2.8l v6 turbo charged? (Page 5/6)
Thunderstruck GT JAN 17, 12:39 PM

quote
Originally posted by Thunderstruck GT:


I doubt you are losing 8 lbs. with the radio and small speakers but lost weight is lost weight.

If you want to lose some significant weight, drill out the inner door shell.






quote
Originally posted by pmbrunelle:

I weighed the removed parts to come up with that 8 lb figure.

I'll leave my door beams and bumpers alone, I'm not really into weight reduction mods that adversely affect safety/comfort/appearance. I did the low-hanging fruit, but it stops there.



I never said anything about removing door beams.

You can show me where I "adversely affect safety/comfort/appearance"
pmbrunelle JAN 17, 01:18 PM
The discussion led to door beams after inner shells... follow the conversation better.
Honest Don JAN 17, 01:19 PM

quote
Originally posted by pmbrunelle:
It's a different feel than Don's, having the long shifting delays and respooling after each shift.




Have you thought about enabling Flatshift?
pmbrunelle JAN 17, 01:35 PM

quote
Originally posted by Honest Don:
Have you thought about enabling Flatshift?



In a traditional manual transmission powertrain, the engine is one entity (that is fully characterized by RPM/load), and the transmission is an independent entity. There does not need to be any interaction between the two systems.

Having any sort of automated interaction between the two systems seems like a driving aid to me, so it's a little bit contrary to my idea of a "pure sports car".

That said, I could change my mind one day, so when I did the wiring plan, I reserved a spot on the MS3X DB-37 connector for an eventual clutch switch. If I wanted to go this way, I would need to implement a clutch switch, probably with a permanent magnet + reed switch. It would not be overly difficult. Do reed switches bounce?

Edit: I was also thinking of trying flatshift without a clutch switch. In that plan, the ECU would recognize that if the driver hits the rev limiter but keeps his foot floored, it's because he wants a flatshift. So in that case, the RPM would be limited to some value above the expected RPM in the next gear. When the clutch grabs and brings the RPM down, the ECU knows the transmission is in-gear again, and the usual rev limiter can apply.

I like the idea of the software-only mod, since it's fully reversible, and more of a challenge to implement.

[This message has been edited by pmbrunelle (edited 01-17-2021).]

Honest Don JAN 17, 10:25 PM

quote
Originally posted by pmbrunelle:That said, I could change my mind one day, so when I did the wiring plan, I reserved a spot on the MS3X DB-37 connector for an eventual clutch switch. If I wanted to go this way, I would need to implement a clutch switch, probably with a permanent magnet + reed switch. It would not be overly difficult. Do reed switches bounce?



If they bounce, it can’t be much. If you’re looking for fancy, what about using a prox switch? No magnet necessary.




pmbrunelle JAN 17, 10:55 PM
Do you use that as an axis limit switch for machine tools?

Thinking about it some more, bounce is a moot point for a clutch switch.

In the real world, a driver could potentially hold the clutch pedal at the switchpoint transition indefinitely (perhaps oscillating about the transition), so the code must be written to work correctly with that input.

In that case, I might as well use a reed switch, even if it does bounce, considering that it can be a much simpler install (one wire grounding to chassis). No power needed.

With further reflection, I remembered that I used a reed switch for my backup lamps:
http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/142564.html

If I could use the same reed switch as for my backup lamps, that would be nice. I like parts standardization, where appropriate.
thesameguy JAN 18, 10:58 AM
These days, removing a Fiero's door impact beam probably doesn't matter. If a 2020 Malibu hits you, it's going through the door glass. The only thing low enough to hit a Fiero's side impact beam is a McLaren. Maybe the best solution for driver safety is to lower the car an increase the chance you just go underneath.
BillS JAN 18, 01:17 PM
I did this - twice, actually.

A company called Miller Woods used to offer a packaged kit to install an IHI turbo on a stock Fiero that would give 190-200 bhp reliably. I enjoyed the car (an 88 GT) for awhile but was building an improved engine for higher output at the same time.

I sourced a long stroke crankshaft out of a 3.1 (also used later in the 3.4) and had some special forged pistons made up to withstand higher boost (compression lowered to 8.5), a custom turbo friendly cam, various durability mods and several modifications to inlet and exhaust that removed bottlenecks. The result was 300 bhp and very significantly enhanced performance we were getting 0-60 in less than 5 sec. and 1/4 time right at 13 secs. It required premium gas and had a knock sensor that backed off timing if necessary as well as an over boost protector that cut fuel if you got too high (somewhere in the 10-12 psi range you hit the point where there is no gain with increased boost without installing an intercooler, which is a right PITA in a Fiero.

I drove the result for 15 years or so before I moved on to newer challenges and sold it. The car looked dead stock and was a lot of fun when other cars tried to out accelerate it as the weight at the rear of the Fiero favours excellent traction. It was faster than cars like the NSX and a dead heat with the twin turbo Toyota Supras.

A lot of people here will tell you not to waste your time on an engine with all the inherent breathing limitations of the cast iron headed V6, but I had a great time with it. Today I would have started with a 3.4 engine but they weren't available used yet when I did it.
Will JAN 18, 08:08 PM

quote
Originally posted by thesameguy:

These days, removing a Fiero's door impact beam probably doesn't matter. If a 2020 Malibu hits you, it's going through the door glass. The only thing low enough to hit a Fiero's side impact beam is a McLaren. Maybe the best solution for driver safety is to lower the car an increase the chance you just go underneath.



To add a serious note... impact beam height is actually set by the NHTSA... so yes, a 2020 Malibu would his the impact beam, because it's impact beam is at the same height.
Will JAN 18, 08:25 PM

quote
Originally posted by Thunderstruck GT:

I never said anything about removing door beams.

You can show me where I "adversely affect safety/comfort/appearance"





The door pictured never had an impact beam in the first place.