Team3S: 3000GT & Stealth   Wednesday, April 30 2003   Volume 02 : Number 143
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:45:44 -0600
From: "Donald Ashby" <dashbyiii@earthlink.net>
Subject: Team3S: Help finding a webpage
 
There was a webpage I'm pretty sure on Jeff's site that talked about how much of an increase in flow there is going from 2.5" to 3" piping. Or something like that, does anyone know the site off hand or was I hallucinating? Donald Ashby '93 3000GT VR-4 (RIP) "Don't drink and park, accidents cause people!"
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 16:42:29 -0500 (CDT)
From: Geoff Mohler <gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Help finding a webpage
 
You also lose velocity..velocity is largely important as well.
 
Just depends what your WHOLE system it like.
 
- ---
   **Now offering replacement Audi/BMW/Mercedes/Porsche/SAAB/Volvo parts!**
 
Where do you buy YOUR brakes from?
orders@speedtoys.com  Maybe I can help..asking is free.  :)
 

***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:46:12 -0600
From: Janice Findlay <jefind@shaw.ca>
Subject: Team3S: nitrous
 
I put a Zex 55hp shot dry nitrous system on my 93 Dodge Stealth R/T non-turbo and it is adjustable to 75hp.  I have put in a cooler range spark plug but I haven't adjusted the timing any.  I was told by Zex I should be alright as long as I stay at 55hp, is that true?  What would I have to do for mods if I wanted to up the jet size safely? Thanks
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 20:28:29 -0400
From: "Philip V. Glazatov" <gphilip@umich.edu>
Subject: RE: Team3S: Data logger for Second Gen
 
At 08:43 AM 4/29/2003, Starkey, Jr., Joseph wrote:
>The advantages are not so obvious to me, Phillip.  What do you see as
>the advantages?
 
I said, we have not discovered the advantages yet. But a smaller 2nd gen
cam sensor saves a lot of weight!
 
Philip
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 00:22:49 -0400
From: "Marven Lamarre" <neoblackjack21@earthlink.net>
Subject: Team3S: Changing the License Plate Bulbs
 
Hello again everyone,
 
Does anyone know how to remove the cover over the bulbs above the rear license plate holder on our cars. I tried using just a screw driver but they seem pretty on there. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
 
- --- Marven Lamarre
- --- neoblackjack21@earthlink.net
- --- 1992 Dodge Stealth Non-Turbo
 "Catch Me If You Can"
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 15:15:52 +0400
From: Andrew Spargo <spargo@emirates.net.ae>
Subject: Team3S: OBD11
 
I am thinking of getting an OBD11 handheld scanner which will work on our cars. I have been informed that the OTC 3353, 2001 Monitor Elite Deluxe Set will work on the 3000 GT (and a Lincoln Navigator - wife's car). Has any one on the list used this or knows if it will work?
 
Andy Spargo
1999 VR4 - Middle East specs.
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 08:17:16 -0500
From: "Darlene Madden" <dmadden@selectis.com>
Subject: Team3S: time to repaint 93 Stealth ES
 
I have been checking around for quotes on repainting my 93 Stealth ES and am finding a wide variety on pricing. The body is in excellent condition except for a large scrape along the driver side front end including the bumper. I have gotten prices from $400 to $5000. Anybody have any comments or thoughts on why this is the case? I'm sure there is a difference in quality, but that big a difference? I always mention team3s wherever I go, so they know I am not some dumb woman they can take advantage of. It really does help. Thanks for your input. Darlene Madden
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 09:39:49 -0400
From: "Alex Pedenko" <alex@kolosy.com>
Subject: RE: Team3S: time to repaint 93 Stealth ES
 
If you're talking about just repairing that scratch, then it shouldn't be 5k. My car was keyed all around and it cost 2k (and they did a good job)...
 
