 
     |
| Few small questions that don't deserve a whole topic (Page 2/4) |
|
Raydar
|
APR 07, 04:33 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 1985 Fiero GT:
I'm not looking for super aggressive timing, just wondering what was common and safe, I'll make sure that it runs well with low octane, but I'll usually use high octane anyways.
... |
|
I can't answer regarding hooking up a knock sensor. I wasn't even aware that the tune could be changed to accommodate. But then, it's been a while since I looked.
I have always had good luck setting my timing by ear. Advance the timing in small increments, until it pings just a little bit under load, or at part throttle cruising. Then back it off until it doesn't.
My 4.9 has been running that way for almost ten years. It's also how I set my 3.4. The cam I had in it really liked a lot of advance. Way more than stock.[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 04-07-2024).]
|
|
|
|
1985 Fiero GT
|
APR 07, 04:33 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by theogre:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by 1985 Fiero GT:
3: are there any "numbers" on Rodney's and others power pulleys, actual hp gained, actual responsiveness gained from lower rotating mass, etc. |
|
All are "scams" & worse Slows Down everything w/ Under Size Crank Pulley.
Example: If you have any problems w/ coolant system now then expect overheating way easier. Even CS Alt will hate running slower results make less power. Even @ highway speeds often have power shortage, worse @ night/weather w/ Headlight & more On too.
see https://web.archive.org/web...fierocave/csalt2.htm
[/QUOTE]
Yes, I know the downsides, just curious of any exact numbers, 1 extra, 2 extra, etc. my Fiero came with the 65 amp si alternator, so I'm not worried about my 105 amp cs130 not being able to keep up with my Fiero's meagre demands (no AC, several LEDs that I have tested to use less power and work well in the Fiero) with the power pulley, my cooling system is also perfectly functional, fully flushed/cleaned and refilled with fresh coolant, no kinks in pipes, radiator is in very good shape, and I have Rodney's lower temp fan switch. So I'm not at all worried about the downsides, I know that the alternator will draw as much hp from the engine as it needs to make the electricity, no matter the pulley size, and that the only other thing is the water pump, which likely doesn't draw much power, but I'd want to know any dyno results. One benefit I can see is that it spins everything slower, which will be better for the bearings in the long run if they aren't overloaded otherwise.
|
|
|
|
1985 Fiero GT
|
APR 07, 04:35 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Raydar:
I can't answer regarding hooking up a knock sensor. I wasn't even aware that the tune could be changed to accommodate. But then, it's been a while since I looked.
I have always had good luck setting my timing by ear. Advance the timing in small increments, until it pings just a little bit under load, or at part throttle cruising. Then back it off until it doesn't.
My 4.9 has been running that way for almost ten years. It's also how I set my 3.4. The cam I had in it really liked a lot of advance. Way more than stock.
|
|
Yeah, that's likely what I'll do, I didn't want to get close to that though, just see what others have gotten, do an average of that, set it, and should be good, but because it varies by engine oil need to do that, but benefit is I'll get every last degree of timing that I can!
|
|
|
|
theogre
|
APR 07, 05:14 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 1985 Fiero GT:
Yes, I know the downsides, just curious of any exact numbers, 1 extra, 2 extra, etc. my Fiero came with the 65 amp si alternator, so I'm not worried about my 105 amp cs130 not being able to keep up with my Fiero's meagre demands (no AC, several LEDs that I have tested to use less power and work well in the Fiero) with the power pulley, my cooling system is also perfectly functional, fully flushed/cleaned and refilled with fresh coolant, no kinks in pipes, radiator is in very good shape, and I have Rodney's lower temp fan switch. So I'm not at all worried about the downsides, I know that the alternator will draw as much hp from the engine as it needs to make the electricity, no matter the pulley size, and that the only other thing is the water pump, which likely doesn't draw much power, but I'd want to know any dyno results. One benefit I can see is that it spins everything slower, which will be better for the bearings in the long run if they aren't overloaded otherwise. |
|
"105Amp" is Peak Amps possible.
