Sorry, I'm gonna go offtopic one last time. Idk how I missed this post...

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

How could I guess you'd bring up the ZR1 round the Nurburgring. That old chestnut. :rolleyes:


Ok, yes, you have a car that is very quick around the Nurburgring.. normally compared to the GTR or something... but what you're not so happy to mention is that if you give it to any normal enthusiast, they'd be faster in sometime less... archaic.. IE anyone that's not a professional racing driver would be quicker in something easier and more I mean not saying it's a BAD car, but leaf springs? Again, modernize!

Most RWD cars require more skill than AWD cars...that's just the nature of the beast. Sure, if you want the easy way out, go AWD. And if the ZR1 is so "archaic" as you say, what does that say about the slower, technology-stuffed GTR? Technology does NOT always mean superiority, no matter how much you argue.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

Even the Z06 you posted uses 2 valves per cylinder! Just like most American engines.

Yet it still beats "high tech" Lambos with ease for a fraction of the price. Next!

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

The 4cyl cars we have get's us reliably, cheaply, cleanly and economically from A-B in relative, so mock all you like. But we have better technology, it's just the way it is..

I'll say it again...technology does not directly equate to superiority. In many cases, it just adds more stuff that can break. My Tbird's original engine had 155,000 miles on it and I took it EVERYWHERE, beat the snot out of it at the track (including 2 hour drives to the 1/4 mile, racing it, then driving it 2 hours home), and drove it 300 miles a week at times. It never left me stranded and always got 22-28mpg.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

As for economy, well, I don't drive cars, I just ride bikes, so I can only comment on my families cars..

Wow that explains A LOT. You ride bikes, yet you seem to think you're the #1 authority on technologically advanced cars.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

My Dad (only person I ever really go in the car with) had a 2.2 Vectra.. It was quick..certainly quick enough without constantly wishing you had more power.. (150bhp or so.. most American cars with 3.5L engines kick out that amount of power! :jawdrop yet he managed to AVERAGE (not highway, AVERAGE) 38.6mpg. On the motorway, at around 65-75mph, it would be showing 50mpg on the trip computer.. make of that what you will.

Seriously? You need to do some research...American cars were puttin out 150+hp with small 2.3L Turbos back in the mid 80s. That's just 1 example...maybe one day you'll open your eyes and find the rest for yourself.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

Besides who NEEDS a V8 kicking out 2## bhp when you can get a 2.5 or 3L petrol that does the same? But maybe that's just me?

Who said I needed it? Who NEEDS a 400hp 4cyl? Who NEEDS a 350hp 6cyl? We do it cause of fun. Also, I'd love to see you put out the power my car is for the same budget with a 4 cylinder. Turbo kits alone (for comparable hp numbers) are more than what my whole engine build cost, and I could have even done my build for much cheaper than I did (I took lots of precautions). Not to mention that even if I had a 4cyl or 6cyl with the same, or more power, it'd still be nowhere near as fun for me; the torque and sound of a V8 is where it's at.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

Your video... impressive.. but doesn't sound like short shifting or anything less than full throttle to me..

The gas pedal was to the floor, but when dad installed the new carb by himself, he didn't get to adjust the throttle cable. We checked it a few weeks ago and the throttle cable is not fully opening the carb. Also, in the video, dad was shifting at ~5500rpm. That 385ci V8 is good for 6000-6500 easy. We've had it up to/a little over 6k a few times...it's awesome.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

Besides, my motto is "any moron can go fast in a straight line. The true moron is the one that crashed into a tree at the next corner!"

I'd love to see you try handling a 9 second car down a dragstrip, much less building it yourself in the first place.



Ok, resume on-topicness. BTW, I really like that VX220. *drool*

And you think I can be arsed to do all this again and win? Make another thread, if you so wish. This is not the place.

Oh waow, after all this time you finally decide it should be taken to another thread, great idea sherlock!

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

And you think I can be arsed to do all this again and win? Make another thread, if you so wish. This is not the place.

You won't win because you are wrong and know nothing about it.

Quote from G!NhO :

You won't win because you are wrong and know nothing about it.

