Team3S: 3000GT & Stealth Thursday, March 14
2002 Volume 01 : Number
782
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:
Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:07:52 -0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: FMIC
However..where theres a problem..theres a
solution.
If youre gonna bother with upgrading the IC, the raditor is an
obvious
upgrade to match it. NOT downgrading the A/C system.
On
Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Furman, Russell wrote:
> Ok, now the question is do
we need one that is that LARGE? I mean it is
> almost as large as
our stock radiator, is there a more compact design we
> could use may be
relocate it (the compact one) in front the factory oil
> cooler then put
the FMIC in? Seriously a setrab 25 row oil cooler should
> more than
be able to offset the blocking of airflow by a compact condenser?
>
>
> This would definitely help the 2G guys with their cooling
probs even with
> the stock radiator
- ---
Geoff
Mohler
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:09:03
-0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Intercoolers
Nah..gotta come out, just so so so much simpler
than any type of pressure
cleaning (then how do you drain out all the
cleaner?)
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Mike & Cathy wrote:
>
Has anyone come up with away to clean intercoolers with out taking them
>
off. My motor is out now so their off being cleaned. Can they be cleaned
at
> a car wash regularly to keep grime out? I drive in all weather and
they are
> packed. Also I need one of the oil cooler lines if anyone have
an extra. If
> you look at the cooler in the car it will be the left one.
Thanks for any
> help.
> Mike S 92 rt tt Wash. St
-
---
Geoff Mohler
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:07:45
-0600
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Intercoolers
> Nah..gotta come out, just so so so much
simpler than any type
> of pressure cleaning (then how do you drain out
all the cleaner?)
I think they meant cleaning the outside of the
intercoolers, not the inside.
In which case a pressure washer will probably
work, but be wary of bending
the fins on the intercooler.
-
-Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:13:32
-0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Intercoolers
Ohh..well..ya.
Note: Cleaning out the
inside is important to efficiency as well. Oil
Happens(tm)
On
Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Jannusch, Matt wrote:
> > Nah..gotta come out,
just so so so much simpler than any type
> > of pressure cleaning
(then how do you drain out all the cleaner?)
>
> I think they meant
cleaning the outside of the intercoolers, not the inside.
> In which case
a pressure washer will probably work, but be wary of bending
> the fins on
the intercooler.
>
> -Matt
> '95 3000GT Spyder VR4
>
- ---
Geoff Mohler
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:15:51
-0800
From: "Gross, Erik" <
erik.gross@intel.com>
Subject:
Team3S: Cleaning Insides of Intercoolers
Ok, so once you have the silly
things out of the car, what's the best way to
clean them and make sure
there's nothing left in there when you reinstall
them? Simple green
followed by garden hose, followed by some flammable (or
readily vaporizable)
solvent?
- --Erik
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:20:39
-0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
Team3S: Re: Cleaning Insides of Intercoolers
Heres a tip I wrote for the
Supra www site
http://www.speedtoys.com/~gemohler/tgn/tip_ic_clean.htmlOn
Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Gross, Erik wrote:
> Ok, so once you have the silly
things out of the car, what's the best way to
> clean them and make sure
there's nothing left in there when you reinstall
> them? Simple
green followed by garden hose, followed by some flammable (or
> readily
vaporizable) solvent?
>
> --Erik
>
- ---
Geoff
Mohler
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:32:36
-0700
From: "Justin Sturgeon" <
justinstur@hotmail.com>
Subject:
Team3S: new member has questions
Hey guys (and girls),
I'm a new
member and a new owner of a 91 stealth R/T (NA). Over all, its in
good
shape, but there are a couple of things I have questions about:
1.
I am getting some squealing at high RPM and I have narrowed it down to
the
accessory or alternator belt. How do I adjust/tighten this
belt?
2. I have the automatic climate control. Everything
works fine (heat, A/C,
defrost) except for the LED display. The
display is just black. I was
wondering if anyone knows if there is
possibly a loose wire, blown fuse, or
something simple that could be causing
this. Hopefully its not the whole
unit itself.
3. My oil
pressure seems real low at idle. I gathered from the search page
that
this is normal (at least on the low end), but when I am cruising, it
hands
out right around the first big hash mark, about 2/5 up the gauge.
Does
that seem low? Is that indicative of other problems. I'm running
Mobile1 15w/50 full snythetic, but it was the same before I changed the
oil.
4. I was wondering if there are any other members in the
Boise, ID area. I
could use a mentor and a knowledgeable friend whose
brain I can pick.
5. I would also like to know what you all would
suggest as far as
modifications go for a non-turbo. I have the K&N
FIPK and I just put in the
NGK plugs and wires. Money IS an object
here, so list upgrades that you
would do to get the best performance
inprovements for the least money and
the order that you would do them
in. I especially want to know about
exhaust upgrades. How much
difference will it make? Please be specific
about brand, size,
etc.
6. I'm also looking for a rear bumper cover for cheap.
Anyone have one
taking up space in their garage that they want to get rid
of.
Thanks for your help.
Justin
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:21:00
-0500
From: MIHAI RAICU <
mraicu@wayne.edu>
Subject: Team3S: HELP
- Car dying at idle
Everyone,
Just 1 hour ago, out of the blue my
car (93 Dodge Stealth
Base (5 speed) 128K miles) wanted to die at idle (and
died).
For the rest of the 1/2 hour trip the car drove fine,
however, it would stumble and die if left idling. The RPM
just
wouldn't stay at 750 RPM. It would do this with the air
conditioning
on or off.
Do you think I need to give it some fuel injector
cleaner? I
have 92 gas in the tank, and the tank is 1/2
full.
What do you think is the problem?
Please reply to me a
CARBON COPY also, so that I may see the
answer sooner than tonight.
-
-MIHAI-
93 Dodge Stealth Base (5 speed)
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 18:27:35
+0000
From:
apedenko@attbi.comSubject: Re: Team3S:
HELP - Car dying at idle
This sounds like the ISC. It could be as simple
as the
screw falling out, but it sounds like all the other
idle issue
posts.
Alex.
> Everyone,
>
> Just 1 hour ago,
out of the blue my car (93 Dodge Stealth
> Base (5 speed) 128K miles)
wanted to die at idle (and died).
> For the rest of the 1/2 hour
trip the car drove fine,
> however, it would stumble and die if left
idling. The RPM
> just wouldn't stay at 750 RPM. It would do
this with the air
> conditioning on or off.
>
> Do you think
I need to give it some fuel injector cleaner? I
> have 92 gas in
the tank, and the tank is 1/2 full.
>
> What do you think is the
problem?
>
> Please reply to me a CARBON COPY also, so that I may
see the
> answer sooner than tonight.
>
> -MIHAI-
> 93
Dodge Stealth Base (5 speed)
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:24:24
-0800
From: Rick Pierce <
piercera@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Alternative to Bigger/FM Intercoolers or Bigger Brakes
Here's
another "cheap" alternative I've heard about but have not tried.
You
can swap in a pair of DSM SMICs (about 200 cubic inches)in place of
the
3Ss - supposedly their about twice the size of the stock ICs and can be
made
to work - I'm sure the hoses would have to be changed around and since
the
DSMs SMIC is passenger only, you might have to rework the hose fittings
for
the driver's side. The DSMs are always upgrading to a FMIC or a
Supra MKIV
SMIC, so these can be had for very little cash and there is a ton
of them
around.
Just another option for those of us cash
constrained.
One other thing there was talk on 3Si about someone picking
up two of the
MKIV SMICs and mounting them in the front of a 3S to work as a
FMIC - don't
know if it ever went anywhere. MKIVs can be had for about
$100 each and are
about 500 cubic inches and due to their size are too large
to replace the
SMICs directly on our cars.
- ----- Original Message
-----
From: "Gross, Erik" <
erik.gross@intel.com>
To: "Team3S
List (E-mail)" <
team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Wednesday, March 13, 2002 8:58 AM
Subject: Team3S: Alternative to Bigger/FM
Intercoolers or Bigger Brakes
> Just to let you know about
something I'm considering integrating in to my
> already gadget-laden VR-4
:-) Technically, the credit goes to Brian
Geddes
> for
pointing me to this website, but since he hasn't said anything
about
it,
> I'll throw it out there.
>
> This website has
some really cool tech articles and a bunch of DIY parts.