"Power" pulleys make alts generate way less then Peak Amps often causes problems even can't charge the battery & run the engine @ same time.
Go read Watt Story again.
You already help engine power using CS because SI Eats More Engine Power then CS.
Not just Rotor is closer to Field but also wired different too so make more Amps while eating Engine Power.
Little or no dif in bearing life to spin slower. What kill alt & other bearings are people think just put more force on the alt etc when changing a belt.[This message has been edited by theogre (edited 04-07-2024).]
|
|
|
|
1985 Fiero GT
|
APR 07, 05:39 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by theogre:
"105Amp" is Peak Amps possible.
"Power" pulleys make alts generate way less then Peak Amps often causes problems even can't charge the battery & run the engine @ same time.
Go read Watt Story again.
You already help engine power using CS because SI Eats More Engine Power then CS.
Not just Rotor is closer to Field but also wired different too so make more Amps while eating Engine Power.
Little or no dif in bearing life to spin slower. What kill alt & other bearings are people think just put more force on the alt etc when changing a belt.
|
|
Yes, I do understand the power output, but cs130 will make a higher % of peak power at a lower rpm then si, and I have read watt story. from my rough math, the Rodney power pulley is a 25% under drive, so if factory pulley, 65 amp si alternator is spinning 2000 arpm at idle, like watt story says, and it makes 35 amps, from your chart, the 105 amp cs130, at 1500 arpm (25% under drive) makes... 40 amps! So I am not lacking anything at idle, in fact it is still better then original, if it was good enough for gm to allow from factory, it's good enough for me now.
At 2000 engine rpm (regular cruise rpm), 4000 stock arpm, si makes 60 amps, 3000 arpm cs130 (25% under drive) produces 80 amps. No matter what rpm I'm at with the under drive pulley, I am still making more power then gm equipped factory, which will not be a problem, obviously.
I have looked into the pros and cons, none of the cons effect me when comparing to the factory setup, which was not my question, my question was simply how much of a difference is there in actual hp numbers. I expect very little, but not nothing.
|
|
|
|
pmbrunelle
|
APR 07, 10:07 PM
|
|
1. Electronic things (and things in general) don't last long with heat; use a heat shield.
2. zkhennings on here tried POR-15 on exhaust manifolding; it didn't last, so he doesn't reccommend it. I think that bare metal exhaust manifolding is best. For valve covers and intake, you should use a two-part urethane paint, either base/clear or single-stage.
3. I don't have any number on hand, but this is probably harder to measure than it is to calculate. If you can estimate the alternator's intertia, and you know the old/new pulley ratio, then you should be able to estimate the effect on the car's acceleration.
4. Maximum timing advance without knock is not necessarily equal to ideal timing advance. Ideal timing advance (MBT) maximizes work performed on the piston. Normally, an engine should be designed so that MBT timing can be attained at full load without knock for the intended fuel.
5. I suspect that wax on a tire might flake off; sounds like a bad idea.
6. The numbers printed indicate the fuse rating that should be used in the associated slot.
|
|
|
|
1985 Fiero GT
|
APR 07, 10:12 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by pmbrunelle:
1. Electronic things (and things in general) don't last long with heat; use a heat shield.
2. zkhennings on here tried POR-15 on exhaust manifolding; it didn't last, so he doesn't reccommend it. I think that bare metal exhaust manifolding is best. For valve covers and intake, you should use a two-part urethane paint, either base/clear or single-stage.
3. I don't have any number on hand, but this is probably harder to measure than it is to calculate. If you can estimate the alternator's intertia, and you know the old/new pulley ratio, then you should be able to estimate the effect on the car's acceleration.
4. Maximum timing advance without knock is not necessarily equal to ideal timing advance. Ideal timing advance (MBT) maximizes work performed on the piston. Normally, an engine should be designed so that MBT timing can be attained at full load without knock for the intended fuel.
