Team3S: 3000GT & Stealth Monday, December 17
2001 Volume 01 : Number
702
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:
Sun, 16 Dec 2001 21:58:07 -0600
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Is HKS no good?
> I forgot that they make the VPC. But it
has a
> limited adjustability and people still have to buy
> Apexi
S-AFC to make it work properly. But as I
> wrote yesterday, if you
have an AFC, you could
> become a little creative, save $1000+ and run
your
> favorite 720 cc injectors with a stock MAS.
Your idea is yet
to be proven. I personally don't think that its going to
be consistent
enough to make good solid reliable power. Good luck on the
idea though,
I'm sure there are several people here interested in hearing
how it works
out.
I'm curious about where you are going to put all the extra intake
piping.
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:25:36
-0600
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: RE:
Team3S: Is HKS no good?
The MAS bypass idea has been tried already and it
works. I read about it
somewhere, but it was on a DSM or something. I did
not just make it up
yesterday ;-)
If you need more space in the
underhood compartment, you could move the
battery to the trunk and you will
have enough space to install two more
turbos or two more K&N's. I might
try it myself some day but I do not have
to since I will be installing 550
cc injectors, at least for now.
Philip
At 09:58 PM 12/16/01,
Jannusch, Matt wrote:
> > I forgot that they make the VPC. But it has
a
> > limited adjustability and people still have to buy
> >
Apexi S-AFC to make it work properly. But as I
> > wrote
yesterday, if you have an AFC, you could
> > become a little creative,
save $1000+ and run your
> > favorite 720 cc injectors with a stock
MAS.
>
>Your idea is yet to be proven. I personally don't
think that its going to
>be consistent enough to make good solid reliable
power. Good luck on the
>idea though, I'm sure there are several
people here interested in hearing
>how it works out.
>
>I'm
curious about where you are going to put all the extra intake
piping.
>
>-Matt
>'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 00:59:41
-0600
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Team3S:
BOV open types vs Greddy Type-S
Could anyone educate me please, do I have
to use Greddy Type-S if I am
planning to keep the stock MAS?
If I use
a open-atmosphere valve, then already counted by MAS air will
escape and the
ECU will get confused, richen the mixture the engine will
run rich for a
while. I heard Apexi Super-AFC is supposed to correct this,
but I read on
their website that they make this correction only for "hot
wire" meters and
not for our Karmann's. So, does it mean that Greddy Type-S
and maybe some
other recirculating BOV's are only ones I could use?
Not that I do not
like Greddy Type-S, but I think that there could be some
other nice BOV's
out there. I just want to keep my options open.
Thanks.
Philip
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 06:59:58
+0100
From: "Chip @PDN" <
c.greenberg@pdn-inc.com>
Subject:
Team3S: fuel filter
How often is it called for to change the fuel
filter? The dealer tells me
every 15k miles. That seems a bit
often too me.
Thx
Chip
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 06:54:29
-0800 (PST)
From: Jeff Lucius <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Is HKS no good?
MAS bypass:
For our cars, installing the
stock MAS on the intake hose to one
turbo (and just having a filter on the
intake hose to the other
turbo), does not solve the *essential* problem of
using larger
injectors with the *stock* ECM. Larger injectors are basically
only
needed when larger turbos are used and boost is increased to
well
beyond factory design limits. The problem is that the ECM
cannot
provide fuel in the proper amount needed to minimize knock at
extreme
boost levels. Even using WI and high-octane fuel, richer A/F
ratios
are required at 18-22+ boost levels - where 550-720 injectors
are
required.
The "MAS bypass" would require 720 injectors to work,
but the ECM
would always think only 1/2 the air is flowing than actually is.
It
will not adjust the A/F correctly (nor the timing for that matter)
for
the high boost levels - the ECM wuld think the engine is under
light load.
The ARC2 and VPC (with accessories if desired) allow us
to richen the A/F to
help quell knock at high boost. Timing cannot be
changed though (timing
increased as a result of the ARC2 or VPC
reducing the air flow signal).