>
http://www.autospeed.com>
> One
of the things I'm seriously looking at is their
Intelligent
Intercooler
> Water Spray Controller Module. It has
temperature sensors for ambient
temp
> and the IC core temp and
monitors how hard you're driving the car (via
IDC,
> TPS or something
else) and adjusts the spray timing and duration to only
> spray the ICs
when they are in danger of heat soak.
>
>
http://www.autospeed.com/cgi-bin/browse.cgi?category=705&product=1281&ecomsv>
r=628632478
>
> An alternate application of the above is to use it
to control a
water-cooled
> braking system. I'm also toying with
integrating this into my road-race
> car, probably in addition to larger
brakes and brake cooling ducts.
>
> Oh, and if you read their
webpage, it's an Australian site, so remember
that
> down under, a
"fang mode" would be analogous to "flooring it" or "romping
on
>
it". Next, we'll be talking about boots, bonnets, and petrol
:-)
>
> --Erik
> '95 VR-4 destined to have so many LEDs,
toggle switches, and gauges
> that it will require flight school
certification to drive it
> ... and Mitsu thought it had a lot of
gadgets from the factory 8)
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 14:55:39
-0500
From: "Furman, Russell" <
RFurman2@MassMutual.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: FMIC
Actually I personally would do all three, just consider
the space available in the drivers side IC well. A setrab 25 row, a condesor
about the size of a DR SMIC and the aluminum radiator and you have more than
offset the "restriction" the FMIC would pose.
- -----Original
Message-----
From: Geoff Mohler
Sent: Wed 3/13/2002 12:07 PM
To:
Furman, Russell
Cc: 'Team 3S'
Subject: RE: Team3S:
FMIC
However..where theres a problem..theres a solution.
If youre
gonna bother with upgrading the IC, the raditor is an obvious
upgrade to
match it. NOT downgrading the A/C system.
- ---
Geoff Mohler
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:18:56
-0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: FMIC
No.
The IC itself is the restriction.
Regardless of whats behind it..the IC
is greatly reducing airflow volume
behind it. Yes, the condensor adds
more, but its not a large leap of
faith to see that youve lost a LOT of
volume & pressure to the radiator
either way you go.
Its the volume of available air you need..and minus
that..you have to find
a way to add coolant volume AND time in the radiator
to make up for any
possible issues that might create.
An FMIC will
create aerodynamic fault with how efficient the radiator
_could_ be..just
being there.
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Furman, Russell wrote:
>
Actually I personally would do all three, just consider the space available in
the drivers side IC well. A setrab 25 row, a condesor about the size of a DR
SMIC and the aluminum radiator and you have more than offset the "restriction"
the FMIC would pose.
- ---
Geoff Mohler
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 14:30:02
-0600
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: FMIC
> Actually I personally would do all three, just
consider the
> space available in the drivers side IC well. A setrab 25
row,
> a condesor about the size of a DR SMIC and the aluminum
>
radiator and you have more than offset the "restriction" the
> FMIC would
pose.
I prefer bigger more efficient sidemounts over a front-mount
setup.
Increasing intercooling efficiency (only marginally over a pair of
big
efficient sidemounts) at the cost of reducing cooling efficiency of
the
cooling system isn't a tradeoff that says "great idea" to me. For a
car
that is only at full throttle for 12 seconds at a time that's maybe
okay.
The other 99% of the time my car isn't at full throttle it would just
be an
airflow restriction to the radiator. The 1% I'm at full boost it
is dumping
massive amounts of heat into the radiator. That's not a
positive thing -
even if you have a bigger more efficient
radiator.
...add to that maybe re-engineering the A/C condenser and it
sounds like a
lot of work for little gain at a big cost.
Yeah, the
front-mounts sure look cool though!
You may feel otherwise, but I've had
to listen to enough friends with
front-mount setups on DSM cars complain how
their car overheats often.
Anyone wanting to upgrade intercoolers should
at least consider the pros and
cons of either setup. If you absolutely
need to have the maximum core
volume available for whatever reason then a
front-mount is the way to go, as
long as you can work around the
drawbacks.
Don't forget that your turbos have to pressurize all that
extra core volume
before the boost rises at the plenum. If you don't
like lag, then
smaller-sized intercoolers might be better if they'll provide
adequate
cooling.
Pros and Cons - both ways.
- -Matt
'95
3000GT Spyder VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 16:01:43
-0500
From: "Tom Terflinger" <
terflit@hotmail.com>
Subject:
Team3S: 1st Gen Air scoop
Has anyone tried replacing our 1st gen hood
scoops w/ one that is raised in
the front for 2 mini hood soops? You could
then easily route the cool air to
your air filter which is almost right
below the passenger side scoop.
Tom
92 VR4
TNT3KGT
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 22:10:01
+0100
From: "Roger Gerl" <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: another injector question...
> Why be conventional?
Because the stock pump runs out of steam when you
> increase the
boost. Bigger injectors won't help if the pump can't supply
> what
you need. On stock turbos I could routinely run 17-19 psi on
the
stock
> injectors with the Supra pump, where the stock pump would
go lean at high
> RPM.
What is the fuel pressure measured at 18 psi
and 6000 rpm with the stock
pump ?
Roger
93'3000GT TT
www.rtec.ch*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 22:14:26
+0100
From: "Roger Gerl" <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: another injector question...
> Bigger injectors will bring
your O2 readings up, but they will not change
> the duty
cycles.
The ECU can adapt about 10%, therefore duty cycles are comming
down !
> A bigger pump will not make any difference if you keep
the
> stock fuel pressure regulator.
No, the stock fuel pressure
regulator has not a lot if any to do with this.
Maybe if you are running two
Supra pumps in parallel.
> If you want to be original, get a fuel
pressure regulator.
Not of help. Increasing the fuel pressure above the
desired limit of the
injectors is bad. You will run overrich when the fuel
pressure is increased
! 10% can be adopted but then you are flooding the
engine.
> need a bigger pump though if you see lean readings at high
RPM and WOT.
First check the fuel pressure if it really drops !! Lean
readings can be of
other causes.
Roger
93'3000GT TT
www.rtec.ch*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:25:22
-0600
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: another injector question...
>> On stock turbos I could
routinely run 17-19 psi
>> on the stock injectors with the Supra pump,
where
>> the stock pump would go lean at high RPM.
>
>
What is the fuel pressure measured at 18 psi and 6000 rpm
> with the
stock pump ?
Couldn't say, since I didn't have a fuel pressure gauge at
that time, nor
would my stock turbos hold 18 psi at 6000 rpm.
It only
worked because the stock turbos are so poor at high RPM and wouldn't
hold
high boost.
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 16:17:34
-0600
From: "Trevor James" <
trevor@kscable.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: another injector question...
The OBD2 ECUs in the 3/S can trim
fuel 16.6% according to my datalogger.
Trevor
96 R/T TT,
11.82@116.1, 93 Octane & Plain Radials
97
VR-4, Bone stock down to the filter
- ----- Original Message
-----
From: "Roger Gerl" <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
To: <
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Wednesday, March 13, 2002 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: Team3S: another injector
question...
> > Bigger injectors will bring your O2 readings up,
but they will not
change
> > the duty cycles.
>
> The
ECU can adapt about 10%, therefore duty cycles are comming down
!
>
> > A bigger pump will not make any difference if you keep
the
> > stock fuel pressure regulator.
>
> No, the stock
fuel pressure regulator has not a lot if any to do with
this.
> Maybe
if you are running two Supra pumps in parallel.
>
> > If you want
to be original, get a fuel pressure regulator.
>
> Not of help.
Increasing the fuel pressure above the desired limit of the
> injectors is
bad. You will run overrich when the fuel pressure is
increased
> ! 10%
can be adopted but then you are flooding the engine.
>
> > need a
bigger pump though if you see lean readings at high RPM and WOT.
>
>
First check the fuel pressure if it really drops !! Lean readings can
be
of
> other causes.
>
> Roger
> 93'3000GT
TT
>
www.rtec.ch***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 23:23:12
+0100
From: "Roger Gerl" <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: another injector question...