Sure I don't. Go suck a Jeep.

And yes Bawbag whatever floats your boat.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

Sure I don't. Go suck a Jeep.

And yes Bawbag whatever floats your boat.

You go suck your bike then! fool! pirate:

I already do! At least I can admit it.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

And you think I can be arsed to do all this again and win? Make another thread, if you so wish. This is not the place.

Good point, I agree. Here we go:

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=58665

Quote from jibber :

It's loosing 58hp on the drivetrain?!

Highly unlikely, just a typical inflated rolling road reading to please the Max Power lot.

Quote from ajp71 :

Highly unlikely, just a typical inflated rolling road reading to please the Max Power lot.

Wow, people are stuuuuuuuupid in here. Here are my dyno sheet readings, with low oil pressure and wiped out main/rod bearings:

http://img.photobucket.com/alb ... ine%20Project/240rwhp.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/alb ... ine%20Project/300rwtq.jpg

With fresh bearings in good shape (a lot less resistance in the engine) and good oil pressure, lets say it adds 5rwhp to give me 245rwhp. Account for 15% drivetrain loss, and you get 281.75. Now lets go back and look at what I said:

Quote from kingcars :

"bhp" of my car is more around 280-290ish hp, accounting for drivetrain loss.

Quote from kingcars :

For starters, 250hp < 250rwhp. 250rwhp = ~290hp. Drivetrain loss.

So what were you saying about inflated readings?

On another note, check out the torque curve on the 300rwtq run...never drops below 250rwtq, even at 1600rpm.

You're car is producing more than twice the power at the wheels so if efficency is the same drivetrain losses are going to be twice as great.

Quote from ajp71 :

You're car is producing more than twice the power at the wheels so if efficency is the same drivetrain losses are going to be twice as great.

Exactly. Drivetrain loss becomes greater with the more hp you put out. Putting out 1000hp at the crank only translates to ~850 at the wheels.

Didn't know they could put boats on dyno's

Quote from kingcars :

Wow, people are stuuuuuuuupid in here. Here are my dyno sheet readings, with low oil pressure and wiped out main/rod bearings:

http://img.photobucket.com/alb ... ine%20Project/240rwhp.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/alb ... ine%20Project/300rwtq.jpg

With fresh bearings in good shape (a lot less resistance in the engine) and good oil pressure, lets say it adds 5rwhp to give me 245rwhp. Account for 15% drivetrain loss, and you get 281.75. Now lets go back and look at what I said:





So what were you saying about inflated readings?

On another note, check out the torque curve on the 300rwtq run...never drops below 250rwtq, even at 1600rpm.

you drive a diesel?
power drop off at 5k rpm is, well, sad to say the least...

Should post up my most recent dyno plot

Quote from Osco :

you drive a diesel?
power drop off at 5k rpm is, well, sad to say the least...

Should post up my most recent dyno plot

The RPM on the sheets are a bit off; HP drop off was at 5500, not 5000. Note that on the 240rwhp run, it shows the decline at "5000" but on the 300rwtq run it drops at "4500." I took the car to 5500rpm and 5000rpm on those runs respectively; during the calibration part at the beginning, I messed up so thats why the RPMs are slightly off. Also, this is using a stock 1988 Mustang cam. Besides, keeping the power band low means more fun on the street. Getting a bigger cam or degreeing the stock one more could yield higher rpm band, but wouldn't be quite as fun from stop light to stop light, where it sees most of its use. Also, this is a budget build. And for a very mild build, it makes great power. Overall power curve on those sheets is very good. People like you are, well, sad to say the least.

Quote from DejaVu :

Didn't know they could put boats on dyno's

Quote from BigPeBe :

200bhp from 2 litre Pinto is very reasonable. It is possible to produce that with good headwork and with good cam and 45 sidedrafts and you are still able to produce a nice torque curve with the engine pulling nicely from lower revs too. But for my knowledge the problem is that 200bhp usually requires revs going up to 8k and I have heard that the original internals can't take +7k without the fear of destroying the pistons. Same goes for the very popular Mahle pistons. If you wan't to be able to rev it safely a lot you need more expensive internals to take it.