Moving battery:
Contrary to Philip's wistful statement below, moving
the battery out
of its stock location (to anywhere else) does allow space for
ANY
additional turbos or two more K&Ns. It would leave a nice space
for
WI equipment.
Injector installation:
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/nlucius/n-2-injectors.htmJeff
Lucius,
www.stealth316.com-
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
To: <
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Sunday, December 16, 2001 10:25 PM
Subject: RE: Team3S: Is HKS no
good?
The MAS bypass idea has been tried already and it works. I read
about
it somewhere, but it was on a DSM or something. I did not just
make
it up yesterday ;-)
If you need more space in the underhood
compartment, you could move
the battery to the trunk and you will have enough
space to install
two more turbos or two more K&N's. I might try it myself
some day but
I do not have to since I will be installing 550 cc injectors,
at
least for now.
Philip
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:32:21
-0600
From: David Allison <
daedel@mac.com>
Subject: Team3S: Torndado
fuel saver
I happened to catch the infomercial on this thing a minute ago
and it
looks at least interesting. I've read some reviews and this
thing
supposedly works really well on high performance engines. Just
wondering if anyone with a 3S has tried one? The guy in the commercial
had a K&N FIPK installed when he put his in and went from 200 HP to
~220. I'd like this thing as a stocking stuffer, so get back soon
;)
- -David
94 3000gt
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 08:53:42
-0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Torndado fuel saver
Snake oil.
Sued multiple times by
the FTC already.
On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, David Allison wrote:
> I
happened to catch the infomercial on this thing a minute ago and it
>
looks at least interesting. I've read some reviews and this thing
>
supposedly works really well on high performance engines. Just
>
wondering if anyone with a 3S has tried one? The guy in the commercial
>
had a K&N FIPK installed when he put his in and went from 200 HP to
>
~220. I'd like this thing as a stocking stuffer, so get back soon ;)
>
> -David
> 94 3000gt
- ---
Geoff Mohler
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 11:29:50
-0600
From: Drew Mouton <
drew@irev2.com>
Subject: Team3S: Want to
pass on some wheels?
Hey All,
I need to buy some replacement street
wheels (and tires) for my '92
3000base. The stock 16s have just been waiting
for me to get around to a
size upgrade.
Is anyone sitting on a decent
used set of 17s or 18s they'd like to part
with?
Cheers,
Drew
Mouton
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:54:40
+0100
From: "Roger Gerl \(RTEC\)" <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: fuel filter
Each 60k service is
enough.
Roger
93'3000GT TT
www.rtec.ch> How often is it called for
to change the fuel filter? The dealer tells me
> every 15k
miles. That seems a bit often too me.
> Thx
>
Chip
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:01:18
-0600
From: "Alex Pedenko" <
apedenko@attbi.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Wheels/Tires
The 18 x 10 was more or less
random - I don't know much about sizes past
xxx/xx sizing, so I think
I'm gonna try 'n go w/ the P zeros (I've drooled
over those before
:)
How do they handle in the snow? I don't mean knee
deep snow, but just
wet, slushy weather in general.
Also, what's a good price for those and what's a good price for Volk GTP
18 X
9 wheels? The guy at wheel options offered 490 per.
thanks,
Alex.
- -----
Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Lucius" <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>
To: "Alex
Pedenko" <
apedenko@attbi.com>;
"'Team3S'" <
team3s@team3s.com>
Sent: Saturday,
December 15, 2001 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: Team3S: Wheels/Tires
> ---
Alex Pedenko <
apedenko@attbi.com>
wrote:
> > I went to
www.wheeloptions.com and hat them price
out a package for
> > me -
> >
> > 2700 for the
package
> > 4x Volk GTPs 18X10 @ $490 ea
> > 4x Michelin MXM
Pilot 255/35? ZR18 @185 ea
>
> 10" wide wheels:
> I have 18x9
wheels with 38 mm offset on my '92 Stealth TT. The wheel
> itself extends
maybe 3/8" past the outer edge of the front fender
> (still tucked in a
little in back). The 265/35 tire extends out
> another 1/8". Your 18x10"
wheel will protrude an additional 1". Not
> 1/2" because you will have to
keep the inner edge of the wheel about
> in the same relative position as
mine, which leaves about 1/4" of
> clearance with the tire I have mounted
and suspension and body parts.
