A 3.4 DOHC Build then... F40 Turbo
Topic started by: Fierobsessed, Date: 02-04-2013 03:59 AM
Original thread: http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum3/HTML/000143.html


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #1, 02-04-2013 03:59 AM
      At this point, Im already about half way through this entire swap/build already. But, as it is a build, It is a story. So I will start from the very beginning.

About this project:
I swapped the 3.4 DOHC into the car 5-6 years ago.
I got the turbo itch, and had the funds. So I purchased some parts, most courtesy of eBay!
First I bought a F40 Six speed.


Then I bought a turbo, Garrett GT3582R. With a T3/3" V-band outlet, factory Garrett anti-surge housing.
Then I went to Tial for a 50MM blow off valve
Again to Tial for their MV-S 38mm V-band waste gate
Once more to Tial for their Stainless V-band exhaust housing



About this car:
I purchased this car in the June of 2003 in Long Island, NY. It is a Silver 1988 Fiero GT. Fully optioned, with leather and sunroof and a 5 speed. 183,000 miles.




It's been to the 20th Fiero anniversary. I've driven it from the atlantic coast to the pacific coast.
The original engine dropped its timing chain, just due to its high mileage.
The second engine was a refreshed 86 Fiero 2.8 with a cam. I spun a bearing around a tight turn at max RPM in second, It lost oil pressure momentarily. The oil level was a little low. I did take it to the track for just one quarter mile before it spun the bearing. It ran a 16.3 @ 80.03.
I replaced the engine with a 3.4 Pushrod engine 7/4/04
I moved to Las Vegas with the car 02/05.

10/31/06
The 3.4 DOHC Swap begins.
I got bored with the pushrod 3.4 and due to a couple issues, I decided it was time to swap it out.

My goal for this swap was to do a complete 94-95 3.4 DOHC swap with factory style routed exhaust, using my cars original (216,000 mile) 282 Getrag. The engine management system was on the 94-95 OBD 1.5 platform. I made some modifications to the program to enable the use of the manual transmission. The code was already there, just needed to be turned on and some values programmed in.

Heres the donor engine/car




To do a 3.4 DOHC Swap, there are a lot of things to be done.
You need to:
Build an exhaust system
Build a fuel delivery system
Build a harness
Fabricate an upper mount or an alternate method of anchoring the engine against axle torque
Clearance the decklid hinge box
Clearance the strut tower near the dogbone brace.

More later...

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 02-04-2013).]

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #2, 02-04-2013 06:02 AM
      How is that non F40 inboard tripot held in the F40?

FieroWannaBe (patond@alumni.msoe.edu) MSG #3, 02-04-2013 10:57 AM
      Doesn't the G6 passenger intermediate shaft bolt up to the 3.4DOHC?

fieroguru MSG #4, 02-04-2013 11:07 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:

How is that non F40 inboard tripot held in the F40?


Snap ring. He also pressed on a sleeve to extend the seal surface to the new location.

That is a hybrid tripod with a F40 compatible male spline section and a fiero style tripod cage welded to it.


fieroguru MSG #5, 02-04-2013 11:51 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by FieroWannaBe:

Doesn't the G6 passenger intermediate shaft bolt up to the 3.4DOHC?


It probably does, but with the hybrid tripod he has, he can use the stock fiero axle shaft and same $$$ and need fewer parts.


stickboy MSG #6, 02-04-2013 03:12 PM
     

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #7, 02-04-2013 04:37 PM
      Guru, you're on the ball! Made that cup some time ago, I just hope that with the major diameter being what it is where it is welded, that I won't have any strength issues. This engine should rather easily turn out 400+ RWHP, as all turbo 3.4 DOHC's have.

Anyway... More detail on the swap itself, keeping in mind this all happened about 6 years ago, long before I decided to turbo,

Building an exhaust system:
I chose early on to go Fiero style routing, using two front manifolds, 2.5" 409 grade stainless and a Flowmaster 80 series muffler, which everyone knows on an 88, it will not fit! It needs to be modified. I cut up and patched 3 mufflers before I finally got it right.

First attempt (yikes!)

Second attempt

Third and final attempt

Much better!
And this is its final configuration

Shown with an old muffler

after some cleaning, polishing and painting



Exhaust. Done!!

Fuel delivery:
I really dont have any pics of what I did. But simply, I scavenged the plastic fuel lines from a 4th gen firebird, and used that to run the fuel to the quick disconnects that were already on the 3.4 DOHC. I also used a 90 TTA fuel pump in the tank. Nothing special or difficult.

Wiring harness:
Again, I didn't take any pictures of this process this time. But I can say that It takes me roughly 40 hours to build a harness from the time I have the complete donor harness in hand. Much of the time is spent dissassembling the harness. I always start by stripping all the tape and split loom off, then I de-pin the ECM connectors. Next, I cut all ground and power splices out. At this point the harness just comes completely apart.

All the connectors get plugged into the engine where they are needed, then all wires get routed an taped in to eachother. All wires get shortened and lengthened as needed and the new power and ground splices are made. I reuse the bulkhead passthrough from the Fiero. That thing is a pain in the butt to dissassemble and clean! I then tape and loom the whole harness. Then it is done.

That's my process for harness building. I do need to build a completely different harness for the Turbo build, I will document that process more closely when I get there.

Fabricating an upper mount:

Many 3.4 DOHC owners know that this is risky business. I've never broken my timing cover. I am not afraid I might. I know that the reason theirs broke, is solely because their dogbone applied a strong twisting force on the lifting bracket. I designed mine to only place a straight back pushing force on the lifting bracket.

This is the raw structure piece I built.

I chose this shape because It would be low enough profile so that there would be no need, or reason to have to trim the decklid.
I welded an 1/8" plate to the top, then using a flap disk cleaned it up, and painted it. The lifting bracket itself was cut up and I welded a sectioned piece of pipe, that the bushings fit into, in place.

You can see in this picture the two main mounting points for the bushings, the one on the cam carrier is doing most of the work.

It just clears the decklid!


Clearancing the chassis for this engine:
This engine CANNOT be mounted without some minor clearancing of non-critical structure.
The decklid hinge box


The dogbone brace

Tight fit when done!


In the process of the build I also found a need to build a custom fill housing using pieces of an old 2.5L thermostat housing and the 3.4 DOHC's plate. I also discovered why it is important to use the engines original thermostat in this configuration. I had a LOT of trouble getting the Fiero style thermostat to work in this housing. It was too isolated from the engine heat to function at all.


Once all of that nonsense is done, It's time to move on to installation!
Heres the 4 sides of the engine package that got loaded into the car.





And as it was for the last 6 years:



That's pretty much it for the original swap.

Upcoming, the problems I had with the engine, and the beginning of the turbo installation!


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #8, 02-04-2013 05:44 PM
      Before I get into all the nasties about turboing this engine, It's important to know what kind of resources I have in my garage. I am working out of a 3 car garage, that doubles as a personal metal fabrication/prototyping shop. I very recently got the bulk of the large tools.

First up is my mill. It's a relatively cheap benchtop mill, Bolton Tools ZX45. Since it is not a Knee mill, the whole head is able to be raised and lowered as needed (at the expense of my arms). I have a rotary table and a mouting vice and various collets, chucks and endmills.


Second up is my Lathe. Birmingham 12X36 Geared head Gap bed lathe. It's pretty nice, still chinese built, but it seems decent quality. I got the Aloris style quick change tool post and a few other accessories. This is my favorite tool in the garage.


Next is my TIG welder. It's an OLD 1979 Miller Dialarc HF-P. It weighs as much as the mill at around 700 LBS, but it is good for 310 amps, and can weld ANYTHING. I recently found a few problems with it that once corrected made this things welds come out so much better. It's a wonderful piece of equipment! However, Since it's power requirements were so great (100A single phase 240) I decided to tack on a breaker box, with cam-lok feeds and a few auxiliary 240 volt outlets, and a few 120V outlets to the sides of the welder. This way my power comes from a slightly modified breaker box, to my welder, and that feeds power to all my large equipment. So in effect, my shop is mobile.




Slight mod to an extra panel cover



A MIG welder is a fabrication MUST HAVE. This one is a Millermatic DVI. It runs on 120 or 240. uses gas, It's rated to 150 amps, so it can weld some pretty heavy stuff. It comes in the same package as the famous Miller 250/251.


I recently came across a SMOKIN' deal on a blasting cabinet. An elderly gent offered it to me for about 1/4 its price new, and it was still very new. It is a TP Tools 960-SE This was something I've always wanted, but I never though I'd get one like this! It even came with extra glass protectors, gloves, 100 lbs of glass bead... It was a deal I could not pass on!



My girlfriend Dayna wanted to try it out!


Whatcha doin Dayna? Ohh, an Allante Intake. Nice work!


Fortunately, I already had a 60 gallon air compressor. I've always been a fan of the Craftsman compressor. My dad had one for 20 years before the compressor head finally quit. So I figured I'd get the larger unit that used that very same compressor head.

I went cheapo on this piece of great equipment, Straight to harbor freight for a belt sander. I've always needed one of these for fabricating exhaust. I do most of my pipe cutting with a Sawsall, then I flatten the cut surface with this belt sander. The fitup is perfect. I can then TIG weld without any filler in most cases. It comes out beautifully. This belt sander makes that possible.


I also have an engine hoist, an arbor press and plenty of other odds and ends. It's crowded, but capable.

Then there is my little dinky, crowded work table. Having a 3 car garage doesn't offer a heck of a lot of wall space. Especially when things like shelving, Lathes, Mills, Compressors, welders, and Blast cabinets, Jet engines... take up said precious wall space.
My dad playing with the TIG for the very first time, on my work table.


Overall, This is my garage/workshop





Oh, and Just incase anyone feels the need to ask, this is another project for another build thread in the future, but It's being worked on a little while this project is going on. So none of that rhetoric about what engine I should have put in my car. Because I'm doing THAT too.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 02-04-2013).]

fieroguru MSG #9, 02-04-2013 06:18 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Guru, you're on the ball! Made that cup some time ago, I just hope that with the major diameter being what it is where it is welded, that I won't have any strength issues. This engine should rather easily turn out 400+ RWHP, as all turbo 3.4 DOHC's have.



I remember when you made it, because I copied the idea. My LS4/F40 has a hybrid tripod for the driver side and I also had one like yours for the passenger side, but it wouldn't clear the LS4 block... so I "had" to use an intermediate shaft.

Great looking stuff so far!


joshua riedl MSG #10, 02-04-2013 08:01 PM
      Did you port match the manifold when flipping it? It blocks a good bit of the exhaust port when doing that.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #11, 02-04-2013 09:31 PM
      Can't put anything passed you guys!

This is what I did about the manifold flip:





I didn't really mension it, but I did rebuild this engine. But I've had a 97 crate engine forever that I'm going to put into service, but with the old 94 heads. I need the older heads for compression and for the flipped manifolds. I Could make a plate to adapt a flipped 96-97 front manifold, but then I'd still have 9.7:1 which is a bit much.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 02-04-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #12, 02-04-2013 10:27 PM
      The joys of a 3.4 DOHC.

The 3.4 DOHC is a hodge podge of an engine. The bottom end of the 60º the complex addition of DOHC heads that are driven by a chain and a belt. And it leaks. But on the plus side IT FLOWS. And boy does it. No other engine I have ever heard of takes to boost like this engine does. It doubles its horsepower at well under 1 bar of boost.

4 years with this engine, it ran great. Met my performance expectations time and time again. 26 MPG city (when driven like a wuss) normally 22 MPG City. 31 MPG highway with ease. But I did have some troubles. The engine had a ratteling noise, I never figured out what it was, I'm guessing its the timing chain tensioner. And it also ticked a lot when the oil was at the end of its life and I was ragging on it hard. I also needed to run 10W-30 as 5W-30 made the engine tick like crazy. Thicker oil was always better in this engine. And I chose synthetic. This may have been the single biggest mistake I made with this engine. It seems, that synthetic oil eats seals. The aluminum/silicone lined gaskets that sealed the heads to the cam carriers failed completely. I had oil coming out from everywhere. It appeared that the synthetic oil swelled the seals so much that they blew out. This is what prompted me to pull the car out of service to do the big upgrades, and I'll stay clear of the synthetic this time.

My 282 Getrag was also getting old, It had seen 247,000 miles of service, the last 30K with the 3.4 DOHC. It still works, but it tends to get a little noisy on long steep climbs at highway speeds. I figured it was time to put it to rest.


nitroheadz28 MSG #13, 02-05-2013 02:00 AM
      Very cool build sir, everything about your work looks factory

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #14, 02-05-2013 06:05 AM
      It looks really good and I envy your toy (tool) collection. As a note to others intending to do a high output turbo motor with aspirations to exceed 400 hp, I would do a 3" exhaust start to finish except for dual outlets from the muffler. I had a tremendous obstruction to exh flow that I was not aware of although I suspected a little. I have a 3" pipe from the turbo that terminates into dual 2.25" inlet baffled 4" round mufflers. I also installed an electric cutout at the junction to bypass those mufflers. With the cutout closed boost pressure reached the 7 psi wastegate setting, upon opening the cutout I discovered it was actually being limited to 7 psi as boost pressure climbed another 3 psi by 5000 rpm with the cutout open. The exhaust note is too loud to run without a muffled option. That 3.4 will run higher rpm than what I'm cammed for and I don't see it needing any less flow than what my pushrod motor needs so keep that in mind.

tesmith66 MSG #15, 02-05-2013 06:30 AM
      Wow. Didn't know about the manifold flip covering up part of the port. Now I have to pull mine apart...



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #16, 02-05-2013 09:07 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by nitroheadz28:

Very cool build sir, everything about your work looks factory


Thanks! That was the goal! Make it look like it belonged in there.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #17, 02-05-2013 09:18 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:
I had a tremendous obstruction to exh flow that I was not aware of although I suspected a little
... I don't see it needing any less flow than what my pushrod motor needs so keep that in mind.

I absolutely agree. It's something I'm a bit worried about. At this moment in time my intention is to go 3" from the turbo outlet, throuh a 3" stock located catalytic converter, to the very same muffler I have been running all along, with the dual 2.25" outlet pipes. But I'm concerned about the muffler's ability to handle all that airflow, then the 2.25" outlet pipes ability to do the same. This engine already runs 2.25" straight out of the manifolds! My other condsideration, is that 100% of the exaust gets crammed to about a 1.25" circle within the turbo before it starts to funnel into the turbine itself. After that, a 3" outlet is like a playground. I bet that the catalytic converter itself is a bigger restriction then the muffler. But for the reason of sanity, I'm going to have a V-band flange connecting the muffler, so I can change it out later if I need to. Or, test without!


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #18, 02-05-2013 10:46 AM
      Right after Thanksgiving this year, I got my car through inspection, and registered for another year of service, drove it home then the engine came out. I remember the engine being a lot cleaner when it went in, but I'm not overly concerned about that at this juncture.
Now for the fun stuff. Where do I put the turbo?

I thought long and hard about turbo placement. Since I wanted the exhaust to go forward first to a stock location cat, I knew that I would most likely have to go with something like this:


This is where the test fitting trials began. Right away I started by removing the old crossover tube, coolant neck, water bypass and fuel lines. This bought me some room to play with fitment, knowing that every thing I removed for test fitting will later need to be modified to work around the turbo system.

Next, I unbolted the 282 Getrag, and permanantly retired it from its very long life as my Fiero transmission. Perhaps It'll get a little rebuild and live on? I think it will! But I am done with 282's. I've moved on.

I removed the clutch, which much to my surpise was in absolutely perfect condition. The original machining on the fywheel, and pressure plate appeared untouched by the clutch for 30,000 miles. The clutch disk itself also was in this rather miraculous exactly as it was when I installed it condition. There was practically no dust in the bellhousing. Nice and clean. I can't say enough how pleased I was with this Clutchnet Kevlar Sprung disk. I highly reccomend this clutch!!!

I bolted up the F40 to the engine to see how I would do the shifter cables, and how that was going to effect my turbo placement and immediatly got to fabricating...



For shifter cables, I chose to use the one stock Select Cable like everyone else, and for the shift cable I had California Push-Pull make me the very same cable people have been getting for the F23 swap. This is my now, not so secret weapon!

For these brackets, I used some 1/8" X 2" flat stock, and a piece of 1/8" plate cut and drilled to match the bolt pattern around the shift mechanism. I made 3, 5/8" spacers to raise the plate up a little to clear a few things. Just some quick tack welds to start. I'll finish the welds much later.

I knew that since the turbo will go directly above the shift cables, that I wanted to make the shift cable bracket double as a turbo support, so I made the plate extra big in case I wanted to weld something to it later.

When I'm fabricating things, I always like to take stock on what are the Knowns, and the Unknowns. This way, I can keep working on the Knowns. And think about the Unknowns as I go, or put them off completely untill all the knowns are completed. I KNOW Im going to use an F40 Transmission. I KNOW that the shifter cables need to go where they have to. I also know that the turbo will be above the transmission. So this dictated what my work priorities were. It never makes sense to dive right into the unknowns, when you havn't even factored all the knowns in yet. You'll get yourself stuck when you realize... Oh, crap, this had to go here! And that there is no avoiding it, and that might mean starting from scratch.

So once the Shift cable bracket was completed, it was time to load the engine and transmission into the car for a test fit. A few things that I was looking for:
1. Will the transmission fit in the car with the engine placement as it was with the getrag?
2. Do I need to change the engine location?
3. Does the new shifter cable bracket interfere with anything?
4. Will the turbo fit at all?
5. What about the inevetible addition of an intercooler?
6. How will I plumb this nightmare?

Test fit.

Ok so this is roughly where the turbo will need to go. It looks like fitment isn't too bad!

I had a box of 2.5" charge pipe bends that I accidentally ordered a few years ago for a project, (that required 3" pipes) and I kept them knowing that I would most likely need them for my Fiero. I immediatly realized that the turbo compressor outlet could never face straight up, or route rearwards without hitting the strut tower and the decklid. I found that the U bend, with a 90 degree silicone coupler was the magic trick I was looking for to get the compressed air towards someplace useful, It curved right around the shift cables, and down through that spot just above the main frame rail, at the bottom of the strut tower. like this:



The other discovery was that I had to do a hard 90 out of the throttle body to avoid the decklid and run over the top of the air filter, then downwards by the trunk. My plumbing plan was starting to take some shape.

Sure, why not, that looks like a good spot. Easy acces to manifold vacuum too!



So with this picture, I found that I would need to make a sharp, over 90 bend to clear the firewall. I ordered a couple stainless 3" 180's and a super tight 90.

For me, cutting the trunk wasn't going to be an option I would entertain for this project. I figured I'd find a way to avoid that. So Now that I had my ideas on plumbing, I needed to find an appropriate intercooler. Naturally with the mid engine design, and the space requirements, I gravitated towards a Water to Air type. And the best placement I could find for it... Between the passenger side axle, and the cradle. I'll need to do some obvious heat shielding with this arrangement. But I think it'll work great!



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #19, 02-06-2013 04:42 PM
      Once I had the exact tubo location figured out in that test fit, I pulled the engine back out and made a bracket to support the turbo in that spot. I added it to the shift cable bracket.

You can see that clearly the head to cam carrier gasket was leaking in this picture too.


This is the intercooler I wound up getting in a package deal with a pump and a front mount heat exchanger.


I spent a lot of time trying out various mounting positions for it.



In the end I found that it was just a little too thick to fit between the axle and the sway bar and with fittings, just a little too long to fit between the alternator and the transmission. So I picked up a smaller version of that intercooler.


The engine went back in again this time to play with the new intercooler and to build the down pipe. I started by welding the tight 90 to the V band flange, then welded a second piece to it to make it go slightly past 90 degrees. I needed it to clear the AC lines and the heat shield. Then a third piece to correct to the nearly straight down Looks like I hit the nail on the head with this pipe.


Love my TIG welder.


Engine back out


Still working on how to do the intercooler



Hudini (hudini@tds.net) MSG #20, 02-06-2013 09:56 PM
      Great build. Watching it closely. Have you tried placing the intercooler in place of the 180* bend after the compressor? That's where mine fit the best.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #21, 02-07-2013 12:06 AM
      Thanks!
The shifter cables would have interfered with the intercooler I'm pretty sure. As it is they go right through the 180.


ericjon262 MSG #22, 02-07-2013 12:13 AM
      I'm liking your build so far! Turbo 60* FTW!



fieroguru MSG #23, 02-07-2013 06:40 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Thanks!
The shifter cables would have interfered with the intercooler I'm pretty sure. As it is they go right through the 180.


You might try mounting the intercooler along the frame rail on the front side of the transmission with the inlet/outlet pointing up.


I have slightly more room there due to my engine/transmission placement being further to the rear (needed for idler/firewall clearance on the LS4), but there is still quite a bit of space there and it would be further away from some heat sources.


If you get creative, you could probably mount it in front of the wheel well on the driver side and route the charge pipes through the fuel fill opening in the side panel.


fieroguru MSG #24, 02-07-2013 02:02 PM
      Another option if you want to do some more fabrication... shorten the intake runners on the upper intake and then take the intercooler and cut off the outlet housing/taper. Add a 2"- 4" open plenum between the intercooler core and the start of the intake manifold runners and then weld it all up. The throttle body would need to be on the inlet of the intercooler, but the volume between it and the ports would be very close to stock.

Here is a shortened intake, just needs the intercooler housing welded off the backside of it (covering the valve covers):


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #25, 02-07-2013 04:21 PM
      That thought did cross my mind, about an intergrated upper intake manifold/intercooler. I have a 96-97 intake that I could have modified to do that with. Maybe I'll still make something to that effect later on.

Either way, I started welding up my charge pipes last week. And heres the result:
Post intercooler pipe welded


Pre intercooler pipe welded


The Blow Off Valve added


Honestly, I was a bit out of practice with aluminum, towards the end they started looking like I knew what I was doing


As far as I'm concerned, the Intercooler is done. My only remaining tasks with it are to mount it properly, and build what I need to insulate it from the radiant heat of the exhaust. Header wrap, foil lined glass heat tape, and some metal shielding will be my weapons of choice. I've had really good luck with these in the past.

One thing I really like about the AWIC's is that you can cool the core by running the pump and a fan on the front mount. So a little heat from the exhaust isn't going to bother me much.

Next on the list, Transmission mounts!

Previously, I was using Rodney Dickman poly transmission mounts, and his brackets with my old Getrag 282. I am also using his poly engine mount as well. I'm keeping my original dogbone setup, and Rodneys engine mount. For the transmission, The rear mount is going to keep his poly setup, with a custom bracket between the transmission and the mount. This is what I came up with:






I made it out of 1/8" steel, it took 6 pieces to make it. It's actually pretty light and very strong. I'm not to worried about this piece!

Then For the front mount, I found that Rodney's mount wasn't compatible with the transmission, there was some interference between the mount and the bosses on the front of the transmission. There was a pretty simple solution to this problem. I removed the polyeurathane mount from the bracket and bolted it straight to the cradle using the factory holes. It's on a little bit of a diagonal, but who cares. Next I fabbed another bracket. For as simple as it looks, its actually as complicated then the rear bracket was, and used 6 pieces of steel as well. Mostly because the bosses on the transmission weren't faced off on the same plane.




One thing I had a problem with in the past, is cracked cradles. The front mount has a tendancy to tear the cradle at the bolt holes. I modified the cradle when I first did the 3.4 DOHC swap to remedy this issue. This is what I did then:

That should be plenty sufficient still.

There is an interference between the cradle and the F40 transmission where I needed it to be located. The factory position for the engine to the best of my knowlege places the centerline of the crankshaft 9" above th bottom of the cradle, and 19" from centerline to the rear cradle mounting holes. The interference was located here:

This is looking from the drivers side wheel well at the front transmission mount.

With the rear mount in place the transmission was resting in the front on this interference, which is actually about 1/8" above the intended location of the engine and transmission. So some minor clearancing will be needed. I could cut the part off of the transmission, but instead, I will modify the cradle.

And with the transmission mounts done, it is time for yet another test fit.

Ok, so this picture makes me a bit giggly.

Bit closer then I intended it to be, but still perfectly fine.


Clears the cradle by 3/8" or so


Clears the frame rail by 1/4" or so



At this point. We are at where this project is at present day. So I'm going to head back to the garage and remove the cradle yet again.

I'm currenly waiting on the various 90's of pipe and other stuff to build the turbo crossover from. I have nothing else to do till those show up.





Silicoan86 (jcoan86@yahoo.com) MSG #26, 02-07-2013 10:55 PM
      Fantastic build! I'm really enjoying reading this thread.

I'm surprised that you are still using the 91-95 style intake manifold though, the newer style really flows a lot better. Was it a space concern? Of course, as fieroguru mentioned, you would probably benefit greatly from a custom short runner manifold with this build.

[This message has been edited by Silicoan86 (edited 02-07-2013).]

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #27, 02-08-2013 05:44 AM
      From experience, clamp your vacuum tube fittings that are subject to boost pressure, the tube to my wastegate came off a couple times but fortunately I didn't over boost the motor. Consider your vent tube size from the valve covers, they were not optimized for boost and can be improved on. If you intend to run double digit boost numbers crank case pressure can build faster than it can be relieved through the stock PCV tubes and at some point lead to seal leaks (a very common character with boosted motors) not to mention possibly force oil into the turbine housing. It will also cause the oil to get dirty quicker.

Not sure what your plans are for oil cooling but one of the best options out there is the sandwich oil cooler found on some VW motors and more appropriately the one I have that comes on some of the 3900 motors. It uses a nipple fitting in place of the block drain plug for coolant flow and a return "T" into a heater hose. I didn't realize it initially but engine oil comes off of the bearings hotter than coolant and at operating temps IS hotter than coolant so you can regulate it with your engine temps and keep it cool and near its most effective viscous range instead of wide temp swings associated with an external cooler. I don't have mine installed yet and my oil temp gauge shows highs of around 240 deg after running the car a little hard with 185 deg coolant temps.

That's a very nice looking turbo so whatever you can do to avoid ever having to take it down to work on it is worth it.

I use the same interlocking GM poly mounts picked up from AZ and at the moment do not use a torque strut so they hold pretty dogone good although a torque strut should be installed for better stability. I didn't reinforce the front cradle mount but had to reinforce the rear cradle mount pad area because it sees the most stress under load and mine actually cracked.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 02-08-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #28, 02-08-2013 05:50 AM
      I have a complete 96-97 Intake manifold set. But for a bunch of reasons I decided against swapping it over.

My main reason is that I really don't care about what my peak HP is, I want a very broad range of high torque levels, something that resembles a superchargers behavior. We can all agree that the more low end torque an engine can produce naturally aspirated, the faster it will spool a turbo. Short runner intakes, or fatter runner intakes have a distinct disadvantage in this field, but make up for it with a more peaky powerband. I want this thing to spool up extremely quick. I probably went one size higher then I needed on the turbo though. That's why I chose to keep the 91-95 intake.

The other reason was that It is far less work to leave it as is.

Not sure when my Xover tubing will show up, so I'm going to look into other things to work on in the mean time.

A little glimpse into what I'm doing with engine management.
I plan on wiring this engine as a Turbo Grand Prix Using a 1227730 ECM. I have somewhat lofty goals for the programming, but after some of the software I have written for these and other ECMs and had working beautifully, I've built up a lot of confidence in my ability to program. Unfortunately, moreso then my ability to actually tune one.

I will be running 3 IAT's, 1 for Ambient temperature, 1 pre intercooler, 1 post intercooler.
I will also have the ECM controlling the intercooler pump and as well as its native cooling fan control. Have the two work together.
Because of the multiple IAT's, I will be able to log the performance of the intercooler.
I also have a Wide band setup, which will also be running to the ECM for logging purposes.
The ECM needs to be tuned and programmed for:
Manual transmission
Siemens Deka 60lbh injectors
Boost control beyond a few PSI
Modified output (ALDL) Logging
Intercooler control
Expanded input usage for the IAT's
3.4 DOHC flow characteristics

Not sure If I missed anything.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #29, 02-08-2013 06:06 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:

From experience, clamp your vacuum tube fittings that are subject to boost pressure...

If you intend to run double digit boost numbers crank case pressure can build faster....

Not sure what your plans are for oil cooling...

rear cradle mount pad area... cracked.



All very good points. I have planned to make my vacuum tubing of stainless, its prettier, and tougher. And I absolutely plan on clamping every connection. There is no excuse for hoses popping off!

I haven't really looked into what it will take to vent this motor correctly, but for sure I will have to do something about this.

I haven't addressed oil cooling yet, but I do have an external oil filter kit I might use. Some of the older 3.4 DOHC's came with a built in oil cooler that the filter mounted to. Apparently some other models have it too if you can find it. I'll have to remember to look for this the next time im in the U-Pull-It.

I agree, the rear pad should see a lot of engine stress! it is closest to the axle of all the mounts, so it see's the greatest forces. I've even crushed the rear mount on a getrag once from one hard launch. I should do something to reinforce it before I finish this project.

Thanks for the suggestions and the compliment!


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #30, 02-08-2013 12:59 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:

Not sure what your plans are for oil cooling but one of the best options out there is the sandwich oil cooler


Many TDC's had a sandwhich cooler installed from the factory on the oil filter boss.

Edit:
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Some of the older 3.4 DOHC's came with a built in oil cooler that the filter mounted to.


Ditto

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 02-08-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #31, 02-09-2013 07:23 AM
      After a quick session cleaning the garage, I got back to the business of once again, removing the cradle.

Since I am still waiting on plumbing, which should be here early next week, I wanted to investigate the Garrett GT3582R, turbo theory, cradle clearancing that I need to do, and the serious oil leak problem I had on this 3.4 DOHC.

A close look at the GT3582R turbo in all its glory


First lets look at the compressor


This particular turbo is fitted with an anti-surge housing. An anti-surge housing typically has a pocketed inlet, or if its aftermarket, it'll have a bunch of holes drilled radially around the inside of the inlet.

On the inside of the housing, you can see a slit all the way around the inlet hole. This slit intersects the pocketed section on the otherside of the inlet. When a turbochargers output pressure is more then its impellers speed can sustain, the normal pattern of airflow starts to break down as the pressure tries to escape out the inlet. The idea behind an anti surge housing, is to allow the unsettled air partway through the impeller a little space to escape back to the low pressure of the inlet, before it disturbes the flow of the air at the very entrance of the impeller. If this weren't there, in certain conditions the boost would full on blow right out of the inlet. This is known as compressor surge (or in jet engines, compressor stall). This condition suddenly causes the compressor impeller to drop a great deal of speed, as the load the air places on it multiplies. This damages the turbo. It can even cause the nut holding the compressor impeller to tighten till the shaft snaps off, if subjected to this abuse regularly. My swap shouldn't have this problem as the boost levels will be fairly tame compared to this turbo's max output.


Now lets look at the turbine housing,
This TIAL cast stainless steel housing is really pretty. It was totally overkill, I didn't need to get it, but once I sold the original housing, it wasn't all that expensive. Being all V-Band, and having housings of multiple A/R values, I figured, if I hate the way it spools, I can swap it out for a differen A/R value in only a few minutes, with no gaskets.


Heres a neat picture, this is the inlet of the turbine housing, showing the shape it chages to once it enters the turbine housing. And, looking at it, you can see how the cross sectional area is ever decreasing as it goes into the turbo. This is the basis of the term A/R, or Area/Radius ratio. Best explained, As the hot gasses enter the turbo, the cross sectional area decreases at the same time that that area gets closer to the centerline of the turbine wheel itself. The size of the area, and the distance from the center of the turbine (Radius) are in a fixed ratio. The A/R ratio. This ratio basically determines how aggressivly the gasses are shoved into the turbine. A low A/R tends to spool faster, but is less efficient. A larger A/R tends to be more efficient, and produces great horsepower numbers, at the expense of turbo lag. This is also a great way to tune a turbo for the displacement of the engine it is on. There were 3 A/R options, .63, .82, 1.06. I chose the middle option, the .82. The .63 would have been a bit like a cork for a 3.4L DOHC engine's exhaust, but would be perfectly happy on a lower displacement 2-3L 4 banger. 1.06 would be good for my engine, but I'd rather have it spool faster, as I don't intend to use all of this turbos 600hp flow potential anyway. I'd actually consider the .63 housing before the 1.06.


The CHRA unit
CHRA, or Center Housing Rotating Assembly. This particular turbo, and all Garrett GT-R series turbos are full ball bearing turbos. The spool much faster as there is little friction to overcome compared to hydrostatic bearings. The downside is that they are very expensive, and cannot be rebuilt by the novice, at least until recently.
You can see the AN-4 oil feed, and the oil drain, as well as a water passage hole. The oil inlet does contain a small oriface restrictor. Feeding oil at 40-60 PSI unresticted has a tendancy to overflow the turbo bearings, causing it to smoke, and spool slower. The oil outlet is a 1/2" NPT pipe screwed into a two bolt flange with an AN-8 Flare fitting.

You can also see the difference in size between the compressor wheel and the turbine wheel. This is definitely a high flow compressor!


The Turbine wheel
This part is typically made from Inconel, which is a high nickel super-alloy, similar to stainless steel. This metal is suitable for extreme temperatures, and is as non reactive as stainless steel. I've seen many turbochargers turbine's before, but this is the first one I have ever seen that carried blades this thin. Clearly this was done for weight reasons, which again helps greatly with spool. The blades are at a glance, about as thick as a business card.


Turbo's always need to be mounted in such a way that the oil drain is straight down, you can see the water lines attached, and some more of the bracket that will support the turbos weight.


My engine developed a pretty bad leak here:

the gasket actually ruptured out from between the head and the cam carrier, so there was constantly oil dripping onto the exhaust manifold and the catalytic converter, the engine bay smoked constantly, and it stunk pretty bad. This was the main reason the engine had to be pulled out in the first place.

This is how I get my engine in and out:


And one more shot of the interference on the F40 transmission with the cradle before I cut it out.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #32, 02-13-2013 05:39 AM
      Updates!

This morning while I was waiting for pipes, I decided to finalize the shifter cable bracket/turbo support.
As I had left it, it was a few bits of steel just tack welded together, sharp edges, overhang... all that good prototyping nonsence! Looked something like this:


Removed


First step, Weld it up



Then, Round off edges, cut off excess metal, and sand blast


Then I decided to add a couple of extra reinforcements


Weld those in nicely


Some more sand blasting, then install.


Once that was done, My piping that I need for the crossover/turbo manifold showed up!
The large 90's are 2.25" 304 stainless weld joints, about 1/8" thick!
All the other parts are for the wastegate, 1.5" bend, 1.5" flex, 1.75" 90, 1.75" straight.


Preliminary layout for the wastegate


The Proposed arangement somewhat in place


With the concept for the wastegate settled, I figured it would be time to look at what I have planned for the turbo drain.
This was nice and simple, All I'm using is a 1/2" AN flare fitting on the bottom of the turbo, and a piece of 24" long 1/2" appliance gas hose. I decided this would be best because, as it is stainless, it can tolerate extreme temperatures, (that it should never encounter!) It acts as a coalescent for misting oil, and since it is thin, and has a bunch of surface area, the oil inside it will self cool. Hopefully it'll do as I think it will. It wasn't difficult to find that ideal mostly downward position for it. Don't know If I'm the first to do this, but I think its a great idea!



I just got started on building the Crossover manifold.
There is going to need to be a collector just before the turbo, where I merge both 2.25" pipes into the single 2.25" inlet of the turbo. So what I'm going to do, is to run both exhaust pipes straight to the turbo one at a time, and mark their orientation on the turbo inlet flange, then I will draw a 50/50 center line across the two orientation marks, and cut the two individual pipes on that axis. If I get it right, then they will form a perfect collector. I will also have to cut a hole in the top of the collector for the 1.75" wastegate pipe that will point straight up. I'll post pics of this process.

So far, I did some trimming the two bends that I will be using for the front exhaust bank, and got a perfect fit for them. Hopefully tomorrow I will get some welding action on these pipes. There is not going to be any flex joint on this connection, just due to space reasons. The turbo bracket itself is flexible enough to accomodate the heat expansion that will certainly occur, and there will be a flex joint on the rear bank, down pipe, and wastegate. That should be sufficient.


Thats all I got for you folks tonight, Thanks for watching!



Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #33, 02-13-2013 06:14 AM
      I made my shift cable bracket at the tranny adjustable and recall some remarks in descent about doing so, I believe flexibility even where it is not foreseen is important, GM included some adjustability with the originals. Many of the F40 transmissions are very difficult to impossible to shift into the lower gears in cold weather below 60 deg and often times I've had to start the car with the tranny in gear otherwise I would have to shut the engine off to do so until the tranny gets warmed up from use.

The potential problem with that is some times impatience sets in and you can start to force the gears stressing the shift cables. Light duty cables (Advance, Autozone, etc) will not hold up and even the good ones can start to show some fatigue as mine have a little, or the bracket may have bent a little. It still shifts fine when warm but cold initial shifts sometimes fall short of being fully engaged now which I can adjust for. You may want to consider at least a custom gear shift cable thicker than what's currently available for more firmness in shifts. I know Rodney makes a good cable, I purchased mine from the Fiero store and although not the same to my knowledge, they look exactly like the ones he makes regarding quality and are much better than what the local parts stores provide. It doesn't look like you'll have much room to work in that area once it's in the car so keep that in mind.

Disregard, I see now you have a cable source should it become a problem.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 02-13-2013).]

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #34, 02-13-2013 06:29 AM
      1/2" drain back from the turbo is cutting it very close, especially since it is angled which will reduce the flow rate from the turbo, you should have at least 5/8" to be on the safe side as oil comes through really quick after it heats up. If it's a ball bearing unit okay, but the coolant jacket tells me it's not. I'm speaking from having backed oil up into the turbine housing on a number of occasions. You don't want to restrict oil flow into the turbo unless you have to due to high pressure, not restrictive drain back.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #35, 02-13-2013 09:30 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:

The potential problem with that is some times impatience sets in and you can start to force the gears stressing the shift cables.


You're using two of what were originally designed as select cables, right? The cables designed to be shift cables are significantly more robust than the select cables.

 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:
If it's a ball bearing unit okay, but the coolant jacket tells me it's not.


It is a ball bearing turbo. I thought that the BB center sections needed cooling jackets more than the journal bearing centers.



Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #36, 02-13-2013 09:38 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
Once that was done, My piping that I need for the crossover/turbo manifold showed up!
The large 90's are 2.25" 304 stainless weld joints, about 1/8" thick!
All the other parts are for the wastegate, 1.5" bend, 1.5" flex, 1.75" 90, 1.75" straight.




Weld El's rock. It's good that you're going that thick for the hot side piping. I went with 11 ga mandrel bends for the primaries on my Northstar manifold... and it's not even turbo. A friend had a custom manifold made for his turbo MR2 Spyder a few years back using SS Weld El's.







Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #37, 02-13-2013 09:44 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Will:
It is a ball bearing turbo. I thought that the BB center sections needed cooling jackets more than the journal bearing centers.


I'll have to check into the cables again as the thicker OE cables I had could not be used due to the larger cup size.

I remember reading differently about the ball bearing turbos due to reduced friction which also permits much less oil flow. I've seen them with both though and didn't see where he mentioned it was BB.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #38, 02-13-2013 11:59 AM
      The oil inlet on this turbo has an oriface restrictor that is only .035" in diameter, the oil flow required is very low on this turbo. The drain hole on the bottom of the turbo is actually pretty tiny too, I think the 1/2" drain line isn't going to give me any grief. If it does, I'll source out some 5/8" line.

The one thing that sucks about the crossover manifold, is that although I have the 11ga weld el's, I still have to run the thin material at the manifolds, as they flare out on the manifold. It will be the most likely to crack where the two thicknesses are welded together. I wanted to use the weld el's due to there fairly tight radii that they have. Those buggers eat sawzall blades though!


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #39, 02-13-2013 12:38 PM
      I use 18 TPI blades and a cheap lubricant to keep the blade cool.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 02-13-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #40, 02-14-2013 06:31 AM
      Some more progress!

I did some welding on the front bank crossover tube, I first started by putting the pipes in place and making a couple of alignment marks with a sharpie, then I remove the pipes and clamped the two together on my work table do a couple of light tack welds, and then do the full weld once I removed all the clamps. Here it is just before I tack welded it.


Traditionally, when you are tig welding stainless pipes together, you have to do what is known as a back purge. Essentially, you fill and run some of your shielding gas (argon) into the inside of the pipe, so that the oxygen in the atmosphere doesn't react with the metal on the inside of the pipe opposite the weld zone. This wastes a whole lot of shielding gas.

A friend of mine turned me on to this product called Solar Flux "type B".


This stuff is basically a super fine powder, that when mixed with methyl alcohol (I use HEET, from autozone) forms a paste. I apply the paste to the inside of the two pieces I'm about to tig together, then weld away. The heat of the weld causes the Solar Flux to turn into a hard glass like shell that insulates the back of the weld joint from oxygen, saving me a bunch of argon. Pretty neat product!

However, I've also read that it should not be used in a turbo manifold as the glass like substance it leaves behind could flake off and damage the turbo's turbine blades. But, I use the sand blaster on the inside of the joints, removing any and all traces of the solar flux. So this process leaves pretty clean welds, and no residue.

I am, by no means an expert welder. I am far too under practiced to be considered anything other then amature. But still, I enjoy the challenges of fabrication. So take any welding advice I give with a grain of aluminum oxide.

After that weld was done, I put the pipe inplace and had to do a couple of in situ tack welds to join the new pipe to the flange piece mounted to the manifold. Here I am about to do just that.


After the tack weld, final weld and some more sand blasting



I had a little extra time this morning and managed to get started on the rear bank tube. I welded the two joints as needed, and started fitting them into place.


The next challenge, now that I have the two pipes that need to join together at the turbo flange, I need to figure out exactly where to cut them to form a nice clean collector. This is actually pretty tough to do. I'm going to get my hands on some form of laser to draw out the lines on the pipes. I drew out the 2 orientation marks on each of the two pipes, then transferred the 4 marks to the turbo flange. Then I drew my 50/50 mark to indicate the spot where the seam will intersect the flange. This was a good starting place for marking out the collector Y. I'll get that going tomorrow hopefully.

Things are moving right along, and with that, the end of page 1.


Squeaky (jaysonstevenson@live.com) MSG #41, 02-14-2013 12:13 PM
      Looks absolutely phenominal! I consider my DOHC swap pretty clean but your's is another caliber. I'm curious to see how it performs with the stock intake, other DOHC's I've seen have had short-runner intakes. No doubt the numbers will be impressive. Had Pontiac made the 1990 prototype an optional factory turbo on the DOHC would've been unreal!

ericjon262 MSG #42, 02-14-2013 04:53 PM
      Looks good!

I used a chop saw to make the merge for my waste gate, if your mid pipes meet on a level plane, it wouldn't be too hard, just cut at the center of the pipe, and weld. if I had done it, I would have started at the turbo and worked back to the manifolds though.





Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #43, 02-14-2013 07:28 PM
      Mine aren't on a level plane, they are rotated about 5/8". Also, since I had to cut a little on an angle for the front bank pipe, they are also slightly lopsided, thus the need for a laser drawn line. In using a cutoff wheel for the rough cuts instead of the sawzall this time because I can be very careful with that tool. The sawzall tends to wander off on the other side too much for this critical joint. The line is slightly tilted and rotated from an even plane. I'll finish the cutting and welding of that joint tomorrow I hope.

ericjon262 MSG #44, 02-14-2013 07:45 PM
      sorry, I was having a killer brain fart when I posted that, I see exactly how you're gonna do that, it'll work great!

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #45, 02-16-2013 06:49 AM
      The Crossover progresses

To do the "Y" on the crossover, I needed to draw a somewhat accurate bisection line on my two pipes that I fitted to mate to the turbo flange. So I devised a laser setup, mainly my camera tripod, and a cheap laser line unit from Home Depot. These pipes were somewhat expensive, so I wasn't taking any chances of needing a re-do.


See the lines


Then it's back to the garage for some air cutoff tool action! It took a good 10+ Minutes to actually do this cut, but I kept it shy of the line so I could surface it to specification on the belt sander.




Tack welded one of the two pipes to the flange


Then, test fit the other pipe, a little work with the belt sander, then it fit perfectly!


Full steam ahead for the welds.
Caution, Hot!


Picture showing what the inside looks like after a weld using solar flux to protect the back side of the weld.


Then, a couple minutes in the blast cabinet, not a trace left! But, you can see that the welds are a little lacking in penetration. In hindsight, It might not have been a bad idea to "V" the joint before welding. Oh well. Too late to do something about that. I got used to working with thinner metal... Still, got enough penetration to keep me from losing any sleep.




Another fit check, everything is spot on!



Next challenge, the Wastegate!

Ok, so heres what I have planned, a simple pipe welded to the Crossover's "Y" coming straight up, then a 90 towards the firewall, then the wastegate. Nice and simple!


So first I took the 1.75" piece of straight pipe, shortened it, cut it on an angle and ground the heck out of it till it fit tightly where I needed it to go.


Then weld, easy stuff.


Another shot of the inside, with the wastegate pipe in place.

Tomorrow, I'm going to drill the wastegate hole, and maybe weld in the wastegate flange, and the 90. I don't have much time to play tomorrow.
Till then...


the_bandit MSG #46, 02-16-2013 09:00 AM
      You have a great mustache! And those welds look great! Keep up the good work!

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #47, 02-16-2013 09:29 AM
      Looks show room perfect, very impressive. Stainless expands more than mild steel so there will definitely be some stress in the merge pipe to the turbo without an expansion joint. Given the way it connects to the manifolds I believe you'll be able to resolve it by getting the pipes good and hot, then backing the bolts off just enough to relieve the expansion stress and tighten them back down before it cools that way when it does there will be a net compression force pulling the manifold ends together.

Hudini (hudini@tds.net) MSG #48, 02-16-2013 11:47 AM
      It will expand and bend. Just a matter of where. Mine bent the metal holding the turbo when hot which caused leaks between the logs and crossover when it cooled back down.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #49, 02-16-2013 03:27 PM
      Expansion will not be an issue. I only have just this one pipe ridgid mounted. The turbo is bolted to a somewhat flexible mount.This pipe will push, pull or twist the turbo in any fashion it sees fit. The down pipe will have a flex, the wastegate has a flex, and there is a flex going in between the rear bank and what I have made so far. I am allowed 1 solid tube, just so long as every other connection or mount has some flex.

I got my morning off to an early start,

Wastegate feed before drilling


Wastegate hole from the turbo inlet flange, after some fancy work with a hole saw,


Then I pretty quickly got back into the welding, First I joined the wastegate flange to the elbow, then welded the elbow to the wastegate pipe from the crossover.


I welded the wastegate outlet flange directly to the flex pipe, and I'm holding the loose elbow wich I will probably have to get to tomorrow some time.


The fitment of the wastegate feed


And the crossover as it is now




Thats all I'll be able to do today. Tomorrow, I hope I will be able to do the little elbow for the wastegate outlet to the down pipe, maybe even get the rear bank tube, flex, and flare all in place. That would complete the crossover and wastegate system completely.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #50, 02-18-2013 12:07 AM
      Did a bunch of work today. First, my intention was to finish the wastegate plumming. I cut the hole in the downpipe, formed the elbow to fit it, and welded the elbow to the pipe, then to the flex tube.



All bolted up


With the wastegate system all buttoned up, I turned my focus to the rear bank exhaust pipe, this is what I came up with.

This is the flex that allows expansion of the crossover tube without cracking.

All welded up. This concludes the building of the crossover, which is probably the most difficult part about creating a turbo setup.



I put the engine back together, a bit to make sure everything is going to fit and work. I do have to grind just a little bit of material off of the lower intake manifold, No matter what I did it was going to hit the crossover pipe, there just wasn't enough room back there, I figure 1/8" of clearance is good enough, and its not an important chunk of aluminum.


In the final install, I plan on wrapping the crossover tube with some "Lava Rock" header wrap. The crossover passes the charge pipe, the air filter and the turbo compressor housing. I need that pipe to give off minimal heat to the engine compartment. I might even make a metal shield to go around the wrap, or to shield the air filter and compressor housing I'll cross that bridge when I get a bit closer to finished.

I need to rip the engine off the cradle, notch the cradle for the transmission clearance, do a little reinforcing of the rear cradle. So that's next.

To do list:
Make a mount for the intercooler
Do some small piping for the wastegate and BOV controls
Make new fuel lines that work around the turbo
Make a new water neck that works around the turbo
New 3" exhaust system
Add plumming for the intercooler water lines and pump
Wiring harness

There are a bunch more things to do... but honestly, I think the hardest part is now in the past.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 02-18-2013).]

Hudini (hudini@tds.net) MSG #51, 02-18-2013 12:32 AM
      Beautiful work. Missed the expansion joints earlier. Looks very good.

ericjon262 MSG #52, 02-18-2013 12:36 AM
      good job on the crossover, your's looks way better than mine does!

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #53, 02-19-2013 11:20 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

In the final install, I plan on wrapping the crossover tube with some "Lava Rock" header wrap. The crossover passes the charge pipe, the air filter and the turbo compressor housing. I need that pipe to give off minimal heat to the engine compartment. I might even make a metal shield to go around the wrap, or to shield the air filter and compressor housing I'll cross that bridge when I get a bit closer to finished.


I'd recommend ceramic coating inside and a metal heat shield vice the header wrap... Wrap really keeps the heat in the metal


fieroguru MSG #54, 02-19-2013 12:38 PM
      Great job on the fabrication and welding! Everything is displayed in a neat and orderly fashion.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #55, 02-19-2013 09:43 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Will:
I'd recommend ceramic coating inside and a metal heat shield vice the header wrap... Wrap really keeps the heat in the metal


I've thought a bit about ceramic coating. My fear is that if anything chips off, anything at all, it will damage the rediculously expensive turbine.

No matter what, I absolutely must keep the radiated heat to a minimum on the rear bank tube. The header wrap, with a metal shield is closest to what the factory used, except the temperatures may be quite a bit hotter in this setup, so I do have my concerns about it too.

 
quote
Originally posted by fieroguru:
Great job on the fabrication and welding! Everything is displayed in a neat and orderly fashion.


Thanks! I think we share the same love for fabrication! Might even over do it just a bit


fieroguru MSG #56, 02-20-2013 07:16 AM
      Not sure if there is room, but you may try to fit an intake tube to the turbo so the filter/air intake can be further away from any heat. The added benefit is you could do more to keep the intake tube cool (coated, wrapped, etc) without worrying about long term impact due the low temp that the tube would see. Then you could do less on the exhaust side.

Another option would be to add a few heat shields tacked to the exhaust. Something like these:



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #57, 02-27-2013 04:50 PM
      Just got back from a little vacation, a few parts are on order and on the way. I'm waiting on a catalytic converter with 3" metal substrate, some more 3" pipe, an oil feed line, some fittings, a turbo blanket, 1.25" bend pipes and a piece of metal to make a flange for a new water outlet. Hope I don't run out of argon! I've still got a LOT of welding to do!

My next focus is on cleaning the cradle, clearancing it for the transmission, Then I will do the water outlet and the remainder of the exhaust.

Getting 3" to pass between the front engine mount pad on the cradle and the oil pan is really tight. It does fit, but only just. there will be a little bit of the exhaust below the bottom of the cradle, I've resigned to this fact, but it's no big deal.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #58, 03-02-2013 07:35 AM
      OK! progress report time!

Clean cradle... Check!


Cradle notching, and filler plate


Weld the bugger in (will clean up this rather crappy weld later)


Fit check shows that the notching was a bit excessive, but extra room is better then not enough!


Once that was done, the parts to build the new water neck showed up. I purchased 2, 304 stainless16 gauge 1.25" mandrel bent 180's one with a tight 1.8" radius, the other with a loose 3.6" radius, and I got a 4X6" piece of 1/4" 304 Stainless plate.



My original intention was to have the water outlet come out and make a sharp 90 up and the long radius to go around the turbo's air inlet. This is what the outlet looked like with the turbo and air filter in place.


After some careful reconsideration of that plan I found I could squeeze the pipe in going downward and run it under the turbo towards the coolant piping on the car. Much shorter, much neater. So I made a couple of cuts, and one weld, and this was what I came up with:


And in place,


Once I had a better idea of how the pipe needed to be run, I cut another piece of pipe, this time with the long radius and welded it to the first pipe.


Next was straight on to the flange.



A little fancy work with the sawzall and the belt sander


Drill some holes


Mount it up with the thermostat in place for the fitment of the pipe


I then put the pipe in place, first with a couple of tack welds, then I removed the flange and pipe and finished the weld.


Looks pretty good!


With the Air filter in place,


This is where it is exiting seen under the turbo, in front of the transmission


That is it for the water neck for the time being. I will have to come back to it to add a bleeder (filler too?) and one support, possibly add another pipe to it to bring it closer to the under car coolant tubes.

I also recieved a couple of other goodies. I got my oil line, 36" -4AN stainless braded line, with a 90 on one end, and a straight on the other, and my turbo blanket. It'll go in something like this:


I also recieved a 3" metal substrate catalytic converter. Honestly I'm a bit dissapointed with it. It's just so dinky I don't know how well it will flow. Its 3" inlet and 3" outlet, yet its only 4" in diameter! But being that it has a super fine metal substrate, I guess it keeps the bulkiness down to a minimum? I've decided that I will V-band the inlet and outlet into place. So If I hate it, I can change it out, or hollow it out for the dyno and put a larger cat in for the street... or whatever I want to do!



tesmith66 MSG #59, 03-02-2013 07:55 AM
      Just out of curiosity... what are you going to do with the old exhaust system?



3.1 88FieroGT (ponchoracer@gmail.com) MSG #60, 03-02-2013 10:41 AM
      Very nice work you are doing... Just out of curiosity why didn't you run an divorced waste gate (meaning open to atmosphere)? Emission?

darkhorizon MSG #61, 03-02-2013 01:45 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by 3.1 88FieroGT:

Very nice work you are doing... Just out of curiosity why didn't you run an divorced waste gate (meaning open to atmosphere)? Emission?


noise and better boost control are my reasonings for it. Might be trading in some exhaust flow potential, but meh.


3.1 88FieroGT (ponchoracer@gmail.com) MSG #62, 03-02-2013 02:48 PM
      I love the sound of my dump. How does it help with boost control asking cause i'm curious.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #63, 03-02-2013 08:08 PM
      I chose to run the dump into the exhaust for three reasons. I don't like to breathe exhaust fumes, a dumping wastegate could be viewed as an exhaust bypass by a keen eyed emissions inspector. And I kinda want this car to be moderately quiet, and not totally obnoxious on power either. Really there was no great reason to do an atmospheric dump, other then a lower back pressure when the wastegate is open.

As for the old exhaust, the jury is still out on it, I had planned on re using the muffler and tail pipes, but I'm starting to waiver on the idea of doing that, it is a complete almost all stainless 3.4 dohc exhaust system... Including the crossover...


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #64, 03-03-2013 07:53 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by 3.1 88FieroGT:

I love the sound of my dump. How does it help with boost control asking cause i'm curious.


Open dump is best for all out performance since redirecting exhaust back into the mainstream disrupts flow as well as potentially affects boost, good and bad depending on what you're trying to accomplish, but ultimately the noise level would be the determinant for me. I've run both and currently run open dump just behind the inboard cv joint and because of the length and size of the dump pipe, it makes the sound heard when blowing over the opening of a jug when it opens.

The location of his wastegate would very likely allow fumes to roll back into the car if it were open dump, unless the dump pipe was unusually long and exiting near the back of the car. One thing for sure, if you don't have enough exhaust flow it will not matter much.


darkhorizon MSG #65, 03-03-2013 01:24 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by 3.1 88FieroGT:

I love the sound of my dump. How does it help with boost control asking cause i'm curious.


