Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I don't know how we got into AI here... I don't think I brought it up, but none of the ECMs we're talking about use any form of AI. The EZ-EFI 2.0 uses a modest form of machine learning, but I wouldn't even really call it machine learning, because it's just continually (automatically) refining a fuel map variance based on variables it gets from the sensors. So... not really machine learning. The MegaSquirt most definitely does not use any machine learning, it's strictly a decision-tree model that references a fuel map (which you've defined) in accordance with variables it gets from the sensors.
No one is trying to convince you to use MS, but you are just misinformed about what you think it can do.
It does self tune automatically with an O2 sensor input, you will need to set the timing just like in your motor.
You input the engine parameters into the software and it produces a tune to get the car running, and then you can use self tuning while driving to get it in the ballpark, just like with your new ECU. All ECUs need to be actually tuned by a human though.
Yes with MS you have to make a harness, yes with MS you do not have a little display screen like yours will have where you can make changes without a laptop, but other than that I don't think there is as much difference between them as you seem to believe.
You are still going to have to run up and down the street adjusting the tune by hand, or pay someone with a dyno to do it.
Once again, in no way trying to tell you to run MS, but if other people read this thread I want to correct the misinformation. MS has come a long way at this point. And yes MS does not have knock detection built in, but I have a knock module add on for mine that will allow it to detect knock. Different strokes.
Oh and in regards to MS vs 7730, the MS is way faster and has more resolution, and you can tune on the fly. Also the logging capabilities are very good, and it has a cool test mode where you can do things like actually determine the deadtimes for your injectors for example.
[This message has been edited by zkhennings (edited 03-01-2023).]
No one is trying to convince you to use MS, but you are just misinformed about what you think it can do.
It does self tune automatically with an O2 sensor input, you will need to set the timing just like in your motor.
You input the engine parameters into the software and it produces a tune to get the car running, and then you can use self tuning while driving to get it in the ballpark, just like with your new ECU. All ECUs need to be actually tuned by a human though.
Yes with MS you have to make a harness, yes with MS you do not have a little display screen like yours will have where you can make changes without a laptop, but other than that I don't think there is as much difference between them as you seem to believe.
You are still going to have to run up and down the street adjusting the tune by hand, or pay someone with a dyno to do it.
Once again, in no way trying to tell you to run MS, but if other people read this thread I want to correct the misinformation. MS has come a long way at this point. And yes MS does not have knock detection built in, but I have a knock module add on for mine that will allow it to detect knock. Different strokes.
For the love of God, please... the religious zeal with the Megasquirt community is just something I've never seen before. I'm sure it's an absolutely fantastic solution for someone who has the time to put in and set it up... but I do not want to have to build a harness, and program an ECM. There is so much going on in my life, and this just isn't something I want to deal with.
I'm going to install this system, like many 1000s of other people have, and it's going to work quite well, and I'll be able to get in, drive it, and never have to think twice about configuring things beyond a few initial settings. I will be running what I would barely consider a modified engine. It's a 3.1 with .040 overbore, 17lb injectors, and a mild cam. Hardly what I would consider to be some crazy race engine. You guys know me... I've been on here for a long time. I have multiple engineering degrees... I'm quite capable of doing all the things that Megasquirt would require of me to do, I just absolutely do not have the interest in doing it.
I'm not trying to be mean, but I think there's more of a psychological thing going on here. I know a lot of people have invested time and money into something (like installing a Megasquirt) in their cars... and I am absolutely positive it's worked out really, really well for them. But it's important to understand that different people have different perspectives on life. I am just looking to relieve my highschool years to some degree in a mid-life crisis. I am not looking to build a race car, or something insanely awesome. Just something that's reliable, and very, very simple. I want to get in and drive it. I won't be drag racing, or doing any kind of racing with it... just enjoying it.
At some point, I have to question whether these responses are genuinely based on concern about my well-being and me wasting money, or people intentionally trying to push something that's very important to them, like the Patriots being better than the Dolphins (which they are not) or something like that. I appreciate the feedback, but what possibly could you say at this point that hasn't already been said? I'm moving forward with this... and I'm excited. I just got my 6EFI MSD box in the mail today... and I'll combine the instructions when I have a minute.