Alex
'95 VR4
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 06:47:32 -0700
From: "Guy, Michael (CS)" <michael.guy@northropgrumman.com>
Subject: RE: Team3S: time to repaint 93 Stealth ES
 
 I would think that $400 for getting your car painted is a little cheap. They would have to cut corners somewhere. Stick with the more reputable shops, not so much the back yard painters (although some of them can really paint.)
 I do body work on the side, mostly custom stuff shaved door handles, trunks, molded body kits, etc... and I know for a fact that taking a scrape out is a little on the expensive side if they are doing it the correct way(should be around $500).
 I would assume though that the cheaper body shops are going to jip you out of Clear coat, or primer, or just use all around crappy paint. Again, stick to the more expensive places, and ask exactly what prep work they are doing. Make sure the whole car is sanded down, primed, wet sanded, primed again, painted with at least 2 coats of paint, then cleared. They should be wet sanding between coats with a very high grit sandpaper, and then painting again for a good solid grip for the second coat. If you are painting it a different color, make sure that they are going to paint the insides of the doors, and possibly where they can, any place that the original paint still is. If not, make sure they either repaint the places where the original paint is, or they blend it real close to the color of the paint now(orginal color).
 I'm not a pro, but this is what I would look for. As far as quality paint goes, I would make sure it is a decent brand. I prefer 'House of Colors' paint, but it is a little on the expensive side. But intend on being short a car for at least a week for a decent quality paint job. Don't call Maaco, they don't do prep work, they just paint over what you bring them.
 
Hope this helps.
Mike Guy
92 Stealth SOHC
 
PS: As far as the custom stuff I do, if any body is interested, the website is www.mafixcrew.com, crews, ronin racing, William Olsen 87 Celica. This is the pride and joy of the club I am in. Me and him did most of the work. Don't know if any good pics are up, but I think there are some.
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 09:03:10 -0500
From: "xwing" <xwing@wi.rr.com>
Subject: Team3S: RE:  VCU, Torque Split
 
IMHO, our cars DO have a 45/55% torque split.
Why would Mitsubishi (and other companies that have
used VCU's) LIE about their vehicles' torque splits?
All these companies/engineers/powertrain
subcontractors like Getrag LIE or don't know what they are talking about...or maybe WE have an inadequate understanding of drivetrain theory.  Which seems most likely?  I'm not so proud of my engineering prowess that I'd make blanket statements that the torque split is NOT 45/55.
 
I don't disbelieve the engineers at Mitsubishi who, along
with Getrag/Germany and GKN/Italy who built the VCU's, the AWD system for the 3S, have always indicated that there is a 45%front/55% rear torque split baseline; which then can vary from that based upon slippage front to rear. Something as simple as a very slight effective final gearing of front vs rear wheels, leading to a very slight mismatch in speed of "front wheel output" vs. "rear wheel output" so the VCU is having a constant very slight slippage, biasing torque thereby 55% rear, would give a baseline 45/55 split.  Any INCREASE in rotational speed difference would make the "torque biasing curve" of the VCU vary from that baseline, so more or less torque is directed to the wheels with less or more wheelspeed/spin. The VCU has a "differential limiting force" capability; it can't transfer 10,000 lb-ft of difference to one end and 0 to the other, it is limited to transferring maybe 220 lb ft or so (for older Lancer EVO VCU) and after that torque biasing, you start to see wheelspin on the end with less traction, though the end WITH traction still is getting at least 220 lb-ft of torque applied for acceleration.
 
The VCU doesn't 'lock tight', it is designed NOT to lock (4WD style) because then we'd be jerking around corners etc like my GMC truck in 4WD :) ...the VCU "resists" and directs a PROPORTION of torque to front/rear, dependent on relative speeds of rear and front tire systems.  Its RESISTANCE can be overcome by applying more torque than its specification; this can cause more and more slippage, and can heat up/burn out the VCU.
- ------
From the Internet on VCU's:
 
The connection may also be made by a viscous-coupling unit (VCU), a sealed canister or barrel-shaped device that's filled with thixotropic silicone fluid and a series of interwoven plates resembling CDs in a changer magazine. One set of these plates is attached to the drum shell, and the others are attached to a driveshaft through the middle. As the speed varies between the two sets of plates, because one driveshaft is rotating faster than the other (either by turning or by wheels slipping), the silicone reacts to the heat being generated by thickening, which in turn starts to limit the speed differential between the two sides of the VCU. This allows the slip necessary to avoid binding, without allowing one axle to spin while the other does nothing. Some VCUs have a locking function for off-road use (Montero, Range Rover) while others do not (Escalade). Vehicles with all-wheel drive use a differential-or viscous coupling or clutch pack, depending on the vehicle's engineering-to maximize traction when needed. As wheels begin to slip in these vehicles, more and more power is automatically directed to the wheels where there is no slippage. The power shift can be sizable, if necessary, and again, it's done without any input from the driver.
 
