Team3S: 3000GT & Stealth Monday, February 10
2003 Volume 02 : Number 077
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 13:52:51 -0600
From: "Matt Jannusch" <
mjannusch@attbi.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Is it true cylinder #1 runs hotter?
> I just ordered my EGT probe and gauge, I was wondering where to tap it
> to get the most useful information from it. I remember someone once
> told me that cylinder #1 runs leanest, and therefore hottest, so would
> it be best to tap into the manifold right after #1? If not, where
> should I tap it?
The rear bank cylinder closest to the passenger side of the car seems to be
the most common piston to break first. I believe it is because of the
small size of the crossover tube between the fuel rails. Bob K. makes a
great kit that solves that problem...
Its a very well-made piece and a simple bolt-on (but beware fuel pressure
in the rails, even when the motor is off). I'm sure there's more info on
3si.org about it.
If you take off the crossover tube and measure the inner diameter of the
tube, you'll see what I mean.
I put my EGT probe in the collector of the rear manifold and it seems to
work fine. No matter where you put the probe, it is a compromise one way
or another.
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 15:15:12 -0500
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Is it true cylinder #1 runs hotter?
At 02:52 PM 2/9/2003, you wrote:
>The rear bank cylinder closest to
the passenger side of the car seems
>to be the most common piston to
break first. I believe it is because
>of the small size of the
crossover tube between the fuel rails.
This is cylinder #6. My AEM EMS has an individual duty cycle correction on
that one cylinder increased by 3%. I wonder if they did it just because
they felt like it or because they really measured the EGT's or the O2's on
each cylinder individually...
Philip
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 15:19:54 -0500
From: Michael Tanenbaum
<
gtg509d@mail.gatech.edu>
Subject:
Team3S: help with diagnosing
Hello,
How are you? I have been having quite a time with my car, and I think
it all
comes back to the original problem I've been having that has not been
pinpointed. The computer is showing an error message - "14 - TPS
signal out of
range". The TPS has been replaced as well as the
computer (the computer is now
a remanufactured one), so I don't think either
of these components are the
problem. What are the other players in the
relay from the throttle to the TPS
to the computer?
My car is running pretty poorly since it is confused. I'll press on
the gas
and gas will flow, but the car isn't making a good mixture at
all.
Thank you very much for the help.
Michael
ps. If you could, please also reply to my address - thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 15:14:45 -0600
From: Jon Paine <
ppainej@attglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Ok, so what's the big deal about rebuilding an engine?! Engine
rebuild advice needed!!
Mitsu does have an engine overhaul manual that's not usually sold with
the 2 shop manuals. The book covers all versions of engine for
whatever
model years it covers, it's not specifically for the 3000gt
(mine covers
'92-'96).
It doesn't necessarily cover the basics of engine overhaul but it
does
give all the exploded diagrams with disassembly/assembly steps and
torque values, including all the external parts and brackets. I'm not
sure of the order number but the parts counter guys can find it. If
you
talk them up nice they might let you look at the shop's copy to
decide if it
would do you any good.
Jon
Tyson Varosyan wrote:
> Well, don't know if many remember my $2
timing belt gasket getting
> into my timing belt...
>
>
Anyhow finally got around to getting some work done on the car. Pulled
>
the motor out last weekend, put it in the trunk and started calling
>
around to see what people charge to do the machine work and
>
re-assembly. I have never torn apart an engine, but hell, I have never
>
done many things, and end up doing them on this car... Seems any time
>
anyone hears 3000GT TwinTurbo, their eyes change to $ signs. The
> quotes
I am getting for a longblock rebuild are more than the cost of
> my
entire car!! Obviously they are marking up parts and charging
> insane
rates for labor... Cheapest quote I can find for doing just the
>
shortblock (labor and machining only, no parts) is $700! NOBODY will
>
warranty the work ether! Cheapest longblock rebuild (not including
>
parts and using my 90% assembled heads) was $1700!!!!
>
> Anyhow,
here is the condition:
>
> I have heads, 90% assembled (just need
cams).
> I have new pistons.
> Reusing rods, cams, crank and
block.
>
>>From what I understand, there is only about $300
worth of machine work
>>that
> needs to be done (balance crank,
bore cylinders, surface the top).
> What is the big deal with assembly?
