CK's TR6
-
Content Count
164 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by CK's TR6
-
-
I have RG’s nissan diff (3.54?) and CV halfshafts. I am in the US. This was a no brainer, car is sooo much better than when I bought it in 1982 with 22k mileage. Ten years on I think for the conversions. Your guys import duties suck for car parts. I heard of someone in OZ who bought a U.S. car, proceeded to make sure it was shipped with stuff in the trunk………….. I was paid in USD and shipped the stuff I sold to South Carolina.
-
motorcycle flasher unit that beeps. works like a charm.
-
Cross section of 3" pipe is 7.07 in sq. Split 2.5" pipe with 1" section added, cross section is 7.41 in sq. A square section 3.5" wide by 2.5" tall is 8.75 in sq. a 23% increase over a 3" pipe (a 78% increase over a single 2.5" pipe). Greg Lund's exhaust had a lot of rectangular sections to fit through the T shirt area and then to the muffler.
-
-
Greg Lund lived in the next town over. Superb car. He even had fabricated his own A arms to fix front suspension geometry. Emailed Lee Jansen a couple times too. Both cars outrageously nice.
-
37C …….OMG! ha ha ha. Try 48C and elevation changes of 6000 ft, say 4 in 130 miles. And roads that you are hauling along at 75 - 80 mph. Or a couple hours at 85 - 90 mph at 48 C across the desert. My electric fan comes on when I come to a stop, or in very slow traffic. Also, there are sacrificial anodes as part of the radiator cap. I do have the power! ……of bling, radiator, water pump housing, water pump, lots of shiny bits.
-
Well, you could drop him an email and see what he says prior to ordering. I know several cars with them and no issues. I think the bigger issue is HM's customs/duty regime is the ............. road block. If I remember correctly, car parts is one of those issues (like tea etc about 250 years ago).
-
the brightest tail lights are spokeworksleds. but they are a USA product, and pricey. so, $ vs goal. they aren’t bulbs per se, they are circuit boards that fit over the reflectors. they plug directly into the wiring harness, eliminating the bulb holders.
-
On my second set of Potenza RE-71R's. XKR runs on Pilot Sport 4S's. Either one provides good grip. Consider the ADVAN A052. I think either of these three would do the trick.
-
I didn't know this but in the aforementioned Megasquirt 3 manual (Murray 2018), Page 139-140 detail PWM fuel pump control, talks about GM systems, pressure regulation,/correction, fuel rail pressure settings, etc etc. I would assume then a MS3x can do the returnless PWM fuel pump control.
-
I think it is the same either way. When I had access to a metal lathe I turned a couple pair of the rotors. When I lost that access, I had Richard turn a set of his hubs to accept the rotors. That way I change the rotors at any time. I think your hubs are very similar to mine and could be turned prior to install. I have the bearing spacer and HD axle set up also. Six of one way, half dozen the other.
https://www.goodparts.com/product/hub-tr3-6-front-alloy-with-bearings-and-1-2-20-wheel-studs/
-
When I got my aluminum front hubs from Richard Good (Goodparts), I had him machine the hubs to accept the toyota vented rotors as is.
-
It appears that this whole idea of returnless EFI fuel system is more a US thing. Probably because the tuner market here follows the OEM technology. Just googling around I found two aftermarket PWM controllers for fuel pumps and that both Holley and Eldebrock have returnless systems. My neighbor is a Holley dealer and has been granted full access to the software (not the first time of having access to IP software). He has been doing EFI in big HP V-8 motors for several decades. He even sold EFI parts to GM as a OEM supplier. If I get the opportunity to talk to him about it I will.
-
Some further quotes from same article:
"Returnless systems are now used on many late-model cars and trucks. The first ones appeared back in 1993 on certain Chrysler V6 and V8 truck engines. By 1998, all Chrysler cars and light trucks had them. In 1996, Toyota introduced its first returnless system, and Honda went returnless in 2001. General Motors and Ford started down the returnless route in 1999, and in 2004, GM went returnless on most of its full-size pickup trucks and SUVs with the Vortec 6000 (LQ4 and LQ9) engines, including the Cadillac Escalade; Chevy Silverado, Suburban and Tahoe; the GMC Sierra and Yukon; and Hummer H2.