>
> Are you sure you want the look of
tire/wheel sticking out 1.5" past
> the front fender? Not that there is
anything wrong with that. Just
> being sure that is what you
want.
>
> Offset:
> The stock offset is 46 mm with 8.5 inch
wheels. To keep exactly the
> same clearance between wheel/tire as the
stock setup, your 10" wheel
> will have to have an offset 0.75" less (19
mm less) than 46 mm or
> about 27 mm. Look at your current clearance at
various positions of
> the wheel/tire. If you can stand to have less
clearance then you can
> add that amount back into the the offset. So if
say you could stand
> to move the wheel/tire 1/4" (6.35 mm) closer to the
strut, then
> offset could be increased to 33-34 mm (for 10"
wheels).
>
> Tires:
> Why would you mount a 255-mm (10") wide
tire on a 10" wheel? The 255
> easily mounts on 8.5-9" wheels. Remember,
the overall width of the
> tire is wider than the mounting width. The
265/35 Pirellis mount
> nicely on my 18x9 SSR GT1s. A 275 tire is more
suitable for a 10"
> wheel. Maybe 18x8.5 or 18x9 wheels might suite your
goals better than
> 18x10 wheels. Just a suggestion. :)
>
>
SSR GT1 wheels:
>
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/nlucius/n-2-ssr-gt1.htm>
>
Pirelli P Zero Rosso tires:
>
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/nlucius/n-2-pirelli-pzra.htm>
>
Jeff Lucius,
www.stealth316.com***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:19:21
-0800
From: "Geddes, Brian J" <
brian.j.geddes@intel.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Idea for cheaper way to run 720CC injectors?
Perhaps if you
bought a used MAS from a junk yard and hooked it up to the
other intake
pipe. You wouldn't plug the second MAS in, but it would give
you
identical restrictions on both pipes. :)
- - Brian
>
-----Original Message-----
> From: Philip V. Glazatov
[mailto:gphilip@umich.edu]
> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 9:52
AM
> To:
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Idea for cheaper way to run 720CC injectors?
>
>
> One more reason to do a bypass instead of installing MAS on
just one
> intake: Two turbos do not always spin at the same speed. If
> you install
> your MAS on just one turbo, then that turbo might
not always
> spin at the
> same speed as the other one. Therefore
you will not be
> getting total air
> flow proportional to the MAS
sensor reading.
>
> Philip
>
> At 12:58 AM 12/15/01,
Philip V. Glazatov wrote:
> >I would use one large air filter. The
reason is that if one
> filter gets
> >dirtier than the other,
or if you oil one K&N more than the
> other, or if
> >you
swap the filters accidentally during teardown, etc...
> you will have to
> >tune your air/fuel ratio all over again.
> >
>
>Philip
> >
> >At 11:05 PM 12/14/01, John Monnin
wrote:
> >>What if you only hooked the stock MAF sensor the to ONE
of
> the intake
> >>pipes. The other intake pipe would
be connected to a
> separate air filter.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:46:45
-0800 (PST)
From: Jeff Lucius <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Idea for cheaper way to run 720CC injectors?
Uneven turbo
speed:
Turbine speed is basically determined by the exhaust gas flow
-
assuming identical turbo and compressor sections. The turbo
compressor
section creates the low pressure zone that sucks air in
through the air
filter. Remember, there is high pressure after the
turbo and air flows from
high to low pressure. The low pressure after
the turbo being the cylinders
with pistons going downward. Having
different *minor* restrictions in front
of the turbo probably won't
make too much difference. At least nothing
measurable to worry about.
The turbo is not going to care.
I posted
this below in another thread but it should probably go in
this
one.