Trevor if you use the
Pocketlogger, then the information can be wrong. If
not I'm positive that it
is in such a range. 10% is just what I have seen
(but the datalogger is also
made for 4-bangers)
Roger
93'3000GT TT
www.rtec.ch- ----- Original Message
-----
From: "Trevor James" <
trevor@kscable.com>
To: "Roger Gerl"
<
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>; <
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Wednesday, March 13, 2002 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: Team3S: another injector
question...
> The OBD2 ECUs in the 3/S can trim fuel 16.6% according
to my datalogger.
>
> Trevor
> 96 R/T TT,
11.82@116.1, 93 Octane & Plain Radials
>
97 VR-4, Bone stock down to the filter
>
> ----- Original Message
-----
> From: "Roger Gerl" <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
> To:
<
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 3:14 PM
> Subject: Re: Team3S: another
injector question...
>
> > > Bigger injectors will bring your
O2 readings up, but they will not
> change
> > > the duty
cycles.
> >
> > The ECU can adapt about 10%, therefore duty
cycles are comming down !
> >
> > > A bigger pump will not
make any difference if you keep the
> > > stock fuel pressure
regulator.
> >
> > No, the stock fuel pressure regulator has
not a lot if any to do with
> this.
> > Maybe if you are running
two Supra pumps in parallel.
> >
> > > If you want to be
original, get a fuel pressure regulator.
> >
> > Not of help.
Increasing the fuel pressure above the desired limit of the
> >
injectors is bad. You will run overrich when the fuel pressure is
>
increased
> > ! 10% can be adopted but then you are flooding the
engine.
> >
> > > need a bigger pump though if you see lean
readings at high RPM and
WOT.
> >
> > First check the fuel
pressure if it really drops !! Lean readings can be
> of
> >
other causes.
> >
> > Roger
> > 93'3000GT TT
>
>
www.rtec.ch*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 17:03:54
-0600
From: "Trevor James" <
trevor@kscable.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: another injector question...
Nope, not a pocketlogger. The
datalogger I used is designed for all ISO
protocol OBD2 vehicles (Asian,
European, & Chrylser). The ECU outputs the
short term fuel trim signal in
a percentage form. It's able to adjust the
short term fuel trims for both
cylinder banks independently by +/- 16.6%
from the base
map.
Trevor
96 R/T TT,
11.82@116.1,
93 Octane & Plain Radials
97 VR-4, Bone stock down to the filter
-
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Gerl" <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
To: <
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Wednesday, March 13, 2002 4:23 PM
Subject: Re: Team3S: another injector
question...
> Trevor if you use the Pocketlogger, then the information
can be wrong. If
> not I'm positive that it is in such a range. 10% is
just what I have seen
> (but the datalogger is also made for
4-bangers)
>
> Roger
> 93'3000GT TT
>
www.rtec.ch*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 17:43:22
-0600
From: "Todd D.Shelton" <
tds@brightok.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S:
FMIC
Also, the Alamo intercoolers were redesigned
a few years
ago. We installed the first/new model
on my car. They are larger
and thicker. In my
case we specified larger inlets and outlets
to
match the custom pipes/368 setup.
Designed and built by Corky Bell
and
sold/distributed by Alamo.
- - tds
http://www.brightok.net/~tds***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 16:57:17
-0700
From: Wayne <
whietala@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: FMIC
I always wondered what cores Alamo uses, now we
know.....Cartech....one of
the best in my opinion.....
At 05:43 PM
3/13/02 -0600, Todd D.Shelton wrote:
>Designed and built by Corky Bell
and
>sold/distributed by Alamo.
>
>- tds
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 18:40:04
-0700
From: Wayne <
whietala@prodigy.net>
Subject:
Team3S: Porterfield Rotors
I just got my rotors (thanks Geoff) today and
have a question.
When i picked up the car from Geoff, he mentioned that the
porterfield
rotors have a tendency to crack due to interference with the
hub. He said
somebody on the list used shoe polish or something to determine
where the
interference was. Can that person speak up?
There is a
slight "shoulder" inside the rotor nearest the hub surface, if i
put the
rotors on a lathe, and cut that shoulder off, would that eliminate
the
interference?
I was thinking of either doing that, or putting a chamfer
on the outer edge
of the hub plate. I don't want to crack these rather
expensive rotors, i
don't have the kind of money Jim Berry does
;)
Any comments??
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 18:41:18
-0700
From: Wayne <
whietala@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Greddy BOV
Thanks everyone, i just turned the screw about 3 times
from fully loose and
it seems to work fine.....
W
At 12:40 AM
3/13/02 +0100, Roger Gerl wrote:
> > What have people found to be a
good adjustment point on the allen screw?
> > (halfway, 3/4,
etc)
>
>As it is out of the box is ok.
>
> > Also, do
you just leave the small nipple open?
>
>Yes, no need to connect
anything to it.
>
>Roger
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 17:50:12
-0800
From: "fastmax" <
fastmax@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S:
Porterfield Rotors
The issue wasn't cracked rotors but rather a wobbling
like a warped
rotor --- the thought was that the rotor wasn't seating
correctly on the
hub. The interference was where the hub centric shoulder hit
the rotor.
Jim
Berry
==========================================
- -----
Original Message -----
From: "Wayne" <
whietala@prodigy.net>
To: <
team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Wednesday, March 13, 2002 5:40 PM
Subject: Team3S: Porterfield
Rotors
> I just got my rotors (thanks Geoff) today and have a
question.
> When i picked up the car from Geoff, he mentioned that the
porterfield
> rotors have a tendency to crack due to interference with
the hub. He said
> somebody on the list used shoe polish or something to
determine where the
> interference was. Can that person speak up?
>
> There is a slight "shoulder" inside the rotor nearest the hub surface,
if i
> put the rotors on a lathe, and cut that shoulder off, would that
eliminate
> the interference?
>
> I was thinking of either
doing that, or putting a chamfer on the outer edge
> of the hub plate. I
don't want to crack these rather expensive rotors, i
> don't have the
kind of money Jim Berry does ;)
>
> Any comments??
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 20:58:10
-0500
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Possible product
At 04:18 PM 3/13/2002,
pvg1@daimlerchrysler.com
wrote:
>My offline/online logging device is able to read 8 analogue
channels and
>one
>frequency. I do have a two or four row LCD
display with backlight (I just
>can't find any amber lights !!) I also
have an EEPROM on board for offline
>sampling. Online is realtime via
RS232. It has audible alarms for settable
>limits, 4 values display
simultaneous, two or four bar graphs the same time
>but makes no sense.
Peak values of 8 channels are stored. Water injection
>control on RPM and
boost level integrated (8 digital lines output). More
>frequency inputs
are needed. Couldn't find a good keyboard and case and
>amber backlight
LCD.
>
>-10 samples per channel per second is enough
>- Knock
sensor logging doesn't help at all, a filter device is needed !
>Voltage
doesn't say anything at all :-(
>- 4kb data storage is enough for a
quarter mile log
>
>I never attached it to stock sensors but to
external temp, boost and
>pressure sensors. Price for the PLC kit with
display is about $80, boost
>sensor is $56 and some temp sensors around
$30. It is available in Germany
>and I guess something like that can be
bought in the US too.
>
>Roger
>93'3000GT
TT
>www.rtec.ch
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 21:13:52
-0500
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Possible product
Sorry for the previous empty posts. Hey, I
needed to send my fair share of
junk mail too. ;-)
"Roger Gerl"
<
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
wrote:
>My offline/online logging device is able to read 8 analogue
channels and
>one
>frequency. I do have a two or four row LCD
display with backlight (I just
>can't find any amber lights !!) I also
have an EEPROM on board for offline
>sampling. Online is realtime via
RS232. It has audible alarms for settable
>limits, 4 values display
simultaneous, two or four bar graphs the same time
>but makes no sense.
Peak values of 8 channels are stored. Water injection
>control on RPM and
boost level integrated (8 digital lines output). More
>frequency inputs
are needed. Couldn't find a good keyboard and case and
>amber backlight
LCD.
I could not understand. Is this a DIY kit or is it a working data
acquisition system with an LCD display that I could buy for
$80?
>- Knock sensor logging doesn't help at all, a filter device is
needed !
>Voltage doesn't say anything at all :-(
Have you tried an
analog voltmeter? I went to a local RadioShack today to
buy one but they did
not have the one that I wanted.
Philip
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 21:51:47
-0500
From: Joe Kenwabikise <
jdk88888@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: another injector question...
