DIY_EFI Digest Saturday, 13 March 1999 Volume 04 : Number 165 In this issue: [Fwd: R: Emulator] Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #160, Eprom Emulator Re: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e Re: Chassis dynos exposed Re: Electric water pumps (was) alt charging cont sw Re: Electric water pumps (was) alt charging cont sw Re: Real HP loss numbers Re: Real HP loss numbers Re: Electric water pumps (was) alt charging cont sw Re:hp loss Re: Chassis dynos exposed Re: Bosch Fuel Pump Re: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e Re: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e Re:hp loss Re: Chassis dynos exposed Re: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e Re: Off Panhard bar Re: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e Re: Bosch Fuel Pump Re: Off Panhard bar Re: Re:hp loss Re: Off Panhard bar See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DC Smith Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 04:24:29 -0600 Subject: [Fwd: R: Emulator] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------B285122D4F20807847DA5B07 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I emailed from the web page.. - -- *********************************************************************** Dan Smith 84 Regal 12.13@112 GSCA# 1459 St.Charles, Missouri mailto:dcsmith@xxx.net http://www.tetranet.net/users/morepoweral *********************************************************************** - --------------B285122D4F20807847DA5B07 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: by smtp.tetranet.net (mbox morepoweral) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Sat Mar 13 03:26:26 1999) X-From_: ludwigo@xxx.it Sat Mar 13 03:03:24 1999 Return-Path: Received: from q45a.bytes.net (root@xxx.10]) by smtp.tetranet.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA23390 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 03:03:23 -0600 Received: from fep10-svc.tin.it (mta10-acc.tin.it [212.216.176.41]) by q45a.bytes.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA17744 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 01:03:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from default ([212.216.32.252]) by fep10-svc.tin.it (InterMail v4.0 201-221-105) with ESMTP id <19990313090233.LOQZ3438.fep10-svc@default> for ; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:02:33 +0100 From: "Orgler Ludwig" To: "DC Smith" Subject: R: Emulator Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:01:11 +0100 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19990313090233.LOQZ3438.fep10-svc@default> Hi Dan Smith, > I would like to know how much for your emulator. Also, is the software a > editing program or just to run the emulator? The software of BYTERUNNER is just to run the emulator. Our NONSTOP-emulator is battery-backed, you can read back from NONSTOP and you can change 1 byte at a time The cost is 320.- EURO 1 EURO corresponds approx. 1.09 US-DOLLAR Best regards Orgler Ludwig Orgler electronic - ----------------------------- - --------------B285122D4F20807847DA5B07-- ------------------------------ From: m.cortecchia@xxx.it (Marco Cortecchia) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 14:08:38 +0100 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #160, Eprom Emulator >Pat, > I attempted to look at the link (just curious) and it was dead. You don't >have to order eprom emulators all the way from Italy. Many places in USA sell them. I >think even Universal Cross Assemblers in Canada sells one. >For anyone who is interested, here are a few vendors of ROM emulators: > >Dataman: the Dataman S4 is a programmer and emulator: www.dataman.com >Grammar Engine: Promice with trace: www.gei.com >EmuTec: PromJet emulator: www.emutec.com >I think TechTools (www.tech-tools.com) may also sell rom emulators > >Mark D'Sylva > Hi , the Eprom Emulator is only 1 part of the kit . You can buy the better emulator in the world , but if You don't have a SoftWare ( specific for ECU tuning ) to use it during ECU tuning , You can't real use it . Our SoftWare Eprom Wizard 2.0 can work with Racelogic EPROM Emulator and with FlexROM II eprom Emulator , and with our SoftWare You can realy use this emulator in ECU tuning work . You can see some informations inside our new web site : www.3wad.com/efi/ Using our SoftWare You can made changes in Realtime , with engine turn on . You don't need use 2 emulators because the Racelogic have 2 memory inside and this memory banks are swaped in automatic way every time You change a byte . The Racelogic have the tracing of readed address to , so You can know every time , where the ECU work . It's a very very important features for tuning work , because You can see what are the used maps , You can understand the real input variables for each map , and You can see ( also over 3D maps surface ) what are the used points during engine work . The Racelogic have 4Mbit memorys with 16 bit data bus , so You can work with ALL memory used on automotive applications . MARCO CORTECCHIA ( SoftWare developer ) Via