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 03-01-2023).]
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: but I think there's more of a psychological thing going on here.
Yes, but the mental bug is not what you think it is...
So I think (am I wrong?) we both sort of agree that all the ECUs in question use lookup tables (possibly adjusted with some feedback), and generate outputs with a human-written executable (decision-tree in your words, but I prefer procedural, as the conditions for an engine are mostly constant for each program loop, without much branching).
I submit that ECUs of similar construction must behave similarly.
My understanding is that you agree with me that the ECUs in question are all similar, yet you believe that the EZ-EFI will behave differently (require near-zero human intervention for tuning), despite its nature being the same. Is my understanding correct? It appears to me that you are stating a logical contradiction.
If there appears to be a logical contradiction, then somebody's mental model or understanding of the situation is wrong. My mental bug here is that there appears to be a lack of understanding, potentially on my part, and this distresses me. I ask questions, and I discuss, because I want to resolve the apparent contradiction.
I have taken as an axiom that similar things must behave similarly. I have assumed this statement to be true, without justification. Do you disagree with this axiom?
Do you disagree that EZ-EFI is similar to MS/7730/other, despite my screenshots showing the lookup tables of EZ-EFI?
Since the OP wasn’t asking opinions on what to get, why is everybody trying to steer him to something else. I say right on with the install…..we can all learn something here, hopefully we’ll be able to help him out somehow. Certainly don’t want to discourage him posting a build thread……some of us own other cars that might want to modify it at some point.. jmho….
PHAT MAX I agree 100 percent. It does't matter which system you use as long as you have fun with the project. Sleek 82T/A Please keep us posted. They give you a rough time for the ecu that you want to use now I am worried that I am next on the list for using an Emtron ecu. Sleek
Yes, but the mental bug is not what you think it is...
So I think (am I wrong?) we both sort of agree that all the ECUs in question use lookup tables (possibly adjusted with some feedback), and generate outputs with a human-written executable (decision-tree in your words, but I prefer procedural, as the conditions for an engine are mostly constant for each program loop, without much branching).
I submit that ECUs of similar construction must behave similarly.
My understanding is that you agree with me that the ECUs in question are all similar, yet you believe that the EZ-EFI will behave differently (require near-zero human intervention for tuning), despite its nature being the same. Is my understanding correct? It appears to me that you are stating a logical contradiction.
If there appears to be a logical contradiction, then somebody's mental model or understanding of the situation is wrong. My mental bug here is that there appears to be a lack of understanding, potentially on my part, and this distresses me. I ask questions, and I discuss, because I want to resolve the apparent contradiction.
I have taken as an axiom that similar things must behave similarly. I have assumed this statement to be true, without justification. Do you disagree with this axiom?
Do you disagree that EZ-EFI is similar to MS/7730/other, despite my screenshots showing the lookup tables of EZ-EFI?
Your personal desires / life situation have nothing to do with my mental bug.
I don't really like all the "research paper-esq terms" you're using here. We're a bunch of dudes on a car forum, we don't need to act that level, I live that stuff at work, and don't really want to live it on Fiero Forum if I can avoid it. I only ask why you care so much ... is it that I might be making a bad decision, or is it more that maybe you've spent a lot of time making your Megasquirt work really well, and you're upset that you feel your experience here is not being valued? I cannot emphasize enough that I just do not want to mess with a laptop, and how I absolutely do not feel like making an entire wiring harness from scratch. As most people have said with this kit, the hardest part is simply figuring out where to place the harness, and to me... that's kind of the fun part. It's like renovating a bathroom, where every piece of wood has already been cut, all the tile is already cut, and all I have to do is put it together. I cannot emphasize enough... the harness it comes with has already been pre-wired for 80s/90s GM sensors. With the exception of the ignition wiring, and the fuel pump wiring, everything else is already laid out for me.
Answering your questions. I don't know where you get the idea that human-intervention is required to get the system working. Unless you're arguing semantics.... all you do is put in a few values when you first set it up (# of cyls, fuel injector size, displacement size), and whether or not you want it to control the timing. And that's it. From then on, it essentially works on a PID loop where-by it takes all the values from all the sensors, matches it up with a large database of fuel mapping tables, using a single correction percentage modifier to adjust the table values. This is the open-loop learning that the EZ-EFI offers with the system. It's enough to get your car running pretty decent, and it quickly improves the AFR on something like a sigmoid curve... exponential improvement at first, and then slightly incremental as it experiences new situations.
For the vast majority of engines out there, including even mild to slightly wild modifications, this system will work really well. Through all the research I've done, all the videos I've watched, most people were VERY pleased with it.
There are several situations where the system absolutely did NOT work well for the buyer... and that is usually lumped into two categories:
The car didn't run well before they switched to the new ECM: This can mean there were preexisting conditions with the engine... everything from a poorly installed cam, to timing issues that existed before, to low compression, to bad grounds, to who knows what.
The engine is usually pretty wild: This would be to the point where AFR, timing, not enough vacuum, etc... are very non-standard... which basically means a proper "initial" fuel mapping association for the basic values given at the beginning can't be properly matched up to what the owner has.
But back to your question about the look-up tables. That these screens exist and that I have the ability to make adjustments for WOT, Idle, Cruise... timing, etc... is pretty awesome. But it's NOT NEEDED. You can associate this with making slight tweaks on a carburetor... like say, a Rochester QuadraJet... you can adjust idle by setting the fuel and idle air screw, you can adjust cruising by changing out the jets in the primary and adjusting the linkage slightly, and you can adjust WOT by changing out the jets in the secondaries and adjusting the linkage for the secondaries flap. It's really the same thing. But obviously, none of that is required. For any of the engines I own, there is nothing so wild and crazy that I would need to even touch that stuff.
Now, with your Megasquirt, you have the ability to fine tune everything, at 100rpm increments if I remember correctly... through the entire RPM range, whatever you choose to make it. I'll never get the fine-tuning potential that you get with the Megasquirt, no one here denies that... but I'm going to get pretty damned close. But we're not talking about seconds in the quarter mile here... we're talking about maybe a couple horsepower at wide open throttle. But I'm already leaving tons of horsepower on the table with the old **** that I have in there now. The EZ-EFI is really meant to be a solid fuel injection upgrade for a stock to slightly wild engine configuration.
Yes with MS you have to make a harness, yes with MS you do not have a little display screen like yours will have where you can make changes without a laptop, but other than that I don't think there is as much difference between them as you seem to believe.
With a $60 Amazon table and a $14 software from TunerStudio you can have your screen with multiple styles and have the capability of dataloging.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I don't really like all the "research paper-esq terms" you're using here. We're a bunch of dudes on a car forum, we don't need to act that level, I live that stuff at work, and don't really want to live it on Fiero Forum if I can avoid it. I only ask why you care so much ... is it that I might be making a bad decision, or is it more that maybe you've spent a lot of time making your Megasquirt work really well, and you're upset that you feel your experience here is not being valued?
As to "why I care"... I can explain. I am a Fiero and automotive enthusiast.
In science, someone presents an idea, it is scrutinized and debated, until there is finally a consensus among the group. When there is a consensus, the group gains collective knowledge, which is generally considered trustworthy.
Here, we study the Fiero. I would like to see this forum continue to grow as a repository of quality Fiero information. The publicly readable back-and-forth debate process is a way to develop this collective knowledge. Perhaps not everyone wants to engage in that sort of exchange, but without debate, I think it is hard to advance our learning.
In this thread, I have not criticized your choice of ECU.
I have criticized your assertion that the EZ-EFI will work in a near-turnkey manner, because I think the statement is incorrect, and therefore merits debate.