So basically, I could run 396cc
injectors with no problems.
Since my IDC's are running upwards of 95%
now (@15psi), would the 10%
over injectors even be worth it? (I'm not
skilled in math, so could
someone figure this out for me?
:)
Thanks all,
Joe
91 RT/TT black
Trevor James
wrote:
>
> Nope, not a pocketlogger. The datalogger I used is
designed for all ISO
> protocol OBD2 vehicles (Asian, European, &
Chrylser). The ECU outputs the
> short term fuel trim signal in a
percentage form. It's able to adjust the
> short term fuel trims for both
cylinder banks independently by +/- 16.6%
> from the base map.
>
> Trevor
> 96 R/T TT,
11.82@116.1,
93 Octane & Plain Radials
> 97 VR-4, Bone stock down to the
filter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roger Gerl"
<
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
>
To: <
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 4:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Team3S: another
injector question...
>
> > Trevor if you use the Pocketlogger,
then the information can be wrong. If
> > not I'm positive that it is
in such a range. 10% is just what I have seen
> > (but the datalogger
is also made for 4-bangers)
> >
> > Roger
> >
93'3000GT TT
> >
www.rtec.ch*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 20:58:05
-0600
From: "
merritt@cedar-rapids.net" <
merritt@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Porterfield Rotors
At 06:40 PM 3/13/02 -0700, Wayne
wrote:
>I just got my rotors (thanks Geoff) today and have a
question.
>When i picked up the car from Geoff, he mentioned that the
porterfield
>rotors have a tendency to crack due to interference with the
hub.
I am on my second set (soon to be third -- hey, it's a wear item)
and I have yet to warp or crack a rotor. Just be careful how you cool the brakes
down after some hot laps, and you should be OK.
Rich/slow old poop
94
VR4 w/Big Reds and Porterfield rotors
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 20:48:41
-0500
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: another injector question...
At 04:14 PM 3/13/2002, Roger Gerl
wrote:
> > Bigger injectors will bring your O2 readings up, but they
will not change
> > the duty cycles.
>
>The ECU can adapt
about 10%, therefore duty cycles are comming down !
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 20:50:51
-0500
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: another injector question...
At 04:14 PM 3/13/2002, Roger Gerl
wrote:
> > Bigger injectors will bring your O2 readings up, but they
will not change
> > the duty cycles.
>
>The ECU can adapt
about 10%, therefore duty cycles are comming down !
Is this also true for
the WOT open-loop operation? How would the ECU know
what to adjust to if it
does not have the feedback?
Philip
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 22:25:55
-0500
From: "Darren Schilberg" <
dschilberg@pobox.com>
Subject: RE:
Team3S: Intercoolers
For the intercoolers and front radiator I prefer to
cover these with
cloth, metal grid, screen, or a front car cover like a Le
Bra. My bra
cost $100 and covers all these areas and a few inches of
the hood (where
rocks always find that front lip to the hood). It also
covers the side
mirrors (an option with some Bra purchases).
It also
saved the front bumper when a truck backed into it at less than
5 mph as well
as when exiting a steep driveway. The Bra ripped a hole
in itself on
this last one but saved the bumper. Easily $100 saved
right there
alone.
- --Flash!
1995 VR-4 with bra
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 21:56:57
-0600
From: "Jannusch, Matt" <
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Subject:
Team3S: Bras...
> For the intercoolers and front radiator I prefer to
cover
> these with cloth, metal grid, screen, or a front car cover
> like a Le Bra. My bra cost $100 and covers all these areas
> and a few inches of the hood (where rocks always find that
>
front lip to the hood). It also covers the side mirrors (an
>
option with some Bra purchases).
I prefer to have maximum airflow through
the intercoolers and radiator - so
my bra has nothing covering those
areas. I'll clean the bugs out and
straighten a few fins for the peace
of mind that I haven't decreased my
intercooler efficiency. As always,
other folks' priorities may differ from
mine.
> It also saved the
front bumper when a truck backed into it at
> less than 5 mph as well as
when exiting a steep driveway.
> The Bra ripped a hole in itself on
this last one but saved
> the bumper. Easily $100 saved right there
alone.
I've been using it during autocrossing as I turn and brake hard
enough to
scrape the hell out of the bottom of the front fascia. Works
good for
saving the paint in those areas, but the bra is taking a
beating. Its just
the factory Mitsu '94-96 bra, but I don't think they
are available anymore.
I got mine for $40 off eBay a couple years ago and it
came with sideview
mirror covers (that look really* lame) and a piece for the
front of the hood
between the headlights.
The negative part of it is
that it can be a pain to get it on right, and
that you don't want to leave it
on as it'll collect moisture and do terrible
things to the paint
(yikes!). The one I left on my Mitsubishi Starion
cracked the paint and
then rust finished it off.
Works great for racing though...
-
-Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 23:03:53
-0500
From: "Aamer" <
aamer@thepentagon.com>
Subject:
Team3S: Starter problem resolved
Thanks to everyone who replied to the
message I posted a few days ago. It
turns out that the problem was the
starter as most people, including myself,
suspected. I took it out and
cleaned the solenoid with some electrical parts
cleaner and relubed the gears
with universal grease; and things seem to have
returned to normal now.
Hopefully that took care of it for good.
Aamer Abbas
'94 3000GT (DOHC
-- Naturally Aspirated)
email:
aamer@thepentagon.comfax: (707)
982-8817 [add +1 country code if faxing from outside the
United
States]
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 21:45:34
-0700
From: "Erik Petterson" <
erikpetterson@yahoo.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Fun with Alignments
I too have been screwed over at one
too many alignment shops. I would like
to do my own alignments...
Is there an instruction website out there
concerning how to do your own
alignment...??? I'm no mechanic, but I can
follow directions well.
:)
- -Erik 91 Stealth
- ----- Original Message -----
From:
"dakken" <
dougusmagnus@attbi.com>
To:
<
team3s@team3s.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, March 12, 2002 6:57 PM
Subject: Re: Team3S: Fun with
Alignments
> With all of these bad alignment shops why don't more
people do their own
> alignments? Toe-in can be checked with a $35
tool from JC Whitney and
> camber and castor can be checked with a good
level gauge that gives you
> degrees. You can even go cheap on the
toe-in tool and make one yourself
> with a 8' 2x4, a couple of 90 degree
joints and 2 wood clamps.
>
> Doug
> 92 Stealth RT
TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 21:11:42
-0800
From: "dakken" <
dougusmagnus@attbi.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Fun with Alignments
> I too have been screwed over
at one too many alignment shops. I would
like
> to do my own
alignments... Is there an instruction website out there
> concerning
how to do your own alignment...??? I'm no mechanic, but I can
>
follow directions well. :)
>
> -Erik 91 Stealth
Actually it
is pretty simple. Here is a web page that walks you through it:
http://www.allpar.com/fix/alignment.htmlOn
our cars you only have to worry about camber and toe-in. Caster
is
factory set and you don't have to worry about it unless you hit a curb
or
two (in which case you will have to take your car to a frame
shop). Be
sure to have a service manual for your 91 Stealth
handy.
Also keep in mind that according to the 91 repair manual, every
camber
graduation change will change your toe-in by 0.5 mm. If you do
your toe-in
last then you don't have to worry about it.
Doug
92
Stealth RT TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 21:34:05
-0800
From: "dakken" <
dougusmagnus@attbi.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: HELP - Car dying at idle
Check for a vacuum leak. A
hose that is cracked or slipped off could make a
car die at idle but still
run above idle. Feel all of your hoses also, to
see if any of them are
hard and not sealing completely.
Doug
92 Stealth RT
TT
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 22:11:56
-0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: FMIC
> I prefer bigger more efficient sidemounts over a
front-mount setup.
> Increasing intercooling efficiency (only marginally
over a pair of big
> efficient sidemounts) at the cost of reducing cooling
efficiency of the
> cooling system isn't a tradeoff that says "great idea"
to me. For a car
> that is only at full throttle for 12 seconds at a
time that's maybe okay.
> The other 99% of the time my car isn't at full
throttle it would just be an
> airflow restriction to the radiator.
The 1% I'm at full boost it is dumping
> massive amounts of heat into the
radiator. That's not a positive thing -
> even if you have a bigger
more efficient radiator.
