Rear gear selection - Page 2

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last
Results 16 to 30 of 42
  1. #16

    Default

    Attached are cam specs, and the dyno sheet.
    Name:  35BB4D1F-8113-45AD-BD0E-B372AFFFCB2E_1590173388177.jpg
Views: 37
Size:  43.7 KB
    Name:  8E61AAF6-D4D5-418F-9105-B15E420651F2_1590173422399.jpg
Views: 35
Size:  48.2 KB
    As I said, I’ve been steadily increasing launch rpm by the end of last year, it may very well have more in it that I didn’t get a chance to see due to the end of the season.

    I do know according to the go-pro when I’m at 4k about to launch, I’ve built 10psi on the transbrake.

    One thing to keep in mind was that was I found out I had low compression in about 6 cylinders. So, was I down on power? Probably so. At least a bit.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ModularFords.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17

    Default

    Here’s a better dyno picture...Name:  945B709B-2536-4637-BF20-0AD0EB4EB5CC_1590174157249.jpg
Views: 33
Size:  44.8 KB

  4. #18

    Default

    You might want to check out where the cams were actually installed, Matt.

    In one location, the cam card indicates the cams are installed straight up (0˚ Adv/Ret) which would imply a 2˚ overlap as illustrated by Mark Olson's CamChart S/W below;

    Name:  114 LSA 0? Adv.png
Views: 33
Size:  67.5 KB

    More towards the top of the cam card, the card indicates the cams are ground on a 114˚ C/L for the intake and a 122˚ C/L for the exhaust which would be a 118˚ LSA advanced 4˚. That would look like the image below;

    Name:  118 LSA 4? Adv.png
Views: 36
Size:  68.7 KB

    Of course neither of these two different phasing may be what the cams actually are or are installed at. It is possible they are different and were installed with a third phasing that was yet different than either of those above.

    I am beginning to think it might be a good thing to check them out just to know what they really are and where they really are installed at. BTW they certainly are not shrinking violets in the valve lift department.



    Ed
    Last edited by eschaider; 05-22-2020 at 02:54 PM. Reason: Spelling and Grammar

  5. Remove Advertisements
    ModularFords.com
    Advertisements
     

  6. #19

    Default

    Ed, I installed them with the comp cams adjustable gears you recommended. And I installed them with dial indicator on valves, I believe you were holding my hand the whole time 😂

    If you would like I can go back through that thread and my notes and pictures and get the numbers.

  7. #20

    Default

    https://www.modularfords.com/showthr...259311?page=15
    Somewhere around post 145.

    To jog the memory, I set both banks at the 114 ICL which I found out was 11 degrees off if I were to have just installed dot to dot. Basically one bank was advanced and the other retarded to meet that ICL

  8. #21

    Default

    I went back and re-read your post (here is the link=> https://www.modularfords.com/threads/259311-Turbo-Engine-Re-Build/page5?p=2262567&viewfull=1#post2262567 I had forgotten that you did the phasing and you documented it. You are correct the cams are at 114.

    When you describe cam phasing use the advance and retard representations as modifiers to the actual cam phasing. For example if the cam is cut on 114˚*centers as yours are, then installing them at 114 is putting them in straight up. If you install them at 112 and 116 then you have advanced the cam(s) 2˚. To get that 2˚ advance may require an offset at the cam of a different number like 4˚, 6˚, 8˚. That offset is typically compensating for one of two things.

    • The first. is a predisposition of some cam grinders to build a small advance into the cam for low speed performance. They know most of the cams will end up in street vehicles and poor bottom end is a kiss of death for the cam manufacturer follow on sales.

    • The second, is just a sloppy core supplier that did not get the cam keyway precisely at or near the zero point. Cam cores have additional material on the raw lobes which the cam grinder removes more or les of for a particular cam profile. If the core supplier is far enough off the mark then the finished goods cam can be a few dereees off of where you might expect it to be with the chains and dots "lined up".


    Another potential whoops you want to be attentive to, as the engine builder (particularly on the 4V engines), is the fit of the exhaust cams in the heads. Some core suppliers will provide the exhaust cams with five ten thousandths (one half thousandth) additional on the cam journals. I have never gotten a good explanation of why. When you install the cams in the heads the intakes spin effortlessly. The exhausts have a very noticeable drag associated with rotating them. The drag is the additional five, ten thousandths of an inch diameter on the journals. Most of the time not a problem but then there is always the one time it is a problem. In my experience it has only been a problem when I build the engine. Everyone else seems to get a pass on the problem.

    Matt's engine is already built so the next comments are for everyone else who later reads this thread. The last thing to get oiled in an OHC engine is the cams. That means during the build cycle the last thing you do as you assemble the cams to the heads is to add a single drop of ProLong (<= clickable) to each cam saddle and cam cap to provide lubrication at cold start before the oil system can deliver lube to the journals. Then always run ProLong in the oil to protect the top of the engine when you garage the car for a week or more because the lube will run out of the space between the cm journals and the cam saddles asking the cm to scuff the saddles.