I'll get back to the science at hand, in a later post. I have some Fiero parts that need painting.
if you don't want to touch a laptop, and have EFI, you're probably going to have a bad time, regardless of what EFI system you use. almost every "modern" standalone EFI system is advertised as "self tuning", to a point, they all are, but most are only going to get you about 1/2 way there at best. There's a 99% chance that you are going to be required to inspect data, and think critically about what that data is telling you, and then make changes to parameters and tune the computer to get the car where it's capable of being.
it's also worth mentioning that anyone you talk to at Fast, DIY autotune, Holley, AEM, Motec, ect, wants you to buy their ECU. if there's an ounce of self tuning, they'll sell it by the pound and emphasize the results. it's not uncommon to see gripes and complaints about paying a tuner to tune so many of these "self tuning" EFI systems.
The problem with a totally self tuning EFI system, is that the number of variables at hand is astronomical, the even tuning two similar engines have a massive number of variables that have to be accounted for in some manner, and none of the "self tuning" systems incorporate nearly enough of the variables to adequately predict the results of a change in fuel or spark. PID loops are great, but only go so far, and they have to be running to be effective, and are only really effective at steady state operation. transients are a whole different ballgame.
all that doesn't even begin to discuss the non ECU related part of the discussion, the driver. I may tune my car to run one way and think it's great, you or Patrick might get in it and start cursing. a "good" tune, is somewhat subjective, something no ECU can account for, and something that can't really be quantified, and evaluated. The biggest issues I see with this discussion, is that there will be no basis for comparison, and therefore, the results are just results, they aren't good, they aren't bad, they just are, nobody will know how good or bad this ECU is, because there is no data to support it being good or bad other than subjective data that isn't quantified. no dyno numbers, no track times, no 0-60, nothing, so nobody reading this thread will actually know what the true difference was, if there was one.
I'm going to say it again, because I think you're expecting an out of the box 10, and you're probably not going to get it, There's a 99% chance that you are going to be required to inspect data, and think critically about what that data is telling you, and then make changes to parameters and tune the computer to get the car where it's capable of being.
if you really don't want to mess with a laptop at all, EFI (regardless of brand)probably isn't the best thing for your car, I highly recommend that you talk to reputable, local tuners, and make sure one of them is willing to look at that setup, and help you tune it.
------------------ "I am not what you so glibly call to be a civilized man. I have broken with society for reasons which I alone am able to appreciate. I am therefore not subject to it's stupid laws, and I ask you to never allude to them in my presence again."
I invited Lou Dias to trash me in my own thread, he refused. sorry. if he trashes your thread going after me. I tried.
So apparently, my website (http://www.PontiacPerformance.net) has been up for so long that a lot of my images are starting to come up in the top-5 images for many searches (for various things). In particular, my HEI-8 image... which, while not wrong, was created by me to be used to support a question I had on another forum, rather than being an intended source of information for others. So I'm redoing some of these, which I will end up using in my larger write-up for installing the FAST system and the MSD 6EFI ignition controller. Can you guys tell me if this image (so far) looks accurate? Would really appreciate the help.
UPDATED:
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 03-02-2023).]
The MegaSquirt most definitely does not use any machine learning, it's strictly a decision-tree model that references a fuel map (which you've defined) in accordance with variables it gets from the sensors.
quote
Originally posted by zkhennings:
"I think you will be happy with your choice though."
"No one is trying to convince you to use MS, but you are just misinformed about what you think it can do."
"Once again, in no way trying to tell you to run MS, but if other people read this thread I want to correct the misinformation."
quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
For the love of God, please... the religious zeal with the Megasquirt community is just something I've never seen before. I'm sure it's an absolutely fantastic solution for someone who has the time to put in and set it up... but I do not want to have to build a harness, and program an ECM.
Alright... done! Doesn't that look pretty? I'm going to replace the original image in a couple of days, so all the places where people used that image, will have the correct updated one.
It will be particularly helpful to those who have to build a wiring harness completely from scratch. With the FAST system, literally every other existing GM sensor on the Fiero will connect to the harness they've supplied me. The only leads I'll need to mess with are the GBRE leads coming off the ignition control module. But I'll save that for another post when I've built the diagram for that. This one above is the stock Fiero ignition wiring, to the best I could find images and documentation in my 87 Fiero Service Manual.
That photo I would assume applies to the Caddy 4.9 setup as well since it's HEI?