MAS bypass:
For our cars, installing the stock MAS on the intake
hose to one
turbo (and just having a filter on the intake hose to the
other
turbo), does not solve the *essential* problem of using
larger
injectors with the *stock* ECM. Larger injectors are basically
only
needed when larger turbos are used and boost is increased to
well
beyond factory design limits. The problem is that the ECM
cannot
provide fuel in the proper amount needed to minimize knock at
extreme
boost levels. Even using WI and high-octane fuel, richer A/F
ratios
are required at 18-22+ boost levels - where 550-720 injectors
are
required.
The "MAS bypass" would require 720 injectors to work,
but the ECM
would always think only 1/2 the air is flowing than actually is.
It
will not adjust the A/F correctly (nor the timing for that matter)
for
the high boost levels - the ECM would think the engine is under
light load.
The ARC2 and VPC (with accessories if desired) allow us
to richen the A/F to
help quell knock at high boost. Timing cannot be
changed though (timing
increased as a result of the ARC2 or VPC
reducing the air flow signal).
Jeff Lucius,
www.stealth316.com- ----- Original
Message -----
From: "Geddes, Brian J" <
brian.j.geddes@intel.com>
To:
"'Philip V. Glazatov'" <
gphilip@umich.edu>;
<
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Monday, December 17, 2001 2:19 PM
Subject: RE: Team3S: Idea for cheaper way
to run 720CC injectors?
Perhaps if you bought a used MAS from a junk yard
and hooked it up to
the other intake pipe. You wouldn't plug the second
MAS in, but it
would give you identical restrictions on both pipes.
:)
- - Brian
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:15:47
-0800
From: "Gross, Erik" <
erik.gross@intel.com>
Subject: RE:
Team3S: Idea for cheaper way to run 720CC injectors?
> The "MAS
bypass" would require 720 injectors to work,
> but the ECM would always
think only 1/2 the air is flowing
> than actually is. It will not adjust
the A/F correctly (nor
> the timing for that matter) for the high boost
levels -
> the ECM would think the engine is under light load.
So
Jeff, correct me if I'm wrong, but based on your comments about modifying
the
airflow signal in our cars, I come to the following conclusions:
1) This
would apply to any modifications done so that the airflow
signal is modified
(specifically: lowered) - meaning VPC, MAS bypass, ARC2,
etc.
2) The
ECU would NOT provide extra fuel to prevent knock at high boost.
This could
be countered by using an aftermarket air/fuel controller, but
would require a
lot of time tuning all the details.
3) The ECU would NOT preemptively
retard the timing at high boost to
prevent knock. Maybe an aftermarket
timing controller would help?
4) The ECU WOULD retard timing if excessive
knock were detected. But
at extreme power levels, it only takes a
little knock to break stuff
quickly, right?
5) The ECU's fuel cut
operation would not protect the engine in the
case of running extremely lean
or running with extremely high boost (i.e.
oops, forgot to connect the
wastegate actuator line).
6) Essentially, if you plan to add
higher-flowing injectors and thus
bypass the ECU's engine safety mechanisms,
you'd better be extra sure you
know what you're doing and have gauges
everywhere in the cockpit to monitor
all the things that the ECU normally
protects you from.
That sound about right? Man... maybe I *will*
pull the
15Gs/550s/VPC off my wish list for a reliable road-race/road-trip
car. I
like the idea of running 15-16psi to redline, but if that means
one failed
part results in an engine rebuild rather than "fuel cut, pull
over, fix
problem, resume driving," I'm not so sure.
Theoretically, I should be happy with 350-400hp for a
road-race
car.... but there was a time not too long ago
where I tried to convince
myself that I'd be happy with my old NA 3000GT,
too. We all know how that
ended up =) @#$%$@#%@#$ feature
creep....
- --Erik
'95 VR-4 with stock airflow signal
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:30:47
-0600
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Idea for cheaper way to run 720CC injectors?
> 1) This
would apply to any modifications done so that the airflow
> signal is
modified (specifically: lowered) - meaning VPC, MAS
> bypass, ARC2,
etc.
Yes.
> 2) The ECU would NOT provide extra fuel to prevent
knock
> at high boost. This could be countered by using an
>
aftermarket air/fuel controller, but would require a lot
> of time tuning
all the details.