Physics of the main exhaust flow leaving the turbo and a proper angle of the dump tube will effectively suck exhaust out of the wastegate.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #66, 03-03-2013 01:40 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by darkhorizon:
Physics of the main exhaust flow leaving the turbo and a proper angle of the dump tube will effectively suck exhaust out of the wastegate.


I don't know dark, I don't have access to Maximum boost at the moment for all the specifics but I'd expect the velocity of the dump exhaust to be higher than the main exhaust leaving the turbo and likely to serve as the source of instead of being subject to any scavenging. The transition into the main will have an effect for sure depending on its arrangment.



DaytonTD (dacton@hotmail.com) MSG #67, 03-03-2013 02:10 PM
      Gorgeous work your doing, keep it up!

3.1 88FieroGT (ponchoracer@gmail.com) MSG #68, 03-03-2013 07:02 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by darkhorizon:


Physics of the main exhaust flow leaving the turbo and a proper angle of the dump tube will effectively suck exhaust out of the wastegate.


Still really don't see what that has to do with the Waste gate opening and closing in turn controlling boost... Either way i'd rather have as little back pressure as possible and being a younger guy my loud exhaust system doesn't bother me.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #69, 03-04-2013 04:34 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by 3.1 88FieroGT:


Still really don't see what that has to do with the Waste gate opening and closing in turn controlling boost...


It doesn't. I'm sure he means that with the lack of back pressure in the exhaust for the dump gives it more capacity to flow out the necessary gasses to keep the turbo's speed under control. This is true when you are running your wastegate on the ragged edge and you need that extra flow of an external dump.

But to that, the arguement can be made that if your exhaust adds enough back pressure to your wastegate to cause boost creep, it also adds it to the pressure at the outlet of the turbo, and that decreases boost. But if you're running into those kind of issues, your exhaust system is FAR too restrictive to begin with. That's why I'm contemplating a different muffler at the moment. I did some asking around and word on the street is that although my old Flowmaybe 80 series crossflow sounds great, it does NOT flow, and that I need to look into straight through, bullet style mufflers.

My goals aren't too lofty. Over 400, under 500. The turbo can do 600. But honestly, the engine is pretty much stock, so I think doubling the 210 from the factory, and then some is reasonable. I only plan on studding the heads down, possibly the bottom end too.

On another topic of interest at the moment. Clutch selection!
I've done quite a bit of research lately. But no matter where I turn, the waters get muddy. It seems that the clutch I want might not exist, or is so rediculously expensive that I would never consider using it.

The good news is that the F40 transmission has a common spline count and diameter, and a very common disk diameter too.
Cars that have a 1" 23 spline shaft, and around a 240mm disc...
a bunch of Fords, pickups, explorers, probes and focuses
Most Mazda's even including RX cars
a buttload of Porsche's if not all of them.
Mitsubishi's, especially the lancer evo cars

So there is no shortage of potential disc sources, and plenty of high power applications.

I really want a low inertia disc. I absolutely LOVED my clutchnet Kevlar sprung disc that was in the car with the Getrag, but it was WAY to heavy. I could tell that the synchros were struggling with every shift, and with the high RPM 3.4 DOHC, it was taking its toll.
After 30,000 miles with the 3.4 DOHC, this is what came out, note the minimal dust.


unbelieveably, this is what the pressure plate surface looked like!


You can see that the original machining is fully intact.

The flywheel looked the same, and there was virtually no wear of the clutch material itself. It also held quite well, only once it broke in.

very little dust in the bellhousing and on the pressure plate too!


So for the most part I was VERY pleased with this clutch disc, and I plan on installing it on my 3800/F23 with a stiffer pressure plate. But that's a story for another thread.

I really took an interest in the Porsche disc's They so clearly have minimal inertia.


However, I don't like the idea of using an undampened clutch disc. They can beat a transmission, or drive line to death. Every engine crankshaft pulse needs to be absorbed at the clutch, using a dual mass flywheel works, or a dampened disc. I plan on making a custom flywheel, using a SPEC high clamp pressure plate. But what disc??? Anyone have any ideas?


sleevePAPA MSG #70, 03-04-2013 04:48 AM
      I have the clutchnet 6 puc disc and found that it performs very well, with minimum chatter. its the sprung hub though. thats about as aggressive as Id want to go to keep it streetable.

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #71, 03-04-2013 05:58 AM
      There is an aftermarket flywheel available in aluminum that supports the stock G6 clutch and pressure plate. I had the stock pressure plate checked and it produces 2000 lbs of clamping force so I highly doubt you need to place any focus on that given it is as high or higher in clamping force than most of your aftermarket performance pressure plates for the typical run of lesser trannies for the 60 degree motor. You should look into a disc better than stock though.

I use a Kevlar disc based on the stock G6 hub which I don't recommend now because of minimal damping ability. The picture below is of my options at the time I had it made and I went with the circular arrangement seen below over the puck. My flywheel is a modified unit from the F-body with a stock already HD pressure plate relative to the OE Fiero plate at the time it was produced, that was modified to produce about 2300 lbs of clamping force. Stock was somewhere around 1600 lbs of clamp force I believe.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 03-04-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #72, 03-04-2013 07:08 AM
      I have a 2.8/3.4 camaro flywheel. So I have a pretty good idea what I am going to do with that... I have a lathe too, and I am not afraid to use it!

Maybe I will have a custom clutch made. Ideally I would like to get the disc's weight down a bit. I hate heavy discs. Maybe that 4 puck is the trick I need

Edit: 240mm diameter, 23 spline X1", very light weight... $119. Could be as good as it gets? Might be a bit harsh though.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 03-04-2013).]

Slowbuild MSG #73, 03-04-2013 11:48 AM
      Really nice.

It's been mentined, and I don't know if you adressed it or not, but having your air filter so close to the manifold will probably destroy it. It gets HOT in there. Glowing hot.

The wastegate may survive so close to the hot side of the turbo, but it may also self destruct, or worse, start sticking. sticking closed would be bad. If you have room, I'd extend it away from the turbo, or use a turbo blanket/shield of some kind.

I can only wish my welds were that good!!!

EDIT:

I see that you are using a turbo blanket. Very good. I'm still concerned for your air filter though.

For my knowledge (I have a 3.4 DOHC sitting in a box in my basement), where do the F23 control cables hook in? For the Muncie 4speed, those cables are why I couldn't locate my turbo there..too much heat for the cables. Forgive me if this is a dumb question..I know nothing about the F23).


Chay

[This message has been edited by Slowbuild (edited 03-04-2013).]

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #74, 03-04-2013 11:58 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Slowbuild:
The wastegate may survive so close to the hot side of the turbo, but it may also self destruct, or worse, start sticking. sticking closed would be bad. If you have room, I'd extend it away from the turbo, or use a turbo blanket/shield of some kind.

I can only wish my welds were that good!!!
Chay


That's the kind of thing you worry about with Ebay special wastegates, name brand shouldn't be a problem not to mention that a street driven vehicle is not likely to encounter the kind of extremes that cause that kind of threat to the wastegate. The one example I saw of an aftermarket wastegate sticking was in an unscientific, impractical unrealistic setting where it was heated to glowing hot temps and opened and closed continuously until it stuck which took several minutes and far longer than any street driven vehicle would come near matching.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #75, 03-04-2013 10:45 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Slowbuild:

Really nice.

It's been mentined, and I don't know if you adressed it or not, but having your air filter so close to the manifold will probably destroy it. It gets HOT in there. Glowing hot.

The wastegate may survive so close to the hot side of the turbo, but it may also self destruct, or worse, start sticking. sticking closed would be bad. If you have room, I'd extend it away from the turbo, or use a turbo blanket/shield of some kind.

I can only wish my welds were that good!!!

EDIT:

I see that you are using a turbo blanket. Very good. I'm still concerned for your air filter though.

For my knowledge (I have a 3.4 DOHC sitting in a box in my basement), where do the F23 control cables hook in? For the Muncie 4speed, those cables are why I couldn't locate my turbo there..too much heat for the cables. Forgive me if this is a dumb question..I know nothing about the F23).


Chay



The pipe will be covered and insulated. The crossover is not as close as it appears in one of the pics above. I will address all of that heat shielding and insulating towards the end of the build.

Thanks for the compliment on the welds, I am getting better at it all the time. A the end of the day it is A LOT of stainless welds!

What Joseph Upson said is absoutely true. A nameless or cheap knockoff wastegate might be questionable. But this is a TIAL, it is their latest and greatest model. the MV-S which they run all day long glowing red hot without issue in tests. It is even water cooled, which they said is not necessary for my application, but I'm going to hook it up anyway.

Anyway... Today's progress report.

I started this morning with a run to the Pic-a-part, looking for a factory oil cooler, and much to my surprise I found a 91-93 LQ1, with the oil cooler! I yanked all related items to convert my engine over.


Cleaned the parts up a bit.

The water feed actually comes from a brass fitting screwed into the coolant drain plug in the block.
The water neck has a few spots where the aluminum was completely rotted through. But I have to use this water neck it has the return from the oil cooler. The 94-97 engines don't have the port, maybe I can fix it with epoxy, or TIG it.



Next I began tackling the 3" part of the exhaust. I started with this 180, I cut it at 45 degrees to form the question mark shaped pipe that the Fiero's stock exhaust system has.



Tried a fit up, found I needed to add a 1.75" long straight to the sections to make it fit nicely.


Welded up


Then, I welded the V-band flanges to the catalytic converter, and started doing some more fitup.


At this point, I'm calling it a night, perhaps tomorrow morning I'll get the remainder of the exhaust from the downpipe to the cat finished. We'll see how that goes...


sleevePAPA MSG #76, 03-04-2013 11:53 PM
      there was a guy chasing me around trying to sell me a burrito when I was at the pic a part today LMAO

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #77, 03-05-2013 11:23 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
However, I don't like the idea of using an undampened clutch disc. They can beat a transmission, or drive line to death. Every engine crankshaft pulse needs to be absorbed at the clutch, using a dual mass flywheel works, or a dampened disc. I plan on making a custom flywheel, using a SPEC high clamp pressure plate. But what disc??? Anyone have any ideas?


Sprung hub clutch disks and dual mass flywheels ONLY reduce gear rattle in the transmission.
They are for noise reduction ONLY. End of discussion.
(Except in the case that the secondary mass of a dual mass flywheel actually slips from the torque, but that's not a normal mode of function).

Think about it... How stiff would those springs have to be to prevent engine torque from simply compressing them into coil bind and making a solid connection?
When my Northstar destroyed its first Centerforce and I sent the disk back, the tech who looked at it noted that the travel stops in the hub were beaten flat... So obviously the springs in that hub had nothing to do with cushioning engine torque.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #78, 03-05-2013 12:09 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Will:


Sprung hub clutch disks and dual mass flywheels ONLY reduce gear rattle in the transmission.
They are for noise reduction ONLY. End of discussion.
(Except in the case that the secondary mass of a dual mass flywheel actually slips from the torque, but that's not a normal mode of function).

Think about it... How stiff would those springs have to be to prevent engine torque from simply compressing them into coil bind and making a solid connection?
When my Northstar destroyed its first Centerforce and I sent the disk back, the tech who looked at it noted that the travel stops in the hub were beaten flat... So obviously the springs in that hub had nothing to do with cushioning engine torque.



I have to disagree for two reasons Will, first the dualmass flywheel for the F40 does not use springs, or springs only, as I tampered with one of the OE flywheels short of disassembling it and some type of grease came out of it. Second, within the design parameters of the stock dualmass application the flywheel may offer shock protection in the same manner that smooth clutch engagement as opposed to a clutch pedal slipping dump does. It definitely quiets the tranny down but I do not believe that is its sole purpose as it should be capable of damping the firing pulses in the same manner that the harmonic balancer does as long as it is not static which should be the case under most if not all conditions in the stock application. It is designed to slip also at its torque limit. Whatever the case, the over all mass of the flywheel may be the real protector as opposed to the limited independent movement of both parts.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #79, 03-05-2013 01:15 PM
      The torque needed to compress the springs till it hits the stops on the OEM F40 disc is roughly 1-2 lb/ft. Those springs don't do squat! I can only guess that their purpose is to allow the some give to shift if the meshing is close enough. For all intensive purposes, the F40 disc is a solid disk. Any torque at all hits the stops. The function of the springs is moved to the flywheel on a dual-mass which technically speaking, is a better place for it. Less inertia in the disc, longer synchro life, better shifting.

On my clutchnet disc, Its probably in the 100 lb-ft range to compress them fully. Let's just say it was extremely tough to check them out. The springs are VERY beefy. Im sure in any event that when you are accelerating heavily, no matter the clutch, that you are driving the wheels undampened, but with the higher RPM of hard acceleration, the weight of the flywheel smoothes the pulses out beautifully anyway. It's not like you spend a lot of time in this condition.

I agree Will that the springs, or the dual mass flywheel reduce noise. But I'm saying that in addition to that, it directly reduces spline fatigue and fretting. (at the clutch disc, at the dog rings, at the axles... ect.) Joseph Upson lost his 6 speed from what is believed was most likely caused by the fatigue of having ZERO give in the driveline, with the engine at low RPM's in 6th gear for an extended period of time, which is a normal mode of operation for 6th gear. The evidence supports it.

Either way, I'm going with a light weight design sprung disc and a solid normal weight flywheel. But I am stil trying to find a disc with that magic combination that gets me light weight, Torque capacity, drivability and durability for a reasonable price. Thats a real challenge! I've seen some very interesting discs out there.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 03-05-2013).]

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #80, 03-06-2013 10:31 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:
damping the firing pulses in the same manner that the harmonic balancer does...


If you're basing your understanding on that, you need to do some more research into how a harmonic balancer works.

The harmonic damper absorbs the torsional "ringing" in the crankshaft but does absolutely nothing to reduce peak output torque from the engine.

 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:
Whatever the case, the over all mass of the flywheel may be the real protector as opposed to the limited independent movement of both parts.


I think it's pretty well established that increasing flywheel weight increases transient loading on shifts. The transient loading from decelerating the flywheel is far greater than the engine's actual output.

That's why first gen CTS-V's with stock flywheels tend to blow their diffs apart, while those with lightweight flywheels don't have that problem to the same extent.

 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

The torque needed to compress the springs till it hits the stops on the OEM F40 disc is roughly 1-2 lb/ft. Those springs don't do squat! I can only guess that their purpose is to allow the some give to shift if the meshing is close enough.


It's noise reduction and only noise reduction, pure and simple.
Thank you for making the measurement and posting the numbers.

 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
I agree Will that the springs, or the dual mass flywheel reduce noise. But I'm saying that in addition to that, it directly reduces spline fatigue and fretting. (at the clutch disc, at the dog rings, at the axles... ect.) Joseph Upson lost his 6 speed from what is believed was most likely caused by the fatigue of having ZERO give in the driveline, with the engine at low RPM's in 6th gear for an extended period of time, which is a normal mode of operation for 6th gear. The evidence supports it.


That doesn't pass my sniff test.

A car that *ACTUALLY* has a spline fretting problem is the BMW E30 325iX where the front driveshaft is driven by the transfer case. That ONLY happens when the incorrect lubricant is used in that spline interface. That driveline has THREE rubber flex disks in it AND a sprung hub clutch.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #81, 03-06-2013 11:54 AM
      I understand it pretty well Will and considered similarity in ability between the balancer and the flywheel. The real motivator in re-examining the subject is that you said "End of discussion". You know better than that.

Seriously my thinking and consideration is more from a physics base than occupational so I question for more understanding. Whatever the case, much of the documentation on dualmass flywheels ascribes reduction in tranny gear wear as well as dampening protection from high torque applications (what likely destroyed my F40) as a benefit so you have a lot of correcting to do among the companies stating such.

Whatever you do Fierobsessed make sure you have a good sprung hub on Kevlar disc material as it is noisy on engagement with the tiny spring G6 hub I'm using. I believe I've already mentioned it but the easiest fix for tranny noise without the dualmass flywheel is idle rpm held around 1000.



Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #82, 03-06-2013 03:52 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:

I understand it pretty well Will and considered similarity in ability between the balancer and the flywheel. The real motivator in re-examining the subject is that you said "End of discussion". You know better than that.


I knew I'd get pushback on it, but I also know that such devices are employed for noise reduction.

The BMW community doesn't see high failure rates from the S5D-310Z when used with an unsprung disk and a lightweight single mass flywheel.

Your argument seems to be that the dual mass flywheel acts like a harmonic damper in such a way that it reduces peak torque through the drivetrain. This is not the case. A harmonic damper does not reduce peak torque at all.
The only way the flywheel can reduce peak torque through the drivetrain is by slipping. If it only deflects, then a firing impulse will fully deflect it, and peak torque will go through the flywheel to the transmission without being reduced.

The only way available to you to sensibly make a counter argument is to measure the torsional stiffness of the flywheel. Have you done that?


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #83, 03-08-2013 06:26 PM
      Onward!

Today, I worked on the exhaust. Mainly the downpipe, and the curvy pipe that goes under the engine, the one I call the question mark pipe.
The downpipe to the flex joint, and the flex joint to the 90 degree both had a bit of gap that needed to be filled in. So I changed my steel wire out for stainless wire in the MIG, so these two weld joints got migged, I did the pulse method of welding. The problem with that was that it left little pinholes that I later needed to run the TIG over. Stainless mig is crap. but it'll fill in gaps, where it's not practical to with the TIG. Either way, it's done, and I am satisfied


Then I assembled it.


More parts are on the way. I got a couple more V-bands, one to seperate the question mark pipe from the muffler system, just for convienience. And another to build a Catalytic delete pipe. I don't need it, but if I race, or dyno, It might find its way onto the car...

I bought a 3" muffler, a Borla 40085


I also picked up some more pipe to complete the exhaust, and a couple of exhaust tips. I really wanted to retain the stock tips, but being just 2" pipe inlet, they might have been a bit of a bottle neck. For the new tips, I chose these:



Next week I should be able to assemble the rest of the exhaust.



sleevePAPA MSG #84, 03-08-2013 07:38 PM
      so um....do any welding on the side?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #85, 03-09-2013 02:58 AM
      I honestly don't have a lot of time for side work. You'd be shocked if you knew how few man-hours I've actually put into this project. It's probably about 5-6 hours a week. I just work like crazy when I am on it, get a whole buttload of work done, snap a few pics... ect. And to be honest, it is some of the cleanest work I've ever done!

Once this exhaust stuff is all done, there really isn't a whole heck of a lot of work left. I still have to put together an engine, but that will go very quickly. I still need to make a flywheel, do a bunch of wiring, a bunch of minor things need to be buttoned up. Almost all the money dedicated to this project has been spent, I just need to buy a clutch, and a bunch of small ancillary stuff. It still surprises me how far along this project is, and how little time I have put into it, and for that matter, how much money I HAVE put into it :-)


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #86, 03-09-2013 03:38 PM
      Buying stuff and bolting it together is the easy way, but not cheap!

Jncomutt (jncomutt@hotmail.com) MSG #87, 03-10-2013 10:29 AM
      That drain line looks tiny.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #88, 03-18-2013 05:56 PM
      The oil enter's the GT35R turbo through a .035" restriction hole, the the drain line has a 1/2" ID. So I'm not worried about the drain hose being small at all, probably a bit small for a journal bearing turbo though. I know some gasses must be released through the drain line to the oil pan as well, but it shouldn't be a problem... I hope.

It's time for another update.

Over the last week, while waiting for exhaust parts to show up, I dove deep into the task of building a wire harness. I finally finished the wiring this morning. I can honestly say, I put about a good 30 hours into the harness, perhaps a little more.

If I recall correctly, it started out as a 3.1L Chevy Celebrity harness. I stripped the whole thing down to just what I needed I also had a donor V6 Fiero harness that I got the C500, C203, the bulkhead part, and some of the wiring and connectors from.


This is what the completed harness looks like


This set of connectors is over by the battery, From top to bottom:
Ignition Power feed to ICM
ECM to ICM connection
Crank sensor to ICM
C500 Connector
Constant power connetion


This set of connectors is located near the starter, From top to bottom:
Wideband O2 Sensor controller
Ground lug
Oil Pressure Sensor
Heated O2 sensor
A/C compressor clutch control
Starter solenoid control
Alternator power feed


This set of connectors is located on the rear of the engine block, From top to bottom
Knock sensor
Alternator charge indicator (somewhat hidden in the picture)
Reverse switch
Crank Sensor
Alternator Power
VSS


These 3 connectors are located near where the power steering pump was
Wastegate Control
MAP sensor
Injector harness connection
The 6 injector connections are also shown.


This set of connectors is located under and around the throttle body, From top to bottom:
Ambient intake air IAT
Pre-intercooler IAT
Coolant temperature sensor
Post-intercooler IAT
Throttle Position Sensor
Canister purge Solenoid
Idle Air Control Valve
Exhaust Gas Recirculator


These connectors are located under the drivers side deck grill, from top to bottom:

Electric Cruise control
Fuel pump relay
Cruise control switch interconnection
A/C relay
I may wind up needing to add a third relay to invert the brake signal to operate the cruise correctly


This is the ECM, and the related goods. You can see near the bulkhead passthrough, the Dakota Digital SGI-5 Speed signal converter. This takes the 78 tooth 60,000 PPM VSS signal, and converts it to a 30 tooth 24,000 PPM signal, then feeds it to the ECM. The ECM then converts the 24,000 PPM signal to a 4000 PPM signal. One thing I love about the 1227730 ECM, is that an 87-88 2.5L computer holder works perfectly with it!


You can also see a pigtail sticking out of the harness near the ECM, That contains this simple circuit that buffers the 4000 PPM signal from the ECM for the speedometer. Normally the speedometer is directly connected to a VSS, so this little circuit makes the signal compatible



Some of the stuff I needed for the exhaust started showing up. I got my muffler and my tips! But, I got the wrong radius mandrel bent 3" stainless to feed it. The correct stuff is now on order, but it won't be here till the end of the week.


Stock tips VS new tips


Since I haven't done a fit check in a while It's time to do one.
With the new muffler being 5" in diameter and round, I must make sure everything I've done is working out. And that the muffler will fit where I need it to

Overall Fitment, stll looking great! Wastegate is tightly packed in where I wanted it


This one was a nail biter as I was installing the engine, it was really close!


I tried sticking the muffler in, and found the happy spot for it, Sorry no pictures of that yet, but I got the info I need, the muffler does indeed fit, but not exactly where I expected it to.

I forgot to put up a pic of the Front Mount Heat Exchanger, so here it is:


While I was doing the wire harness, I realized I needed some more connectors to do the job. I found a couple of Fiero's in the pic-a-part and scored a few things, Like the computer holder for the 7730, another 87 4 cyl throttle cable (for my other project...) some A/C hoses, (again for my other project) and I got this!

Recall weatherstrip! in great shape too!

But, on the other end of the spectrum, I saw this horable thing at the pic-a-part:

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 03-18-2013).]

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #89, 03-18-2013 07:11 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
This is the ECM, and the related goods. You can see near the bulkhead passthrough, the Dakota Digital SGI-5 Speed signal converter. This takes the 78 tooth 60,000 PPM VSS signal, and converts it to a 30 tooth 24,000 PPM signal, then feeds it to the ECM. The ECM then converts the 24,000 PPM signal to a 4000 PPM signal. One thing I love about the 1227730 ECM, is that an 87-88 2.5L computer holder works perfectly with it!


You can also see a pigtail sticking out of the harness near the ECM, That contains this simple circuit that buffers the 4000 PPM signal from the ECM for the speedometer. Normally the speedometer is directly connected to a VSS, so this little circuit makes the signal compatible




You should need two of those pull-up circuits, one going into the ECM from the SGI and one from the ECM to the odometer. I was told by Dakota after telling them about the combination that I would need a pull-up which is what you displayed, for the signal coming from the the SGI module and when tested without it I did not get a signal to the odometer with the circuit between the ECM and odometer installed alone.

I wrote a thread on it with the specified changes/calibration to run the odometer and the digital cruise if you think it will be helpful. Don't forget to twist the signal wires from the vss sensor.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #90, 03-19-2013 12:18 AM
      Hmm... Interesting, I'll check that out. I'm surprised that you needed one between the SGI-5 and the ECM. The SGI-5 has both open collector outputs and A/C outputs, open collector would need a pull-up, A/C should replicate the VSS signal. I'll go check out that thread.
Thanks for the feedback!


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #91, 03-19-2013 01:48 PM
      Can you give me a link? I tried searching for it without any luck.

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #92, 03-19-2013 03:00 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Can you give me a link? I tried searching for it without any luck.


http://www.fiero.nl/forum/A...130314-2-113809.html


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #93, 03-19-2013 07:11 PM
      Thank you!

I see that you basically set yours up to create a 4K PPM input system. If I read it correctly, you used OUT4 (Open Collector) which natively divides the 60,000 PPM of the F40 by 32, then your multiplier factor of 2.024 sets you up with a 3795 PPM output, or about 4K.

I plan on using it in a different manor, as a straight divider. You will always need to use the pullup if you are coming out of OUT2, OUT4, or OUT5 as they are "Open Collector" meaning it just grounds the wire to trigger a signal.

OUT1 and OUT3 are AC output, they shouldn't need any pullup resistor, or circuit, they should simulate a VSS.

Screw what the manual tells you to do. Read past that nonsence.
It seems like SW3, doesn't effect OUT1 (AC) and OUT2 (OC) they are always going to put out the factored ratio of the input directly, between 4X to 1/4X.

With SW3 off, It natively divides the input by 2 for both OUT3 (AC) and OUT4 (OC), and divides by 4 for OUT5 (OC) All changeable by a factor of 4X to 1/4X, Good for cutting down pulse counts reasonably.
With SW3 on, it divides by 16 for OUT3 (AC) 32 for OUT4 (OC) and 64 for OUT5 (OC) All changeable by a factor of 4X to 1/4X So you'd use this setting if you REALLY need to cut down the pulse count by a substantial factor.

So I plan on using OUT1, all switches OFF and running a multiplier of .386 (10 Corse, 6 Fine) to straight divide the number of teeth from 78 to 30.1, Ideally I would need 30.
OR I can use OUT3, all switches OFF and a multiplier of .771 (14 Corse, 10 Fine) to first divide the pulses in half, then factor that by .771 to arrive at 30.1 ish again.

With this, no mods should be needed to the Road Speed Constant or I/P Divisor. It will be recieving the same 24k PPM that TGP ($8F) is used to seeing, at least I hope. But, It's all talk till I can prove it, right?

Good call on the twisting of the pairs for the VSS. I should have done that, not too late though. I've used a SGI-5 before (SGI-5B, Metal case) in the past, and it did exhibit some extreme twitchiness on the speedometer that seemed somehow related to the engine RPM, while I was not moving. Plus this time my VSS and crank sensor leads are in the same bundle, so twisting the pairs would probably be a wise thing to do.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 03-19-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #94, 03-20-2013 04:04 AM
      Looking at Fuel pumps, I felt it was obvious that a 255 LPH pump should flow in the range needed for my engine. They generally can support around 500 hp or so.
In the 255 LPH flow category we have a lot of options, at really good prices. Everyone runs the Walbro's. Many complain of noise, and some of reliability issues.

I was doing a bunch of research on each of the available 255 LPH pumps, and the truth is that its not easy to do. No one does an honest side by side comparison of this category of pumps. I was going nuts trying to find the "best" pump. So much so that my girlfriend started researching too. She actually found one that has a lifetime replacement warranty, promises to be quiet and had an independent test, which also sited the Walbro f2000169.

HFP Brands, HFP-343


Walbro f2000169


And for $79, seems like a winner. This looks like this is the same pump that is supplied by TRE Performance.


darkhorizon MSG #95, 03-20-2013 11:33 AM
      Why do you have a dakota converter? Why not just feed 60k into the ecu?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #96, 03-20-2013 03:17 PM
      Although you can set the road speed constant to display speed correctly inside the ECM, the I/P pulse divisor in obd1 ecms only has a few valid settings, none of which are compatible with 60k ppm. They can only do 8 potential divisor rates. So, without it, I would have no speedometer or odo.

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #97, 03-20-2013 04:32 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
Although you can set the road speed constant to display speed correctly inside the ECM, the I/P pulse divisor in obd1 ecms only has a few valid settings, none of which are compatible with 60k ppm. They can only do 8 potential divisor rates. So, without it, I would have no speedometer or odo.


I tried all of the I/P divisors and recall only 0 and 1 work properly, or at all. When I entered the other divisors it shut the odometer down for a few minutes before it would start working again.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #98, 03-20-2013 06:42 PM
      The digital IO extender chip "U10" on ALL 7749/7730/7727 based ECMs are physically wired to output the pulse divisor to digital outputs 5, 6, and 7.

The input byte is configured by the high 3 bits of a byte.

So it looks like this:
Divisor A = Bit 7
Divisor B = Bit 6
Divisor C = Bit 5

76543210
00000000 = 0
00100000 = 32
01000000 = 64
01100000 = 96
10000000 = 128
10100000 = 160
11000000 = 192
11100000 = 224

So the working divisor bits should simply be increments of 32, up to 224.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #99, 03-20-2013 07:48 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:
I tried all of the I/P divisors and recall only 0 and 1 work properly, or at all. When I entered the other divisors it shut the odometer down for a few minutes before it would start working again.


That should read several, including some of the values you posted. I stopped experimenting when the temporary disabling of the odometer that resulted suggested something that could possibly damage the odometer electrically was occurring as I had already had prior incidents where the odometer needle swung violently to the point of coming off the gauge.

The road speed constant helped fine tune the odometer once the appropriate pulse divisor was selected. The bits don't show up in the 8F code mask in TP5 the way you have them posted but they do in Code59.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 03-20-2013).]

fieroguru MSG #100, 03-20-2013 07:53 PM
      You can run the VSS wired right to the ecm and enter 60K for the ppm. This will make the ECM see the right speed. Then you can splice into the Yellow VSS wire to drive the Dakota Digital box and use it to run only the Fiero speedo. The best thing about this method is that the common "noise" (where the speedo randomly jumps to 20mph) the Dakota Digital box produces at low vehicle speeds will not be sent to the ECM, which can change idle speeds and cause other drivability issues.

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #101, 03-20-2013 07:59 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by fieroguru:

You can run the VSS wired right to the ecm and enter 60K for the ppm. This will make the ECM see the right speed. Then you can splice into the Yellow VSS wire to drive the Dakota Digital box and use it to run only the Fiero speedo. The best thing about this method is that the common "noise" (where the speedo randomly jumps to 20mph) the Dakota Digital box produces at low vehicle speeds will not be sent to the ECM, which can change idle speeds and cause other drivability issues.


I believe I tried this approach unsuccessfully and I don't have any jumpy needle problems with the SGI unit in place, perhaps the cause is somewhere else.


fieroguru MSG #102, 03-20-2013 08:19 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:


I believe I tried this approach unsuccessfully and I don't have any jumpy needle problems with the SGI unit in place, perhaps the cause is somewhere else.


I ran the 92-94 HTOB getrag with a 24K VSS through the 7730 8D for several years using this method. During this time I also verified that the 7730 8D would accept 60K for PPM and all it did was scale the ECM speed by about 1/3.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #103, 03-20-2013 08:52 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by fieroguru:
I ran the 92-94 HTOB getrag with a 24K VSS through the 7730 8D for several years using this method. During this time I also verified that the 7730 8D would accept 60K for PPM and all it did was scale the ECM speed by about 1/3.


I'm sure it was one of your threads that I was following when I tried it, whatever the case I wasn't able to get it to work with 8F. My odometer is pretty close with the current arrangement and trouble free although I would have preferred the method you've described.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #104, 03-28-2013 02:08 PM
      More updates!

Since we love these so much.

Back to the exhaust, We start out with another pile of pricey 304 stainless parts to be welded.
Borla muffler
2, 2.5" mandrel bent 180's
4, 3" mandrel bent 90's
1, long piece 2.5"
2, exhaust tips.


The muffler itself is 5" in diameter, the factory muffler is around 4". So I had to find a little bit of room where a 5" round muffler would fit, I found that spot a little higher up. And of course, this meant loading the cradle back into the car yet again for yet another fit check... Seems like I do this alot.


The reason I chose this borla muffler was because its 304 stainless like every other component of this exhaust system. It has what practically amounts to a lifetime warranty, it is of a straight through design, it is relatively compact for a 3" muffler and only 15" long.


I started adding some pieces to the question mark pipe to extend it towards the rear for the muffler, I decided to add a V-band flange at this point as well, so that the muffler can easily be removed, if needed.


Some more test fits, It's like a game. I used a long level and a pair of clamps to give me a location reference of the trunk firewall, it just so happened to be located where the level was almost even with the back edge of the cradle mount platforms. So it was easy to keep track of.


Prop a few things up, make a few cuts and some welds, and the muffler is in place.


This is what I envisioned for after the muffler, that way I can keep the dual exhaust look. Which if it is a GT, really needs to have. I got smarter about plumming, I ditched the sawsall for the stainless and broke out the abrasive chop saw. I should have done that a lot earlier. It made easy and cheap work of these pipes! The number of sawsall blades I was burning through was costing a bit of money.


Got that in place


Starting to see it all come together, the finish line is close


And with the last couple of welds...


I can finally take a breather. There are a couple of little things to do, but the exhaust is done.



Onward!
My fuel pump arrived yesterday. High Flow Fuel Systems, HFP-343


I suspected that this pump was probably the same one that TRE Performance sells, well... there is little question about that theory now!


I happen to have a Walbro kicking around that I have no intention of using, but to see them side by side is always a welcome comparison
Clearly, they share the same top piece, possibly the same physical motor?


Looking into the inlet of the TRE Performance pump, it clearly has a (at least) two stage design, having a first stage "Fan Like" velocity pump that feeds fuel into the second stage positive displacement pump that pressurizes the fuel. Second stage pump's design I couldn't tell you. I can say that this style of design is very similar to all factory GM pumps, using a velocity pump that feeds a positive displacement pump. 4 cylinder Fieros actually use a two stage velocity pump only, that's why they produce so little pressure, but they actually flow very well.


The Walbro however, has a very obvious design, probably a single stage, Gerotor style positive displacement pump. This partially explains the Walbro's great dislike for low fuel levels, and to some extent the reason for its noise.


Another thing, both of these pumps draw around 13 amps. This is kind of a lot of power. All the fuel that gets pumped actually goes through the core of the motor carrying away the heat produced by this small high performance motor. So if you starve it for fuel, the motor will overheat quickly. So all high performance fuel pumps are subject to damage in the event of any fuel starvation. So having the first stage pump helps ensure a constant supply of fuel to the second stage pump. The walbro doesn't have this type of first stage, so that's why I say it's more sensitive to fuel levels. Not sure if all Walbro's are like this, the one I have is meant for a Grand Prix, so its not exactly apples to apples.

Lastly,
I finally purchased a clutch. I went back to Clutchnet as I did previously since I was so pleased with the quality.
I purchased a 6 puck sprung disc for a 2006 G6 GXP, which is 9-1/2"
#6BS7G61


And, I got a pressure plate for a 1992 Firebird 3.1, which we all know is the 9-3/4" Pressure plate. I went with their "Yellow / Stage2" pressure plate.
#YP3121

Clutchnet called me the next day to ask me about the difference in diameter from the disc to the pressure plate, and graciously offered since they had to make the clutch to order anyway, to fit the disc to the pressure plate. Which of course I agreed to. I have to say, that was a pleasant surprise.

I chose this disc and pressure plate based on Matt Hawkins reccomendations. He has a similar engine setup and he is using a 9-1/8" version of this disc with a stock replacement pressure plate, and has had no issues with it. So I have a larger diameter, and a somewhat stiffer pressure plate, so I'm less worried about slipping. I think I am a very conservative manual driver, and I am great about breaking in clutches anyway. I also have to tune this engine with boost disabled (WG spring removed), so the clutch and engine will have a chance to break in before I start adding boost to the equasion.

That is todays update.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #105, 03-28-2013 02:22 PM
      Oh, and if anyone is curious, I am sick of welding stainless. I circled a piece of stainless with my TIG a total of 38 times to create the exhaust, from manifold to tips, and it still isn't quite over, but I think my skill has improved quite a bit.

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #106, 03-28-2013 04:27 PM
      I'm sure you know this but the pump current is a function of load and voltage so when it fires up it will not likely draw that kind of amperage unless you're running high pressure and at the max voltage it is specd for, it would put a nice load on the motor at that output level also.

I believe you made a very good choice going with a pump other than Walbro for a daily driver. That was one noisy pump and every bit as sensitive even to normal low tank levels that stock pumps see without a problem. The 8100 V8 pump I just replaced it with almost requires that I put my head near the console in order to hear it.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #107, 03-28-2013 04:43 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

The digital IO extender chip "U10" on ALL 7749/7730/7727 based ECMs are physically wired to output the pulse divisor to digital outputs 5, 6, and 7.

The input byte is configured by the high 3 bits of a byte.

So it looks like this:
Divisor A = Bit 7
Divisor B = Bit 6
Divisor C = Bit 5

76543210
00000000 = 0
00100000 = 32
01000000 = 64
01100000 = 96
10000000 = 128
10100000 = 160
11000000 = 192
11100000 = 224

So the working divisor bits should simply be increments of 32, up to 224.


Just a heads up since I ran into this problem today as the last hanging point before being able to drive the car after completing the new harness. Some two pin plugs are labeled in reverse with A and B terminals on the opposite sides so if you use a plug that didn't come directly from a Vss sensor make sure it has the proper arrangement, or you'll connect the plug up correctly color wise but backwards terminal wise, which may cause you to dig into your harness unnecessarily all of which I did before my Christopher Walken like psychic powers kicked in and prompted me to check after a new pull up circuit didn't resolve the problem.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 03-28-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #108, 03-28-2013 06:47 PM
      Thanks, I'll have to check out that connector thing. I wouldn't think that it's important, as far as I know the output signal is A/C, so it should have no polarity. But I did get that connector from some random harness...

The fuel pump has a "fixed" (sort of) displacement, and voltage is relatively stable, so it's load is only really dependent on pressure for the most part. And according to the chart it will draw between 12-13 amps all the time. The walbro would draw 9-11. So it is a bit of a hefty pump. It contributes to heating the fuel in the tank, which is a bit undesired. But for an engine that should be over 400 hp, I'm willing to make that small sacrifice.

I started machining the flywheel this morning, I have the 92 firebird flywheel, I'm cutting the outer ring off of it.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #109, 03-28-2013 06:55 PM
      Double post...

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 03-28-2013).]

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #110, 03-28-2013 07:01 PM
      It shouldn't but believe me it makes a difference and my guess would be that it's because the square wave that is triggered would be negative (upside down) instead of positive. One thing is for sure, the odometer didn't budge and the data log showed no speed with it connected backwards.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #111, 03-28-2013 10:23 PM
      In the AC socket on your wall, on side is neutral and one side is hot. The neutral is a return and the voltage on it doesn't change. The voltage on the hot wire fluctuates from -165 to +165. If you hook up a pin that's expecting fluctuating signal relative to a ground reference to the neutral wire, it won't see any signal.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #112, 03-28-2013 11:14 PM
      Started machining the flywheel. For a factory flywheel the machining is pretty bad. My flywheel arbor and the face surface are bang on, but the rest of the machining is pretty bad, even the ring gear seat wobbled. There was a lot of holes drilled for balancing, I'm sure they just make sure the clutch surface is good, then balance it. I'm surprised that the external edge machining was that far off. I have a bit of work ahead of me.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #113, 03-29-2013 03:35 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Will:

In the AC socket on your wall, on side is neutral and one side is hot. The neutral is a return and the voltage on it doesn't change. The voltage on the hot wire fluctuates from -165 to +165. If you hook up a pin that's expecting fluctuating signal relative to a ground reference to the neutral wire, it won't see any signal.


I agree.
But... on the VSS circuit, the ground is at the computer, not at the sensor. The sensor is plastic. So if you swap the wires, the old signal wire will be grounded, and the old ground will send back a signal. However, Joseph is correct, the signal would be upside down (mirror imaged) if traced on a scope. Perhaps the ECM cannot interperate the signal if it is upside down, I'd find it a little odd that he found that it can't interperate it, but it's totally possible. It's not exactly like an AC sine wave where everything is symmetrical, its more like a heart beat, with regularly timed pulses and silence between them.

I know the crank sensor can't handle an upside down signal, it relies on an initial "positive"* spike to show when the timing is, It doesn't like it when the initial spike is "negative"* going. *might be backwards, but the point stands.

Seems like this topic is a bit irrelevent to my build though. If Joseph is right and my ECM fails to see the VSS, I will have a fairly informed idea where to look. Either way, I won't know till I have everything together, and I can spin the wheels, or test it in place.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #114, 03-29-2013 05:33 AM
      Ground and neutral do not have the same function in the circuit.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #115, 03-29-2013 07:04 PM
      I did some machining on the flywheel today. I started with a stock 92 Firebird 3.1L flywheel. I knocked the ring gear off of it since it was absolutely useless with the F40.

So this is what I started with:
Firebird 3.1L on the left, G6 GXP on the right


Underside


I could have machined the old ring gear seat down and pressed the Fiero ring gear on, but the seat would have been VERY thin. So I decided to cut off the entire outer ring. I cut a groove in the outer ring of the flywheel, Working this diameter pushes the absolute limit of what my 12X36 lathe can handle, It is a gap bed, but the flywheel just fits wihtin the supports of the saddle by less then 1/16", after a little unnessary diameter is taken down. I cut the groove deep enough to nearly seperate the ring from the flywheel.


Then, I took the flywheel out of the lathe and hit it on the concrete a number of times to crack the ring off. I didn't want to seperate the ring entirely using the lathe, It could have flung off and damaged the bed. With the ring seperated I put it back in the lathe to do some finishing cuts.


My lathe could barely reach around the back of the flywheel for the little bit of a back face cut that I needed to do, but I managed to get it.



The removed ring and the somewhat finished flywheel,


The bolts are flat head M10, I will need to countersink them.


These coupler nuts will hold the ring gear.


I will machine a groove in the coupler nuts, sit the ring gear in them, then weld the coupler nuts and the ring gear together.


The flywheel has 12 holes exactly 30 degrees apart around the edge, I drilled them out to fit the M10 bolts in a tight tolerance, and will countersink them. I'm debaiting on weather or not I will need to use all 12 holes, or just 6. I think 6 will be fine.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #116, 03-30-2013 11:28 AM
      Can you just stack your modified flywheel on top of a flexplate?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #117, 03-30-2013 09:10 PM
      Great question!



There is little to no centering hub left on the back of the crank with a flexplate mounted, I know I could peel the one ring off to expose a little more hub. The flywheel still has a chamfer on the inside of its ID, so it probably still wouldn't quite make it.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #118, 03-31-2013 08:43 AM
      I don't know how the dimensions stack up, but if you need a spacer, you could make it locate on the ID of the pilot bore. Maybe you could turn a stepped bushing that would tap into the pilot bore and extend the OD of the locating shoulder.

You don't need the reinforcement washer when you're stacking a flywheel on top of the flex plate.

The circle you showed has 8 bolts... Is that a Northstar?


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #119, 03-31-2013 10:54 AM
      3800. It's the only flex plate I had laying around. I know I could have made some sort of adapter or something to get a flex plate sandwiched in there. I just didn't want to. Something about it just doesn't sit right with me. No real reason other then that.

The more I work on this flywheel, the more upset I become with its orignial manufacture. There isn't ANY concentricity amongst ANY of the critical dimensions. It was so bad I started questioning whether or not my 3 Jaw was centering correctly, so I broke out the 4 jaw and did a manual alignment using the pilot bore for center, and the face for straightness. Once I had it dialed in perfectly, I found that the machine work that I did already is still straight and true. My 3 jaw chucking was good.

Then, I began questioning whether the pilot bore was concentric with the pressure plate mounting bolts. Truth is... that it wasn't even close. I measured a total difference in distance from the closest to center, to the farthest from center at .034" So it's safe to say its .017" out of concentric. That's horrible. So for laughs, I tossed the pressure plate on to see how it fared.



Needless to say, It's not looking too good. Mind you, that this is a factory flywheel from GM, and a stock replacement pressureplate for a Getrag Fiero. Worse still, you should see how the internal pressure plate ring wobbles.

I believe that the wobbling, from either poor balance, or poor centering of the pressure plate was the reason that I was experiencing shift "lock out" at high RPM's. Basically what I mean is that the clutch was self engaging at high RPM, and made shifting difficult when ragging on it hard.

So, I'm going to have to finish the ring gear thing. Then, I need to drill and tap new pressure plate bolt holes. Once that's done, the flywheel will need surfacing, and balancing. This turned into a bigger project then I anticipated. Maybe I should have just used the dual mass... It is afterall, designed for the 60 degree engines.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 03-31-2013).]

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #120, 03-31-2013 12:07 PM
      Here's an update plus some recent experience and info that might be of use to you.

The computer does not care which terminal is connected to A or B on the Vss plug. After making a new pullup circuit and having the same problem and then correcting the wiring mismatch and having the same problem, it appears either the wiring arrangement for the 727 ecm I switched to is backwards, or I made a mistake that I have yet to see, as with the ECM recognized a signal in both wiring arrangements only with the input signal attached to the purple wire going into the ecm which is the understood ground for the Vss. Whatever the case once I got it working after all the tests I decided there is a pin assignment typo in the diagram.

Be sure to make a good oil catch can/separator, etc. Although many including myself at one point, are opposed to feeding vent pressure back into the engine, the system is actually beneficial to the motor when setup right. I picked up some good ideas from AutoSpeed that you may find helpful as I did. I had never considered what they did and what a fan of the site did to make the system very effective compared to the typical unbaffled container which I was always suspect of. I believe it was Will actually (not tooting his horn just giving him his due recognition (I still believe you're wrong about the flywheel)) that pointed out the need to have those combustion gases actively removed as they will certainly affect the cleanliness of the oil among other things.

You need better flow than the naturally aspirated ports, an easy approach would be a 1/2" fitting on the oil cap to avoid tampering with the valve covers if feasible.

Here are the links on AutoSpeed they have more than one on the subject:

http://www.autospeed.com/cm...il+separator&x=0&y=0

A fan of the site used a fuel filter which will certainly catch the oil although I question its abilities regarding the size.

http://s220.photobucket.com...CT/DSC00260.jpg.html

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 03-31-2013).]

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #121, 03-31-2013 12:16 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
This turned into a bigger project then I anticipated. Maybe I should have just used the dual mass... It is afterall, designed for the 60 degree engines.


Not if you intend to put down more than 300 lb/ft. It's torque limited to about 10% above the engine it was rated for and I do believe I managed to make mine slip with the stock motor at about 7-8 psi.


fieroguru MSG #122, 03-31-2013 12:30 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

The more I work on this flywheel, the more upset I become with its orignial manufacture. There isn't ANY concentricity amongst ANY of the critical dimensions.



The precision of some parts is quite scary... especially when they are cast or stamped.

I would suggest using all 12 standoffs vs. the 6 to reduce the chance of the starter pushing the ring gear inwards (in the unsupported areas).

Also, what is the overall depth of that flywheel (crank face to clutch face)? Just curious.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #123, 03-31-2013 01:32 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by fieroguru:


The precision of some parts is quite scary... especially when they are cast or stamped.

I would suggest using all 12 standoffs vs. the 6 to reduce the chance of the starter pushing the ring gear inwards (in the unsupported areas).

Also, what is the overall depth of that flywheel (crank face to clutch face)? Just curious.


I went ahead with just the 6. Done and welded. I'm actually quite pleased with it.

1.735" Crank to surface.

I still wonder if THIS dual mass can even slip. When I got it, the bolt holes affixing it to the crank and the through holes on the secondary mass were lined up, the 60 degree V6 has a bolt pattern with one odd bolt out of place, so I could easily tell that the two parts of the flywheel either didn't slip, couldn't slip, or it lined back up. They do rotate loosely a bit. Feels like it hits rubber bumpers on either end. One thing that I liked about the dual mass, I put it in the lathe, spun it to 1400 RPM and no visible wobble, no shaking, nada. It's actually machined and balanced correctly.



Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #124, 03-31-2013 03:11 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:


I went ahead with just the 6. Done and welded. I'm actually quite pleased with it.

1.735" Crank to surface.

I still wonder if THIS dual mass can even slip. When I got it, the bolt holes affixing it to the crank and the through holes on the secondary mass were lined up, the 60 degree V6 has a bolt pattern with one odd bolt out of place, so I could easily tell that the two parts of the flywheel either didn't slip, couldn't slip, or it lined back up. They do rotate loosely a bit. Feels like it hits rubber bumpers on either end. One thing that I liked about the dual mass, I put it in the lathe, spun it to 1400 RPM and no visible wobble, no shaking, nada. It's actually machined and balanced correctly.


The 10% above stock application estimate is directly from a SACHS rep via email a few years back when I inquired about it. That's also one of the reasons they are swapped out on some performance cars in addition to the fact that they also tend to wear out like clutches.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #125, 04-02-2013 05:42 PM
      I wouldn't take any manufacturers statement about something's limits too seriously. They will always tell you its good for its intended application, and perhaps just a little more. They rate the 282 higher then the F23 for a reason, they have became more conservative. Either way, I am sticking to my home modified flywheel. It has no real known limits.

Current status of the flywheel:



Because it was so poorly made, I still have todrill and tap 6 new bolt holes for the pressure plate. Then, I have to resurface it, and balance it. Nothing too difficult.

This morning I made the intercooler support bracket, this went actually pretty quick, and It holds it better then I thought it would.



I also loaded the engine back in again for what probably is its LAST test fit, now that the exhaust is done.



Everything so far is looking great, It all fit just as I had hoped that it would.
The tips were even where I wanted them to be, and they really look great! I'm going to tack weld those in place when I take the engine out.

And again, with the engine back in the car, it's time to tidy up the garage. I made myself promise, that every time the cradle was out of the way, that I would clean the garage. So far, I've managed to stick to that plan.


fieroguru MSG #126, 04-02-2013 06:36 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
I made myself promise, that every time the cradle was out of the way, that I would clean the garage. So far, I've managed to stick to that plan.


Its good to have garage housekeeping rules!

Mine is if I can't find the tool/part I need in 10 minutes, stop everything and clean the place up and put everything back where it belongs.

The swap is looking good!


ericjon262 MSG #127, 04-02-2013 08:53 PM
      thanks for posting the info on the fuel pump, I think I might go with one of those myself.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #128, 04-04-2013 05:46 PM
      One more pic of the engine loaded in the car...


With the garage all cleaned up, I've decided that it is time to do the engine build. Which starts with TWO teardowns. The first, is a 97 Crate 3.4 DOHC that Iv'e had for about 10 years... just kicking around. The second is the engine that was in the car. This engine had a fierce oil leak from the front cam carrier, and the intake manifold gaskets were beginning to fail (letting air in, not coolant out)

Crate motor


One cam carrier removed


Bottom end exposed


Heads, off.


Just looking for the spot to put the oil return bung


On to the old engine! Here is where it is most obvious that the 3.4 DOHC really is just a 2.8 on steroids, with massive heads.


Cam carriers off.


Heads off


Everything looks in order here


This is what makes this engine special. But, its all VERY heavy stuff!


Gasket failure! Which as it turns out, I am totally at fault for. The bolts were never torqued, only snugged. Some were downright loose. This explains why the gasket only failed on the front head. The rear head was totally tight. No leaks. I am so disappointed with my self for this screw up. But, at least I know what went wrong. The oil leaking onto the intake manifold gasket was the reason those gaskets started to swell, and fail too.


Lastly, this is where all my hard work, and money is sitting right now...



Which, you have to admit, any engine sitting in this spot, is going to perform quite well...
That's it for now.


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #129, 04-04-2013 05:57 PM
      My best friend, Garth, would loose his mind over this setup. Its what he has always dreamed to have in a Fiero. if you ever decide to go with a different powertrain, PM me. Dead serious.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #130, 04-09-2013 06:30 PM
      Still working away at this, in the last couple of days I...
1. Tore both my original engine and my crate engine down to their short blocks
2. Removed all 48 valves from the 4 heads
3. Cleaned the 94-95 heads.
4. Found two slipped valve guides, pressed them back into place. I don't know how I'm going to prevent this in the future.
5. Found my head studs to be too short for my heads, because the head bolt threads start 0.7" below the deck.
6. Found that my head studs fit perfectly in place of the mains bolts.
7. Ordered connecting rod studs, Flywheel bolts, and a batch of new head $tuds all from ARP. They were pricey.

Next on my list is to have the heads decked for finish only. And whenever the clutch shows up, finish the flywheel, which needs to be re-drilled correctly for the pressure plate, then surfaced and balanced.

The heads are getting the 96-97 valves. Why not? They are brand new! I checked them for compatibility, and they are 100% interchangeable. I also plan on using the cams and cam housings from the 96-97 crate engine. No sense in using old parts when I can avoid it. The lifters are improved in the later engines, but the cam profile is just a little bit tamer. I could mix match them, but everyone always says you shouldn't mix things like that. Jury is still out for me on that one. I happen to strongly believe the 3.4 DOHC cams can be interchanged, even if used, as they appear to have a flat grind, and a cutout on the base circle to provide the lifter spin. Bucket lifters are too short to accomodate a tapered grind like traditional flat tappet cams anyway. Maybe I WILL use the 94-95 cams... Still debaiting on that one. Either way. I plan on degreeing all the cams. It's actually VERY easy, I don't even need the engine!

Once this is done, it is the extent of the modifications I plan on making to the engine itself. My next goal is to make it pretty. Lots of cleaning, lots of painting. Still debaiting on colors, I'm leaning towards either silver or blue, or a combination, as my engine bay already has some polished aluminum, and blue silicone couplers. Either way, I plan on working on the intake, filling it out and smoothing it till it looks like glass.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #131, 04-09-2013 07:15 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
4. Found two slipped valve guides, pressed them back into place. I don't know how I'm going to prevent this in the future.


Keep the motor cool especially since it's turbocharged now, ~180ish. I had to buy a 160 degree thermostat and trim it to fit to help keep my temps in that range. I have a 3900 head that has a valve seat partially dropped from getting too hot.


sleevePAPA MSG #132, 04-09-2013 08:07 PM
      loctite the valve guides?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #133, 04-09-2013 10:31 PM
      They are pressed in, no real way to loctite them. I was thinking about notching the guide stem under the spring, and using an E-Clip under the spring shim to hold the stems in place. But notching is difficult, and the E-clips are a little large at the diameter I need them.

sleevePAPA MSG #134, 04-09-2013 10:55 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

They are pressed in, no real way to loctite them. I was thinking about notching the guide stem under the spring, and using an E-Clip under the spring shim to hold the stems in place. But notching is difficult, and the E-clips are a little large at the diameter I need them.


I know but if you coat outside of the guide there might be enough of a film to adhere to the head.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #135, 04-10-2013 08:05 AM
      Pic of a cleaned up head.


96-97 head, VS 91-95


Slipped valve stem, the one that is sunken in is the slipped one


Since I had the new oil pan off, I decided to add the oil return bung. I first cut a hole, then I removed the surrounding paint


New bung in place


Weld it!


What was formerly intended to be head studs, has become main cap studs. They happened to work out! With the spacers (washers), and the windage tray in place, the length is perfect!


A tool I made about 11 years ago, when I was first playing with the 3.4 DOHC. It's what I use to remove the cam cog bolts. Works FAR better then the Kent Moore tool!



I got around to actually documenting the cam specifications for the 94-95 3.4 DOHC. The numbers were almost perfectly spot on with what I have seen their specs quoted as.



