DIY_EFI Digest Friday, April 9 1999 Volume 04 : Number 218 In this issue: Re: 302 or 460 build up Re: Torque measurement Re: Engine load vs RPM and torque Re: Torque measurement Re: 302 or 460 build up Re: 302 or 460 build up Re: Engine load vs RPM and torque Re: 302 or 460 build up Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #216 Re: Torque measurement Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #216 parts parts parts Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #216 Re: Engine load vs RPM and torque RE: Halp Diamond Star Motoring See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 19:55:22 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" Subject: Re: 302 or 460 build up How light? I think a 460 will imbalance the car and spin tires at will. It won't make the car faster, unless light means 4500 lb. Gary Derian > > > >Hi All; > > This isn't strickly efi but efi will go on it so.. > >I'm getting a 302 ( 5.0L) or a 460 (7.3L) to build for a light car > >Hp isn't what I'm after I want torque ( more fun, less tickets) > > > >what would you guys suggest for around 300hp and lotsa grunt( the 460 will > >be closer to 400hp) > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 19:39:07 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" Subject: Re: Torque measurement To apply a pure torque, use a T-handle. Pull up on one side and push down on the other. Otherwise the force of the weight is also applied to the engine. Gary Derian Subject: Re: Torque measurement > > > except the bar has weight > better to place it vertical and use a scale to get the weight required > a 5" bar and 80 lbs pull would be 400 ft lbs > > Clive ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 21:12:16 EDT From: Tedscj@xxx.com Subject: Re: Engine load vs RPM and torque In a message dated 4/8/99 8:11:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, bearbvd@xxx.net writes: > as much as I like the forged (6061 alloy) Alcoa wheels, even > they crack quite a lot in the wrong kind of service! > > Regards, Greg > Well, I just HAVE to put my $.02 in! When I was in the Army, we used two different types of wheels on our M60 based tanks, steel and alum. The steel wheels would bend frequently and need to be replaced when convenient, but the aluminum wheels ... they were constantly BREAKING and of course required immediate replacement if you didn't want to drive around on your hubs. I have not been too fond of aluminum wheels ever since, no matter how 'faddish' they may be. ESPECIALLY on trucks. I mean, what's the point? Is the few pounds you save really going to help the handling with a live axle suspension? But then most people with trucks (SUVs) these days won't ever see a dirt road, much less off-road, anyway. But the idea of alum. wheels on a truck is stupid if you ask me. Ted ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 21:11:48 -0400 From: "Ord Millar" Subject: Re: Torque measurement >> >> Since the motor mounts are connected to the block , you need to rotate the >> block to compress the load cell not the crank. My "plan" was to prevent the crank from rotating relative to the block, then apply torque to the crank, and thus to the block. Other than the fact that my torque wrench is only good to +/- 2% or so, is there a problem with that? >> The hardest part with this method is figuring out the scale in foot pounds. >> Usually load cells are calibrated with certified weights hung from a known >> length, usually a 1 foot long bar, hence 'foot- pound' I don't know how you >> could calculate the moment of movement that the block would place on the >> load cell. I would guess if you bolted a 1 foot bar on the engine at the >> center line of the crank and placed a 1 pound weight on the end of the bar, >> you would be able to calibrate the load cell out put for 1 foot Lb. Of >> course you would >> want to cal it to 300 ft.Lbs or what you think the engine would put out. If >> you use a 2 foot bar then 1 pound on the end would apply a force of 2 foot >> Lbs. This would save some cal weight. Your idea is excellent and should >> give some good results. Another way to read the torque would be to connect a >> load cell to the block about where the front freeze plug is, and the other >> end to the frame. This will make a solid motor mount that might damage the >> Trans case if you torque it to hard. You might want to try this using the >> same cal procedure, and if it works go to the mount system. > I think it would be extremely difficult to get a 2" long bar in the engine bay with weights hanging on it, because there is not a lot of room. > >except the bar has weight >better to place it vertical and use a scale to get the weight required >a 5" bar and 80 lbs pull would be 400 ft lbs > That could work if I remove the hood. I will try to glue one of the guages onto the mount, or onto the nut that holds a mount, and see what kind of noise I get when the engine is running. Calibration might be moot. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 21:12:11 EDT From: KD6JDJ@xxx.com Subject: Re: 302 or 460 build up Gary Derian > > > >Hi All; > > This isn't strickly efi but efi will go on it so.. > >I'm getting a 302 ( 5.0L) or a 460 (7.3L) to build for a light car > >Hp isn't what I'm after I want torque ( more fun, less tickets) > > > >what would you guys suggest for around 300hp and lotsa grunt( the 460 will > >be closer to 400hp) > Gary I want to cast my vote for a well built 302 rather than either a 351 or 460. A -- The 460 is too big and heavy for any light street car. B -- The 351 is heavier and taller than the 302, and will get you about 17 percent more HP than the 302. C -- The Windsor 351 heads can be installed on the 302. The block can be redrilled to accept the larger 351 stud diameter. D -- You can get a cam to provide you with the 'torque at RPM' that want. I bet that a stock cam , slightly advanced , will get you as much low RPM torque as any street machine you will ever try to impress. Just my 2 cents worth Jerry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 20:46:56 -0500 From: "David" Subject: Re: 302 or 460 build up Greetings, I have to agree on the 351. Look at the December 1998 issue of Hot Rod and see the FI unit they built. I would love to have this in my Lincoln. David - -----Original Message----- From: KD6JDJ@xxx.com> To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Thursday, April 08, 1999 8:26 PM Subject: Re: 302 or 460 build up |Gary Derian |> |> |> >Hi All; |> > This isn't strickly efi but efi will go on it so.. |> >I'm getting a 302 ( 5.0L) or a 460 (7.3L) to build for a light car |> >Hp isn't what I'm after I want torque ( more fun, less tickets) |> > |> >what would you guys suggest for around 300hp and lotsa grunt( the 460 |will |> >be closer to 400hp) |> | | Gary | I want to cast my vote for a well built 302 rather than either a 351 or 460. | A -- The 460 is too big and heavy for any light street car. | B -- The 351 is heavier and taller than the 302, and will get you about 17 |percent more HP than the 302. | C -- The Windsor 351 heads can be installed on the 302. The block can be |redrilled to accept the larger 351 stud diameter. | D -- You can get a cam to provide you with the 'torque at RPM' that want. I |bet that a stock cam , slightly advanced , will get you as much low RPM |torque as any street machine you will ever try to impress. | | Just my 2 cents worth Jerry | | ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 21:07:55 -0500 From: Tom Sharpe Subject: Re: Engine load vs RPM and torque Matt Beaubien wrote: > Greg, > > > >I'd like to be able to input the weights of the piston and rod, and the > > >torque value to obtain their loadings. Most people will tell you the largest > > >loads are seen on the exhuast stroke at TDC, > > > > This is in tension--- > > > > but that doesn't explain why > > >those turbo Honda's start bending rods at 10 psi... > > > > This is instability under compressive loading (column failure. > > I realize the difference, even though my first year statics course was 5 > years ago ;-). What I'm getting at is most references say that the tension > loads are so much greater that you don't have to worry about the compressive > loads. Not so when artificial aspiration or severe knock is encountered. > > > Aluminium is not good for SUSTAINED high revs because of no fixed endurance > > limit in tension. > > Drag racers sure can get away with a lot that OEM's or even oval/road racers > can't. Are you uncomfortable driving cars with Al suspension pieces due to > no endurance limit...? I had a 440 Dodge that ate rod bearings over 7500 rpm. One rod came out bent in a half moon shape, so short that the piston skirt was banging on the crank throws, with 55 psi at idle. I also took many pieces of piston skirt out of a running turbo motor after detonating. One set of full grove main bearings looked like they were heated until putty like, then squeezed out by the crank. My point is that rod failure can be caused by overloading the bearings... maybe the Honda just doesn't have enough bearing surface area or crank diameter to handle the power. Sharpe ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 21:25:35 -0500 From: Tom Sharpe Subject: Re: 302 or 460 build up Pat Ford wrote: > Hi All; > This isn't strickly efi but efi will go on it so.. > I'm getting a 302 ( 5.0L) or a 460 (7.3L) to build for a light car > Hp isn't what I'm after I want torque ( more fun, less tickets) > > what would you guys suggest for around 300hp and lotsa grunt( the 460 will > be closer to 400hp) If you want something with "fear factor", go for a 512ci or so (stroked 460), 502ci FBC or 500ci HEMI. It keeps the women and children off the streets. Raise the hood, start the motor, and crack the throttle - most people will run for cover. If you want a sleeper, the 302 blower/turbo motors are lots of fun in a light car, but the whistle/whine gives them away. 302 on a bottle is cheap, quiet, and could be a money maker if they don't see the NOx bottle. One of my personal favorites is an old 390 FE with dual quads, tell 'em it's a 427 and you won't have to run anybody. The other is the 412ci 351 Windsor stroker. Tell 'em it's a 302, they'll think it's a 351 because of the deep sound. Just get a good set of heads and don't win by more than a car length. Last but not least is the 300ci 4"x4" 6 popper. it takes a lot of head work (you can use cut up 351 heads) but it makes torque in spades and is almost indestructable. Every UPS truck in the country has one. And they are reasonably light. I