It actually should provide extra fuel when on boost, but
the response curve
probably won't be optimum.
> 3) The ECU would
NOT preemptively retard the timing at
> high boost to prevent
knock. Maybe an aftermarket
> timing controller would
help?
It should* seek out maximum advance whenever possible and then back
off when
it sees knock - to a point. What would really be great would
be an
aftermarket fuel and timing controller in one box, that could adjust
fuel in
different tables for RPM, throttle position, and boost level.
Then have the
same sort of tables for timing control. Then also have
datalogging for us
poor guys caught in the middle of the OBD standards.
Gee, kinda like...
Oh, say... An EFI Systems PMS controller.
8-)
> 4) The ECU WOULD retard timing if excessive knock were
>
detected. But
> at extreme power levels, it only takes a little
knock to
> break stuff quickly, right?
Pretty much -
yes.
> 5) The ECU's fuel cut operation would not protect the engine in
the
> case of running extremely lean or running with extremely high
> boost (i.e. oops, forgot to connect the wastegate actuator
line).
Fuel cut can still happen, but it'll probably be too late if it
ever comes
along to save your pistons.
> 6) Essentially, if you
plan to add higher-flowing
> injectors and thus
> bypass the ECU's
engine safety mechanisms, you'd better be
> extra sure you know what
you're doing and have gauges
> everywhere in the cockpit to monitor all
the things that the
> ECU normally protects you from.
Yup. I
learned that the hard way.
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder
VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 17:37:58
-0500
From: "bdtrent" <
bdtrent@netzero.net>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Idea for cheaper way to run 720CC injectors?
From the school of
keeping it simple, I've had good luck for the last 3 yrs.
and 4 open track
events with the following setup:
13g's
AVC-R set to 18psi
AFC
RC
500's
Denso 260lph pump
EGT
Boost gage
FIPK
ATR down pipe
(questionable benefit)
Cat free stock exhaust
Stock bypass
valve
This system will hold boost at ~16psi in 2nd, 17psi in 3rd, and
18psi in
4-5th
If I were doing it again, I would switch to RC 550's as the
500's are
pushing at high rpm. Otherwise, this is a bare bones system
that works.
Tuning took about 5 minutes. I was running 18psi at my last
open track
event but the water temp was normal and the EGT's were peaking
around 870C
down the front straight. I havn't got a datalogger yet, but
that will
hopefully change by the end of next
week.
Regards,
DaveT/92TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:03:26
-0800 (PST)
From: Jeff Lucius <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Idea for cheaper way to run 720CC
injectors?
Erik,
That is a nice synopsis. I would add the
following comments.
1. Yes. The VPC, ARC2, AFC, and similar devices are
properly called
air-flow signal conditioners (AFSC). When using the *stock*
ECM, the
air flow signal must be reduced to compensate for the
higher
"flow-per-squirt" of larger-than-stock injectors.
2. True and
not true. The ECM will do two things that I have observed
using the
datalogger when it sees high knock counts (lots of
detonation). It will
retard timing and it will dump fuel - regardless
of whether an AFSC is
installed. I understand that in extreme case it
will also revert to a
failsafe ("low octane") timing and fuel map.
3. True. The ECM will
naturally retard timing (actually reduce the
timing advance) as it sees
higher and higher air flow at a given RPM.
This still happens with AFSCs just
not to the extent it does without
AFSCs. See my web pages below.
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/jlucius2/j2-2-tmo2.htmhttp://www.geocities.com/lutransys/jlucius/2-tmo1.htm4.
I have datalogged 20+ knock counts many times - especially when my
CAS was
not set correctly (way too much basic timing). Nothing has
broken yet. Maybe
the forged pistons and moly rings helped. On the
other hand, wear may have
increased drastically on rod and main
bearings. So will a *little* knock
break things quickly? Probably
not. Will lots of knock do it? Maybe, depends.
Will any knock have
detrimental impact on engine longevity? Almost
certainly.