Bellini 70/A 40026 - Imola ( BO ) ITALIA Tel/Fax : +39-(0)542-681936 m.cortecchia@xxx.it www.3wad.com/efi ------------------------------ From: andy quaas Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 06:00:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e I don't know much about the 2 tannys, but i would like to hear about mastertune! Andy - ---Doug Bazarnic wrote: > > I just broke the input hub / shaft assembly for the second time on my '95 > Chevy 1/2 ton truck. It keeps blowing out the aluminum lugs that retain > the snap ring for 3rd gear. I do have extra ponies under the hood, but I > don't see how the extra power would be causing this problem. (It's 355 > cubic inches, B&M blower, Air Flow Research Heads, large roller cam, Cola > Crank, Ross Racing Pistons, Eagle Rods, etc etc) The truck only runs in > the low 14's, but this tranny breakage is nuts. > > The truck has a total of 42,000 miles on it and I've broken an Art Carr 10" > Torque Converter, and the aluminum input hub/shaft twice now. The aluminum > hub is a cast piece of sh*t, and it's teeth that hold the snap ring in > place leave. This last hub (which was brand new from GM and about 6 months > old) lasted less than 8,000 miles. Either I'm putting too much thru this > tranny, or it's a real piece of crap. > > Ohh, and by the way, I drive it like it was a Corvette on a road course! > It weighs in at 3944 lbs. > > So the $100 question is: How easy would it be to swap the 4l60e vs the > 4l80e. Can the stock computer talk to a 4l80e without any probs? I've > got the mastertune software that lets me change what ever I want, so shift > points / line pressure wouldn't be a problem, if the stock computer can do > it. Also, are the wiring harness connectors the same? > > Thanks, > > Doug Bazarnic > > P.s. If anyone is interested in my calibrations / chip sw, lemme know, as > I'd be happy to share. > > > > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @xxx.com ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 09:39:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Chassis dynos exposed - -----Original Message----- From: Clarence L.Snyder To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Saturday, March 13, 1999 12:09 AM Subject: Re: Chassis dynos exposed Clayton used to make them. Bruce >> That's an engine dyno setup, I've never seen a car dyno of this type. >> The dynojet type systems have been around for at least three years (my >> earliest chassis dyno runs) >> >> [...] >The "rolling road" dynos - can't remember the brand but my memory seems >to think Stewart Warner or ? from the sixties/seventies were combination >load cell/inertia units. The inertia rollers could be used for brake >testing as well as making the load test realistic. No fancy PC to >control it, but in skilled hands you could do a full RPM range, through >the gears, in about 2 minutes flat. The readings were strictly RPM and >torque from which the horsepower was derived using a circular slide rule >supplied with the unit. If I remember correctly there was a paper strip >readout, like a printing calculator available. The one we had at the >college just used a second body to write the numbers when you pushed the >meter lock button. Pick your RPM, throttle up, load it down, balance >load and throttle until the RPM at WOT was at spec, and read the torque. > ------------------------------ From: "Curt Platteborze" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 09:55:58 -0500 Subject: Re: Electric water pumps (was) alt charging cont sw Have you seen the Meziere LTI Electric water pump. Uses your existing pump body housing, retrofits with an electric motor and reverse blade impeller. Many other apps as well. Meziere: 760-746-3273 WWW.MEZIERE.com Curt ------------------------------ From: "Gary Derian" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:00:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Electric water pumps (was) alt charging cont sw Yes! Lexus even uses a hydraulically driven fan to get mechanical fan like cooling power at low road speeds and electric like power savings at high road speed. Caprice taxi and police cars all have large mechanically driven fans whereas the normal road cars get electric only. Gary Derian >> >>The reason water pumps are such a large HP lose is cause they need to be. >>You >>can slow em down some, and in some applications take em out. But, for a >>street motor, >>they is what they is. >> For you to have an electric motor pump as much as an oem waterpump you'd, >>have to have a >>big a----- motor/pump to replace it. >> For fast warm ups use a recirculating thermostat >>Bruce > >Bruce is right on this, completely. (Or is it one of the little guys?) > >There is even a good debate possible as to whether a high pressure fuel >pump should be electrically or mechanically driven, let alone a water pump, >or an engine fan (if you are working an engine any kind of hard at low >speeds for any length of time)! > >For any sizable auxiliary drive loads, a mechanical drive is way more >efficient than an electrical one. > >Regards, Greg > ------------------------------ From: "Gary Derian" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 09:38:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Real HP loss numbers I think you were sleeping where the exhaust was routed above the rear axle. There is no way a ring and pinion would reject that much heat. Gary Derian When I was a kid (5 or 6), my folks had a Dodge van. On cold days >during long trips I had two places I liked to take a nap: right behind the >engine cowl (directly over the transmission) and right over the rearend. >Why? In both places the floor was nice and toasty warm! Even when the >weather was in the teen's, there was enough energy dumped by the differential >to keep the floor nice and warm even with the ice cold air flowing under it! > >Clint > ------------------------------ From: "Gary Derian" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 09:48:14 -0500 Subject: Re: Real HP loss numbers Inertial effects in a drive train are considerable and vary greatly with gear. The effective polar moments of inertia increase with the square of the gear. Axles have little effect. Driveshafts have more. Engines and flywheels have the most. They have both high inertia and spin faster than anything else (in the lower gears). I ran some calculations once on flywheel inertia. A 30 typical lb. flywheel effectively adds about 1000 lbs of mass to a car in first gear. Of course if you are traction limited in first gear, it doesn't matter. An inertia dyno can take all of these inertia factors into account and give the same numbers as a brake dyno. If you are dyno testing to generate numbers, then go through all the inertia calcs. If you are dyno testing to optimize fuel and timing maps, it really doesn't matter what the number are, as long as they are repeatable. Gary Derian >>I have wondered about this myself. I have heard anywhere from 15% >>to 25% in drivetrain losses. What I can't figure out is where the >>energy is going. If you have a 300HP engine with 25% drivetrain >>loss, then you are losing 75HP somewhere. Since it doesn't just >>disappear, something has to be soaking up 75HP of energy. My >>guess is that the loss would be in the form of heat which would >>mean of lot of drivetrain parts would have to be getting really hot >>(assuming the 300HP load on the engine). Since I have only seen >>my transmission get warm, it doesn't really make much sense unless >>I just haven't had the load on for a long enough period. ------------------------------ From: Jim Davies Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 09:42:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Electric water pumps (was) alt charging cont sw On Fri, 12 Mar 1999, Frederic Breitwieser wrote: > > > The only flaw in this logic is that the Dodge Truck has a > > > Mopar alternator which doesn't charge the battery > > > effectively, hence my desire to replace it with a GM unit. > > > > > Why not just fix it? > > Because its a small, 43A alternator and since I'm putting in > a nice EFI system, and redoing everything anyway, I wanted > to ugprade the alternator at the same time. That and I > happen to have a GM alternator. > > -- Mopar made a large-frame alternator that put out over 100 amps and didnt fry. Common on heavies with electric heated rear windows. Either a 400 or 440 donor will have the brackets needed... ------------------------------ From: Jim Davies Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 09:55:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re:hp loss On Fri, 12 Mar 1999 Jason_Leone@xxx.com wrote: > < to 25% in drivetrain losses.>> > > Typically, expect a RWD front engine car to lose 20%. Expect a FWD front engine > car to lose 15%. I'd guess a RWD rear engine car would be closer to 15% than 20% > (ala Porsche). It depends on the individual drive train design, and the > materials used. A big factor is the rear axle gearset and especially if it is a hypoid design and also [I think] how much the actual offset is between the ring and pinion centreline; the greater the offset, the longer the pinion tooth becomes, thus increasing friction. I notice spiral bevel gearsets coming back into production and I believe it is because of the greater drag of the hypoid design. ------------------------------ From: dave.williams@xxx.us (Dave Williams) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 01:25:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Chassis dynos exposed - -> > systems, if at all. They worked by running the car on the dyno, > - -> loading up the - -> > rollers (usually via a water brake system), and reading the horse > - -> power number - -> > when the load prevented the engine from accelerating past a - -> > predetermined rpm. > That's an engine dyno setup, I've never seen a car dyno of this type. > The dynojet type systems have been around for at least three years > (my earliest chassis dyno runs) Three years? Clayton has been making water brake chassis dynos for well over THIRTY years. I own