Looking at the bills I'm seriously
> thinking about doing it myself. From
what I gather doing the bearings
> is the most tricky part.
>
> Is there any engine rebuild guide anywhere online? Some soft of a
> wire-up? Also sources to get stuff like bearings? Tips etc wanted. I
> don't know what I am getting into here but I am seriously thinking
> about doing this on my own...
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 14:23:29 -0800
From: "Chris Winkley & Teri
Beaman" <
cwinkley@hevanet.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: 265's on 8.5 rims?
Geoff...
You might re-consider when you use terms such as "...will be 'FAR' (cjw
-
CAPS) outside...". What does "far" mean and why is it unacceptable for: A)
street use, B) racing use (drag or open track, or C) both?
Phillip wrote that the additional sidewall width using a 275 X 35 would be
1.35mm per side of a 9" rim. I don't know this to be true but hope that this is
a measurement he made. Can you comment on why that is either hazardous or less
than optimal for street purposes, racing purposes, or both? Some empirical data
would be useful, I've been running 265 X 35's on one of my sets of stock chrome
rims for six months. While I have not been to the open track since I mounted
these, I compared them, side by side, and front to back with my second set of
stock chrome rims (18" X 8.5") that have stock 245s on them and there was
virtually no visible difference in terms of overall height. There was naturally
a slight difference in tread width (didn't even appear to be 20mm to me) and
virtually no difference between sidewall width (the "bulging" someone
described). Granted, I did not use a set of calipers on either set of sidewalls,
and the tires were not loaded (meaning they were not on the car at the time) but
I believe there is a known measurable difference in all dimensions for the same
size tire based on manufacturer alone. What is the "technically" source you
quote that dictates that the "BEST" fit for a 9" rim (not stock on any model of
VR4) is a 245 (X what profile?)?
As far as I know, there are people who have been using 265 X 35s, even 275
X 35s, for years and I haven't read of any problems attributed to the extra
sidewall width. In my personal case, and I'll wager it's the case with everyone
who's driving a VR4 on the street, strip, or track, there's a LOT more
opportunity for improvement in our driving skills than there is in the
negligible difference in sidewall width. Is it "optimal"? Perhaps, perhaps not.
Do 265 X 35s fit perfectly under my lowered (Eibach 1.25") body without rubbing
lock to lock? Yes. Even under hard acceleration in a tight circle? Yes. My bet
is that tire design, tread pattern, and wear factor are all more "significant"
(also a subjective term) issues than the sidewall width difference we're
discussing.
Looking forward...Chris
Incorrect. The stiffest part of the tire is ONLY the tire directly
supported by the wheel.
The sidewall will be far outside the edge of the wheel.
Technically,. the BEST fit for a performance tire on a 9" rim is 245.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 23:31:34 +0100
From: "Roger Gerl" <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Is it true cylinder #1 runs hotter?
Matt, it is still not the case that the rear bank is running out of fuel
due to the low diameter of the crossover. Remember, the FPR sits at the end of
the rear fuel rail and therefore regulates the pressure in both rails. If it
would run out of fuel, the pressure would fall off in the whole rail. I agree
that the design can be improved but just look at the intake to the rails as the
opening in the adapter is smaller than the crossover tube. But it doesn't act as
a problem unless the whole fuel line system to the rails have changed.
Indeed we found several problems with #1 is breaking first on 1st gens and
#4 on second gens. I still have no idea why because nobody knows what the
differences in the blocks or heads are in between those ages. Even more, Luis's
93'3000GT from Europe has a 2nd gen engine like mine and he also had troubles in
#1 although in others too.
The only thing the is different on #1 is the length of the runner of the
front header to the turbo flange. This may cause the biggest danger for
backpressure acting more quick compared to the other exhaust exits. this may
cause lean spots in the chamber on the next cycle and therefore harmful
detonation. Unfortunately, #4 has the same problem as it also has the shortest
distance to the flange ... maybe this thought has really something in it. If
there is another turbine mounted that causes less backpressure due to the better
ratio the problem may be less.
Any thoughts on this theory ?
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 20:28:28 -0600
From: "Matt Jannusch" <
mjannusch@attbi.com>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: Is it true cylinder #1 runs hotter?
> Matt, it is still not the case that the rear bank is running out of
> fuel due to the low diameter of the crossover.