- ---
I dont think youre dumping heat into the
radiator..you just have less
volume to pull thru it..hotter yes, but a larger
radiator (more volume) is
the perfect answer to that very very simple
problem.
> Anyone wanting to upgrade intercoolers should at
least consider the pros and
> cons of either setup. If you
absolutely need to have the maximum core
> volume available for whatever
reason then a front-mount is the way to go, as
> long as you can work
around the drawbacks.
- ---
One nobody has mentioned..is too MUCH
volume.
> Don't forget that your turbos have to pressurize all
that extra core volume
> before the boost rises at the plenum. If
you don't like lag, then
> smaller-sized intercoolers might be better if
they'll provide adequate
> cooling.
- ---
Yep.
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 22:16:35
-0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Porterfield Rotors
> I just got my rotors (thanks Geoff)
today and have a question.
> When i picked up the car from Geoff, he
mentioned that the porterfield
> rotors have a tendency to crack due to
interference with the hub. He said
> somebody on the list used shoe
polish or something to determine where the
> interference was. Can that
person speak up?
- ---
EEK! Id not say PF ones do..any can, and a
lot do.
> There is a slight "shoulder" inside the rotor nearest
the hub surface, if i
> put the rotors on a lathe, and cut that shoulder
off, would that eliminate
> the interference?
>
> I was
thinking of either doing that, or putting a chamfer on the outer edge
>
of the hub plate. I don't want to crack these rather expensive rotors, i
> don't have the kind of money Jim Berry does ;)
>
> Any
comments??
- ---
Geoff Mohler
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 22:20:00
-0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Bras...
If you get into track duty a lot..I mean..a _lot_,
you will want a tough
screen up there.
A bolt, nut..etc, doesnt need
to ruin YOUR day like it did the guy in
front of you.
On Wed, 13 Mar
2002, Jannusch, Matt wrote:
> > For the intercoolers and front
radiator I prefer to cover
> > these with cloth, metal grid, screen,
or a front car cover
> > like a Le Bra. My bra cost $100 and
covers all these areas
> > and a few inches of the hood (where rocks
always find that
> > front lip to the hood). It also covers the
side mirrors (an
> > option with some Bra purchases).
>
>
I prefer to have maximum airflow through the intercoolers and radiator -
so
> my bra has nothing covering those areas. I'll clean the bugs
out and
> straighten a few fins for the peace of mind that I haven't
decreased my
> intercooler efficiency. As always, other folks'
priorities may differ from
> mine.
>
> > It also saved the
front bumper when a truck backed into it at
> > less than 5 mph as
well as when exiting a steep driveway.
> > The Bra ripped a hole
in itself on this last one but saved
> > the bumper. Easily $100
saved right there alone.
>
> I've been using it during autocrossing
as I turn and brake hard enough to
> scrape the hell out of the bottom of
the front fascia. Works good for
> saving the paint in those areas,
but the bra is taking a beating. Its just
> the factory Mitsu '94-96
bra, but I don't think they are available anymore.
> I got mine for $40
off eBay a couple years ago and it came with sideview
> mirror covers
(that look really* lame) and a piece for the front of the hood
> between
the headlights.
>
> The negative part of it is that it can be a
pain to get it on right, and
> that you don't want to leave it on as it'll
collect moisture and do terrible
> things to the paint (yikes!). The
one I left on my Mitsubishi Starion
> cracked the paint and then rust
finished it off.
>
> Works great for racing though...
>
> -Matt
> '95 3000GT Spyder VR4
- ---
Geoff
Mohler
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:19:20
-0500
From: "Darren Schilberg" <
dschilberg@pobox.com>
Subject: RE:
Team3S: Porterfield Rotors
Wayne,
Yes you can smear a layer of
shoe polish or something similar and it is
the flatness (or lack thereof)
that makes the slight wobble in the
rotor. However, when you are
supposed to use a small amount of
Anti-Seize compound so that the inside hat
of the rotor does not stick
itself to the outside hub/mounting surface then
there is already going
to be a slightly imperfectly flat surface.
I
will take a slight wobble on the track for 150 miles over having
rotors
"welded" to the hub anyday.
- --Flash!
1995 VR-4
-
-----Original Message-----
From: Geoff Mohler
Sent: Thursday, March 14,
2002 01:17
> I just got my rotors (thanks Geoff) today and have
a question.
> When i picked up the car from Geoff, he mentioned that the
porterfield
> rotors have a tendency to crack due to interference with
the hub. He
said
> somebody on the list used shoe polish or something
to determine where
the
> interference was. Can that person speak
up?
- ---
EEK! Id not say PF ones do..any can, and a lot
do.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 22:20:45
-0800
From: "fastmax" <
fastmax@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S:
FMIC
Nobody seems to think that extra volume is a problem [ within reason
of
course ]. My pair of 368 turbos can put out about 1000 cfm so a couple
of extra cubic feet of volume should not be an issue. At 16 cfs it
would
only take the turbos 1/8 of a second to fill two cubic feet of
intercooler
and additional hard
pipes.
Jim
berry
========================================
- ----- Original Message
-----
From: "Geoff Mohler" <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
>
One nobody has mentioned..is too MUCH volume.
>
> > Don't
forget that your turbos have to pressurize all that extra core volume
>
> before the boost rises at the plenum. If you don't like lag,
then
> > smaller-sized intercoolers might be better if they'll provide
adequate
> > cooling.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 22:25:48
-0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Porterfield Rotors
Antiseize aint a bad idea..but ive never
had a stuck rotor..I mean..I
change em at least once every 6-7 sets of race
pads (once a year).
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Darren Schilberg
wrote:
> Wayne,
>
> Yes you can smear a layer of shoe
polish or something similar and it is
> the flatness (or lack thereof)
that makes the slight wobble in the
> rotor. However, when you are
supposed to use a small amount of
> Anti-Seize compound so that the inside
hat of the rotor does not stick
> itself to the outside hub/mounting
surface then there is already going
> to be a slightly imperfectly flat
surface.
>
> I will take a slight wobble on the track for 150 miles
over having
> rotors "welded" to the hub anyday.
>
>
--Flash!
> 1995 VR-4
- ---
Geoff Mohler
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 22:27:21
-0800 (PST)
From: Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: FMIC
True..but thats on raw volume
alone.
Pressurized..changes the volumetric math.
Anyway..with most
well planned upgrades..its a value to be engineered..if
you have the
time/money/person to do it.
I had to, theres no FMIC for the GT4 Alltrac
for sale..anywhere.
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, fastmax wrote:
>
Nobody seems to think that extra volume is a problem [ within reason of
>
course ]. My pair of 368 turbos can put out about 1000 cfm so a couple
>
of extra cubic feet of volume should not be an issue. At 16 cfs it would
>
only take the turbos 1/8 of a second to fill two cubic feet of
intercooler
> and additional hard pipes.
>
> Jim berry
>
========================================
- ---
Geoff
Mohler
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:35:37
-0500
From: "Darren Schilberg" <
dschilberg@pobox.com>
Subject: RE:
Team3S: Porterfield Rotors
Well I just took off the last set of rotors
that went 3 full DEs and a
full set of Pagid Orange pads plus about 9 months
of street driving.
Luckily, the one that was stuck on there was the one that
cracked
through the stud bolt hole. I didn't have to worry about saving
it.
Still ... it took quite a good shots with a 2 pound hammer to get
it
unstuck from the hub. Put some good dents in the backside of the
rotor
face. That was with some anti-seize on it but not since the first
of
the season when it was new. I hadn't needed to change rotors until
now
(had them off a time or two for maintenance but they came off
fine). I
think it might have been some rust over the winter that got
between the
spots where anti-seize was.
Remember that I had a heavy
car, no front brake air ducts, and plenty of
hot temps for the rotors to get
nice and toasty with the hub. I also
didn't have the necessary bolts to
help pull out the rotor but they were
done for anyway so no biggie at the
time.
- --Flash!
1995 VR-4
- -----Original
Message-----
From: Geoff Mohler
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002
01:26
Antiseize aint a bad idea..but ive never had a stuck rotor..I
mean..I
change em at least once every 6-7 sets of race pads (once a
year).