Actually, there are two different types of returnless EFI systems in use: mechanical and electronic. In the mechanical systems, a mechanical regulator is mounted on the fuel pump module to provide a more or less constant fuel pressure to the engine. This type of setup works well with a speed-density EFI system that uses throttle position, intake manifold pressure and engine rpm to determine engine load rather than an airflow sensor.
On 1996 Chrysler and Dodge minivans with returnless EFI, the regulator can be serviced by removing the fuel pump module from the fuel tank, then prying back the locking tabs that hold the regulator in its housing. The regulator can then be pried out and replaced with a new one. There are also two O-rings inside the housing that also should be replaced. Forget these, and the system may not hold normal pressure."
According to RockAuto, the 96 Chryler minivan fuel pump operates at 49 PSI. Here in Phoenix we have stop and go traffic approaching L.A. standards, add in the ambient temp of 115 F and all these idling cars in the summer, the roadway temps are probably very very high. I would think the cramped engine compartments are very high, but I don't see cars suffering from vapor lock in their MPFI systems. If it was such a problem, there would be cars on the side of the road all the time in the summer but there isn't. Further quote:
"On a 2005 Chevy Silverado, for example, the on demand returnless EFI system has a turbine-style fuel pump inside the fuel tank that routes fuel through an in-tank filter to the in-tank regulator. The regulator maintains a preset pressure to the fuel injection system, which is 55 to 62 psi (or 48 to 54 psi on engine VIN code Z)"
So, it seems that a 4 bar system wouldn't have a problem. I did run my system at 4 bar after initial set up as the injectors were too small. I ran this way until I got bigger injectors.
-
-
Did I ever state I had problems? Did I ever state what my tip in response was like? And, keep in mind my throttle body came from a 4.3L application. All I stated was, if you size a throttle body to have no restriction (that would imply it flows 1.7 times the actual CFM at that RPM) of flow at WOT and redline, which can conceivably may go to 7000 rpm, you may have driveability issues in day to day driving. And your response was, that is nonsense. Okay, it is nonsense. However, at WOT and 5500 RPM, my MAP is within 1% of atmospheric pressure, ie no restriction. I believe that my sizing wouldn't have any restriction even at 7000 RPM. Second, once past initial tip in, it doesn't take much to really flow a lot. So, no real loss in performance there either, even though it is a single TB. Speaking of tip in, I have no tip in issues at all, whatever assumptions you made to the contrary. I contend that is because of the design of the throttle plate as previously mentioned. If you want a list of references concerning tip in, I can give you a list.
On another topic, re fuel system design. Around here, fuel systems run from 3 to 6 bar fuel pressure. Mine is 3 bar. And it is a circuit design, which had heat sleeves etc through the T shirt area etc. In the summer, the fuel rail would get so hot you couldn't touch it, hotter than even the intake manifold. Never had any percolation problem or it going lean. This is in traffic with outside air temps around 115 F. However, I felt that I could partially cure this problem. I ran a teflon cored SS braided line from the back inside the trunk, down the inside of the B post, into the inside of the rocker, exit, then across the outer frame rail to the inner frame rail, then forward. Steel sleeves for most of it. Fuel rail doesn't get hot anymore. It runs cooler than the intake manifold, it has heat blocking stand offs. And my plenum has heat blocks between it and the initial 6 pipes, just like a carb car. And I have a custom heat shield that shields all this from the header.
-
3 hours ago, mtrehy said:
nonsense. unless you've completely miss-sized the throttle body it will be absolutely fine. People have been doing this for 20+ years and yet is keeps coming up as some kind of new advance in TR6 modification every 6 months on here
mmmmm. According to my measurements my single throttle body has an inlet of 76mm and a bore of 72 mm. That bore will support 700 cfm airflow. What does a TR6 engine flow at 6000 RPM? depends on VE. But, I don't think the VE is that great, even with head work, large valves, 1.55 rollers (a valve lift of 0.454"), a 275 duration etc etc. Maybe 80% VE. At that, maybe around 280 CFM, possibly 300. However, at tip in, half my throttle plate opening is blanked off like I said. At WOT 6000rpm, I think my single TB is sized pretty good (the MAP has maybe 1-2 HPa loss from atmospheric). Did I completely miss-size my TB? What would be my tip in if it didn't have the blanking plate? Is it possible to have a single TB that will flow more than needed but still have good tip in? Is there any performance loss using a single TB that can flow this well at WOT compared to 6 ITB's? How is my tip in? How is my throttle response after 1/4 throttle application? I have read in many many places about the trouble with tip in and large single TB's. My statement was a caution regarding tip in and TB size. Is that nonsense? Only if the TB is miss sized according to your statement. Therefore, perhaps you can give guidance on what would be the proper sizing to avoid issues with tip in.