love to be different. Put a T04B on that!!!! Sharpe ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 21:32:03 -0500 From: Tom Sharpe Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #216 Stuart Hastings wrote: > I'm interested in improving the performance of my boat. > > > I presume that adding an aluminum CIS intake manifold to my > raw-water-cooled engine will turn it into a giant battery :-) with > accellerated galvanic corrosion. Have the manifold HPC coated inside and out ! TomS ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 22:43:52 -0400 From: "Ord Millar" Subject: Re: Torque measurement - -----Original Message----- From: Greg Hermann To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Thursday, April 08, 1999 10:30 PM Subject: RE: Torque measurement > >Well--you would be measuring the torque output of the TRANSMISSION, not the >engine--so you would need to calibrate the thing a fair amount higher for >the low gears. Look at the engine-tranny package as a black box to >visualize why this is so. And calibrating with a bar stuck through the >output yoke, with the tranny in gear, might be a lot easier approach. > >Greg Hmmmm(n). I uderstand what you are saying, but if the transmission is in neutral, and I open the throttle, the engine rotates oposite to the crank direction. There is no output from the transmission... Is this just the energy that is being stored in the flywheel causing this oposite reaction, or am I more lost than I think? Ord ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 22:56:49 EDT From: ECMnut@xxx.com Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #216 Stuart, the Syclone & later vortec truck 4.3's had aluminum intakes. You can have'em coated though. Also, the Syclone/Typhoon V6 is MPFI, not SFI. It fires all 6 injectors at once. For a port injection setup, you could use an intake manifold and fuel injector hardware from a 93-99? 4.3 H.O. V6 which was a popular option in the S-trucks. It has nice long torquey runners.. The EMC used in Syclones was the 87-90 turbo sunbird (1227749) unit. Can we talk you into a blower or a turbo? The chip already exists.. 8-) HTH Mike V > I'm thinking if a lousy carburetor is so expensive, what about using EFI? > I scanned the DIY-EFI archives for 4.3L, and discovered the preferred 4.3L > EFI is the extremely rare SFI used on the Syclone, and the almost-as-good > second-best is the CIS (one injector, six ports). However, the CIS system > seems to have an aluminum intake manifold, so I don't think I can use it > without the added expense of "fresh-water" cooling. Volvo and MerCruiser > sell V6 engines with TBI EFI, but these are much newer and rarer than > 4bbls, so I haven't even bothered asking about junked ones. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 23:34:00 -0400 From: Paul Tholey Subject: parts parts parts Okay fellas, I have been getting re-settled cause I changed ISP. I have beel wheelin' and dealin' with you guys for some time. There are a few loose ends I need to tie up. I beleive I owe a couple of people some wire pigtails. You know who you are, so drop me a line so we can square. For the rest of the list. I am still pulling from my local U-Pull-It yard. Most of the cars are everyday stuff up to 1992. A while back I grabbed bunch of 730 ecm's and harnesses cause I needed money for a trip to Bike Week. Thanks so much for the support. I ended up running out of time before I filled everyones orders. Gosh. This sounds like I could go into business. Anyways, if anyone still wants me to look for parts, I will. This gives me an excuse to stay at the yard all week, and look for the ever elusive 749! The deal remains, 730 ecm are going for $35, and harnesses are $100. I do on occasion run into some TBI SBC trucks. Sorry guys, no TPI and the sort. I know the 727 ecm is getting popular but I don't have any yet. The best I can do is make a list of orders and send the stuff as I get it. Thanks again, Paul Tholey ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 00:04:40 -0400 From: Shannen Durphey Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #216 Stuart Hastings wrote: > > I'm interested in improving the performance of my boat. > > Most marinized car > engines have water-jacketed exhaust manifolds, because anything as hot as > an exhaust manifold is a fire hazard on a boat. I think this means that an > EGO is pretty much out of the question on a boat engine, Mount your sensor in the exhaust crossover of the intake. I gather (from reading the DIY-EFI archives &etc) that > balance-shaft V6 TBI systems are fairly common (read "cheap") in > junkyards; they were used in El Caminos, Caprices, and Astros. I haven't > actually seen one, so I don't know if the intake manifold is Aluminum or > Iron. Aluminum. >Said donor vehicles probably all have balance shafts underneath > their intake manifolds, and roller camshafts for reduced friction. Worked on an early "Marinized" 4.3, roughly 88 vintage. Had aftermarket roller cam installed by Mercruiser. > I'll interject something about my own capabilities here. I'm a programmer > by trade, and while it sounds fun to disassemble ROMs and tweak BL tables > with a laptop while under way, I don't have time for such a big project. > EFI for my boat is only feasible if I can get a