Let me explain the wheel, Picture it rotating clockwise. You can see that the cams are naturally retarded 3 degrees.

A little note on the specifications. I found that the cam lobes are asymmetrical. Meaning the opening profile does not match the closing profile. They actually open aggressively, and close a little slower. My calculated centerlines and lobe separations are based on the averaged positions from the .050" marks. The centerlines are off just a tad for this reason. (they are actually about 3 degrees earlier then the averages). What this all means, is that these cams are 3 degrees advanced when the timing is done correctly based on the true Centerlines, but because the valves open and close differently, the exhaust cam is slowly closing when the intake valve gets ripped open, making it behave as if the cams are set in 3 degrees retarded. It's a little funky, but the numbers don't lie!

It does have a 112 degree lobe separation, which is good for computer control, and the durations are short by any stretch of the imagination anyway, so the lobe separation can easily be tightened up for higher, peaky performance. Now, this gets my gears turning, I wonder what I should do to these cams for the turbo...

Let me mension that my van, has a fairly aggressive cam in it.
LT4 Hot cam, At .006 lift, the intake and exhaust have a 54 degree overlap.
3.4 DOHC cam, At .006 lift, the intake and exhaust have a 20 degree overlap.

At .050" the LT4 Hot cam has -2 degrees of overlap
3.4 DOHC has -15

So there is plenty of room to tighten up overlap, if that's what you want to do.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 04-10-2013).]

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #136, 04-10-2013 08:39 AM
      Leave the cams alone. They are already optimized for a motor that breaths very well up top and a properly sized turbo which you appear to have can expand on that based on your turbine housing size plus any additional power goal you hope to achieve can be accomplished by turning up the boost.

In my scenario increased engine displacement and compression warrants a cam change to better match the mods above stock. That is likely why the near stock grind camshaft I installed in the previous motor and left advanced netted me ~33 mpg hwy and that's a low estimate despite one cylinder being very low on pressure due to a burnt valve and damaged rings. With current cam that has a little more duration I'm getting about 30-31 mpg hwy.

Stock cams perform very well under boost in my experience.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 04-10-2013).]

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #137, 04-10-2013 08:46 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
3. Cleaned the 94-95 heads.

The heads are getting the 96-97 valves. Why not? They are brand new! I checked them for compatibility, and they are 100% interchangeable. I also plan on using the cams and cam housings from the 96-97 crate engine.


The '96-'97 heads flow significantly more air than the '94-'95 heads. If you have the '96-'97 LIM, you should use the '96-'97 heads.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #138, 04-10-2013 11:09 PM
      96-97 heads don't flow much better. The intake castings are identical. The exhaust went with a slightly larger (in area) rectangular port, instead of the squareish port of the early motors. They probably flow a bit better, the exhaust valves are more tuliped, so I get that advantage from the 96-97's valves, but hardly worth the 9.7:1 compression those heads would leave me with. I deliberately chose to use the early intake, narrower runners are better for torque, and as a result, better spooling. Long story short, the 91-95 engine is better for boosting then the 96-97's are, for what MY goals are. If I really wanted to make 600 horsepower, I would have gone with custom pistons in a 96-97 engine, and a 1.06 A/R turbine housing. I'd be dealing with some turbo lag too. But I don't want 600 HP, I want 450ish as It's a daily driver. I also hope to retain 30+ highway MPG. And mid 20's in the city like I've been getting previously.

I got my clutch today! Very happy about that. I will post pics and observations later.


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #139, 04-11-2013 12:31 AM
      Hey, let me know when you are ready to get started on the exhaust. I am plugging away at my car and should have it running in the next day or so. My crap exhaust can get me by for a little bit.... LOL

BTW, you are doing some top notch work. Excellent attention to detail. Long live the LQ1! Maybe I'll get around to getting mine running again. She has 60K worth of hard track miles on her and was built back in 1994. Apparently its the first known (and documented!) swap of its kind. You should see some of the work-arounds Garth and (IIRC) Greg Duncan did to get it running properly on the stock tune.

[This message has been edited by BV MotorSports (edited 04-11-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #140, 04-11-2013 08:22 AM
      BV, I'll PM you the details after this post. I've got some good news for you...

About the clutch. That too, I have some good news, but, there is some bad news. First, the good news.
The clutch looks great!


Disc, pressure plate side


Disc, Flywheel side


The disc is well made. The diameter wasn't what I ordered, It is a 9-1/8" OD disc. I ordered a Firebird pressure plate. Since they had offered to match the pressure plate to the disc, I didn't realize that they were going to use a Fiero size pressure plate, and reduce the F40 clutch disc to match it. But that's OK by me. The 9-3/4" system has a bunch of inertia, and this disc has less. So that's OK. Believe it or not, this is still the good news.

Now, the bad news.
The pressure plate is probably defective. I cleaned the surfaces of the flywheel and pressure plate, sandwiched the disc in there and evenly tightened the bolts down.

Once I had them all torqued down I could quite easily see 3 of the clutch fingers were sticking up much higher then the others. This could have prevented the clutch from disengaging altogether by sucking up precious throw-out bearing travel. So I put it in the press to attempt to disengage it. Perhaps, I thought, that disengaging the clutch would settle the internals, and even out the fingers. It didn't. I also measured the stroke it took to disengage. it was exactly .300" Which, while the HTOB could handle that. However, I wasn't about to accept the high fingers. I also tried spinning the disc to see if the high fingers followed it when it was released, with no effect.

I marked the high fingers, and pulled the pressure plate off, and turned it over. I found a problem, but I am unsure if it is the reason the fingers are wonky.
This is how it was intended to be manufactured:


This is what I found near the high fingers


You can see the ring, and a plate are next to each other in one crimp, and stacked one on top of another on the next. I'm going to call them tomorrow and see what they think. I don't believe this pressure plate is useable. The fingers are all even when the pressure plate is not bolted up, but once it is they are clearly not right. That kind of wobble would probably destroy the HTOB over time.

The new pressure plate


Same disc and flywheel with my old pressure plate


ericjon262 MSG #141, 04-11-2013 01:52 PM
      who made the clutch?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #142, 04-11-2013 06:44 PM
      It's a clutchnet disc and pressure plate. I'm waiting for a call back from them.

sleevePAPA MSG #143, 04-11-2013 09:00 PM
      I have the same one and never noticed and any of the fingers out of place when installed.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #144, 04-15-2013 03:56 PM
      I degree'd the 96-97 cams, here they are!
code:

Intake Exhaust
Open .006 10 BTDC Open .006 122 ATDC
Open .050 -4 BTDC Open .050 138 ATDC
Close .006 124 BTDC Close .006 12 ATDC
Close .050 144 BTDC Close .050 -8 ATDC
Lift 0.37 Lift 0.37

Duration .006 246 Duration .006 250
Duration .050 212 Duration .050 214
Centerline 110 Centerline 115
Lobe Separation 112.5



And this was the 94-95 cams
code:

Intake Exhaust
Open .006 4 BTDC Open .006 126 ATDC
Open .050 -10 BTDC Open .050 142 ATDC
Close .006 120 BTDC Close .006 16 ATDC
Close .050 146 BTDC Close .050 -5 ATDC
Lift 0.37 Lift 0.37

Duration .006 244 Duration .006 250
Duration .050 204 Duration .050 214
Centerline 112 Centerline 111.5
Lobe Separation 112



To sum it up, the 96-97 Intake cams have a little more duration then the older cams. The exhaust's are nearly identical. The major difference is that the intake cam has cast in, about 5 degrees advance, and the exhaust is 4 degrees advance. So the bulk of the difference is the cam timing was changed. That's it.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 04-15-2013).]

Zac88GT (snarfboot@hotmail.com) MSG #145, 04-15-2013 06:36 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

They are pressed in, no real way to loctite them. I was thinking about notching the guide stem under the spring, and using an E-Clip under the spring shim to hold the stems in place. But notching is difficult, and the E-clips are a little large at the diameter I need them.


Use wicking grade Loctite 220 or 290. It's designed to be applied to pre-assembled parts.


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #146, 04-15-2013 07:21 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

BV, I'll PM you the details after this post. I've got some good news for you...



I like good news!


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #147, 04-18-2013 01:03 PM
      I left you a PM and voicemail. Whats up?

sleevePAPA MSG #148, 04-18-2013 01:15 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Zac88GT:


Use wicking grade Loctite 220 or 290. It's designed to be applied to pre-assembled parts.


This^^^




Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #149, 04-19-2013 09:01 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

I degree'd the 96-97 cams, here they are!
code:

Intake Exhaust
Open .006 10 BTDC Open .006 122 ATDC
Open .050 -4 BTDC Open .050 138 ATDC
Close .006 124 BTDC Close .006 12 ATDC
Close .050 144 BTDC Close .050 -8 ATDC
Lift 0.37 Lift 0.37

Duration .006 246 Duration .006 250
Duration .050 212 Duration .050 214
Centerline 110 Centerline 115
Lobe Separation 112.5



And this was the 94-95 cams
code:

Intake Exhaust
Open .006 4 BTDC Open .006 126 ATDC
Open .050 -10 BTDC Open .050 142 ATDC
Close .006 120 BTDC Close .006 16 ATDC
Close .050 146 BTDC Close .050 -5 ATDC
Lift 0.37 Lift 0.37

Duration .006 244 Duration .006 250
Duration .050 204 Duration .050 214
Centerline 112 Centerline 111.5
Lobe Separation 112



To sum it up, the 96-97 Intake cams have a little more duration then the older cams. The exhaust's are nearly identical. The major difference is that the intake cam has cast in, about 5 degrees advance, and the exhaust is 4 degrees advance. So the bulk of the difference is the cam timing was changed. That's it.



Sweeeet. Nice work. Degreeing cams is a bit of a PITA, but well worth it if you want your engine to run at its max potential.

So if you run the intake cam with the older exhaust cam, you can have 5 degrees more overlap with the factory timing setup.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #150, 04-21-2013 11:01 PM
      One last little blurb about cams:
I think what I will do with the cams is install the exhaust cam as is with its 4 degrees of advance, and I will retard the intake cam 5 degrees back to what the older cam's timing was. This way it will spool very quickly, and it will reduce overlap. Both should be beneficial in terms of my goals. I'm still debating on either this, or just install them as is. Both should be fine. I like that with boost I can allow the intake valve to stay open a little longer as the boost will prevent reversion, when the piston starts coming back up for compression. So I'm favoring the retarded intake cam for a couple reasons.

Here's a 91-95 lifter, vs the smaller 96-97 lifter. The 96-97 lifters are an improved design from what I can gather. They are less prone to ticking.

Some hardware that I ordered came in.

I originally ordered head studs that were not the right length. They would have fit if the threads on the block would have gone all the way to the top of the deck. It turns out that they start about 0.7" from the deck. So I had to get longer studs. The shorter studs however worked out perfectly on the mains, as pictured above.



For the head studs, I wound up getting:
16, ARP "ATP5.950-2LUB" Studs
16, ARP "200-8605" Nuts
2, ARP "200-8530" Washers, pack of 10

Now, even these studs aren't quite perfect either. They are a little long. the 3.4 DOHC does not allow you to use a stud that is too long. When the cam carriers are installed they will hit the studs if they are longer then about 5/8" above the heads top surface. The 3.4 DOHC's head bolt holes are blind, they do NOT intersect the water jackets. So I can't get the studs in far enough. The threads stop short of the bottom of the hole, and this is preventing the stud from going in far enough to clear the cam carrier. This leaves me with two options. Shorten the stud, or tap the holes a little deeper into the block. I plan on using a bottoming M11x1.5 tap to get the threads and the studs to the bottom of the hole.

For the mains I got these:
8, ARP "ATP5.060-1LB" Studs
8, ARP "200-8605" Nuts
1, ARP "200-8530" Washers, pack of 10

For the rods, I got:
1, ARP "133-6002" Rod bolt kit (2.8 Chevy)

And I also got some flywheel bolts
1, ARP "206-2803" Flywheel Bolt set for Vauxhall/opel -Rover K Series (supposedly, a set of 8, but it was actually 6, which is fine)

For my deep flywheel, head height is not an issue, so I didn't mind them being a little tall.


My pressure plate went back to Clutchnet. Hopefully they can get that all sorted out. Once that comes back I can jump on finishing up the flywheel. For the time being, my focus is to change out the hardware inside the engine, and get the head stud situation straightened out, which appears to be pretty simple.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 04-21-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #151, 04-22-2013 09:02 PM
      I started buttoning up the bottom end.

I cleaned the timing cover from my old engine. Surprisingly it didn't even need any paint. It survived 6 years of service and only needed a good cleaning. I installed the cover taking care to put sealant on the 4 M10 bolts that intersect the water passages. I then put the oil pan on. I needed to put a couple of small outward dents on the pan where the front mains studs were hitting, it was a very minor interference.


I tapped the head bolt holes a little deeper, I managed to get an extra 3 whole turns on the tap. This got the head stud length out of the block to 4.144". Now I don't have to worry about the studs hitting the cam carriers anymore.


Rumor has it that the 91-95 3.4 DOHC's are non interference engines, while the 96-97's are interference.
So I decided to run a little test,
I put a piston at TDC, put an intake and an exhaust valve in the head and put the head on. Then I could see how far the valve could move before hitting the piston.

I pulled the valve up to the seat, measured the stem height then zeroed out the caliper, Then I let the valves rest on the piston and measured the stem height.
Exhaust:


Intake:


The valve lift is .370" and the head gasket adds .055" of clearance. So at a minimum this engine was designed with .039" of clearance in a worst case scenario. So this engine is a clearance motor. And the valve reliefs are necessary to maintain that.

Next, I'll have to get the heads and clutch all finished up, and get this engine ready to go back on the cradle. Then it starts to get exciting.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #152, 05-10-2013 06:06 PM
      After a little bit of a break, in which I was waiting for my heads and flywheel to come back from the machine shop, I'm back in full swing. I was on a side project during that time too.

As soon as the heads came back I started loading in the valve train from the 96-97 crate engine into those 91-95 heads.



Gaskets in place.


All bolted up


Cam carriers on and TORQUED this time. Getting ready to do timing.


Belt loaded, timing wheel, marker and disk set on TDC


I made a tool, its 3/4" by 0.895" by 3" aluminum block. I decided to use this in place of the standard timing setting tool that sets both cams in straight up at TDC.
All I need to do is place it on top of the flats, and when it is even with the top of the cam carrier itself, the cam is straight up. This way I do one cam at a time, and set the timing on them to whatever I want.



I took the covers off the end of the cam carriers to allow me to manually turn the cams.


So all I had to do was set the crank where ever I want the timing to be, then place the tool on the cam, turn it till its square with the carrier, then lock it down.

I set the exhaust cams to be even at ZERO, so they are straight up. I retarded the intake cams 5 degrees. This should lower the engines peak torque RPM, and help with turbo spool. At least in theory.

After I had all four cams locked down I did a test, where I put the tool on the cams and rotated the crank till the tool was flat with the cam carriers, WITHOUT looking at the crank degree wheel. This is how I confirmed the timing was as I wanted it. and everything was bang on within a degree. I then checked that the degree wheel was correctly indexed on TDC again. This way I absolutely know everything is as intended.

Timing is done!

I also sand blasted the intakes, and the valve covers, I decided that I am going to have them powder coated. I had too many problems painting them to justify powder coating, with the money made on the side project.

I'm getting excited about this project coming along.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #153, 05-15-2013 01:10 PM
      keeping it simple for today. I blasted and painted my exhaust manifolds and heat shields, and installed them, as well I painted the lower intake, installed it and the Siemens Deka 60 lb-hr injectors. They fit beautifully.




For the huge injectors that they are, they are quite small. I've always found that to be a bit ironic.

It's more waiting for me, my clutch isn't back from Clutchnet yet and I'm sure it will likely be a day or two more till the intake and valve covers are back from powder coating. So once again I am stuck waiting. I'm looking for little details to iron out while waiting. I know I have some plumbing to do, I need to balance my flywheel, and paint a couple things. But really, there isn't a whole heck of a lot of work left to be done. And at the moment I don't want to even think about dropping the tank. It is my absolute least favorite activity to do on a Fiero. I'd rather replace a throttle cable then drop the tank


sleevePAPA MSG #154, 05-15-2013 09:11 PM
      Nice! looking forward to seeing the car once its on the road

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #155, 05-18-2013 08:38 PM
      I cant thank you enough for duplicating your exhaust for me. Its one of my favorite parts of my build. I seriously think that with your fabrication skills, you could offer some TOP SHELF parts for Fieros. Again, thank you so much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





sleevePAPA MSG #156, 05-18-2013 10:44 PM
      WOW

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #157, 05-19-2013 06:26 AM
      I'm glad you are happy with it, If you have any questions about installation don't hesitate to ask.

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #158, 05-20-2013 11:15 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

I'm glad you are happy with it, If you have any questions about installation don't hesitate to ask.


I'm not happy with it at all. I am ecstatic!!!!!! Maybe on of these days I'll get around to installing the exhaust. I am too busy showing it to all my friends when they visit. Everyone that see's it say its too pretty to hide under the car. Man, We need to get you to start making headers, y-pipes, turbo manifolds, exhaust's etc. I'll take your first set of LQ1 headers & y-pipe in the stock Fiero routing. Make sure it clears the Izuzu shifter cables. Garth says he wants this same exhaust but for his '87 LQ1 GT.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #159, 05-23-2013 05:51 AM
      Some good news for this morning, Got a call from the powder coaters letting me know that they just pulled my pieces out of the oven, and to pick them up in a couple hours.

So I picked them up and snapped just this one photo of the front valve cover


I had to wait the whole agonizing day to get home from work and place the valve covers on and the Intake manifold, but when I finally got home I got right on it.




I am much more pleased about how the valve covers came out then I am about the intake. The valve covers are a very smooth casting while the intake is fairly rough so the powder coating has a bit of a texture to it on the intake. Makes me wish I had smoothed it out beforehand. But it's done and it still looks pretty good.

I've been keeping busy cleaning and painting everything. I rebuilt a 3800's gear reduction starter, cleaned and painted what needed it. I also attacked the alternator, Water pump pulley, the EGR valve and it's mount, as well as the transmission, it's brackets, the mounts, and the cradle. Just rebuilding, cleaning and painting. So that's been a bit of busy work.

Heres the starter, the oil cooler plumbing, and the turbo drain. You can see here why choosing the drain location was a bit tight.


Transmission


Turbo/shift cable bracket, and front transmission mount


I'm getting kind of frustrated with Clutchnet at the moment. I've E-mailed them, and called them with no response. They've had the pressure plate in their hands for well over a month, and not one thing, no pressure plate, no call, no E-mail. I've heard they can be a pain in the butt when it comes to customer service, but as of now, it has become a problem. It took a week or so to get it to me in the first place, so why a month + to repair it?

I'm going to go ahead and mate the engine and transmission, work on some of the smaller but critical stuff, like fuel lines, vapor catch system, heat shields, intercooler plumbing, heater line plumbing and so forth, and tear it apart to install the pressure plate when it arrives. But I am a bit frustrated about it.

Other then that, I think it's coming along beautifully. I've also been working on a huge swath of improvements on the $8F code, specifically to make it work with my setup, and to make tuning easier.
I've added Digital EGR functionality
I've removed the Adder table, and expanded the main VE table to tune easier in the N/A range (17X13), Boost is still a multiplier, I'm more then okay with that.
I've added in A/C pressure transducer instead of the A/C pressure switch, and added code that set a pair of threshold values that are used to mimic the old switch.

I also added two additional MAT sensors, one for intake air temperature, and one for after the turbo. The stock one is located post intercooler, I might have to put it inside the intake manifold, but I'd sooner like to put it near the throttle body inlet. These new sensors are programmed to only report to the ALDL for logging.

I've added wideband logging, much like the IAT sensors, so that it reports to the ALDL.

I've added someone else's tweaks to help with manual transmission adaption.

I promise that when I am done with this code and all tuned in, I will make it available. Who knows what kind of bugs I'll need to iron out of it first. I've been using TunerPro V5, and heavily reworking the definitions, and adding patches for all the new functionalities.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #160, 05-23-2013 07:05 AM
      You may want to take a peak at Robertissar('s) nast1 8F code on the 60 degree forum for some more ideas. I haven't given it a try yet but it has higher resolution VE tables up to about 8200 rpm. I'm getting ready to switch back to code59 since I'm still having problems with spark blowout using code 8F that I don't believe I ever experienced with code59 when the compression was a little higher than it is currently. It could be something in the code but I have not been able to find it.

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #161, 05-23-2013 04:51 PM
      You know whats funny? Bobby Starcher & I came up with the metal timing cover way back in 2001 when we were working on Garth's LQ1 swapped 87. Nice to see it put to use all these years later!



Here is ours:






Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #162, 05-23-2013 07:27 PM
      I'm not totally sure I'm going to use it just yet. I still have a plastic one in great shape. I bought this metal one from someone 9 years ago, I had it made 1/4" thick to help support idler pulleys for a supercharged LQ1 that never happened. I'd rather it was 1/8" thick for this application. I could have a new one laser or waterjet cut, but I'm a bit on the fence about it at the moment. The 1/4" one doesn't seal correctly to the upper timing sprocket covers without modification, and it just barely clears the belt. It still looks pretty though, but it is SO overkill.

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #163, 05-23-2013 08:02 PM
      I was wondering why yours was so thick. We used some foam rubber on ours where it meets the engine. Its been in use for 12yrs and 60k miles. We kinda had to come up wih something when the dog bone attachment broke the mount for the original pwr steering. We also relocated the dogbone down by the oil filter. Worked out pretty well.

[This message has been edited by BV MotorSports (edited 05-23-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #164, 06-02-2013 08:19 AM
      With the buildup of the engine nearly complete, I decided that I would forego the clutch and just assemble the engine and transmission and get to work on all the remaining stuff, mostly the smaller diameter plumbing that needed to be done.

Engine and transmission mated, without the clutch.


Landed on the cradle, Naked


Add clothing


I have got to say, When It's put together, its sheer beauty is reason enough to keep me plugging away at it


Now, with things back to their assembled state, I can begin working again. First up, fuel lines.
I started out with some 3/8" stainless tube, and after a couple of practice runs, I managed to bang out two fuel lines that navigate over the top of the turbo inlet.
When I was happy with them, I welded on the stubs from the original fuel lines that go into the fuel rail.


This is one of the more difficult types of welds that I've been doing. Its two VERY thin wall tubes, and they are being welded with a 1979, 700 LB 310 amp TIG machine, and yet, it's so incredibly accurate. It is a challenge though to keep the torch from blowing holes in these super thin tubes.

I also made some vacuum lines out of this same stainless 3/8" tube to operate the BOV and the PCV, a nice "T" weld was needed.


It'll go something like this...


Looking for a way to secure the fuel lines, I took advantage of my Shifter cable/turbo support bracket to now also hold the fuel lines, So I milled out a small block of aluminum to hold them in place.


Secured nicely!


I really love when I have the opportunity to turn a part in the lathe, and I found just that opportunity in plugging the cam position sensor hole. I loaded a piece of aluminum stock in the lathe, and just started turning away, mimicking many of the dimensions of the original sensor.


I then cut it off, turned it around and did some finishing work


All done


At this point, I turned my attention to both the turbo's water cooling lines, and the wastegate's water lines as well. Water cooling the wastegate according to the Tial, is optional on street applications, but recommended for racing applications. I figured what the heck, if I can find a nice way to do it, I would.

The 3.4 DOHC has a strange feature of its cooling system. It has a hot water outlet port from the thermostat cavity that directly feeds the throttle body in the intake manifold, and then dumps it back into the water pump inlet neck. What's strange about it, is that it closes off as the thermostat opens. Presumably it just allows water flow to circulate around the engine loop till it is up to temperature, then the thermostat opens, it will only circulate through the radiator. I decided, that since I would have had to rework the dump line from the intake back to the water pump inlet neck. That I would instead re-purpose it by running it through the turbo and wastegate In parallel, then dump it back into the pump inlet neck. I would then modify the thermostat so that it can no longer cut off the circulation to the throttle body.

So I changed out the 3/4" throttle body water line for a 1/2" fitting, and I put a better heater core barb on the intake outlet. They don't interfere with each other this way.


Next up, custom turbo water feed tubes.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #165, 06-03-2013 06:09 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:

You may want to take a peak at Robertissar('s) nast1 8F code on the 60 degree forum for some more ideas. I haven't given it a try yet but it has higher resolution VE tables up to about 8200 rpm. I'm getting ready to switch back to code59 since I'm still having problems with spark blowout using code 8F that I don't believe I ever experienced with code59 when the compression was a little higher than it is currently. It could be something in the code but I have not been able to find it.


Thanks! I've been watching some of his stuff, I like his work.

To your problem, my understanding is that this is not possible. The Ignition Control module interfaces directly with the crank sensor, and the computer only feeds it info on varying the timing a bit. The ECM cannot kill the spark to the best of my knowledge, only control it's timing. Even then, any timing issue will show up in the ALDL. Try monitoring L003D, Bit 3. If it goes high, all fuel is shut off, It's triggered by: Over-rev, Over-speed, VATS and Over-boost. If it's just breaking up, it could be a multitude of other things. Figured I'd throw something out for you to check.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #166, 06-03-2013 06:35 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:


Thanks! I've been watching some of his stuff, I like his work.

To your problem, my understanding is that this is not possible. The Ignition Control module interfaces directly with the crank sensor, and the computer only feeds it info on varying the timing a bit. The ECM cannot kill the spark to the best of my knowledge, only control it's timing. Even then, any timing issue will show up in the ALDL. Try monitoring L003D, Bit 3. If it goes high, all fuel is shut off, It's triggered by: Over-rev, Over-speed, VATS and Over-boost. If it's just breaking up, it could be a multitude of other things. Figured I'd throw something out for you to check.


Actually it appears it is so far. Robertissar teased out about 5 dwell related tables in my XDF and I adjusted two of them a little. Whether they work or not is hard to say as the day before I adjusted them the car ran as high as 9 psi, but that was with mild throttle input and below 4000 rpm after I installed the OE coils in the stock location compared to the MSD coils in a cooler location. After I made the adjustment the car again went to 9 ish psi with more aggressive throttle input but I could feel a little break up.

I delayed the alky injection a little more and hit 10.3 psi without any break up or blowout and it appears the alcohol injection may have been behind some of the blowout although I believe it was set to activate at appx 7 psi. I'll have to check but I suspect it doesn't kick in until 8 psi now. I'm also running a little more timing than I was able to previously with the blowout problem which is another sign that something between the changes has cleared up the blowout as I have not had it since the changes even with more timing and boost and above 4400 rpm. Normally it would blowout around 3500 rpm.

The dwell is determined based on certain inputs as I had previously read some months ago in a GM document so adjusting them to make a calculation during a more demanding load I suspect would help.


dratts (dratts2@gmail.com) MSG #167, 06-03-2013 11:31 AM
      You guys are so far ahead of me on the technical end of this that the only thing I can contribute/say is HOLY COW! that thing is sure pretty. Congratulations, I think that I would want it in my living room so that I could look at it more often.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #168, 06-08-2013 12:30 PM
      been working on the turbo/wastegate water lines.
I took my two water line kits, which were banjo fittings with 3/8" tubing. I cut the tubes down to about an inch, and welded on 4AN fittings to them.
Once that was done, I went ahead and bent up some 1/2" stainless tube to get the water to and from where it needed to go. I drilled the opposite side of the banjo's to 3/8" and welded the new 1/2" tubes to them.



The two 4AN fittings will each go to the wastegate. This way the water flow coming out of the throttle body will divide and either go to the turbo or the wastegate, and then rejoin and head back to the water pump inlet neck. The two hoses to connect the turbo water lines to the wastegate are on order, and should be delivered later on today. I also took one of the banjo fittings off the wastegate and cut off the 1/4" barb, drilled it out to an "R" drill, and tapped it with a 1/8" NPT, so I could screw in a stone filter, as this port will be atmospheric in this build.


I took the original throttle body return tube and cut it in half, then folded the edges down with a pair of pliars to close the opening down to 1/2". I welded a 1/2" stainless 90 bend and used a brass compression coupler to join the turbo water drain to this connection. I only put the coupler there for convenience reasons. Once the two hoses come in, I can say that the water lines are now complete.


Next on my list was the two O2 sensor bungs. One heated narrow band, and one Wide band. This was about as simple as it gets. I picked my location, just downstream of the turbo, slightly on the inside of the bend (because it's probably a little cooler there) and used a 7/8" hole saw, and slipped my two bungs in, and TIG'd them in place. I also ran a thread chaser through to clean up any distortion that may have been caused in the welding process.




Lately I've been putting a lot of thought into how I am going to do my breather/oil vapor recovery system. I am seriously considering integrating the turbo drain into that system too. It's been racking my mind a bit, mainly because I'm just about completely out of space. This swap is the tightest fit thing you can imagine, it's up to the point where I can say that I just don't have any place to put anything else. But nonetheless, I will seek a functionally convenient spot to put this device I have to design and build.

The reason I speak of integrating the turbo oil drain system is simple. Most people screw up their oil drains because they forget what is actually coming out of their turbo isn't really oil, it's mostly just air, and of course some finely misted oil, and a reasonable amount of hot liquid oil. The turbo has above atmospheric pressure going into every hole except the air inlet, and hopefully the oil outlet. So a bit of air coming out of the oil drain is expected. This air bleeds in through the seals, which helps keep the oil from going out those seals. So it is important that this air has little to no restriction on it.

This is the sole reason you should never have your turbo oil drain go into the oil pan below the level of the oil. All the air coming out of the drain would be restricted by the oil blocking its path. It would have to blow bubbles in the oil to drain correctly. This Is too much of a restriction. If the air was bled off right below the turbo, then the oil actually can be plumbed in below the oil level in the pan, and it would be okay. Not that this is my goal, I already come in above the oil level.

I am considering this concept of venting this turbo drain air directly from the turbo into an air/oil separator, that drains back the liquid to the oil pan. Also doing the same to the engine from a valve cover. Then I can just let the turbo's oil drain separately directly to the oil pan naturally by gravity. This will increase my drain lines capacity greatly by removing the airflow from it.

I've never heard of anyone doing this type of arrangement, but I see merits to be had, and it really isn't too difficult. But it's all theory till I actually build it, or for that matter even decide to go this route.


nitroheadz28 MSG #169, 06-08-2013 01:11 PM
      A work of art

It would almost be a shame it install it in a car.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #170, 06-11-2013 05:42 PM
      Thanks!

I got my wastegate water feed lines and installed them the other day, I'm pretty happy with them, but I will need a 90 degree swivel adaptor on one end of one of the lines. The bend radius was a little too sharp for my liking. But it looks good so far.


After much debate (in my head) I finally came up with a vapor recovery/breather tank design that not only am I pleased about, but that I will be making from scratch, with things I have on the shelf, So it will be cheap.

One of my priorities was to make it with a cover that is removable. I did a little layout in Autocad, and using the dimensions it kicked out. I milled the cover pieces out. This is the first time I have used my rotary table to do curved milling, and much to my surprise, it went extremely well!




I designed this cover to be used on the end of a short piece of 3" boost tube I had laying around from another project.


I found my spot to put it too, It's going to be wedged between the cruise control servo, and the boost pipe coming out of the turbo. Seems like the last spot I can fit something up high. I will try to find a way to allow it to drain into the oil pan. Possibly use the oil level sensor hole? I don't know just yet.

And another thing I had to do, was to come up with a Fiero slave to F40/F23 adapter. That didn't turn out to be that difficult at all. I might make a batch of these if I have time.


Just keep plugging along...


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #171, 06-13-2013 08:28 AM
      neat.

i ran across this while looking for easyish upgrades to my 95 LQ1.

you've actually gotten most of my long-term goals done already(F40 + turbo), i keep forgetting that when it comes to building engines that will fit transversely, the fiero guys tend to get stuff done.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #172, 06-13-2013 10:07 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

After much debate (in my head) I finally came up with a vapor recovery/breather tank design that not only am I pleased about, but that I will be making from scratch, with things I have on the shelf, So it will be cheap.

One of my priorities was to make it with a cover that is removable. I did a little layout in Autocad, and using the dimensions it kicked out. I milled the cover pieces out. This is the first time I have used my rotary table to do curved milling, and much to my surprise, it went extremely well!





What machine is that?


fieroguru MSG #173, 06-13-2013 11:39 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Will:


What machine is that?


 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

First up is my mill. It's a relatively cheap benchtop mill, Bolton Tools ZX45. Since it is not a Knee mill, the whole head is able to be raised and lowered as needed (at the expense of my arms). I have a rotary table and a mouting vice and various collets, chucks and endmills.





carbon MSG #174, 06-13-2013 02:12 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by RobertISaar:

neat.

i ran across this while looking for easyish upgrades to my 95 LQ1.

you've actually gotten most of my long-term goals done already(F40 + turbo), i keep forgetting that when it comes to building engines that will fit transversely, the fiero guys tend to get stuff done.


Welcome! Good to see you over here!


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #175, 06-13-2013 02:22 PM
      yeah, i've always been interested in GM's not-quite-ferrari, but very few that aren't basketcases around me... i don't want to step into a new platform with no idea of how it's supposed to look/act.

i guess to keep this post on-topic, Fierobsessed: seems you're handy with the 6811, should you want any already debugged code for anything that i've already published for nAst1(or the 8F w/nAst1 table patch i released to the TGPforums a while ago), let me know. i eventually release everything publically, but it tends to lag behind when i post official patches.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #176, 06-13-2013 09:19 PM
      Great!
Honestly I owe you quite a bit of thanks for the TPRT V5 definitions, and a few other odds and ends of yours that make the use of $8F code of quite a bit better for my build. I fully intend to do a full release of my own data, Including the pinouts and the calibration file, and the patches I created (admittedly added to your TPRT V5 Def). But I too lag behind getting these things out because I do not like to release anything that I feel is incomplete.

I would consider myself fluent in 6811. BUT I've NEVER worked in assembly, I've only dealt with machine code to this point. I still love to write machine code for added functionality. I reserve some space between the cal's and the code (usually L9000-LA000) for my own personal playground. Add a few jumps, re-address re-size and re-scale some tables, and I'm having fun with it.
In my studies of the ECM, my goal was to obtain control of every pin available, And once I had that figured out, it was all over. Wish I could find a picture of my ECM test box that I made something like 8 years ago. Really useful tool.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #177, 06-15-2013 09:41 PM
      The clutch pressure plate saga continues... After two months since I sent it back to Clutchnet to correct manufacturing defects. I finally got it back in my hands. One look, and I can say that there is NO WAY that thing is going in my car. The fulcrum retention ring isn't fully seated all the way around, and one of the tabs that hold it was broken off. What a piece of ****. I guess I'll have to give Spec a call. No one really complains about their pressure plates. Now, Clutchnet's discs are on the other hand, are quite nice. So, that's what it's going to be. I just hope I can get my money back for a pressure plate that I could never use. I'm still out return shipping, possibly twice. Totally unacceptable bull****.

On the upside, i've got a whole bunch of NPT weld on bungs and other connection stuff ordered and on the way to help build the vent/oil seperator system, and also an AN fitting for the EGR feed, which will come off the crossover.

I also really need to start putting some thought into a heat shield system to protect the wiring, the compressor housing and the intercooler from the heat coming off the crossover. I have header wrap, but I have a feeling a trip to the pick and pull for a donor crossover to get a heat shield is in order...


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #178, 06-16-2013 02:59 PM
      Pic of the pressure plate as it arrived yesterday, you see what looks like a burn mark on the fulcrum retention tab?


This is what it looks like on the other side.

Junk!!!

In other news...

I removed the compression fitting I was using to join these two pipes, and welded them instead. Figured out that there was no advantage to being able to separate them.


Then I broke out my pure 1/8" tungsten, ground it to a point, then scorched it, torch negative till it was nicely balled up... Set the welder to A/C, Continuous HF, and got back into the groove of welding aluminum.

My first task was to add a 3/8" NPT bung to the turbo discharge pipe before the intercooler, and one to the post intercooler pipe just before the throttle body. Each of these are for IAT sensors to determine intercooler efficiency, and the later sensor will also handle fuel calibrations. It took me a little bit to get back into the welding mode of welding aluminum. I got so used to working with stainless that I truly forgot how aluminum looks and behaves. But towards the end, I was absolutely back into it.



I also picked up a 45 degree 4" hose for my air inlet to filter. I needed to add this and a stainless pipe to allow me a place to mount my filters IAT (for ambient) and also the vent back from the oil separator. It tucks the filter down away from the heat a bit better too. But it is really close to the shift linkage.


Since I was all setup for aluminum, the next task was to close the bottom of my oil separator tank. I cut a piece of aluminum in the lathe to fit inside the pipe, and welded it on.


Then I started working on the cap, I needed to add a sealing groove to it in order to stuff an O-ring in place, I modified a 1/8" parting blade for this task.



This seems like the only likely place I will have room for this separator. It will stand up vertically, right near the relay mount by the fuel fill. Conveniently, This isn't far from the intake neck, or the valve cover which will have the breather barb, and it's high up, so oil drainage should be no problem.


I'm still debating on having the turbo drain T into the oil separator to alleviate the air pressure that comes out of there. That's pretty close by too. I don't see any disadvantages to doing that, other then another added pipe/hose/tube to the huge pile of them that I've made already.

It's become really clear to me that putting a turbo on a motor is a really REALLY complicated, and expensive proposition. But hey, at least it's getting closer to wrapping up... I think....

I know I still have to build the water lines for the intercooler, mount the FMHE and pump, put the fuel pump in, adjust my fuel lines to fit the new locations, and a few other odds and ends.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 06-16-2013).]

carbon MSG #179, 06-17-2013 06:50 PM
      Must suck to be awesome...

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #180, 06-18-2013 06:38 PM
      Thanks!

Well, I went and did what I really didn't want to do, but absolutely had to do. I dropped the tank.

It was 7 months since I had the car running, so I had no idea how much fuel was in it. I will never, ever again drop a tank without draining it out completely. It was a bit of a mess.


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #181, 06-18-2013 08:14 PM
      My car is at a custom exhaust shop getting your exhaust fitted. These guys do a lot of high end work. You know what they said about your exhaust?

"This is by far the nicest home-built custom exhaust we have ever seen". "You sure this isn't an actual Borla exhaust"? if that isn't a compliment, I don't know what is!


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #182, 06-19-2013 04:40 PM
      Wow! That is a heck of a compliment! Honestly, I'm just happy that you are satisfied. When it's all said and done, I'd love to see a video and hear it. I have no clue how it will sound, I just hope its mellow. I yelled through that muffler and was impressed at how much sound it cut down. Clearly, it flows very well too!

Any way, Starting things off with a top shot.


When I powder coated the valve covers, I kind of forgot that I needed to add a breather. So I went online looking for a 3/4" bulkhead barb, and found that it is a common part used as a boat's bilge pump exit. So I picked one up. Bonus, It's stainless! It was a bit wide at the flange 1-3/4". So I put it in the lathe, cut it down to 1-3/8" and drilled a 1" hole in the valve cover. slipped the seal in, and passed the fitting through and secured it with the nut. This worked out well! I didn't have to disturb the powder coating by any kind of welding.



It also cleared the spark plug holes, and it appears that it will clear the brake vacuum supply, I can always adjust its exit angle.

I got my 4AN 90 swivel today too, so that allowed me to adjust the wastegate cooling lines to a much more appropriate orientation where the bend radii are much better.


I also started working on my fuel tank lines. I've always hated the hose clamped lines at the tank, so I went ahead and added a couple of push connects to the tank. This way I can use the high pressure nylon lines instead of metal lines for the fuel. Just so long as they are well protected, they will last forever, and are much easier to work with, at least once you get the ends on!

I scavenged the plastic fuel lines from a 4th gen Firebird. I welded on the little ends that I cut off of some fuel rails.

I also put the quick connects on my fuel lines going to the fuel rail. I just need to find a place to put the fuel filter, and get the lines all fitted.


That's all for today!


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #183, 06-19-2013 05:46 PM
      Its sounds crazy good!! It doesnt have that typical 3800 tractor sound. It sounds a lot like an old flat-plane crank Ferrari. Its an odd but pleasant sound. Oh yeah, no adjustments were needed to fit it. The only part that was cut and welded was the J pipe that goes from the flex joint to my downpipe. Success!

[This message has been edited by BV MotorSports (edited 06-19-2013).]

fieroguru MSG #184, 06-19-2013 07:01 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

I went ahead and added a couple of push connects to the tank.



That is a great idea! I might have to start doing that as well.


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #185, 06-19-2013 08:15 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by fieroguru:


That is a great idea! I might have to start doing that as well.


I know right?


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #186, 06-23-2013 01:40 AM
      Hey, did you see the vid of your exhaust? It has a very unique sound! I love it!!!!!

[This message has been edited by BV MotorSports (edited 06-23-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #187, 06-24-2013 08:17 AM
      It sounds NOTHING like any 3800 I've ever heard. Sounds downright exotic! Thanks for posting that!

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #188, 06-24-2013 11:12 AM
      Thats what I am saying!!! Its odd but awesome.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #189, 06-24-2013 11:15 AM
      Link?

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #190, 06-24-2013 02:04 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Will:

Link?

http://youtu.be/HL_AC0m-xK4



carbon MSG #191, 06-25-2013 07:52 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by BV MotorSports:

http://youtu.be/HL_AC0m-xK4


Very nice! I can't wait to hear that on a TDC...

[This message has been edited by carbon (edited 06-25-2013).]

zkhennings MSG #192, 06-25-2013 03:04 PM
      That sounds incredible! What kind of tips were used? Also this build is crazy! I am super impressed with the packaging! It could look factory if it wasn't all turned up to 11!

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #193, 06-25-2013 03:44 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by zkhennings:

That sounds incredible! What kind of tips were used? Also this build is crazy! I am super impressed with the packaging! It could look factory if it wasn't all turned up to 11!



Thanks, I love it. Nobody can believe its not a Borla built exhaust. They all say its too nice for a "garage build". I keep telling Fierobsessed he could start making these for members! Anyway, this is the only mention I found of the tips.

http://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...ML/127002-3.html#p82


zkhennings MSG #194, 06-25-2013 03:55 PM
      Wow well that is the best sounding 3800 I have ever heard. Yea I did not see what kind of tips they were when I was reading through the thread the first time. The muffler is a borla XR-1. I am deciding between it and a borla XS Pro which is supposed to be a little quieter. Also my car is NA so it will be louder than your turbo car so maybe the XS Pro is the way to go

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #195, 06-25-2013 06:02 PM
      Tips:
"Vibrant Weld-On Dual Outlet Exhaust Tip - 2.5" In x Dual 3.5" Angle Cut Tips (1333)"

Good news, I ordered a new pressure plate. I got one from Spec, part number SCC-883, which is a Stage 3 kit's pressure plate. According to Spec's David Norton, it is a static 2,350-2,400 lb plate, which, I believe should be right around 50% more then stock, and should hold mid-460's lb-ft with the stage 3 disc. I am using my Clutchnet disc with Spec's pressure plate. I really like Clutchnet's disc, I just don't think I'd ever buy anything other then those from them at this point. I'm going to do what I can to get my money back on Clutchnet's pressure plate, which at the end of the day, should just about cover the cost of the Spec pressure plate. If I can pry the money out of their hands...

I also got started on fitting the Front Mount Heat Exchanger. It has turned ugly. I only hope I can Macguyver that sucker in place. I haven't seen too many threads on FMHE installations. I'm curious as to what others have done. My problem is that the heat exchanger didn't fit between the frame rails with the radiator cap/neck that it has. I had to cut it off. Now things seem to be fitting better. My concern is that it now completely blocks all airflow to the condensor and the radiator. Has anyone had issues with this? What size FMHE's do others run anyway?


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #196, 06-25-2013 06:27 PM
      I think this is the only pic I have of mine. I'll get a better pic if you want.



Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #197, 06-25-2013 07:32 PM
      What does your heat exchanger look like? My heat exchanger has its inlet and outlet on one end as is intended for a remote filler location. It is mounted to the metal impact bumper support via two tabs at the top of the exchanger and stands perpendicular to the ground instead of angled and does not appear to interfere with A/C performance as far as I can tell.
I did cut the ends off the two frame rails that extend a little forward of the bumper support to clear it.

If your car is lowered you have to take that into account, I initially had it attached a little further back to the support which raises it a little higher for ground clearance in a lowered car but after bringing the ride height up I was able to attach it to the forward portion of the bumper mount lower lip so that more surface area was exposed to on coming air.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 06-25-2013).]

Hudini (hudini@tds.net) MSG #198, 06-25-2013 08:05 PM
      I bought this one and mounted it where others would have the condenser since I have a no A/C car. http://www.frozenboost.com/...1115c841b5383cef1755

I cannot open the top cap either so I mounted the fill tank higher than the exchanger. I also plumbed the flow to enter the bottom of the exchanger and out the top to avoid air pockets.

I can see you would have to be a bit more creative with a condenser mounted there too.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #199, 06-26-2013 05:06 PM
      My FMHE is pretty big...


The ports are on opposite sides, 3/4" pretty much centered.
end tank to end tank is 27.25" but the cap and filler overhung an additional 1/2" which made the intercooler not fit within the frame rails. I cut off the filler/cap, and I intend to make it remote mounted where I can fill it from above. I will make it T into the cars existing coolant reservoir for overflow and recovery.

I found that once I removed the shroud ducting from between the radiator and the condenser, and cut off the upper half of the FMHE's mounting tabs, that the FMHE slipped right in. It almost completely seals up the entire opening for the condenser and the radiator. This is where I am concerned; Will my A/C suffer? Will the engine cool off when the fan kicks on?

This weekends forecast is... 117ºF Litterally, no crap I am not kidding, it is going to be THAT hot in Vegas. Welcome to July.

Anyway, here's what it looks like in place:



Perhaps, all I need is a good fan, Maybe the stock one is plenty enough? Or, perhaps it's going to cause so much trouble that the car will overheat? I've never had overheating issues with this engine before. I have a stock replacement V6 radiator and fan in it. And just maybe I'm paranoid, and making a big deal out of nothing.

At least the air dam will be shoving air directly through the FMHE.

Thoughts?

I attacked another small but important task, the dipstick.
The original dipstick would have hit the decklid, and probably the window sill.
After some scouting in the Pic-A-Part, I grabbed a Camaro 3.8L dipstick. I straightened it out using the flat jaws of the milling machine vise, then gave it careful long radius arcs using a 1/2" EMT conduit bender as a guide This way the dipstick still worked and I got it to a reasonable place. Purely by luck, the 3800's oil level to the dipstick flange is roughly the same as the 3.4 DOHC's, so that was a bonus. I took a piece of 1" X 1/16" mild steel stock and bent some edges for strength, gave it some twist, drilled it and welded it to the dipstick.



So now it faces the rear of the car, and it is still pretty smooth to pull and replace. It's just another minor detail that had to be sorted out.


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #200, 06-26-2013 06:12 PM
      I converted my 2010 WRX to w2a using parts from Frozen Boost. I picked up on of the little cooling fans and a thermostatic fan controller from Advance Auto. Worked perfect and you can set it to come on when you feel necessary. I also think with that FMHE, you will notice some reduction in the A/C condensers efficiency. How much is unknown. I just dont see how it couldn't be effected to some degree.

Edit, hey, can you make me a dipstick as well? I broke Garth's off in the tube and need to replace the whole darn thing.

[This message has been edited by BV MotorSports (edited 06-26-2013).]

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #201, 06-26-2013 08:09 PM
      Having installed the small 7"cooling fan that came with my system on my heat exchanger recently, I can say don't waste your time except for the possible benefit due to your exchanger location. Either my heat exchanger due to size 26x7x3.5 is efficient enough surface area wise to negate it or it just isn't effective. I noticed absolutely no improvement in idle air temps and unplugged it to eliminate the amp draw, as long as the car is moving the inlet temps are pretty stable ~10 deg above ambient, changing slightly with the ambient temps at cruise speed. Also my coolant temps are pretty stable at cruise running right at 100 deg above ambient.

I would be a little concerned about condenser temps with the exchanger that close to it at idle. I've watched how easily the gauge pressure climbs on the A/C high side with the fan running at idle on a 90 deg day, I suppose 117 deg ambient temps will be just as merciless. My exchanger sits pretty far out from the condenser so at a stand still the air pulled by the fan is from the gap between the two exchangers rather than through the intercooler exchanger and then the condenser.



[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 06-26-2013).]

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #202, 06-26-2013 08:51 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

I found that once I removed the shroud ducting from between the radiator and the condenser


*THAT* will affect your engine cooling more than anything else you've done. The air's path through the various heat exchangers MUST be ducted for them to work in a Fiero.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #203, 06-27-2013 02:30 AM
      Yeah, I agree, I plan on cutting them up and refitting them between the condenser and the radiator. That's about all I can do with them. I'm thinking about powering up the fan, and seeing how much of an effect installing the FMHE has on the airflow coming out of the radiator. It's sitting still that is the only time I am concerned. The fan is ECM controlled, so I can add programming to turn on the fan in ways that benefit a turbo car too.

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #204, 06-27-2013 09:15 AM
      I was thinking about my setup last night and I am curious as to what you are going to to do with yours. I like how ericjohn was running hard-lines for the w2a system. I need to redo mine. Whodumbass has mine run on top of the coolant pipes. LOL interheater!

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #205, 06-27-2013 10:31 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by BV MotorSports:
I was thinking about my setup last night and I am curious as to what you are going to to do with yours. I like how ericjohn was running hard-lines for the w2a system. I need to redo mine. Whodumbass has mine run on top of the coolant pipes. LOL interheater!


Only if your heater lines are not insulated and even then it's not likely to cause much of a problem given the small contact area. Just be sure to use non corrosive metal lines of good diameter.



BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #206, 06-27-2013 04:58 PM
      Hardlines? Nah, he used all rubber! Its madness I tell ya.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #207, 06-27-2013 09:44 PM
      I've been thinking about using 1/2" EMT for the lines going under the car. It's cheap, easy to bend, galvanized, and the diameter matches my pump, the Intercooler and the FMHE. So I think that's what I'll do. Put the tank back in, put some pipe in on either side of it then put the under plate in for support. Hope it fits!

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #208, 06-28-2013 12:29 AM
      Did you see where I asked you to make me one of your LQ1 dipsticks?

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #209, 06-28-2013 01:00 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
I've been thinking about using 1/2" EMT for the lines going under the car. It's cheap, easy to bend, galvanized, and the diameter matches my pump, the Intercooler and the FMHE. So I think that's what I'll do. Put the tank back in, put some pipe in on either side of it then put the under plate in for support. Hope it fits!


I wouldn't use any metal line aside from aluminum here unless you intend to use an anticorrosive coolant instead of distilled water. I used some sort of galvanized tubing from Home Depot and found it to be very unforgiving if you are not strict with water purity. It nearly ruined my heat exchanger and intercooler with scale after a temporary contamination with tap water after a leak, while I thought I had a little time to get around to flushing and refilling. Then again GA water could have been exceptionally hard. I don't recall what type of pump you have but generally you should use a high pressure pump for 1/2" diameter line/hose covering that distance. I doubt my bilge pump would move water very effectively through a tube diameter that small and use 3/4" as a result.



Hudini (hudini@tds.net) MSG #210, 06-28-2013 02:28 AM
      I use the Bosch Ford Cobra pump and normal 50/50 coolant with rubber lines. Works like a champ so far.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #211, 06-28-2013 04:24 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by BV MotorSports:

Did you see where I asked you to make me one of your LQ1 dipsticks?


Yes, I was going to ask if it was for a 3800 or lq1. Either way I'm going to have to go to the pullit for another donor dipstick, and that will have to wait till it cools off into the lower 100's it's obscenely hot this weekend!

On the intercooler plumming, if you have had issues with EMT conduit, I really don't see any harm in a full rubber installation either, but it is a lot of hose!

My pump is a cheapie Chinese built unit by "Zhonglongmotor" I've opened it up for a quality assessment, and found its actually quite a good little pump. It's a potted, sealed brushless motor, with a wet permanent magnet armature. So there is really nothing to burn out so far as I can tell. And in testing, at 3.5 amps it throws water out pretty violently. We'll see how efficient it is. I've got plenty of IAT sensors for that! I figure I can make a boost/timing limiting code for excessive IAT going into the engine. I think that's reasonable protection.


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #212, 06-29-2013 12:08 AM
      Thanks. Just let me know when you get around to it. Not a pressing issue. She wont be road-worthy anytime soon.

Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #213, 06-29-2013 07:17 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:


Yes, I was going to ask if it was for a 3800 or lq1. Either way I'm going to have to go to the pullit for another donor dipstick, and that will have to wait till it cools off into the lower 100's it's obscenely hot this weekend!

On the intercooler plumming, if you have had issues with EMT conduit, I really don't see any harm in a full rubber installation either, but it is a lot of hose!

My pump is a cheapie Chinese built unit by "Zhonglongmotor" I've opened it up for a quality assessment, and found its actually quite a good little pump. It's a potted, sealed brushless motor, with a wet permanent magnet armature. So there is really nothing to burn out so far as I can tell. And in testing, at 3.5 amps it throws water out pretty violently. We'll see how efficient it is. I've got plenty of IAT sensors for that! I figure I can make a boost/timing limiting code for excessive IAT going into the engine. I think that's reasonable protection.


The heater hose is reasonably priced at Home Depot as opposed to a parts store ~$14 for 10' of 3/4", the problem with the bilge style pumps is that they'll still run with near or complete blockage so depending on where you locate your tank the resistance to flow can be significant (from what I've observed) with a low pressure pump as opposed to those running a Mezzier pump. I installed a bigger tank and placed it in the trunk where before it was up front and placed the initial external pump in series with the in tank bilge pump, 950 gph in tank and 500 gph after the intercooler to help after the first restriction. Nice thing about the low cost bilge pumps is that I discovered a week or so ago Walmart has a nice selection of them.

If you have a low resistance system a conservative pump will do fine as my system does not run any cooler with two pumps going and upgraded from 5/8" to 3/4" hose, how ever the coolant capacity gives you more reserve under sustained boost. I'd still like to figure out a way to capture the cold temps of the AC dryer and store it in the intercooler coolant.


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #214, 06-29-2013 11:45 AM
      I am running the Bosch "Cobra" pump. It works great and has really good flow in my system.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #215, 07-01-2013 08:06 AM
      I did some more work on the air oil separator system. I really wanted to build one that I could feel comfortable that no oil was going to be sucked into the turbo's intake. It could puddle in the intercooler if it did. So here's the finished product:



It will have a few of these stainless scrubbers stuffed inside.

This should give the air/oil mist plenty of surface area to coalesce, then drain back into the oil pan. I've decided to T the drain port in with the turbo's oil drain. This way, The air pressure and oil mist from the turbo has a upward facing relief, and only liquid oil should drain back down into the oil pan. We'll see how all this plays out. If anything goes wrong, there will be blue smoke, and I'll be draining oil out of the intercooler.

I also worked on the other component in the breather system, The intake collar.
I took a short 2.5"X4" Stainless intake connector, drilled a couple of holes in it at the appropriate locations and welded in a 3/8" NPT half coupler, for the IAT, and a 1/2" NPT half coupler for the 3/4" barb that will allow the air oil separator to vent into the intake.
Ambient IAT sensor



In place


The more I look at the FMHE installation, the more confident that it's going to work out just fine. I think there is plenty of space for the fan to pull air into the condenser and radiator. But at the suggestion of my father, It would probably be a good idea to vent the hood. And I couldn't agree more. But I won't consider doing that till I am up and running.