If I would now have the money, I would probably take the current engine out. Use the original 205 iS block and internals and get a big valve head and select a "fast road" cam with powerband going "only" up to 7k. And then get 45 Dellortos and get them tuned in dyno. 170bhp would be very likely possible and I could set the rev limit somewhere around 7k, or just be sure to not give it more.

But oh well this is just all day dreams. I have to do my mandatory military service so I'm not going to able to make money probably at least for a year now.

Nothing to do with this, but thought it might make more sense this way....
Where abouts is the idle control valve on the Efi system? Have you got a diagram/photo? I get rich running on idle and its sluggish at low rpm. But pulling off the vacum pipe to the fuel regulator sorts out the idle problems and it idles fine. Any ideas? Been told to clean the ICV out but not sure how or where it is.

Quote from kingcars :

The RPM on the sheets are a bit off; HP drop off was at 5500, not 5000. Note that on the 240rwhp run, it shows the decline at "5000" but on the 300rwtq run it drops at "4500." I took the car to 5500rpm and 5000rpm on those runs respectively; during the calibration part at the beginning, I messed up so thats why the RPMs are slightly off. Also, this is using a stock 1988 Mustang cam. Besides, keeping the power band low means more fun on the street. Getting a bigger cam or degreeing the stock one more could yield higher rpm band, but wouldn't be quite as fun from stop light to stop light, where it sees most of its use. Also, this is a budget build. And for a very mild build, it makes great power. Overall power curve on those sheets is very good. People like you are, well, sad to say the least.

I was asking a genuine question about your dyno plot and specifically the dramatic power dropoff at the before-mentioned rpm range, as it resembles a plot for a diesel eninge (at least is does to me). I did not criticise you or your car in any meaningfull way, so I think your 'insult' was completely uncalled for. But hey, if that's what floats your boat... (pun intended yes)

Quote from Osco :

I was asking a genuine question about your dyno plot and specifically the dramatic power dropoff at the before-mentioned rpm range, as it resembles a plot for a diesel eninge (at least is does to me). I did not criticise you or your car in any meaningfull way, so I think your 'insult' was completely uncalled for. But hey, if that's what floats your boat... (pun intended yes)

So calling my engine "sad, to say the least" isn't an insult? Sorry for the confusion....?

BTW - the power dropoff is just where I let off the gas. I didn't build it with the intention of high rpm. For a street car going stop light to stop light, low end power is where the fun is. So it's not a diesel...just a stock cammed Mustang 5.0L V8 with heads, intake, and 1.7 roller rockers. The stock cam is known for great low end power and nice power curves (but not high rpm obviously haha), though we did set the cam at 2 degrees retard to give it a little bit more top end; when degreed stock, they start to lose power around 4500ish. Oh, and a ~3300lb car isn't really a boat anymore by today's standards .

please don't twist my words. If you would've read my post more carefully then you would've seen that I meant the significant power drop off seemed a bit sad to me. Whether you let off or that's just where that motor stops making any power is another debate. I just noticed, because I couldn't see myself shifting at 5k rpm, as that's not even where I make peak power and still have 2k rpm left Just different engine characteristics.

For the thread's sake, I wont go into the power that a V8 (could) make vs. an inline 4/5/6 cylinder engine. I believe S14 and another guy already have a pissy-fit thread about that

Quote from robt :

Nothing to do with this, but thought it might make more sense this way....
Where abouts is the idle control valve on the Efi system? Have you got a diagram/photo? I get rich running on idle and its sluggish at low rpm. But pulling off the vacum pipe to the fuel regulator sorts out the idle problems and it idles fine. Any ideas? Been told to clean the ICV out but not sure how or where it is.

It's this thingy here.

Oh and you may notice that I don't have the wires connected to it, that's because I don't use it. At least during summer the ICV isn't really needed, it usually only helps a bit during the startup and raises the idle when the engine is cold. I plugged it off because it only made my idle to randomly go up and down and sometimes it even kept open thru a pull so the AFR went a bit more lean than I wanted it to do.