5. I suspect that wax on a tire might flake off; sounds like a bad idea.
6. The numbers printed indicate the fuse rating that should be used in the associated slot. |
|
Thank you very much, for the wax, I'm not worried about flaking off, the Maguire's stuff is a liquid, and is really good on basically anything, it has his results on weatherstrips, just wondering whether Maguire's wax shine will last as long as specific tire products that aren't as inert as the synthetic wax, and end up shortening the life of the tire
|
|
|
|
1985 Fiero GT
|
APR 25, 10:56 PM
|
|
Update, my cs130 alternator charges better then factory with the Rodney power pulley, like the ogre's data shows, old was 12.8 idle, new 14.5 idle, 13.9 consistent with everything on.
The Maguire's wax works great on the tires, keeps the white letters clean and white, as for the black it isn't as glossy as a specific tire shine, more of a deep satin, and it is super easy to clean, just use a hose, and it dries perfect again, and again and again.
I checked my timing, took it up to 15* didn't really feel much difference, same with power pulley (I've gotten less sensitive over the winter haha) but I got 7.0 second 0-60. Before exhaust manifold porting, ignition coil, power pulley, and 3* more timing, best was 7.6 seconds. For reference they did 7.5-8.5 brand new in testing.
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
APR 26, 08:46 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 1985 Fiero GT:
3: are there any "numbers" on Rodney's and others power pulleys, actual hp gained, actual responsiveness gained from lower rotating mass, etc.
|
|
I definitely don't have any "numbers" for Rodney's Power Pulley set... but I installed the "Steeda" Underdrive Pulleys back in the day... I think it was like 2003 or something. Before I wiped the cam lobe... and I felt a noticeable difference in "around-town" drivability. My car was an automatic at the time, so it might have been a bit more noticeable for me (I know you have a stick), but it really felt like I was getting significantly less "resistance" in the mid-rpm range.
Best way to describe it... have you ever taken a car that you've been driving around forever, and then put in a can of Seafoam, and the car magically drives like it's brand new? That's the kind of difference I got from going with those pulleys.
I know Rodney's improved upon the original set of pulleys that he sold years ago (and the Steeda ones). I ordered his new set just to be sure. It also comes with an idler pulley which made a huge difference for me as well... so overall, I think it's worth the $200 bucks. His new pulley for the alternator also gives you back a little bit more charging than the previous one... which some people complained about at idle. So it fixes that problem.
.
I assume you've done all the other stuff already, right? Higher spark ignition coil, ported exhaust manifolds, port-matched intake runners and stuff...
|
|
|
|
1985 Fiero GT
|
APR 26, 08:50 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
I definitely don't have any "numbers" for Rodney's Power Pulley set... but I installed the "Steeda" Underdrive Pulleys back in the day... I think it was like 2003 or something. Before I wiped the cam lobe... and I felt a noticeable difference in "around-town" drivability. My car was an automatic at the time, so it might have been a bit more noticeable for me (I know you have a stick), but it really felt like I was getting significantly less "resistance" in the mid-rpm range.
Best way to describe it... have you ever taken a car that you've been driving around forever, and then put in a can of Seafoam, and the car magically drives like it's brand new? That's the kind of difference I got from going with those pulleys.
I know Rodney's improved upon the original set of pulleys that he sold years ago (and the Steeda ones). I ordered his new set just to be sure. It also comes with an idler pulley which made a huge difference for me as well... so overall, I think it's worth the $200 bucks. His new pulley for the alternator also gives you back a little bit more charging than the previous one... which some people complained about at idle. So it fixes that problem.
.
I assume you've done all the other stuff already, right? Higher spark ignition coil, ported exhaust manifolds, port-matched intake runners and stuff... |
|
Yeah, that's part of the problem, I did so much over the winter I can't tell what helped and what didn't haha, I now have the 88 alternator, so didn't need the smaller alternator pulley, but yes the idler pulley is really nice, and I'm sure the power pulley helps some. I did the exhaust, and coil, but haven't touched the intake yet, never found 100% clear instructions for that, and I'm only 18, so I haven't had enough "experience" to have had a car that was neglected enough that seafoam fixed anything haha.
|
|
|
|