It's once again time for a little cleanup in the garage, but the heat is getting oppressive. I am hoping that SPEC can get me my pressure plate in the next couple of days. This way I can pull the engine off, slap it in place and put it back on the cradle, and really start to finalize this whole job. I can't believe it has taken me 7 months so far to get this far. I was hoping it would only be about 3-4 to finish. But then I got a bit obsessive (hence my username). This project is turning out better then I imagined and the scope of the project is quite a bit bigger then I thought it would be. Not to mention FAR more expensive then I could have ever imagined. I'll explain that when this project is done. I've been keeping a record of all that was spent. I think I am right at the point where there are only a couple of things to buy. Just some fluids, some hoses and clamps, and a few other odd's and ends.



Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #216, 07-01-2013 08:25 AM
      Unless you're running dual IAT sensors that's not the best location for your sensor, it will only measure ambient air temps when you need actual going into the motor, although you have intercooling and will not likely see extreme temps there will definitely be a substantial difference between ambient and boost temps at the throttle blade that could affect your fueling.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #217, 07-01-2013 08:51 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
It would probably be a good idea to vent the hood.


This will have a significant negative effect on your air conditioning. The hot radiator outflow from the hood vent goes straight to the cowl plenum intake for the A/C.

I agree with Upson... your fueling will need to be based on an IAT inside the manifold, or as least as close to the throttle as you can get it.
If you have extras just for logging, that's fine, but the sensor used for your fuel and spark needs to read the air actually going into the engine.


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #218, 07-01-2013 08:56 AM
      not that i'm saying it's a good design, but the L67s measure air temps before being compressed.... and those M90s make some heat.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #219, 07-01-2013 08:56 AM
      I've got 3 IAT's. One on the intake, Pre turbo as shown above, one post turbo, and one more post intercooler, but pre throttle blade. The 8F code is meant to work with a true MAT sensor, mounted into the side of the upper intake manifold on the 3.1L, Post throttle blade. It's probably not that big of a deal that mine is on the wrong side of the throttle blade, but there is a bit of cooling that occurs at high vacuum on the inside of the intake.

The one post intercooler is the only one that is being used for fuel management, the other two only report to the ALDL as of this time. I added them primarily to help to figure out how the intercooler is doing, as well as to document the changes needed in the tune based on the outside temperature,


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #220, 07-01-2013 09:18 AM
      I added a second IAT in the upper plenum itself as a second temp feed for monitoring and noted that you have to be mindful to make sure it is in a direct air stream or you may end up in a dead spot (like between two ports) that doesn't get much turbulence to show true efficiency of the intercooling from what I recall in some differences I was seeing between the sensors. I was testing the effect of the methanol injection which was chilling the manifold below ambient. I need to set it up and test it again.

RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #221, 07-01-2013 09:22 AM
      oh, and since i'm thinking about it:

FWIW: in stock N/A 60V6 calibrations, air temps have VERY little effect on fueling. i was curious about this one day and threw everything on my testbench and moved coolant around to roughly 190*F and monitored the change in BPW from changing the IAT signal from ~0*F to ~150*F. at low airflow/fuel flow, there was something like .08mSec change to a ~1.5mSec pulse width between the highest and lowest temps.... proportionally higher at higher flows.

it all runs down to the intake runner temp calculation, it's HEAVILY biased towards coolant temp rather than IAT. i'm not sure if you'll run into the same problem with 8F, but just something to be aware of in case air temps cause a large fueling error for you.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #222, 07-01-2013 09:49 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by RobertISaar:

not that i'm saying it's a good design, but the L67s measure air temps before being compressed.... and those M90s make some heat.


There is a good reason for that. MAF systems, such as the L67's, The IAT sensor is required to work with the MAF to determine the most precise airflow coming into the Blower/engine. With the air quantity measured accurately, you already know how much fuel is needed. How hot the blowers outlet air is only really effects detonation resistance. (I'll concede, fuel vaporization efficiency is a factor) But it is completely predictable based on boost pressure and intake temperatures, and is compensated for in the factory tuning. I believe the interdependence of the IAT and MAF is the reason GM started bundling them into the same component a few years back, probably saved a buck or two as well, Win/Win for them.

On this SD based engine, the air temperature is just a compensator, it just skews the airflow (well, fuel flow) numbers a bit. So as long as the sensor reports something proportional to the temperature's that the engine is consuming, it's going to be fine. Might just need some light tweaking, or none at all.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #223, 07-01-2013 10:23 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by RobertISaar:

oh, and since i'm thinking about it:

FWIW: in stock N/A 60V6 calibrations, air temps have VERY little effect on fueling. i was curious about this one day and threw everything on my testbench and moved coolant around to roughly 190*F and monitored the change in BPW from changing the IAT signal from ~0*F to ~150*F. at low airflow/fuel flow, there was something like .08mSec change to a ~1.5mSec pulse width between the highest and lowest temps.... proportionally higher at higher flows.

it all runs down to the intake runner temp calculation, it's HEAVILY biased towards coolant temp rather than IAT. i'm not sure if you'll run into the same problem with 8F, but just something to be aware of in case air temps cause a large fueling error for you.


That may be an area to consider tuning, 8F has an Async factor vs Manifold air temp under acceleration enrichment however, all of the values listed are identical so if the table is being accessed it would show no fueling influence as a result of the temp change. More important regarding the IAT temps is the effect on spark knock protection which code59 fortunately has a table reference for.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #224, 07-01-2013 12:52 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by RobertISaar:

oh, and since i'm thinking about it:

FWIW: in stock N/A 60V6 calibrations, air temps have VERY little effect on fueling. i was curious about this one day and threw everything on my testbench and moved coolant around to roughly 190*F and monitored the change in BPW from changing the IAT signal from ~0*F to ~150*F. at low airflow/fuel flow, there was something like .08mSec change to a ~1.5mSec pulse width between the highest and lowest temps.... proportionally higher at higher flows.

it all runs down to the intake runner temp calculation, it's HEAVILY biased towards coolant temp rather than IAT. i'm not sure if you'll run into the same problem with 8F, but just something to be aware of in case air temps cause a large fueling error for you.


Did you watch ignition advance at the same time?


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #225, 07-01-2013 12:55 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

There is a good reason for that. MAF systems, such as the L67's, The IAT sensor is required to work with the MAF to determine the most precise airflow coming into the Blower/engine. With the air quantity measured accurately, you already know how much fuel is needed. How hot the blowers outlet air is only really effects detonation resistance. (I'll concede, fuel vaporization efficiency is a factor) But it is completely predictable based on boost pressure and intake temperatures, and is compensated for in the factory tuning. I believe the interdependence of the IAT and MAF is the reason GM started bundling them into the same component a few years back, probably saved a buck or two as well, Win/Win for them.


Yeah, correct temp is vital to correct MAF reading. Also, GM has all the test data they could ever need on blower performance. They can look at RPM and airflow into the blower and know the blower's heat input in a very deterministic way.
Turbo heat input isn't as deterministic because turbine RPM can vary considerably with engine load and RPM, while the supercharger RPM does not.


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #226, 07-01-2013 09:22 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Will:


Did you watch ignition advance at the same time?


i'm sure i did, but this was playing with stock A1 and A1 doesn't bias spark at all based on air temp. i added it in for nAst1 since it kind of bothered me for it to be left out. had been dealing with some knock that only happened when the IAT was reading high(either from just that high of temps underhood, or a heatsoaked sensor).


JamesCurtis (jamie.curtis@outlook.com) MSG #227, 07-01-2013 10:51 PM
      Silly question time:

What do you do with the oil once it is captured in the can? Does it somehow return to the oil system or do you dispose of it at every oil change?

Awesome project, I am in awe at your fabrication skills. I would love to learn how to do ANYTHING with metal and watching threads like this really blows my mind . I can't wait to hear the first impressions when you get this on the road.


Slowbuild MSG #228, 07-02-2013 03:10 AM
      A little off topic, but what do you think the response time is for those air temp sensors. I've found them to be really slow. Unless I'm in boost for a long time there is no change in temp according to the logs.

Is there a type of sensor that's faster or something?

Chay


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #229, 07-02-2013 05:04 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by JamesCurtis:

What do you do with the oil once it is captured in the can? Does it somehow return to the oil system


The can will always be draining back to the oil pan by gravity. I've decided that I will be combining the turbo drain with the miniscule amount that the separator will be accumulating. So they will both drain into the oil pan together.

 
quote
Originally posted by Slowbuild:

A little off topic, but what do you think the response time is for those air temp sensors. I've found them to be really slow. Unless I'm in boost for a long time there is no change in temp according to the logs.

Is there a type of sensor that's faster or something?


Are you using the same sensor as I am? It's a stock V6 Fiero sensor from the air filter housing. (Delphi TS10077) I know they do have some lag time, but I'm uncertain just how much of the lag is in the sensor, and how much is programmed into the ECM. ECM's have a "Lag filter" that slows the readings down to eliminate transient signals, It might not use it at all for this sensor though. That being said, the Turbo Grand Prix used the exact same sensor as the V6 Fiero IAT. The lag time might not be something that we can improve.

But, You could look down the list of Delphi TS100?? part numbers, maybe there is one that has a finer sensor element? Probably won't have the same resistance profile though... It could be fixed in the code if needed.

Some potential candidates:
TS10098 (Ford connector, fine sensor element)
TS10080 (Direct replacement, different profile?)
TS10036 (1/4" NPT, needs bushing)
TS10003 (89-90 Isuzu, Fine sensor element)



Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #230, 07-02-2013 06:21 AM
      I don't recall the name of it but 8F code mask does appear to have an offset/calibration table for the MAT sensor that I imagine is already set to compensate for lag time probably the way spark advance works. Seeing it was a special calibration table I never tampered with it.

RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #231, 07-02-2013 09:01 AM
      in 8F:

byte 4C is raw MAT counts(which is the MAT you see in the datastream). at ED07, it's the only place written to, immediately after an A/D read of channel 8, so no modification is made to it at all. what you see is what the sensor is reporting.

after that, typical MAT offset and then normalization and then DTC checking. either an estimated(when DTC present) or normalized MAT value is stored to byte C6. it's the only place it is stored, so no filtering is applied to it either.

looking for other places in the code where either are referenced, noticed that 864E, bit 5 is actually not enabled in the code... normally used to switch between MAT and IRT for the alpha-n idle table. MAT is always used.

8653, bit 7 determines if normalized MAT is directly used apparently nowhere in the code(no stores are made after calc is done and next subroutine ignores generated values) or if IRT is calculated. that does have some filtering built in but it's not actually used in the base pulse calculation either(like it is in later code)... normalized MAT is at D059.
after looking at all of this, i'm reminded of why i don't particularly like 8F, too buggy.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #232, 07-02-2013 09:17 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Slowbuild:

A little off topic, but what do you think the response time is for those air temp sensors. I've found them to be really slow. Unless I'm in boost for a long time there is no change in temp according to the logs.

Is there a type of sensor that's faster or something?

Chay


The Fiero open-element IAT sensor responds fairly quickly. However, some applications, like the L98 tuned port 350, use a coolant temp sensor for the IAT. This sensor has the element enclosed in a brass shroud and is MUCH slower to respond than the Fiero-type IAT.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #233, 07-02-2013 02:30 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by RobertISaar:
after looking at all of this, i'm reminded of why i don't particularly like 8F, too buggy.


It is pretty unique, almost seems unfinished. It kind of makes me want to use manual $DF, and focus on adding in real support for boost. If done carefully, really not a whole heck of a lot needs to be done. Think about modding the section that makes the map variables, have it create normal map variables based on 2-bar value *2, capped at 255. Then, use the 2 bar variable only to reference the main fueling table and spark, extend those tables with some boost columns. Then you could borrow the waste gate controls from $58 or $8F. Ok this part is a bit hairy. but its doable, IF, you have the ram space. There's always plenty of program space though!!

But in all honesty, Using 8F and dealing with its difficiencies and crappy workarounds is easier then creating a highly custom OS like above. I think I'll look into the feasibility of DF, or maybe A1? Either way, I'm going with 8F for now, if that turns out to be just fine and drivability is up to my standard, then it is what it is!


Slowbuild MSG #234, 07-02-2013 02:47 PM
      I'm using a stock sensor, no brass, there is a plastic protected element that looks like glass kinda. I tested it in hot water etc and it seemed to function ok, but laggy. Maybe I need to freshen it up a bit.

Do you see changes in air temps in your logs soon after going on boost?

Thanks,

Chay


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #235, 07-02-2013 02:51 PM
      that is NEARLY identical to the route that i went with nAst1 to add boost support....

i did run out of program space though(i have less than 200 bytes of usable space left, some of it not continuous, either). using a 9396, have TONS of leftover RAM, i need to build a custom MEMCAL adapter to open up portions of the addressing space to be used with the PROM, since the way GM connected what would be pin A15 on the PROM is actually connected to VCC. then dealing with CS, OE... it's been interesting to come up with a solution that isn't overcomplex.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #236, 07-03-2013 08:25 AM
      I took some time today and read up on the nAst1 project some more. It was quite some time ago that I took a look at it. I dismissed it as it wasn't particularly useful to me a after a few pages in because without boost support, 8F really is a better choice to start tweaking from...

Well, I read up about 20 pages of the 54, and the more I read, the more interested I am! I didn't realize that it had gained boost support. That's kind of a big deal. I'll certainly entertain test bedding for you with this project.

Only one thing I wanted to mention. Without reading up on 537 posts, It's really hard to understand the list of features, changes, uses, and Pinout's of your project. It would be very helpful if you could include that data with your uploaded package, or in the post that the link that you have in your signature directs to.

That being said. You have one seriously ambitious project, and I am blown away with your intricate knowledge of code to function. I find it difficult to follow the disassemblies in the more complicated routines. I know I can make routines, but they won't have interrupts, stack pushes/pulls, Fdiv's or anything like that. Kind of like working with the tools you know best, and working around the ones you're not comfortable with. I'm comfortable with port accesses, table lookup mods, ALDL mods, and a decent number of other stuff. But I've always had trouble correlating a performance issue to a specific table/value.

This is a bit O/T, but is mostly directed to you.

Quick story. My Van (LT4 Hot cam Vortec 355 with a BBC TBI Running '427/$0D) had a severe surge at idle in gear. I ported the flags for AE, PE, DE, and DFCO to the ALDL to help figure it out.
The engine was getting a AE pulse with each surge due to an unstable MAP sensor reading, IE my cam is a bit aggressive. So I raised the Delta MAP threshold for AE. This fixed the aggressive surging. But to this day it still surges, and all I can think is: Is it an error in my VE table? Spark table? Is it an Idle setting? Is it a closed loop fuel tuning parameter that is out of control due to a moved O2 sensor? I can never figure all that stuff out. Far too many possible reasons. ALDL isn't telling a clear enough story, all its saying is that the IACV is going nuts trying to quench the surge, O2 is going crazy, and so is the fueling. I gave up figuring it out years ago. It drives ok enough for me. There is too many settings for me to figure out what is causing the issue. I find that so frustrating, I gave up trying.

And my opinion is that the 16197427/$0D might be the most flexible ECM. It does everything from 4L60E's TH350's, Manual Transmissions, L4's to V8's... It really is a huge improvement over the 7730. It has some flaws though. Not enough PWM/Digital Outs, or Analog Ins, and No boost support. It sort of has a built in TCM that runs semi independently of the ECM too. It's a great ECM for 2.8 Fiero's, and Especially 4.9 Caddy cars, but no one on here has done that yet

As for my project... Still waiting on a pressure plate. Hope it comes in soon! In the meantime, Ill keep playing with the FMHE and its plumbing.


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #237, 07-03-2013 04:08 PM
      if you think the thread is bad, the directory i have everything stored in is probably a little worse... i'll see what i can do to somewhat organize it and perhaps document some things that i may have forgotten to do before.

the 7427 is would be an interesting place to start with if you wanted to run full custom code seeing how it's a P6(so the 6811 pink book is a lot more relevant). the lack of I/O(and non underhood case) is why i chose to go with probably the most common P4 family units still in existance. the 2.5K of RAM is also nice with the 9396, since the MPFI 60V6 factory code already runs really close to hitting stack overflow.


FieroWannaBe (patond@alumni.msoe.edu) MSG #238, 07-04-2013 12:26 AM
      OSE 12p.
Read up, and see what you think of that.


FieroWannaBe (patond@alumni.msoe.edu) MSG #239, 07-04-2013 12:27 AM
      Dopple post

[This message has been edited by FieroWannaBe (edited 07-04-2013).]

sleevePAPA MSG #240, 07-04-2013 03:21 AM
      for $0D, does it have IDLE over/underspeed ignition error tables? Not familiar with $0D but $8D uses ignition timing to finely control idle and those tables allow ECM more/less control. Usually a choppy cam will throw off the synergy of the calibration and idle is the first major tuning hurdle.

Also, 12P might be worth a look if interested as stated above.

http://delcohacking.net/for...topic.php?f=27&t=356


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #241, 07-06-2013 07:21 AM
      I don't remember off the top, but that OSE 12P looks fascinating... more digging for me to do now!

Today, I started on the rear suspension, got a bunch of work done on it!

When I put the engine in originally, I went ahead and put in prothane bushings. I think I didn't grease them enough, they always squeaked. So this time, I'm going to make a couple of modifications to the bushings, then add some zerk fittings where applicable.

I started with a 1' long piece of delrin 2.5" In diameter, Cut It down to size, then bored a hole in it, then sliced it into little washers with a parting tool.
Then I took each bushing and cut off the flanges off of each of them. What I am left with is a hybrid, delrin/polyurethane bushing.


Then, I got busy making a ton more of these.


For the adjustable Toe link, I did something a little special. 88's have a problem when the rubber deteriorates on the toe links, or when poly is installed, the metal sleeve slides down the bushing and eventually comes in contact with the cradle, and/or the upright, and starts to saw into them. So I made a cup shaped delrin bushing that will prevent that from happening again, by ensuring that the sleeve can't slip off the poly.


Then I got really busy with the sandblaster and blasted clean the uprights and the links.


I also ordered a new pair of wheel bearings. I had an unusual, and unfortunate mishap with one of them just before I pulled the engine for this project. See here for details.
http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/125790.html
Needless to say, I went for a set of bearings that weren't just cheap replacements. I specified Timken's... at nearly 4x the cost of the cheapest ones I could find.
No kidding, you can get a PAIR of new "513011K" rear Fiero wheel bearings to your door for $40 on eBay. Shipping included. But you have been warned...

Another task, back to the fuel lines. Since I decided to go all Nylon and Quick disconnect on my fuel lines, I ordered a few parts to make this happen
Dorman parts:


I also ordered 10' of 3/8" and 5/16" nylon fuel hose too. I'll post more details when I actually do the fuel lines themselves

And, I received my Stainless scrubbers that I will be using as a coalescent inside the air/oil separator. I ordered 12, thinking I'd need 3 or so. Nope, one was plenty. These are nice because I can be reasonably assured that I will not need to worry about pieces coming off and going down into the oil pan.


Yep, one's plenty.


I'm still a bit concerned about the mounting location for this piece though. It looks like the spot that I have slated for it might be a bit more crowded then I initially thought. It's looking like it might go in the wheel well where the old air intake and water separator were. There just isn't any space left inside the engine bay. I've truly packed every possible space with every piece of needed equipment. It's insanity I tell you!

The only thing that is holding me up right now, is the clutch pressure plate. Hopefully Spec will pull through and I'll have that soon. Then, I can actually start finalizing my setup, and actually tightening down some more bolts.

Once I get this suspension done, and the clutch installed. I'll really need to focus long and hard on getting the heat shielding done. It seems like the crossover is such an inconvenience. It's near the air intake, The turbo compressor, the throttle body and it's wiring, the CTS, the intercooler and plumbing. So it seems that the solution is to really concentrate on shielding the crossover from everything really, or build heat shields for every one of these items. Either or both of these solutions must be considered.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #242, 07-06-2013 08:03 AM
      Autospeed still expressed some concern with the possibility of some steel shards coming loose over time when they performed this catch can modification, I'm not sure what they did but I think they installed a piece of screen over the drain and vent hole to make sure it didn't happen. I've been running a standard cheap ebay catch can with the see through level hose on the side for months now, with a vent to the inlet air pipe to the turbo to help suck the vent gasses through. The inlet port from the valve cover has about a 3" tube connected internally directing the vent gasses to the bottom of the catch can to help separate oil before venting out the top. So far I have yet to see any oil register in the level tube. I run 15W50 Mobil 1 so that may be helping keep the oil mist to a minimum.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #243, 07-09-2013 11:17 PM
      I think a screen is a good idea too. Why not?

Got my wheel bearings and fuel hoses in today.
The fuel hoses are 10' rolls of 5/16" and 3/8" Nylon fuel hose. I'm actually a really big fan of the plastic fuel hoses with quick disconnects. This allows for flexability, small packaging, and if protected correctly, infinite lifespan. Just all around easier to deal with. It's not all that expensive either. A novice can just go to Autozone, pick up a Dorman 800-229 and 800-230 a 3/8" and 5/16" compression fittings, put those on the tank, then make up the plastic lines that will plug into practically any swap.

Like I was saying in my last post, I sprung some extra $$$ for the Timken bearings. I could have spend $40 on a pair of brand new pieces of junk. But I still think at 4X the price, they really aren't even all that expensive.
Old Duralast bearing on the left, new Timken on the right.


You can see right away that the wheel flange is WAY thicker. Good. I don't ever want that to fall apart on me again. Also, it looks like the outer bearing area between the wheel flange and mounting flange is also MUCH heavier. Perhaps a larger bearing lives in there then normal???

I can say though, that the crappy Duralast bearing looked exactly the same as the OEM bearings. Physically indistinguishable from OEM. But you can see that with the Timken, they at least made an effort at improving the bearing, even though they are competing against some slash-throat pricing.

I am still waiting on a pressure plate. Hope it comes in soon! It's really stalling this whole project, and worse, my motivation.

In the meantime, I've been painting the cleaned suspension parts and getting a few more supplies together. I need very little more then the pressure plate to finish this whole project. I still need to make a pair of mount brackets for the FMHE, and start running some lines front to back.


zkhennings MSG #244, 07-10-2013 03:36 PM
      Where did you get the delrin? That is such a good idea, I want my suspension to be able to move easier!

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #245, 07-11-2013 12:05 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Today, I started on the rear suspension, got a bunch of work done on it!

When I put the engine in originally, I went ahead and put in prothane bushings. I think I didn't grease them enough, they always squeaked. So this time, I'm going to make a couple of modifications to the bushings, then add some zerk fittings where applicable.

I started with a 1' long piece of delrin 2.5" In diameter, Cut It down to size, then bored a hole in it, then sliced it into little washers with a parting tool.
Then I took each bushing and cut off the flanges off of each of them. What I am left with is a hybrid, delrin/polyurethane bushing.
http://images.fieroforum.com/2012/IMG_1958.JPG

Then, I got busy making a ton more of these.
http://images.fieroforum.com/2012/IMG_1959.JPG

For the adjustable Toe link, I did something a little special. 88's have a problem when the rubber deteriorates on the toe links, or when poly is installed, the metal sleeve slides down the bushing and eventually comes in contact with the cradle, and/or the upright, and starts to saw into them. So I made a cup shaped delrin bushing that will prevent that from happening again, by ensuring that the sleeve can't slip off the poly.
http://images.fieroforum.com/2012/IMG_1960.JPG

Then I got really busy with the sandblaster and blasted clean the uprights and the links.
http://images.fieroforum.com/2012/IMG_1961.JPG




 
quote
Originally posted by zkhennings:

Where did you get the delrin? That is such a good idea, I want my suspension to be able to move easier!


Just go to rod ends in the lateral links. Urethane is for suckas and has all the problems you noted and then some. Stop wasting time trying to fix something that should be trashed and go with what GM should have put in those links in the first place.
http://realfierotech.com/ph...p?f=3&t=2573&start=0

There are a few threads on it on this forum as well. I think FieroGuru has found rod ends with integral sleeves that help significantly.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #246, 07-12-2013 04:19 PM
      Thanks Will. I'm seriously looking into that now. Just so long as they are durable, and greasable, I'm totally cool with using them. I will be driving this car a buttload once It's up and running. So the links have to be very durable, if not lifetime parts. I honestly hate poly, I have to fix a serious issue in the front end where the poly siezed to both the inner and outer sleeves, and worked the sleeve out of the control arm. it's a crap sandwich up there. There is no way I would ever put poly back in unless I can reliably grease it externally. That was my current intention. But... A good and durable heim setup I'd be all over. Bushing compliance be damned! So, it looks like I'll be doing a little research and perhaps some shopping.

fieroguru MSG #247, 07-12-2013 04:29 PM
      Here are the ones I am using, chromoly, teflon lined, non-greasable:
http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/120882.html

 
quote

QA1 PCYM Series rod ends feature a 2-piece chromoly steel design and a heat-treated, black oxide coated body for corrosion resistance. The ball is heat-treated as well with a precision-ground, hard chrome plated finish. The ball is specially designed for high misalignment applications. QA1 PCM Series rod ends are built to last.


I would not suggest greasing them. All it does is give something for the dirt/grit to stick to and wear them out faster. I am up to about 3K miles on my setup with lots of driving in the rain and they are still tight.

I did bore out some large nuts and tacked them to the tubes so I had a good method to tighten them.

[This message has been edited by fieroguru (edited 07-12-2013).]

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #248, 07-14-2013 05:29 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Thanks Will. I'm seriously looking into that now. Just so long as they are durable, and greasable, I'm totally cool with using them. I will be driving this car a buttload once It's up and running. So the links have to be very durable, if not lifetime parts. I honestly hate poly, I have to fix a serious issue in the front end where the poly siezed to both the inner and outer sleeves, and worked the sleeve out of the control arm. it's a crap sandwich up there. There is no way I would ever put poly back in unless I can reliably grease it externally. That was my current intention. But... A good and durable heim setup I'd be all over. Bushing compliance be damned! So, it looks like I'll be doing a little research and perhaps some shopping.


I know it's counter-intuitive, but greasable rod-ends are contra-indicated.

Just get high quality (minimum $25 each) steel on steel and seal them with sealing washers and rod-end boots.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #249, 07-14-2013 07:28 PM
      My thinking is that we are dealing with is something similar to a tie rod end. They grease and seal those, and they have lube grooves in them to promote grease flow. That's what OEM uses, and it lasts a really long time, but usually winds up needing to be changed out once in a cars life. So I'm a bit weary of metal on metal with no lube. What I think I'll do, unless I am convinced through more research otherwise, is get a higher end grease-able setup; Grease it and run it. If it all goes tits up, I'll get new joints and run them dry. Not like its difficult to replace joints anyway, but it is a pricey experiment in durability. I'm doing some serious research in the meantime. Overall, I like the idea though. They are pretty, and they should make up for some of the shortcomings of the Fiero's old design. It's also got me thinking about making my own custom press-in Front A-arm Joints, since the poly up there has been quite troublesome. And, I have the resources to make it happen. I'll let you guys know what I wind up deciding to do.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #250, 07-15-2013 11:17 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
Overall, I like the idea though. They are pretty, and they should make up for some of the shortcomings of the Fiero's old design. It's also got me thinking about making my own custom press-in Front A-arm Joints, since the poly up there has been quite troublesome.


I'm designing weld-in spherical bearing sleeve that will work on '84-'87 rear arms and '84-'88 front arms. I'll be glad to share the design with you.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #251, 07-28-2013 08:42 PM
      It's been a little while, it's time for an update!

I've been in a bit of a holding pattern for a while mainly due to the clutch. But finally I have a moderate clamp force pressure plate. However story doesn't end there...
I ordered a medium pressure 2,400 Lb 9-1/8" pressure plate from Spec. This is a 50% increase in applying pressure.


Immediately I got right down to inspecting my purchase. I have to give Spec their due credit. This is one pretty pressure plate. Manufacturing defects? Zero.
But what is it? What did they do to increase the applying force?
I noticed that it seemed like the pressure plates surface is awfully low in relation to the mounting surface. So I broke out the caliper and a straight edge to take a measurement.


So, .271"

Ok so... The next obvious thing to do was to measure my Clutch Net disc.


That means that...


Oh, that's not so good.

I sent an e-mail to Spec inquiring about the intended clutch thickness for this model pressure plate, their answer was .350" to .360". Which is really helpful. Or in my case, bad news. Although I could just install it, and I could drive with it, It would have a minimal life, and will never have full holding capacity.

I happened to have a pressure plate from when I originally put the 3.4 DOHC in my car already, it is a Valeo brand stock replacement. Turns out it is exactly the same donor pressure plate. This gave me a unique opportunity if you know what I mean...


Ok here's the difference

They drill out the three rivets on the straps that secure the friction surface, and they re-machine the fulcrum point inward, which does cause the friction surface to lose some clamping distance, which can be made up for with a slightly thicker clutch disc. Intern, there is a dramatic increase in holding pressure. With that bit of machining done, they put the friction surface back, replacing the rivets with new ones. It would work great but only if I have the correct thickness disc for their pressure plate.

I have some thinking to do. This problem is not yet resolved. But in the meantime I've been very busy. I loaded the engine back in the car for another fit check. And it was nearly perfect. Only the dipstick tube needs an adjustment. The air filter the silicone elbow and stainless joint all fit, and it looks like the oil separator has it's home too.



I'm back on hold on this project. Getting married! So needless to say the next week or so I'll be a bit preoccupied!




Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #252, 07-29-2013 01:13 AM
      Married, arrested, same thing, congratulations.

I've mentioned it before but, given how many times I've read about problems with the Spec combos on first go around, you may want to visit your local clutch builder if you have one. My pressure plate started out as a stock HD unit that was modified the same day to 2300 lbs clamping pressure. At this point given how well it has held I wouldn't consider buying a plate, or disc from any company unless the local builder couldn't supply it.


Squeaky (jaysonstevenson@live.com) MSG #253, 08-07-2013 11:42 PM
      Have you ever considered building kits of your turbo set-up?

[This message has been edited by Squeaky (edited 08-07-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #254, 08-13-2013 07:25 AM
      Nah, it's just too much work, and not financially viable. I'll save the details of why for the conclusion post I will do once this project is more or less done.

Onward!

I am pleased to say, that now that I am married, that I still have my Fiero's and I'm still working on this project. Well, at least just getting back into the groove now.

So I finally decided to grab the bull by the horns and make a custom higher strength pressure plate. This was a really fun project, and one I only wish I knew then, what I know now, so let me share.

The fun starts with a standard aftermarket Getrag pressure plate. This one is a Valeo PN AMC44, Sold under the brand name Dynapak.


First things first, drill the rivets from the pressure plate face side, I started with a 5/32" drill, then only drilled a little bit down with a 7/16"


Once the rivet head was just starting to show break through, I removed the remains with a pair of pliers, the idea is to not damage the strap in any way, so drilling had to be done very carefully.


Head removed


I very carefully pried the straps off of the rivets with a flat head screw driver, they popped off rather easily.


Oh, I almost forgot, label! Is orientation important? I don't know, but It can't hurt. And I know my 1 is backwards, I wrote it while it was upside down and I suck at it.


I tapped one of the straps out of the way so I could remove the pressure plate.


With that one strap out of the way, it wasn't difficult at all to free the pressure plate


Remove some rivet remains


Now for the fun stuff, and another reason I love my 12" lathe


All I have to do is move the pivot point closer to the fulcrum, So it started out like this:


And after a little reworking, it's now like this:


Measuring from the face to the pivot point, it was .770" stock


I cut it down at the same outer face angle to .720"
This pressure plate lost some throw, but gained some leverage.

For assembly I needed to make some rivets. No problem. Another easy task for the lathe.



I put the plate back in place and tapped the one moved strap back into place and slipped the rivets into place


Today's custom tool... A rivet thingamabob. Some 1/4" steel hastily welded to a vice grip. But oh, what a wonderful tool it is.


And what does this tool do? It clamps the rivet into place for pressing, without interfering with the pressing process.



I also made up a small shaft of steel to do my rivet pressing, then mounted it all up and pressed away.


Final result:


IT'S DONE! I finally have my clutch all sorted out. I've been on this problem since February, and I spent all kinds of money on pressure plates that didn't work out. Reworking a stock plate was more fun then I thought it would be. I'm just so relieved that it's done. Now I can start to really wrap things up and get this car going in the near future.

I've also settled on the rear suspension links for the toe and trailing links. They're on order. I'm getting excited about this project again, and that's just what I need right now.


Steven Snyder (fiero@steventsnyder.com) MSG #255, 08-13-2013 03:42 PM
      Nice work on the pressure plate. It's cool how black box items can become so simple and easy to modify if you just take the time to measure and investigate.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #256, 08-24-2013 05:45 AM
      Todays task was to build some brackets to mount the intercooler. These brackets slip in between where the 88's front suspension anchors to the frame, and the frame itself.



After painting and mounting them, you can see it hovering right in front of the condenser


Then it was just a matter of slipping the intercooler in and bolting it up!


And here's its final resting place. Just enough clearance to make me happy!


I still have to make up a radiator cap setup from what I cut off of the intercooler so I can fill it, I'll "T" the overflow line in with the coolant system's overflow. It's just convenient that way.

I also received some parts for my rear suspension links. I sort of ordered the wrong ones, paid a little extra for a feature I had to remove...


No big deal to remove the studs,


The rod ends I got are from QA1, they are Chromalloy Steel on Steel, 3 piece, and equipped with a zerk fitting. They really are the best thing I could find for the application. Along with those, I also got aluminum hex style adjusters, 9" and 10", and I got seals for the rod ends. I'm hoping my choice in a moderately high end grease able rod end will result in excellent performance and lifespan. We'll see. I still have to make up some spacers, but it looks like if I drill out 1/2" nuts, they will fit perfectly.


And on another side note, I picked up a new toy. I absolutely love this truck. I've wanted one for years, and now I finally have one! So hopefully before the end of the year, I will be driving two vehicles with 400 or more horsepower I'm just glad I don't have to work at it with the Trailblazer SS.




Dr.CGT (chazdorn@aol.com) MSG #257, 08-24-2013 03:38 PM
      Looks good son. After years of lurking this is my first post

Dr.CGT (chazdorn@aol.com) MSG #258, 08-24-2013 03:46 PM
      Looks good son. Cant wait to take a ride.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #259, 08-25-2013 03:57 AM
      Wow, after 5 and a half years of not knowing my dad even registered, he finally posts!

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #260, 08-26-2013 01:12 PM
      Did a bit more work on the front mount heat exchanger today.
Originally, the FMHE had a radiator cap on the top on one end. But, there is no way that the intercooler would have fit between the frame rails with that overhanging the end tank.


So... I used my trusty sawsall to cut it off.


Still needing a fill port, I decided to make the coolant fill a remote mount. I welded in a 1/2" NPT bung.


I put a 1/2" 90 degree barb fitting into it. This way I can JUST sneak a hose between the frame rail and the condenser, then up to the remote fill.


The next big task, was to make the remote fill. I figured why not use the part I cut off the intercooler, and some aluminum stock to make the filler.



Ready to be mounted


Here seems like a good spot.


I still have to mount the pump, and run some lines, but the hard stuff with the FMHE is done.
That's all for now!


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #261, 08-26-2013 06:40 PM
      Just a little more for today,
I got the itch to test out my suspension links, and the custom axle cups. Mainly to verify the depth of the tripod assembly.
I built my axle cups a long time ago but here they are as I was making them




So it is an EMPI aftermarket axle for a Chevy Equinox that was the donor for the stub shaft, and I machined a stock manual Fiero cup to press onto it, then welded it in place. On the one, I had to add a sleeve to extend the sealing surface to mate with the seal.

That was 4 years ago.

Today I wanted to test fitment. My drivers side axle shaft is from a 90 something, probably 93, Corsica with a 4T60. I knew it would have a beefy short axle shaft. the outer CV is the original to the Fiero. The passenger side has the same treatment, but it just uses a stock manual Fiero axle shaft and outer CV, with the custom axle cup. The passenger side cup didn't need to be tested, because it's in the stock location almost perfectly, but I needed to test the drivers side because the axle line has shifted forward for the G6 transmission. It's substantially closer to the crank itself then it was on the Getrag, and the axle cup is further out on the drivers side as well, and the angularity on a shorter axle can spell disaster if it is not considered.

The links look good!
I did wind up drilling out 1/2" nuts to turn them into spacers. They fit absolutely perfect!



All the zerk fittings are pointing downwards except for the rear inboard, they can all be greased easily. Also, there are seals on either side of each rod end. the seals will allow pressurized grease to escape, but should prevent any dirt from getting in. I hope this combination will provide exceptional life span on these rod eyes!

And for the axle test,
All the way up to the bump stop.


About mid-travel.


Free hanging was fine as well.

So now I know I don't have to worry about the axles. That's another check mark on my to-do list.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 08-26-2013).]

fieroguru MSG #262, 08-26-2013 07:48 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Today I wanted to test fitment. My drivers side axle shaft is from a 90 something, probably 93, Corsica with a 4T60. I knew it would have a beefy short axle shaft. the outer CV is the original to the Fiero. The passenger side has the same treatment, but it just uses a stock manual Fiero axle shaft and outer CV, with the custom axle cup. The passenger side cup didn't need to be tested, because it's in the stock location almost perfectly, but I needed to test the drivers side because the axle line has shifted forward for the G6 transmission. It's substantially closer to the crank itself then it was on the Getrag, and the axle cup is further out on the drivers side as well, and the angularity on a shorter axle can spell disaster if it is not considered.

And for the axle test,
All the way up to the bump stop.




Did you spin the tripod while it was full compression? I went the same route with the hybrid tripod/corsica axle and at full compression the axle hit the inner surface of the tripod housing. However, I had the upper strut hat flipped and the tubular cradle had the drivetrain lowered 1", but then I rotated the transmission back up, so my setup was slightly different than yours. I ended up cutting the tripod housing back so there was 1 groove for the boot vs. two to gain the needed clearance.






doublec4 (doublec4@hotmail.com) MSG #263, 08-26-2013 11:03 PM
      Not sure how I've missed this thread until now! Great work!



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #264, 08-28-2013 04:47 AM
      Thanks!

Guru, looking at your pictures made me want to recheck. I feel better now that I did. My axle still clears the cup, but it turns out that when I tested it the first time, I did NOT hit the bump stop like I thought I had. But this time I had the whole car sitting on that one spring. I think I got it this time. It looked much closer to your picture.


My next task while the engine is still in the car was to make yet another bracket (I've long since lost track of how many brackets I've made) to hold the Air/Oil separator that I built. I was running out of space in the engine bay, but I could just squeak this in where the old air cleaner used to be. That got me thinking... What if I made a bracket that mounted exactly like the air cleaner assembly?

That was the answer!

So I bent up some metal I had laying around and found building the mount was pretty easy.



Next, I made a clamp like bracket that would hold the can, and welded that on.


A couple of bolts, and it all comes together pretty nicely!


And it slips right in, and the old air cleaner bolts hold it all in place.


It's been a very productive day again.

I am ready to pull the engine out for the very last time so I can put the clutch in, and do a bunch of finalizing so that I can put this project on the road. It's getting exciting!


fieroguru MSG #265, 08-28-2013 06:21 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Thanks!

Guru, looking at your pictures made me want to recheck. I feel better now that I did. My axle still clears the cup, but it turns out that when I tested it the first time, I did NOT hit the bump stop like I thought I had. But this time I had the whole car sitting on that one spring. I think I got it this time.


I normally do the axle check w/o a spring on the strut, so its easy to cycle the suspension from full compression to full droop while spinning the tripod assy.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #266, 08-28-2013 10:05 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

What if I made a bracket that mounted exactly like the air cleaner assembly?



I did something similar with my CAI:

http://www.fiero.nl/forum/F.../000121-20.html#p774




GM went to the trouble of welding all those little top hats to the body metal in order to hold things in the engine bay... Why shouldn't we take full advantage of them?


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #267, 09-19-2013 05:41 PM
      It's been a long time since I've had any updates. Life is busy! But I'm back at it again.

After a little axle testing, and building that bracket, It was once again time to remove the engine. This should be the last time it comes out! I promise!

It's time to install the flywheel and clutch. As per instruction, I put Loctite on the bolt threads, and a grease just under the bolt heads to aid in getting the correct bolt torque. Done. Note, that I decided to use grade 8 studs in place of bolts to hold the pressure plate. I was finding that the cast iron threads in the flywheel tend to gall. There is only one solution to keeping that problem at bay. They were loctited in, as well.


Next I had to bolt up the pressure plate and center the disc. And that is done! hopefully this is the last time I will need to see the clutch for a long time.


With the clutch being bolted in, I slipped the engine back into place and mated it up with the transmission. It all went very smoothly. Then I decided to build the axles. But since these axles have 240K on them, I figured it would be a good idea to disassemble and thoroughly check them over. I'm glad I did, because I found some damage to the outer star on one axle. No worries, I had a donor axle to pull another star from.


I cleaned, greased and assembled the axles, new boots, new clamps.


And, installed! I also painted everything before assembly, It's nice to see it done.

You can see that the F40 actually has its axle holes closer to the crankshaft then the Getrag. The 3 shaft design pulled the differential closer. So this axle will always be a little out of alignment, and will probably not last quite as long as it should. But that's just how it has to be.

I had one more little welding task on the crossover. I needed to add a 8AN stainless fitting to the crossover to connect the EGR to. No problem. Drill a 3/4" hole, and weld away!


Installed.


When I purchased this 12" Gas line, It was painted yellow. I stripped the paint off using paint stripper. I accidently destroyed one when I attempted to use the wire wheel and sand blaster on it. Apparently, it was a little too powerful and I poked through. But the paint stripper did a perfect job.


Hoping to cut down on unnecessary heat in the engine bay, I began wrapping the exhaust with the Lava rock header wrap. This should keep me from cooking the wiring and the compressor housing on the turbo, since the pipes pass kind of close to the compressor. It would suck to heat that up too much.


So I'm back on track and will be working on it almost daily. Soon I hope... Soon!

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 09-19-2013).]

zkhennings MSG #268, 09-23-2013 06:40 PM
      Everything looks good! The header wrap is nice too, just a shame it covers up those nice welds. I love the look SS gets when the welds change the color.

If you run out of places to bolt things to in the engine bay, I bought a bag of these along with some ss flange locking nuts from McMaster. ("These" is referring to the right angle weld studs)

I tore out all those right angle brackets and welded in studs anywhere I needed them. I used cushion clamps to hold the miscellaneous wires and tubes and fuel lines. They are easy to remove and it cleans up the engine bay a lot.

It took me a few hours to remove all the brackets and decide where I needed studs and weld them in place. It's a good day project.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #269, 09-24-2013 10:30 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
Note, that I decided to use grade 8 studs in place of bolts to hold the pressure plate. I was finding that the cast iron threads in the flywheel tend to gall. There is only one solution to keeping that problem at bay. They were loctited in, as well.


That's odd. I've never heard of cast iron being prone to galling... exactly the opposite, in fact. In my experience it's very resistant to galling.


 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

I cleaned, greased and assembled the axles, new boots, new clamps.



What's your axle setup? (You don't have to go over it again... just linking the post where you talked about it would be fine...)

 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

So this axle will always be a little out of alignment, and will probably not last quite as long as it should. But that's just how it has to be.


That's a non-issue.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #270, 09-25-2013 06:26 PM
      I was having a ton of issues with galling on the flywheel. This is something I have not encountered in the past. Testing my various clutch combinations required me to mount the pressure plate multiple times. Each time I dissassembled it, the theads were clearly damaged on the bolt. (10.9 grade) So I used the tap a couple of times to fix the threads. It didn't really matter because the 6 pressure plate bolts on this flywheel were not located correctly on the flywheel in the first place. So I drilled and tapped 6 new bolt holes centered around the flywheels true center and installed studs. The donor flywheel was shockingly poorly machined from the factory. It's all good now I hope!

For the axles, it's just a couple of posts up, here...
http://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...L/127002-7.html#p260

And, the CV alignment, I agree It's no big deal.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #271, 09-26-2013 09:47 AM
      Oh yeah, the welded cups. Thanks!

Slowbuild MSG #272, 09-26-2013 12:12 PM
      For the turbo header heat...I did the wrap thing and it did work ok, but I still had some heat issues. I went to a .020 sheet metal heat shield and the issues are gone. It's not as flashy as header wrap but it works better, especially long term.

Thought I'd mention this for anyone with these common turbo issues.

Chay


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #273, 09-27-2013 01:06 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Slowbuild:
I went to a .020 sheet metal heat shield and the issues are gone.
Chay


I couldn't agree more... especially since that is exactly what I wound up doing anyway!
I took the stock "Front" heat shield that I had mounted on the rear manifold (which is actually a flipped front manifold) and welded on some very thin, probably just that, .020" or so sheet metal to the heat shield. The stuff was so easy to bend using a piece of exhaust pipe as a guide, and tin snips for cutting. The welder had to be put on its lowest setting and it was still burning through easily. So it isn't by any means my prettiest weld, but It's fine enough.



I applied some heat reflective tape to the inside of the heat shield, and laid some header wrap over the top of that to keep the shield cool. It should be far cooler now.


So I went from this, which was going to cause serious issues:


To this, where I feel like there is nothing to worry about:


I also decided to build a little shield housing for my CTS. The wiring and the sensor were pretty close to the crossover, and that just didn't seem like a good thing. I'll wrap the wire with heat tape. I'll probably build another small heat shield for the crossover in this area too.



While I was at it, I added another section to the end of my water outlet pipe. It now drops off near the under car coolant line.


I had an idea. I decided to make a new oil drain fitting out of various pieces of steel gas pipe fittings. I wanted one 1/2" NPT inlet, and two 1/2" AN outlets, one vertical, one horizontal. This is a really novel idea I think. The vertical outlet will drain directly into the oil pan, and the horizontal is going to the bottom of my air oil separator. This way, any gases from the turbo aren't forced into the drain line, they can travel up to the bottom of the air oil separator, and any oil that accumulates in the separator can gravity drain down the same line into the oil drain that goes straight into the pan. This will alleviate any pressure that may build in the drain line to the separator, and allow just oil to run its way into the oil pan.


And finally, I plumbed in the oil feed for the turbo as well. So now all my oil issues are addressed. Done.


I'm going to work on the wiring a little more now. I decided to change the way I wired the fuel pump. I'm not particularly thrilled with the factory layout.
Get this:The power goes from the fusable link near the battery through the body harness to the fuse panel in the front. Then back through the body harness to the C203, to the engine harness. Then to the relay and oil pressure sensor for control, then back through the engine harness to the C203 Then to the body harness for a third time, then back into the engine bay where it finally goes to the fuel pump connection. It's all a bit much.

This circuit will now be drawing around 11-13 amps now, so I think I'll cut it down to a fuse mounted near the relay running directly to power, then leave the last bit in so I don't have to have two connectors running to the fuel pump. It'll cut the wire length into a third of what it was. Then I could re-utilize the old fuel pump power wire for something else that needs full time power. Not sure what that might be yet. Probably nothing.

After I get the wiring harness touched up, I just have some 1/4" and 3/8" tubing to make up for a couple items, then I can mount the upper intake. It's all just some detail work and the intercooler plumbing left. Then it's install...


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #274, 10-04-2013 11:25 AM
      It's been a very busy past few days. I've made a ton of progress and the engine/cradle assembly is complete. I'm just cleaning the garage, which got way to messy during the final assembly phase, then I need to prep the car to receive the package, including installing the intercooler lines and pump as well as some other engine bay preparations.

Some recap on what I've done most recently, I...

Redid the little bit of fuel pump wiring I had mentioned in the previous post, and added a fuse to the circuit which will go by the relay.
Tidied up the wiring, added some heat reflective fiberglass tape
Finalized the wiring harness in general
Removed the original 3/8" valve cover breather port stubs and installed 1/8" NPT plugs as they were no longer needed at all.
Cleaned the belt covers and the top cover, painted the hardware and installed
Installed the sway bar
Tightened up all connections
Modified my PCV pipe that also operates the blow off valve
Installed the turbo blanket
Installed the various water lines to the turbo and wastegate
Added the connection hoses to the engine for the coolant and breathers.

I worked on some of the smaller lines, like the fuel pressure regulator reference line, since this is now a boosted engine, I felt it was appropriate to place some insurance on all the vacuum lines. I used aircraft style fastener wire and pliers to wrap and tighten most of the smaller lines. I could have used small zip ties instead, but I'm pretty good with the stainless wire and I don't trust cheap zip ties. The connections were very secure after this.


An decision had to be made. Which wastegate spring should I use?...


After much debate, since the spring will be nearly impossible to get to in order to change it, I settled on the spring on the far left, it's natural opening pressure is 7.25 PSI. I originally had installed the smaller spring above it, which was 4.35 PSI. It really bothered me how easy it was to open the wastegate with just my fingers, let alone the buildup of exhaust pressure. 15 PSI of exhaust pressure would likely have pushed the valve open against that spring. It just seemed too weak for me to be comfortable using it. I may not know what kind of pressure will be in the exhaust manifold, but I wasn't going to let that inhibit boost or spool.

The other reason the spring selection was touchy is because I chose to use an ECM controlled boost solenoid, so the ECM can regulate boost at whatever PSI I want. So I wanted a weaker spring, as the computer's ability is only to increase boost past the spring setting by delaying the application of control pressure to the wastegate. So if I put in a bigger spring, I lose some flexibility in how much range the ECM can control boost. So I figured I wouldn't want to have anything less then 7 PSI as a setting.

However, one more thing I will do is apply a strong vacuum to the other port on the wastegate to pull the diaphragm open so it will not boost during initial tuning. 7 PSI might be a bit much for rough tuning. A vacuum line with a check valve should do the trick.

Another thing I had to do was add some Fiero style exhaust hangers to the front of the exhaust.



I also made and added some cradle intercooler lines.




Once all this was done, I can say the engine is ready for the car. But the car isn't ready just yet.

One last walk around.









I also drained the gas tank. I used the fuel pump to empty it most of the way. Once the fuel pump chugged its very first bit of air I immediately cut it off and drained the tank by manual methods. I learned that the Fiero's fuel tank actually has about a gallon and a half, or so of fuel when the pump finally quits on flat ground
This is what I got out of it after the pump was finished.


I'm going to finish organizing and cleaning the garage, then I will get the tank ready, and load it in, do the new intercooler lines to the front, find the intercooler pump a home and wire it in. Then its just some cleaning and painting in the engine bay and the engine will go in. Hopefully within the next day or two.

It's getting so close...


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #275, 10-10-2013 05:06 PM
      I had a really busy week. I've been working on the car as much as I can stand to. I didn't take a heck of a lot of pictures, but heres the jist of it.

The engines in. It runs. It boosts. It drives.



Without tuning it much it's not really drivable. It idles ok but I'm having serious issues with data logging. so I'm having trouble with diagnostics right now.

After getting it up to temperature it sprung a water leak that required me to drain the coolant and remove the turbo. Which I might add, is a huge pain in the butt


I found later on that the leak was actually not my welded pipes, but rather the banjo bolt itself which was damaged in manufacture


Nothing a few seconds on the lathe couldn't fix


I got it all back together now. And am struggling to maintain a connection from the ECM to my computer.

I did have an issue where somehow, inexplicably 12V was making it to the map sensor wire, causing the car to fry a computer and make the car not run. If the MAP readings weren't pegged, it might have been a bit more difficult to find. But the real question is, how does 12V get into a direct wire from the map sensor to the ECM?!? Either way, I will have to fix that!

In the meantime I've bypassed that wire externally for the time being, and am having quite a time trying to get the ECM to communicate. There is something weird going on that I will get to the bottom of.




Dr.CGT (chazdorn@aol.com) MSG #276, 10-11-2013 11:37 AM
      Grounds? you did some painting

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #277, 10-11-2013 02:02 PM
      That's the same thought I was having. But there is only a 30mv difference between the chassis and the ECM when the engine is running, that is well within acceptable. If it were a volt or more I could see some serious issues. If anything, that tells me that my engine is well grounded.

I figured out what was the issue with the MAP sensor wire and had a good laugh at myself. I intend to put in the electronic boost gage/tach, I knew I had to commandeer a wire to the dash board, and I decided to use the no longer needed "Temp warning" lamp circuit to feed the signal to the gage pod. My stupid face forgot that I wired that! The bulb was still in the socket in the instrument cluster, and it was back feeding its 12V feed into the map sensor wire. I popped the bulb out, and all is good now. I've always been a good harness builder, I even put in features I forget about.

Troubleshooting is continuing on the logging... I can't even begin tuning without data logging.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #278, 10-11-2013 02:54 PM
      Yay! I fixed the data logging! Again, my fault, I wired in a feature I forgot about. I wanted a calibration wire to the wideband controller, I put it on the ALDL, but I put it in slot E which happen to be one of the serial data ports that IS wired to my logger. So the wideband controller was interfering with the serial communication. I moved it to an empty port and it now logs perfectly. So I took a lap around the block and logged it, now I can start dialing in! I needed to hear some spoooooling followed by some Spwishing to keep me motivated.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #279, 10-11-2013 04:58 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
I figured out what was the issue with the MAP sensor wire and had a good laugh at myself. I intend to put in the electronic boost gage/tach, I knew I had to commandeer a wire to the dash board, and I decided to use the no longer needed "Temp warning" lamp circuit to feed the signal to the gage pod. My stupid face forgot that I wired that! The bulb was still in the socket in the instrument cluster, and it was back feeding its 12V feed into the map sensor wire. I popped the bulb out, and all is good now.


How's your MAP wired that this could happen?



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #280, 10-11-2013 06:59 PM
      It's wired normally, 5V, GND, and Signal. But, the signal wire splits, one going to the ECM, the other runs into the C500 (D3) which was the temperature light. From there it makes it to the cluster, where it will be locally wired to the sunbird boost/tach. The key is to not have the temp indicator bulb in place. Or move the wire to a different conductor on the cluster. I forgot to do that. so the bulb was back feeding the map sensor and the ECM. Oops.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #281, 10-12-2013 07:46 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
the other runs into the C500 (D3) which was the temperature light. From there it makes it to the cluster, where it will be locally wired to the sunbird boost/tach.


Why on earth are you doing that?

Edit: Nevermind, I was thinking MAF rather than MAP

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 10-12-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #282, 10-18-2013 09:41 PM
      Just a little bit of spooling and a bit of boost...



I finished the intercooler plumbing this morning, wired the pump to key on power, and filled the system with coolant and bled the air out. Seems to be working well. I may also need a lighter spring than the 11 psi spring in the blow off valve, I'm getting a bit of off throttle turbo surging sound. I've been playing with the tune and sorting out a few misc issues I've had. I've been so busy that I really haven't had the time to do many updates. But it's all turning out well!


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #283, 10-31-2013 11:08 PM
      I've been keeping busy on this project. I had to sort a couple of leaks I had to sort out, namely the turbo water fittings again. I wound up using AN $$ fittings to replace one of my custom pipes. Once that was taken care of, I did some basic tuning and drove it around a bunch. It drives great in open loop, terrible In closed loop. I have my work cut out for me tuning wise.

I've spent the last two weeks doing a complete hack on $6D, which is pretty much 96% identical to $8F. The only differences:
Calculation of map variables (due to map sensor difference)
6D has shift light logic
8F has wastegate code.

They basically took $6D and cut the shift light logic from it since 8F was an "auto only" and reused some of the ram slots for the added in wastegate code.

After doing the hack, I polled the differences between an otherwise identical $6D manual ATWX and an automatic ARYH code, and applied whichever differences I felt were applicable to my 8F code as a tuner pro v5 patch.

