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.html

On 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.com
Subject: 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.com
fax: (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.html

On 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.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
- ----------------------------------------------------

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 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.ch

At 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.st
Subject: 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.htm

That 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.htm

Jeff 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.net
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.
- ------------------------------------------------------------

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/~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 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.htm

Air and fuel flow calculators:
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/jlucius/2-air-fuel-flow.htm

Example FMIC chart at Paul's site:
http://www.ppeengineering.com

About turbos:
http://www.geocities.com/lutransys/jlucius5/j5-2-3s-compflowmaps.htm

Jeff 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
***************************************