    Parting thoughts on the Prolong. A 12oz bottle costs somewhere between $15 and $20. The gallon bottle on the clickable link above costs $64 and has 128 oz of ProLOng in the bottle. Do the math — its way less expensive to by the gallon bottle.

  9. #22

    Default

    I also like to pre-lube using the Peterson pump a few minutes prior to starting.

    As Kevin stated it’s simply not leaving in a hurry. That may be because it was getting low on power (low compression) or there simply wasn’t enough launch rpm.

    Because the 60’ is done solely in first gear I want to focus on it more than the 1-2 shift.

  10. #23

    Default

    The Peterson remote with the built in lube pump is excellent for preluding an engine that has set for a while prior to starting it.


    Ed

  11. #24

    Default

    Ed,
    Regarding the Pro Long lubricant. Aside from the single drop on the cam saddles, do you add it anywhere else during a new build? Also, is it safe to say you do not want to add any to the oil on a newly built engine until it has had a full break in and the rings have seated? Conservative assembly locations aside that is.

    Thanks
    Ken

  12. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 4sdvenom View Post
    Ed,
    Regarding the Pro Long lubricant. Aside from the single drop on the cam saddles, do you add it anywhere else during a new build?
    No.


    Quote Originally Posted by 4sdvenom View Post
    Also, is it safe to say you do not want to add any to the oil on a newly built engine until it has had a full break in and the rings have seated? Conservative assembly locations aside that is.

    Thanks
    Ken
    Absolutely none to the oil until the rings are seated. At assembly use TotalSeal's QuickSeat ring seating secret sauce.


    Ed

  13. #26

    Default

    Ed, I have changed the shift point to 7500rpm, will see how it does but it should keep the engine and boost in the powerband and take care of the 1-2 shift.

    With that being said, the 60’ is ALL 1st gear, so I’m still on the hunt.

    With 10psi boost (all I can build on transbrake) and launching at 43-4500rpm I’m going to go out on a limb and say that watching the past videos, it has a bog. I say that because it physically does not have the power at the launch to break the tires loose and traction is too good.

    Since I starting going to a better track and changed to slicks, I’ve never had the issue with traction, and that may be the reason I’m seeing this “bog.” The bog is defined as “high rpm, then release the t-brake, the suspension does its thing, transfers weight, and tires crinkle....then rpm drops and about 20’ out starts picking up again.“

    I also have the option of launching at a higher rpm instead of changing gearing, but I admit, I’m an amateur at all these minute detail that go into the launch. What I’ve read, studied, and seen is that I need to be on the very fine line of spinning off the line and maximum traction, and as of right now with no immediate changes to power or boost, I’m just getting maximum traction by weight transfer and wheel speed is too low to actively move the car forward.

  14. #27

    Default

    Don’t get me wrong, it’s not a bog similar to a clutch drop at 6k rpm in a Toyota Corolla on slicks, It just seems to struggle between the power of the engine and the traction at the ground.

    Ideally I believe (and I could be wrong) that when you launch at “X” rpm you should not lose or stay at that rpm for very long. I feel like I drag out that launch rpm a good 20’ until it starts building more steam, and is able to move the car forwards faster.

    Again, I could be completely going about this wrong, but I feel if I can instantaneously raise rpm off launch and wheel speed off the line it would yield a faster 60.’

    It may be worth looking back through the datalog info and seeing if there is an rpm drop on launch, and if so how long the dip stays before increasing. By comparing rpm to wheel speed for that first 1.4 seconds I should be able to deduce whether or not I’m applying enough power to make a clean acceleration or if I need to take in factors such as launch rpm or gearing. Even though it may only be milliseconds, in my understanding you should never lull or dip in rpm off launch.

  15. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CrucialProspect View Post
    Ed, I have changed the shift point to 7500rpm, will see how it does but it should keep the engine and boost in the powerband and take care of the 1-2 shift.

    With that being said, the 60’ is ALL 1st gear, so I’m still on the hunt.

    With 10psi boost (all I can build on transbrake) and launching at 43-4500rpm I’m going to go out on a limb and say that watching the past videos, it has a bog. I say that because it physically does not have the power at the launch to break the tires loose and traction is too good.

    Since I starting going to a better track and changed to slicks, I’ve never had the issue with traction, and that may be the reason I’m seeing this “bog.” The bog is defined as “high rpm, then release the t-brake, the suspension does its thing, transfers weight, and tires crinkle....then rpm drops and about 20’ out starts picking up again.“

    I also have the option of launching at a higher rpm instead of changing gearing, but I admit, I’m an amateur at all these minute detail that go into the launch. What I’ve read, studied, and seen is that I need to be on the very fine line of spinning off the line and maximum traction, and as of right now with no immediate changes to power or boost, I’m just getting maximum traction by weight transfer and wheel speed is too low to actively move the car forward.