Then, I copied the section of code for the shift light from 6D to an open area in 8F, patched in the logic option to turn on or off the shift light code, (it was always there for some reason) added the appropriate jumps, corrected the internal addresses, and assigned new ram slots to handle the shift light timers involved.
All this to make 8F have a fully functional manual option. I also had to re-disassemble 8F to make sure I didn't make any mistakes when adding in the new code.

It is extremely time consuming doing a full hack. But with 8F being well hacked, it was a matter of lining them up next to each other. And move the descriptions over.

In the meantime, I tore the front end apart. I had installed poly bushings 5 years ago, and I had the upper control arm bushings seize to the shaft, and the shells broke free of the upper arms. It was a bad situation. I'm replacing the front bushings with rubber, and putting in Rodney Dickmans tapered front bearings and zero lash end links. Hopefully this will all make the front end as good as the day it was made.

I've come to the conclusion that poly sucks for some things, and is excellent for others. My lower control arms in the front worked excellent with poly, but I had numerous problems with it on the uppers. The rear toe and lateral links had problems, but the trailing link was perfect. At the end of the day, the larger, and less rotated poly bushings were fine. It was the little ones that had all the issues. I was considering using poly in the lower control arms, but I decided I didn't want the maintenance of poly at all.

So I'm still busy, and since the heavy code work is done, I can get back into tuning as soon as I get the front end back together.


BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #284, 11-06-2013 10:22 PM
      Hands down one of the finest engineering examples on PFF. You got to love that first drive, eh?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #285, 11-08-2013 12:18 AM
      Thanks! I've taken quite a lot of pride in the work that I have put into this. It's the best work I've done I think.

It's quite powerful but it needs so much tune work, and I'm still sorting out stuff. Like surprise leaks.

Here's one that wasn't a surprise, but rather a disappointment.


So... the axle seal is leaking a little. For now I'm going to just pretend everything is fine

I thought a bit about spark plug selection. I've had Autolite Iridium XP5243's in this engine forever, I really like these plugs.
But realizing that they are old, and still gapped to 0.060". I got a cheap set of NGK TR6 plugs and decided to put those in. 0.040" gap. But being a 3.4 DOHC Fiero, this isn't the easiest task, but quite a bit worse than the old 2.8's.

These three are perhaps the easiest to change in all of automotive history, provided you have a long enough extension.


But... once you remove the decklid, you're confronted with this catastrophe.


No problem, I'll just put the jack under the back of the cradle, unbolt the dogbone, remove the bottom two rivets from the two splash guards, remove the rear cradle bolts and lower the engine...
Now, I can just squeak the wires out, and the socket and extension in and change the plugs.


It probably took about 30 minutes to change all 6 and bolt the cradle and dog bone back in place, and put the deck lid back on.

Driving around, I didn't notice much of a difference. But at least it's something I don't have to worry about now.

I'm still playing around with tuning. It needs a ton of work. I have done some testing, and It's clear that I have a few things to sort out.
The engine hits a solid wall while boosting and I'm having trouble identifying what that wall is. But I'm afraid it might be turbo surge? It makes the characteristic sound of it. Maybe the air filter is too small and restrictive??? Either way, it's something to test.


sleevePAPA MSG #286, 11-08-2013 04:05 AM
      boosted with a .060" gap? should be around .025", d/r if I read that wrong. If there is compressor surge you will hear a distinct fluttering that gets progressively louder as the rpm's climb.

As for the wall, spark timing and AFR's, where are they at when you hit the wall?


Hudini (hudini@tds.net) MSG #287, 11-08-2013 08:13 AM
      $8F has a backwards rev limiter table. For some weird reason the higher you set it the lower the limiter kicks in. If your hack copies $8F you might have the same issue.

tesmith66 MSG #288, 11-08-2013 08:17 AM
      I dropped my DOHC down until the bottom of the pan was level with the lowest part of the cradle for the most upper clearance possible.

I can get the boots off of the front 3 by pushing them forward, then pulling them at an angle towards the passenger side. I pull the plugs by dropping the socket into the hole, then the extension and then attach the ratchet. Unscrew the plug all the way, disconnect the ratchet, pull the extension until I can reach the socket and disconnect it, then use a magnetic pick up tool to get the socket and plug out. I pulled the rubber thingy out of the socket so the plug will stay in the hole- that way if the socket drops off of the magnet it wont smash the plug gap. I start new plugs with a piece of rubber hose (don't forget the anti-seize!).

Learned this method when we had a Ford Probe with the DOHC V6.

Do you have some sort of water diverter or rain guard to keep the front 3 dry? I have already had trouble with water getting in the plug wells and causing weak or no spark. Had the same problem with the Probe if I got too crazy at the car wash.



RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #289, 11-08-2013 09:46 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Hudini:

$8F has a backwards rev limiter table. For some weird reason the higher you set it the lower the limiter kicks in. If your hack copies $8F you might have the same issue.


most, if not all of the MPFI 60V6 masks are actually like this. however, most of the XDFs have the correct conversion in them. for some reason, the 8F XDF was released with a LOT of conversion errors in it.

also, .060 on a LQ1? i want to say factory gap was .045? any benefit to running it .015 larger than normal? i know the theoretical benefits, but i wasn't sure if even a stock engine was going to deal with spark blowout.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #290, 11-08-2013 03:20 PM
      "They" don't tell you this, but you can get away with a larger gap if your gap has pointier tips, like the iridiums do. (think Tig torch, or lightning rods, pointy for that reason) And you get a healthy spark out of DIS anyway. I never had any issues with spark with the .060" N/A. Heck, I deliberately spread those plugs to that gap because I knew I could get away with it, N/A of course. But being boosted, I figured it might be the source of trouble. Still, it was not. Surprisingly.

AFR's were floating around 11.5, and timing was 8-10 degrees (weak!) and 8 lbs. Which was coincidentally registering a light knock. Unless my intercooler is garbage, or something else is wrong, shouldn't be knocking with those conservative numbers. That's why I was thinking plugs. If your fuel and timing is right and your engine is hitting the wall, and your turbo is fluttering... its probably mechanical. It could be caused by:
Compressor surge itself, which would likely be the intake filter restricting the air enough to raise the pressure differential across the compressor past the surge line.

A loss of spark, which should cause compressor surge as the turbines driving force is being removed while still under boost at WOT.

An exhaust restriction, which again will cause compressor surge due to a decrease in turbine drive, like a broken catalyst.

I'm going to try removing the air filter just to see if that is what the trouble is. It seems likely, especially if the turbo happens to be running anywhere near margin.

Hudini, you are absolutely correct, the program loads reference period, which is inverted to RPM then compares it to the cutoff value. So if you raise the value, it does in fact lower the rev limiter. But, the 8F definition did have the correct formula (1310732.000000 / X) for the value. So, it shouldn't have the inversion issue.
I haven't touched that value anyway, I see no need to rev it that high... yet

Tesmith, I couldn't really lower this engine's mounting due to the fact that the F40 transmission is naturally a bit downward leaning at the differential. its axle cup would scrape the frame if it were lowered by any real amount. Also, I am using a stock 88' fiero front engine mount, and that completely dictates height. As well as the transmission hanging lower off of the bottom anyway. So any ambition I had to lower the engine via custom mounts was fraught with complications. So I decided it would just be best to leave it where it was. I still think 1/2 hour was pretty good time to change the plugs, considering that I had to remove the decklid and swing the cradle a couple of inches. I probably won't have to do that again for a while anyway. Or so at least I hope!


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #291, 11-08-2013 06:13 PM
      I decided to make a timing table with a REALLY conservative boost section, keeping the degrees low for the time being. Ill test that sometime this weekend.

I learned something about my car today. I bypassed the boost controller, so that it was intake pressure acting directly on the half bar wastegate spring. Turns out, I think that the sound I thought might be compressor surge may actually be the unique sound that my wastegate makes when it opens. The wastegate solenoid seems to have been fluttering the opening of the wastegate. Bypassing it smoothed out the opening of the wastegate so that instead of the fluttery sound I was hearing, its more of a steady sound of high velocity air through a corrugated pipe. Which is what my wastegate dump flex is. So maybe I was mis judging it. I'll look into it some more later.

I'm going to work on my fueling tables in open loop via the wide band, and get them dialed in with conservative timing. Hopefully this strategy will keep knock at bay while I get the tables dialed in. I'm hoping I can achieve the boost levels I want, then step in some timing to make some more power. I'm just a bit worried about the pistons though. Down the line I plan on a forged bottom end, I'm just hoping that I dont have to sacrifice this engine to the tuning gods.


sspeedstreet (sspeedstreet@verizon.net) MSG #292, 11-08-2013 08:13 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

But... once you remove the decklid, you're confronted with this catastrophe.


I replaced my cam covers (1992) with ones from the '96-'97 design motor. First off, they use stiff rubber sleeves instead of rigid plastic on the later plug wires. They bend enough to clear the rear window shelf without lowering the motor. A second benefit is their umbrella design that fits over a vertical wall cast into the covers. My original covers leaked badly when water got onto the motor; these seal completely.

~Neil


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #293, 11-09-2013 07:18 PM
      Ah, yes! I remember those later wires. I actually like the early wires in the back, but the newer ones for the front. I live in Las Vegas, so rain isn't much of an issue. I also found by chance, an original decklid recall weatherstrip in the U-Pull yard. So that is my only defense against water. And it hasn't been an issue. I also am a bit liberal with my Dielectric grease on this engine.

This is my second 3.4 DOHC fiero, I used to have an 85 coupe with a 96 engine. Living in rainy Long Island, I had noting but problems with the front three all the time. Here, it's just never been an issue.


Silicoan86 (jcoan86@yahoo.com) MSG #294, 11-10-2013 02:17 AM
      I've also had issues with water getting in the front 3 plugs on mine, even with the recall strip attached to the decklid. It got to the point where the car was misfiring so badly that I couldn't drive it. About two months ago I had to come up with a solution, even if just temporary - but enough to get me through the rest of the season with the car.

I quickly made a cover out of aluminum to prevent water from getting in there. I didn't spend much time on it so it's not pretty, but it'll keep water out till I come up with a more permanent solution during the off season (which has now arrived here in MN). I tested it with a car wash and the plugs and valve cover were bone dry afterwards.



Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #295, 11-10-2013 09:28 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
It drives great in open loop, terrible In closed loop. I have my work cut out for me tuning wise.


It took me a while to get closedloop working pretty well, the biggest problem being a stable idle and fighting the stall saver spark control to get there. I recently switched back to openloop because of the occasional idle hunt that would result from turning on the A/C, which raising idle rpm pretty much resolved but I like to keep idle near 875- 900 rpm as opposed to just shy of 1000 and at the lower limit is where most of the trouble occurred. There are so many tables with obscure titles that can actually act inversely to what the title suggests, so you can make a problem worse before figuring out you need to go in the opposite direction. If all of the major tables were defined regarding their actual function the tuning process wouldn't be so testy.

Be sure to tease out your spark dwell tables, Robertsaar did that for me and after an article with data on ignition coil dwell time relative to other load factors suggested I should adjust mine upward closer to 7 ms, I have not had another episode of spark blowout (misfire) boosting in excess of 15 psi after doing so.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #296, 11-13-2013 01:53 PM
      Thanks for the tips. Most of the issues I've been seeing in closed loop idle appear to be excessive changes in injector pulse width. Which I assume is because I have rather large (60 lb) injectors. So I need to figure out what table or value needs to be tweaked to trim down the size of the changes in PW based on o2 swings. It just doesn't seem to like running at 13.5 - 14.7:1 at idle, It just suddenly shuts down very abruptly. 11.5 or so, runs beautifully, but that's not really what I want I'll try running the idle spark compensators from a 3.4 DOHC code and see if that helps.

Isn't dwell hard coded in the software? I cant find any reference to any tables or values at all for dwell. There are a hand full of dwell values in a small chunk of code, but It's a little hard to decipher exactly what they mean or do, or when they are called.



Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #297, 11-13-2013 08:55 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
Thanks for the tips. Most of the issues I've been seeing in closed loop idle appear to be excessive changes in injector pulse width. Which I assume is because I have rather large (60 lb) injectors. So I need to figure out what table or value needs to be tweaked to trim down the size of the changes in PW based on o2 swings. It just doesn't seem to like running at 13.5 - 14.7:1 at idle, It just suddenly shuts down very abruptly. 11.5 or so, runs beautifully, but that's not really what I want I'll try running the idle spark compensators from a 3.4 DOHC code and see if that helps.

Isn't dwell hard coded in the software? I cant find any reference to any tables or values at all for dwell. There are a hand full of dwell values in a small chunk of code, but It's a little hard to decipher exactly what they mean or do, or when they are called.


I had trouble at idle with the 60s so I can imagine what you're probably going through with even less displacement, especially if you are running a base fuel pressure in the stock 50 psi range. It's very strange but yes there is something about attempting to run stoich AFR at idle that the motors do not like and usually it manifests with a rough idle although the rpm maybe stable. You basically need to give it what it wants until you find the balance as there appears to be some fine tuning fuel delivery that I don't believe the wideband can pick up but you can feel the difference.

The tables I had to work with before my idle AFR would even budge toward stoich from a low AFR are:
FUEL INJ OFFSET VS. FUEL PUMP VOLTAGE

You're dealing with injectors that are newer and different in their characteristics relative to stock, I had to lower values to get my AFR to come up at idle as trying to do it via the idle fuel table was not working to the point where I thought the table was useless and when I adjusted the fuel table enough to get a response the results were poor and erratic. Setup a history table that tracks your pump voltage in the idle range so you'll know what your pump is seeing. You'll be able to observe the cell follower as voltage changes and note whether you need to increase or decrease fuel based on where the voltage sits with various loads on the system.

FUEL INJECTOR OFFSET VS. BASE PULSE WIDTH

This table may end up needing to be tapered off after 1 or 2 cells because theoretically larger injectors take slightly more time to open initially having more surface area pressure to overcome and weight of mechanical parts after which it tends to deliver a bit more fuel than the smaller injectors as it operates with the same linearity. I used this table to help with fine tuning things like the cooling fan and A/C coming on where the BPW would jump in desired amount.

I've been able to achieve idle AFR in the 13s but much more than that and it gets unstable in closed loop with electric loads switching on and off. Make sure you have no vacuum leaks of any kind, the problems come on slowly and progressive and can throw you for a loop until you discover how easy they can develop. I used the stock bolts in the exhaust manifolds and they made me pay about every 3 months. I have studs on the way now as it was a real headache to get at bolts barely accessible for tightening. I see you've nailed that one already.


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #298, 11-13-2013 09:01 PM
      look for "prop" tables..... they're highly involved with the injector skewing for closed loop control. there are also scalars that can come into play, especially at idle, though i would need to check my notes to see if they're actually enabled in 8F.

dwell..... those values are kind of hidden in the code, not sure of the best way to post info on them other than grabbing my disassembly and posting the entire section of code.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #299, 11-13-2013 10:35 PM
      I spent a long morning trying to tune idle. What a pain! And I agree with what you are saying. I'm clearly following your experiences.

What I am coming across is tweaking the idle VE table is getting me to 11.5-12.0 once it gets just a little higher than that it becomes completely unstable. It doesn't feel like the pulse width, nor the AFR's are reacting to subtle table changes, but rather large changes, and then when I get close, the AFR's suddenly jump, and the engine stalls. I tried zeroing out the idle spark compensator tables, then made the small area in the idle sweet spot in the main timing table flat. This gave me completely stable timing fixed at 23 degrees. Which is what the 3.1 had in the sweet spot. This made the car have an extremely stable idle, but only when pig rich 11.3-11.5. Any higher AFR than that it starts surging and it dies. I'm going to mess with the timing value some tomorrow, and try the voltage injector offset thing while I'm at it. I've found that the EGR BPW compensation table stops effecting the fueling at right around 40-41. So I can't trim any more fuel out there. It was frustrating to try to get the idle tuned in. I feel like I've made no progress, but I am learning a lot in the process.

I've been working on 8F for a bit, I know the code fairly well. It definitely can do what I am asking it to In modified form. But trying to get the idle figured out is testing my patience. It has left me wondering which tables are truly active while idling. And, whether I am hitting limits as I'm tweaking things in. I'm not sure if there are any pulse width limitations on the injectors in synchronous firing. I'll have to consult my hack for a while.

These are things that will be the death of me! But I'll keep working on it! Thanks against for the suggestions guys! You've given me some more things to try out.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #300, 11-14-2013 06:22 AM
      AFR VS COOLANT TEMP FOR COLD ENGINE AND CLOSED THROTTLE

Keep that table in mind, as you start to adjust tables that globally affect fueling at startup you may eventually encounter a problem with cold starts. Watch your BPW value in Tunerpro just before cranking, if the value is red and the motor starts without issue it should be fine, if it smells pretty rich you may need to reduce fueling (raise value actually) in this table some. If you encounter a problem where the motor starts okay but shortly after starts to run increasingly lean for a while and then returns to normal it is most likely this table and the lean problem lasts until it times out. I've tried the base pulse vs TPS table but found this one more effective since the TPS table did not appear to be time oriented and therefore did not fix the lean outs after starting.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 11-14-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #301, 11-14-2013 03:44 PM
      I think I've found my issue. The injectors MAY be too big after all. I sent L0089 to my data stream which is the LSB for the PWM sent to the Injector driver. It's the last value that gets sent to the injector driver to tell the hardware exactly what to do.

It seems at idle, I was throwing out 18 counts, which was shooting 11.5:1 But then as I was lowering the idle VE table, slowly at first, I watched the number drop in decrements of 2. It would take around 4-5 whole % VE just to drop the counts a single decrement of 2. ONLY when this output value would change, I would see it affect the AFR's. This explains why the Idle VE table seemed to be numb to minor changes, but responsive to major ones. I could get the counts down to 12, and it would be shooting right around 13:1. But, the instant the value hits 10... the engine dies. I mean just plain cuts off. This may be a limitation of the ECM's hardware apparently. It's calculating BPW correctly, but it's subject to the resolution of the hardware then, the limitations of it as well.

This also explains why it just plain wouldn't idle in closed loop. It was hitting this same hardware wall when it was trimming back the AFR's as I have been trying to do.

I may need to look into a different injector management method. There is Async, and Quasi-Async. I'm not sure how that is going to play out. I may have to break out my 42.5's for the time being if I don't find a solution to my dilemma.

Bottom line, it does NOT like the 60 LB injectors. If I can't get it to shoot the right amount of fuel by one mean or another at an idle, then I will have to resort to changing injectors.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #302, 11-14-2013 04:21 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

I think I've found my issue. The injectors MAY be too big after all. I sent L0089 to my data stream which is the LSB for the PWM sent to the Injector driver. It's the last value that gets sent to the injector driver to tell the hardware exactly what to do.

It seems at idle, I was throwing out 18 counts, which was shooting 11.5:1 But then as I was lowering the idle VE table, slowly at first, I watched the number drop in decrements of 2. It would take around 4-5 whole % VE just to drop the counts a single decrement of 2. ONLY when this output value would change, I would see it affect the AFR's. This explains why the Idle VE table seemed to be numb to minor changes, but responsive to major ones. I could get the counts down to 12, and it would be shooting right around 13:1. But, the instant the value hits 10... the engine dies. I mean just plain cuts off. This may be a limitation of the ECM's hardware apparently. It's calculating BPW correctly, but it's subject to the resolution of the hardware then, the limitations of it as well.

This also explains why it just plain wouldn't idle in closed loop. It was hitting this same hardware wall when it was trimming back the AFR's as I have been trying to do.

I may need to look into a different injector management method. There is Async, and Quasi-Async. I'm not sure how that is going to play out. I may have to break out my 42.5's for the time being if I don't find a solution to my dilemma.

Bottom line, it does NOT like the 60 LB injectors. If I can't get it to shoot the right amount of fuel by one mean or another at an idle, then I will have to resort to changing injectors.


Yep, all of that. You may still be okay by adjusting the two tables I mentioned as there are tune specifics for a stock motor and smaller injectors at play not to mention all the other stuff that a computer program is probably calculating the appropriate values for. There is also an injector spec sheet and I imagine yours is the same as mine which has flow specs for fuel pressure as low as the 30s. In other words you may need to drop your fuel pressure if you can. I removed the regulator along with enough outlet tubing from an 8100 V8 fuel rail which is adjustable and set my static fuel pressure to 40 psi which drops a little lower with idle vacuum.

This is why I often question members who plan to use injectors that appear to be far more than what they need as a "just in case I" approach. It's not a big deal until you decide you want to run closedloop. There is a member planning to use 80s on a 3800 SC right now with practical performance goals and that's a bit much for an intended daily driver.

I believe you can also select for single pulse at idle as well which I believe is tied to QUASI which you can disable to possibly get the desired effect.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 11-14-2013).]

RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #303, 11-14-2013 04:23 PM
      increments of two sounds like you're already in single-fire mode, since the BPW calc is done assuming double-fire until BPW threshold is tested for, then doubled or cleared if single-fire conditions are met....

also, d10 = .153mSec.... that seems awfully short, even for 60lb/hr.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #304, 11-14-2013 07:10 PM
      I guess I should really think about fuel pressure then! I'm not far from where I need to be, I just need that little bit less fuel, and of course a little breathing room. Realistically, I need something like 50 lb injectors for what I am doing. So a little less fuel pressure looks like my best option. I'm going to have to machine myself an adjustable, vacuum regulator. This sounds like a fun challenge!

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 11-14-2013).]

ttt123 (briandocherty@hotmail.com) MSG #305, 11-15-2013 12:49 PM
      I just read through this entire thread and i hope I'm not the only one who feels like they were just neutered.... yup i'm not a man after seeing this work wow man just wow I'm going to go outside and kick my fiero now lol

needless to say you did an amazing job and cudos on your talents sir.

take care
brian


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #306, 11-19-2013 09:56 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:

I had trouble at idle with the 60s so I can imagine what you're probably going through with even less displacement, especially if you are running a base fuel pressure in the stock 50 psi range. It's very strange but yes there is something about attempting to run stoich AFR at idle that the motors do not like and usually it manifests with a rough idle although the rpm maybe stable. You basically need to give it what it wants until you find the balance as there appears to be some fine tuning fuel delivery that I don't believe the wideband can pick up but you can feel the difference.


This is due to mismatched dead times among your injectors. Most injector suppliers only match gross flow rate, but don't try to match dead times. Thus, the minimum fuel delivery per pulse can vary by 100% of the group average across the set.

If you're operating at minimum pulse width, one injector might be delivering 50% of the group average and the next might be delivering 150%... so one cylinder's always going to be lean (and misfiring) and one cylinder's always going to be rich, even though the average is stoich. To get the lean cylinder up to the point that it no longer misfires, the overall average has to be noticeably rich.

Injector Dynamics supplies injectors with matched dead times, but they're not cheap.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #307, 11-19-2013 10:04 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
It seems at idle, I was throwing out 18 counts, which was shooting 11.5:1 But then as I was lowering the idle VE table, slowly at first, I watched the number drop in decrements of 2. It would take around 4-5 whole % VE just to drop the counts a single decrement of 2. ONLY when this output value would change, I would see it affect the AFR's. This explains why the Idle VE table seemed to be numb to minor changes, but responsive to major ones. I could get the counts down to 12, and it would be shooting right around 13:1. But, the instant the value hits 10... the engine dies. I mean just plain cuts off. This may be a limitation of the ECM's hardware apparently. It's calculating BPW correctly, but it's subject to the resolution of the hardware then, the limitations of it as well.

This also explains why it just plain wouldn't idle in closed loop. It was hitting this same hardware wall when it was trimming back the AFR's as I have been trying to do.

I may need to look into a different injector management method. There is Async, and Quasi-Async. I'm not sure how that is going to play out. I may have to break out my 42.5's for the time being if I don't find a solution to my dilemma.

Bottom line, it does NOT like the 60 LB injectors. If I can't get it to shoot the right amount of fuel by one mean or another at an idle, then I will have to resort to changing injectors.


Definitely sounds like you're hitting your minimum injector on time.

Don't the batch fire computers fire all the injectors every revolution?
That's a horrible way to run large injectors.
First, that cuts the pulse width in half, which makes the problems with short pulse widths MUCH worse
Second--and compounding the first--there are two fuel delivery events per valve event, which means that the greater error in fuel delivery acts TWICE for every combustion event.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #308, 11-19-2013 10:14 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Will:
This is due to mismatched dead times among your injectors. Most injector suppliers only match gross flow rate, but don't try to match dead times. Thus, the minimum fuel delivery per pulse can vary by 100% of the group average across the set.

If you're operating at minimum pulse width, one injector might be delivering 50% of the group average and the next might be delivering 150%... so one cylinder's always going to be lean (and misfiring) and one cylinder's always going to be rich, even though the average is stoich. To get the lean cylinder up to the point that it no longer misfires, the overall average has to be noticeably rich.

Injector Dynamics supplies injectors with matched dead times, but they're not cheap.


That's why I threw the idea of trying to relative-match the values on the injector spec sheet out the window, although my problem was with idle being too rich such as the case here. On the other hand, the two tables I mentioned when used together did help produce a more practical idle AFR without roughness and there is a gray area where the inj BPW offset table makes an audible difference when changed that can't be seen in the AFR reading. Both tables are a bit ratchetty regarding resolution but seem to work together well. RobertSaar mentioned the proportional gains tables but I found better response from the latter two. I do recall mention of the prop tables being of more significant help with radical camshafts on the Thirdgen forum.


You can look at the inj spec sheet and other specific data here in the thumbnails just below the main picture. Note the offset curve as system voltage drops. My fuel pump voltage runs about 1 volt below system/battery voltage and I was able to follow it and adjust the offset table accordingly by watching the AFR along with voltage drop as the alternator heated up.
http://www.siemensdeka.com/...114961/#!prettyPhoto

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 11-19-2013).]

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #309, 11-19-2013 11:58 AM
      Yes, you DEFINITELY need to program dead time versus voltage into your computer in order to have the ECM trying to pulse the injectors correctly.

If you have full data logging capability of an OBDII computer, figuring out which injectors are doing what could be easier, as you can watch the misfire counters. If you try to idle at stoich and you're seeing #2 and #5 misfire a lot, then you move all the injectors to the next higher cylinder number (and 6 -> 1), then see #3 and #6 misfire counters go up... then you know which injectors are well outside the group average.

You can also log injector pulse width per cylinder on a sequential engine and back out the intake manifold correction if your samples are close enough in time.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 11-19-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #310, 11-19-2013 09:42 PM
      I'm not OBDII so that's not really something I can do much about.

In the meantime, I made an adjustable fuel pressure regulator... This was a fun challenge.
First, I found a spare fuel rail kicking around


This is the stock regulator


The obvious thing to do was to cut the top off, unconventional method, but effective!


Ok, so there is the spring, I need to make that adjustable.


Design time!


Chunk of stock


First I did the internal boring cuts


Then... I got so busy I didn't take many pictures.

Then This...




Assembled, I use a large snap ring to hold the two parts together.


Old vs new


Then, it was time to tear the upper intake manifold and the fuel rail off and put the custom regulator in


Regulator is in. Its quite a tight fit, a litte grinding was necessary to clear the lower intake manifold. But I knew it was going to be very tight.
I adjusted the unreferenced pressure to 34 PSI, put the intake manifold back on and went back to tuning. The pressure under idle vacuum was 28 PSI. That's pretty low. Theoretically it brings me to around 53 lb injectors.


I tried retuning it, and unfortunately its not enough. It will idle at 14.7:1 now which is great! but... it's still right at minimal pulse width. If I give it more timing like it wants, I have to pull some more fuel to idle, and it still dies. It looks like I'm going to have to break out the 42.5's weather or not I like it. I'm stuck with it for now. It's a bit disappointing. I'll up the fuel pressure back to 46, which was what the stock regulator was set at, run the 42.5's and run them to their maximum at whatever boost it will let me run. The only upside, is that I know this engine idles great at 14.7:1, but timing is a very conservative 16 degrees, the 3.4 DOHC wants more timing, and less fuel then this.


sleevePAPA MSG #311, 11-19-2013 10:29 PM
      what is the PW? Have you tried single firing for idle?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #312, 11-20-2013 12:46 AM
      Its firing between .12 and .15 ms to get me to 14.7:1.

I believe I am in single fire, but I have to check the logs.

Admittedly, it now idles and runs great at 14.7:1 open loop. But as soon as the slightest bit of fuel is trimmed by closed loop... it just shuts down.

I'm a bit curious though about idle timing. At idle I found if I start throwing a few degrees at it, the AFR's start to drop considerably even with the exact same amount of fuel going in. I assume that it's a good thing, its bringing up its idle fuel efficiency, and asking for fuel to be trimmed in return, which I am unable to do.

Is there an "every other revolution" mode? That might help... SFI works on that principal if I'm not mistaken. But it could cause instability I would guess.

I can't be the first to try to tune idle on a GM P4 ECM using 60 lb injectors. Makes me wonder what everyone else is doing, or what I am missing right now. These same injectors are used on some ULEV vehicles, so it has to be possible. Maybe the lack of SFI is the reason I can't get the PW's low enough to idle correctly. I can't fix that without rewiring the whole thing...


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #313, 11-20-2013 01:13 AM
      non-SFI shouldn't be a problem..... some of the code59 guys are running 80 lb/hr without issue IIRC.

i've forced single-fire mode in place of double-fire in A1 before..... i really didn't see a difference in terms of any output or idle stability or ......

but i was also playing with 3.1 liters and 16.7 lb/hr injectors, so i didn't have such critical of timings. i tried for a few weeks to try and get the transition from single-fire to double-fire correct, but i must not have understood the code that operates it well enough, roughly 50% of the time it would go off without a hitch.... the other times a calculated single-fire burst of fuel would have a double-fire burst of fuel added on top of it, causing the AFR to shoot way rich for a cycle. feels odd with the TCC locked. i seem to remember the double to single transition being less of a problem.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #314, 11-20-2013 06:16 AM
      Did some code searching. looks like this code only sets the "Deliver fuel on every reference pulse" flag during cold start. I'm assuming that's 3 pulses per rev.

Otherwise, I can't find anything showing single or double fire mode anywhere.



Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #315, 11-20-2013 07:26 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Its firing between .12 and .15 ms to get me to 14.7:1.

I believe I am in single fire, but I have to check the logs.

Admittedly, it now idles and runs great at 14.7:1 open loop. But as soon as the slightest bit of fuel is trimmed by closed loop... it just shuts down.

I'm a bit curious though about idle timing. At idle I found if I start throwing a few degrees at it, the AFR's start to drop considerably even with the exact same amount of fuel going in. I assume that it's a good thing, its bringing up its idle fuel efficiency, and asking for fuel to be trimmed in return, which I am unable to do.

Is there an "every other revolution" mode? That might help... SFI works on that principal if I'm not mistaken. But it could cause instability I would guess.

I can't be the first to try to tune idle on a GM P4 ECM using 60 lb injectors. Makes me wonder what everyone else is doing, or what I am missing right now. These same injectors are used on some ULEV vehicles, so it has to be possible. Maybe the lack of SFI is the reason I can't get the PW's low enough to idle correctly. I can't fix that without rewiring the whole thing...


Have you tried following the Integrator on the Tunerpro dash to see what it's doing at idle when closedloop is activated? It does not always match what the wideband reads. That helped me a lot with the direction I needed to go for adjustments as well as when loads were initiated at idle; cooling fan, A/C.

You may also need to start closedloop activation at a higher temperature for now, if it is as low as the 8F OE setting of ~80 deg. I had a fairly easy transition into closedloop at 135 deg and part of this problem is not knowing what all the coldstart tables are doing, when and for how long at startup to tune in consistency. Anything lower than 135 deg and an idle hunt set in along the way to full operating temp. So a coldstart areas state of tune varies as a result to the point of having a headache at a very low activation temp, to no trouble at a higher activation temp with such a large injector change.

You may also need to restore the characteristic idle spark advance for the tune, as well as find out what the typical idle spark advance is for that motor. When I zeroed out the idle spark correction tables a couple days ago as you had done, along with my already flattened sparkadvance area, I actually wound up with an idle hunt in openloop that I did not have with them in place before. So I reasoned that with my high compression ratio that perhaps I need to increase them a little above stock. So far so good although I'm still running openloop at the moment.

You may also need to consider your idle rpm setting considering the tune 8F anyway, was setup for a smaller motor with about 40 lbs of coverter, flywheel and fluid weight. I have the best results around 925 rpm. It may sound irrelevant but after wrestling with this subject for the better part of a year before making good progress you will want to consider all possibilities given the enormous number of tables in the code to accomplish the same thing "brainless" carbed engines did with little effort.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 11-20-2013).]

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #316, 11-20-2013 09:27 AM
      With more displacement and a lighter flywheel, the 3.4 will gain and lose RPM more quickly than the 3.1/auto. That affects idle stability significantly, as a given load will have a much larger effect on idle RPM and require a faster correction to keep the RPM from changing significantly.

RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #317, 11-20-2013 09:51 AM
      i took a look at all stores to 3FD0.

the section of code starting at A4C3 looks to be the one involving single vs double-fire. there are two stores, A4F1 deals with the no-fire cycle, A528 deals with the double volume cycle(due to the LSLD at A501).

if single-fire isn't allowed, the code immediately jumps to A52E.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #318, 11-20-2013 03:36 PM
     


9.2.2 Quasi-Asynchronous Fuel Delivery
Quasi-Asynchronous fuel delivery is used when the synchronous fuel base pulse width becomes
so small that the fuel pulses cannot be accurately delivered.
Enabling quasi-asynchronous fuel mode will cause the fuel injectors to be energized every other
reference pulse but for twice the duration (of the normal synchronous base pulse width). This
results in the same amount of fuel being delivered, but with an accurately controllable injector
pulse width.

It looks like what I really need is quasi-asynchronous mode. Problem is, It's not activating it for some reason. It appears that all the conditions are being met, but it's not going into that mode.

C0D0, Battery voltage normal
C0DF, Engine running
C0E3, DFCO not active
C0F3, MPH not exceeding L86C2 (255)
C0F9, BPW high hysteresis qualifier L86BA (1.28 MSEC, I'm WELL BELOW!)
C102, BPW low hysteresis qualifier L86B8 (0.98 MSEC, Again, WAY BELOW)

So it should be setting the quasi async flag. but I'm not seeing it. I need to get this one figured out!


joshua riedl MSG #319, 11-20-2013 05:46 PM
      How About commanding 13:1 afr and see if it will idle that way. It should at least tell you if it's in the tune or injectors.

mkman (michaelkunzman@hotmail.com) MSG #320, 11-20-2013 07:45 PM
      I would like to ask you a quick question that might help me with my build. I noticed you did not use the jackshaft intermediate axle that the F40 tranny uses, what application of inner cv cup are you using that will go into the F40 trans directly? I want to do my build without the jackshaft, but I haven't gotten to the axle research just yet.

Thanks, Mike


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #321, 11-21-2013 03:37 PM
      Looks like this thread found a new home.

The axles, Not so easy! http://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...L/000143-7.html#p260

But, I wouldn't be so quick to do it. My axle seal is leaking at that particular tripod. It might require a bearing/seal assembly, or perhaps I just plain have a leaky seal. Although it works just fine, this issue did come up. See a few posts above for that.

Great news today!
I bypassed all conditionals for Quasi-Asynchronous mode, affectively forcing it to run in that mode. Heres a little clip of what the difference sounds like:

you can't hear any change in the quality of the idle, which is great. It was running pig rich in this video, otherwise it would have shut down when transitioning to normal firing mode.

Then, I just went ahead and pulled back the fuel, and added in a little bit of timing.


Now, I just need to figure out which conditional is failing to allow quasi asynchronous pulse, and fix that. I think it's the road speed to disallow QAP, which is set to 255 mph (at L86C2). That may be set to disable QAP entirely, where it APPEARS like it is set to be active all the time.

Either way, It looks like I can probably restore fuel pressure back to stock, as this tuning roadblock is lifted.
Now, It will even idle in closed loop, but the corrections are still far to aggressive, I need to figure out which "Idle Proportional gain count" or whatever it is that I can dial that in with. It's making the AFR's go all over!



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #322, 12-05-2013 05:44 PM
      It's been a little while since an update.
Tuning, tuning, tuning.... That's what my life revolves around nowadays.

However, having done a TON of work on the program, I am pleased to say that I've got the idle sorted out. It wasn't easy, and I burnt a half a tank, JUST IDLING! The bottom line is this:
Today, the state of Nevada recognized that a Turbocharged 3.4 DOHC with 60lb injectors easily passed emissions without any hiccups.


Our test is three parts:
A 90 second high speed emissions check at 2500 RPM's in neutral
An idle emissions test.
Visual inspection of all emissions components.

Since I have all the factory emissions equipment installed and functional. The visual was an easy pass, but they did want to see the cars emissions label, which I could not provide,"Oops, sorry, no the label was lost a long time ago" Even though it was simply taped over. They did not know or figure out that it is an engine swap.

This all makes me feel proud of what I have done.
I'll get to the chronicle of tuning, and where I stand so far later on.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #323, 12-05-2013 10:19 PM
      The craziness that is tuning, Let's discuss!

Like anything that gets tuned, you start with a base file. Mine is from a 90 Grand Prix McLaren Turbo, It is an $8F mask, ARZC code running in a 1227730 ECM, which is the in-car version of the 1227727 that was used in the 89-90 Turbo Grand Prix's. This ECM has everything I need to do this whole project. Conveniently, it is a very common, and cheap ECM.

I also know that there are three other tunes that contain valuable data for guiding the tuning of this engine.

$DF, BCFA which is the 91-93 Grand prix's with the 3.4 DOHC, and a manual transmission, uses a 16196396 ECM, which is similar to the 1227727, and 1227730, but it has some extra ram.
$6D, ATWX which is for a 89 Cavalier 2.8 with a manual transmission, Used in the 1227730.
$6D, ARYH which is also for a 89 Cavalier 2.8 with an Automatic transmission, Also used in the 1227730.

The two $6D codes were especially handy for helping show me what GM changed in an otherwise identical car, to make them compatible with a manual transmission. $6D is nearly the same code as $8F, minus the boost stuff, so this little treasure of information was very helpful!

I have a hack for $8F and created most of one for $6D, so it wasn't too difficult to compare the differences to figure out what might be changed for a manual transmission. I have only implemented a couple of the changes to my current code.

The very first thing I did to the $8F AZRC code was change the table called "Base Pulse Constant vs Desired EGR", which were all set to 105, down to 42, which reflects the change in injector size from 22# to 60#, as well as the change in displacement from the 3.1L Turbo Grand Prix, to the 3.4 DOHC, This allowed the engine to actually run. Otherwise, it would have been FAR too rich. It still injected FAR too much fuel to start, so I could only start it with the throttle pressed to the floor, which shuts off all fuel during cranking. (clear flood mode)

I decided to decrease the cranking fuel to 40% of what it was, since that is roughly what I did to the "Base Pulse Constant vs Desired EGR". The table that I used for this was "Crank fuel PW vs Coolant Temperature" I just grabbed all the values and multiplied them by 0.4. Now the engine starts right up.

The next change I found I needed to make was to disable closed loop. It would surge and stall when Closed loop would start to make fueling corrections. This was simple. I changed the "Temperature threshold for C/L determination" from 80.15F to 304.25F, effectively disabling it. This made it run better, but not good enough to drive yet. I also decided that it would be a good time to disable Charcoal Canister Purge "Disable CCP if coolant < this" set to 304.25, and the EGR "If coolant <= this Disable EGR" also to 304.25. I'll deal with those later.

I was having issues where I would hit the throttle and it would stall every time, with the WBo2 reading pig rich when I'd open the throttle. I went "Async Factor Vs Coolant" (under Fuel AE) and multiply them by 0.4. This allowed the throttle to be opened without any bogging. At this point, the car suddenly became drivable. And so I did some breaking in, and had some fun with it.

I have a bit of a dislike for the way That $8F (and $6D, $DF) calculates it's Volumetric Efficiency. It has 3 tables. One is a "Base VE table", which just looks up an RPM and coughs out a simple VE value. Then, it goes to either the "Idle VE table" or the [Open throttle] "VE Table" where it looks up a second number based on MAP and RPM, then adds it to the Base VE table value for the final VE number.

Seems silly to me.

Why not just add the base VE table numbers to all the values on the Idle VE table AND the [open throttle] VE table, and skip having a Base VE table altogether?
So that's what I did. Except, I made a new VE table that goes up to 6400 RPM, stuck it in an open spot on the chip, and re-directed the call to it. As well as opened up the RPM lookup cap from 4000 RPM to 6375 RPM so that it could see the whole table.
This makes tuning much more straight forward now.

With that sorted, I Imported the main VE table, and the Idle VE table from $DF BCFA, and made the necessary changes so that it would fit the new tables. Then I made a new "Main Spark Table" which was based on BCFA's Main Spark Table in the Naturally aspirated section, and blended in the boosted timing table from $8F AZRC.

This gave me a good basic tune to start playing with.

This seems like a lot, but it is where the tuning STARTS.

My car's inspection was due Dec 7. So that set the deadline to get it running well.

The first thing I tried to do, (and failed at) was to get the engine to idle in open loop, at 14.7:1 on the wideband. All I had to do was decrease the Idle VE table till it would hit 14.7:1 Only, it would die anytime I got near 13.5:1 because the injectors couldn't inject a small enough pulse before it wouldn't inject anything at all.
In the end, the adjustable fuel pressure regulator wasn't even enough to get the fuel trimmed back. What I found, was that the engine wasn't running in Quasi Asynchronous Pulse mode, so it was firing the injectors once per engine revolution. I modified the program a little to ignore the MPH disable parameter for Quasi Async mode. This change caused the injectors to fire every other revolution, effectively allowing me to trim the fuel back further. (see video above) Suddenly I was able to adjust the Idle VE table down till I was idling at 14.7:1

With that issue settled, I tried enabling closed loop. "Temperature threshold for C/L determination" from 304.25F to 80.15F.
The engine started surging with the closed loop corrections. But I noticed that the INTegrator was also fluctuating heavily with the surges. So clearly the INT was changing too fast, causing the corrections to be too large. I went to this table: "Integrater Update Delay Vs CLFLOW" and multiplied all the values by 3.0. This slowed the INT corrections down enough to keep the magnitude of the corrections reasonable.

One thing that I decided to do to help idle stability, was to import the idle RPM tables from $DF BCFA. This made a nice difference.

I realized that this engine REALLY doesn't like when the cooling fan kicks on. It would stall almost immediately. This one had me scratching my head for a little while. I combed over the logs carefully and noticed that the IACV jumps open a few counts just before the fan is actually commanded to turn on. I found a couple of parameters: "Fan 1 Turn on delay" (0.3 second) AND "Num of IAC steps for Fan 1" (which was 10 steps). So I increased the fan delay from .3 seconds to 6 seconds, to help me see how the IAC steps affected the idle. So I saw the IAC bump open 10 steps. which caused a slight idle surge, then the fan kicked on and the engine died anyways. I bumped the IAC steps up from 10 to 15 and tested it again. It had a slightly larger idle surge, and I set the Fan 1 turn on delay to expire exactly when the idle surge peaked, which was 1.6 seconds. This solved my stalling issue.

This is where I was this morning. It ran well enough to pass emissions. I'm far from done, but getting a car to idle correctly certainly makes me happy, and saves a lot of gas.

One other thing I noticed today that may have a surprise effect on tuning, I've been using a Memcal from a 3.1L N/A aluminum head "vin T" engine to do my tuning.
I had a factory Turbo Grand Prix Memcal hanging around that I would re-burn when doing my final tune. I knew It's resistor chips are identical between the 3.1L N/A and Turbo. But it turns out, that the ESC filter on the Turbo memcal is different then the N/A. This is VERY important. This means that Knock was probably being incorrectly reported to the ECM. I was seeing unreasonable knock out of the engine constantly under low boost. I have a feeling that putting in the Turbo Memcal is going to make a big difference in how I tune timing.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #324, 12-12-2013 07:53 PM
      Been having a ton of fun with the car lately. Lots of tuning to do still, I've been working on the main VE table a bit.

I had a couple of problems pop up. I had a fuel leak near the fuel filter. It turns out that the barb that I was using to go from the nylon tubing to the fitting for the fuel filter wasn't aggressive enough, and the fuel was leaking around it. The barb was from a "Nylon Fuel hose repair kit" that you can get from Autozone. So, I'd recommend against those crappy barbs. I replaced it with a barb that I cut off of a metal quick disconnect end, and welded it to the fuel filter fitting. Problem solved.

The other issue was the intercooler pump. I was using a cheap generic pump that came with my intercooler. It was making some funky noises, and I suspect it was possibly leaking too. So, I bought a Bosch "Cobra" pump and installed that instead.

Slight difference in size and quality...

On the upside, I did a bit of driving, a bit of WOT fun, and let me say, It's pretty fast at 10 PSI. Leaves me giggling maniacally when I look at the speedometer and it just blows through 40-80 in just a few seconds, then 80-100 in just a couple more. I've only driven a few cars that accelerate this fast. It's quickly getting to the point where it may be the fastest car I've ever driven. But it's not quite there yet...


sleevePAPA MSG #325, 12-12-2013 10:21 PM
      I have to see this thing soon lol.

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #326, 12-24-2013 10:52 PM
      Any luck on that dipstick?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #327, 12-27-2013 02:02 AM
      Merry Christmas Steve.

BV MotorSports (sbvincent@yahoo.com) MSG #328, 12-27-2013 07:27 PM
      You are a true craftsman, I must pay you for your wares!

Also, that bosch pump can be tricky to prime. I run the same pump for my w2a system. The only thing I dont like its the old school GM fuel injector style retaining clip. Otherwise, its a great bit of kit.

[This message has been edited by BV MotorSports (edited 12-27-2013).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #329, 12-28-2013 02:07 AM
      It's not uncommon for people to have trouble with those clips. Many try to remove the retaining clip with a screwdriver. If that's your problem, you are not alone. You need to press the center of the retaining clip in and it will release the connector...

It was funny to read Blooze's reaction to that issue here!
http://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...L/000116-4.html#p144


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #330, 12-28-2013 02:16 AM
      The dipstick is a gift. It wasn't a big deal to make, I just needed to get off my butt and do it.

Priming that pump wasn't too bad. But I had a lot of issues getting the system filled though. I found that the Anti-freeze was too thick to pour into the 1/2" fill neck's hose and effectivly have the air come back up through the fill neck. It just wouldnt go! But when I was putting the distilled water in, it worked just fine. But I figured that out the hard way.



Some testing on a fairly deserted desert road. It's quite a bit of fun!


fieroguru MSG #331, 12-28-2013 09:20 AM
      So roughly 10-100 mph in about 9 seconds... that would be fun!

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #332, 12-28-2013 04:04 PM
      Sort of. My speedometer needs calibration badly. It's way off. Second gear to 80 on a F40? More like 60-65 probably. But I was taking my sweet time shifting...

I am having one strange issue with tuning. Any time I'm coming off the throttle fairly quick, I'm getting a heafty burst of knock. But under 10 PSI of boost, there is no knock and the timing is ramping back in. So when I shift, I'm starting back in to boost with a large amount of retard that tapers off over time. If I'm in second gear for a while and I just whack the throttle, I'll have no retard issues and it pulls so hard!

Maybe I still have boost in the intake between the throttle blade and the valves when decel enleanment kicks in creating an instant lean condition for a couple of engine rotations? It's really strange! Not sure just yet what's causing that.


fieroguru MSG #333, 12-29-2013 09:45 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Sort of. My speedometer needs calibration badly. It's way off. Second gear to 80 on a F40? More like 60-65 probably. But I was taking my sweet time shifting...

I am having one strange issue with tuning. Any time I'm coming off the throttle fairly quick, I'm getting a heafty burst of knock. But under 10 PSI of boost, there is no knock and the timing is ramping back in. So when I shift, I'm starting back in to boost with a large amount of retard that tapers off over time. If I'm in second gear for a while and I just whack the throttle, I'll have no retard issues and it pulls so hard!

Maybe I still have boost in the intake between the throttle blade and the valves when decel enleanment kicks in creating an instant lean condition for a couple of engine rotations? It's really strange! Not sure just yet what's causing that.


I can hit 70 mph in 2nd gear at 7K with my F40, so it didn't seem too far fetched... all comes down to tire diameter at that point.

You might try turning off decel enleanment to see what happens. Also its quite possible you just have too much timing in the high to moderate vacuum and high RPM areas of the timing table. I know I had to tweak mine some on the LS4 since they never expected shifts to happen at 7K and see those areas of the timing map at with the throttle closing.


brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #334, 01-13-2014 11:39 AM
      I have a $DF mask I modified for boost kicking around here somehwere if you want it. Lifted the spark/fuel control off of $8F but never got around to the wastegate. Was a daily driver for 2 years running 36# injectors from a 3800SC and if I remember right there were very little tuning changes below 100kPa that I had to make.

[This message has been edited by brian89gp (edited 01-13-2014).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #335, 01-20-2014 03:05 AM
      I'd love to look at your $DF code. Curious though, why go through the troubles of adapting DF? I know it's an improvement over the existing 8F, but is it worth the effort? 8F is ok, I haven't really had much trouble trying to get it to do what I want. DF does have the advantage of being manual, and is compatible with my EGR...

brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #336, 01-22-2014 09:16 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

I'd love to look at your $DF code. Curious though, why go through the troubles of adapting DF? I know it's an improvement over the existing 8F, but is it worth the effort? 8F is ok, I haven't really had much trouble trying to get it to do what I want. DF does have the advantage of being manual, and is compatible with my EGR...


I'll dig it up this week. One other thing that I just remembered, I ran two MAP sensors, one 1 BAR as a dedicated barometer that was open to the atmosphere and one 2 BAR for manifold pressure. The barometer calculation in 8F I considered inadequate.

Which is more difficult, retuning all of 8F for a different engine? Or modifying DF but leaving the tuning for stock 0-100kPa untouched?

1. It is already tuned for the DOHC, and a turbo doesn't change most of the tuning. You get an instantly drivable car that you only have to tune for boost and tweak in a few other spots
2. The DOHC with a manual trans can be interesting to tune to be hospitible when done from scratch
3. Stock the RPM range on the tables is higher

[This message has been edited by brian89gp (edited 01-22-2014).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #337, 01-23-2014 12:09 AM
      Sounds good! I'd definitely give it a shot, just so long as the code doesn't require the extra SRAM of the 9396. I'll take a peak at BCFA and look at it's memory map.

Thanks!


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #338, 01-24-2014 07:29 PM
      Looking into using $DF, BCFA based...
I found one possible issue in the memory map. L0200. I don't believe the 7730 has access to that address, it is written to but disabled from reading by calibration (manual transmissions only). It's towards the end of the code not sure what it does, all I know is that it appears to only be able to write $00 to it. Since it is always zero, not having any storage hardware at that address may not be an issue at all.

In the meantime I managed to calibrate my Speedometer.

My old Getrag was a 30 tooth reluctor, so I worked around that number:
225/45/17 tires are 25" diameter, so 78.5" circumference.
That's 807.13 rotations per mile, times 30 reluctor teeth is
24214 pulses per mile. So 24K PPM. Got it.

So, the first thing I did was set my IP Pulse divisor to 128 ($80)

My notes on pulse divisors...
A B C
0 = 0 = 0 0 0 Divide by 1 (4000 ppm VSS)
4 = 128 = 1 0 0 Divide by 6 (24000 ppm VSS)
2 = 64 = 0 1 0 Divide by 7 (28000 ppm VSS)
6 = 192 = 1 1 0 Divide by 8 (32000 ppm VSS)
1 = 32 = 0 0 1 Divide by 9 (36000 ppm VSS)
5 = 160 = 1 0 1 Divide by 10 (40000 ppm VSS)
3 = 96 = 0 1 1 Divide by 11 (44000 ppm VSS)
8 = 224 = 1 1 1 Divisor disabled, no output

Wiring and configuration of the Dakota Digital SGI-5C module

Power and Ground are straight forward.
Sensor ground: I wired to the Purple wire from the VSS
Input: I wired to the yellow wire from the VSS
Out 1: goes straight to Pin B10 on the ECM
I deliberately left pin B9 on the ECM OPEN. It is already grounded inside the ECM.
ECM pin B11 goes to the pull-up circuit, here:


The calibration switches are all turned OFF.

First I started with the calibration I first thought would be accurate. 6 Coarse, 9 Fine. Which is a calibration factor of .383.
By dividing the 30 teeth of the getrag's reluctor, by the 78 teeth of the F40's ring gear/reluctor. I got .384; .383 was the closest setting.

I verified accuracy on a police speed display, which seemingly to be perfectly accurate according to our other vehicles.

So now my speedometer is accurate. Worked like a charm. Now I just need to fix my road speed constant so that the ECM MPH matches the speedometer. That should be pretty straight forward.

I'm still tweaking values here and there in the code. Fueling is pretty much bang on. I'm curbing the issue I'm having with knock while shifting by pulling my timing in the 4800+ RPM column so that it is 17 at boost, and 23 at full vacuum. There was a 35 degree peak in between, but now its just a straight line. I think that 35 degree peak while coming off throttle was causing a knock burst. We'll see!


Steven Snyder (fiero@steventsnyder.com) MSG #339, 02-11-2014 01:09 AM
      Looking good. It sounds tame in that video, but it sure hauls ass! I've got to come out that way and check out your car sometime.

brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #340, 02-19-2014 10:47 PM
      Thought that $df requires '9396 but can't say I ever researched it in depth.

Can't figure out how to attach files to this forum. If you PM me your email I'll get them sent over. What I have:
1. HTML files with the assembly changes commented and documented
2. the BIN files I used (125 of them in total) with an Excel spreadsheet documenting the tuning change (and/or assembly change) for each one

[This message has been edited by brian89gp (edited 02-19-2014).]

Steven Snyder (fiero@steventsnyder.com) MSG #341, 02-20-2014 04:04 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by brian89gp:

Thought that $df requires '9396 but can't say I ever researched it in depth.

9396 has more RAM that the other related ECUs so that sounds right.

That reminds me, I need to dig up my WBO2 datalogging patch for $DF and get it up on my site..


brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #342, 02-20-2014 05:30 PM
      I decided to take the a/c pressure transducer off and use the wiring for a separate a/d channel for an additional MAP sensor. Every place the stock a/d variable for the a/c sensor was called I loaded a dummy variable so I gained the ram address for use elsewhere. Also to do this you must turn off the a/c pressure transducer present option flag.

Stock
code:
C720  @2    ldaA  #$00
C722 call LF04E
C725 staA L014C
C728 ret
D067 ldaA L014C
D06A cmpA #$D0
E74B ldaB L014C
E74E cmpB 226, X
F0BB @2 ldaB L014C
FOBE cmpB 0, X



Change to:
code:
C720  01    @2    nop
C721 01 nop
C722 01 nop
C723 01 nop
C724 01 nop
C725 01 nop
C726 01 nop
C727 01 nop
C728 39 ret
D067 86 4B ldaA #$4b
D069 01 nop
D06A 81 D0 cmpA #$D0
E74B C6 4B ldaB #$4b
E74D 01 nop
E74E E1 E2 cmpB 226, X
F0BB C6 4B @2 ldaB #$4b
F0BD 01 nop
FOBE E1 00 cmpB 0, X



brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #343, 02-20-2014 05:32 PM
      Since I didn't have a cutoff in the barometer calculation the first time I hit boost the baro would be pegged at 103kpa and it would stay there until the car was shut off. Since I had the MAP running off of a single 2bar sensor and had an extra channel open I decided to use an independent baro sensor.