How did you determine that? I have yet to see any solid proof either
way, and am open to suggestions. In discussing EGTs front vs. rear with
several other owners I've observed the rear bank reads hotter than the
front. Could something other than differences in A/F ratio cause this -
yes. I'm still going to put my money on the most likely cause - reduced
flow to the rear injectors at high injector flow rates as the most likely
explanation.
> Remember, the FPR sits at the end of the rear fuel rail
> and
therefore regulates the pressure in both rails.
Yes, but the FPR isn't able to regulate the volume* of flow - restrictions
in the system will limit the upper end of fuel flow (and potentially end-rail
pressure). The largest restriction in the system IS the crossover
tube.
> If it would run out of fuel, the pressure would fall off in the whole
> rail.
Where are you measuring pressure? Before the rails or after the
rails? If measuring before then you have no data on what the pressure is
after the rails - the most important place to monitor fuel pressure. If
measuring after then I'll take your data into consideration. My car is
stored for the winter, but I am setting it up now to read pressure after the
rails rather than before.
> I agree that the design can be improved but just look
> at the
intake to the rails as the opening in the adapter
> is smaller than the
crossover tube. But it doesn't act
> as a problem unless the whole fuel
line system to the
> rails have changed.
That's not what my measurements came up with. Mine clearly showed the
crossover is the smallest diameter of the whole system - with the outer diameter
of the tube being smaller than the inlets/exits on the tube flanges. I'll
have to look for my digital pictures to determine what the measurements were,
but I clearly remember that the tube was by far the smallest diameter of the
entire fuel system. It is at best suboptimal to have an area of reduced
flow capability before the last set of injectors.
> The only thing the is different on #1 is the length of
> the
runner of the front header to the turbo flange.
> This may cause the
biggest danger for backpressure
> acting more quick compared to the other
exhaust
> exits. this may cause lean spots in the chamber on
> the
next cycle and therefore harmful detonation.
I agree that there's likely a high amount of backpressure - but I tend to
blame it more on the undersized TD04 exhaust housings rather than the
manifolds. Could both be a contributing factor? Sure. Again,
I'm open to suggestions and ideas. I also consider that potentially having
high backpressure may be a contributor to us getting knock at relatively low
boost levels compared with other similarly designed motors.
Either way, the fuel rail loop is a potential weak point which is now
easily (and cheaply) solved with Bob's kit.
- -Matt
'95 3000GT Spyder VR4
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 01:54:16 -0500
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: 265's on 8.5 rims?
I made some theoretical calculations. I did not have a chance to measure
different wheels with a ruler myself, but the numbers that I quoted came
from what tire manufacturers say those wheels are supposed to be. Usually
those numbers are rounded and not exact, but for the same manufacturer I
think you could compare two tires, especially their widths, like apples to
apples.
I am sure most know this, but I will still write down the calculations just
in case.
Widths:
245x40R-18 is 29.1 mm wider that a 8.5" rim
265x35R-18 is
49.1 mm wider that a 8.5" rim
275x35R-18 is 46.4 mm wider that a 9.0"
rim
This makes the 265x35R-18 tire mounted on a 8.5" rim only 2.7 mm wider than
its rim than the 275x35R-18 tire mounted on a 9.0" rim, or 1.35 mm per each
side.
Profile heights:
245x40R-18 = 245 x 40% = 98.00
265x35R-18 = 265 x
35% = 92.75
275x35R-18 = 275 x 35% = 96.25
Wheel diameters:
98.00 x 2 + 18" = 653.2
92.75 x 2 + 18" =
642.7
96.25 x 2 + 18" = 649.7
Philip
At 05:23 PM 2/9/2003, Chris Winkley & Teri Beaman wrote:
>Phillip
wrote that the additional sidewall width using a 275 X 35 would
>be
1.35mm per side of a 9" rim. I don't know this to be true but hope
>that
this is a measurement he made. Can you comment on why that is
>either
hazardous or less than optimal for street purposes, racing
>purposes, or
both? Some empirical data would be useful, I've been
>running 265 X 35's
on one of my sets of stock chrome rims for six
>months. While I have not
been to the open track since I mounted these,
>I compared them, side by
side, and front to back with my second set of
>stock chrome rims (18" X
8.5") that have stock 245s on them and there
>was virtually no visible
difference in terms of overall height. There
>was naturally a slight
difference in tread width (didn't even appear to
>be 20mm to me) and
virtually no difference between sidewall width (the
>"bulging" someone
described). Granted, I did not use a set of calipers
>on either set of
sidewalls, and the tires were not loaded (meaning they
>were not on the
car at the time) but I believe there is a known
>measurable difference in
all dimensions for the same size tire based on
>manufacturer alone.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 02:00:39 -0500
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <
gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: Re:
Team3S: help with diagnosing
Take a voltmeter and check the TPS signal voltage. It should be around 0.5V
at 0% throttle and around 4.5V at 100% throttle.