The ICV shouldn't really affect the AFR, it only gives a bit more air to the engine during idle if needed to correct the RPM.

Maybe your fuel pressures are off? Try changing the fuel pressure regulator to another one.

Or maybe it's the MAF? My MAF is modified so it "fools" the ECU to give richer AFR, but my engine is a bit tuned so it's needed. If your engine is stock it should also have stock MAF.
There is also the screw on the MAF from where you can adjust the idle AFR, tho it doesn't have a big effect so if your AFR is massively rich it doesn't probably help.

Quote from kingcars :

....

I agree with you, but there is no way you could win on this forum, as it is full with "european car lovers/american car haters" who think they are always right.

So i suggest you to stop trying to debate them as you just cannot win from these pussy car fanboys.

Quote from BigPeBe :

It's this thingy here.

Oh and you may notice that I don't have the wires connected to it, that's because I don't use it. At least during summer the ICV isn't really needed, it usually only helps a bit during the startup and raises the idle when the engine is cold. I plugged it off because it only made my idle to randomly go up and down and sometimes it even kept open thru a pull so the AFR went a bit more lean than I wanted it to do.

The ICV shouldn't really affect the AFR, it only gives a bit more air to the engine during idle if needed to correct the RPM.

Maybe your fuel pressures are off? Try changing the fuel pressure regulator to another one.

Or maybe it's the MAF? My MAF is modified so it "fools" the ECU to give richer AFR, but my engine is a bit tuned so it's needed. If your engine is stock it should also have stock MAF.
There is also the screw on the MAF from where you can adjust the idle AFR, tho it doesn't have a big effect so if your AFR is massively rich it doesn't probably help.

Thanks PeBe,

Took off the ICV and opened it up and cleaned it with carb cleaner (Tip from an "efi specialist") Seems to have helped a touch, but its still a bit random on idle. Havnt tried it unplugged, all i know is that using the vacumm pipe to the regulator unplugged (like an extra air intake) makes everything run fine! Havent got a spare regulator, and dont fancy spending lots of money on a new one! going to try a few more things first. Thanks for the help

Quote from Osco :

please don't twist my words. If you would've read my post more carefully then you would've seen that I meant the significant power drop off seemed a bit sad to me. Whether you let off or that's just where that motor stops making any power is another debate. I just noticed, because I couldn't see myself shifting at 5k rpm, as that's not even where I make peak power and still have 2k rpm left Just different engine characteristics.

Well then I apologize for misinterpreting your post. However, you could have brought it up in another manner...maybe just ask me why the power dropped off there instead of calling it sad.

Quote from G!NhO :

I agree with you, but there is no way you could win on this forum, as it is full with "european car lovers/american car haters" who think they are always right.

So i suggest you to stop trying to debate them as you just cannot win from these pussy car fanboys.

Yeah I'm finding this out very quickly. And I think for the first time ever in my life, I have gotten tired of debating such a topic.

Quote from kingcars :

And I think for the first time ever in my life, I have gotten tired of debating such a topic.

Good, then stop.

Quote from robt :

Thanks PeBe,

Took off the ICV and opened it up and cleaned it with carb cleaner (Tip from an "efi specialist") Seems to have helped a touch, but its still a bit random on idle. Havnt tried it unplugged, all i know is that using the vacumm pipe to the regulator unplugged (like an extra air intake) makes everything run fine! Havent got a spare regulator, and dont fancy spending lots of money on a new one! going to try a few more things first. Thanks for the help

Yeah the ICV doesn't probably have anything to do with the rich idle.

I dunno how it is around there, but around here those stock fuel pressure regulators are really easy to find as used parts and well very cheap too. Even I have few of them lying around and wouldn't probably ask more than a fiver for one. Brakers etc. should have those available.

It could also be one of the temperature sensors, intake or the one measuring the engine temp. If the ECU thinks it's running cold or getting cold air it should be injecting more fuel than necessary.

But well I hope you find the real cause. These EFi systems can sometimes be a real pain in the ass when something is not working correctly, it can be a one little cheap part causing big problems.