The baro is set up on the regular MAP wiring, the MAP sensor is on the a/c pressure transducer wiring. It just worked out that way (I suck at planning)

Stock:
code:
F1E1 ..............bunch of stuff
F27C



Modified:
code:
F1E1	ldaA #$30	;a/d channel
F1E3 call LFD5D ;a/d read routine
F1E6 staA BARO
F1E8 clra
F1E9 staA L01F4
F1EC ret
F1ED-F27C nop



brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #344, 02-20-2014 05:33 PM
      This adds the F77 table to the code, F77 is the BPW boost multiplier term and is the table that controls fuel during boost.

In this case the BPW table is located at #1620 in the binary file, it is a 1 column x 11 row table. The rows are 100kpa to 200kpa in 10kpa increments.

Stock:
code:
B7D7 @1 stD L008F
B7D9 stD L0159
B7DC ldaA CTS2



Modified:
code:
7D7 @1 call LFE4A	;F77 table addition
B7DA nop
B7DB nop
B7DC ldaA CTS2
FE4A stD L008F ;bpw
FE4C ldX #$9620 ;F77 table
FE4F ldaA L014C ;2 bar variable
FE52 ldab #$79 ;offset to start at, $80 = half
FE54 call LF6FC ;2d tbl lookup
FE57 ldX #$008F ;bpw
FE5A call LF7F8
FE5D lslD
FE5E stD L008F ;bpw
FE60 stD L0159
FE63 ret



brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #345, 02-20-2014 05:34 PM
      I originally had 2 map sensors but eventually figured out how to use a single 2bar MAP. Turns out it was on the a/c pressure transducer wiring so that is where it is today. (#00 is a/c pressure transducer, #30 is MAP sensor)

Stock:
code:
9907  	ldaA  #$30	;load a/d channel
9909 call LF04E ;a/d read routine
990C staA MAP ;store result
990E staA L0054 ;store result
the others are similar, just a
different a/d routine is called



Modified:
code:
9907  	call FE2E	;jump to routine
990A nop
990B nop
990C staA MAP ;store result
990E staA L0054 ;store result
9CC9 call FE2E
9CCC nop
9CCD nop
9CCE staA MAP
C51E call FE3C
C521 nop
C522 nop
C523 staA MAP

FE2E ldaA #$00 ;a/d channel
FE30 call LF04E
FE33 staA L014C
FE36 ldaA L014C ; load 2bar
FE39 cmpA #$7E ; see if it is 1 or 2 bar
FE3B bcs @+3 ; if <7A then jump (1 bar)
FE3D ldaA #$FD ; else load max 1 bar value
FE3F ret
FE40 ldaA L014C ; if 1 bar
FE43 lslA ; multiply by 2
FE44 ret
FE45 ldaA #$00
FE47 call LFD5D
FE4A staA L014C
FE4D ldaA L014C ; load 2bar
FE50 cmpA #$7E ; see if it is 1 or 2 bar
FE52 bcs @+3 ; if it is 2 bar
FE54 ldaA #$FD ; load max 1 bar value
FE56 ret
FE57 ldaA L014C ; if 1 bar
FE5A lslA ; multiply by 2
FE5B ret



brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #346, 02-20-2014 05:35 PM
      The spark table needs to be changed to run on a 2bar scale. The kpa scale is roughly this now: 10,21,33,45,57,69,81,93,105,116,128,140,152,164,176,188,200

Stock:
code:
A0B1 	ldaB MAP3
A0B3 ldX #$8129
A0B6 ldaA NL_RPM_INDEX



Modified:
code:
A0B1  	call fe27
A0B4 nop
A0B5 nop
A0B6 ldaA NL_RPM_INDEX
FE27 ldaB L014C ;2bar var
FE2A ldX #$8129 ;spark table
FE2D ret



brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #347, 02-20-2014 05:37 PM
      There you go. I did all of this back in 2003 so I can't really answer as to why I did things the way I did (switched around the MAP and BARO sensor....) but I know it worked. Drove it daily for a year or two and the drivability was the same pre and post modifications.

The gist is there is a 1 BAR MAP on the standard MAP sensor pinout that is open to atmosphere and acts as an independent barometer and feeds the RAM value directly instead of calculations and tables off of the MAP sensor. The 2 BAR MAP is on the old AC pressure transducer pinout and replaces the stock MAP in the code, the scaled 1 BAR is still fed into the same RAM address and a 2 BAR RAM address is added that is referenced by the BPW table and the main spark table. There is a BPW multiplier table for fuel and the spark table is rescaled to use a 2 BAR MAP. Not much else was really required to get it working.

The car had A/C and I noticed no difference before/after removing the pressure transducer. The BIN's I have are tuned for the use of stock L67 injectors.

[This message has been edited by brian89gp (edited 02-20-2014).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #348, 02-26-2014 09:17 PM
      Cool! Seems much simpler then I would have thought!

couple of notes:

You could liven up some extra analog input pins with a simple change to the accumulator load before the A/D routine. OR using the MUX read routine. The 7730 and similar has a ton of spare analog and digital inputs. I've livened up a slew of them for this project, mostly extra IAT/MAT compatible inputs.

I've never had much luck with $01 NOP's They always seemed to cause the uP to crash, probably the COP watchdog (?) so I usually address my way out of open address slots.

That being said; Thanks so much for your conversion, I will try it out when I have the time.

I had to pack up shop and move across town. So needless to say, life is busy again.


lou_dias (loudfiero@gmail.com) MSG #349, 02-27-2014 09:37 AM
      What I did to get my '7730 + F40 to use the stock Fiero speedo is the same digital to analog circuit above but I used the 2000PPM output instead of 4000PPM. Reason being the F40 outputs a 60,000PPM signal and the stock getrag uses 4000. The 7730 by default expects a 24000 signal so a divisor of 6 works great for the getrag. For the F40 you need a divisor of 15 for the Fiero speedo and the 7730 only supports none and 6-11. So using the 2000PPM output is like an extra division of 2 so a divisor of 7 or 8 gets you within 7% error but if your tires are over or undersized you can reduce that error. Ideal divisor is 7.5 using the 2000PPM output but that's not supported. Depending on whether you use 7 or 8 is your margin of error.

brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #350, 02-28-2014 09:26 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Cool! Seems much simpler then I would have thought!



Suprised me too. Taking the easy way out with the independent baro sensor made it a lot easier

 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

couple of notes:

You could liven up some extra analog input pins with a simple change to the accumulator load before the A/D routine. OR using the MUX read routine. The 7730 and similar has a ton of spare analog and digital inputs. I've livened up a slew of them for this project, mostly extra IAT/MAT compatible inputs.



I was thinking that few input pins had the same internal electronics as the a/c pressor sensor and MAP sensor. I did purposfully take the easiest way out though..

 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

I've never had much luck with $01 NOP's They always seemed to cause the uP to crash, probably the COP watchdog (?) so I usually address my way out of open address slots.

That being said; Thanks so much for your conversion, I will try it out when I have the time.

I had to pack up shop and move across town. So needless to say, life is busy again.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #351, 03-10-2014 04:52 AM
      I think its time to do something I've never seen done on this forum. A full disclosure of cost. It's something I put together during the entire build. I kept tabs on what I was spending on items that went into the build. Items that wound up not going into the build were left out, and plenty of misc. hardware, hoses and paint are definitely not on the list, though they should be.

So here it goes!

Turbo and accessories:
GT3582R Turbo with anti-surge housing $1200
Tial stainless turbine housing, 0.82 A/R $400
Tial MV-S wastegate $263
Tial 50mm "Q" bov $260
Oil feed line 36" Long 4-AN, 90 on one end $32
Oil feed fitting 1/4NPT to 4-AN $5
Oil Feed Oriface restrictor $17
Oil drain tube (24" Gas hose) $25
Oil drain flange kit 1/2"NPT $29
Weld on pan bung 8-AN $8
Water connection kit $47
Wastegate water feed 4-AN 90 degree $8
Wastegate water feed hoses 10" 4-AN $31
Turbo blanket $43
half couplings (1/2"NPT Bungs) for drain $17
Total, $2385

Heat Protection:
2" Foil lined fiber heat wrap tape $32
10' 1-1/4" Wire Loom $9
10' 1" Wire Loom $6
10' 3/4" Wire Loom $12
25' 1/2" Wire Loom $7
25' 3/8" Wire Loom $6
25' 1/4" Wire Loom $5
Total, $77

Induction:
2.5" Aluminum piping and clamps $80
2.5" Silicone couplers 1X 30 degree, 2X 90 degree, 1X 3" to 2.5" 90 degree $100
Water to air 2.5" Intercooler, Front Mount Heat Exchanger and pump $350
3X Aluminum 1/2" NPT Bungs $12
3X IAT sensors $66
4" SS intake coupler $12
4" Silicone 45 degree coupler $10
Total, $630

Water outlet:
Water outlet flange (1/4" Stainless plate) $12
304SS Tube 1.25" tight radius $27
304SS Tube 1.25" loose radius $28
Total, $67

Engine and upgrades:
Crate 97 LQ1 $625
8X ARP Main Studs $75
16X ARP Head Studs ATP5.950-2LUB $192
16X ARP Nuts 200-8605 $10
3X PK 10 ARP Washers 200-8530 $24
ARP Flywheel Bolts 206-2803 $35
Gaskets $250
Powder coating $200
1/2" stainless tubes (Coolant) $40
Head machining $130
CTS $17
Valve cover Breather fitting $25
Total, $1623

Fuel System:
Fuel pump HFP Brands, HFP-343 $80
6X Siemens Deka 60# Injectors $310
3/8" stainless tubes $80
Fuel line connectors, Dorman (Summit) 800-086 800-081 800-080 $27
Fuel line Dorman (Jegs) 800-074 $20
Fuel line Dorman (Jegs) 800-075 $18
Total, $535

Transmission:
Steel for bracketry $70
Shift cables (Rodney dickman Getrag Select, Custom California push and pull Shift cable) $240
F40 transmission $400
Clutch disc, Clutchnet 6 Puck Sprung 9-1/8" 23X1" spline $141
Stock Pressure plate (Modified) $120
Flywheel Resurface $40
Axle cups (Chevy equinox/Fiero Hybrids) $200
Axle boots Dynapak K-1060, and K-2206 $40
Fluid 4 Qts. Gl4 75W-85 $64
Drivers axle shaft (from 93 Cavalier drivers side) $25
Rodney Poly transmission mount $70
Transmission mount (Energy, for RWD chevy) $25
Total, $1435

Exhaust system:
3X 3" SS vband kits $60
2.5" 304SS 5' straight $45
2X 2.5" 180 304SS $80
2X 3" 180 304SS $100
3X 3" 90 304SS Tight radius $95
Borla 3" 304SS Muffler $118
2X 304SS exhaust tips $79
2X Hangers $8
Total, $585

Down pipe:
3" Stainless Braided flex joint $20
Tial outlet flange $49
Tial outlet clamp $36
3" tight 90 304ss $44
3" 180 304ss $50
1.5" Wastegate flex pipe $24
2X 304SS O2 bungs $15
Innovative LC-1 Wideband $100
Bosch wbo2 sensor $60
Total, $398

Crossover:
2.25" 180 304ss $55
304SS 2.25" Flex joint $20
4X 304SS 2.25" 90 degree weld elbow $72
304SS 1.5" 90 degree weld elbow $15
304SS 1.75" 90 degree weld elbow $15
304SS 1.75" straight $15
8AN weld on bung (EGR) $8
Tial turbine manifold Inlet flange $49
Tial turbine manifold Inlet clamp $36
"Lava Rock" Header wrap $36
EGR tube (10" x 1/2" Gas tube) $13
Total, $334

Suspension:
2" Rod Delrin $12
4X LH end links HAL-HML8-10SZ (20.97) $84
4X RH end links HAL_HMR8-10SZ (20.97) $84
4X LH jam nuts HAL-JNL10S (2.99) $12
4X RH jam nuts HAL-JNR10S (2.99) $12
2X 10" link bars KYS-100-T010 (10.99) $22
2X 9" link bars KYS-100-T009 (10.99) $22
3X 6 pack 1/2" Rod end seals (11.97) $36
2X Timken Wheel bearings $155
Total, $439

Grand Total, $8508. Which is a bit conservative. Its probably closer to $9000

My reasoning behind this disclosure is to expose what the real costs were to do this type of build. Keeping in mind that I did almost all the work myself, except for the flywheel and head surfacing and the powder coating. I Probably put a couple hundred hours of work done in about 2-3 hours per day. And, this build is not over. I intend to slowly push the boost up till the MAP sensor says It can't do any more. I intend to Dyno it then, and in the meantime I REALLY want to do the body work and get this car painted. It is a really rough looking car at the moment, but mechanically, it's a beautiful beast, and a whole lot of fun to drive.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #352, 04-16-2014 05:00 PM
      Today I decided to tackle the axle leak. It was getting pretty bad.


So, I had to come up with a plan. The most obvious choice was to get one of these and make it fit.


But, I've seen several complaints about these, and that the stub material is too soft on the axle cup and tends to spall a bit. So I started looking for just a standard bearing that would fit around the seal collar that I pressed onto the axle stub. There weren't any that were that size. So my next idea was to find one that would fit the smaller diameter of the stub itself, which just so happened to be a hair under 30mm. And that was no problem at all!
I also needed a bearing that's OD was smaller than the OD of the seal. I wound up getting a 30x47x9 bearing.

And so I very carefully cut off the pressed on seal collar in the lathe.



Then I sanded off the paint and polished off the sealing surface


I did a bit more AutoCAD, to layout my piece, then began machining a chunk of aluminum to match.





I deliberately oversized the piece to be a hard press fit at .003" over. But, I had a trick up my sleeve to make it easy to press...

That's right, an air duster. When held upside down, it produces an extremely cold liquid which I used to freeze the piece to a temperature too cold to safely touch, It still needed to be somewhat lightly hammered in with a dead blow, just not as hard as it would have been otherwise.

Then, I took the two seals off the bearing, then washed out the grease with a solvent bath. These bearings will be sitting in transmission fluid, so they didn't need the seals, nor the grease.


Then install:



tap in the new seal


Test fit the axle cup


Seems to be going great, so I re-greased and clamped the CV assembly back together


At first I was going to re-fill the transmission via the fill port, but it would have been nearly impossible to get to the nut. So, instead I removed the VSS and filled it through the hole. Worked great.

And 40 miles later...

No leaks!! Just like it should have been.

While I had the rear wheel off, I got a hold of some hub centric rings to help center the wheels. The car was a bit shaky on lug centric. It seems a lot better now.

I am still working on code a little here and there. The car feels incredibly fast. It now tends to get a little squirrely in the back in second gear. Which, for a Fiero with good tires, means you're making a butt-load of horsepower.

My focus over time with this car is shifting though, I'm starting to really think long and hard about doing the body work, get the interior all squared away and actually have a complete car that I am proud of.


Dr.CGT (chazdorn@aol.com) MSG #353, 04-16-2014 08:48 PM
      Looks good. 400 thow with a .003 press fit It should not walk out. Just keep an eye on it. You have two tapped holes on the engine side if you need to make a hold in bracket

sleevePAPA MSG #354, 04-16-2014 11:21 PM
      If you ever bring that out to cars n coffee let me know! I'd love to see it!

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #355, 08-27-2014 04:51 PM
      I've put the project away for a bit while we've been getting settled in our new house.

But recently, I've taken it out for a few more tuning and shake down runs

I wanted to tune the car to handle the onset of Air Conditioning load, but it turns out that my compressor is no longer displacing Freon. So I'm betting that the control valve on the V5 compressor is busted. Common problem, but aggravating. So I abandoned that effort.

Instead, I've been desiring to push the boost up slowly. I've done some reading, and feel like I know how to approach stepping up the boost via code changes. But first, I had to install the original fuel pressure regulator, which I did today.

Shortly, I will find some web space and release my code, along with the research that went into making it happen.




Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #356, 08-28-2014 05:39 PM
      Today has been a fun day. It started with an oil change. I'm now switched over to Mobil 1 synthetic 10W-30.

Once I had the engine warmed up, it was time to start incrementing the boost. Fortunately, I have one of the best boost controllers available. Stock GM Equipment

Since 8F has native wastegate control, I am using the turbo Grand prix's boost control solenoid (AC DELCO 214-474)

My Tial wastegate has a "Half Bar" spring in it. so 7.25 lbs of boost theoretically. In reality, its right around 8.2 peak sustained boost. Between manifold pressure and the wastegate control is the boost control solenoid. The BCS is a normally open valve that can "throttle" the pressure that makes it to the wastegate. When no power is applied, the pressure from the intake manifold controls the wastegate directly. The valve itself is controlled by pulse width (Duty Cycle) And the more duty cycle is applied, the more boost gets restricted from opening the wastegate. Which increases boost. So the goal for today was to slowly increase the duty cycle on the BCS, and document how that impacted the sustained boost level.

First thing I did to the code, was to increase the boost fuel cutoff limit to 14.5 PSI, restore at 7 PSI, the I filled out the desired boost pressure base table. 14 PSI in the 100% throttle column.

Next, I turned off the ability for the computer to adjust the boost upward by turning off the boost step-up update interval to zero. And, "Positive step adjustment for wastegate DC to zero". So now the computer can only put out the maximum DC that is specified in "Initial Value of WG DC vs RPM" (in all RPM columns)

I did a few runs starting at zero DC and incrementally stepped up the value: in return I got this data:
%DC PSI
0 8.2
10 8.4
20 8.6
30 9.2
40 10.0
45 10.7
50 11.5
55 12.3
60 13.0
65 13.7

At about the 55% DC mark, I started to really lose traction in second gear. But I pressed on, working my way to 65% DC, mostly in 3rd gear and 13.7 PSI of boost. I never actually had to adjust the fueling. It was rock stable at 10.8:1. Some of the early "Just Guessing" changes seemed to have been pretty much on the mark. Just a touch richer than I'd like, but perfectly good for that kind of boost.

How does it drive? A bit scary. The boost comes on and the back end gets squirrely between 35 and 55 mph, traction comes back in at right around 55 mph again. I can say now, that the power the engine makes is pretty dialed in. However, I've lost some drivability with the fuel pressure bumped back up with the stock regulator. I need to work on getting the day-to-day driving bit nailed down. I had it downright reasonable before. Now it stalls, and throttle response is boggy off idle.

I'm also finding that I am having temperature management issues that I need to work on.
The engine temperature is much higher than I'd like. Its a 195 degree thermostat, fan comes on at 213, and shuts off at 204, but my CTS regularly registers 220 or so. Perhaps the crossover and turbo is cooking the CTS? I thought I shielded it plenty, but I suspect it still is being heated. The fan is running all the time practically. I'll have to get a thermal gun and do some investigating. I really should have installed a 180 degree unit, It seems logical with a turbo engine. It's a complete PITA to change out now, but I think I will make the effort sometime soon.

I'm also going to have to add heat protection for the decklid. The turbo wasn't really running hot at 8.5 ish PSI. But today when I pushed it up to 13.7 The heat coming off the turbo was impressive. So much so that I sat with the car as it was cooling off to make sure nothing started burning, because I could smell cooking paint once again, not necessarily the decklid.

The worst part. Intake air temperatures are frighteningly hot. Today, I've seen the highest temperatures that I have ever seen. Going into the turbo, which is my temperature sensor just inside the air filter. It hit 188 deg f. At the same time the turbo outlet temperature skyrocketed to 290 f. Which is very close to the highest temperature that the sensor can register (304 f.). That aside, the intercooler did it's job. Dropping the turbo outlet temperature a whopping 110 f. to 180 f. Slightly cooler than the air going into the inlet. So... I really need to devise a cold air intake, with little to no room to do it. That sounds like the rest of this project. Difficult.

All that aside, I think a dyno session really sounds like a good idea now that I'm at the boost level I built this engine to operate at. Not sure when I'm going to do that. But I NEED to know how much power am I making! And I know you all want to know too

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 08-29-2014).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #357, 09-09-2014 02:40 AM
      I drove all over the valley this morning hitting every dyno shop in town. Came away empty handed unfortunately all were either booked solid, or closed up shop. I'll have to schedule one someday in the near future.

In the meantime, I've had my first casualty of boost. My EGR.


It's got some carbon soot buildup all over the intake manifold around the EGR. I'm guessing the pressure on the crossover tap is too great on boost. It didn't have any issues till I turned up the boost. The discoloration from the heat started to show up on the EGR tube near the EGR when I turned it up, which is a not so subtle way of telling me that the exhaust has been leaking through the EGR, and the soot told me exactly where. I do still intend on having a working EGR when this is all said and done.

I chose to tap the EGR feed from the crossover because the Turbo Grand Prix had it that way. But I guess I didn't consider that perhaps the back pressure would be too much for the EGR. Having boost push on it too from the other direction probably isn't helping matters. This EGR wasn't ever used in a turbocharged application either. Guess I better think about a workaround for this issue too.

However, tuning is going well, I've really committed some time to nail the idle down. Since the fuel pressure change it became problematic again. It turned out that much of the idle surging was caused by the fueling map in idle having too steep of a slope on the X axis. Flattening out the 600 and 1000 rows really cured the idle surging.

Stalling was another issue, that seemed to be caused by a lack of spark timing in the area on the chart that becomes active during a stall. Originally I spliced the 3.4 DOHC's ECMs timing table into the Turbo Grand Prix's naturally aspirated section. This caused the 80-100 kPa section at low rpms to have Zero timing. So I back filled that part of the table with more of the original Turbo Grand Prix's original timing table, cleaned up. This made a pretty dramatic change to throttle response as well as helped curb the stalling issue. It's becoming more drivable all the time
Blended table before:

Blended table After:


One thing that I am finding the more I dial this thing in, is that any changes that I've made to the code that I wasn't completely aware of its effects, needed to be removed. Every change made to the code has to be done with purpose. Guessing at some settings is ok, just as long as the effect is fully understood.

So far, I've started the code changes over 3 times from the original donor bin. Each time only starting with the changes that I knew were effective in achieving the goals.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 09-09-2014).]

sleevePAPA MSG #358, 09-09-2014 10:53 PM
      VRI maybe?

Or there is Doug's dynopower in Henderson, if you go here let us know, as there may be a few people that may want to go.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #359, 09-11-2014 02:49 PM
      VRI likes to deal with Fords. If I went there, their dyno will explode. It would be the first time it's ever seen any real horsepower Poor Dougs dyno doesn't stand a chance! It hasn't had to measure any torque from those Eclipses yet. It would be in for a big surprise.

Hah! well, on that note, I wouldn't mind ganging up on a dyno day type event. It would probably be wise to wait for a crisp day, or get an ice tank for my intercooler.

I did some preliminary HP estimates based on injector utilization. I've hit 65% on 60 lb injectors, so It looks like I've seen right around 470 ish crank horses. But that could be a bit off. Wouldn't mind tuning that calculation to match the dyno results. My guess is I'll probably see 430 or so to the wheels give or take some.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #360, 10-02-2014 02:33 PM
      I'm now working on re-coding 8F for 3-Bar operation. I'm hitting the limit of what 8F allows for with boost. My boost set point is too close to the limit of what the code/sensor combo can handle, so sometimes I over-boost just a little and the ECM has no idea what to do. about it.

I could lower the boost but I don't want to.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #361, 10-04-2014 11:50 PM
      Well, crap. I damaged the engine. Probably a spun bearing, maybe broke a piston?

It seems like a little code change made for a destructive result, I lowered the "Boost fuel cutoff limit" variable a couple of counts below where I found the MAP sensor actually maxes out. I did that so that if the boost ever maxed out what the sensor could handle, it would kill the fuel. Turns out though, that having the boost set close to that point allowed me to hit that fuel cut point too easily.

As soon as it happened, it was too late. A few VERY loud backfires and the engine instantly started to sound like a diesel. Still ran just fine, but I'm not going to test it out. Looks like I'll have to ready a bottom end for it. Not sure if I'm going to go all out and assemble a forged bottom end, or if I'll just toss my old bottom end back into service. I don't have the time or the money to work on it at the moment, so it's parked for the time being. It wasn't the power that broke it surprisingly.



LZeppelin513 (bjamestate@gmail.com) MSG #362, 10-06-2014 09:09 PM
      Sorry to hear that!

I wouldn't think cutting the fuel would do damage like that. Cutting the fuel would mean no fuel, means no combustion, means no detonation. Weird.

Good luck when you open it up.

edited to add: I was really looking forward to some more videos too!! Great job on everything anyway.

[This message has been edited by LZeppelin513 (edited 10-06-2014).]

Steven Snyder (fiero@steventsnyder.com) MSG #363, 10-07-2014 12:00 PM
      Damn, that sucks :-(. It was not a good weekend for cars.. we had the same thing happen in the Impreza I was co-driving at Prescott Rally on Saturday. Broke a piston and rod and cracked open the block when the motor leaned out.

How does the fuel cut operate? Does it just shut off fuel until the MAP goes below the cutoff pressure, without any hysteresis? If so it's probably not safe to use.. you're basically going to end up with a lean condition right around the cutoff pressure as the fuel cutoff cycles on and off.

[This message has been edited by Steven Snyder (edited 10-07-2014).]

carbon MSG #364, 10-07-2014 01:12 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by LZeppelin513:

Sorry to hear that!

I wouldn't think cutting the fuel would do damage like that. Cutting the fuel would mean no fuel, means no combustion, means no detonation. Weird.

Good luck when you open it up.

edited to add: I was really looking forward to some more videos too!! Great job on everything anyway.



Except wall wetting and pooling at high RPM.

[This message has been edited by carbon (edited 10-09-2014).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #365, 10-07-2014 07:08 PM
      It cuts off at 14.7 PSI, and restores at 8. So it did have a huge hysteresis, but it was violent when it kicked in.

I think that the fuel cutoff, combined with the high boost pressure and cylinder temps caused it to try to eat itself. Maybe it was when the fuel started coming back in? I don't know.
I'm probably going to slap another bottom end in whenever I get the chance, unless I broke a piston and damaged a head. But I think I only spun a bearing though.

I'm shooting for middle of November to swap it in, but thats a maybe as of now. I have to pass emmissions in late November / early December. Which, coincidentially is around the time my wife should be giving birth to our first. So, it's not exactly a high priority at the moment. Perhaps a forged bottom end could be in the works over a slightly longer timeframe.


zkhennings MSG #366, 10-08-2014 09:04 AM
      Well forged internals = more boost = you

Would you play around with CR at all if you go forged, maybe raise it a little or just stay where you are?


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #367, 10-08-2014 11:26 PM
      Lower!
I'd really like to be at 9.0:1 and run something like 20 Lbs of boost. I'm probably at 9.4-9.5:1 or so right now due to the early heads with late pistons. But I'm also tempted to just toss in my old bottom end for the time being.

As far as code goes, I've done most of the re-code for 3 bar I believe. It's untested though.
But, I did find that the computer is limited to 255 kPa, as when it figures out BPW, It takes the filtered map input, then it does some simple math to figure out exactly how many kPa that is, then figures out how much fuel building from that number. But, the figured kPa is a 8 bit (byte) value, so its limited to 255 kPa, which is still like 22.4 lbs of boost I suppose I could fix the code so that it figures a 16 bit (word) value before doing the BPW calcs... Really open up that $8F to its fullest 29 PSI of boost potential.

Converting to 3 bar didn't seem all that hard. The only real challenge is rescaling all the values that use the 2 bar RAM variables, and there was a little bit of math that needed to be fixed so it could calculate the 1 bar RAM variables correctly. Unfortunately, the code liked to use the native LSLA (multiply by 2) or LSRA (divide by 2) where as I had to change it to a LDAA "$03", then MULtiply to figure out the single bar value. This calc took up extra space so I had to move it to the custom code section. No biggie. But it was annoying that I couldn't just change a couple of numbers. I've really re-worked the heck out of 8F, but honestly the code hasn't let me down!

The only thing that I was having some trouble with code wise, was the transitioning from Quasi-Asynchronous Pulse to Normal mode and back. The engine always has a hiccup when the transition occurs, usually right at 19% throttle. I found that I could skew the injectors output based on BPW in a table to try to linearize the transitions, it helped substantially, but it's far from gone. This is one of those things that sucks about large injetors. The ECM wasn't meant to operate them in Quasi-Asynchronous Pulse for idle and part throttle. It was meant only for extreme vacuum, like when decelerating from high speeds. So there was some drawbacks.

That being said, the drivability was downright good. I had it down to where stalls were minimal, and I was working on fixing that last detail with stalling when the engine let go. I really regret setting up that boost fuel cutoff value. I had it set so high that it couldn't be achieved. Didn't have any problem till I set that lower Oh well, thats how it goes! I will rebuild!


Rick 88 MSG #368, 10-09-2014 09:11 PM
      PM sent

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #369, 10-09-2014 10:29 PM
      Responded.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #370, 10-10-2014 12:55 AM
      Got a couple of things on order for a forged bottom end.
First things first, Crankshaft!
GM - 12577484 which is the forged steel crankshaft from the LX9 (3500) and LZ8 (3900) engines.
It's going to add a bit of weight, but it will make up for that with brute strength.
With my lathe and mill I have the facilities to machine a new timing reluctor onto that crank. Should be a cake walk.

Connecting rods. Thought long and hard about them. The forged crank has a 2.25" crank pin diameter, and .864" journal width.
There aren't a heck of a lot of rods intended for a 2.25" crankpin.

But, There was the 4.3 even fire motor, surprisingly, it has a 2.25" crankpin. They wanted to increase the crankshafts strength with the split throws, the best way to do that was to enlarge the crankpins so that they had more overlap. Thus the 2.25" crankpins.

However, 4.3L rods have two little issues. Their big end is wider, .930" as opposed to .864" and the Piston pin is fatter, .927" as opposed to .9055" (23mm). But the other good thing is the length is 5.7". Just like the stock rods for the 3.4 DOHC.

So the rods will have to be narrowed to fit. And since I will have to do custom forged pistons anyway, I can specify the .927" pins. Probably cheaper too as they are common to SBC's.

So I am going with Eagle CRS570063D rods. They advertise them as for applications up to 750HP.

One other issue would be which bearings to use. But I think I have my answer. Turns out that the 4.3's bearings aren't anywhere near as fat as the journals width, In fact its .753" Where the crank pin is still .864" So that leaves .110"overall, or .055" of clearance on either side of the shell. They needed to be narrow on the 4.3L since the journals have radiused fillets on the edges. But on the forged crank, it has recessed (rolled) fillets. So a fatter bearing won't collide with the fillets. So stock 4.3L bearings will be used.

That should be a good recipe for a forged bottom end, good up to 750 HP since that's what the rods are rated to. I don't plan on pushing that kind of power, but I think I could see this engine going into the 500 ish range with this setup. I think this engine was easily at or above 450 with 14.2 PSI. Certainly accelerated like it was!

I'll likely have to make some small clearance notches in the block for these rods though, they'll probably swing just a little wider than the original rods. It'll be tight for sure!


ericjon262 MSG #371, 10-13-2014 02:43 PM
      here are the rods I am using with my 3500...

http://www.summitracing.com.../overview/make/buick


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #372, 10-14-2014 04:27 PM
      Data log any detonation?

Going to look at what actually failed in your current engine before you build another?


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #373, 10-16-2014 04:24 PM
      got the crank


and the rods


I wasn't having problems with detonation so much. In fact the engine ran pretty darn well! I wasn't data logging at the time though.

I will tear down the engine later on, but in the short term I will be building the bottom end components and testing clearances and stuff. Of course, I will open the engine up eventually and show off what I had accomplished destruction wise.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #374, 10-16-2014 06:46 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by ericjon262:

here are the rods I am using with my 3500...

http://www.summitracing.com.../overview/make/buick

Interesting rods, I didn't know about them. I like the length, but I'd be concerned about their big end width, they are .019" narrower than the crank pin, they would have fairly excessive side clearance. Not to say they wouldn't work, but it is way outside typical clearance. Also, are those rods "offset"? That's my only issue with the 4.3l's rods. Luckily they need to be narrowed from .930" to .858", and that gives me ample clearance to try to remove the offset, but then things get awkard with the bearing tangs, I might have to flip and re-tang the rods. I want the piston centered squarely over the rod, otherwise there is a bending force applied to the rod. I mean chevy offset the rods on the 4.3 for the same reason.

But my next thing is getting pistons made. And I'm conflicted about which piston manufacturer to use. I have no idea how to compare and pick the best or most cost-effective. I'll probably have to send a sample piston in. Ive found all the custom piston forms to be inadequate for locating the valve reliefs. I basically need a stock piston to be forged, slightly dished with a .927" sbc pin.


ericjon262 MSG #375, 10-16-2014 07:03 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Interesting rods, I didn't know about them. I like the length, but I'd be concerned about their big end width, they are .019" narrower than the crank pin, they would have fairly excessive side clearance. Not to say they wouldn't work, but it is way outside typical clearance. Also, are those rods "offset"? That's my only issue with the 4.3l's rods. Luckily they need to be narrowed from .930" to .858", and that gives me ample clearance to try to remove the offset, but then things get awkard with the bearing tangs, I might have to flip and re-tang the rods. I want the piston centered squarely over the rod, otherwise there is a bending force applied to the rod. I mean chevy offset the rods on the 4.3 for the same reason.

But my next thing is getting pistons made. And I'm conflicted about which piston manufacturer to use. I have no idea how to compare and pick the best or most cost-effective. I'll probably have to send a sample piston in. Ive found all the custom piston forms to be inadequate for locating the valve reliefs. I basically need a stock piston to be forged, slightly dished with a .927" sbc pin.


gonna be honest, don't know too much on the rods, I bought them in a package deal with a bunch of other parts, race shop that built my engine didn't seem to think it would be a problem at all.

have you looked into other smallblock chevy rods? you'll end up with 2 spares in the cost of a build, that's nothing.

[This message has been edited by ericjon262 (edited 10-16-2014).]

sleevePAPA MSG #376, 10-16-2014 08:50 PM
      EricJohn, if there is too much endplay its going to bleed off a lot of oil pressure. OTOH, out of the box those are usually wider, so they may have fit perfectly.

ericjon262 MSG #377, 10-16-2014 08:52 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by sleevePAPA:

EricJohn, if there is too much endplay its going to bleed off a lot of oil pressure. OTOH, out of the box those are usually wider, so they may have fit perfectly.


well, considering the rods are the final destination for the oil before returning to the pan, I bet it'll be fine.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #378, 10-16-2014 09:12 PM
      Just did a little reading on side clearance. Apparently 20 or 30 thou is no biggie. Doesn't effect oil consumption, because it has to squeeze through a 0.001 ish clearance first so the 0.008" clearance from the factory is effectively wide open. Learn something new everyday. Eagle sells rod/crank combos that run mid .020"s for side clearance and no one has issues with that.

Either way, I'm sticking with the 4.3l rods I have now. I have the equipment I need to modify them so I don't even need to leave the garage to fit these rods.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #379, 10-17-2014 08:49 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Just did a little reading on side clearance. Apparently 20 or 30 thou is no biggie. Doesn't effect oil consumption, because it has to squeeze through a 0.001 ish clearance first so the 0.008" clearance from the factory is effectively wide open. Learn something new everyday. Eagle sells rod/crank combos that run mid .020"s for side clearance and no one has issues with that.


Exactly. Really, the only limit on big end side clearance is that it's less than small end side clearance.

Rods can be bushed down to run smaller piston pins. The smaller pins can be used with shorter compression height pistons without getting into the oil ring. Shorter compression height = longer rods. But you're sticking with what you have...

I used CP pistons in my Northstar. CP does a better job with surface finish inside the ring grooves than most of the "usual suspects". If you get a gapless TOP ring package from Total Seal, then you can have CP cut your ring grooves to those rings and run .001 ring side clearance.

Caveat: For some bore sizes Total Seal gets rings from "normal" ring manufacturers and modifies them to make them gapless. For their basic offerings, you're subject to the suppliers QC. My first set of rings had a couple of rings with .0012 thickness variation around the ring. Obviously that means I couldn't run .001 side clearance with those rings. I had to have the rings lapped (TS' "Diamond Finish" process) to get their tolerances down to what I wanted in order to have CP cut the tightest grooves they could cut. The diamond finish step is fairly expensive at $100+ per ring. It only matters on the top rings, of course.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 10-17-2014).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #380, 10-18-2014 12:34 AM
      Since I'm going to need custom pistons anyway, I'm now considering getting a pair of total seal sets for a VW Beetle engine "Totalseal-9200C". They have 92mm bores, and the rings are very reasonably priced, and with some simple sizing changes will fit the pistons beautifully. They do run a gapless 2nd, and a conventional top ring. That's fine with me. I'm strongly considering CP as well. They just seem like professionals, hell bent on providing a perfect product.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #381, 10-20-2014 02:32 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Since I'm going to need custom pistons anyway, I'm now considering getting a pair of total seal sets for a VW Beetle engine "Totalseal-9200C". They have 92mm bores, and the rings are very reasonably priced, and with some simple sizing changes will fit the pistons beautifully. They do run a gapless 2nd, and a conventional top ring. That's fine with me. I'm strongly considering CP as well. They just seem like professionals, hell bent on providing a perfect product.


Call Total Seal and discuss exactly what your finished bore size will be...
CP only sells to businesses (at least they did a few years ago), so you'll need to know what shop you'll have order the pistons. You can call CP directly and convey the specifics of your order, but that order will have to be placed through a shop.

 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
They do run a gapless 2nd, and a conventional top ring.


Don't do that... it's dumb. I have no idea why they ever started selling gapless 2nd's.

Some gas gets by the top ring via the gap. That blow-by gas collects between the top and 2nd rings (hence some piston designs have an accumulator groove in the 2nd ring land to increase the available volume and reduce the pressure). The 2nd ring needs a wider gap than the top so that the top ring's blow by can escape into the crank case faster than the top ring lets it by. If the 2nd ring is gapless, the top ring's blow by builds up between the two rings until there's enough pressure to unseat the top ring under certain load conditions.

Get a gapless top and conventional 2nd. (IIRC, TS sells that as an "upgrade" to most of their sets anyway...)

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 10-21-2014).]

ericjon262 MSG #382, 10-20-2014 10:42 PM
      interesting, thanks for posting the tech concept there Will, good info!

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #383, 10-22-2014 10:17 PM
      I started a dialogue with Ben at WOT-Tech, He has a piston design that is nearly drop in for my needs, just needs valve reliefs cut. It's the 3400 piston, with a flat top, .927" pin. He says he can get top gapless top rings for them too. I might just go that route. Tell ya' what though. It's going to be one expensive set of pistons!

Right now, I'm waiting on the rod bearings, so I can finalize my dimensions that I need to cut the rods to. I've decided that I am going to flip the rods, narrow only one side so that the rods are no longer (just barely) offset, and re-tang the rod and cap for the bearings being shifted to the new rod centerline. Definitely sharing that experience when I get there.


brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #384, 10-23-2014 04:35 PM
      The "Boost fuel cutoff limit" feature seems to be a bit dangerous, though I would have never thought it was as it seems like a good idea in the perfect world. I wonder if it better to pull spark and leave fuel 100% untouched for any sort of RPM/Boost/whatever limiting feature.

[This message has been edited by brian89gp (edited 10-23-2014).]

sleevePAPA MSG #385, 10-23-2014 05:30 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by brian89gp:

The "Boost fuel cutoff limit" feature seems to be a bit dangerous, though I would have never thought it was as it seems like a good idea in the perfect world. I wonder if it better to pull spark and leave fuel 100% untouched for any sort of RPM/Boost/whatever limiting feature.



Ever blow up a muffler before?



brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #386, 10-23-2014 07:34 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by sleevePAPA:


Ever blow up a muffler before?


Nope, but it sure sounds cheaper then a short block. A little more exciting too

What is the proper way to do it, fuel, spark or both?


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #387, 11-04-2014 03:45 AM
      Got some of the fun stuff done today. I took those rods, and performed 3 machining operations on them to make them work with the 3.4 DOHC with the 3.9's forged crank.

First, I had to crunch some numbers, or really... let AutoCAD do the figuring.
On the left is an overhead view of the edge of the rod with bearing as it came from eagle. On the right, what needed to happen to make it work


Since these rods are offset (clearly shown in the drawing 0.065") I had to take 0.074" off of one side of the rod to take it down from the 0.930" to the 0.856" that was needed to fit the crank, this would eliminate most, but not quite all of the offset of the rod.

Off to the lathe! It was a bit out of balance, so I had to cut pretty slow, but it did an excellent job.


Done with that.


Putting the bearings in showed that although they would work, the bearing wouldn't be centered on the cranl journal, nor the rod.


I felt it best to flip and re-tang the rods so that the bearings would be centered. This was a pretty easy job for the milling machine. I used a 3mm x 25mm slot cutter to do the dirty work. I spaced it 0.126" off the mill table, then clamped the rod to the table and took a .055" deep cut into the edge of the rod. Then did the same for the cap.



Once that was done, I put the crank into my old block, and attempted to fit the rods in so I could check block clearances. I ran into a small snag there...


The big end of the rods are bigger than the bores! OUCH! I thought perhaps I could drop the rods into the bottom end, and slip the pistons into the bore and insert the pins right at the deck. But with the rods in, the pin bore was below the deck so the pins would have never gone in.

So after some contemplation on what to do, I settled on using the lathe to narrow the edges of the rods. I didn't have to take much off.



The big ends now measure right at 3.603, they fit into the 3.622 bore comfortably now.

Custom pistons are on order, I decided to send a crown design to the manufacturer in order to demonstrate the location of the reliefs, the angles of the reliefs, and the location and size of the dish that I needed. Basically, its the stock 3.4 DOHC piston with a 5cc dish added to it to drop the compression from 9.5:1 to 9.0:1
The only deviation to this drawing was a relieving of the thin material near the relief cuts, just as they did from GM. I also went and had them do the ceramic coated crown, and coated skirts. I'm excited to see how these come out!

It might take a month or so to get them made. They should be the key to making this engine capable of well beyond 500 hp.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #388, 11-05-2014 09:40 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
Off to the lathe! It was a bit out of balance, so I had to cut pretty slow, but it did an excellent job.


Done with that.




I hadn't ever put much thought into HOW rods should be narrowed... but it would be fairly tough to clamp them down to a mill table. This is a really cool way of doing it.


sleevePAPA MSG #389, 11-05-2014 11:08 AM
      I would be a little skittish trying to mill the width down in a lathe. Creative for sure

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #390, 11-06-2014 12:26 AM
      At the end of the day they are just chunks of metal that need some material removed. I locked my table down and used the compound to set the cut depth. No magic here at all. I actually just youtube'd rod narrowing. Costa Mesa R&D (fiatnutz) always has helpful hints on how to do this type of machining. They had two of these operations on their channel. The narrowing of the big end to fit in the bore was the most difficult, just because there wasn't any nice way to mount the rods in the chuck, but the 4 jaw chuck was able to grab the rod on the edges of the journal, lots of little adjustments to get it located right, but once the cuts were done, the rods looked factory.

zkhennings MSG #391, 11-07-2014 02:53 PM
      Wow that's awesome, what speed did you have the spindle spinning with the rod on it like that? I know if that was me I would have kept my face as far away from the plane that rod was spinning on as possible I had a chunk of delrin break off in a lathe and launch itself one time, did some damage to the wall. Connecting rod would go through the wall haha

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #392, 11-07-2014 11:52 PM
      It was either 200 or 220 rpm.

elitopr MSG #393, 11-19-2014 08:27 PM
      Very nice thread...

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #394, 11-29-2014 09:21 PM
      Thanks!

Finally an update, Custom pistons are here, and they are pretty!
I purchased these through WOT-Tech, sent them the dimensions for the crown design and the compression height, and they came through beautifully!



Of course I Immediately popped the rod in, and slid the pin through.




I had machined one of my original pistons to make it like the drawing in my last post. It was really nice to see how they faithfully reproduced my dimensions. They also widened out the radiuses in the corners of the dish and valve reliefs. The pistons are ceramic coated on the top, and graphite impregnated on the skirts. The pins are .927 for the rods I'm using.





I only have one issue, that I had a feeling that it might come up and bite me.
There is only .037" of clearance between the rods width and the inside of the piston total. That would be fine if the rod wasn't still .028" offset. So I'm going to have to mill just a little bit of metal off of one side of the small end of the rod to buy me the clearance required.



I'm probably not going to get to install these for a while. More big life news. I'll be a father by Monday.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 11-29-2014).]

brian89gp (me@brian89gp.com) MSG #395, 12-03-2014 08:52 AM
      Congratulations on Jr. Fierobsessed

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #396, 12-21-2014 01:00 AM
      Bit of a late update, but...
It's a girl! Adelyn, 6lb 11oz born 12/02/14 at 12:27AM



So, now that that's all going on, I've found I have a lot more time to THINK, rather than time to DO.

And lately, my thinking has been about balancing this new rotating assembly.
The new forged crank is quite a bit heavier than the old cast crank. My new rods are just a bit heavier than stock rods. The piston and pins gained just a little bit of weight too I think.

I researched balancing methods for this type of engine, and one engine balancing company states that specifically for the 3.4 DOHC and the other internally balanced 60 degree V6's that bob weights weighing 100% of the big end of the rod with bearings (rotating mass)+ 46% of the weight of the piston, wrist pin, locks, rings and the small end of the rod (reciprocating mass) must be used on all crank pins to balance the crankshaft. Externally balanced GM 60 V6's use 100% of the rotating + 50% of the reciprocating mass. As do practically all v8's.

I wonder if the internally balanced 60 degree engines were actually under balanced to 100% + 46% as a compromise. And I have a strange feeling that this forged crank out of a 3900 engine is designed for 100% + 50%. Just because it's soooo heavy. But this info is scarce to find. I'm wondering if any of you know what is best in this particular setup, since I have to balance it anyway.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 12-25-2014).]

sleevePAPA MSG #397, 12-22-2014 09:48 AM
      Im going to take a guess and assume the 4% underbalance could be for some weight of the oil, but it depends on the weight of the reciprocating mass. Consider the older buick V6's with a 36.6% bob weight, that was meant to reduce some of the secondary imbalance to add creature comfort, and they didn't need to rev that high to notice an obvious primary imbalance. If you weigh in the new reciprocating mass and its much heavier than before, consider a 50% balance, and since its going into a street car, I don't believe there is a need to overbalance. HTH

Congrats on the new baby girl! We are expecting our third(boy) NLT 24 Dec(C-sec).

[This message has been edited by sleevePAPA (edited 12-22-2014).]

Fiero Vampire MSG #398, 12-22-2014 08:22 PM
      Congrats man on your daughter. Great thread / work by the way.

sleevePAPA MSG #399, 12-22-2014 08:57 PM
      ^^^ 'nother LV member, nice!

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #400, 12-25-2014 05:40 PM
      Last run for this engine... Sounds kinda awful. Had to do the fuel pressure let off.


I'm working on getting the bottom end parts all together. I still have to do yet another machining operation on the rods, I have to narrow the small end of the rods to fit inside the pistons better. And, I need to make a reluctor ring that fits the crank with the 7 timing notches.

One thing... I found documentation that the notches are 60 degrees apart, with the one odd one being 10 degrees out. My old 3.4 DOHC it actually measured out to 4.25 degrees. It might not matter at all where that notch is, as long as its close to that one 60 degree notch. I was thinking about having the ring water jet cut, but I think I'll just machine it myself.


ericjon262 MSG #401, 12-25-2014 11:20 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
I'm working on getting the bottom end parts all together. I still have to do yet another machining operation on the rods, I have to narrow the small end of the rods to fit inside the pistons better. And, I need to make a reluctor ring that fits the crank with the 7 timing notches.


BCC makes an internal ring for the 3500, might save you some time and energy.

http://www.britishcarconver...-kit-internal-detail

[This message has been edited by ericjon262 (edited 12-25-2014).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #402, 12-25-2014 11:58 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by ericjon262:


BCC makes an internal ring for the 3500, might save you some time and energy.

http://www.britishcarconver...-kit-internal-detail



Ordered. It's not worth the headache for the price. Thanks for that link!


ericjon262 MSG #403, 12-26-2014 01:26 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:


Ordered. It's not worth the headache for the price. Thanks for that link!


glad I could help!


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #404, 02-05-2015 10:31 PM
      Been a while since an update. I haven't had a moment to spare till today. So I was working frantically to get as much done today as I could.

First thing, As ericjon262 pointed out, I went ahead and purchaced the 7X reluctor kit from British Car Conversions.


I went ahead and removed the old Reluctor...


I heated up the new reluctor and put it into position.


This afternoon, I also removed the damaged engine.



Tomorrow, I'm hoping to peel the engine off of the cradle, get it on the stand and tear it down. I need to find out what failed. I'm positive that a rod bearing has failed. And I believe that short lube trough on the main bearings may be the bulk of the cause. Joseph Upson found the bearing change in this post> http://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...HTML/107886.html#p28 that the main bearings design was revised sometime relatively recently. Now, practically all aftermarket bearings share the longer trough design. Even when you order them for your '85 2.8 Fiero, you'll get the same "7242MA" bearings that I ordered with the long troughs.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #405, 02-06-2015 09:47 PM
      Autopsy is complete, the evidence is presented...



I believe I may have exceeded how much boost a crate engine can handle.
Surprisingly, no rod bearing failures had occurred at all, no broken pistons, no real carnage.

I have a feeling that this may have been a result of ring butting. I doubt it was weakness with the rods, but I can't quite rule that out either. I was pushing a lot of horsepower through this engine. The only rods that were severely bent were #1 and #2.


msweldon (marc.weldon@mindspring.com) MSG #406, 02-07-2015 04:09 AM
      Given you're earlier statement of:
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
It wasn't the power that broke it surprisingly.

along with the pics of the rods and the fuel cut shenanigans the ECU was undergoing..

That looks like fuel hydro lock or miss timing detonation...given the backfire(s) you described at the moment of failure, I'd perhaps go with fuel hydro lock, and not detonation, as your bearings are good and your piston tops from what I can tell look quite intact. The stock LQ1 pistons are the first weakest link in the rotating assembly chain. If the rod was fatigued due to continuous overstress it would have probably snapped under this "event" instead of deflect as it did.

I've never seen a bent rod in a turbo LQ1 failure.. almost "always" piston or bearing (rod or crank). Most all, if not all, 60* V6's came with forged rods thereby "usually" forcing pistons and bearings to throw in the towel first given an overpressure situation.

just my initial thoughts...

*Edited for clarity

[This message has been edited by msweldon (edited 02-07-2015).]

sleevePAPA MSG #407, 02-07-2015 04:53 AM
      Somewhere around 450hp seems to be the limit of the stock rods, maybe 500.

Closest comparison I know about in link below.

http://www.v6z24.com/jbodyf...117366,start,60.html


msweldon (marc.weldon@mindspring.com) MSG #408, 02-07-2015 11:16 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by sleevePAPA:

Somewhere around 450hp seems to be the limit of the stock rods, maybe 500.

Closest comparison I know about in link below.

http://www.v6z24.com/jbodyf...117366,start,60.html


true but he also said that the engine could have already been hydrolocked before purchase. However, the stock rod bolts should always be replaced with an ARP or equivalent for ANY turbo lq1 build as his second failure shows. Matt Hawkins ran and is still running 400hp for years, and several hot rod power tours, on an lq1 crate with only the pistons and rod bolts replaced. He did shred a timing chain however. Regardless, I would venture that anything with 400hp and greater with stock 60* rods / pistons / crank, needs to be carefully and judiciously tuned as the weak points will surface quickly at these power levels.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #409, 02-12-2015 04:21 AM
      I got into the more fine points of the teardown, I've concluded that I bent 2 rods.
How bent?


Cylinder 1's piston was being lightly hit by the cranks counterweight because the rod was short. This is what was making all the racket.



Cylinder 2's piston was a bit crooked in the bore, so the piston and bore had a fair amount of scuffing. The bores have some scratching, which will likely persuade me to use my old block, as its bores are still in excellent shape. I need to get a bore gage and inspect the two blocks and pistons further and make that call.

Inspecting the heads I found no evidence of any issues. The sparkplugs look perfect, carbon deposits were very consistent across the heads and pistons.


One somewhat alarming thing I found, was that it appears as though the PCV system was allowing quite a lot of oil into the intake manifold. The runners were wet with oil, and quite a bit was pooled in the bottom of the intake manifold. There was not a drop of oil in my intercooler, so I know the turbo and the oil separation system worked perfectly. But the PCV line was clearly passing oil.

I also had a chance to drop the forged crank, the Eagle rods, and the new pistons in to check clearances once again. The good news is everything fits and spins perfectly. I was expecting to have some problems with block clearance. The 3500's and 3900's have a clearancing for the big end of the rods right by the oil pan. But minimum clearances seem to be right at around 1/8". I don't know about how it'll effect the windage tray yet, but that's nothing a couple of washers couldn't fix if need be.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #410, 02-12-2015 06:02 AM
      I was interested in seeing what happened inside the motor. I highly doubt the rods were bent because of ring butting as I have done that before in a Turbo TPI 305. The ring butt sign will register as a groove in the side of the cylinder bore the length of the stroke at the ring gap location.

The pop or backfire you heard was probably the result of misfire at the upper extremes of the boost level where the ignition system is taxed. I've had the problem for quite a while because it keeps cropping up in different areas as a result of a weak/bad coil, bad plug wire, too wide a plug gap for the boost level with high compression and too much water in the water/meth injection mix. Spark knock severe enough to bend a stock rod will almost certainly chip a stock piston, or break the ring land (done that before to). It looks like the rods bent because they couldn't handle it and that's likely why everything else looks good.

I'm not sure what your new connecting rod length is but if it's still 5.7" and you did the rotating assembly clearance check before the 7x ring was installed, recheck it looking at the clearance between pistons #3 and 4 on the 7x ring side of the bottom pin area of the piston. Although my problem was the result of increased stroke you'll want to make sure clearance is adequate for changes associated with high rpm. If you have 6" rods it will be fine.

I checked and see that you are using 5.7" rods so definitely check the 7x ring clearance relative to the piston as it extends outward further than the crank weights.

I also saw your remark about lowering compression to run 20 psi. With great intercooling and premium fuel it shouldn't be necessary for the 3.4 DOHC as I've hit 20 psi a number of times at 11:1 compression although I have water/meth injection. I doubt 10:1 would pose a problem for you at that level of boost.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 02-12-2015).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #411, 02-14-2015 03:40 AM
      I did a light glaze busting on cylinder #2, It showed me that the cylinder scuffing from the crooked piston would require an overbore. It also had some moderate bore scratches mostly near the top. One is particularly bad. The block is fine, but is not serviceable at 92mm 3.622" anymore.

So, I pulled my old '94 block off the floor and prepped it for service. It's bores are perfect, even after a glaze busting. Had to clean the block up quite a bit, it had some sediment in the water jackets. I also bottom tapped the headbolt holes so my studs would fit.

I did my fit check with the 7x ring in place. It was roughly 1/4" from the bottom of pistons 3 and 4. The pistons are actually shorter than the stockers by quite a bit. So it's all good there!

I also am back at it machining the connecting rods small end down to the width of the big end. It's actually the toughest process I've had to do on the rods. I'm half way done with them now. Very time consuming and tedious, but very much worth it.


ericjon262 MSG #412, 02-14-2015 09:18 AM
      can you measure the OD on the new reluctor and compare it to the stock 3.4 wheel for me?



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #413, 02-14-2015 09:13 PM
      The new ring is a 0.411" radius increase over the 5.750" diameter

Narrowing the small end of the rod on the mill


Cylinder #2 bore scuffing and bad scratch after glaze busting


Same bore, different view


94 piston, Custom forged piston, 96-97 piston


You can see the difference in the height on the 96-97. They are MUCH taller

So once I finish the rod narrowing, will start the weight matching, then I'll have to have the crank balanced. Then I can file my rings, and start assembling the short block.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 02-15-2015).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #414, 03-05-2015 10:32 PM
      Got my crank back from the machine shop, all balanced and ready to roll!