Then check that same voltage at the ECU pin. Make sure the pin is clean and
not loose. There is really nothing else to check.
Philip
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 10:37:34 +0100
From: Roger Gerl <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: Is it true cylinder #1 runs hotter?
At 20:28 09.02.2003 -0600, Matt Jannusch wrote:
> > Matt, it is
still not the case that the rear bank is running out of
> > fuel due
to the low diameter of the crossover.
>
>How did you determine
that? I have yet to see any solid proof either
>way, and am open to
suggestions. In discussing EGTs front vs. rear
>with several other
owners I've observed the rear bank reads hotter than
>the front.
Could something other than differences in A/F ratio cause
>this -
yes. I'm still going to put my money on the most likely cause -
>reduced flow to the rear injectors at high injector flow rates as the
>most likely explanation.
snip
>Either way, the fuel rail loop is a potential weak point which is now
>easily (and cheaply) solved with Bob's kit.
Installed AN-6 line in between the rails and EGT are still the same ->
nothing changed. At this time, the FP was measured in this line. I highly
agree to change the ugly crosstube as well but it hasn't helped so far
!
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 05:04:29 -0500
From: "Mark Mullins" <
mmullins@swfla.rr.com>
Subject:
Team3S: modulators
Hi everyone,
I just bought a 93 Stealth NT and would like to do some
upgrades for performance. I have ordered a K&N FIPK for starter s and would
appreciate your suggestions on further upgrades. Also, I keep seeing these
performance mod's promising a 20hp improvement on eBay. what is your opinion on
these??
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 13:02:25 +0100
From: Roger Gerl <
roger.gerl@bluewin.ch>
Subject:
Re: Team3S: modulators
The opinion is not to do these bad nothing-doing mods that may even harm
the engine.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 08:02:28 -0600
From: "William Jeffrey Crabtree"
<
wjcrabtree@earthlink.net>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: Ok, so what's the big deal about rebuilding an engine?! Engine
rebuild advice needed!!
Tyson,
Everybody else has been giving you great advice but I wanted to give
you a few points that I've learned along the way. Perhaps these are some
things that aren't so obvious, perhaps they're common sense. I wanted to
put these down, not just for you, but for anybody that might be reading this
thread.
I've been working on my car for nearly 4 years now. I last
drove it Easter Sunday 1999. It's JUST about ready to go again. Part
of my problem has been making money for the project a priority. Part of my
problem has been making time to work on it a priority.
First of all, if you're doing all of this stuff yourself,
HAVE A SAFE,
SECURE, AND DRY PLACE TO WORK ON THE CAR. Temperature
control is a BIG bonus....I've been freezing my A$$ off lately in my garage here
in the STL area.
HAVE GOOD TOOLS. That buffalo tool set that your grandmother
gave you when you went off to college to use in the dorm might be versatile, but
it just won't cut it through an entire teardown and rebuild. There's
nothing quite like having the right tool for the job. If you need a
left-handed, combination torx adaptable, converter.....then by-god, go buy
one!! Your blood pressure and your knuckles will thank you!!
Throughout the course of my project, I've picked up quite a few things along the
way like an air compressor, a parts washer, an engine stand and hoist. So
be sure to budget some money to spend on doing the job right with the right
tools. (for Tyson
specifically) If you've already gotten the motor out,
you're probably pretty well equipped already.
HAVE ANOTHER CAR TO DRIVE, Even if it's a $900 econobox, circa
1975. I chose a Jeep because of it's versatility, durability, availability
of parts, easy to work on, etc, etc, etc....plus it's a lot of fun too.
Don't get pressured into getting your project done in a hurry by the need to USE
the car. The project will be a lot more fun if you're not under the gun.