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:37:17
US/Central
From:
tds@brightok.netSubject: Re: Team3S:
FMIC
> Nobody seems to think that extra volume is a problem [ within
reason of
> course ]. My pair of 368 turbos can put out about 1000 cfm so
a couple
> of extra cubic feet of volume should not be an issue. At 16
cfs it would
> only take the turbos 1/8 of a second to fill two
cubic feet of intercooler
> and additional hard
pipes.
> Jim berry
-
----------------------------------------------------
Not to be negative,
but based on my experience
with the 368s, I would think they would just
be
horrible to road race with. If all the corners
were fairly fast
sweepers where the revs could be
kept high, it wouldn't be so bad but low
speed corners
that are too fast to drop into first but lower rpm
in 2nd
could be devestating.
Those babies (368s) raise the powerband - that
is,
you lose power on the bottom. To be more clear,
it just takes
longer to spool and usable boost
is higher than before (15g for
example). There
is a larger area at lower rpm where the car is
just
a slug.
I've done a lot work to combat this - tubular
headers,
raising timing, experimenting with cam gears to lower
power band
etc. I'm still not really satisfied and
I'm set up (mostly) for street
wars.
I've learned to keep the rpm higher than I used to -
jumping
from one car to the other (daily driver Z-28)
might make it seem
worse?
I've often wondered if something between a 15g and the
368
would be better suited for my needs and what I
really want ....
?
Overall - not so bad, but slow speed corners in 2nd
gear at low rpm
leaves much to be desired IMO.
More than once I've said to myself: "this
would suck
trying to go full throttle out of a corner whilst
road
racing".
Of course eventually boost builds and all is fine
but
at times (depending on rpm, gear etc) it takes
longer than I like - even
considering we are using
turbos.
It's probable that my custom monster
exhaust and
race "mufflers" contribute to the problem, but
how much I'm
not sure ..... might be able to
restrict exhaust a bit more for low
end/offboost
torque increase?
The 15gs were nearly instantaneous in
their thrust
with my setup but ran out of air on top - down to 17-
18 psi
no matter the setting ... The 368s never run
out of air on top but at times
it sure does take a bit
to get those babies spinning. Seems to get
worse the
hotter the car and the warmer the weather/ambient temp.
- -
tds
http://www.brightok.net/~tdsThis
message was sent using BrightNet MailMan.
http://www.Brightok.net/mailman/***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:02:19
+0100
From: Roger Gerl <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Possible product
>I could not understand. Is this a DIY
kit or is it a working data
>acquisition system with an LCD display that
I could buy for $80?
It's a fully programmable standalone system that can
be used for
everything. I use it for logging some sensor and ECU
data.
>>- Knock sensor logging doesn't help at all, a filter device
is needed !
>>Voltage doesn't say anything at all
:-(
>
>Have you tried an analog voltmeter? I went to a local
RadioShack today to
>buy one but they did not have the one that I
wanted.
Again, using a voltmeter doesn't help anything as the knock
information is
within a special frequency area and a voltmeter shows the
full voltage of
the whole spectrum and is useless without a
filter.
Roger
93'3000GT TT
www.rtec.ch*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:08:54
+0100
From: Roger Gerl <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: another injector question...
The ECU learns from the closed
loop and select the desired values from
different maps (2-3 ignition and two
fuel maps). There are two additional
offsets that work in conjunction with
the pointer to the values on the map.
The offsets are active at WOT too but
have less influence. Therefore at WOT
I'd expect higher O2 voltage readings
(richer mixture) but it comes down
due to the offset determined during
closed loop. I have not yet verified
this but sounds positive together with
the DSM information we have.
Roger
93'3000GT TT
www.rtec.chAt 20:50 13.03.2002 -0500,
Philip V. Glazatov wrote:
>At 04:14 PM 3/13/2002, Roger Gerl
wrote:
>> > Bigger injectors will bring your O2 readings up, but
they will not change
>> > the duty
cycles.
>>
>>The ECU can adapt about 10%, therefore duty
cycles are comming down !
>
>Is this also true for the WOT open-loop
operation? How would the ECU know
>what to adjust to if it does not have
the feedback?
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:34:32
+0100
From: Roger Gerl <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: another injector question...
At 21:51 13.03.2002 -0500, Joe
Kenwabikise wrote:
>So basically, I could run 396cc injectors with no
problems.
Well, it will be rich in the beginning and learns over time.
I'd expect a
richer than normal mixture during the warmup phase as it seems
that then
the offset doesn't come i nplay.
>Since my IDC's are
running upwards of 95% now (@15psi), would the 10%
>over injectors even be
worth it?
Well, 10% larger injectors (find some that are compatible !)
will of course
reduce the IDC by 10% what is good. The result will then be
85% IDC if the
mixture is the same. If it is not then mileage will
increase.
> (I'm not skilled in math, so
could
>someone figure this out for me? :)
10% more fuel
theoretically allows you to get 10% more power. With an IDC
of 95% you are
able to get about 350hp out of the mixture. With 10% larger
injectors the
theoretical result is about 385hp. But more power means you
have to increase
the airflow too i.e. pressure. Theoretically this means
that you can add 10%
more boost unless the injectors are again at 95% and
you are getting the
additional 10% power. The more our engine is boosted up
the higher the
danger for detonation. This is why our cars run richer in
the high load
region as fuel is used to "cool" the chamber. Therefore the
10% power is
wishful thinking as the waste of fuel must be included as
well. We do not
have the right figures for this but it is said that about
20% of the
additional fuel must be used for this. Therefore 8 of 10% more
fuel can
really be used for more power. This therefore may result in
increasing boost
by 1 psi for the larger injectors.
Practically ,you may already
experiencing knock with the stock injectors.
Add the larger ones may help in
having better conditions then so you'll
probably only run safer but not
faster.
Try it, log the data with a TMO Datalogger and lets analyze the
data over a
specific period.
Roger
93'3000GT TT
www.rtec.ch*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 06:58:38
-0500
From: "Furman, Russell" <
RFurman2@MassMutual.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: FMIC
Hey Todd, are you headers coated how about the turbine
housing and your precat eliminators? All that will help with lag also get an ITC
and try retarding the timimg low in the rev band it will help increase turbo
spool but your EGT's down low will rise a bit. Jarret Humphries did this to a
t-51 turbo supra (q trim i believe) and he managed to reduce lag by almost 500
rpms.
- -----Original Message-----
From:
tds@brightok.net Sent: Wed 3/13/2002 8:37
PM
To: fastmax; Geoff Mohler; Jannusch, Matt; Furman, Russell; 'Team 3S'
Cc:
Subject: Re: Team3S: FMIC
> Nobody seems to think that
extra volume is a problem [ within reason of
> course ]. My pair of 368
turbos can put out about 1000 cfm so a couple
> of extra cubic feet of
volume should not be an issue. At 16 cfs it would
> only take the turbos
1/8 of a second to fill two cubic feet of intercooler
> and additional
hard pipes.
>
> Jim berry
-
----------------------------------------------------
Not to be negative,
but based on my experience
with the 368s, I would think they would just
be horrible to road race with. If all the corners
were fairly fast
sweepers where the revs could be
kept high, it wouldn't be so bad but low
speed corners
that are too fast to drop into first but lower rpm
in 2nd
could be devestating.
Those babies (368s) raise the powerband - that is,
you lose power on the bottom. To be more clear,
it just takes longer to
spool and usable boost
is higher than before (15g for example). There
is
a larger area at lower rpm where the car is just
a slug.
I've done a
lot work to combat this - tubular headers,
raising timing, experimenting
with cam gears to lower
power band etc. I'm still not really satisfied and
I'm set up (mostly) for street wars.
I've learned to keep the rpm
higher than I used to -
jumping from one car to the other (daily driver
Z-28)
might make it seem worse?
I've often wondered if something
between a 15g and the
368 would be better suited for my needs and what I
really want .... ?
Overall - not so bad, but slow speed corners in
2nd
gear at low rpm leaves much to be desired IMO.
More than once
I've said to myself: "this would suck
trying to go full throttle out of a
corner whilst road
racing".
Of course eventually boost builds and
all is fine
but at times (depending on rpm, gear etc) it takes
longer
than I like - even considering we are using
turbos.
It's probable
that my custom monster exhaust and
race "mufflers" contribute to the
problem, but
how much I'm not sure ..... might be able to
restrict
exhaust a bit more for low end/offboost
torque increase?