Block ready to receive


Dropped the crank in


Plastigage, then assembly lube... and then the first piston went in. And that's when all hell broke loose.

This was the piston at top dead center. And that, is well below the deck. My heart began to sink. Something Is seriously wrong.

So, I measured the stroke of the crank, and found that it was only 2.990"

Someone screwed up big time. I was sent the wrong crank. It was advertised as being from a "2006 Impala 3.9" and it certainly wasn't.

That means I'm out about $500 due to the purchase of the crank + the balancing all gone to waste

I contacted the seller to see if the will out of good grace fix their mistake. However, I've had the crank since October, they can totally say go to hell. I'm definitely out the money for balancing though. And that sucks.

I was really looking forward to putting this bulletproof short block together this weekend, but it looks like Its going to be a few weeks at least.


sleevePAPA MSG #415, 03-07-2015 12:37 PM
      Well that sucks!

zkhennings MSG #416, 03-13-2015 01:01 PM
      Sorry to hear that, that really sucks, just bad luck.

I just had my DDs engine get ruined (wrx cam seized for no reason at 2500rpms and blew the timing gears and belt to hell and trashed all the valves and pistons) and had to waste like 400 bucks on a massive tow, and triple A covered 100 miles of the tow.

Wasting money feels awful

I am really looking forwards to when this does end up going back together though, it is inspiring how clean your engine and turbo setup is.


ericjon262 MSG #417, 03-18-2015 03:51 PM
      any updates to this? heard back from the crank supplier?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #418, 03-18-2015 08:03 PM
      I did contact them, it was purchased too long ago to return. So I proposed an exchange where I pay shipping both ways. They're mulling it over, but It looks like they will likely go for it. I was able to prove that they were still mis advertising 3.5L cranks as 3.9L cranks. Hopefully I'll have this issue resolved shortly.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #419, 04-03-2015 06:05 PM
      Good news!


They did good by me. So now I have the correct stroke, forged 3900 crank. I'll clean it up, change reluctor wheel out for the 7X, then send it off to be balanced.

Then, I'll get back to assembly.


ericjon262 MSG #420, 04-03-2015 09:17 PM
      Awesome sauce!



sleevePAPA MSG #421, 04-04-2015 02:22 AM
      Nice!

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #422, 04-04-2015 09:33 PM
      First order of business, I changed out the reluctor for the 7X. That was a piece of cake now that I have some experience doing that already.

The second step was to throw the crank into the block and load a rod/piston assembly in, moving it bore to bore to clearance check everything. Funny thing about that, was when I had the 2.991" stroke crank, clearances were excellent, which at the time was a surprise to me. And yet, somehow I didn't pick up on the fact that the reason it cleared everything so well was because it was missing 0.32" of stroke! Now that I have the right crank, checking clearances was a more serious matter.

Turns out, that there were two clearance issues with the block:

The rod bolt was solidly hitting the inside of the block near the oil pan rail.


The other clearance issue was the big end of the rod just grazing the bottom of the bore. Its hard to describe, but you can see where I marked the interferences.

So I took the block outside and used a grinder bit in a dremel to clearance the required spots.

I washed the block down thoroughly, dried it off and re-oiled the bores.

Once that was done, I reinstalled the crank, and moved the piston/rod assembly through each bore to recheck my clearances. I used a piece of emery cloth about .030" thick as a feeler for the tight spots. Everything now checks out good.

Monday, I'm going to drop the crank off for the balance job, and hopefully soon I can start assembling the bottom end again.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #423, 04-14-2015 07:37 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
I did contact them, it was purchased too long ago to return. So I proposed an exchange where I pay shipping both ways. They're mulling it over, but It looks like they will likely go for it. I was able to prove that they were still mis advertising 3.5L cranks as 3.9L cranks. Hopefully I'll have this issue resolved shortly.


It's the 3500 non VVT and 3900 cranks that are the same, glad you got it worked out, I totally missed that the 3.4 DOHC block is not relieved to clear the connecting rod bolts in the same manner that the other 60 degree blocks are.



Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #424, 04-14-2015 08:16 PM
      It's the same stroke as stock, so the only difference is the rod journal diameter. I don't see why contemporary 60 degree V6 blocks would have reliefs, but obviously the modern ones should.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #425, 04-25-2015 11:19 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:


It's the 3500 non VVT and 3900 cranks that are the same, glad you got it worked out, I totally missed that the 3.4 DOHC block is not relieved to clear the connecting rod bolts in the same manner that the other 60 degree blocks are.


Even then, they are mostly the same. different reluctors, different forging. But, they are interchangeable otherwise. I learned that the cranks with the big "5" cast into them are 3500 VVT cranks, and the ones with the big "8" cast into them are 3900's.

The fun bits are underway in my garage, the assembly of the engine has been coming along a little bit now. It seems I have minimal time to actually work on it.

I'm doing some cleaning, not so much work with paint as the paint was still pretty fresh. I just want to slap it all together and get back to driving it already before the oppressive heat comes. Perhaps I'm a little impatient.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #426, 04-28-2015 04:30 AM
      Some bottom end assembly. If this doesn't make you happy, then you don't deserve to call yourself a car person.



Figured there wasn't any harm in checking out the oil pump, and maybe think a little about bumping up the pressure.
This oil pump is massive. It is the largest oil pump of this type that I have ever seen. It's gears are so big, that it easily doubles the volume of a Chevy SBC high volume aftermarket pump. That's how crazy big it is.



Bumping the pressure up a little isn't much of a task. I removed the cover and pushed the little pin out. I then shoved a 1/4" split washer in and put the pin back in place. The spring was only compressed about 1/4" from resting, but now its more like 5/16" so its a slight bit of an improvement



With the oil pump settled I bolted the mains and the windage tray back down with the studs.


I did have to grind a little bit of material off the oil pump to help it clear the studs nut


Once all that was done, and everything was in order, I put the timing cover assembly on the engine, and installed the oil pan. I flipped the engine back upright.
I always do this with the 3.4 DOHC's. I put a second O-ring on the oil pump drive assembly. I used a 30mm X 35mm X 2.5mm O-ring I got at the local hardware store. The O-ring that is on the assembly normally is highly unreliable. The factory one that was on this engine had a couple months of use and was so hard it broke of in pieces. The second O-ring seals into a groove that is already present in the block and prevents any possible leakage. This is one of this engines biggest natural flaws. That and intake gaskets, but I'll get to that in a minute here.


Cleaned the head surfaces and installed the studs and gaskets.
The money shot!


Ok so, about intake gaskets... We have a serious issue here that I am trying to solve in a reasonable manner. What I have learned about the 3.4 DOHC over the years is that two things cause the intake gaskets to fail, and both for the same reason. That reason is oil. These gaskets swell when large amounts of oil pool on the sealing surfaces, and frequently this leads to them extruding out of place and letting air in.

I say there are two causes for oil to pool on these gaskets. One is valve cover or cam carrier gasket leaks that drip straight down onto the gasket, and it pools there. That's easy to see and solve. So I'm not worried about that.

The other source is what I've confirmed to be the PCV system. My air intake is absolutely dry of any oil up to the throttle blade. and yet oil is pooling inside the intake and getting into the engine, and potentially damaging the gaskets. When I took the motor apart, I noticed that there was oil all over the PCV valve and the tubes that link it to the intake and its ventilation source, which is the nipple on the valley cover/Oil distribution manifold. Somehow, oil is able to make in into this vent nipple.

I'd strongly prefer to keep the PCV system intact, as this car is emissions legal still somehow.

So I'm looking for ideas on what to do to keep oil from coming out the nipple on the manifold/cover
The valley cover

I opened one of them up to study the baffle system that is supposed to prevent oil ingestion

This left me wondering if the intermediate shaft (the dummy cam) is throwing oil into the inlet or something. I don't know. I'm kind at a loss for ideas here.

Otherwise, the assembly is going quite well. I can't wait to get the thing all back together.


sleevePAPA MSG #427, 04-28-2015 06:05 PM
      If the oil pump had a paper gasket between the halves, that is most likely a shim. Might want to spin the pump to check if the gears spin freely and not bind up on the outer housing. I found that out the hard way when I was building my 3.4, had to face the gears on a lathe.

Have you considered using a vacuum pump and catch can? I would at least use a catch can with the PCV system since it wasn't originally designed to be used with boost.


eph_kay (cjcoulter@me.com) MSG #428, 04-28-2015 10:51 PM
      Im sure you have considered this, and it might not even work, but what are your thoughts on the 3x00 cross bolt main caps and oil pan?

Chris


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #429, 04-29-2015 03:03 AM
      I have them, considered using them too. But I found that there is no nice way to integrate them, and they would hardly be worth the effort.

First, the rear main is the same for both styles. So there was no advantage there. Only the two center ones will fit with the sheet metal pan, negating the possibility of using the front main. So, I'd have had to have the block align bored for those two mains.

I considered possibly using the cast aluminum pan with the front three cross bolted mains, but then the exhaust and front mount wouldn't fit. On top of the fact that the pan doesn't bolt up anyway, not even close. Sorta ruled it out for me. Not saying I couldn't, but that it wouldn't be worth all the effort, especially when the windage tray is so thick and strong, pretty much provides the same function as the cross bolted mains. The one thing I did consider though, is that the metal that those mains were made of appeared much better than the cast caps that the 3.4 DOHC has.

There is definitely a possibility of improving the mains, but I only took the option to install the studs. Even then, they are still torqued to 70lb-ft, as not to warp the caps out of round.


eph_kay (cjcoulter@me.com) MSG #430, 04-30-2015 02:08 PM
      I figured you had thought it through, and honestly didn't realize the pans weren't swappable, I guess there had to be a few more things on the TDC that didn't transfer right over

Well keep up the good work your fab work and packaging is top notch

Chris


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #431, 05-01-2015 02:31 PM
      Speaking of thinking of things through, I started doing the timing belt and assembly, when I ran into a snag, literally.

I had sealed up the bottom end last week and bolted the heads, cam carriers and timing housing assembly. I put 5 quarts of oil in, and used a power drill to turn the intermediate shaft to prime the oil pump. All this was going well.

But today, I when I was turning the motor as part of doing timing, something was causing the crank to have hard spots in its rotation. A snag of some sort. This put me in a fowl state.

So, reluctantly, I destroyed the oil pan gasket when removing the oil pan. The cause was apparent immediately.



Well, didn't think of everything did I now? Hah. Well, at least the gasket was destroyed before I even removed the pan. It seems as though the pan gasket hangs inside the rail about 1/8". It needs to be nearly flush where the rods swing close. So I have to go get another gasket and modify it a little.

By the way, I find this is my preferred method of assembly. Keep your torque specs close, and your torque wrench closer.


I usually don't find myself getting back into the bottom end this late in the assembly, but it happened. Twice actually. I had to pull the pan right after I put it on the first time when I found that my spacer washers for the studs were too wide, and did not allow the oil pump drive shaft to slip into the oil pump. A little grinding on those washers fixed that issue.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #432, 05-07-2015 11:18 PM
      As the engine is coming together. (slowly, as I have like no time at all anymore these days) I think its time I take care of a problem I was having with the clutch. I had an issue where the clutch would not disengage when the engine was at high RPM. I've heard of it referred to as High RPM Clutch Lockout. I had this problem even before I turbocharged the engine, and switched to the 6 speed.

My theory is that the pressure plate needs more then just the 3 straps holding it against the diaphragm. So... I'm improvising a bit.


I added some springs to help hold the plate stable.



hopefully, this little mod will fix that issue.

I should be good for slipping the engine onto the cradle next.


sleevePAPA MSG #433, 05-08-2015 11:58 AM
      What rpm are you shifting at? Reason I ask is I had a FWD clutch from clutchnet on my blazer, shifted at 7k a few times and never had an issue with clutch lockout.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #434, 05-08-2015 01:00 PM
      Somewhere in the 5500-6500 range. I don't think its a clutchnet disk issue though. I've had this problem with every Sachs pressure plate I've had. I'm hoping the extra tension against the diaphragm will help at high rpm. I recall even having this problem when I had just a PR 3.4 in the car, and again when I changed to the first iteration of the 3.4 DOHC. They've all had the same model pressure plate.

The mod I did to increase clamping force and help pedal feel also had a small decreasing effect on the tension too. I'm just putting some non scientific faith in these springs, hoping they'll help a bunch.


Dr.CGT (chazdorn@aol.com) MSG #435, 05-08-2015 07:47 PM
      Hope they don't become spring bullets at 6k. Thats a lot of centrifugal force with little holding them in.

Dr.CGT (chazdorn@aol.com) MSG #436, 05-08-2015 08:37 PM
      Could the straps be retensioned or a leaf added ? Is the disk hanging up on the spline?

ericjon262 MSG #437, 05-09-2015 11:55 AM
      as much as you've spent on this, I would suggest getting a new pressure plate with stronger springs if you think that's the problem.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #438, 05-09-2015 09:35 PM
      It would seem like an easy answer to go that route. But I've already purchased two uprated pressure plates to build this car. The first one from clutchnet was so bad, I couldn't justify even attempting to install it for the reason that it likely would have not worked at all, It had uneven fingers.

The second purchase was one from Spec. This one was perfectly well built, and easily could have handled my application, horsepower wise. However, it required a super thick clutch disc, which I don't have. So, it would have likely failed very quickly.

Finally, after studying what Spec did to up the torque capacity, I decided to modify a stock plate to be able to handle the torque by moving the fulcrum inward like the Spec plate, but not as far so that I could fit my custom clutchnet "F40" disk.

Power handling was great with this combo, clutch feel was okay, but trending towards boarderline for a daily. But I've always had trouble getting the clutch to stay disengaged during a High RPM shift. It wouldn't even allow the shifter to come out of gear. I'm not really worried about the springs flinging out, the springs will be operating at nearly fully compressed, and they will only have just the last bit of the spring exposed. Perhaps, I could have layered up some more straps if I had them. But that would mean I need yet another donor pressure plate.

I just sent the clutch pressure plate and the flywheel out for balancing. I figured since I've got the crank balanced, it would make good sense to balance the flywheel. especially since I did so much machining to it previously.

When the flywheel gets back, I can load the engine back onto the cradle and get the package all dressed back up for installation.


sleevePAPA MSG #439, 05-09-2015 10:41 PM
      If you want to try the springs, maybe you can add pins that anchor to the flywheel and protrude through the rivets on the PP to keep the spring from walking out?

Or add weights to the fingers like a centerforce PP?


fieroguru MSG #440, 05-10-2015 09:21 AM
      I shift my LS4/F40 at 7K quite often without issue, but my clutch/pressure plate setup is completely different (10" ford setup). The only shifting issue I ever had was aggressive 3rd gear up-shifts where the getrag select cable (used as a shift cable) was buckling as it reached maximum extension. Reworking the bracket to use the thicker and longer extending Isuzu Shift cable fixed that issue.

If you are going to go the spring route, they really should be positively anchored at both ends (recessed hole on the flywheel & spot weld a centering dimple on the head of the rivet). As they flex/vibrate and experience rotational forces, the springs will likely walk out from the current mounting hole. Once you lose one, the other two will likely cause an imbalance issue, and the loose spring will likely get hung up on something within the bellhousing and cause further damage.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #441, 05-10-2015 01:39 PM
      High RPM shifting problems are more likely hydraulics than the clutch itself. After all, if the hydraulics are fully extended, then there would have to be something pretty crazy going on with the clutch in order for it NOT to fully disengage.

However, a properly working clutch might not disengage if the hydraulics aren't working correctly.

One thing I've seen happen is that excess grease on the TOB sleeve in the transmission can collect clutch dust and turn to mud/gum/gunk over time. Normal motion of the clutch fingers can push the TOB away from the fingers, but the return spring inside the slave cylinder can't overcome the stickiness of the clutch dust loaded grease, so the TOB sits a little bit away from the fingers. This increases dead space in the clutch pedal travel, with the result that even when the pedal is all the way down, the clutch is not fully disengaged.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #442, 05-10-2015 07:06 PM
      This problem was fairly easy to spot. Pressing the clutch in, while in first gear, rev it up to 5-6K. The car would jump/lurch a bit. It even had a bit of a thump/thud as it would grab just a bit. I couldn't find any way to blame hydraulics there.

The idea of the clutch doing something pretty crazy isn't crazy at all when you think about it. When you press the clutch, the diaphragm flattens out a bit, which takes pressure off of the pressure plate. The only thing that causes the pressure plate to retract WITH the diaphragm's movement, is the three spring straps. If there is any kind of imbalance in the pressure plate itself, it could wobble against the diaphram, and could rub the clutch disk as a result, causing a little bit of drag. So if I help the pressure plate stay seated against the diaphragm, it should increase the RPM point where an imbalance will cause the pressure plate to wobble. At least that's what I think is happening.

I can't really fix or detect an imbalance unfortunately. I can't guarantee that the pressure plate itself is centered. I can only be sure that the pressure plate cover is centered and the unit as a whole is balanced.

Perhaps, I could mod or change the rivets to have a peg that pokes through the spring, that would be fling proof. I might do that actually...


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #443, 05-13-2015 04:41 AM
      Just a quick one of the engine before its put on the cradle, which will likely happen later this week I think.


Incidentally, today I found something peculiar that explained why this engine was so noisy all those years ago.
Heres the noise:


And heres the cause:

I scavenged a new tensioner off of the engine block that was in the car earlier. I was looking around for something the other day, and this caught my eye. Glad I have an answer now! That was a long time ago.


Dr.CGT (chazdorn@aol.com) MSG #444, 05-13-2015 08:03 PM
      Dam spring bullets

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #445, 05-24-2015 11:49 AM
      No spring bullets.

I took both suggestions for the clutch that I felt were appropriate. I cut the rivets and pressed them out.

I made some new rivets with a shallow peg on the back to hold the springs in place.


While I had the pressure plate apart, I took the spring straps and bent them a bit more, made them more "Z" shaped then they were.

Hopefully, all this added pressure plate retention force will cure the high RPM clutch disengagement issues.

I had an idea, I took an old 3.4 DOHC crankshaft, and cut the rear flange off of it. It was a ton of work to cut the bugger off! I wanted to make a nice, very accurate flange for machining flywheels. It also occurred to me that with a couple of small, high precision bearings, It would make an excellent balancing arbor as well.


With 1/4" ID shielded bearings, I washed out the grease with WD-40 to cause the bearings to be as low resistance as possible. I then balanced the arbor. You can see the holes I drilled into the face to balance it. It is extremely sensitive.

I balanced the flywheel first, had to do a little bit of drilling to get it nailed down. When I was finished, the flywheel was well enough balanced to stay in whatever position I rotated it to. Then, I bolted on the pressure plate, and balanced that too. I actually put the arbor on backwards so that the bearings were centered within the mass. I had to do quite a lot of drilling to do on the pressure plate to get that balanced. But, when I flipped the arbor back into the lathe chuck and ran the lathe at full speed with the flywheel and pressure plate mounted. There was absolutely zero vibration. Very comforting to see that.

All being well and good, I went ahead and mounted the flywheel, torqued the ARP fasteners to 70 ft-lbs using Loctite on the threads, and ARP lube under the heads. But, once it was torqued the bolts, I washed off all of the ARP lube. I don't want to contaminate the clutch disc.


Then of course, the engine and transmission got mated, and landed, and I'm currently dressing the engine. I can't wait!


TXOPIE (tx.opie@gmail.com) MSG #446, 05-24-2015 01:11 PM
      Very Nice...love following your thread...thanks for posting.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #447, 07-19-2015 05:22 PM
      Been a while with no updates, so here's the run down behind what I've been up to.

At the tail end of May, I had mated the engine and transmission and began dressing the motor
Some things that I had to tackle while prepping the assembly:
I created a bunch of new heat shields for the crossover, as to not radiate heat near the air filter and Coolant temperature sensor.
I insulated the coolant temperature sensor itself considerably more
I modified and installed a 180 degree thermostat to cool things down a bit.
I created an intake air filter shroud/housing out of a flour/sugar can, and wrapped it with sticky backed fiberglass reflective heat blanket. I'm hoping this will greatly reduce the temperatures that the intake filter is pulling in.
I built a heat shield to go between the intercooler and the muffler.


By the 16th of June I had all the hardware checked and the cradle assembly ready to be installed.

It took two weeks to get a moment to roll out the assembly to the car and install it. And another two to find the time to plug everything in, and fill the coolant systems.



Having a kid, and an opposing schedule to my wife, and oppressively hot 105+ degree days makes it very difficult to find the time to work on the car. But, on the occasion I can't sleep, so I go outside and get a bunch of work done.

Finally, yesterday I did my once over. I charged the battery, and cranked the engine without fuel till I had oil pressure. Then I turned the ignition to prime the pump 5 times, till I could hear that the fuel system was filled. Then I cranked it and it started up immediately. Like as if it were driven yesterday. Very un-ceremonious.

I'm working on fitting the new air box into the very cramped engine bay, lots of trimming going on with it. I've also decided to cut up my boost tubes, and weld in some V-band joints. I'm waiting for those to show up. I've had some serviceability issues in my engine bay, like the air filter not being removable if the boost tubes were in place. The boost tubes were damn near impossible to remove because the intercooler ports are pretty tough to get to. So, I'll make the boost tubes come apart easily to free up the air filter area. Especially now that there is an intake housing in that area.

So, to recap. In this rebuild of the engine I...
Changed back over to my old used block
Replaced the crankshaft with a Forged 3900 crank
put a 7X reluctor on that crank
Modified the heck out of 4.3L Forged H Beam rods (narrowed, flipped, re-tanged)
Got custom forged pistons, lowered the compression ratio from 9.5 to 9.0
New moly rings
New bearings with improved lubrication channels
Balanced the rotating assembly
modified the flywheel and pressure plate for better disengagement
made heat shields for the crossover, Coolant temperature sensor, air filter and intercooler
upped the wastegate spring from .5 bar (7.25 PSI) to .7 bar (10.15 PSI)
welded indexing tubes into the V-band splits on the exhaust

Whenever I have spare time and its too hot outside I've been working on recoding $8F for 3 bar operation. It's been difficult to say the least. But I think I am just about done with it. I just have to test my work, and fix whatever doesn't work.

But, I am really pumped about how well it's running. This means a lot of things went right. Especially the stuff with the 7X reluctor.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #448, 07-19-2015 09:44 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
But, I am really pumped about how well it's running. This means a lot of things went right. Especially the stuff with the 7X reluctor.


That's pretty impressive.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #449, 07-25-2015 08:45 AM
      I wrapped up a bunch of little details, put the wheels, rear bumper, wheel well liners and tail lights on.

I added the three V-band sets to the boost tubes then installed all the goods.

Then I put the car on the ground, and took it out for a spin. Everything seems to be in order.

I forgot just how fast this car is, either that or it got faster. The boost was on waste gate spring setting, so probably 10 or 11 PSI. I wasn't logging the short lap I took.

All that being good, I decided to try out my 3 bar program with the 3 bar sensor. It started and stalled, was difficult to keep running. That's actually pretty good, I was expecting the first attempt to have some small code error that would have crashed the microprocessor, but it didn't. So now I'm working on code debugging, ported all the MAP ram variables to the ALDL, and configured Tunerpro to spit them out into a graph. Fairly straight forward. We'll see how that goes.

Maybe for the time being I'll just stick to 2 bar it runs perfectly with it. I have to get the car back through emissions as it was due a little after the last engine let go so in the short term its best.


davylong86 MSG #450, 07-25-2015 07:51 PM
      That is one nice looking 3.4 turbo! Great job on a well thought out project. When you get the chance, post a video of the car when you fire it up. Bet it sounds as good as it looks.

msweldon (marc.weldon@mindspring.com) MSG #451, 07-27-2015 10:31 AM
      What type of main and rod bearings did you use?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #452, 07-27-2015 03:15 PM
      Main bearings are
Sealed Power 7242MA STD. Which are for a 3100.
Rod bearings are
Sealed power 1020CP STD which are stock for a newish 4.3L same as the rods I'm using.

I started doing my 3 bar code debugging today and found that I didn't put the 3 bar patch on the code yet when I put the 3 bar sensor in. So it was running poorly for that reason. I patched the code, then did another debug run. Much to my surprise, it started right up and surged a couple of times before settling down to a nice idle. Throttle response was trash, but it ran pretty well otherwise.

The debug was important, It showed me that the re-calculated value used for processing the fuel control was bang on, as was most of the other 3 bar variables.

What wasn't doing so hot was all the 1 bar values. I need to work on those. They were all zeroed out, so some math is completely failing. I also found that the 3 bar value that it uses for timing and boost multiplier was calculating correctly, but the value wasn't getting off the floor (zero) when idling. The 2 bar debug revealed that it is off the floor when idling, so I'll have to fudge the math on that value to make it read similarly to how it did when running the 2 bar and adjust the tables that reference it accordingly.

This stuff is fun!


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #453, 07-27-2015 05:10 PM
      Easy fix for the 1 bar stuff. I didn't see any errors in the code, so I changed it over to addition instead of multiplication on the math to make 1 bar variables. That fixed that issue. Then I tested it in the car, and It drives just fine now on the 3 bar sensor and code. Still having a little problem with Baro calcs... but I'm sure I will get that straightened out too. I did peak boost at 20 PSI... heh, it's really pretty intense at that boost level. The code Is limited to 22-23 PSI by several mechanisms. So I will likely not go above 20-21 PSI. The sensor and the computer can handle more, but it would require a heavier rework of the code.

This 3 bar code Is ironing out just beautifully

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 07-27-2015).]

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #454, 07-27-2015 08:50 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Main bearings are
Sealed Power 7242MA STD. Which are for a 3100


You weren't able to source the 270 degree grooved mains?


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #455, 07-27-2015 09:45 PM
      7242MA are the 270 degree lube trough mains. I really liked the idea of the rods getting a lot more of a direct connection to the oil source.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #456, 07-27-2015 10:45 PM
      I thought you had done that... but I also thought the bearings were from a manufacturer other than Sealed Power.

IVANNATINKLE (seanmiller063@gmail.com) MSG #457, 07-30-2015 07:25 PM
      PICTURES VIDEOS!!! lets see it! awesome looking motor

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #458, 07-31-2015 07:54 AM
      There are good pictures on page 7 of the engine, and videos of the car destroying speed limits on page 9. Those will have to do for now. But I will have some more in the future.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #459, 08-08-2015 11:04 PM
      Got my car through its second emissions test, and it passed

Anyway, I've been really scratching my head about my coolant temperature lately.

Ever since I turbocharged the 3.4 DOHC, the engine has a really hard time maintaining temperature. My temperature profile always looks like this:

Starts out cold, slowly builds up till it hits 182 degrees. My thermostat is a 180 degree, so thats expected. I get on the highway and it slowly creeps up to right about 208. Approximately 20-25 minutes into the drive, the temperature then starts to slowly increase into the 220's and 230's. It gets to where its almost touching red on the gage. I checked it out with an IR thermal gun, and it said my engine outlet pipe (under the car) was 217, and the upper radiator hose was 220. So, it's running hot for sure, not overheating badly, but getting up there. My fan is working just fine too.

I've always been concerned that the CTS is being cooked by the turbo crossover pipe. Its very close to it, but also well insulated. So I got another CTS and put it in a brass T, and inserted it in-line in the water feed to the turbo and connected the CTS wire to it. This small loop bypasses the thermostat, and recirculates back into the water pump so its temperature is pretty accurate. I still found it getting into the 220's today. My fan setting is 192 and the thermostat is 180, so I should never see any temperatures above 200 if the system is working correctly, or within its capacity.

My curiosity or fear, is that my intercooler FMHE may be causing the radiator airflow to be weak. I ran this radiator when I was still NA, and never had any issues with its ability to keep the engines temperature right where it is supposed to be. But I also wonder if it could be the water pump. I'm trying to remember which water pump I put in the car, since I haven't changed it out in a long timeI want to say its the one from either the crate engine, or just a cheap replacement from autozone.

Perhaps I'll just pull the FMHE and see what happens.

Those are the only two things that I can see causing this issue. As always If anyone has suggestions or any other ideas I'm all ears.


fieroguru MSG #460, 08-09-2015 01:03 PM
      If its 220 going into the radiator, I would measure the temp coming out of the radiator too. If its much cooler, then it could be a flow issue (water pump), if its still hot, then it could be an air flow issue across the radiator.

solman105 MSG #461, 08-09-2015 01:30 PM
      PM Sent, I have an idea but I'm pretty sure that you thought of it!

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #462, 08-09-2015 03:05 PM
      I did measure inlet and outlet temperatures at the radiator and wasn't quite sure what to make of it. There was some temperature drop, but only a few 8-10? degrees. This could mean high water flow or an ineffective radiator. Or, it's normal? I don't have anything to compare it to. I'm sure I'm going to have to pull the heat exchanger. It would suck if its the problem, but it probably is.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #463, 08-09-2015 06:46 PM
      The water temp doesn't actually drop much going through the radiator... a handful of degrees is normal. Yeah, pull the heat exchanger. It's likely the culprit if all of your radiator airflow is otherwise stock. Do you still have a stock radiator or do you have an upgrade?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #464, 08-09-2015 07:08 PM
      Stock replacement V6 radiator. This car has had this same engine in it for 8 years or so and didn't have overheating issues till I turboed it. So I'm fairly certain its not a radiator quality issue. Ill let you guys know how it goes.

I'm thinking quarter panel scoops, small radiators and fans are in my near future. I really have got to start thinking about learning bodywork. This car needs it badly anyway


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #465, 08-11-2015 07:37 PM
      I've been using my car's original V6 manual trans radiator the entire time I've had the Northstar swap on the road and haven't had problems related to the radiator.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #466, 08-14-2015 02:49 PM
     

Well, There's my new intercooler, just a piece of pipe. I did connect it to my fill port/radiator cap, and made sure it was topped off with coolant. This way at least it'll radiate with its 25' or so of pipe and hose, and still breathe in and out coolant as a radiator should.

I also reconnected the original CTS, and then I flogged the car some. It seems to be much better. Temperatures were staying around the 1/4 mark, and ventured up to the 3/8 mark, but cooled off easily when the A/C was turned on. I'm thinking it's working fine now, but It was cooler outside and raining. I'll drive it to work tomorrow with the A/C on and see how it holds up.

If all continues to go well, I think a pair of these "Oil coolers" might be my future intercooler.

I am contemplating the location. Quarter panels seem like a possibility.

Another thing I had a chance to really test yesterday was the clutch. I got curious about how my changes to the clutch had improved the disengagement at high RPM. The answer is... Perfectly. I achieved the fastest shift I had ever done in my Fiero on the first try. I spun the tires in first, and kept the turbo spooled more than enough through the shift into second that the tires continued to spin. Needless to say, this made me very happy.

So it looks a lot like this iteration of this engine is doing much better than the first so far. I still have the boost set at a relatively low wastage spring controlled 11 psi. I set the ECM to shoot for 13, but I'm leaving the control solenoid disconnected for the time being till I have a good intercooler back in service.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #467, 08-16-2015 06:45 PM
      Go figure, I was wrong about the intercooler. I drove the car to work, it's 109 degrees outside. Just like it did before it seemed to have the temperature under control, and then slowly started to overheat just as I was about to get off the freeway before I got to work.

It seems like removing the FMHE made absolutely no difference. I just had to re-test it on a hot day like today. Also, just my luck, It was low on refrigerant, so.. No A/C for me today. My phone overheated. I think I overheated a bit too. Now, all I can think of, is possibly the water pump, Radiator, or still an airflow problem somehow. But for the life of me I have no idea at the moment which is failing.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #468, 08-21-2015 05:51 AM
      I'm questioning now whether or not the stock v6 radiator has enough cooling capacity on a hot day to cool this turbocharged engine, especially with the A/C on.

The turbo does add back pressure to the exhaust, causing the engine to retain more heat. That coupled with the turbo having to work a little at highway load only adds more heat and back pressure to the engine, effectively, I think that the turbo is causing the cooling system to have to cool not just the engine, but the heat that normally would be lost out the exhaust as well.

Does that sound like a reasonable theory?

Perhaps a big aluminum radiator is the answer?

Still confused about this issue, everything seems to be functioning, it just runs hot!


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #469, 08-23-2015 11:34 AM
      The turbine won't be pulling significant heat out of the exhaust unless it's making significant boost... IE, the exhaust volume/energy won't be high enough to make the turbine a restriction unless the compressor is making boost.

fieroguru MSG #470, 08-23-2015 01:10 PM
      Have you checked all the seal flaps and material around the radiator to eliminate air paths. As you drive above 30 mph, you shouldn't need the fan to even run if the lower air dam and all the flaps around the radiator are properly installed.

Have you pulled the radiator to see if there are a bunch of leaves (or just built up dirt/muck) between it and the AC condenser?



FieroWannaBe (patond@alumni.msoe.edu) MSG #471, 08-23-2015 06:33 PM
      Also, there are two style waterpumps for the 3.4. Which style do you have, cast impeller or stamped?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #472, 08-23-2015 07:59 PM
      On the topic of restriction
I was thinking about the exhaust restriction on more of a function of the narrowing of the exhaust corridor before it impinges on the turbine. I mean, I go from a pair of 2.25" feeds, to one 2.25" inlet at the turbo, which funnels down to about 1.5" (?) before it's exposed to the turbine. It's not an insignificant restriction, but I know it's also plenty sufficient to not be a restriction at idle and low part throttle. Which on the highway may be on the border of being a pretty fair restriction. Even then the turbo may be producing a decent amount of air that is banging up against the mostly closed throttle blade. Perhaps I'm over thinking it too, maybe it's nothing to be concerned with. I know that a bad catalyst provides plenty of back pressure to cause a car to overheat, so that is where I'm getting this line of thought from.

Anyway, about the duct work. I did install the FMHE, and I did have to mangle the two side flaps on the inside of the nose a bit which were already falling apart. They are still in place for the most part. But to be honest, they're not in all that good of shape. I just took a look online at what complete ones are supposed to look like, and am realizing just how much of them is missing, and that it likely is an issue if not THE issue. I'd like to see this car cool as its supposed to before I attempt to reinstall the FMHE. So, I guess I'm either buying new side air dams and fresh rubber for them, or making something more specific to my application. Worth a shot before dropping coin on a radiator that I'm not entirely sure is necessary, and may not fix the problem.

On air path clogging,
I recently had the condensor out of the car when I was working on the A/C. I also made sure that my condensor is in nearly flawless condition. Straightened almost every fin out for the most part. So I'm definitely clean there.

Water pump,
I believe, If my memory serves, that I have the cast impeller on my water pump. I got it off my crate engine when my junk yard water pump failed when I first put the 3.4 DOHC in the car. I remember seeing those stamped ones, I don't think I would ever put one of those in a car and feel good about it. The stamped

So, I think I'll do some makeshift mods to my side air dams to see if eliminating the leakage fixes the issue.

Thanks for the suggestions!


fieroguru MSG #473, 08-23-2015 08:06 PM
      FWIW... I took my LS4 car out for a 30 minute spin today. When I got back in the garage, I grabbed the temp gun and measured the chassis coolant tubes right before the radiator hoses. Coming from the engine was 191 degrees, and returning from the radiator was 170. The fan was on, ambient air temp was about 76 degrees, and I am running the 3-core champion radiator with the stock Fiero fan.

sleevePAPA MSG #474, 08-24-2015 03:21 PM
      Driving around in vegass will help you find out if the cooling system isn't adequate. I had a fluidyne 3 row rad in my mustang and it worked fine until I moved to LV, then during the summer the coolant temps hung around 205*F. Installed a champion 4 row and the temps wouldn't creep above 195*, drove it 600 miles a week. Same issue with the GN, would not drop below 208-210*F cruising around, even with the fan on high.


IMO is good rad and a fan like the Mark VII would keep the engine cool, the original isn't going to cut it.

[This message has been edited by sleevePAPA (edited 08-24-2015).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #475, 08-30-2015 03:07 PM
      I figured making new, and better air dam sides couldn't hurt... Heres what the old ones looked like:


And the new ones, which will also accommodate the intercooler FMHE, if I ever get the temperature situation under control.


Drove it to work yesterday with the new air dam sides, and it didn't make any difference at all. So I had to do what I had to do and bought a new radiator.


I've been fairly confident that the stock V6 radiator could handle this engine's heat output, but short of changing the waterpump, I've investigated every alternative to upgrading the radiator, so now it's time to do just that.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #476, 08-30-2015 05:08 PM
      Another thing that I've been dealing with...

When the gas tank is full, and I am on a rear downward grade (driveway) fuel leaks out of the car.

I jacked up the front end of the car the other day to work on the air dam project, and I could see the fuel dripping out of the back of the tank. I took a look and could not exactly identify the source but it looks to me like the Filler neck vent hose is a bit dry rotted. It was new from the fiero store about 8(?) years ago. That sucks, but I'll have to find a replacement for that too.


California Kid MSG #477, 08-30-2015 11:47 PM
      Don't overlook the radiator pressure cap, and also fill cap in engine compartment. Both should be upgraded to higher pressure.

Don't ask me how I know.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #478, 08-31-2015 12:22 AM
      I agree! However, I haven't Had any coolant loss, or reservoir overflow issues, and I have no rear filler or cap. I've also made sure that there is no air in the rear half of the system by cracking the fitting at the turbo (highest point in the rear).

The other thing I've been considering is spark advance. I know it can cause the engine to expel more heat, and murder gas mileage and power. Also, I am running with no EGR too, which also adds some to the heat loading. So that is something I will attack too. But for sure, it's now getting a new radiator.

I'm thinking about sending the knock sensor input directly to the data stream to plot it on a RPM vs MAP histrogram to help work on my timing table. Should yield some interesting results.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #479, 08-31-2015 04:52 AM
      Interesting development on my drive home tonight, it was a nice 88 degrees outside. The engine stayed cool, reaching the 1/4 mark for the entire drive and staying there as it should. That was sweet confirmation that my issue has been a cooling capacity problem all along.

I did a WOT second gear run to 6500 rpm, and achieved a pretty fast shift into third, mostly to test the clutch and the between shift boost lag. Very little loss of boost on the shift.

Anyway, the temp gauge didn't budge after that little beating. So I'm confident that I've made the right choice to get a new radiator. It's just too hot outside to cool the coolant enough. Especially with the a/c on.


fieroguru MSG #480, 08-31-2015 08:25 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
I figured making new, and better air dam sides couldn't hurt... Heres what the old ones looked like:



Being able to see that much daylight was allowing a good portion of air to bypass the radiator at highway speeds vs. it being forced through the radiator. Your new side guides likely helped some, but probably wasn't the entire issue, and the larger radiator will provide some additional cooling capacity as well.


California Kid MSG #481, 08-31-2015 08:55 AM
      Improving the skirting and new radiator is going to help for sure. Make sure your coolant mixture is set to 65% anti-freeze, 35% water as that is typically the best ratio for most anti-freeze heat transfer. Going further than that Water Wetter added to system drops temps about 10 to 15 more degrees.

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #482, 09-01-2015 06:43 PM
      Not sure where you're getting that info, but pure water (plus anti-corrosion additives) is the best coolant, as long as you can keep it under enough pressure not to boil.


California Kid MSG #483, 09-01-2015 08:33 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Will:

Not sure where you're getting that info, but pure water (plus anti-corrosion additives) is the best coolant, as long as you can keep it under enough pressure not to boil.


Yep, that's true, It's just that I'm old and forget that some people don't live in the cold north like I do.

Link attached for OP that should be useful, didn't occur to me the he lives near Las Vegas:

http://www.torcavettes.com/.../CorvetteCooling.htm


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #484, 09-02-2015 02:42 PM
      What a nice radiator!




I'm anxious to install and test it, but I'm going on a short vacation in the meantime.


California Kid MSG #485, 09-05-2015 11:46 PM
      The Champion is a tight fit, review thread by Archie on how to trip rubber isolater's at the bottom mount area, otherwise it will sit too high. On mine, I also had to grid hole out just a little on upper mount plate were it fits around the fill neck. Be sure to plug input for automatic transmission lines if you have manual trans.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #486, 09-17-2015 08:02 PM
      Installing the radiator went very well. I did some trimming of the rubber mounts, plugged off the holes for the transmission cooler, slipped the radiator in and connected it all up. While I was at it, I sand blasted and painted the upper radiator support, and put a new rubber upper air dam in place. It looks so much better!



I wanted to also knock out another issue that has been driving me mad for a long time. The back of the fuel tank was leaking whenever it was full and I am parked on an incline. I noticed just how bad the leak was when I was making the new front air dams, the fuel was just dribbling out of the tank!

I noticed that the smaller vent return hose that goes to the fill neck appeared to be pretty dry rotted.

So I bought some new Fill neck - Tank hoses from the Fiero store.

But, that didn't make any sense to me. Why would a fuel impervious (not submersible) hose dry rot, unless the gas was soaking the outside?
Turns out, that the small fill nipple's weld to the tank had been broken. Probably when I was struggling to remove the hose from the back of the tank to change the fuel pump.

I used some JB weld, to help re-adhere the nipple to the tank, and put some on the large nipple for a little added insurance.


I also used a tank repair material to build up the spot where the weld was, just to add some additional anchor. I put the hoses on and that problem is likely fixed. I'll have to fill the tank up to find out.

Another quick project was attacking the drivers side door. Last year I tested a new window motor alternative to the crappy ones the Fiero's have always had.
Thread about that... Faster windows

I had some problems with the window channel striking the motor, but I did some grinding to the channel and now it slides right past the motor without clunking against it.


I also had the door latch assembly out for a little cleaning and lubrication. It's nice to have the power door lock working as it should again. Believe it or not, I found one of the biggest obstruction to the power door lock motor working properly is the arm on the back of the door lock cylinder. It has to pivot whenever the door lock is being used, and without a little bit of good grease it provided too much resistance. It has a spring clip that adds a bunch of friction to the tumbler arm. It's a good one to know. Next I'll have to attack the passengers side door.

As far as the engine goes, I haven't drove it yet with the new radiator, and it's looking like the end of the Las Vegas summer is coming near. So unless I drive it on a 100+ degree day, it might be hard to tell if the new radiator was a silver bullet or not.

Either way, I'll also need to pop the FMHE (Intercooler) back in sometime soon. 'Cause boost season is coming, and I think a trip to the dyno sometime in the near future. I want to see 400+ horsepower, which it certainly registers in that range on the butt dyno, even at only 11 PSI. Perhaps I can top 500 if I go for ~20 PSI. That will be exciting.

I also have been having some knock sensor issues to sort out. I keep getting code 43's even though I do see some knock sensor feedback. I'm sure I'll figure that out easily. Could even just be a needed ground strap.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #487, 09-26-2015 04:03 PM
      I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the fact that it's still running hot. The radiator made no difference at all. It was only 90 degrees out this morning, and I was still two notches above 220 towards the end of my drive to work.

It's so strange, there just isn't any reason for it to be running so hot. The only thing I can do now is check or change the water pump. And I still can't see that even being possibly the cause, unless somehow the impeller is loose on the shaft when it's up to temperature. It's an OEM water pump from what I remember, so its got that nice cast impeller.


sleevePAPA MSG #488, 09-27-2015 12:48 AM
      Drive up to Mt Charleston and see if it cools off some at the top?

Have you sprayed the radiator with a garden hose to see if it cools it off when running? If that helps it may need another fan.

*edit* Just remembered that one day I forgot the hood was unlatched while driving to work, couldn't help but notice how much hot air was pouring out from underneath driving down the 215. It usually ran about 200* with the AC on full when it was 100* out, that instance it stayed right around 190*. Food for thought?

[This message has been edited by sleevePAPA (edited 09-27-2015).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #489, 09-27-2015 02:16 AM
      I actually did try driving with the hood not only unlatched, but propped up a few inches. That didn't make any difference. But I haven't really tried driving into much lower temperatures yet. Mt Charleston is a bit of a climb which will up the heat load a bit. I'd like to have this issue solved before I try that trip. So I've got a week till that little cruise that's been put together.

I think the garden hose on the radiator isn't a bad idea, just to see if the system can cool the engine once it has achieved a high temperature.

At this point I feel like I could rule out anything concerning the front section of the coolant system. The radiator that was in there was fine when it was just a N/A 3.4 DOHC, and now I have really good air control with the custom air dams and that monster of a radiator. The fan is factory, but it has a relatively new motor and is in good working order. There's nothing that could be bad, and certainly not undersized, it's just a 3.4L engine!

My coolant pipes and hoses are in good condition, that really just leaves the water pump, or the thermostat. The thermostat has proven to work exactly as intended. I can see it opening on my Logger, the temperature goes flat at 180 degrees for a little while then starts a slow and mostly steady climb up towards the red.

It behaves as a system where the engine puts just a little more heat into the coolant than the radiator can remove, so it slowly loses the battle to control the temperature. But I just can't believe that this is what is going on. The front half is so overkill now for a 3.4L engine. I'll have to do some more digging.


solman105 MSG #490, 09-27-2015 10:27 AM
      I used to have a 4 cylinder Jeep wrangler and when its water pump failed, I went to an auto parts store and got a replacement. I got it to temperature and then the car started bucking and overheating. Turns out that the water pump was spinning the wrong way; my year jeep sold counterclockwise and clockwise spinning pumps. What was on the belt drive determined what type of pump you needed.
Could, by chance this be the same for your motor?


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #491, 09-27-2015 08:07 PM
      That isn't an option on the 3.4 DOHC, they all use the smooth side of the belt to drive the water pump. That being said, the 3.4 PR engines come with a water pump that is driven off the smooth side of the belt, while in the Fiero, the 2.8 is driven off the V side of the belt. So when swapping in a 3.4 PR engine, you have to put on a different timing cover and waterpump, or you'll have a bacwards spinning waterpump and the same issues you described. So there are some motors where you will run across that.

I tried driving in to work with the A/C on for a while untill it was running close to the 220 mark, then turned the A/C off while on the highway. This was helpful as it was hotter today than yesterday, and for the first time in a long time, I watched it go from running hot, to cooling down to the 1/4 mark (halfway between 100 and 220, whatever that value is) which is exactly what is supposed to happen when the system works properly. It wasn't a fast drop at all, but it was noticible.

I rinsed off a bunch of dust that had somehow accumulated on the back of my decklid and got the engine wet a bit. The belt squeeked the whole drive in and that got me thinking, perhaps the belt is slipping, that could slow down the waterpump. So I think a new belt is in order, just to check off that box while I'm at it. Perhaps its not a bad idea still to inspect the water pump if I have the belt off.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #492, 09-27-2015 08:52 PM
      Oh, I forgot to mension, I have some good news about the gas tank. The repair with the JB weld and tank repair was a 100% sucsess. I filled the tank up till it wouldn't take any more, then I parked, uphill to see if the fuel would run out, and not a drop. So I can check that issue off the list.

There was a second effect I didn't expect, but am extremely pleased about.

My gas guage wasn't working properly, even though I had worked on it when I was changing the fuel pump out for the "TRE" pump. I had tested, repaired, and calibrated the sender, But it appeared to be somehow off. A full tank (practically overflowing) would be two full ticks below full. And I would always fill it up from when it hit the last line at empty. It would take about 8.3 gallons before it was topped off. So I figured perhaps the needle on the gage was off by two ticks.

When repairing the tank, I manually powered on the fuel pump and attached a gage with a drain line to let the fuel out into a container. I had already run the tank right to the last line at E. To my suprise, I barely got half a gallon out of the tank before it wouldn't pump any more. So it turned out that the last line at E, was in fact, empty.

When I did the repair on the smaller line (filler vent hose) I found that the nipple was pointed at an upward angle coming out of the tank. So as part of the repair I bent it back to the correct more or less perpendicular to the tank surface and glued it into position. I put the new hoses in, and finished up the job by putting a couple of gallons in the tank to get it on the road.

I drove till it was at the last line. I filled it up all the way again and instead of it only taking 8.3 gallons, it took a whole 10.0 gallons. And wouldn't you know it, the gage went right to the full line. So, two birds...

So, clearly if the filler vent line is drooping down in the tank, you're not going to be able to fill the tank all the way. Makes me wish I angled it up a little further, get a little more capacity out of the tank. I am so happy about how well this repair turned out.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #493, 10-18-2015 04:41 PM
      Guess I'll need to replace a wheel bearing. It only had a few thousand miles on it, they weren't easy miles though. Maybe there wasn't proper torque on the axle nut or the alignment took a toll on it. But at least it was easy to notice and diagnose. I had some on - off throttle yaw, and a rear end twitch on braking, as well as some instability on the highway. I was expecting to see some loseness in the suspension linkage or something, but it was a little more obvious when I took a closer look.



Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #494, 10-19-2015 10:35 AM
      Compare fins per inch and number of rows per inch between the stock and Champion radiator. Although the Champion cools better, in my experience it wasn't by an exceptional amount during a period where I installed a brand new stock radiator while the leaking Champion was out to be replaced.

I performed a head gasket replacement on a Nissan Versa recently after an Ebay special said to be an equivalent replacement turned out to be just the opposite. The car ran fine for months because it was installed in late Fall in cool weather. By the time Summer approached the first unexplained overheat occurred. The thermostat was removed and with a scan tool connected as the car has no temp gauge, it was test driven at night on the hwy where coolant temps settled at ~220ish which was a high normal with a stat and unacceptable without. Long story short, Nissan info on normal temp range could not be found until a youngster finished it off. With the gasket job completed the temps continued to run too high and that drew my attention to the radiator. I sourced an OE replacement and compared the two and noted the Nissan stocker had more fins (~25 vs. 17) and tubes per inch and the difference on the car under the same conditions was ~20 degrees plus cooler difference in favor of the OE plus quicker cool down time.

The V6 stock radiator should be 1.25" thick tube width and the Champion 1.5" with 3 half inch tubes which equates to only 25% more cooling volume if and only if they both have the exact same number of tubes. Then it's down to the number of fins per inch. If the Champion has less in any of those two areas you have to adjust its theoretical advantage over the stock radiator accordingly.

Many aftermarket providers are jumping on the "made in China discount". You really have to check your "old original" part against the new "?" to make sure you're not setting yourself up for failure. Also keep in mind there is at least one row of coolant tubes that are not functional (plugged) in the Champion, at least I was able to see that in my radiator through the filler neck and it's possible another row like it exists at the bottom so you can't count those if so.

You're not losing coolant and have no restrictions yet the car runs hot on hot days and behaves on cool days I say it's still your radiator. If you had a pressure problem you would also have a coolant level problem unless the problem is the cap which would allow the coolant to be pulled back in the radiator after cooling down masking the situation.

Here is a link to what I described about the radiator differences in my old thread about midway down, my first Champion shows one more coolant tube than the one you pictured;

http://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...2/HTML/127904-2.html


Those who have had successes and failures with the stock radiator behind a V8 could possibly be dealing with the 1" vs. 1.25" radiator that came in the Fiero at least during the first year.

Not taking a shot at "Made in China" as the retailer makes the decision on quality.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 10-19-2015).]

sleevePAPA MSG #495, 10-19-2015 12:48 PM
      Time for a dual pass radiator?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #496, 10-20-2015 02:07 AM
      I did a bit of research, and yes, read your thread on champion radiators.

Some of the things that I have had to consider:

This engine has been in this car for 5 years without any overheating issues, before I turbocharged it. The radiator that was in the car was a replacement V6 unit, not sure of the brand.

The radiator that was in the car had 15 fins per inch, a single core approximately 1" width to the inside of the tube. and 34 rows of tubes.
The champion radiator had 19 fins per inch and 3X approximately 1/2" width to the inside of the tube. and 38 rows of tubes.

So the Champion radiator should have far outcooled the radiator that I had, yet it made very little difference at all.

Since the weather had cooled off, the temperature has been rock solid, running even a bit cool with the 180f thermostat

I honestly think that with ambient temperatures at 110f, and the A/C pre-heating the air going into the radiator I may have been trying to cool the radiator with 140-150f air. At that temperature, there really isn't much left to cool with. But I still think that my engine is producing excessive heat anyway, or it could still be the water pump. For now, it will remain a mystery unless it suddenly has problems again.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #497, 10-30-2015 02:33 PM
      This was a fun morning

Ever since I got my 08' Trailblazer SS, and changed out the shocks for some nice adjustable height Belltechs and lowered it an inch, Replaced all the bushings in the front end and had it aligned, I've been very impressed with how well it handles. This hulking 5,000 lb. SUV undoubtedly handles BETTER than my 88 Fiero. Not just by a little, but by a lot.

Once I got this swap done and riding, I quickly noticed why this was. The suspension in my Fiero is FAR softer than in the Trailblazer. It feels like it floats over every hump in the road. Clearly this "Sporty Commuter" has grandma's suspension. Well, at least as far as springs and shocks go.

I decided to install new springs and shocks in the front end.

After much deliberation, looking at spring rates, sizes, motion ratio... All that stuff. I concluded that I needed to up the front suspensions spring rate, not just a little. But a whole lot. I actually had slightly shortened 84 Fiero "WS6" springs in the front already. But I don't think that it made any real difference from stock.

So I started with these.
MOOG:
Part Number 639
Inside Dia. 3.22
Bar Dia.0.593
Spring Rate 344
Load 1625
Install Height 9.5
Free Height 14.22
End Type 1 SQ (Squared Cut)
End Type 2 TG (Tapered flat)

New springs, vs one of the old ones.


Obviously, they're too long.
One side has a nice flat tapered finished edge, So I left that intact for the top hat. I cut the other end.

Originally, I cut it at 10.25" (exactly 3 coils off) and did a test fit. The car came up an inch from what it was before. And since the motion ratio is 0.53 I knew I could take off a whole inch safely, since my goal was to lower the car 1" from what it was before. Another test fit revealed that 9.25" of free coil was infact right at stock ride height. So I took off another .75" of coil. That lowered the car exactly 1" So my final coil length was 8.5". This cut just so happened to line up perfectly with the tail end of the spring, so I had a good reference for where the cut was made to ensure I duplicated it on the other side.


I went from this


To this


Anyone who knows anything about springs knows that shortening a spring raises the spring rate proportionally. 344 Lb/in X 14.22" = ~4900 lb/in/in. So having just 8.5" means that the spring rate is now ~575 lb/in. Which is nearly 3 times stiffer than stock.

So now, My spring specs are:
Inside Dia. 3.22
Bar Dia.0.593
Spring Rate 575
Load 950
Install Height 6.8
Free Height 8.5
End Type 1 Open
End Type 2 TG (tapered off)

Why so stiff? It's got a hefty motion ratio of .53. This means that with 575 lb/in springs, the wheel spring rate is .53^2 X 575, which is only 162 lb/in at the wheel. That's actually not bad at all. The front end is pretty light on a Fiero, so this rate is very appropriate. That's a heck of a jump from the factory 58lb/in wheel rate that the 88's front end comes with.

But, having a spring that stiff does mean you need a strong shock absorber to control it. There aren't many options here. But Koni Red's, if you can find them for the front of an 88 Fiero are a decent answer. I adjusted them to full stiff rebound.


It's just a little bit bouncy. The red's weren't quite intended for this high of a spring rate. But, I can and likely will have them re-valved in the future specifically for these hefty springs. That's one advantage of the Koni reds, they can be rebuilt, re-valved, whatever you need. Bilstein's are also an option for this.

I still have the stock Fiero springs and KYB's in the back, and it still feels floaty back there. but I do have Koni's for the rear, and I plan on converting them to coilovers, and putting in 425 lb/in springs on them. I'll Keep the ride height I currently have. Which is actually pretty low with the heavy engine, transmission, Turbo, Intercooler... all that good stuff brought the back end down a bit with 28 year old springs.