You will also be able to make better decisions about upgrading, and improving
the performance and look of the car if you're not under a time constraint (not
that you should ever take 4 years to do a rebuild...I'm just saying!!)
Well....that's about all I can add. I would never have been
able to get as far as I have without the knowledge base that exists here.
One other great thing about this group of people is the SUPERB encouragement and
moral support. Hope I've paid back a little of what I've taken over the
last few years.
- -Jeff Crabtree
'91 Stealth R/T TT (3SI # 0499)
2k
Wrangler TJ Sport
St. Louis, MO
- -----Original Message-----
From: Tyson Varosyan
Sent: Friday,
February 07, 2003 5:19 PM
Anyhow finally got around to getting some work done on the car. Pulled the
motor out last weekend, put it in the trunk and started calling around to see
what people charge to do the machine work and re-assembly. I have never torn
apart an engine, but hell, I have never done many things, and end up doing them
on this car...
<<<SNIP>>>
------------------------------
I think you were lucky. The centering rings are there for a
reason. I have them with my TE37's also.
Chuck Willis
- -----Original Message-----
From: fastmax
[mailto:fastmax@cox.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:43 PM
I have RP01's with what appears to be the correct centering ring --- $5 for
4 of them --- however --- I only use them for track use and when I remove
the wheels [ no problem ] the rings are stuck to the hub and sometimes get
broken when I remove them. At the last event I forgot it install the rings so
the wheels were centered only with the tapered lug nuts --- I had no problems at
speed, at Sears Point ?!?!? I may leave them off next time also.
------------------------------
Are all centering rings the same size?
I have them with my Milli Miglia
street wheels, and one got chewed up. Need a replacement.
It was at Midamerica Motorplex, when I didn't realize that the centering
ring from my street wheel had stuck on the hub. I had a devil of a time getting
the left rear race wheel on over the centering ring. Finally, with lots of
delicate arranging, I managed to get all five lugs on, and went out. I heard
lots of chattering back there, so I came back in, fearing the worst. When I took
the wheel off, I could see the centering ring had gotten all chewed up and bent
from the wheel moving around on it.
So now I run that street wheel without a centering ring. So far, so good,
but I'd like to replace it.
Rich/slow old poop
At 09:39 AM 2/10/03 -0600, Willis, Charles E. wrote:
>I think you
were lucky. The centering rings are there for a reason. I
>have them with my TE37's also.
------------------------------
No, all centering rings are not the same size. Take a look at your
intact ones. They may have dimensions printed on the outside of the ring.
They differ by inner diameter, outer diameter, and width. They might give
you inner diameter and thickness.
When I went to get replacement rings for my TE37's, they first gave me the
wrong size.
Chuck Willis
- -----Original Message-----
From:
merritt@cedar-rapids.net
[mailto:merritt@cedar-rapids.net]
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 9:56
AM
Are all centering rings the same size?
I have them with my Milli Miglia
street wheels, and one got chewed up. Need a replacement.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 08:03:59 -0800
From: "fastmax" <
fastmax@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Team3S:
Buying tires from Discount Tire Co.
I agree that the centering rings and hub centric wheels are designed that
way for a reason but many a car just uses the tapered lugs. A friend has the
Stillen Brembo brake kit on his car and they provided a spacer to align the
rotor properly and as a result it precludes the use of the center alignment
hub.
The failure mode should not be catastrophic, rather a gradually worsening
vibration or inability to eliminate a vibration.
I would assume that each adaptor is unique to the wheel/car combo.
Jim Berry
====================================================
I think you were lucky. The centering rings are there for a
reason. I have them with my TE37's also.
------------------------------
>The failure mode should not be catastrophic, rather a gradually
>worsening vibration or inability to eliminate a vibration.
It tends to eat away and round out the tapered lug mounts on the wheel, as
the wheel moves around on the lugs. At least, that's what mine did. Chewed it
all up. It's best to use centering rings if you can find replacements.
> Chuck says: Take a look at your intact ones. They may have
dimensions
> printed on the outside of the ring. They differ by inner
diameter,
> outer diameter, and width. They might give you inner
diameter and
> thickness.
Even if I knew the dimensions, where do you find such rings? I don't
remember which model of Milli Miglia wheels I have (there are dozens), and
nothing on the wheel web sites seems to match. Gawd, I hope I don't ever bend
one.