stock system from a junked > car that will tolerate the marine environment and "bolt-up" readily. > Ideally, I'd like to buy a complete system from one donor car, including > distributor, intake, TBI, computer, sensors, and fuel pump. I can > probably deal with some throttle bracket fabrication, new fuel lines, and > I think I can add a fuel pump to my boat's gas tank. However, if an EFI > project gets any bigger, I can't handle it at this stage of my life (I > have four kids, oldest is 8; they are why I have the boat :-). Marine Holley system an option? > I presume that a > properly-installed TBI system won't leak gas or fumes into the bilge. > Correct? EFI systems need a vapor handling system. If hot fuel circulates back to the tank, you get vapor build up. Putting the return line close to the tank may cure this problem, but may allow vapors to form in the TB supply system. > > 5. My Prestolite non-electronic "marine" distributor has fine metal > screening glued over the bottom vent holes. Can I "marinize" an electronic > TBI distributor by duplicating this screening? A distributorless system > elegantly avoids this, but then I presume I need the flywheel pickup that > may or may not fit my heavy, clutchless marine flywheel. And my marine > bellhousing probably doesn't have any provision for a crank sensor either. > GM TBI as used on the 4.3 uses the distributor for the reference signal, not a crank sensor > 6. Are there any blatant misconceptions in my thinking, outlined above? > > 7. If an appropriate TBI system exists (cheap, powerful, > marine-compatible), what donor cars should I look for? Pickups, S-10, Astro vans are the best choices IMHO. Again, is aftermarket an option? > > 8. Would I be smarter to grit my teeth and buy a used 4bbl for $450? Ummm.. Do you really enjoy making changes to a working system? > > 9. Would I be smarter yet to forget the whole project, because the > existing 2bbl works fine, and an additional 30HP (17%) won't improve the > boat's performance by very much ;-) ? Depends on your willingness to invest time, and your level of patience if things don't work out as planned. > > My research so far has been a few Fuel Injection books, and the DIY-EFI > archives, and the DIY-EFI stuff is much more useful. I'm very impressed > with the depth of the technical discussions on this list; thus far, the > price of my research has been inversely proportional to its value :-) . > Somewhere around here there's an address to send donations. ; ) > Thanks in advance, You're welcome. Shannen > > stuart hastings > stuart@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 22:46:23 -0600 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Engine load vs RPM and torque >In a message dated 4/8/99 8:11:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, bearbvd@xxx.net >writes: > >> as much as I like the forged (6061 alloy) Alcoa wheels, even >> they crack quite a lot in the wrong kind of service! >> >> Regards, Greg >> > >Well, I just HAVE to put my $.02 in! >When I was in the Army, we used two different types of wheels on our M60 >based tanks, steel and alum. The steel wheels would bend frequently and need >to be replaced when convenient, but the aluminum wheels ... they were >constantly BREAKING and of course required immediate replacement if you >didn't want to drive around on your hubs. >I have not been too fond of aluminum wheels ever since, no matter how >'faddish' they may be. ESPECIALLY on trucks. I mean, what's the point? Is >the few pounds you save really going to help the handling with a live axle >suspension? But then most people with trucks (SUVs) these days won't ever >see a dirt road, much less off-road, anyway. But the idea of alum. wheels on >a truck is stupid if you ask me. On a semi truck, Alcoas can increase payload over 1000 lbs.!! That translates to $$$, not better handling. They do also run a lot truer, thus increasing tire life, and suspension parts life--which means more $$$$. These are proven facts in big time fleet use--Even with replacing the cracked ones, they PAY for themselves rather handsomely!!! Another factor with 24.5" wheels is the much lower polar moment of the Alcoas, which helps fuel economy a tad. The thing that brings on cracks in the Alcoas is lots of tight, slow turns with a loaded truck. Straight down the interstate, they last almost indefinitely. Fuel tankers going over Loveland Pass (no hazardous loads through the tunnels under the divide on I-70) eat up Alcoas at an impressive rate because of all the hairpin turns. Greg > >Ted ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 23:48:02 -0700 From: "Peter Fenske" Subject: RE: Halp Diamond Star Motoring Hi All Thanks to David, Bruce and Mike as well as others for help with the 2.0 mitsibushi.. Prob was a broken exhaust cam.. Cam sensor is driven off intake cam broken halfway to be exact.. Well hope is not an interference engine.. Oh yes went to trade show today.. The auto xray guy showed me their new up grade for the autoxray which will do both domestic and foreign OBD11.. Price for the upgrade is 199$ can and 47 for cable. I will believe when I get it. :peter ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V4 #218 ***************************** 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".