TimZ

quote: Originally posted by Drax240z: I think I need to go with a pair of vice grips between cam lobes to keep it from spinning (unless someone else has a friendlier idea?) and get a bigger breaker bar. NOOOOOOOOOOO! If you are dead set on trying to hold the cam steady, there are two square protrusions between two of the lobes somewhere towards the middle of the camshaft - at least there are on mine. You can usually situate a large crescent wrench around the protrusions such that you can hold the cam steady, or turn it if you like. I'm guessing that's what they are there for. I'm with Evan, though. I can't believe that you can't get that thing off there with a good quality high torque impact wrench with about 120psi of air behind it. You are MUCH more likely to screw something up with a large breaker bar and extremely high static torques than you ever will be with an impact wrench. [ July 15, 2001: Message edited by: TimZ ]

quote: Originally posted by Ron240zxt: 39 degree timing isnt this a little high? There wasnt any problems with patricks car at this level? I don't know about Patricks car, but that sounds pretty conservative to me. Remember, Scottie said to dial the timing back out with boost, so that you end up with about 24 degrees total timing at 15lbs of boost. The 39 degree number only happens when you are off boost. The 24 degree number is a bit higher than I use, but my timing curve is fairly conservative under boost right now. At 15psi, I'm at about 22 deg total timing.

quote: Originally posted by Evan Purple240zt: Whoa, too dang simple! thanks scottie. However i have a 3bar.. does that matter? Evan No, it doesn't - use the same timing for given actual boost level as Scottie mentioned. The SDS does have a way for you to tell it which MAP sensor you have, right?

quote: Originally posted by Evan Purple240zt: Anyway, i guess if there was a hose hooked up to the intake it wouldnt leak. But wouldnt this be more of a bandaid fix??? Evan... I must be misunderstanding something here. How would using the same PCV setup that the factory used be a bandaid fix? I'm assuming you meant a hose from the valve cover breather to the compressor inlet, and also the hose from the crankcase breather to the PCV valve in the manifold? Seems to me like less of a bandaid than the filter on the valve cover, and no PCV. What am I missing here? The only problem with the PCV system is the possibility of spewing oil into the intake, but this has already been discussed. Also, the ARP head studs are reusable, as far as I know. The instructions for them discuss locktiting them into the block as an option, so that sounds fairly permanent to me. Is there some reason you can't use some sort of sealant on the front cover/head interface? [ July 12, 2001: Message edited by: TimZ ]

How did you have the diode hooked up? Should be reverse biased, in parallel with the fans. The striped side of the diode should be on the +12v side of the fans. This will keep the voltage from spiking when the fan relay shuts off, and since it's reverse biased when the fans are on (no current flow), it should never get hot. You shouldn't need anywhere near 70A for this. A 20A diode is probably overkill, but should work fine.

In general, the impeller won't keep spinning and spinning on it's own. If you can spin it easily with your fingertips, and it turns smoothly and doesn't wobble, then it's probably not your problem. It's quite possible that that's all the boost that system will make. Remember - that was a very early turbo setup, and they didn't do anything terribly sophisticated for additional fuel delivery. Apparently, they only relied on turbo sizing and the popoff valve to regulate boost, so with the heat that that generates, and no intercooler, I doulbt that they could safely run much more boost than 4 or 5psi. I don't remember for sure, but I don't think that is out of line with what the stock ZXTs produced, either. [ July 12, 2001: Message edited by: TimZ ]

Well, James already said what needed to be said re: the TEC. I agree. The TEC2 software has never been that great, but if you have datalogging capability, it's not that hard to figure out, assuming you are interested in figuring it out in the first place. Oh- and I've had my TEC for as long as James has (a little longer, actually ), and I have not had the 'losing a map' problem, either. I'm guessing what happened there was that the file on the laptop got corrupted, and subsequently downloaded (maybe user error, maybe something else). The E-motive software gives you no method of actually uploading a calibration from the TEC, so this must have been inferred from what was shown on the screen. One other thing - the GM ignitions are very similar to the Electromotive ignitions, but one key difference is that they don't use the 60 tooth timing wheel. As I recall, they needed a pair of pickups - a 3 tooth ( for a six cylinder) and a 24 tooth, although I think that one of these was used for the accompanying fuel injection system (can't remember which). What this means is that the 'real' Electromotive system will have less timing scatter, especially under rapidly changing engine RPM/manifold pressures. Also, I'm pretty sure that you realized this, but the junkyard piece will be the ignition only - you will still have to come up with the FI system (assuming you wanted one). [ July 11, 2001: Message edited by: TimZ ]