Well, except for the plug firing order, my guess is that it's probably correct for all HEI-8 ignition systems... so the Caddy 4.9, the 3.8 V6, the 4.3 V6, etc. The only thing is, I noticed when I was looking at different diagrams and images... they don't all have the same wire colors. While I assume the pin-outs are going to be identical for this ICM across any application, there are sometimes other subtle changes with the ignition coil (single plug coil), and other things... so I decided to label it specifically for the Fiero since I was confident at least from that perspective.
That photo I would assume applies to the Caddy 4.9 setup as well since it's HEI?
Probably not... the 4.9 has the HEI with coil in cap vs. remote mounted so the layout is different (and doesn't use a tach filter). It also has an additional cam sensor inside to allow for sequential fuel injection, so instead of 4 wires coming from the inside of the distributor, there are 6.
Gotcha, makes sense. I will look at some diagrams for the Caddy 4.9 pinouts. I do like pictures though.
Easiest thing is to find out what kind of ICM you have, and then start searching for wiring diagrams for that specific HEI module.
If you know what year / model car your engine came from (referencing the VIN stamped on the block), you can then search for the PDF of the Technical Service Manual. It will have all the wiring diagrams. But... to your point, yes, I think the wiring diagrams are difficult to look at. Not complicated, but everything is crammed in there so it becomes hard to sometimes see what the text is referencing since it might be between multiple leads, and it's not always totally obvious.
OK... since I'll be replacing the ECM, the next step for me will be to determine what components of the car will be affected by a lack of ECM. My desire is to completely separate the two systems *COMPLETELY*. Our car obviously comes before the OBD2 and CAN-BUS days, so there's no BCM / Body Control Module. That means there are some things within our ECM that non-engine-management components may rely on.
I spent some time reading the service manual last night while I watched This Old House, and I've discovered a few things...
For the most part, the Fiero V6's accessories and non-engine components had the LEAST interaction with the ECM that I could see; however, the L4 version of the car had multiple systems that integrated with the ECM in one way or another.
I'll make a comprehensive list, but just rattling off a few things... for both engine types... automatic versus manual, the torque lockup converter switch is controlled by the ECM to some degree. Obviously with a manual transmission, you have none of that, so that's completely eliminated. As I'm converting to a 5-Speed Getrag also, that's not something I'll have to worry about personally, but will still document it.
For the 4-cyl (at least with 87), there were a few components which made some use of the ECM, it included the air conditioning system, fan control, and the cruise module. There were some other things as well, but I cannot remember.
For the V6, a couple of these systems were affected, but only in a tenuous manner because they simply referenced leads to providing support via error codes.
The best thing I figured out, is that all of the gauges, from the tach, speedometer, voltage, oil pressure, etc... worked independently of the ECM. I think Raydar said this earlier about the tach, so I can definitely confirm that. Not sure about the temperature, but I'm sure that's an easy solution if not. I'll put something together and post it, might as well include it for the 4 cyl as well... not sure why GM did it more complex for the 4-cyl. I know the 87-88 had DIS ignition, so maybe that had something to do with the change... but the V6's chassis could completely operate independently of the ECM... which is good news.
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 03-03-2023).]
One of the things I want to do is make use of the factory "Shift" light in the dash. Since my Fiero was originally an automatic, there is no bulb there, and the leads go to nothing. I also determined that the shift light is controlled by the ECM, which I am eliminating, so this will absolutely be helpful if I want to install a small module to control the shift light. I think the EZ-EFI 2.0 may already have a provision for controlling an external shift light, as does the 6EFI that I have, but I may choose to keep these things entirely separate.
Pin A on the C203 is the shift light, that pin needs to be grounded. If your ECU shift light output grounds when on, then you can just pin it into that pin A spot. It is pin part number: 12034046, I got some from Mouser. This is the pin that fits in the C203 housing. You may be able to adjust the shift light point from the controller screen thingy.
[This message has been edited by zkhennings (edited 03-03-2023).]