Rich
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 09:38:44 -0800
From: "Geddes, Brian J" <
brian.j.geddes@intel.com>
Subject:
Team3S: AEM EMS (Was: Is it true cylinder #1 runs hotter?)
Philip -
I didn't realize you were using the AEM! Are you on the AEM message
board?
I think AEM put in this correction based purely on the advice of the 3/S
shops (GTPro) that they worked with during development. I don't think they
actually measured individual cylinders.
- - Brian
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip V. Glazatov
[mailto:gphilip@umich.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 12:15
PM
>
> At 02:52 PM 2/9/2003, you wrote:
> >The rear bank
cylinder closest to the passenger side of the
> car seems to be
>
>the most common piston to break first. I believe it is
> because
of the small
> >size of the crossover tube between the fuel
rails.
>
> This is cylinder #6. My AEM EMS has an individual duty
cycle
> correction on
> that one cylinder increased by 3%. I wonder
if they did it
> just because
> they felt like it or because they
really measured the EGT's
> or the O2's on
> each cylinder
individually...
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 13:15:01 -0500
From:
pvg1@daimlerchrysler.comSubject:
Re: Team3S: AEM EMS (Was: Is it true cylinder #1 runs hotter?)
I bought the AEM EMS last August. I struggled initially with some problems
that I caused myself by not disconnecting my Apexi ITC. When I fixed them I was
too busy to continue with the real tuning work. I am on the AEM message board
but I have not been following it lately. Now I am slowly getting back into it
again. Brian, I think you just forgot that I had an AEM EMS. You gave me some
tips on making a DIY-WB O2 sensor for it. My priority #1 now is to rig up a WB
O2. I hope I will have it ready and running by the time warm weather comes
here.
Philip
- ------------------------------------------------
Philip -
I didn't realize you were using the AEM! Are you on the AEM message
board?
I think AEM put in this correction based purely on the advice of the 3/S
shops (GTPro) that they worked with during development. I don't think they
actually measured individual cylinders.
- - Brian
------------------------------
Cool.
"far" in my mind, means "beyond reasonable limits". It wont blow up
or anything, but IMHO, a 245 tire will be likely to overall outperform a 265
tire on a 8.5" wheel.
Each tire brand has different characteristics, But the tread face should
never exceed the width of the wheel itself..for best use.
------------------------------
> I am sure most know this, but I will still write down the calculations
> just
> in case.
>
> Widths:
> 245x40R-18 is
29.1 mm wider that a 8.5" rim
> 265x35R-18 is 49.1 mm wider that a 8.5"
rim
> 275x35R-18 is 46.4 mm wider that a 9.0" rim
>
> This
makes the 265x35R-18 tire mounted on a 8.5" rim only 2.7 mm wider
>
than
> its rim than the 275x35R-18 tire mounted on a 9.0" rim, or 1.35 mm
per each
> side.
- ---
I'm lost.
How did you get from 49.1 to 2.7mm wider on the 265 tire?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 10:53:18 -0800
From: "Tyson Varosyan" <
tigran@tigran.com>
Subject: RE:
Team3S: Ok, so what's the big deal about rebuilding an engine?! Engine rebuild
advice needed!!
Lots of good advice from everyone on the board. Thanks guys. I am still
looking at a few shops, but by the looks of things I will be doing this solo.
Likely more questions to come in the near future.
Tyson
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 11:41:51 -0800
From: "Geddes, Brian J" <
brian.j.geddes@intel.com>
Subject:
RE: Team3S: AEM EMS (Was: Is it true cylinder #1 runs hotter?)
Maybe I did just forget. :) In any case, you've got your
priority right - a working WB02 is essential in tuning the AEM. Have you
ordered a sensor and kit yet?
- - Brian
------------------------------
49.1 - 46.4 = 2.7 mm
All the three tires below are wider than their rims. I compared a 265mm
tire mounted on a 8.5" rim to a 275mm tire mounted on a 9.0" rim. They aren't
that different if you look at them in this way.
I compared these two because nobody questions that it is okay to mount a
275mm tire on a 9" wide rim. But a 265mm tire mounted on a 8.5" rim is not much
different. This is why I am saying that it should work almost just as
well.
Philip
------------------------------
End of Team3S: 3000GT & Stealth V2
#77
**************************************