quote: Originally posted by SleeperZ: IMO, the best place to reference the wastegate is the compressor housing -- the nipple poking out the side of the compressor snail. When you reference the point where the boost is generated, you have the least lag and the best control over the wastegate, and consequently the most stable boost level. Okay, the reference can be placed anywhere between the compressor outlet and the intake manifold. It's largely a matter of personal preference. Placement does make a difference in the response characteristics, though. Placement at the compressor outlet, as SleeperZ suggests will definitely give you the most stable boost response. However, it does not give the least lag - actually this setup will give the most lag, due to the fact that the wastegate gets it's control signal sooner. The upside to this is that this setup generates the least heat, since the turbine is well controlled. The further downstream you go with placement, the more delay there is in the boost signal that gets to the wastegate. Consequently, the turbo runs open loop until the boost signal arrives at the diaphragm. This results in a faster boost rise time, but the intercooler has to dissipate more heat, since you are making the turbo work a bit harder. Also, you can expect a bit of a boost spike (1 or 2psi) at the onset of boost with this setup. If you have an efficient intercooler, this isn't much of a problem. If you are an engineer, this is a very good example of an overdamped vs. underdamped controller. Like I said - this is largely a matter of personal preference. I suggested moving the reference after the IC, since the original post complained about decreased boost levels after installing an intercooler. [ July 10, 2001: Message edited by: TimZ ]

quote: Originally posted by Z_Ferrari: the wastegate actuator vacuum line i have is hooked up to the turbo inlet. So...its seeing NO boost, but its still functioning fine. How is this happeneing? 7psi in first, 11 in 2nd, 16 in third, off the map in 4th? How exactly is that functioning fine? Sounds to me like your turbo is running open loop, and is only being limited by the amount of time it spends in each gear. It doesn't sound like the wastegate is doing anything.

quote: Originally posted by Evan Purple240zt: The muffler is NOT the oval shaped one. Yeah, the bullet race magnum muffler does pretty much nothing, as far a noise reduction goes. The oval race magnum is much, much quieter (although still pretty loud).

Are you using the turbo that came with the BAE setup, or is it a different one?

quote: Originally posted by Drax240z: You mean pop-off valve? If you are expecting a blow off valve to control your boost levels, you've got problems. I was just going to say the same thing. The popoff is a SAFETY BACKUP ONLY, and not a very good one, at that. It's probably a good thing that you aren't getting any boost. What turbo do you have? Is it a T3 or T3/T4? I'm wondering if the wastegate port is just wide open, and you are dumping all the exhaust gas out of it. My ONLY advise at this time is to get a wastegate on there! [ July 08, 2001: Message edited by: TimZ ]

quote: Originally posted by BLKMGK: Waste gate should be reading manifold pressure, not anything in the piping leading from the turbo.... Looks like this has been pretty much beaten down, already... It doesn't absolutely have to be manifold pressure - the wastegate actuator has no use for the vaccuum part of the signal, it just cares about boost pressure. As long as the reference is after the intercooler, it should work fine. For the external wastegates that I have seen, the boost pressure side of the diaphragm is the side that the valve is on, meaning that the valve seal is also there. In my experience, the wastegate valve seals are kind of leaky, and I'd prefer not to send it a vacuum signal if I can avoid it. Vacuum leaks, sucking crap into the diaphragm, etc. The internal gates on the T3 turbos are a regular dashpot, so this probably isn't a concern there.

quote: Originally posted by scottyMiz: i see what your saying now sorry it was a long night.So you want me to take the pressure line off the turbo for the wastegate and move it to the pipe between the ic and throttle? Yes, that's correct. The wastegate will regulate the turbo output to x psi at whatever reference point you give it. So, if the wastegate pressure line is connected between the turbo and the IC, and your wastegate is set for, say 9psi, the boost pressure between the turbo and the intercooler will be 9psi. But, whatever drop you have across the intercooler will not be accounted for, and your actual boost pressure will be 9psi minus whatever drop you have across the IC. If you move the reference point to between the IC and the throttle body, the boost pressure AFTER the IC will be regulated to 9psi (or whatever your wastegate is set to).

Where is the pressure reference to your wastegate connected to? My guess is that you have it connected between the turbo and the intercooler. If you move it to between the intercooler and the throttle, the pressure drop across the intercooler will get taken into account, and you should get your old boost pressures back.

I've often thought of doing the same thing - there are lots of attractive attributes to the LD28 block. I stayed with the L28 block and crank, because that's what I had - for me the LD28 crank wasn't that big a deal. I had 136mm rods made, with arias forged pistons - the rod ratio comes out to 136/79 = 1.7215. I have never investigated it myself, but someone had said that the LD28 block was incompatible with the Z engine bay - something about the oil pickup being in the wrong place, maybe? Any truth to that? If I ever do another turbo motor, I would seriously consider using the LD28 block.