According to Motor Trend,
"Back in the early days of the 5.0L Mustang, we marveled at the ability to upgrade to a 65mm throttle body. Modern motors are equipped with 90mm and dual 75mm throttle bodies right from the factory. Contrary to popular belief, a larger throttle opening does not reduce low-speed power, but the effect on throttle response can be dramatic. The reason is that (compared to a smaller throttle body), any throttle position will offer a sizable increase in airflow. Opening a 90mm throttle body even 3-5 percent is like opening a smaller throttle body 10-12 percent. This makes part-throttle driving difficult as minor throttle angle changes result in dramatic power differences."
-
It is also the response coming off idle. You are stopped at the light and just need a few hundred RPM as you let the clutch out, imagine that a slight tip in of the throttle is a big change because the single TB lets in a lot of air. Makes daily driving a challenge.
-
One problem with single TB is tip in response. If the TB is large enough to NOT restrict airflow at WOT and high RPM, then tip in response maybe more problematic for day to day driving. Which begs the question, since ultimate power is also a function of ultimate RPM, what is your driving style or intended driving style? If it is a track car, then WOT all the way up to the RPM limit just below self destruction. With proper balancing, lightening, Racetorations steel crank etc, that may mean something above 7000 RPM. Tip in response is not applicable. If a fast road car, then day to day driving is more important, but again, will you routinely take it above 5500 RPM? I have a single TB that is quite large but has a shaped blanking plate riveted to one side (OEM did this), this permits very good tip in response while having a large throat. The blanking plate doesn't effect the WOT throttle flow much at all. But, I don't drive much at all above 5000 RPM. See previous post re manifold, my manifold was to increase VE (torque) down low and it restricts flow at high RPM. And, I have soft and hard shift limits programmed in the ECU too. I do hit them once in a while.
The first question is, what are you going to do about a manifold? Is it wet? How much fabrication are you willing or even able to accomplish? What about idle air control? Answer those and you will have your answer. Again, procure the previous referenced books and educate yourself on the sections about your question.
-
I stand corrected.......re the MS3x sequential injection algorithm. "TunerStudio MS Lite Reference", James Murray (2018) page 88, gives one the choice of angle specifics, that is: end of, middle of, or beginning of squirt. Therefore, if set to "end of squirt" one can end the injection pulse exactly when they want it in reference to the intake valve timing (each cam has specifications on duration and timing in reference to the crank). It seems Rick & Emile have empirically hit upon a good timing that stays the same in reference to the intake valve movement. One software choice, one software inputted angle, one bolt and 3 wires; C'est tres simple. IMHO deciding that each cylinder will get squirted at the same point referenced to the intake valve movement is less risky than batching and having 1 or 2 cylinders way off from that perhaps even squirting halfway through the compression cycle. However, if you have a bunch wall wetting going on because the injector isn't right up near the head, then the fueling at intake valve opening can rely on evaporation off the wall rather than the specific timing of the squirt, so batch is fine.
Since we are well into a rabbit hole of thread creep, I suggest reading Banish (previous title) pages 48-52, "Performance Fuel Injection Systems" Cramer & Hoffman pages 110-111, 117-118, 121-126 "How to Tune & Modify Engine Management Systems" Hartman pages 118, 130, 142, 146. And of course, YouTube channel "EFI University" for the reading impaired. The essence is that you want peak cylinder pressure to occur at the best mechanical advantage crank position without encountering detonation. This results in peak MBT (maximum brake torque) at some particular operating condition. You want this at all operating conditions if possible. AFR affects it, but ignition timing is the real determinate. So, for a particular operating point, you would increase ignition advance until MBT is achieved. This requires a specific kind of dynamometer, a load control (aka steady state) that can measure torque vs an inertial dynamometer. The dyno holds the engine RPM constant, the operator holds the load constant (say MAP if using speed density) and then you vary the ignition advance while referencing the engine torque output (MBT). And you do it ad nauseum to fill in your ignition table. So, what kind of rolling road and what you are trying to achieve matters.