5. Not exactly. Fuel cut is initiated by the ECM: 1) when too
much
air flows at some RPM (too much boost), 2) when the engine revs
too
high (~7500 RPM), and 3) during strong deceleration (throttle
plate
closed). There are no safety features in the ECM that I know of
for
"running lean" in open-loop mode (WOT) because the ECM does
not
monitor and use the O2 reading in open-loop mode. Situation 1)
is
greatly reduced or eliminated using AFSCs with larger injectors.
6.
Exactly in my opinion. Two EGT, two A/F, a real boost gauge, and a
fuel
pressure gauge would be the minimum. Also beneficial would be
real coolant
temp (though us with datloggers can scale the stock
gauge), and real oil
pressure and oil temp. Plus anything else that
helps you monitor the engine.
Always a datalogger if applicable.
Don't pull the 15Gs/550s/VPC off your
wish list. Many, many owners
run this or similar equipment without problems.
Believe me (and
others) when we say the reward is worth the expense and
higher
probability for pain.
For a strictly road race car you might
consider DR500/13G turbos, 450
cc/min injectors, and Apex'i S-AFC - along
with any appropriate
warning/tuning devices/meters/etc. 13G turbos will
supply 690 cfm of
air over a broad range of RPM. That is good for a real,
non-stressed
400 bhp. That 10:1 weight:power ratio with upgraded suspension
and
braking may be all you need. But best to ask the successful
road
racers in the group about this.
Good luck,
Jeff Lucius,
www.stealth316.com- ----- Original
Message -----
From: "Gross, Erik" <
erik.gross@intel.com>
To: <
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Monday, December 17, 2001 3:15 PM
Subject: RE: Team3S: Idea for cheaper way
to run 720CC injectors?
> The "MAS bypass" would require 720 injectors
to work,
> but the ECM would always think only 1/2 the air is
flowing
> than actually is. It will not adjust the A/F correctly
(nor
> the timing for that matter) for the high boost levels -
> the
ECM would think the engine is under light load.
So Jeff, correct me if
I'm wrong, but based on your comments about
modifying
the airflow signal
in our cars, I come to the following conclusions:
1) This would apply to
any modifications done so that the airflow
signal is modified (specifically:
lowered) - meaning VPC, MAS bypass,
ARC2, etc.
2) The ECU would NOT
provide extra fuel to prevent knock at high
boost. This could be countered by
using an aftermarket air/fuel
controller, but would require a lot of time
tuning all the details.
3) The ECU would NOT preemptively retard the
timing at high boost to
prevent knock. Maybe an aftermarket timing
controller would help?
4) The ECU WOULD retard timing if excessive knock
were detected. But
at extreme power levels, it only takes a little
knock to break stuff
quickly, right?
5) The ECU's fuel cut operation
would not protect the engine in the
case of running extremely lean or running
with extremely high boost
(i.e. oops, forgot to connect the wastegate
actuator line).
6) Essentially, if you plan to add higher-flowing
injectors and thus
bypass the ECU's engine safety mechanisms, you'd better be
extra sure
you know what you're doing and have gauges everywhere in the
cockpit
to monitor all the things that the ECU normally protects you
from.
That sound about right? Man... maybe I *will* pull the
15Gs/550s/VPC
off my wish list for a reliable road-race/road-trip car.
I like the
idea of running 15-16psi to redline, but if that means one
failed
part results in an engine rebuild rather than "fuel cut, pull
over,
fix problem, resume driving," I'm not so sure.
Theoretically, I should be happy with 350-400hp for a
road-race
car.... but there was a time not too long ago
where I tried to
convince myself that I'd be happy with my old NA 3000GT,
too. We
all know how that ended up =) @#$%$@#%@#$ feature
creep....
- --Erik
'95 VR-4 with stock airflow signal
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:33:15
-0500
From: Michael Reid <
mreid@magma.ca>
Subject: Team3S: Re:
Labor charges for water pump
At 07:33 PM 12/15/2001 -0800, you
wrote:
>water pump
kit:
$125
>belt, valve
timing
$151
>Adjuster, timing belt tension: $ 97 (it is
hydraulic)
>coolent/flush:
$17
>labor:
$420
Seems like decent prices for a dealer. Tallahassee
Mitsubishi (
http://www.worldparts.com/tallmits/
)
discounts these prices by about 35% if you have
somewhere that accepts
"outside parts".