The concept of the VCU, introduced on Classic Range
Rover, was a world first for Land Rover.  It is a canister between the front and rear propshafts, filled with a silicone fluid sandwiched between steel plates. The fluid has the characteristic of increasing its viscosity when stirred and heated.
 
Discussion of Lancer EVO VII regarding its use
of an electrohydraulic coupler rather than a VCU:
"The active center differential (ACD) is an electronically controlled mechanical unit with a hydraulically actuated multi-plate mechanism; the previous center differential had a viscous-coupling limiter unit (VCU). The center differential's standard torque split ratio is 50/50. A multi-steel-plate clutch allows an increase in the limiting device's binding capacity to 1000 N.m (738 lb.ft) from the VCU's 300 N.m (221 lb.ft). On full acceleration, the ACD locks the center differential to almost direct 4WD, while the quick application of steering lock almost fully loosens up the differential. The driver may choose one of three ACD operating modes: Tarmac, Gravel, and Snow."
 
The 4x4 system uses the center differential to regulate torque split between front and rear wheels to secure traction in slippery conditions. When the system detects any slippage in any of the wheels the VCU automatically reapportions torque split in proportion to the rotational speed of the differential between front and rear wheels.
 
Mitsu Pajero features ad:
"7. Torque split With new planetary gears enabling a 33-67% front / rear torque split Smooth high concerning in 4WD 8. Centre Differential VCY (Viscous Coupling Unit) Automatically varies the torque proportion up to 50:50 rear to front Improving all round stability and off road performance "
 
And, from J. Lucius own excellent site of tech articles, these paragraphs: "Variable Torque Split:
       Most manufacturers of all-wheel drive cars boast that their system can vary torque split a certain amount. A common way to rate torque split would be to say that the upcoming Audi TT Quattro, which is primarily front-wheel drive until the computer decides to send torque to the rear, is variable from 100/0 (front/rear) when the clutch pack is disengaged, to 50/50 when the clutch pack is fully locked. it could be argued, however, that the TT Quattro actually has the capability of going to somewhere in the neighborhood of 20/80 or even 0/100 in extreme situations. According to Hideki Ishido, VP of Product Planning for Subaru, torque split actually depends on the grip available at each wheel.
       To see why this is true, imagine a solid four-wheel drive car (with a fully loaded clutch pack, the TT could theoretically act as one). You would assume that solid four-wheel drive always has a 50/50 torque split, but according to Ishido, you would assume wrong. If you actually put torque sensors on each driveshaft, you would see that torque split is constantly changing.
 
"Without the differential and only the VC then power normally goes to only one end of the car and the other end just floats along with the VC absorbing any speed differences. If it's normally a front wheel drive car, and the front wheels start to spin, then the pure VC starts transferring torque to the rear wheels. Others, like Porsche and Lamborghini, have done it the other way around, transferring torque to the front only when the rear tires slip. You'll see these described with something like a 90/10 torque split because they design them to always slip a little bit even when driving straight so that the VC will activate quicker."
- ----------
Summary:
Our 3S ALSO have apparently "like a 45/55 torque split because they design them to always slip a little bit even when driving straight so that the VC will activate quicker."  We have a "torque split in proportion to the rotational speed of the differential between front and rear wheels." Simple, really. Instead of a new computer controlled Audi, Mitsubishi etc clutchpack varying torque split from 0-100%, our 3S have a VCU clutchpack that varies torque from a baseline 45/55 split to ?30/70 to ?60/40 depending on the relative slippage of either end of the car.  What OUR exact values of
+/- torque split capability are, who knows.
That's my opinion, based on engineering articles, ads and magazine statements of "torque splits" other than 50/50; as well as the opinion of Mitsubishi, Audi, Porsche, Getrag, all of whom have similarly cited such "torque splits" via VCU's.  (Our cars 45/55, Pajero 33/67, Porsche 10/90 etc). I am happy to have such major engineering expertise and information backing this mere OPINION.  I could be wrong, but I have alot of backing.
 