Driving Impressions?
Backing out of the drive way, the back wheels going down the apron dip was just so sloppy. Then the front wheels went down the dip, with a little kiss of the air dam on the way down. I was expecting it to be super stiff, but it really isn't.

Hitting man hole covers and the usual road bumps; the things that really only make noise and shake the car, feels exactly the same. It's when I run over certain dips, where I would normally expect the suspension to compress and rebound is where I can really feel the difference. There is a little bit of a bounce in the front end like I said before, the shocks are a bit weak for these springs. I weaved a bit to see how the car leans on turns. It' doesn't, It's so flat and so confident. But it really highlighted for me just how badly this car needs a faster ratio rack.

Another big difference was that there isn't any front end lift on heavy accel, and very little dive on braking. I got used to the feeling of the front suspension unloading almost completely when boosting hard in second gear, and snapping off the throttle transitioning to a nose down dive. All of that is gone now. I suspect that I've lost some rear wheel traction in accel, now that the weight transfer is likely just not there like it used to be.

I'm anxious to do the rears now.


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #498, 10-30-2015 07:17 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

now that the weight transfer is likely just not there like it used to be.



The weight transfer is definitely exactly the same... the front end just doesn't rise as far now.


alpine67 (gmatthis@bellsouth.net) MSG #499, 11-23-2015 03:22 PM
      Would any of you guys happen to have a G6 F40 intermediate shaft assembly you're not going to use?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #500, 11-29-2015 08:27 PM
      I have never had one. I'd suggest archie or the DIY F40 thread, but I see you've already done that.

On another note, I decided it was time to remove the catalytic converter and do some testing without it. I quickly whipped up a "Test" pipe, and bolted it in place of the cat. It's like its a different car. It spools faster and knock has been reduced greatly. Feels really good, I start lighting the tires up pretty good in third right around 65mph, usually grabs the ground again when the car hits about 75.

I'm trying to get this car ready for some potential track time soon.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #501, 12-05-2015 09:32 PM
      Finally got the car to the track, unfortunately it was very busy, so I only got two runs in. The first run wasn't good at all. It was cold outside and I overestimated what kind of traction I would encounter at the track. That and the light turned green much quicker than I expected, I wasn't even in gear, nor up to RPM. So I spun the wheels pretty hard in first for what felt like forever. I had some wheel chatter towards the end of first, still spun second a little, and ran it out the rest of the run.


Second run was much better, Since it was 2.5 hours of waiting in the staging lanes I knew it was going to be my last run. So I was overly cautious. I let air out of the tires, down to 22 PSI, did a light little burnout to heat the tires. Then I launched really softly, and had to wait for the RPM's to come up and the turbo to spool, so it was a bit sluggish out of the hole. I should have been more aggressive. Still it hooked very well, and was a clean run from that point forth.



Car #364


Overall, It was a fun night. I should have been doing low 12's according to my trap speeds, but I'd need a driver mod and a set of tires that aren't made of rocks for It to run a good time.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 12-05-2015).]

Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #502, 12-06-2015 08:54 AM
      Good fun!

What was ambient temp and altitude?

I can tell you from experience that a 112 mph trap is about 315 RWHP in a Fiero. A 116 trap should be about 355-360 RWHP.

You can drop 0.3 off your 60' time just with driver mod. Fieros are capable of 1.8 sixties on street tires. Dropping that 0.3 will compound to 0.4-0.5 total ET difference by the end of the quarter.

That being said, launching a big-turbo car can be tricky. The Northstar has enough low end torque to be fairly linear in its launch behavior at different launch RPM's, it's been fairly easy for me to dial in with some practice. Speaking of which, practice makes perfect. Find yourself some sparsely traveled road or a little used parking lot and get some practice in. With a few runs under your belt you'll get a feel for how hard the engine pulls, how much you can abuse the clutch and how hard you can hit the tires. Good Luck

Edit to add: if you can find a track that prints the 660' and 1000' times, you end up with about 1 shift per interval (60, 330, 660, 1000) and you can use your interval time splits to gauge how well you did at each shift at each run. With the triple and double cone synchros in the 6 speed, you should have no problem at all ripping off outstanding shifts... That should be *MUCH* easier than nailing every shift in a 282.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 12-06-2015).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #503, 12-06-2015 02:10 PM
      I agree, I didn't practice much and 2 runs wasn't enough to get the learning curve down. Especially because track conditions vary heavily based on temperature, weight distribution, tires. We are at 2000' of elevation, and it was right around 40f. Fortunately, I had my laptop hooked up and logged the runs, I counted my shifts to be the gaps between 100% throttle, those were 1-2 0.5s, 2-3 0.6s, 3-4 0.5s. Not the fastest, I'm not used to ragging on it that hard and banging through gears. I probably would have hit that 1.9 60' if I had some rpm when the light changed. But I didn't want to risk lighting the tires up on my last pass. I'm hardly a big turbo though. It's a good fast spool, but it does require about 2800-3000 RPM's to make it spool nicely.

I kept the boost down at 15.5, because in testing at 18 I actually made the clutch slip when I was in 4th. So I found its hard limit. I had no clutch issues at all on the track fortunately.

One thing I noticed on the quarter mile list was Matthawkins 3.4 DOHC turbo 282 getrag, he ran an 11.92 @ 118. almost the same trap speed I have. Clearly I need to drive better to get a good time. His turbo is slightly smaller though.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #504, 12-16-2015 01:49 PM
      Figured something out the other day... Gm's flex fuel composition sensors output signal is compatible with the unused MAF signal input on the 1227730 ECM. So...


ericjon262 MSG #505, 12-16-2015 08:55 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Figured something out the other day... Gm's flex fuel composition sensors output signal is compatible with the unused MAF signal input on the 1227730 ECM. So...


you need to start working with robert...

http://60degreev6.com/forum...-and-Concepts-Thread



RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #506, 12-16-2015 10:14 PM
      ha, we've touched base before.... Matt certainly knows what he's doing without too much input from me.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #507, 12-17-2015 04:37 AM
      ^ Awwe thanks! I'll take that as a compliment.

Speaking of code, I'm still on TGP $8F, but boy has it gone through quite a number of evolutions. Been adding and refining the code more than just the tune. Long story short...

1. I've condensed the 3 VE table components into a single N/A VE table - 400-1200 RPM in increments of 200, 1200-4000 X 400, 4000-6375 X 600. Boost is still a 2D multiplier, but It's stupid easy to tune that.

2. 3 BAR conversion - Works great! but It is limited to 22.5 PSI or 255kPa due to the fact that it calculates BPW on a 8 bit byte that figures out actual kPa. So I'd have to overhaul a few more things to enable even higher boost levels. I just don't need to go there yet.

3. Manual / Shift light logic - Imported from $6D, and I used it to replace the old TCC control section. I had to also specify the N/V ratios for the gears, so that it can figure out what gear its in. Which consequently led to...

4. Decel Fuel Cut Off for manual conversion - Pushing in the clutch caused stalling in DFCO, but now I have a bit that is set when the N/V ratios fall outside the known ratios for any gear. If that bit goes high, DFCO is instantly disabled. This solved the problem beautifully. I've actually retained 100% of 8F's DFCO settings with this little trick.

5. Added sensors - I have 3 IAT's for pre-turbo, post turbo, and post intercooler. The pre and post turbo sensors report to the ALDL only, but the info is useful.

6. A/C pressure transducer - Originally, the code was meant to turn on and off the A/C clutch with 1 input. (A/C requested) I added the transducer, its value reports to the ALDL, but it also has a high and low acceptable setting that can turn off the A/C request if the pressure gets too high or too low.

7. Waste gate control improvement - The original control method left a lot to be desired. It wasn't quick enough to adjust to the correct pressure, nor could it adapt to different boost settings. So I added a small section of code that now looks at the desired boost level based on throttle, then looks up an appropriate waste gate duty cycle, then when the waste gate spring pressure is achieved, the solenoid goes into closed loop control. It re-evaluates the WG DC on throttle/RPM change too, so it will instantly and accurately respond to changes in the amount of boost requested.

8. WBo2 support - No control off of the wide band, but it does report to the ALDL. I haven't found any real reason to actually implement wide band fuel control. Maybe some day I will.

That's about it for now.

I switched back to "Premium" as they call it here, which is an abysmal 91 octane, still $2.89/Gal here. It sucks. I have to back the boost down to wastegate spring settings to keep it from detonating. Or, I could pull back the timing. This has really disappointed me. I'm feeling the pinch of the limits of pump gas. And the pain of $8.00/Gal for 100 octane.

This has really set my mind in motion looking at going with E-85. Currently $2.47/Gal here. I'm not sure if my injectors and pump are large enough at my power level for E-85, but I might be just enough. Price wise, the fuel is a wash against "Premium" when mileage is factored in, but it offers relative octanes that usually exceed 100. So, it makes good sense at this point to go that direction. Thankfully, my injectors, pump, and fuel lines are all ok for use with E-85. The regulator? I have no idea. So I think I only need to add the sensor and wiring, and a bit of code to put it to work, and hope that my injectors and pump are good for the additional flow they will have to handle. Sounds like a fun challenge to me.


sleevePAPA MSG #508, 12-17-2015 09:48 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:


I switched back to "Premium" as they call it here, which is an abysmal 91 octane, still $2.89/Gal here. It sucks. I have to back the boost down to wastegate spring settings to keep it from detonating. Or, I could pull back the timing. This has really disappointed me. I'm feeling the pinch of the limits of pump gas. And the pain of $8.00/Gal for 100 octane.

This has really set my mind in motion looking at going with E-85. Currently $2.47/Gal here. I'm not sure if my injectors and pump are large enough at my power level for E-85, but I might be just enough. Price wise, the fuel is a wash against "Premium" when mileage is factored in, but it offers relative octanes that usually exceed 100. So, it makes good sense at this point to go that direction. Thankfully, my injectors, pump, and fuel lines are all ok for use with E-85. The regulator? I have no idea. So I think I only need to add the sensor and wiring, and a bit of code to put it to work, and hope that my injectors and pump are good for the additional flow they will have to handle. Sounds like a fun challenge to me.


You can spray methanol to keep it simple and still use 91. Ive tuned with the 100 octane(rebel?) over there and switching back to weaksauce 91 was a pain. What injectors do you have now? Pump? Wont take much to max 80lb injectors and a 320lph pump with E85.



RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #509, 12-19-2015 10:57 AM
      fringe benefit of E85 is that you'll have a noticeably higher idle PW, should you get to the range of the injectors being difficult to control.

also, for the flex fuel sensor, do you know what frequency it outputs? when I was measuring stuff on the VATS/MAF circuit, I seem to remember the low-pass filter not liking much above the ~160Hz that the old low-frequency digital MAFs on early MPFI 60V6s output. you can change a single resistor or cap to up the limit obviously, but just something to keep in mind should nothing be seen by the ECM. I discovered this after hooking a simulated "modern" MAF up to that circuit and got no results in the pulse accumulator, started digging around and in the late 90s/early 00s, someone else on the diy-efi boards determined the low-pass frequency being fairly low. they wanted to run a "modern" MAF as well, it was determined that the ECM used by the MPFI Buick 3.0(or maybe 3.3?) is essentially a 1227730 with a different RC low-pass filter, I want to say it was setup for something like a 20-30KHz cutoff though.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #510, 12-19-2015 04:25 PM
      Flex fuel sensor is 50 hz to 150 hz. It expects 5V to be present at the signal pin, which it switches to ground for signal. The PW indicates fuel temperature, 1ms (-40f) to 5ms (304f, sound familiar?), but that's not important to us really.
50 hz is 0% ethanol, 150 hz is 100% ethanol. There is also a 180 hz signal that it will throw out when in sensor error.

I only know that the MAF which was intended for the 7730 was a ~30 to 150 hz signal. Not entirely sure of the voltage, signal form or if its a pulsed ground like the flex fuel sensor. According to the ECM schematic, it is held high, appears to be to 12V, (I haven't measured it) which likely means it needs to be pulsed to ground. There is a capacitor, between the signal and ground, but that is typical for any ECM input, not so much a filtering circuit. From there the signal runs through the injection I/C (U13) which does something (? but it is shown as an amplifier) to the signal before the signal is handed off to the P4 timer chip, which then pushes that signal to address L3FF8. That's about how much I know about it at the moment. I've only begun connecting the dots.

I'd need to hit U13 with an oscilloscope (that I don't have) to see what it does to the signal, perhaps its a pulse divisor of some form? Or maybe it is just a signal amplifier or filter. I don't know.

sleevePAPA, im running 60's and a HFP-343 pump (255 LPH) I think switching to E-85 will run both near their capacities, hopefully not beyond. But really 80's and a 340 pump aren't all that expensive. I just worry that I may exceed my fuel rail, fuel lines, or regulator's capacity. That's where it becomes expensive in a hurry.




sleevePAPA MSG #511, 12-20-2015 01:48 AM
      I bought Deka 60's off a friend that was using them in his T Type, hot air(no intercooler). His car was running low 12's at 110 and the 60's were static after the 1000' mark, and engine was lean. He has since switched to 80's, and sprays meth, running low 11's at 120 with a 6262 turbo, 23psi. He also switched to the aero 340 and gave me his 255. If you switch to E85 I think your fuel system will not be able to keep up.

RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #512, 12-20-2015 03:32 PM
      https://web.archive.org/web..._num_12/threads.html

diy-efi seems to be down(gone?), this had the thread in it, but I can't find a way to get to it. I did copy some stuff out of it and save it to txt format since I was referencing it often. the resistor and cap after the pullup is a low-pass.


Ludis Langens wrote:

> To see if the signal is getting through, hook your scope to pin 16 of
> the '34984/'79435. That's the output of an inverter. Pin 17 is the
> input. The counting is done in a different chip.

Yes, I did not explain exactly when/where I connected the probe very
well. I was at both the counter and the fuel chip. No pulses at all on
the counter. The input conditioning expained the problem when probed at
pin 17 of the 9435 chip.


> The frequency MAF in the 727/730/749 has an RC filter on the input of
> the inverter mentioned above. R is 100K. The C looks like many of
> the other surface mount capacitors.

The C is .01 micro farad.


> The 8253 ECM (used with the 3800) has a different RC filter. The R is
> 48.7K (1%). The capacitor looks different from any other cap on the
> circuit board.

The C is 120 pF (measured in-circuit).


> Hmmm, is the high frequency MAF also used on the Buick 3300 V6?

Yes. The 3300 is just a "batch" version of the 1228253 code.
The 1228706 also uses the 48.7k resistor, but the C would not
read right in-circuit.


> This would explain why it uses an ECM (1228706) that doesn't
> interchange yet looks just like the 1227730.

Exactly. I did not understand the difference either, but now
it is clear. So if one wants to use the high freq MAF in
a 1227730 app, you have to find the 1228706 ECM. This
might turn out to be the easiest way to get the high freq
MAF in an earlier application, changing chip caps is not
for the timid. ;-)

Scot Sealander
going off of their values, a 100K+.01uF combo is a 159Hz cutoff, which makes sense for the 150Hz max signal of the old MAF. plugging in their numbers from the high frequency version(48.7K+120pF), there's a 27.2KHz cutoff, which is quite a bit higher than the ~10KHz the MAF hooked up to it would have produced, maybe some meter error due to being measured in-circuit or the signal was getting too rounded when getting near the upper limit(one of them mentions this in a previous post that with the 160Hz filter in place, even a 30Hz VATS square wave gets extremely rounded already), I'm fairly certain that is why U13 is being used as a buffer as well, to get nice, crisp square waves to the timer chip. the 1.2K pullup should be to 5V as well.


but since you're dealing with something that is already more or less within the frequency range of the old MAF setup, you probably don't need to worry to much about it unless you want to open it up some more to track the possibility of the 180Hz signal occurring.

[This message has been edited by RobertISaar (edited 12-20-2015).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #513, 01-06-2016 08:54 PM
      I've tied a micro controller to the input for the MAF sensor (or VATS) pin F10. I sent the raw input at L3ff8 to the ALDL. I've figured out that it is some sort of rollover pulse counter.

Only thing is, that it appears that the pulse width changes what shows up in the accumulator just as much as the frequency. I tried sending it different frequencies and pulse widths, and the results were all over the place.

I'm not sure if it's actually reading frequency, or just reading "on" duration time or what. I'm honestly pretty confused about what its reading. I have to translate 3FF8 into a delta value to further investigate.

The changes in pulse width that accompany the signal from the Fuel composition sensor will likely skew what the computer reads. Not sure how I'm going to work this just yet. Lots more testing is needed.


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #514, 01-07-2016 04:56 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

I've tied a micro controller to the input for the MAF sensor (or VATS) pin F10. I sent the raw input at L3ff8 to the ALDL. I've figured out that it is some sort of rollover pulse counter.

Only thing is, that it appears that the pulse width changes what shows up in the accumulator just as much as the frequency. I tried sending it different frequencies and pulse widths, and the results were all over the place.

I'm not sure if it's actually reading frequency, or just reading "on" duration time or what. I'm honestly pretty confused about what its reading. I have to translate 3FF8 into a delta value to further investigate.

The changes in pulse width that accompany the signal from the Fuel composition sensor will likely skew what the computer reads. Not sure how I'm going to work this just yet. Lots more testing is needed.


3FF8 may be similar to the knock sensor input in that it only is meant for measuring time that the signal is high. take a look at 3FC6 when you can... I believe it is the actual pulse counter for that circuit as opposed to the "on-time accumulator" that 3FF8 may be.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #515, 01-08-2016 05:29 AM
      You make me glad I know you.

It looks like that pulse only counter is perfect for the task, I made heavy changes to the pulse width on the microcontroller, keeping the frequency, no changes occurred to the input, which is exactly what I need it to do.

Heck, technically I could now pull fuel temperature from the fuel composition sensor, if I were to do a delta of both 3FF8 and 3FC6 and factor the frequency related changes out of 3FF8. But, I don't really care to do that. I just want to make this car fully "Flex Fuel" compatible.

Got my heavy ECM testing equipment out:


The main part of my equipment is the "test box". I built it 10 years ago when I was studying ECMs. It has some output lights, digital input switches, and some potentiometers, (MAP, TPS, A/C Press, CTS, IAT). Most importantly for this test, an ALDL connector, and power inputs for the ECM. I built this box to actually function as a pass through, So It can be put inline in the car itself, and you can interrupt some of the sensors with the switches and pots. I learned a ton about how the ECM's work with this tool.

Also shown in the pic, other items needed for this project,
Power Supply
Emulator
ECM
Custom Chip Adaptor
ALDL to USB adaptor
Microcontroller (Basic Stamp B.O.E.)
Laptop

I also got my E-85 upgrade hardware too. The fuel composition sensor, a pigtail for the connector, and I'll have to step up to even bigger 80# injectors. I was running 60's and had plenty of breathing room with them. But E-85 will require 42% more fuel, so I had to go big.


So far, I have written some code for handling what compensations I may make for whatever the fuel composition sensor gives me.
The first one takes the ethanol content 50-150 hz = 0-255 = 0-100% Ethanol, then goes to a 2D table that will kick out a number that will get added to the BPC vs EGR result, Basically it will scale the injectors. The resolution is a bit course though, I figured on about 11 counts of BPC vs EGR change going from Gas to Ethanol, but I have to do that in the 16 increments of the table. So it's a bit course for sure. I'll have to rely on BLM to work out the details. I also worked out a sensor default mode, signal under 40 Hz, or over 160 Hz which will default to E-85 and send a CE light error, and default to a value that will be slightly lean on ethanol. It'll still run stupid rich with gas, but that's better than REALLY lean on ethanol. I'll also open up the BLM window a bunch so it can still handle trying to correct for a sensor default condition.

I worked out a second compensation for spark advance. I made a relatively small table, half the resolution of the Main Spark table, (1/4 the size) that adds to the spark advance what it would be if the fuel were 100% ethanol. Then, that number is multiplied by the ethanol content factor then added to the spark advance. It's skipped if the sensor is in default. This correction method seems ideal.

I've also been working on my rear suspension a bit in the meantime. I made some coil overs out of the rear Koni struts.
First, I cut the perches off carefully using a sawsall.


Next, I trimmed the weld where the perch was fixed on, down to match the diameter of the sleeve (2.170")


I had some "Spacers" leftover from my drop strut kit from my trailblazer. They happened to be just the right size to modify to make sleeve seats.


I think you can see where I'm going with this.


It's actually a fairly tight fit, I had to push the sleeve onto them with a little bit of force.


I decided to make my own "Pillow ball" top hats, So I machined out a couple of holders that I could install the spherical bearings onto. I also made them 2.5" on the outside, so they function as the center part of the seat for the top of the springs


Machined a 1/4" thick disc to fix the bearing holders to


Coming together a bit


Looking pretty good I think!


I was a bit less than impressed with the quality of the spherical bearings that I got. They are the only 14mm ID ones that you can buy in the world, yet the quality leaves a lot to be desired. The seats on both sides appear to be pressed in. So, I'm going to have to machine some washers to go on either side of the bearing in case they are so bad that the ball pulls or pushes right out of the spherical. They claimed they are rated at 3000 lbs axial thrust load, which should be sufficient, but I think they may fail anyway. I may come up with something better down the road if they do indeed turn out to be insufficient.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #516, 01-16-2016 03:41 PM
      Well, went ahead and tore the intake off



60# coming out, 80# going in



I adjusted my BPW vs EGR and took it for a test spin. Accel enrich has become a problem. It was becoming a problem with the 60's but now with the 80's its barely drivable. I can't find a happy spot in the Async/AE settings that gets the engine to have good, snappy throttle response.

My theory is that It can not do any asynchronous injection between synchronous injections without completely overwhelming the engine with fuel.

So I'm going to test a little theory, and see if just adding the async pulse width to the BPW and get rid of Async all together. That way it will just introduce AE with the normal course of firing the injectors.

Only thing is that I have no idea what the execution order is on the ECM, so It's going to be fun trying to find the correct spot in the code where I can add the two together and it actually not just throw the math out on the next pass. We'll see.


sleevePAPA MSG #517, 01-16-2016 06:02 PM
      I think the 80's have a slightly different dead time, so you may have to tweak the offsets

ericjon262 MSG #518, 01-17-2016 12:54 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by ericjon262:
you need to start working with robert...

 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
You make me glad I know you.



LOL!

car is looking good. good luck with getting the injectors right.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #519, 02-14-2016 09:42 PM
      Spent the last week working on the E-85 Flex Fuel conversion.

First things first, I made a little bracket to hold the fuel composition sensor, and the fuel filter. I also welded some quick connects to a U shaped 3/8" pipe. Conveniently, I found a tiny bit of space next to the oil separator and the cruise module. Officially, I have no space left in my engine bay for anything.


The other side for reference...

Yep, no room any more.

I decided that the 255 LPH pump I was running wasn't going to hack it with E-85. So I dropped the tank and wanted to fix a few things while I was at it.

I attempted to "fix" my gas tank with JB weld last year, It wound up peeling up and leaking anyway. So this time I got serious about fixing it.
It was leaking badly from the vent nipple at the back of the tank. I had intended to TIG weld the tank, so I had drained every drop, cleared out the vapors, and filled the tank with argon. But first I had to clean the joint. In the process I found that the nipple was actually soldered in. So I wound up re-soldering it using a torch. I know gas tank work is scary, but you just have to be smart about it.



Heres the old fuel pump, vs the new.



The new pump also has an inlet screen, good feature.


I spent a little coin, and got some Teflon 3/8" stainless braided hose, and -6AN fittings to make it all happen, I also had to use some quick connect to 6AN fittings to adapt to all the existing lines.



There was one thing that was difficult. I had to run new wires through the firewall bulkhead, from the computer to the composition sensor. I wired the signal into F10, and put in my chunk of custom code, and bam! I've gone Flex Fuel. I also have it reporting to the ALDL, so I can see the amount of alcohol easily. Immediately, I started the car up and found that the alcohol content in 91 here is in fact 10% ethanol. I ran the tank nearly empty and then filled it up with E-85. The content immediately went up to 60%. Not exactly the 85% that is advertised. I think when I dilute the last of the gasoline out with the ethanol, my final percentage will likely approach 70%.

Detonation resistance has skyrocketed. It's really happy at 15 PSI. I think I may turn up the boost a little more, see if the clutch can handle 18-20 PSI. The car is fast now, but I'm excited to push it a little further.

The car's exhaust smells a bit like moonshine, I'll have some esplainin' to do when I get pulled over.


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #520, 02-16-2016 05:20 PM
      i know in this area, actual ethanol content varies wildly depending on the anticipated weather, but that's to be expected when negatives are reached somewhat regularly during the winter. I kind of expect you're seeing that for the same reason, though not nearly as extreme(we've seen below 30% before).

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #521, 02-17-2016 09:30 PM
      I ran it up to 18 PSI... and the clutch can't handle it. It slips a little in 3rd and 4th when the power peaks, but then grabs again after a little slippage. So, I'm backing it down to 16 again. Too much power otherwise. Damn shame really. It's monstrous at 18. I can bust the tires free at around 75 mph pretty easily. It's just really nice to not be held back by crap 91 octane.

I definitely hear what you are saying with the different blends, I know they have to cut it with gasoline to de-nature the alcohol right off the bat. I wish it really were E-85. It's really impressive to see what an impact there is just by increasing the ethanol content by 50%. 85% would be really nice.

I'm working on some more code stuff, some refinements. I've found that compensating the BPC vs EGR based on ethanol content isn't doing all that great. BLM's are at 128 in idle cell, but 144 when on throttle. So that means the fueling curves are a little whacked. Could be because of injector non-linearity, as the injectors operate in a happier zone on E-85. Perhaps a little combination of both, give it some love on injector offsets, and feed it some stronger BPC compensations for the ethanol, that might fix it.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #522, 02-18-2016 10:33 PM
      Definitely thinking a lot about the clutch lately. It's really been weighing on my mind. I've looked into twin and triple disc Tiltons which are a little pricey, but have actual torque ratings. And, then again, I was really close to having enough torque capacity with what I have, I just should increase the pressure plate ratio. But to do that I would need to make a custom flywheel.. again. Which is really starting to sound like the only way to go. Perhaps a shift to a 4 or 3 (eek!) button/puck clutch with a higher pressure plate ratio would fix a few issues. I'd get better modulation due to the PP ratio, and lower disc inertia due to less friction material, and far more holding capacity. Only sacrifice would be... clutch life and opposing surface destruction. I would likely move towards using my spec SCC883 pressure plate, as it already has a very high pressure plate ratio. It's higher than my custom one, but requires either a thicker disc, or a stepped flywheel, which means custom flywheel for sure.

As I type this, I realize that my decision is already made. Better get some materials and get to work.


RobertISaar (robertisaar@yahoo.com) MSG #523, 02-19-2016 04:55 PM
      time for a max PSI vs gear table, either temporarily until the new flywheel is done or perhaps a permanent addition in case you find other weak links?

mr_corean MSG #524, 02-20-2016 05:11 AM
      Dave told me you were going to give me your old fuel setup for my birthday. I think that's mighty kind of you.

sardonyx247 (sardonyx247@yahoo.com) MSG #525, 02-21-2016 05:39 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by mr_corean:

Dave told me you were going to give me your old fuel setup for my birthday. I think that's mighty kind of you.


Yeah good luck with that, I already tried, and wants to hang on to it "just in case" I don't blame him on that.


I hope you figure out a good high HP clutch setup as I will need one soon too


ericjon262 MSG #526, 02-21-2016 09:01 AM
      I'm running a bully stage 6 in my turbo 3500, but I haven't really hammered down on it yet.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #527, 02-22-2016 04:25 PM
      Clutchnet "4BS9421"

with a Spec SCC883 Pressure plate

Iv'e had this pressure plate kicking around since the original build, I just need to make a flywheel that is stepped to work with the new disc, and the pressure plate.

Metal is starting to show up for making the flywheel... so this will be fun.

Don't you mean a bully stage 4? Looks to me to be almost exactly the same thing I'm putting in anyway. 4 pucks instead of 6, which should add some more grip, and its still sprung. And, with Specs high ratio pressure plate, It's going to feel exactly like a stock clutch, but may be a little tougher to modulate, and won't last as long as it could. But it should easily hold quite a bit more than this clutch has been holding.

Since E-85 is working out so well with my car, My "Old" fuel setup is now destined to end up on my eventual 3800 SC build. It's ideally sized for that application. Sorry guys, I'll definitely be needing it in the future.


zjwester (zjwester@hotmail.com) MSG #528, 02-23-2016 12:55 PM
      This is an amazing build! i have been watching it for a while and thinking about a turbo...

ericjon262 MSG #529, 02-23-2016 01:26 PM
      I meant stage 4, I don't know where stage 6 came from. it is a 4 puck sprung hub though. I'm happy with it so far, very smooth, but I haven't hit it too hard yet either.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #530, 02-25-2016 04:51 PM
      Looking at my data logs from my quarter mile run, I learned a lot about my driving, and the car, and how the two of us can work together to shave a butt-load of time off the ET.

The breakdown looks like this:
0.0s I launched, no boost at all at and at 100% throttle the moment the wheels started turning
1.6s Boost hits 10 PSI in first gear, I'll consider this the point where the turbo is "Spooled" I was actually pushing 16 PSI solidly when in boost.
2.2s I release the throttle and shift. This also happens to coincide exactly with my 60' time.
2.7s I'm back at full throttle, so my 1-2 shift was 0.5 seconds to complete.
3.1s Turbo is back to 10+ psi. that's 0.4s after the shift was complete.
4.8s I release the throttle and shift
5.4s Full throttle, 2-3 shift was 0.6 seconds long.
5.7s Turbo is back to 10+ psi. that's 0.3s after the shift was complete.
8.7s Shift begins
9.3s Shift complete 3-4 was 0.6s
9.5s Boost is back at 10+ .2 seconds after the shift.
12.85 at 117.

It was a good run, but It really pointed out where improvements could be made.
If I consider anything that is below 10 PSI, to be turbo dead time, then...
I was out of boost for 4.1 seconds of the quarter. In boost for 8.7.
Total time at zero throttle? 1.6 seconds.

Realizing these issues, I wrote some new code, ran a wire between the ECM and the cruise control servo to tap into the brake/clutch input, and added two new features:
No lift to shift, and staging control.
No lift in my code works as follows. When the throttle is at 90%+ and the clutch pedal is not fully released, (basically anytime its pressed at all) a lower rev limiter is set based on current speed. It sets a rev limiter at the predicted RPM that the next gear will shift into.

Staging control is simply a rev limiter that is present when the vehicle speed is below a specified MPH. I have it set for 5 MPH and 3200 RPM.
So I can floor it and the engine will bounce off the rev limiter at 3200. Then as I release the clutch and the car takes off, it will exceed the 5 MPH and allow the rev limiter to jump to 7000.

In testing, I found that although the code works exactly as intended, the driver (me) has to re-learn how to drive stick, as everything I have ever known to be right says to remove the right foot from throttle when using the clutch, and so far, in two attempts, I have failed.

Best part, I found that the turbo remains in boost for a whopping 2 whole seconds when No Lift To Shift kicks in. That's astoundingly long. The engine at high RPM with the throttle blade open, pumps plenty of air to keep the turbo more than happy. Its when you close the throttle blade for a half a second at 16 PSI, you will only have 0-2 PSI when the throttle blade opens fully again. The Blow off valve doesn't do anything to keep the turbo spooled, it merely keeps the turbo from suffering a massive air reversion through the compressor (compressor stall/surge) which can cause catastrophic damage to the turbo.

I'm still struggling with the whole right foot thing, but I can't wait to try it out again when I find a safe place to practice.

Shortening the shift times themselves will have to be a function of a new, lower inertia clutch disc, and I'll have to be more aggressive myself.


3.1 88FieroGT (ponchoracer@gmail.com) MSG #531, 02-26-2016 12:07 PM
      Doesn't look like you have a whole lot of room but a recirculating blow off valve would help with losing boost during shifting. Are you using a maf or just map sensor? Your coding and tuning abilities are very inspiring lol. I'm hoping to have my build up and going before spring. Picked up a 97 monte carlo for obd2 donor harness and 4t65e transmission. Going to be using dhp tuner which seems to have its limits.

[This message has been edited by 3.1 88FieroGT (edited 02-26-2016).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #532, 02-26-2016 08:16 PM
      MAP only.

Thanks for the compliment, I'm going to release the code and the highly modified definition that has all the patches, and custom stuff when I find a nice way to do so, and I get the definition buttered up for a public release.

Recirculative BOV's are said to be for MAF applications where you don't want to vent already measured air. But even then, it's kind of BS. The compressed air between the turbo and throttle blade still gets measured as it reverts back through the MAF. So even then, it's not really doing as it's advertised.

Either way, when the throttle blade shuts, almost all of the driving energy from the exhaust stops driving the turbine, and the compressor is still pumping a whole lot of air through the BOV, no matter the type. So the turbo has all the reason in the world to slow down as quickly as possible. Keeping the throttle blade wide open, allows the turbo to pump the air into the engine still, and a large amount of exhaust continues to drive the turbine, so the turbo slows down very gracefully. And as soon as the fuel comes back on the boost is already mostly present.

I'm currently working on the flywheel, so far so good , I've got the material machined to shape, I just have a ton of holes to drill, tap and counterbore. I took a bunch of pics, looking forward to seeing how it comes out.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #533, 03-05-2016 08:37 PM
      It's been a fun week. Loads of work was done on the flywheel, So here goes!

Raw materials


I drew a 12" circle on it just to give me an idea where I needed to trim it down


I had to cut the flywheel down to a rough circle, since my lathe can only tolerate a roughly 12.5" diameter stock before I have to pull the gap bed out. Trusty sawsall did the work. It was a lot of cutting!


I needed a hole in the center to even chuck the stock, so I had to break out the hole saw.



Then, I started chipping away at the OD and the ID, working the center out to 5" and the OD down to 11.600" and then surface cuts on both sides.


The disc blank is done!


Next, I had to work on the hub section. I intended this flywheel to be two pieces as it would have been a colossal piece of billet. I could have done that, but it would have been more work really.
Same treatment as before, trim down the outside bore the ID, surface both sides. This time I was able to chuck it from the outside, 7" is right on the edge of what my 3 jaw could take with the external jaws.


Then I did the disc side cuts.


Then the engine side cuts, the two pieces fit together nicely!


With the billet blanks done being machined, It was time to take the take them over to the milling machine and start putting a whole lot of holes in them. The rotary table was as much of an indispensable part of the production as the lathe.


I started my taps with the milling machine right after drilling the holes, so I know they were straight and true, and located exactly in the right place. I then finished off the holes with the hand tap. Much lower risk.



Lotsa holes!


For the off the shelf Fidanza friction plate to bolt to the disc, I had to counterbore all the holes for the length of the screws.


I then made 6 stand-offs for the starter ring, easy work on the lathe again


I figured out what my plate depth needed to be. I wound up having the friction disc be 0.040" above the surface of the flywheel. This way I can use the increased clamp pressure plates with my clutchnet disc.


Bolted on the stand-offs.


Cut a little off the edge off the standoffs till I had them down to 11.092" and then slipped the ring gear over the standoffs.


A little welding


Bolt it all together, and that's pretty much it!



Also, I got my Clutchnet "95-08 Ford Ranger" clutch disc.


It's all coming together... I still have to do some pressure plate soul searching. I need to find a more positive release design, and a ton+ of clamping force. Hopefully I can find a good answer to that issue.


sardonyx247 (sardonyx247@yahoo.com) MSG #534, 03-08-2016 12:26 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:

Looking at my data logs from my quarter mile run, I learned a lot about my driving, and the car, and how the two of us can work together to shave a butt-load of time off the ET.

The breakdown looks like this:
0.0s I launched, no boost at all at and at 100% throttle the moment the wheels started turning
1.6s Boost hits 10 PSI in first gear, I'll consider this the point where the turbo is "Spooled" I was actually pushing 16 PSI solidly when in boost.
2.2s I release the throttle and shift. This also happens to coincide exactly with my 60' time.
2.7s I'm back at full throttle, so my 1-2 shift was 0.5 seconds to complete.
3.1s Turbo is back to 10+ psi. that's 0.4s after the shift was complete.
4.8s I release the throttle and shift
5.4s Full throttle, 2-3 shift was 0.6 seconds long.
5.7s Turbo is back to 10+ psi. that's 0.3s after the shift was complete.
8.7s Shift begins
9.3s Shift complete 3-4 was 0.6s
9.5s Boost is back at 10+ .2 seconds after the shift.
12.85 at 117.

It was a good run, but It really pointed out where improvements could be made.
If I consider anything that is below 10 PSI, to be turbo dead time, then...
I was out of boost for 4.1 seconds of the quarter. In boost for 8.7.
Total time at zero throttle? 1.6 seconds.

Realizing these issues, I wrote some new code, ran a wire between the ECM and the cruise control servo to tap into the brake/clutch input, and added two new features:
No lift to shift, and staging control.
No lift in my code works as follows. When the throttle is at 90%+ and the clutch pedal is not fully released, (basically anytime its pressed at all) a lower rev limiter is set based on current speed. It sets a rev limiter at the predicted RPM that the next gear will shift into.

Staging control is simply a rev limiter that is present when the vehicle speed is below a specified MPH. I have it set for 5 MPH and 3200 RPM.
So I can floor it and the engine will bounce off the rev limiter at 3200. Then as I release the clutch and the car takes off, it will exceed the 5 MPH and allow the rev limiter to jump to 7000.

In testing, I found that although the code works exactly as intended, the driver (me) has to re-learn how to drive stick, as everything I have ever known to be right says to remove the right foot from throttle when using the clutch, and so far, in two attempts, I have failed.

Best part, I found that the turbo remains in boost for a whopping 2 whole seconds when No Lift To Shift kicks in. That's astoundingly long. The engine at high RPM with the throttle blade open, pumps plenty of air to keep the turbo more than happy. Its when you close the throttle blade for a half a second at 16 PSI, you will only have 0-2 PSI when the throttle blade opens fully again. The Blow off valve doesn't do anything to keep the turbo spooled, it merely keeps the turbo from suffering a massive air reversion through the compressor (compressor stall/surge) which can cause catastrophic damage to the turbo.

I'm still struggling with the whole right foot thing, but I can't wait to try it out again when I find a safe place to practice.

Shortening the shift times themselves will have to be a function of a new, lower inertia clutch disc, and I'll have to be more aggressive myself.


You know I came up with the EXACT same idea for launch/staging control at the last track day. and to be done exactly the same way.
RPM limit under certain MPH.

Looking at your last set of pics, you prob spend more time with your lathe than you do you wife

Can't wait to see this next track day Show everyone what a 60deg can do!!!!!


Will (william.lucke@gmail.com) MSG #535, 03-09-2016 09:21 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by sardonyx247:

You know I came up with the EXACT same idea for launch/staging control at the last track day. and to be done exactly the same way.
RPM limit under certain MPH.


FYI, DMSLink was doing shift-no-lift since at least the early 2000's (and I'm sure others did it before that).


sardonyx247 (sardonyx247@yahoo.com) MSG #536, 03-10-2016 04:45 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Will:


FYI, DMSLink was doing shift-no-lift since at least the early 2000's (and I'm sure others did it before that).


No I was thinking of launch control, and I know others have done it, I was just thinking about how to do it on a Fiero ECM with the knowledge that I have, not saying I am the first, but saying I thought of how to do it myself, with no knowledge of how it is done.


3.1 88FieroGT (ponchoracer@gmail.com) MSG #537, 03-20-2016 03:58 PM
      Bump for update

ericjon262 MSG #538, 08-09-2016 08:35 PM
      any updates?

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #539, 08-15-2016 08:34 PM
      None to speak of. Its 110 degrees outside and the car runs too hot in the summer to drive. The old clutch and flywheel are still in the car, and it still slips. The synchros on the transmission are being funky too. So I will have a bit of a go through at some point to address all these issues. But in the meantime, it is parked just mainly due to the heat.

I am working on a 3800 SC build for my other car in the meantime, and that's coming out great so far. But I've been quiet here while I mess around with that.


Joseph Upson (j.j.upson@worldnet.att.net) MSG #540, 08-23-2016 02:46 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Fierobsessed:
None to speak of. Its 110 degrees outside and the car runs too hot in the summer to drive. The old clutch and flywheel are still in the car, and it still slips. The synchros on the transmission are being funky too. So I will have a bit of a go through at some point to address all these issues. But in the meantime, it is parked just mainly due to the heat.

I am working on a 3800 SC build for my other car in the meantime, and that's coming out great so far. But I've been quiet here while I mess around with that.


If you have the means or a local shop near by, have your pressure plate clamping pressure checked as that may be all you need to address to resolve the slip issue. I had mine modified to 2300 lbs as you may recall from a ~1900 lb baseline.

As for the synchro issue, if it's not the common struggle associated with first and second gear on cold start up I'd be concerned. Before my first F40 started to come apart I had trouble shifting into 6th gear without a scrape under light load for about a month. It was a strange, new, seemingly minor issue until it wasn't. Hope that's not the case because if it is that means you probably have to back off the boost. As for your cooling issue, if you can't keep temps around 210-215 deg F under normal driving in 110 deg heat I'd be suspicious of a possible foreign object somewhere on the engine end of the coolant passages.

Is it possible you have a coolant loop somewhere in the system like what's found on the 2.8L where coolant bypasses the engine headed toward the heater core until the thermostat opens?


Just looked at some of your pics earlier in the thread, I see you have some recirculating coolant nipples on the water pump inlet housing. Is it possible recirculating hot coolant is the culprit? The 3900 has a similar arrangement where some coolant coming directly from the cylinder head coolant outlet is recirculated directly to the pump inlet.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 08-23-2016).]

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #541, 08-29-2016 12:08 AM
      There are two circuits that recirculates the coolant within the engine full time.

One is the oil cooler loop. This one has a fitting with a 1/8 maybe 3/16" hole in the front water jacket drain port as a supply to the oil cooler. It dumps the coolant back into the water pump inlet.
The second is the turbo cooling loop. It taps off the throttle body coolant line coming from the intake. Then it runs through the turbo and wastegate. It also returns to the water pump inlet. It is a 1/2" pipe, but it has some choke points. The coolant likely comes back pretty toasty.

Perhaps you are onto something there. Maybe I can route both of those circuits to dump into the radiator inlet. Proportionally, they probably can flow about 1/4 of the total coolant. Shouldn't be an issue, but I can't shrug it off as not possible.

For the clutch I've built a new pressure plate that seems to have a higher clamping force. I also purchased that 4 puck disc to reduce inertia and increase torque capacity. I'll probably just re-synchro the transmission anyway. Certainly 1-3 or 1-4. I found some metal accumulating on the VSS, which is quite magnetic. So, well, yeah.

Either way, second kid on the way, time is going to be an issue again soon.


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #542, 09-20-2016 08:06 PM
      Got a little bit of work done yesterday. Since the transmission was peeing all over the garage floor, I finally changed the drivers side axle seal and put new proper GM fluid in. I also replaced the cracked EGR tube and changed my registration over to Classic Rod. Now that the weather is cooperating, I can drive the car on the weekends again. I really missed taking this thing out and pouncing on the throttle occasionally. I wanted to see if using the factory fluid will help the transmission shift better. If not, I'll have to re-synchro the trans when I finally get around to change the clutch.

3.1 88FieroGT (ponchoracer@gmail.com) MSG #543, 03-20-2017 04:19 PM
      time for an update...

Irrationable MSG #544, 05-03-2017 07:50 AM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by 3.1 88FieroGT:

time for an update...


2x


Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #545, 05-21-2017 08:10 PM
      It's been forever since I've done much of an update. Honestly Its just been sitting. I had another kid in November, a whole 3 months earlier than planned. So, to say the least, things have slowed to a crawl for the last... almost a year.

I did drive the car once and still likes to overheat. It had also decided to break the 3 bar map sensor. I thought it blew the ECM up, but it did turn out to be the MAP.

I replaced the MAP with an expensive GM OEM unit. The car runs and drives great! Still makes much more power than the clutch can handle.

It just gets hot after driving for a while. I'm still pushing around theories as to why it runs hot. I truly don't know why. I'm starting to think its a growing air bubble on the engine side that it cannot purge to the radiator due to the high point being the engine itself. Maybe a simple high inline fill port like the car originally had will fix it, or at least keep air pockets from getting trapped inside the engine itself. That's my latest theory. The turbo is in the engine coolant loop and dumps back into the engine at the inlet. So, if the turbo is boiling water, the expansion can easily get trapped in the engine. My thermostat outlet goes straight down and forward to the radiator, so its probably not flushing any expansion forward as gas. Perhaps this is a critical part of Fiero cooling theory that I just never considered.

You can see what I mean here. The coolant outlet is the stainless 1.25" pipe right near the turbo inlet.


I don't have any intention of doing anything major on the car anytime soon. I really wanted to do the flywheel and clutch thing so I can dyno it and maybe rip off a wicked 11 second 1/4 mile pass.

On the other hand, I did send the tail lights out for the refinishing service, so it's not like nothing has been done at all. I just wish I had time to do it all up.


ericjon262 MSG #546, 05-21-2017 09:59 PM
      have you pressure tested your cooling system yet? my car was overheating, I saw no signs of a leak, but when I pressure tested it, it leaked down very quickly. turned out, the worm clamps to and from the radiator were not tight enough, I replace several with T-bolt clamps, and put the fear of god in them, and it stopped overheating.



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #547, 05-23-2017 09:45 PM
      Nah, never pressure tested it. Probably wouldn't be a bad idea.

Neils88 (nellerin@dal.ca) MSG #548, 05-27-2017 03:53 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by ericjon262:
"...and put the fear of god in them, and it stopped overheating. "



I never thought of using threats of violence as a maintenance tool.... I'll have to add that one to my tool box.


ericjon262 MSG #549, 05-27-2017 05:26 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by Neils88:


I never thought of using threats of violence as a maintenance tool.... I'll have to add that one to my tool box.



lol, it works, I promise.


mr_corean MSG #550, 05-29-2017 05:46 PM
      I might be talking out my ass here, but could you put some sort of a purge valve like our fuel pressure valve? Then you could just run a hose to that into a bucket and purge it until only liquid and no gases were coming from the line. I'm guessing that's the high point in the lines right?

elitopr MSG #551, 07-11-2017 07:46 PM
      PM sent to fierobsessed

ericjon262 MSG #552, 07-12-2017 10:57 PM
     
 
quote
Originally posted by mr_corean:

I might be talking out my ass here, but could you put some sort of a purge valve like our fuel pressure valve? Then you could just run a hose to that into a bucket and purge it until only liquid and no gases were coming from the line. I'm guessing that's the high point in the lines right?



kind of already exists, the radiator cap should provide this function for gasses in the radiator, and *most* engines made past the late 80's/early 90's have bleed valves installed at the high points in the system. with my car, I went a step further, and installed a small tank in the recirculation line that goes from the thermostat housing, back to the water pump. the tank provides for a high point fill in the engine compartment, and has enough volume to allow the velocity of coolant in the tank to lower, and allow gas bubbles to collect there instead of going back into the engine where heat transfer would be effected. I also installed a bleed valve on the tank to allow the gasses to be vented when the system has pressure.


there's pictures of my setup on RFT, and until I find a suitable replacement for photobucket, I won't have them posted elsewhere.

http://phpbb.realfierotech....4510f5475412#p153537



Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #553, 12-04-2017 11:42 PM
      Apologies for the radio silence as of late. Just haven't been working on it or for that matter fixing the little issues till now.

I finally got around to doing some work on my car.

I pulled the cradle, pulled the transmission and replaced the synchros. Which as it turns out, they don't appear to be bad. The clutch may have been causing all of my issues with shifting. So... I'll keep the old synchros in a safe place in case they are needed in the future. I got a different brand pressure plate that seems like its a MUCH better donor than the sachs/Spec. style setup. Its a Exedy GMC502. These have positive release clips that physically PULL the pressure plate off the clutch disk when disengaged as opposed to relying on weak spring pressure to do the retention. I took this pressure plate and moved its pressure angle significantly. I had to add new metal to the plate to machine down. I also modified my press to become a pressure plate dyno by adding a pressure gage. It was fascinating to see how changing the pressure angles effected the clamping force.

Second and even more important task was to work on the cooling system again. I popped out the water pump to make sure it wasn't having any issues. That checked out perfect. So I ordered some fittings and pipe and what not and started changing the layout of the fuel lines and coolant lines near the the turbo. It all needs to change. I'll come back and update this with more pics and details later. But I'm feeling good about this project again.


Rickady88GT (rjkmfam@sbcglobal.net) MSG #554, 12-06-2017 12:07 AM
      That is cool stuff. I would love to have my own mill and lathe.

Fierobsessed (nstarfiero@aol.com) MSG #555, 12-09-2017 07:51 AM
      Ok, back at it. Engine out! It's a bit dirty. Mostly Dusty, but I found a small oil leak from the breather fitting too. Seems like things stayed in order for the most part.


Started taking it apart. I removed the turbo, and there it is. I believe the coolant drain is the design mistake I made that is causing the overheating. More on that later.



The first items on the list of tasks, Clutch and flywheel replacement, pressure plate modifications (Round 2!) and replacing the synchro's. (Which in hindsight, didn't seem to be bad.)

Pulled the transmission and clutch. Honestly, for it slipping at well over 400 HP (I assume) It actually doesn't look too bad. Just a little bit of heat checking on the flywheel and pressure plate, Some material was worn off of both surfaces. Sintered clutch disks are known to wear the opposing surfaces. The disk is flawless, no material lost there.




I had a lot of trouble shifting with the F40. So I cracked open the F40 transmission. I changed the synchro's on gears 1-4. It was actually surprisingly easy to work on this transmission. Splitting the case was just as easy as pulling the shift shaft assembly and removing all the case bolts. INCLUDING THE ONE IN THE BELLHOUSING. This was almost a tragedy story.

Once the case was split, all I had to do was use a gear puller on the outer most gears on the mid shafts, and that forced the bearings off, then it was just a matter of removing the parts, and a couple of snap rings and change the synchros.

Part numbers for the synchros, in case you ever need them
55351580 3rd, 4th, Reverse
55351579 1st, 2nd.
24451752 5th, 6th.

Oddly enough, you can use the 1st and 2nd synchros in 3rd and 4th. Just omit the inner friction, and reuse the original cone. The outer two rings are the same. I suppose with a little creativity with a welder and a lathe, you could possibly convert the 3-4 synchros to triple cone.

I only took one pic of the parts out of the transmission because I was busy doing the work.


New clutch stuff!

I modified my Horrible Freight shop press to add a pressure gage. Now, I have the ability to measure clamping force on pressure plates.
I bought a new donor pressure plate, A Exedy GMC502. I really REALLY like this pressure plate. The positive release clips though change the game for me. It was a design weakness in the other pressure plates I've messed with. Including the Spec SCC883.

Pressure plate tests. I used my press to apply pressure to the pressure plate. I used a dial indicator to measure the distance that the pressure plate was being moved by the press. I recorded the pressure at 0.010" increments, starting at first contact.



The first one I tested is the unmodified Exedy GMC502. You can see that peak clamp pressure was achieved at 0.120" of compression. Peak clamp pressure was 2094 lbs. The pressure curve is really wide, still producing 1076 lbs at 0.250" of compression, Probably could have traveled a little more, but I didn't see the point in doing that.

The second one I tested was the one I just removed from the car. It's the one I modified here: http://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...L/000143-7.html#p253
I really didn't make as much of a clamping improvement as I thought that I did. It peaked at 2459 between 0.120" and 0.130" compression. Not bad. The useful range of compression was shortened up slightly. In testing though, I hit a point right at 0.190" where the spring plate actually inverted and nearly all clamping force is lost completely. The spring's fingers were pointing considerably downward. They would have contacted the clutch disk if there was one installed.

Third test was the newly modified Exedy pressure plate. It had an astounding 3285 lbs of clamp between 0.110" and 0.120" of compression. But, the spring inverted after 0.140" So there is very little range on this plate. Obviously, this plate will be very sensitive to the thickness of the disk, or to wear.

The fourth test was the Spec SCC883. Which also has a very high clamp load, peaking at 3074 between 0.100" and 0.110". It appears based on the data that I may have mis measured the compression distance by about 0.010". This pressure plate actually still has a decent usable range before it inverted after 0.170".

One thing I noted, was that all of these pressure plates peaked clamp load when the spring fingers are about flush or just proud of the surface of the cover plate. This is how I now figure out exactly how to modify the pressure plates now. I also try to slightly overshoot the compression point that peak pressure is produced so that it wears into the peak pressure before it starts to slowly lose clamp load.

Heres a stock pressure plate, and the new one that is about half way through its modification. You can see that I machined a groove into the disk so that I could insert new metal.


I used a "Ring roller" from Harbor Freight to roll a piece of 3/16" steel to about the diameter of the grove I machined.


I used my press to force the ring into the groove. Its a press fit. You can also see my pressure gage that I used to measure the pressure plates.


Machining the metal into the correct angle and height.


Final result. Original vs modded.


Once I had that all sorted out, I put the new flywheel and clutch in, gave the transmission paint a once over, and installed it. It was also time to give the cradle and engine a quick bath. Simple green and a soft brush goes a long way.



I also cleaned up the turbo. The cast iron CHRA rusted up pretty bad. Looks nice now.



Now, I have to deal with the coolant return pipe debacle. I screwed up when I routed it downward, which at the time seemed like the obvious choice for routing. But while what I did was mostly functional, It did however drain from a point that wasn't absolutely the highest point in the coolant system. I believe that this caused any vapor that would invariably be produced in the engine to go to the high point, and not migrate to the radiator like its supposed to. So as I drove more and more, the water level in the engine would continue to be pushed down by the growing bubble, causing a progressive overheating situation that took almost 30-40 minutes to occur. The solution to this problem would be to route the return pipe upwards, then migrate it down to where it needs to go. I also want to add a bleed/fill port.

Having the pipe going up first would ensure that any coolant leaving the engine must flood the engine all the way to the top before trickling down the return pipe. This is how it works on the original Fiero's cooling system. I also blocked off the throttle body coolant line. I was using it to feed the turbo, but now Iv'e teed off the heater core feed line to feed the turbo, and that returns to the inlet of the water pump. If any bubbles show up here, they will flush back to the engine, then up to the return pipe. This change was done to have the turbo receive its water from a point that is guaranteed to be flooded. The throttle body coolant feed is a high point not guaranteed to be flooded at all.

So, before:


And, after:




Added the fill/bleed port.


So I had another problem to deal with, The water pump inlet (discontinued part) had a bit of a corrosion problem where the hoses meet it. I previously smeared RTV over the pitting and got away with it.


But I decided to fix this issue and also add a better turbo water return.
Cut off the old, destroyed barbs


Made a new barb on the lathe, and recycled an AN fitting I used to have on the turbo.


Welded them on.


Honestly, It's the first time I've had any luck attempting to weld cast aluminum. I cooked it with a torch before attempting to TIG weld it and I didn't run into too much porosity as I had previously when welding cast aluminum. It's certainly not my prettiest work, but its effective.

That's all for now, but I still have a few things to do before I shove this engine back in. One thing I am doing next is sound proofing the engine bay. It's just too damn loud in the car. I also want to try to make some changes that will help with shifting. I think the bend at the firewall was too aggressive.

[This message has been edited by Fierobsessed (edited 12-09-2017).]

yamahasrx700 MSG #556, 12-09-2017 10:33 AM
      Your work is awesome and the way you attack issues is inspirational. Great job.

Irrationable MSG #557, 04-11-2019 11:56 AM
      Bump for an update!

robymon MSG #558, 07-05-2019 03:57 AM
      I'm also curious. What happened to your project?

ericjon262 MSG #559, 10-29-2019 01:18 AM
      you ever put this through it's paces?