Dodge dealers, and ones here in Canada
particularly,
seem to charge more, sometimes a lot more.
One satan
dealer quoted me about $50 US ($75 Canadian)
per spark plug ! The lowest of 3
quotes was $25 US;
I got them for $10 from Tallahassee.
My 60K was
done by a non-dealer shop and cost about
$1300 US, but only because I
replaced virtually EVERYTHING
the 60K makes easier, such as waterpump, crank
and cam seals,
gaskets, thermostat, rad hoses, spark plug cables
etc.
Mike.
94 TT.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:45:29
-0800
From: "Gross, Erik" <
erik.gross@intel.com>
Subject:
Team3S: EGT Gauge Installation
For those who've done it...
Can you install the thermocouple (sensor) in the collector of the
exhaust
manifold WITHOUT removing the turbo? - or the engine, duh :-) I
can see a
possibility on the front bank, but the rear looks to be difficult
at best.
I'm not too keen on drilling/tapping the hole in the manifold
while it's on
the car since I imagine metal shavings and turbine blades don't
get along
really well. I want an EGT gauge (actually 2), but I don't
think I'm
motivated to unbolt exhaust/oil-lines/coolant-lines/turbos at this
point.
And then there's the "if the turbos are already off, why
put the same ones
back on?" factor. No budget for bigger turbos and the
prerequisite fuel/air
modifications.... yet =D
- --Erik
'95
VR-4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:58:28
-0500
From: Michael Reid <
mreid@magma.ca>
Subject: Team3S: Re: Is
HKS no good?
At 07:33 PM 12/15/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>my head and
I came to a conclusion that HKS is a company that I should stay
>away
from or be very careful with. Here is why:
HKS did have a reputation for
being accurate in their HP tests.
I never have figured out though, if the 37
HP increase for 91-93 TT's
and VR-4's with HKS air filter and exhaust applies
to a 94 also.
320hp + 37hp = 357hp ??? Or less or more ?
My HKS
anecdote:
In 1994 (I suspect) the original owner of my 94 TT had
installed an
HKS Super MegaFlow (or whatever, the dual green filter in a "T"
shape)
air filter, and the regular HKS catback exhaust.
In 1998, all
four of the chrome exhaust tips came off, due to rusting
of the perforated
metal that holds them to the pipe. I'm not sure I
can excuse this on such an
expensive exhaust, even if I DO drive in
Canadian winters on salted roads. I
only drive about 6000 miles/year
and the car is garaged.
The exhaust
now seems louder than when original and a strip of metal
is coming off of the
main muffler. I don't know if that's to be
expected at 7-8 years of age, but
with a stock or normal exhaust,
perhaps it is.
I've heard the air
filter story about HKS before but don't know what
to think. Even K&N has
a few I think. K&N seems to be the most
popular on 3000GT/Stealth's
though, especially with the cheaper DSM filter.
I HATE that HKS says I
must replace the filter every 10,000 miles.
I expect to replace the whole
thing with a K&N for this reason
and because I hate how the forward
filter element is jammed against
the relay box. I broke an HKS filter plastic
piece partly because
of this and suspect I can't order that one
part.
Mike.
94 TT w/ no HKS exhaust tips.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:59:20
-0700
From: Wayne <
whietala@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Torndado fuel saver
I've tested these on several different
vehicles on a dyno......they are
worthless.
W
At 09:32 AM
12/17/01 , David Allison wrote:
>I happened to catch the infomercial on
this thing a minute ago and it
>looks at least interesting. I've read
some reviews and this thing
>supposedly works really well on
high performance engines. Just wondering
>if anyone with a 3S has tried
one? The guy in the commercial had a K&N
>FIPK installed when he put
his in and went from 200 HP to ~220. I'd like
>this thing as a stocking
stuffer, so get back soon ;)
>
>-David
>94
3000gt
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
End of Team3S: 3000GT &
Stealth V1
#702
***************************************