 At LEAST we might avoid blanket statements like 'Of COURSE the split is 50/50, I've proved it on my website'.  Whoa.  It HASN'T been proved 50/50. Many DON'T accept that; myself, Mitsubishi, Rover, Porsche, etc engineers among them. We (Mitsu, I and others) think 3S have a baseline 45/55% front/rear torque split, that can vary via the VCU to aid traction when needed. But we could be wrong.  :) since we ALL should have "IMHO", IMHO... JT
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 14:35:37 -0000
From: "Jeff Lucius" <jlucius@stealth316.com>
Subject: Re: Team3S: Help finding a webpage
 
If Donald is talking about IC piping, velocity is not really much of a consideration. However, for exhaust piping, velocity is very important.
 
My web page is:
http://www.stealth316.com/2-ic.htm
 
Flow in piping or other components (such as MASs) must always be described using volume flow and pressure loss. Mentioning either one or the other gives no usable information.
 
Flow increases proportional to the ~2.5th power of the pipe inside diameter in *smooth* pipe at the *same pressure loss* for turbulent flow (Reynolds numbers greater than 4000), which is the normal situation in IC piping (or tubing, whatever) from my calculations. I have not calculated Reynolds number for gas in the exhaust tubes.
 
On the other hand, at the same flow volumes, pressure loss is inversely proportional to the inside diameter and absolute pressure. Loss increases (non-linearly) with air volume flow.
 
Some info at the web site below (including how to calculate Reynolds number). http://www.cleandryair.com/pressure_loss.htm
 
So when comparing flow in a 3" tube/pipe compared to one that has a 2.5" ID, flow increases by 1.577 or about 58% with the same pressure loss in both pipes.
 
You can use tables to determine pressure loss (see links on Clean Dry Air's page above). Larger pipes and higher pressures each result in lower pressure loss. Higher volume flow increases pressure loss (non-linearly).
 
Examples in smooth pipe/tube:
3" ID, 300 cfm, 15 psi pressure ---> 0.30 psi loss per 100'
3" ID, 500 cfm, 15 psi pressure ---> 0.78 psi loss per 100'
3" ID, 500 cfm, 40 psi pressure ---> 0.43 psi loss per 100' 2.5" ID, 500 cfm, 40 psi pressure ---> 1.31 psi loss per 100' 2.0" ID, 500 cfm, 40 psi pressure ---> 3.16 psi loss per 100' 1.5" ID, 300 cfm, 40 psi pressure ---> 4.29 psi loss per 100'
 
Summary:
Going to a 3" ID pipe from a 2.5" ID should increase volume flow ~58% at the same pressure loss, or it will decrease pressure loss (maybe 0.05 to 0.1 psi over 10 feet) at the same volume flow.
 
Comments:
Stock IC piping (1.5") is undersized when using turbos that can each flow 400 cfm or more. 3" exhaust piping is close to ideal for all but the highest output 3S engines.
 
Jeff Lucius, http://www.stealth316.com/
 
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Mohler" <gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 3:42 PM
 
You also lose velocity..velocity is largely important as well.
 
Just depends what your WHOLE system it like.
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 08:50:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Casey Spivey <spiv99@yahoo.com>
Subject: Team3S: stroker kit
 
Just wondering if anyone has researched this any more. The website is http://www.importperformanceparts.net/imports/strokerkits_mitsu.html.
I will be rebuilding my engine this summer and this seems to be a good direction to go.  Anyone know the pros and cons for a TT stroker. Thanks, Casey
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 11:36:19 -0500
From: "Steve" <denon11@insightbb.com>
Subject: RE: Team3S: Changing The License Plate Bulbs
 
HI,  Marven
As you have found out the screws
wont cone out because they are rusted and there is no way to apply heat. There is two ways you can do this.
Remove the bottom bumper cover the that has the plastic screws. Then you can try to remove the bulb socket by turning it counter clockwise but it is hard to maneuver up there. Or you can remove the licenses plate and remove the entire bracket. But as far as I know there is no other options.
 
Regards, Steve
 
Artic White 1995 3000GT SL
 
- -----Original Message-----
From: Marven Lamarre
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 11:25 PM
 
Hello again everyone,
 
Does anyone know how to remove the cover over the bulbs above the rear license plate holder on our cars. I tried using just a screw driver but they seem pretty on there. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
 
- --- Marven Lamarre
- --- neoblackjack21@earthlink.net
- --- 1992 Dodge Stealth Non-Turbo
"Catch Me If You Can"
 
***  Info:  http://www.Team3S.com/Rules.htm  ***
 
------------------------------
 
End of Team3S: 3000GT & Stealth V2 #143
***************************************