The 15gs
were nearly instantaneous in their thrust
with my setup but ran out of air
on top - down to 17-
18 psi no matter the setting ... The 368s never run
out of air on top but at times it sure does take a bit
to get those
babies spinning. Seems to get worse the
hotter the car and the warmer the
weather/ambient temp.
- - tds
http://www.brightok.net/~tds This
message was sent using BrightNet MailMan.
http://www.Brightok.net/mailman/
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:03:22
-0500
From: "Bill vp" <
billvp@highstream.net>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Greddy BOV
I take it that the "WHOOSH Whoosh whoosh sound" is
different from the
"Psshhhhhh" sound? Should you hear any sound when
you lift your foot off
the gas after having been boosting (not
shifting)?
- -----Original Message-----
From:
owner-team3s@team3s.com
[mailto:owner-team3s@team3s.com]On Behalf
Of Jeff Lucius
Sent: Wednesday,
March 13, 2002 9:26 AM
To:
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.stSubject:
Re: Team3S: Greddy BOV
As Erik points out, you can tell a BOV is set too
tight when you get
that "WHOOSH Whoosh whoosh sound" when you let off the
gas. That
sound is a sign of mild compressor surge and does not hurt the
engine
but can possibly damage the turbos if it gets more severe.
More
on compressor surge:
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/jlucius5/j5-2-3s-compflowmaps.htmThat
small angled nipple on the GReddy BOV that everyone leaves open
leaks air
when the intake track is pressurized. This only means that
when the pressure
is the same on *both* sides of the BOV, that air
leaks. This is probably of
little consequence, but capping it hurts
nothing that I know
of.
Intake pressure testers:
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/jlucius3/j3-2-pressuretester.htmJeff
Lucius,
http://www.stealth316.com/***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:20:43
-0500
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Possible product
At 04:02 AM 3/14/2002, Roger Gerl
wrote:
>>I could not understand. Is this a DIY kit or is it a working
data
>>acquisition system with an LCD display that I could buy for
$80?
>
>It's a fully programmable standalone system that can be used
for
>everything. I use it for logging some sensor and ECU
data.
Could I then buy it somewhere? Maybe someone in Germany (Jim
Matthews?)
could buy some of those if there is interest. The system has to
be very
straightforward though because I cannot imagine calling Germany for
tech
support.
Philip
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 05:24:15
-0800 (PST)
From: John Christian <
jczoom_619@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Porterfield Rotors
Wayne,
The shoulder you mention, is
probably the pilot
diameter and positions the rotor correctly on the
hub.
It should/can be a tight fit. Check the hub for
rust, etc
before altering the pilot dia of the rotor.
As I recall, the hub does
have a chamfer.
I beleive the interference discussed was between
the
inner hat surface and the hub face.
If you have access to a lathe,
why not adapt the Supra
rotors and get the advantage of directional cooling?
The Supras are a lot less $$$$. I haven't purchased
any in a while,
but the last ones were $57.93
[43516-1430 front Left].
I'll send
you pics in a separate Email.
Be of good cheer,
John
- ---
Geoff Mohler <
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
wrote:
> > I just got my rotors (thanks Geoff) today and have
> a
question.
> > When i picked up the car from Geoff, he mentioned
>
that the porterfield
> > rotors have a tendency to crack due
to
> interference with the hub. He said
> > somebody on the list
used shoe polish or something
> to determine where the
> >
interference was. Can that person speak up?
> ---
> EEK! Id
not say PF ones do..any can, and a lot do.
>
> > There is
a slight "shoulder" inside the rotor
> nearest the hub surface, if i
> > put the rotors on a lathe, and cut that shoulder
> off,
would that eliminate
> > the interference?
> >
> >
I was thinking of either doing that, or putting a
> chamfer on the outer
edge
> > of the hub plate. I don't want to crack these
> rather
expensive rotors, i
> > don't have the kind of money Jim Berry does
;)
> >
> > Any comments??
=====
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: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 08:34:21
-0500
From: Joe Kenwabikise <
jdk88888@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: another injector question...
Well, I've been datalogging for
the past couple of months, and the only
thing that's been troubling me are
the IDC values. Almost no knock
(I've seen 2 or 3 spikes of 1 knock
count, a couple 4 knock counts :) so
that's good. I have been running
lean at times (.86-.92), but usually
stay right around .92 O2. After I
did the fuel pump relay bypass, the
IDC's did drop ~5-10% across, it looked
like the relay had corroded some
(there was also a dead spider in the empty
hole in there... :-D). I've
also been getting very poor mileage
(14-16mpg), so I threw in some
injector cleaner this past sunday, hoping it
might help both problems.
I thought about actually finding 396cc
injectors... :) Haven't really
looked around yet though. Wanted
to see if it was actually worth it
first.
Thanks!
Joe
91 RT/TT
black
Roger Gerl wrote:
>
> At 21:51 13.03.2002 -0500, Joe
Kenwabikise wrote:
> >So basically, I could run 396cc injectors with no
problems.
>
> Well, it will be rich in the beginning and learns
over time. I'd expect a
> richer than normal mixture during the warmup
phase as it seems that then
> the offset doesn't come i nplay.
>
> >Since my IDC's are running upwards of 95% now (@15psi), would the
10%
> >over injectors even be worth it?
>
> Well, 10%
larger injectors (find some that are compatible !) will of course
> reduce
the IDC by 10% what is good. The result will then be 85% IDC if the
>
mixture is the same. If it is not then mileage will increase.
>
>
> (I'm not skilled in math, so could
> >someone figure
this out for me? :)
>
> 10% more fuel theoretically allows
you to get 10% more power. With an IDC
> of 95% you are able to get about
350hp out of the mixture. With 10% larger
> injectors the theoretical
result is about 385hp. But more power means you
> have to increase the
airflow too i.e. pressure. Theoretically this means
> that you can add 10%
more boost unless the injectors are again at 95% and
> you are getting the
additional 10% power. The more our engine is boosted up
> the higher the
danger for detonation. This is why our cars run richer in
> the high load
region as fuel is used to "cool" the chamber. Therefore the
> 10% power is
wishful thinking as the waste of fuel must be included as
> well. We do
not have the right figures for this but it is said that about
> 20% of the
additional fuel must be used for this. Therefore 8 of 10% more
> fuel can
really be used for more power. This therefore may result in
> increasing
boost by 1 psi for the larger injectors.
>
> Practically ,you may
already experiencing knock with the stock injectors.
> Add the larger ones
may help in having better conditions then so you'll
> probably only run
safer but not faster.
>
> Try it, log the data with a TMO
Datalogger and lets analyze the data over a
> specific period.
>
> Roger
> 93'3000GT TT
>
www.rtec.ch*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:06:30
-0500
From: "Bill vp" <
billvp@highstream.net>
Subject:
Team3S: vpc & egt and a/f questions
If the o2 voltage is around 0.92
and the EGT's do not go over 900 Celsius,
should I lean out the
mixture? I am talking aobut the rpm range in the gear
in which maximum
and/or more-often load is obtained.
For example, in the 2000-3000 range,
I would look at 5th gear (5 speed) and
if the EGT at WOT is (for example) 780
C, and the o2 voltage is 0.91 at WOT,
then should I lean out the mixture over
this band?
For the 3000-4000 range, I would use 4th gear as
above.
For the 4000+ range, I would use 3rd gear
Should I lean out
the area under 2000 rpm as much as possible? What causes
better gas
mileage during the cycling phase (such as when using cruise
control)?
Is that something totally separate from the settings that I
described
above? Do most people at cruising speeds around 90mph have EGT's
about
750 C?
I have a VPC and a 1st gen SAFC. What are some other good
sites that
describe the tuning using these devices? Currently I run
into ~900 C temps
at ~6300 rpm in 3rd gear. My pocketlogger should be
here shortly.
My car is a '91 R/T tt with 15G's, 550's,
etc.
thanks,
Bill
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 08:19:03
US/Central
From:
tds@brightok.netSubject: RE: Team3S:
FMIC
> Hey Todd, are you headers coated how about the turbine housing
and your precat
eliminators? All that will help with lag also get an ITC and
try retarding the
timimg low
in the rev band it will help increase turbo
spool but your EGT's down low will
rise a
bit. Jarret Humphries did this
to a t-51 turbo supra (q trim i believe) and he
managed to
reduce lag by
almost 500 rpms.