one. ==dave.williams@xxx.us====================================== I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? =================================== http://home1.gte.net/42/index.htm ------------------------------ From: rr Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 13:14:06 -0800 Subject: Re: Bosch Fuel Pump I pulled a Bosch pump off a Ford Bronco 4x4. It was located in the frame rail at about the drivers feet area. I understand that there is another pump in the tank to feed this one. A low pressure feeding the high pressure. Don't know what it had for an engine, as most of the truck was gone. The numbers from this pump are similar to yours: Bosch 9 580 810-002 12V 927(circled) 847-28 Made in USA E6EF-9350-AA 8G28 I've a feeling that some of these numbers are lot #'s, plant #'s, line #'s and/or date codes. It has a threaded outlet and a formed inlet. I'll be doing a flow test on it soon. When that's done, I'll post the info. HTH BobR. Clarence Wood wrote: > > Can anybody give me any information on the following Bosch pump, or how to find out about the pump? > > Bosch:9 580 810 020 > 12V. 562-10 > E7TF.9350.AA 5B10 > > Thanks, > Clarence > > IZCC #3426 > 1982 280ZX Turbo GL > 1966 El Camino > 1982 Yamaha Maxim XJ-1101J Motorcycle > 1975 Honda CB750 SS (black engine) > 1986 Snapper Comet lawn mower > Clarence Wood > Software&Such... > clarencewood@xxx.net > Savannah, TN. ------------------------------ From: "Brent W" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 11:05:28 -0700 Subject: Re: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e There are many differences between the 4L60E and the 4L80E. The main electrical connector that interconnects the engine wiring harness to the transmission is not the same and there are different numbers of wires used (I don't know what they are all used for). There are two different PCM's that control the 4L80E. One comes on the diesel engines and the other for the gas engines. I'm not sure whether there are differences internally within the transmission for these two applications that might also need to be considered when looking for a transmission. The 4L80E uses a different flywheel and torque converter. I'm not sure whether the crankshaft end would need to be reworked to mate to the 4L80E. The transmissions are different lengths which would necessitate a change of your drive shaft. I have read of people that have done the swap successfully, so with enough knowledge, time, and money, you can have a 4L80E which is a much stronger transmission. And I would guess that it would ultimately be cheaper for you to swap out to a 4L80E transmission rather than to keep paying for a transmission rebuild every so often. Good luck, Brent Wiscombe bwiscombe@xxx.com Mesa, AZ _______________________ - -----Original Message----- From: Doug Bazarnic Date: Saturday, March 13, 1999 1:36 AM Subject: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e >I just broke the input hub / shaft assembly for the second time on my '95 >Chevy 1/2 ton truck. It keeps blowing out the aluminum lugs that retain >the snap ring for 3rd gear. I do have extra ponies under the hood, but I >don't see how the extra power would be causing this problem. (It's 355 >cubic inches, B&M blower, Air Flow Research Heads, large roller cam, Cola >Crank, Ross Racing Pistons, Eagle Rods, etc etc) The truck only runs in >the low 14's, but this tranny breakage is nuts. > >The truck has a total of 42,000 miles on it and I've broken an Art Carr 10" >Torque Converter, and the aluminum input hub/shaft twice now. The aluminum >hub is a cast piece of sh*t, and it's teeth that hold the snap ring in >place leave. This last hub (which was brand new from GM and about 6 months >old) lasted less than 8,000 miles. Either I'm putting too much thru this >tranny, or it's a real piece of crap. > >Ohh, and by the way, I drive it like it was a Corvette on a road course! >It weighs in at 3944 lbs. > >So the $100 question is: How easy would it be to swap the 4l60e vs the >4l80e. Can the stock computer talk to a 4l80e without any probs? I've >got the mastertune software that lets me change what ever I want, so shift >points / line pressure wouldn't be a problem, if the stock computer can do >it. Also, are the wiring harness connectors the same? > >Thanks, > >Doug Bazarnic > >P.s. If anyone is interested in my calibrations / chip sw, lemme know, as >I'd be happy to share. > > > > ------------------------------ From: "Peter D. Hipson" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 08:32:45 -0500 Subject: Re: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e I don't know the 4l60E (I'm a 4L80E person) but there are at least two excellent aftermarket computers for the 4L80E, and as well, I'd guess that maybe your 4L60E ECM could be made to work. Do you know what is in the 4L60E for interfacing with the computer? At 01:25 AM 3/13/99 -0700, you wrote: >I just broke the input hub / shaft assembly for the second time on my '95 >Chevy 1/2 ton truck. It keeps blowing out the aluminum lugs that retain >the snap ring for 3rd gear. I do have extra ponies under the hood, but I >don't see how