Pin A on the C203 is the shift light, that pin needs to be grounded. If your ECU shift light output grounds when on, then you can just pin it into that pin A spot. It is pin part number: 12034046, I got some from Mouser. This is the pin that fits in the C203 housing. You may be able to adjust the shift light point from the controller screen thingy.
quote
Originally posted by sleek fiero:
I do believe the tach signal comes from the white wire that also goes to the tach filter. the ecu gets it's tach signal from the est white wire.
Thanks guys, yeah... that wire will get used by the new ECM, but I can't remember if the EZ-EFI has a shift-light control. I'll have to check the manual.
If helpful, I know the Speedometer runs at 4000 PPM.
I'm pretty sure it's 2000p/m. That's what I programmed my digital dash with... Then again, I haven't read the entire thread so I'm not sure we are talking about the stock V6?
I'm pretty sure it's 2000p/m. That's what I programmed my digital dash with... Then again, I haven't read the entire thread so I'm not sure we are talking about the stock V6?
I know that when the Fiero VSS is connected to a 4.9L Caddy PCM that the pulse per mile need to get set to 4000 in the PCM. Maybe the discrepancy is in the definition of a pulse. As I understand it the Fiero VSS produces a sine wave. There are twice as many peaks and valleys as there are peaks.
------------------ formerly known as sanderson 1984 Quad 4 1886 SE 2.8L 1988 4.9L Cadillac 1988 3800 Supercharged
Yeah I remember now what my problem was when I made the digital dashboard. The signal coming from the VSS is indeed 4000ppm even though the Service Manual (erroneously) says on one page it's 2000ppm:
The 4000ppm sine wave is then converted to a 2000ppm block wave by the instrument cluster and sent to the ECM. That is the signal I used for my digital dash.
82 T/A so I was wondering if you have dragged your car out yet or are you still playing with your daughters tractor engine? I will be following your progress with your new ecu. sleek
How big are the injectors on those throttle bodies?
Are you asking me?
The one of the right was what FAST recommended for my SD4. It was from a Jeep 4.L 6-cylinder kit and meant to be mounted to a 4-bbl/2-bbl adapter. It only has 2 88# injectors on the primary barrels.
The black 4-barrel has 4 58# injectors (they switched out the 88# ones). It was only on the SD4 engine for a day or so of tuning, only to find out I couldn't get it to work any better.
I believe FAST rates their injectors at 60PSI, so they'd be "smaller" running at 42PSI fuel pressure.
Originally posted by fierosound: Are you asking me?
The one of the right was what FAST recommended for my SD4. It was from a Jeep 4.L 6-cylinder kit and meant to be mounted to a 4-bbl/2-bbl adapter. It only has 2 88# injectors on the primary barrels.
The black 4-barrel has 4 58# injectors (they switched out the 88# ones). It was only on the SD4 engine for a day or so of tuning, only to find out I couldn't get it to work any better.
I believe FAST rates their injectors at 60PSI, so they'd be "smaller" running at 42PSI fuel pressure.
Yes, those 88lbs injectors at 60psi are only 74lbs at 43.5 which is the pressure where GM rates their injectors.
82 T/A so I was wondering if you have dragged your car out yet or are you still playing with your daughters tractor engine? I will be following your progress with your new ecu. sleek
Ugh, I was going to... but it looks like my daughter's Fiero is now in the spot where I was going to put my Fiero. I have everything now... but I'm going to put it on pause while I go through this car with my daughter. She will get her learners in 9 months, so I'll need to go through this car by then, so she can take her driver's ed test with it. I did already buy everything though, hahah...
That engine weights over 600lbs. You take the 2.8L or the 2.5L and install the Rocket Oldsmobile you are putting an anchor on your Fiero because you are doubling the weight of the engine. The HP and torque you will be making on your Rocket will become a handicap instead of an advantage. In other words the power to weight ratio will be way offseted on the negative side of the scale.
That engine weights over 600lbs. You take the 2.8L or the 2.5L and install the Rocket Oldsmobile you are putting an anchor on your Fiero because you are doubling the weight of the engine. The HP and torque you will be making on your Rocket will become a handicap instead of an advantage. In other words the power to weight ratio will be way offseted on the negative side of the scale.