HP is a mathematical function of RPM and Torque. Torque is a function peak cylinder pressure (VE) and when it occurs.
I didn't do EFI for the sake of EFI, I did it so I could have dry manifold design flexibility. I have no desire to have it look all too cool like some old style Hillborn racing system or a stack side throat Webers.
-
I have most likely gooned up the math:
For one revolution of the crank:
Assume 270 degree cam, take out lash and all that to get valve at 0.010" open yields about 250 degree duration which is 0.7 of a revolution and rounding for clarity
1000 RPM is approx 60 MS per rev, 0.7 of that is 42 MS and my pulse width is 3.4 MS
2500 RPM is 24 MS, 17 MS 8.9 MS
4900 RPM is 12 MS 8.4 MS 16.2 MS
If my math is correct, then if I squirt at idle somewhere around 310 degrees, the squirt will end just prior to valve opening. Assuming the cam is symmetric etc. I believe TunerStudio just gives the one input for sequential timing without regard to RPM. At 2500 RPM, the squirt will end about 10 MS before the valve closes. At 4900 RPM, a lot of intake port wetting occurs ;-) If any of this is remotely correct, then sequential MAY yield some benefit at idle and cruise but none at higher RPM.
-
The end of my injectors is within an inch of the head, but it is a bespoke manifold.
-
Here is a quote from Rick Baines re sequential angle on his Spitfire, “ “You keep changing the angle on the ECU settings at idle until your (sic measured) AFR reads about 1 point richer - then you know that’s where the fuel is mixing best, and then you lean it back off to get your target AFR”.
Or you can use the angle that Emile determined for his TR6 and then adjust from there.
As for the benefits, who knows? Subjective would be my guess. And, according to Banish, the intent would be to spray onto the hot backside of the intake valve just prior to opening. This essentially eliminates the issues of wall wetting of the intake port.
In my opinion, if you aren’t injecting directly into the port (ie as close to the backside of the intake valve as possible), say because you are injecting via a throttle body that is mounted on stand-off manifolds, there is no point in sequential. Which is a different argument for not doing it. ie, if the point is to reduce the effects of wall wetting, but you have 5” or more of wall wetting, then don’t bother.
Rick Baines simply bolted a sensor to the side of his distributor using an existing hole and triggered off the existing rotor shaft. So, one bolt, 3 wires, and the above programming. He apparently triggered going low where the shaft is cut away for the distributor rotor. If a person can’t handle a bolt, 3 wires, and a couple of settings in TunerStudio, they should evaluate whether a turn key system is more appropriate for their needs.
-
In "Designing and Tuning High Performance Fuel Injection Systems" pages 38 - 40, Greg Banish describes the pros and cons of batch vs. sequential. As for how complicated sequential (and the requisite cam sensor) is, it isn't very difficult. 3 wires and hack up an old distributor. Software changes are easy, especially compared to some other functions of TunerStudio. Several of us in the states use sequential, and there all kinds of old cars on the MS forums that have done it. Like I said, most people have a vested interest in their particular approach.
Additional Fuse and Relay combo box
in TR6 Forum
Posted
I have a 5 circuit box on my car (LHD). It is mounted on a bracket (go binky), that picks up one of the lower bolts for the front wing in front of the wheel arch and the two bolts for the bumper bracket (76). It is a sealed unit. It has the following loads, high beams, low beams, fog lamps, electric fan, and an extra set of horns. It fed directly from the alternator (90 amp) and each relay triggered by the respective circuit. 10 years or more of use. Only issue ever is it popped the fan fuse when the fan motor seized. Not the most convenient location but it is out of the way, and is closely located to the various loads. the fog lamps come on with the running lights, there is a sealed toggle switch to disable this feature. i did have to make a “bullet connector”. I took a six way and cut the center out, then soldered a two way to a four way and then slipped that into the cut six way rubber cover.