the extra power would be causing this problem. (It's 355 >cubic inches, B&M blower, Air Flow Research Heads, large roller cam, Cola >Crank, Ross Racing Pistons, Eagle Rods, etc etc) The truck only runs in >the low 14's, but this tranny breakage is nuts. > >The truck has a total of 42,000 miles on it and I've broken an Art Carr 10" >Torque Converter, and the aluminum input hub/shaft twice now. The aluminum >hub is a cast piece of sh*t, and it's teeth that hold the snap ring in >place leave. This last hub (which was brand new from GM and about 6 months >old) lasted less than 8,000 miles. Either I'm putting too much thru this >tranny, or it's a real piece of crap. > >Ohh, and by the way, I drive it like it was a Corvette on a road course! >It weighs in at 3944 lbs. > >So the $100 question is: How easy would it be to swap the 4l60e vs the >4l80e. Can the stock computer talk to a 4l80e without any probs? I've >got the mastertune software that lets me change what ever I want, so shift >points / line pressure wouldn't be a problem, if the stock computer can do >it. Also, are the wiring harness connectors the same? > >Thanks, > >Doug Bazarnic > >P.s. If anyone is interested in my calibrations / chip sw, lemme know, as >I'd be happy to share. > > > > > > Thanks, Peter Hipson (founder, NEHOG) 1995 White NA Hummer Wagon ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 12:25:05 -0700 Subject: Re:hp loss >On Fri, 12 Mar 1999 Jason_Leone@xxx.com wrote: > >> <> to 25% in drivetrain losses.>> >> >> Typically, expect a RWD front engine car to lose 20%. Expect a FWD front >>engine >> car to lose 15%. I'd guess a RWD rear engine car would be closer to 15% >>than 20% >> (ala Porsche). It depends on the individual drive train design, and the >> materials used. > >A big factor is the rear axle gearset and especially if it is a hypoid >design and also [I think] how much the actual offset is between the ring >and pinion centreline; the greater the offset, the longer the pinion tooth >becomes, thus increasing friction. I notice spiral bevel gearsets coming >back into production and I believe it is because of the greater drag of >the hypoid design. Yep!! Greg ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 12:28:33 -0700 Subject: Re: Chassis dynos exposed >-> > systems, if at all. They worked by running the car on the dyno, > >-> loading up the >-> > rollers (usually via a water brake system), and reading the horse > >-> power number >-> > when the load prevented the engine from accelerating past a >-> > predetermined rpm. > >> That's an engine dyno setup, I've never seen a car dyno of this type. >> The dynojet type systems have been around for at least three years >> (my earliest chassis dyno runs) > > Three years? Clayton has been making water brake chassis dynos for >well over THIRTY years. I own one. Yes, they have. And a chassis dyno with a brake--water or electric--at least IMHO--is the only kind worth having or running a car on!! Electric brakes are somewhat more desireable, as they will develop greater braking torque at lower speeds. Regards, Greg ------------------------------ From: Shannen Durphey Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 14:33:09 -0500 Subject: Re: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e Doug Bazarnic wrote: > > So the $100 question is: How easy would it be to swap the 4l60e vs the > 4l80e. Can the stock computer talk to a 4l80e without any probs? I've > got the mastertune software that lets me change what ever I want, so shift > points / line pressure wouldn't be a problem, if the stock computer can do > it. Also, are the wiring harness connectors the same? > > Thanks, > > Doug Bazarnic > > P.s. If anyone is interested in my calibrations / chip sw, lemme know, as > I'd be happy to share. Hmmm...good question. Same ECM, so there should be a minumum of wiring. There are physical differences, 4L80E is much longer and heavier, and needs a different transfer case adapter. I can't ever remember seing the big trans mated to the 241 transfer case, so you may be looking at a custom machined part for that. Hopefully I'm wrong about there. I've never researched performance converters for this one, it's got a dual stator+tcc, supposed to be real good for torque. If you find any replacements, pass the info along. There's an additional speed sensor to wire in, the connector at the trans is different, PCM calibration used is definitely different between 4L60E/4L80E. One gotcha that I can see is that line pressure in the 4l80E trans, controlled by pcm, is calibrated to one of two pressure control solenoids, and solenoids are not to be interchanged. (Unwritten, of course, is "without swapping the cal".) So calibrations are trans specific. You'd want a trans and calibration for 94+ to prevent problems and get the best "stuff". Is your software for both types of trans? Or is it for the 4L60E only? Might not work on 4L80E. If you don't mind sharing , I love to collect different calibrations. Maybe post it in the incoming directory? ------------------------------ From: "H. J. Zivnak" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 12:30:45 -0800 Subject: Re: Off Panhard bar - -----Original Message----- From: Greg Hermann To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Friday, March 12, 1999 5:22 PM Subject: Re: Off Panhard bar >Or go scrounging in a boneyard that has some old Alfas. They used an upper >triangle, with two pivot points on the chassis, and a BALL joint attached >just to the left side of the pumpkin, plus two lower trailing arms. >Particularly if you replaced the chassis pivots of the triangle (rubber >stock) with bronze on steel, also if you replaced the lower rod ends with >real rod ends, they were as NICE a live rear axle setup as you could want. (Lurk mode off) It's nice to have something to say ! I disagree. Any assymmetry of the linkage will cause the car to react differently in right hand turns than it does in left hand turns. Secondly, because the A-arm is above the axle, and it determines the roll center heighth, the roll center is high. In addition, since the a-arm components must absorb all cornering forces they are subjected to extreme stress, hence the ball joint. This could be improved by placing the joint in the center below the pumpkin, providing symmetry and lowering the roll center, or better yet , replacing the a-arm with two angled arms and eliminating the need for a high strength joint. Come to think of it, you could reverse the angle of the arms, attaching at the ends of the axle housing instead of the pumpkin and near to the longitudinal center line at the chassis. Now you have a four link which provides lateral control and eliminates the need for a Panhard or Watts. >Another very nice set-up was the old Rover 2000 Di Dion setup--instead of a >lateral link, they used half shafts with no slip joint, upper and lower >arms on each side, and a slip joint in the Di Dion tube. Huh? Am I missing something here? I've read this three times and it still doesn't make sense. It sounds like they added an upper arm to a Jaguar set up to keep the De Dion tube from pulling the side gears out of the differential on a hard turn. With no plunge in the half shaft, the half shaft and the upper and lower arms would have to be parrallel and equal legnth. This would cause the tires to move laterally with jounce, hence the slip joint in the De Dion tube. I'm sure that this scrubing of the tires can't be all that good to begin with, but imagine that we want to turn, and the body rolls to the outside as it is wont to do. Because of the equal legnth control arms the tires lose camber angle, and cornering force. All the while the De Dion is trying to further unload the inside tire, and prolly binding up in the process. I don't mean this to be an attack on these two examples. I think the point is that cars roll as well as bounce. Even a Watts linkage with the bellcrank attached to the axle will cause the axle, or the car, to move laterally if the car is in roll when it bounces (but it won't if you attach the bellcrank to the chassis). It is prolly more important to worry about roll steer than lateral movement of the axle. Try driving your car backwards at any speed above a crawl. Another good source of info on four links is Dave Morgan. He wrote a series of articles for National Dragster named Pitside with (you guessed it) Dave Morgan and at least one book titled Doorslammers IIRC. Lots of illustrations of instant center, anti-squat, center of gravity, etc. calculations. Written for the drag racer, but applicable to a road car also. HTH Joe (lurk mode on) ------------------------------ From: Shannen Durphey Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 15:29:55 -0500 Subject: Re: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e Brent W wrote: > The 4L80E uses a different flywheel and torque converter. I'm not sure > whether the crankshaft end would need to be reworked to mate to the 4L80E. Oh, yeah. Converter has 6 mounting lugs. SB chevy crank bolt patterns are divided in 1986. If you need a different flexplate, and if you've got the late crank, the correct 350/4L80E part will bolt up. Shannen > Good luck, > Brent Wiscombe > bwiscombe@xxx.com > Mesa, AZ > > _______________________ > > -----Original Message----- > From: Doug Bazarnic > Date: Saturday, March 13, 1999 1:36 AM > Subject: How easy would it be to swap a 4L60e for a 4L80e > > >I just broke the input hub / shaft assembly for the second time on my '95 > >Chevy 1/2 ton truck. It keeps blowing out the aluminum lugs that retain > >the snap ring for 3rd gear. I do have extra ponies under the hood, but I > >don't see how the extra power would be causing this problem. (It's 355 > >cubic inches, B&M blower, Air Flow Research Heads, large roller cam, Cola > >Crank, Ross Racing Pistons, Eagle Rods, etc etc) The truck only runs in > >the low 14's, but this tranny breakage is nuts. > > > >The truck has a total of 42,000 miles on it and I've broken an Art Carr 10" > >Torque Converter, and the aluminum input hub/shaft twice now. The aluminum > >hub is a cast piece of sh*t, and it's teeth that hold the snap ring in > >place