-
------------------------------------------------------------
Yes - we
did all that quiet a while back
(about 2 yrs ago) plus a few other
things.
I've found an increase in timing to be more
helpful with low
end&off boost response/better spoolup
than retarding the timing.
There is a noticable
improvement under advancement and little to
no
difference when reduced.
Still plenty of room for improvement. I
know
I may be trying to have my cake and eat it too
but would like to get
a bit closer.
Exhaust change (reduction) could yield good results but
the
trade off under boost at higher rpm may not be
worth the difference
for my uses.
I would not consider these turbos to be good
for road
racing unless low rpm range could
be avoided entirely. Also, I'm not
willing to
jam it into 1st at higher speeds in order to keep
rpm high when
slowing for lower speed tight curves.
(90+ degree) One of the more
helpful mods has
been the Tein setup since it has allowed
higher
cornering speeds and higher rpm to be maintained.
- - tds
http://www.brightok.net/~tdsThis
message was sent using BrightNet MailMan.
http://www.Brightok.net/mailman/***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 08:26:53
-0600
From: "Willis, Charles E." <
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Help me please, broke bleeder screw
I believe this is a
universal truth independent of the make of model of car.
Chuck
>
-----Original Message-----
> From: Furman, Russell
[SMTP:RFurman2@MassMutual.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 4:48
PM
> To:
dschilberg@pobox.com;
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: Team3S: Help me please, broke bleeder screw
>
> I swear,
evertime I work on thsi car something else breaks, I bust myself
> up, or
friggin both
>
> Russ F
> CT
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 06:47:54
-0800 (PST)
From: Jeff Lucius <
stealthman92@yahoo.com>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: FMIC
GT368 turbos do not "put out" any more volume flow than
stock 9B
turbos. All the 368s can do is flow denser air (more mass flow
in
other words). The DISPLACEMENT, RPM, and VE determine *volume* flow
and
the very maximum *volume* of air that can flow through our engine
is about
400 cfm. Period. The *volume* of air that flows into the
engine (at a
particular RPM and VE) is the same regardless of vacuum
or boost. Only the
*density* is different. Of course, the volume of
air that enters the turbos
during boost is considerably larger than
that flowing through the
engine.
One more time ..... the air that leaves the turbo is *compressed*
to
fit into the volume that is accepted by the engine (at a particular
RPM
and VE). All any IC, or pair of ICs, need to handle is 400 cfm
max, at the
desired level of efficiency. Now the heat transfer and
mass flow are another
matter. :)
A Pressurization Primer:
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/jlucius/2-primer.htmAir
and fuel flow calculators:
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/jlucius/2-air-fuel-flow.htmExample
FMIC chart at Paul's site:
http://www.ppeengineering.comAbout
turbos:
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/jlucius5/j5-2-3s-compflowmaps.htmJeff
Lucius,
http://www.stealth316.com/- -----
Original Message -----
From: "fastmax" <
fastmax@cox.net>
To: "Geoff Mohler"
<
gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>;
"Jannusch, Matt"
<
mjannusch@marketwatch.com>
Cc:
"'Furman, Russell'" <
RFurman2@MassMutual.com>; "'Team
3S'"
<
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Sent:
Wednesday, March 13, 2002 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: Team3S: FMIC
Nobody
seems to think that extra volume is a problem [ within reason
of course ]. My
pair of 368 turbos can put out about 1000 cfm so a
couple of extra cubic feet
of volume should not be an issue. At 16
cfs it would only take the turbos
1/8 of a second to fill two cubic
feet of intercooler and additional
hard pipes.
Jim
berry
========================================
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 08:47:39
-0600
From: "Willis, Charles E." <
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: BOV Suggestions
I didn't have to tie the BOV out of the way
on our two 1st gen (5 speed)
VR4's but DID have to tie it back to avoid
contact with the shift linkage on
the '94 VR4 (6 speed). I thought it
was aggravated by the Greddy
filtercharger intake not having a nice rigid
support like the K&N
filtercharger that we have on the two
'93VR4s.
Chuck
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
Craig Hodges [SMTP:chodges@houston.rr.com]
> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002
4:10 PM
> To:
Team3s@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: RE: Team3S: BOV Suggestions
>
> I have a 1999 VR4.
>
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:05:14
-0600
From: "Willis, Charles E." <
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: excessive battery corrosion
corrosion of the positive cable
is a typical problem with our cars around
the age of yours. the dealer
part is both the positive and negative cables.
I've already done this swap
out on two '93 VR4's and wonder when I will need
to do it on the '94.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: menalteed
[SMTP:menalteed@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 5:37 PM
>
To: Team3S
> Subject: Team3S: excessive battery corrosion
>
>
My 92 Stealth has had a major problen with corrosion
> at the positive
battery terminal.
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:13:38
-0600
From: "Willis, Charles E." <
cewillis@TexasChildrensHospital.org>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Suspension light blinking on 94 3000gt
> -----Original
Message-----
> From: RJM [SMTP:rjmsmail@swbell.net]
> Sent: Monday,
March 11, 2002 5:43 PM
> To: Willis, Charles E.
> Cc:
'stealthdevil@netzero.net';
Team3S@stealth-3000gt.st>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Suspension light blinking on 94 3000gt
>
>
Thanks Chuck for the advice, I apologize that I am just getting to
check
> the
> car out now. Basics please: I have the
voltmeter(s), manual and am
> looking
> under the front end now,
didn't take rear tires off/inspect rear shocks
> yet
> other
>
than looking around car with tires on (guess that's still "bogus" but
>
right now
> I
> have the front up and want to do the computer test,
I have new tires and
> don't
> want to ruin them)
> 1.) What
is 1st and 2nd generation?
[Willis, Charles E.] '91-93 = 1st
generation, '94-99 = 2nd
generation
> 2.) What is MFI (these two
questions would be good to put in the
> acronyms/FAQ,
> I didn't see
them there)?
[Willis, Charles E.] I don't remember, but I think it's in
the
service manual. Maybe Multi-Fuel Injection or something or Major
Fault
Indication or Motor Fault Indication.
> 3.) Where in the
manual is the ECU (computer) showing pin locations and I
> am
>
assuming I put the voltmeter on DC volts and if I get the generations
>
wrong and
> use the wrong pin it won't damage the ECU (for a 1994 3000gt
SL)?
[Willis, Charles E.] the diagnostic connector is shown in
several
places in the manual, don't have the page numbers here at work, but
look for
the part about interpreting diagnostic codes - where they have
figures of
waveforms.
> 4.) Related to 3.): is there a place in the
archives/website guys that
> shows how
> to
> do the computer
check with the voltmeter, I'm sure there is, sorry I can't
> find
>
it,
> I'll keep searching in the interim.
If the voltmeter is on Volts,
rather than ohms, you shouldn't cause
a problem.
> 5.) If it is a
speed sensor causing the problem, am I left to find which
> one?
I
> am
> assuming "yes".
[Willis, Charles E.] don't know -
but I might have to find out - my
'93has started intermittantly flashing
TOUR_SPORT!
> Thanks MUCH. I've already put another 2,000 since we
talked last.
> Bob
*** Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:12:52
-0800
From: "fastmax" <
fastmax@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S:
another injector question...
- ----- Original Message -----
From:
"Joe Kenwabikise" <
jdk88888@www.speedtoys.com>
>
Well, I've been datalogging for the past couple of months, and the only
>
thing that's been troubling me are the IDC values. Almost no knock
>
(I've seen 2 or 3 spikes of 1 knock count, a couple 4 knock counts :) so
>
that's good. I have been running lean at times (.86-.92), but
usually
> stay right around .92 O2.
I'm having similar problems
numbers although my O2 values seem to stay
in the .92 to .94 range. Using the
formula I got from Jeff Lucius I too get
the 100+ % IDC. I haven't spent
much time with the data logger because
it doesn't seem to be a problem and
I'll be changing the system out in the
near future [ I hope --- so continues
the never ending story ].
> it looked like the relay had
corroded some
> (there was also a dead spider in the empty hole in
there... :-D).
Hell there's your problem --- your system still has
a few bugs in it.
Jim
Berry
=============================================
***
Info:
http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm
***
------------------------------
End of Team3S: 3000GT &
Stealth V1
#782
***************************************