I don't know if you meant this response to me (it is my engine), but I have no intention of ever putting this into a Fiero. I originally bought it to put in my 81 TransAm, which I sold, and then I'd intended to put it in my 73 Oldsmobile Cutlass... which ran so well, that I couldn't bring myself to take that numbers-matching Olds 350 out of the car. So, alas... that motor sits on a stand in a storage unit next to my 73 VW Bus, and my 2000cc Porsche (VW) motor. I spent over $7,000 rebuilding it. It even has a custom cam made by Joe Mondello himself... I actually talked to the guy on the phone back in ~2007 and told him all the exact specifications (valve sizes), the heads (C heads), and my rotating assembly configuration (.040 overbore TRW forged pistons), and he made a slightly modified version of his cam off of it. He even gave me specifications for what I needed to pick the right Rochester QuadraJet and what jets and such I needed. I didn't realize at the time who I was talking to, or how lucky I was that I was actually talking to Dr. Oldsmobile himself on the phone.
Anyway, I don't really know what I'm going to do with that engine. I will either (at some point), find another late 2nd Gen TransAm, or I want a 2-door "luxo-barge" of an Oldsmobile, like a Delta-88 Royale Coupe, and drop it in there... you know, one of those ones with the pillow-top seats. I just don't have the time or space to really do anything with that right now as I've been working on this 85 Fiero with my daughter.
Back to my Fiero though... my Fiero has a ~3.2 liter V6 in it. It's my original 2.8 V6/60 that I've installed a 3.1 crank and rods, with .030 overbore pistons, and a slight compression bump. As per Sleek's recommendations, I'm probably going to tear the whole **** apart and have it re-assembled. While I went to town with my Oldsmobile motor, I made shortcuts with my Fiero engine... and I didn't have them balance the rotating assembly (I didn't know any better). I'd learned my lesson by the time I got the Olds, and it was balanced to within half a gram... the Olds can safely do 6,500 rpms (though power is "spec'ed" to drop off just below 6,000 rpms).
I really want my V6 Fiero to be able to wind-out, so it's imperative that it has a good balance, and a cam to support it. It runs fine now... just not great... power drops off at 5,200 rpms because I have that nonsense "fireball" cam in there now, which was basically designed for the S-10 to improve towing... yep, hehe. But anyway, when I DO get my Fiero out of storage, and my daughter's car is done, I'll finish restoring it with the engine as it is now, with the existing computer. Then replace the ECM with the FAST ... a la this thread, and then take the engine back out and rebuild it the way I really want it (with my cam, etc.).
I've screwed up enough projects to know that you don't break something that's already working... you fix the things that aren't, and then replace working things when everything else is working. Otherwise you end up with multiple problems. One thing I've learned... I'm spending a lot of time working, which while it makes projects and things affordable, I have very little time. That's one of the reasons why I was so "OK" with dropping everything (like this project) and working on this other car with my daughter that we just bought a couple of weeks ago (85 Fiero)... you don't get repeat opportunities like this once they're grown up and living their own lives. I definitely want to retire... hahah. But yeah, this particular project (with my 87 Fiero) will be on hold for ~6-7 months.
EDIT: My daughter is insisting on recording everything, and making a YouTube channel out of it, so I'll try to post the first video by this weekend. It's mostly her getting familiar with the car, and inspecting it, and only taking a few things apart. She's going to put together a plan for what we will tackle first. Dad (me) is paying for all the parts, but she's doing all the work.
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 03-21-2023).]
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Anyway, I don't really know what I'm going to do with that engine. I will either (at some point), find another late 2nd Gen TransAm, or I want a 2-door "luxo-barge" of an Oldsmobile, like a Delta-88 Royale Coupe, and drop it in there...
You probably don't want it right now, but I was browsing nastyz28 recently and noticed somebody in Orlando selling a 1978 Camaro in what sounds like well kept condition. He sounded more worried about the hassle of selling and what kind of person would end up with it, than he was about the price. But I agree the Olds engine would be more appropriate to a TA.
[This message has been edited by armos (edited 03-21-2023).]