leave. This last hub (which was brand new from GM and about 6 months > >old) lasted less than 8,000 miles. Either I'm putting too much thru this > >tranny, or it's a real piece of crap. > > > >Ohh, and by the way, I drive it like it was a Corvette on a road course! > >It weighs in at 3944 lbs. > > > >So the $100 question is: How easy would it be to swap the 4l60e vs the > >4l80e. Can the stock computer talk to a 4l80e without any probs? I've > >got the mastertune software that lets me change what ever I want, so shift > >points / line pressure wouldn't be a problem, if the stock computer can do > >it. Also, are the wiring harness connectors the same? > > > >Thanks, > > > >Doug Bazarnic > > > >P.s. If anyone is interested in my calibrations / chip sw, lemme know, as > >I'd be happy to share. > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ From: "Mike Pilkenton" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 12:44:06 -0800 Subject: Re: Bosch Fuel Pump I'd be interested in your flow analysis Bob. I'm desperately looking for an in-line fuel pump to use on my 3.1L GM V6 motor. Nothing high performance but with my engine transplant project, I can't use a stock tank pump. This Bosch pump sounds like it might work great. Mike P. - -----Original Message----- From: rr To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Saturday, March 13, 1999 10:55 AM Subject: Re: Bosch Fuel Pump >I pulled a Bosch pump off a Ford Bronco 4x4. It was located in the frame >rail >at about the drivers feet area. I understand that there is another pump >in the tank to feed this one. A low pressure feeding the high pressure. >Don't know what it had for an engine, as most of the truck was gone. > >The numbers from this pump are similar to yours: > >Bosch 9 580 810-002 >12V 927(circled) 847-28 Made in USA >E6EF-9350-AA 8G28 > >I've a feeling that some of these numbers are lot #'s, plant #'s, >line #'s and/or date codes. > >It has a threaded outlet and a formed inlet. I'll be doing a flow >test on it soon. When that's done, I'll post the info. > >HTH > >BobR. > > >Clarence Wood wrote: >> >> Can anybody give me any information on the following Bosch pump, or how to find out about the pump? >> >> Bosch:9 580 810 020 >> 12V. 562-10 >> E7TF.9350.AA 5B10 >> >> Thanks, >> Clarence >> >> IZCC #3426 >> 1982 280ZX Turbo GL >> 1966 El Camino >> 1982 Yamaha Maxim XJ-1101J Motorcycle >> 1975 Honda CB750 SS (black engine) >> 1986 Snapper Comet lawn mower >> Clarence Wood >> Software&Such... >> clarencewood@xxx.net >> Savannah, TN. > ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 16:04:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Off Panhard bar - -----Original Message----- From: H. J. Zivnak To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Saturday, March 13, 1999 3:40 PM Subject: Re: Off Panhard bar What's not symmetrical about the triangle?. Or are you assuming the Triangle is mounted off center?. Bruce >>Particularly if you replaced the chassis pivots of the triangle (rubber >>stock) with bronze on steel, also if you replaced the lower rod ends with >>real rod ends, they were as NICE a live rear axle setup as you could want. >(Lurk mode off) >It's nice to have something to say ! >I disagree. >Any assymmetry of the linkage will cause the car to react differently in >right hand turns than it does in left hand turns. Secondly, because the >A-arm is above the axle, and it determines the roll center heighth, the roll >center is high. ------------------------------ From: "Gary Derian" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 15:48:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Re:hp loss Of course a hypoid has more friction than a bevel gear but how much? Viscous drag from the lube also has a great influence and is greater with a hypoid. I suspect the differences between hypoid and bevel are measurable but small. Gary Derian >> >>A big factor is the rear axle gearset and especially if it is a hypoid >>design and also [I think] how much the actual offset is between the ring >>and pinion centreline; the greater the offset, the longer the pinion tooth >>becomes, thus increasing friction. I notice spiral bevel gearsets coming >>back into production and I believe it is because of the greater drag of >>the hypoid design. > >Yep!! > >Greg > ------------------------------ From: "Gary Derian" Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 16:09:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Off Panhard bar There is nothing wrong with a high roll center on a live axle. Of course the suspension tuning must take this into account. With independent suspension, a high roll center usually also means high camber change and track change with wheel travel. This results in jacking in a corner which is really bad, witness early Corvair rear, early VW Beetle rear, or Bronco II front. A solid axle has no jacking and is usable with high roll center. A DeDion suspension is a dead axle connecting each rear hub. This axle is located by various rods as is a live axle. The final drive is mounted to the frame and halfshafts