Pete... Check this thread - I just got done describing my solution for oil in the crank vents... http://www.hybridz.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=12&t=000261

Evan... Yes, either of those things could cause a leak. Sounds like you might be getting blowby as discussed earlier. If you drive it around, without running any boost (I know it's hard to resist), does it still leak? It's very conceivable that there could be enough pressure in the crankcase while under boost to cause a small leak to turn into a spray.

quote: Originally posted by SleeperZ: Hey TimZ (sorry to barge in on your post, Evan) what exactly is that "oil trap"? Is that what it is called, or did you just discover that's what it did and it's meant for another purpose? Where do you get such a thing - I am needing to get something like that for my breather, as I still have a PCV and a stock computer thing going. Thanks, Well, that's what I call it... It's actually a bunch of general purpose fittings that I put together for the purpose of seperating the oil from the air, and draining the oil back to the oil pan. The main piece is a Moroso Y-block fuel line adapter. On the inlet side (right hand side in the pic), I fitted a restrictor with a screen filter in it. I don't remember exactly what this thing was originally for, but I found it at Home Depot - it was either in the plumbing fittings, or by the air compressor accessories - can't remember. On either side of this are brass fittings to get me back to the appropriate sizes for the -10AN hose and the Y adaptor inlet. On the outlet side, it's just a straight -10AN male fitting. The Y adapter is angled to make the outlet point straight up on purpose. On the bottom of the Y, I used a PCV valve as a check valve to only allow oil to drain out - this way oil from the oil pan cannot make it's way back up while under boost (the pressure at the oil pan is higher than the trap under boost, lower under vacuum). Okay, so here's the theory. Oil is heavier than air. The restrictor at the inlet causes the velocity of the oil/air mist to speed up. Also, the hope is that some of the oil droplets will collect on the screen in the restrictor and make bigger droplets. After passing through the restrictor, the oil mist is forced to make a sharp turn in the Y adapter. Three things work in my favor here. First, since the oil is heavier, it cannot change directions as quickly as the air, and most of it 'crashes' into the side of the Y, and drips to the bottom of the Y, where it gets drained back to the pan. Second, if the oil doesn't crash into the side, it has to fight gravity and go straight up to get out of the trap. Third, since there is no restriction on the outlet (bigger hole), the velocity of the air at the outlet is lower than that of the inlet, which makes it even harder for the oil to beat gravity and escape. Oh - also, you might notice that the hose between the valve cover and the trap does a 90 degree turn and loops upward a bit before going to the trap. Same idea. Make sense? You can't see it very well, but I used this same approach between the crankcase breather and the PCV valve. Before I did this, I would regularly find a puddle of oil at the bottom of my intercooler. Now, it's dry. The most expensive part (aside from the shiny hoses, which aren't mandatory) is the Y adaptor - maybe $25. The rest is a few bucks at the hardware/auto parts store. [ June 30, 2001: Message edited by: TimZ ] [ June 30, 2001: Message edited by: TimZ ]

quote: Originally posted by Evan Purple240zt: I guess, i dont mean blowby, its coming out of the crankcase ventalation hoses. I dont have any of them hooked up to the intake (yet). This may be normal for all i know, i never ran without them before. There is NO smoke whatsover in the exhaust. No you had the right idea on blowby. Blowby can cause oil to come out of the crankcase vent hoses. That was why I asked if you were seeing oil in the intake - if your pcv stuff was hooked up, that's where that oil would have gone. I mentioned that some blowby is to be expected on a turbo motor, however, you do want to keep the resulting oil out of the intake/intercooler. I fashoined oil traps that drain back to the oil pan for mine. This still allows proper crankcase ventilation, without blowing oil into the intake. Here's a picture... It's the y-shaped thing on the side of the intake manifold...

Okay - Oltmann is correct in saying that the black paint will making the block closer to a blackbody radiator. However, the thing that most people overlook when making this argument is that the vast majority of heat transfer that takes place in the engine bay is through convection, not radiation. Convective heat transfer is when you transfer heat by bringing it into contact with another medium (aka, blowing air over it). Radiative transfer is the type you get when you step out into the sun and feel warm, or if you hold your hand near a light bulb without touching it - notice that the light bulb doesn't get much cooler while it's heating up your hand? In fact, you could make the argument that painting the block any color will decrease the cooling by providing a barrier to convective heat transfer. That said, the effect is probably still nill, since the engine block was not designed to be a heat exchanger, anyway - that's why it's water cooled. So, if you are painting it at all, I wouldn't worry too much about whether the color will make a performance difference.

Here are a couple of links that should help... http://www.vishnuperformance.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=000022 http://www.vishnuperformance.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=000728 doesn't look very encouraging...

Sorry to hear about that - the front cover isn't that bad - it's just alot of crap that you have to remove to get to it. I'd try to make sure I knew exactly what was leaking before I started that job, though. Front main seal, maybe (the one that seals to the crank dampner)? Some blowby is to be expected with a turbo - are you seeing alot of oil in the intake?

Evan... I went ot the Turbonetics website, and looked at their installation drawings... http://www.turboneticsinc.com/catalog/inst_dimensions.html I see what you are talking about - T-netics shows that the hole should should be tapped for either 1/8 or 1/4 FPT (I think that's a non-tapered pipe thread). As you probably already noticed, they don't show a part for adapting the inlet to a flange, but the drawing above does show the dimensions that you'll need to make one of your own. I'd call them on Monday, and see if they have a part that you can use, and ask why isn't your center section tapped. [ June 24, 2001: Message edited by: TimZ ]