    A good portion of your problem is likely ECU related. The OEM ECU was not designed to properly launch the car with turbos at the track. It was designed to meet EPA mandated emissions. When you finally switch to an aftermarket ECU you will find it easier to build boost at launch, control the engine power at launch, after launch, mid track and so on.

    That said you should be able to build more than 10 psi at launch with the OEM ECU. What happens just after launch will not be as easy to control as it will be with an aftermarket ECU but you will have some limited control. Additionally I would wait until you can build launch boost and then check your converter stall speed performance. The additional boost will give you more low speed torque and more stall as a result. I think you will find the stall creeping up to the low 5000 rpm range which is getting pretty close to a sweet spot.

    With respect to building boost, a number of the turbo guys at different times have commented that retarding the timing at staging allows the turbos to build higher boost for the launch. At the hit the timing is restored sufficiently to just creep up on the tire's traction threshold and then as rapidly as possible move up to MBT as you go down track. Thes kinds of tuning practices for race track operation will almost always require and aftermarket ECU with the features built into its software. Absent that you will only be able to get so far with the OEM ECU.

    You might want to take a hard look at the MS3Pro or the MS3Pro PnP versions that DIYAutoTune offers. The PnP version will run the instrument cluster and use the OEM wiring harness, The non-PnP version will not run the instrument cluster and requires you to build the wiring harness from their kit pieces.



    Ed

  16. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CrucialProspect View Post
    Don’t get me wrong, it’s not a bog similar to a clutch drop at 6k rpm in a Toyota Corolla on slicks, It just seems to struggle between the power of the engine and the traction at the ground.

    Ideally I believe (and I could be wrong) that when you launch at “X” rpm you should not lose or stay at that rpm for very long. I feel like I drag out that launch rpm a good 20’ until it starts building more steam, and is able to move the car forwards faster.

    Again, I could be completely going about this wrong, but I feel if I can instantaneously raise rpm off launch and wheel speed off the line it would yield a faster 60.’

    It may be worth looking back through the datalog info and seeing if there is an rpm drop on launch, and if so how long the dip stays before increasing. By comparing rpm to wheel speed for that first 1.4 seconds I should be able to deduce whether or not I’m applying enough power to make a clean acceleration or if I need to take in factors such as launch rpm or gearing. Even though it may only be milliseconds, in my understanding you should never lull or dip in rpm off launch.

    I suspect the data log will not show the engine loosing rpm. More likely it will show the engine laboring around launch rpm for a second or so and then ramping up the rpm scale as the car moves down track. The phenomena is caused by too tall of a first gear / ring gear / tire size combination for the torque the engine is capable of producing at launch.

    If the engine rpm and vehicle speed is about right at quarter mile, then your tire / ring and pinion selection is pretty close to the mark. The problem lies with the available engine power (torque) and first gear mechanical advantage. Because you can not change first gear, you only have engine torque to play with and that. requires more boost. This brings us back to the tune and the ECU issues in my previous post.


    Ed

  17. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eschaider View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by CrucialProspect View Post
    Don’t get me wrong, it’s not a bog similar to a clutch drop at 6k rpm in a Toyota Corolla on slicks, It just seems to struggle between the power of the engine and the traction at the ground.

    Ideally I believe (and I could be wrong) that when you launch at “X” rpm you should not lose or stay at that rpm for very long. I feel like I drag out that launch rpm a good 20’ until it starts building more steam, and is able to move the car forwards faster.

    Again, I could be completely going about this wrong, but I feel if I can instantaneously raise rpm off launch and wheel speed off the line it would yield a faster 60.’

    It may be worth looking back through the datalog info and seeing if there is an rpm drop on launch, and if so how long the dip stays before increasing. By comparing rpm to wheel speed for that first 1.4 seconds I should be able to deduce whether or not I’m applying enough power to make a clean acceleration or if I need to take in factors such as launch rpm or gearing. Even though it may only be milliseconds, in my understanding you should never lull or dip in rpm off launch.

    I suspect the data log will not show the engine loosing rpm. More likely it will show the engine laboring around launch rpm for a second or so and then ramping up the rpm scale as the car moves down track. The phenomena is caused by too tall of a first gear / ring gear / tire size combination for the torque the engine is capable of producing at launch.

    If the engine rpm and vehicle speed is about right at quarter mile, then your tire / ring and pinion selection is pretty close to the mark. The problem lies with the available engine power (torque) and first gear mechanical advantage. Because you can not change first gear, you only have engine torque to play with and that. requires more boost. This brings us back to the tune and the ECU issues in my previous post.


    Ed
    Engine rpm and vehicle speed probably isn’t correct. Running 1/8th mile, at a 6500rpm shift point I just shift into 3rd. But upping the shift rpm to 7500 I would be gaining 1000rpm in 1st gear, and 1000rpm in second.

    Not sure if the math involved to compute a complex equation. I would think it would require tire size, rear gear ratio, 1st gear ratio, 2nd gear ratio and rpm.

  18. Remove Advertisements
    ModularFords.com
    Advertisements
     

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last