connect to the hubs. The advantage is the kinematics of a live axle with low unsprung weight. Usually the half shafts have to change in length to accommodate suspension travel. In the Rover, the dead axle is allowed to change in length while the halfshafts take the cornering loads. I guess they thought one plunge joint is cheaper than two. Having an A arm locating the rear axle like the old Alfas works pretty well. Having it offset a little actually compensates for the torque reaction of the axle. The first generation Mazda RX-7 had an offset Watts linkage which worked pretty well. A four link rear suspension, where the links are angles to provide lateral location can only work if the links have rubber joints. Also the links have to locate the axle as well as control the torque. For high powered cars, you cannot get sufficient torque control (resistance to wheel hop) and bump isolation at the same time. This is OK for race cars but makes for a poor road car. A very good solution is a torque arm for torque, a trailing arm on each side for bump isolation and bump steer control, and a panhard rod or watts link for lateral location. Just like a 1976 Vega and used since 1982 on the Camaro and Firebird. Volvo also had a good solution on the 700 series sedan. The torque arm was replaced by two rods (half a 4 link mounted in the middle) which mounted to a subframe. Gary Derian > >>Or go scrounging in a boneyard that has some old Alfas. They used an upper >>triangle, with two pivot points on the chassis, and a BALL joint attached >>just to the left side of the pumpkin, plus two lower trailing arms. >>Particularly if you replaced the chassis pivots of the triangle (rubber >>stock) with bronze on steel, also if you replaced the lower rod ends with >>real rod ends, they were as NICE a live rear axle setup as you could want. > >(Lurk mode off) > >It's nice to have something to say ! > >I disagree. > >Any assymmetry of the linkage will cause the car to react differently in >right hand turns than it does in left hand turns. Secondly, because the >A-arm is above the axle, and it determines the roll center heighth, the roll >center is high. In addition, since the a-arm components must absorb all >cornering forces they are subjected to extreme stress, hence the ball >joint. > >This could be improved by placing the joint in the center below the pumpkin, >providing symmetry and lowering the roll center, or better yet , replacing >the a-arm with two angled arms and eliminating the need for a high strength >joint. Come to think of it, you could reverse the angle of the arms, >attaching at the ends of the axle housing instead of the pumpkin and near to >the longitudinal center line at the chassis. Now you have a four link which >provides lateral control and eliminates the need for a Panhard or Watts. > >>Another very nice set-up was the old Rover 2000 Di Dion setup--instead of a >>lateral link, they used half shafts with no slip joint, upper and lower >>arms on each side, and a slip joint in the Di Dion tube. > >Huh? > >Am I missing something here? I've read this three times and it still doesn't >make sense. > >It sounds like they added an upper arm to a Jaguar set up to keep the De >Dion tube from pulling the side gears out of the differential on a hard >turn. With no plunge in the half shaft, the half shaft and the upper and >lower >arms would have to be parrallel and equal legnth. This would cause the tires >to move laterally with jounce, hence the slip joint in the De Dion tube. I'm >sure that this scrubing of the tires can't be all that good to begin with, >but imagine that we want to turn, and the body rolls to the outside as it is >wont to do. Because of the equal legnth control arms the tires lose camber >angle, and cornering force. All the while the De Dion is trying to further >unload the inside tire, and prolly binding up in the process. > >I don't mean this to be an attack on these two examples. I think the point >is that cars roll as well as bounce. Even a Watts linkage with the bellcrank >attached to the axle will cause the axle, or the car, to move laterally if >the car is in roll when it bounces (but it won't if you attach the bellcrank >to the chassis). It is prolly more important to worry about roll steer than >lateral movement of the axle. Try driving your car backwards at any speed >above a crawl. > >Another good source of info on four links is Dave Morgan. He wrote a series >of articles for National Dragster named Pitside with (you guessed it) Dave >Morgan and at least one book titled Doorslammers IIRC. Lots of illustrations >of instant center, anti-squat, center of gravity, etc. calculations. Written >for the drag racer, but applicable to a road car also. > >HTH > >Joe > >(lurk mode on) > > > > ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V4 #165 ***************************** To subscribe to DIY_EFI-Digest, send the command: subscribe diy_efi-digest in the body of a message to "Majordomo@xxx. A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace "diy_efi-digest" in the command above with "diy_efi".