. Maybe
then I won't have to burn my clutch or speed
past 100 MPH. Thanks.
Philip
At 10:08 AM 8/18/2001, Jim Berry
wrote:
>I'd use a roll-on to check mods.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 13:08:07
-0500
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
> If dive and squat were repeatable
I would assume the
> results would be repeatable also --- has anyone
kept
> track of similar ¼ mile runs and the G-tech equivalent.
I
think overall the results are reasonably repeatable, but if I make a run
in
Tour suspension mode versus Sport mode the results on the Tour run are
even
more optimistic. :-) I like those results the best.
Heh....
> I think the same applies to ¼ mi runs also unless
>
you're a serious racer, in my case if I could get
> within .3 on
consecutive runs I'd be amazed, that's
> why I'd use a roll-on to check
mods.
Its probably even tougher to get consistent roll-on acceleration
than a
dragstrip launch though (at least for me - you might be better at it
than I
am!). I'm thinking I might try out something like this
instead:
http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/roaddyno/index.htmlEssentially
what I'm really looking for when I'm not at the dragstrip is
engine output
power and not so much 1/4 mile time or acceleration data.
The
horsepower number on the GTech can be pretty iffy and since there's
no
datalogging you can't draw a plot of wheel horsepower later to use as
a
tuning aid.
Since I haven't found an AWD dyno anywhere remotely near
where I live
(Minnesota) maybe this will do something for me to at least get
some better
performance data than "Well, it seems really quick!".
:-)
Anyone played with that hardware/software? Opinions?
30
day money back guarantee, which is nice...
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder
VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 14:29:37
EDT
From:
Sportsmobile101@aol.comSubject:
Team3S: Car wont start, please help.
Hi team, i drove home last
night in my 92 SL and it was working ok, but
this morning when i tried to
start it, it started but the rpm did not get
over 500 and then it just
died. So i fugured maybe my fuel pump had died,
but i checked that and
it is working fine, i replaced the fuel filter just in
case, but that didn't
do anything. Where should i start checking?? Any
advice is
greatly appreciated. Thanx in advace.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:01:51
-0500
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Sorry, I did read my slips incorrectly.
Here are the original
slips:
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 (Run 3 G-Tech
reading)
Reaction 1.037
0.720 0.480
60
ft 2.536
2.246 2.031
330
ft 6.596
6.060 5.860
1/8
ET 9.869
9.229 9.106
1/8
MPH 75.63
76.90 75.79
1000' ET
12.623 11.947 11.855
1/4
ET 14.964
14.234 14.165 (14.05)
1/4
MPH 95.24
99.31 98.47 (103.6)
I raced at the Milan Dragway
in Michigan, the Great Lakes altitude??? The
weather was about 75 deg F and
I'd say 70% humidity. It got a little cooler
by the my last run. During the
second run I panicked and clutched it when I
started pulling away from that
500HP+ Camaro. ;-) I lost some time but
gained some speed I think. He still
got me in the end. My G-Tech was
surprisingly accurate during the one time I
used it.
Philip
'95 R/T TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:13:18
-0400
From: Joe Gonsowski <
twinturbo@mediaone.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Back from a drag strip
Hey Philip, many of us Michigan folks
have run at Milan and Lapeer dragway.
Next time you go, let the MI crew know
(we have an email list, contact "Alan C.
Sheffield" <
alan92rttt@mi3si.org> if you aren't on
the list yet). Even if my
car isn't running, I'll gladly go to watch,
help, take pictures, etc. Your ETs
can use some improvement, and you'll
get it with a better launch / 60 foot. A
1.8 60' will get you to ~ 13.8
which is typical although others in better
states of tune and aggressive
shifting have gotten to mid 13s stock.
Joe Gonsowski
Westland,
MI
'92 R/T TT
12.236 @ 113
"Philip V. Glazatov" wrote:
>
Sorry, I did read my slips incorrectly. Here are the original
slips:
>
>
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 (Run 3 G-Tech
reading)
> Reaction
1.037 0.720 0.480
> 60
ft 2.536
2.246 2.031
> 330
ft 6.596
6.060 5.860
> 1/8
ET 9.869
9.229 9.106
> 1/8
MPH 75.63
76.90 75.79
> 1000'
ET 12.623 11.947
11.855
> 1/4 ET
14.964 14.234 14.165 (14.05)
> 1/4
MPH 95.24
99.31 98.47 (103.6)
>
> I raced at the Milan
Dragway in Michigan, the Great Lakes altitude??? The
> weather was about
75 deg F and I'd say 70% humidity. It got a little cooler
> by the my last
run. During the second run I panicked and clutched it when I
> started
pulling away from that 500HP+ Camaro. ;-) I lost some time but
> gained
some speed I think. He still got me in the end. My G-Tech was
>
surprisingly accurate during the one time I used it.
>
>
Philip
> '95 R/T TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
End of Team3S: 3000GT &
Stealth V1
#582
***************************************
