[Diy_efi] Spark Plug readings

[Perry Harrington]

On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 06:33:57PM -0400, Brian Renegar wrote:
> Jeez Perry.  If you really wanted to pick on me, you could have just sent 
> me a private message.  Anyways, comments to your responses follow....
> 

Not picking on you, saving time and bandwidth.  It's amazing how much
bandwidth can be saved by eliminating speculation.

> 
> >BTW, why are you using the F303 cam?  An E303 or stock 5.0 cam would be
> >better.  The F303 isn't designed for turbo apps.  The E303 has 0 overlap
> >and the stock has somewhere like -6 degrees or more of overlap.  The stock
> >cobra cam has -4 to -6 degrees of overlap and more duration than a stock
> >5.0 cam.
> 
> The F303 cam IS designed to be a forced induction cam.  At .050" lift, it 
> has -2* overlap, whereas the E303 has 0*.  So it has LESS overlap than the 
> E cam, making it a better candidate for turbos.  Yes, the stock cam does do 
> well with turbos.  But only to about 500RWHP with 1.7 rockers.  After that 
> you just don't have the lift or duration necessary for higher HP levels.
> 

You're right, I was thinking of the Z or X.  One of them is popular for dumb
reasons.

> 
> >Also, why aren't you using the RT to log all this stuff?  You wouldn't
> >need a copilot if you were logging all the data.
> 
> I AM using the RT to log.  I just finished up my diy-wb yesterday, so I 
> will be logging that as well.  But the RT does not have the capability of 
> logging boost, and other things that I would like to monitor like the 
> Snap-On "ears" used to listen for inaudible pinging.
> 
> 
> >Also, is this a complete incon kit?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> >If you are having ANY detonation problems, there is something wrong.  You
> >said you calculated your compression ratio, could you post the following bits:
> 
> I am not having detonation.  The engine is running very rich.  Don't have 
> the information on the compression ratio right here.  I calculated that a 
> long time ago.  So I'm not sure where the info went off to.  But I took 
> into consideration all that you mentioned.
> 

I thought that's what started the conversation.  The plugs did look rather
inconsistent.

> 
> >I was looking at the incon kit a while back after reading about it.  The
> >people I talked to said that they had supply problems.  So, I started
> >thinking about TDC and their kits appear better engineered.  If I were you,
> >I would give Turbo People a call and get their advice.
> 
> It is true that Incon appears to be going under, or has gone under.  But 
> the quality of the kit is top notch.  Why do you say TDC's are better 
> engineered?

I've read a lot of good things from racers who have used TDC products.  They
are one of the more popular suppliers, and their kits come in stages rather than
"here you are".

> 
> 
> >Oh, another thing, when you 'command' a 10.8:1 AFR from the EEC-IV, you aren't
> >getting 10.8:1.  That is a pseudo AFR.  The Ford computer calculates the AFR
> >based on MAF and injector size.  Since the injector size is usually different
> >for the low and high slopes, it interpolates.  The real reason for the low
> >and high slopes is to get the car to run right and idle at low RPMS.  The
> >injector isn't really as sloppy as ford makes you believe.  Also, very few
> >people and tuners use the actual MAF curve, they just screw with the CID 
> >value.
> >This is successful for some, but it further skews what you 'command' from the
> >computer.  When you are 'command'ing 13.2:1, it could really be 14:1.  You
> >can verify this using widebands or narrowbands with datalogging against the
> >computer to find the stoic crossing.  You need to determine what your fudge
> >factor is.
> 
> I understand all of that.  Injector high slope has nothing to do with 
> running at WOT though.  Don't know why you threw that in there.  I have the 
> MAF correctly entered, and use the Ford Lightning values for the 42# 
> injectors.  Once I get everything completely dialed in, if it commands a 
> 10.8:1 AFR, it WILL be at 10.8:1.
> 

I'm just saying that from experience the ford computer doesn't.  I've got 24lb
injectors and a 75mm race bullet with a specific calibration curve, and it still
isn't correct.  I don't do any CID fudging.  Part of the problem is that the
Ford computer code is derived from the SD code.  They convert mass into SD for
calculating fuel, from what I've heard.  Otherwise you wouldn't have the tables
laid out the way they are, you'd have MAF vs RPM = fuel with the other scalars
applied after.

> 
> >BTW, is this a street legal car?  If not, ditch the stock computer.  I only
> >have the stock computer because I *have to* for CA emissions purposes.
> 
> Yes it is a street legal car.  But even if it were not, I would keep the 
> EEC in there.
> 

The problem isn't the EEC, it's the people who make product for the EEC.  They
make a lot of money by NOT telling you information.  I hate the whole EEC scene
because of that.  If the GM guys can share information AND schematics, why can't
the EEC guys?  The guys at diablosport are about as up front as I've seen.  I
have even given thought to being a dealer because of their technology and their
philosophy.  I've got an EEC-Tuner and Autologic chip.  The politics tied up
in those two products is just absolutely f**king rediculous.  And the others
are just as embroiled (yes, even tweecer, more so).

> 
> >BTW, you can get a standalone datalogger called the SNEEC from Race systems.
> >It does EEC-IV datalogging and is supposedly fairly robust.  Check out
> >http://racesystems.com/
> 
> Not for the price he's asking on that.  I can build my own data logging 
> system for less than $50.  I already have in place a Dataq logger.  That 
> plus the data logging capabilities of the TwEECer RT are all that I need.

He is pricey, but I don't think he has fully exploited the potential of the
hardware yet.  I'm developing a data acquisition system as well, cheaper though.
Recent events have put off the release for a considerable amount of time
unfortunately (like not having a job in 2 months).

> 
> Brian
> 

--Perry

-- 
Perry Harrington			Data Acquisition & Instrumentation, Inc	
perry at dainst dot com					 http://www.dainst.com/

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty or safety. Nor, are they likely to end up with either.
                             -- Benjamin Franklin

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi