The victim
1988 Fiero Formula

The culprit
39 year old telcom employee

The motive
I am new to the blog on this forum, but I regularly read the information listed within these pages as well as others like 60degreev6.com I had a friend in high school who had a black 88 formula 5 speed and in 88 it was one cool ride, he still owns it and I tried to purchase the car from him some years back as it had been rotting in his yard for 10 or more years (what a shame) but he would not part with it. About a year ago I found an 88 red formula automatic car in nice shape for 1100 $ I am now ready to begin the project I have been plotting for some years now, an American made mid-engine turbocharged sports car on the cheap, not an all out quarter horse but a car that begs to be driven hard into the corners as well as having good strait line performance.

False witness
Many people have said I should use a 3400 or 3500 60 degree v6 maybe a 3800 SC or even a V8 but my goal is not the quickest quarter mile car on the block, Many people have shoe horned V8s or jacked up 3800 SC motors into these cars with cunning ingenuity and some impressive homegrown engineering and I love reading the builds, ideas and solutions these guys come up with (valuable info for any Fiero project) and the awesome projects they have created (hats off to you guys) but for me that approach would be a waist of the original corner eating, mid engine layout of the Fiero that I love. “and I took the road less traveled”

Scene of the Crime
I have started by locating a low mile 1990 3.1 turbocharged engine at a junk yard 70 miles from my home, I chose the TGP 3.1 Mclaren turbo engine for the high nickel content block, 981 casting crank that has been Nitride coated ( 60 Rockwell) with rolled fillets and chamfered oil ports, c1037 heat treated forged rods with SAE 1050 quenched rod caps and 8.8 compression ratio via dished hypereutectic pistons and 28cc combustion chamber (Info courtesy of http://www.turbograndprix.c...d%20Differences.htm)
I thought that this engine would be hard to locate due to its low production numbers (Around 5000 from what I can find) but to my surprise after only a couple hours of searching the net I located one at a semi-local junkyard.

The short block is pretty strait forward: check the crank and bore then machine accordingly if needed, (crank looks perfect and almost no ware on cylinders) a good balance job and the only extra will to be to install oil spray nozzle for each cylinder to keep detonation and excess heat out of the design. I will not re-use the pistons even if I do not need to increase the bore size, the OEM factory hypereutectic pistons are still available in standard as well as overbore for 29.95 a piece, the only other mod will be to ceramic coat the new pistons.
The heads and intakes have been removed from TGP engine and I have acquired the top end off of a 2001 Malibu 3100 engine for the better heads with larger valves 1.76 vs. 1.72, the D shaped exhaust ports and the 2000 and later 3100/3400 large port intake manifolds for the size and superior flow.
The stock springs will be removed, the spring seats on these 3rd Gen heads will need to be machined down to accept LS1 yellow springs for a more aggressive cam profile. I will retain the stock roller rockers with new pushrods. The heads and intakes will receive a mild port, polish and gasket match, the heads will receive a ceramic coat from the valve out for further heat reduction.
The heads will get a good multi-angle valve job and the exhaust valves from the Gen 3 heads will be removed and the TGP Gen 2 head stainless exhaust valves used on the Gen 3 heads provided they are still in goo shape.
The camshaft will be chosen when I have the flow numbers from the Gen 3 heads to make sure the cam matches the engine performance (do not need cam specs my engine can’t use) custom grind billet camshafts are available from Comp Cams.

The ECM and fuel control will provided with a Mega Squirt controller to avoid the whole trying to make an ECM work with an engine and fuel curve it was never intended to be used on. The injectors I will use are 52 LB and will be bought new. The throttle body will be from a 62mm GM 3.6 DOCH engine and an adaptor plate from WOT TECH on the 60degreevs.com page will be used.

The Turbo has yet to be decided on as there is still a lot of work, information and experts that need to be completed or consulted before I make a decision on what turbo to use, I am leaning to a Garrett T3/T4 hybrid at this stage but this may be to large for my application, the jury will be out on this one for a while.

The exhaust will consist of custom headers and stainless tubing for most of the exhaust components so that I get some longevity out of the parts as a majority of the hard work will be in fabricating these pieces.

The Transaxle, pedals and cables have been acquired from a 1987 Fiero GT donor car purchased about six months ago with 77,000 on the odometer it was left to rot in a back yard in Maryland (one mans junk) and the faded but perfect body work will be sold to bank roll more components for my project.

The rest of the car will receive suspension and brake upgrades, I will post on these subjects at a later date when I have some more information on what I think will work best. I am thinking coil overs, a poly kit some lowering springs and eleven inch brakes up front so far.

HP expectations should be in the range of 325 – 350 WHP

Cost so far:
1988 Fiero Formula 2.8 V6/W Automatic – 1100 $

1990 Mclaren TGP 3.1 engine – 500 $

1987 Fiero GT 5 speed donor car – 400 $

2001 Malibu 3100 top end – 140 $

Total 2140 $

Pictures will be added to this blog as I get some time to post them (soon)

Feedback feed back is welcomed anyone who might have suggestions, relevant information or just wants to become part of the sickness is welcome to reply.

Thanks,
Scoob

------------------
Scoobysruvenge

Those 52# injectors are WAY overkill, I would suggest some 33# L67 injectors, or if you need to make more than 350hp, try the 39# cobra injectors.

quote the spring seats on these 3rd Gen heads will need to be machined down to accept LS1 yellow springs

If you use a less aggressive 105# spring or a 3500/3900 spring, you would be a bit better off as you dont have to machine the seats, and it will be a ton less strain on your timing chain. The 105# spring should offer good operation up to 6800-7000rpms under moderate boost levels, and a bit less under larger PSI levels. If you plan on operating at higher RPM's, make sure you consider a aftermarket non adjustable lifter, matched with an adjustable rocker and pushrod setup.

quote The ECM and fuel control will provided with a Mega Squirt controller to avoid the whole trying to make an ECM work with an engine and fuel curve it was never intended to be used on.

I feel that even OBD1 would be a better option for you, as it has a nearly free investment up front, and a very good base map to start with, as you are not changing hardly any of the characteristics of the motor, other than a small amount of volumetric efficiency at lower RPM with the cam swap. If for some reason there are limiting factors that I am not familar with in the stock OBD1 PCM... I know for a fact that a maf based OBD2 system would be inordinately superior to a megasquirt, and you will start with an aluminum head base file out of a platform of your choice.

I know people love custom ecu's, but after building a few custom setups, I know that eliminating as much variability in a system makes for a much more enjoyable project.

quote he throttle body will be from a 62mm GM

There are very little performance gains to be made in the throttle body department of a turbo setup.

quote I am leaning to a Garrett T3/T4 hybrid at this stage but this may be to large for my application,

A 57 trim .63 a/r t3/t4 turbo would be a ideal turbo for your situation, although the technology is a bit dated. If you wanted to get fancy, a GT28R would also fit the bill nicely with a high flow compressor setup (it would limit your max power a bit more than the 57trim, but offer superior curve response and spool time). Both turbos would dance around the 300-350whp area, the GT28 would be on the low end, and the 57 trim would be on the high end.

------------------
Losing sight of our roots in the cathode rays.
Ultimate 3800 swap thread

sounds cool man can't wait to see pics

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: The stock springs will be removed, the spring seats on these 3rd Gen heads will need to be machined down to accept LS1 yellow springs for a more aggressive cam profile. I will retain the stock roller rockers with new pushrods. The heads and intakes will receive a mild port, polish and gasket match, the heads will receive a ceramic coat from the valve out for further heat reduction. The ECM and fuel control will provided with a Mega Squirt controller to avoid the whole trying to make an ECM work with an engine and fuel curve it was never intended to be used on.

Be careful how much valvespring you put together with a flat tappet cam. There's a post on the forum someplace of someone trying to adapt the Gen III roller lifters to a Gen I or II engine. Go search for it... it might be insightful.

As far as engine management goes, you will be in FAR better shape if you take the program from the TGP ($8F) and use it in a 7730. Rewiring the Fiero for a 7730 computer is an easy task that is also well documented on this forum. You can buy reasonably priced hardware and software to tune the $8F/7730 combo on the fly just like a megasquirt. The OE program is MUCH more robust than the Megasquirt program and you'll be dozens to hundreds of man hours ahead in starting with a production calibration vs. a map full of zeroes. The TGP engine ships with a 2 bar MAP sensor and the $8F calibration is of course boost-aware.

Good idea for using the TGP SS valves in the Gen III heads.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 04-15-2009).]

I appreciate the feedback, I like the stock spring idea, no expensive springs, retainers or machine work (keeping faith with the whole on the cheap thing as well), is there a blog about this somewhere or have you done this swap yourself ?

My brother currently uses a Megasquirt EFI on his turbo v6 Mustang and it is truly an awesome tool it took us 2 Track days and 4 hours on the dyno to dial it in besides I work for a major Telcom and get play with some of the most advanced technology in the corporate world so it’s just mixing work and pleasure.

The injector size by my calculations is 45.57 lbs/hour derived from 350 hp, 6 injectors, turbocharged, a flow rate of 0.8 and a fuel pressure of 43.5 if a 10 percent overvalue is added for further expansion of HP gains we come up with 50.257 lbs/hour, if I have made some grave error in my calculations let me know before I drop my dough$$$

The throttle body calculations I come up with are 61 mm for moderate to high volume through the expected flow rates of the engine configuration and the 62mm throttle I can get on the cheap at my local junk yard 25$ with all the sensors. Although I am strong willed I am not hard headed, let me know what you suggest and why.

Before I choose the Turbo I need to get my heads flowed so I can choose a camshaft that will match my power curve, I have been given these Turbo choices before from some respected people as well.


Thanks for all the input !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

------------------
Scoobysruvenge

As far as the capabilities of the computer go, MS is outright primitive compared to a factory computer. It was developed to be simple and cheap, not to have advanced capabilities.

Check out www.tunercat.com http://tunerpro.markmansur.com/ www.moates.net www.diy-efi.org for info on tuning factory computers. A chip emulator and real time tuning suite can give you all the real time tuning and logging capabilities of MS along with the robustness and capabilities of OE hardware and programming for only marginally more cost than MS, if any at all.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 04-16-2009).]

I looked at TUNERCAT and using that 20 year old computer in my car the truth of the matter is that most of the computing power is lost in the shuffle and the ECU only uses about 15% of its capabilities 95% of the time so bigger is not better not to mention the old style of dynamic computing it uses, I do like the real time tune and the tuning process is available in most cases via windows GUI program, but there is no support for anything the stock ECU doesn't support this means no wideband 02 sensor input, no EGT sensor input, etc. This was the deal breaker for me.
I find the MegaSquirt system several ways better first I can upgrade it with the many features and modules that are available for MegaSquirt system (control anything you can dream up)
Second learning my EFI system at the component level is invaluable as hotrod hobbyist (knowledge is power)
Third I already have experience with how well the MegaSquirt performs first hand. (I like it, I like it a lot)
Fourth I'm not sure about the TUNERCAT setups, but Megasquirt (with extra code) can do launch control, flat shift, tach output, table switching, fan control, two shift lights, and experimental output (boost controls) and any other trick pony you want to control.

Thanks for your input

------------------
Scoobysruvenge

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: I looked at TUNERCAT and using that 20 year old computer in my car the truth of the matter is that most of the computing power is lost in the shuffle and the ECU only uses about 15% of its capabilities 95% of the time so bigger is not better not to mention the old style of dynamic computing it uses, I do like the real time tune and the tuning process is available in most cases via windows GUI program, but there is no support for anything the stock ECU doesn't support this means no wideband 02 sensor input, no EGT sensor input, etc. This was the deal breaker for me. I find the MegaSquirt system several ways better first I can upgrade it with the many features and modules that are available for MegaSquirt system (control anything you can dream up) Second learning my EFI system at the component level is invaluable as hotrod hobbyist (knowledge is power) Third I already have experience with how well the MegaSquirt performs first hand. (I like it, I like it a lot)

A) Calling something "old" is just an excuse for not taking the time to learn what its virtues and vices really are. Cadillac Big Blocks and Chevy Big Blocks are both old engines, but Cadillacs are pretty nice engines...

B) The 7730 was designed when RAM cost $500 a megabyte... it does NOT waste computational power. I don't know where on earth you got that idea. The hardware specs are actually very similar to MS. MS uses the 332 processor and is an outgrowth of the EFI332 project, while the 7730 uses a 68HC11 variant.

C) If you'd actually read what the emulator can do, you'd know that it can log extra sensors and insert that data into the datastream between the emulator and the PC.

D) There are software patches that allow the $8F code to report wideband AFR via the EGR pintle position slot in the factory datastream... plug it right into your datalogs.

E) The number of tuning parameters available in production code is HUGE compared to what can be tuned with MS... maybe 10X more. The program is MUCH more robust.

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: Fourth I'm not sure about the TUNERCAT setups, but Megasquirt (with extra code) can do launch control, flat shift, tach output, table switching, fan control, two shift lights, and experimental output (boost controls) and any other trick pony you want to control.

I have NO idea why you think fan control, shift lights and tach output are fancy features... The FIERO ECM controls a shift light STOCK and it's a brick compared to the 7730. The $8F code in the 7730 does boost control. HELLO, it was used in a production turbo car... It even includes boost ramping functions that can be tuned to be primitive traction control.

Multiple tunes on one chip: http://www.moates.net/produ...th=31&products_id=80
Real Time tuning plus datalogging extra sensors: http://www.moates.net/produ...th=31&products_id=54
You can even Bluetooth it to be wireless: http://www.moates.net/produ...h=31&products_id=132
Just check out their products: http://www.moates.net/product_info.php?cPath=31 Do some actual research.

So basically, the ONLY things that MS does that the 7730 doesn't are launch control and AFR *control* from a wide band sensor.

Quit trying to show off (because... umm... you failed at that) and do some honest reasearch.

Try this on for size: If you tune your engine on a dyno or a dragstrip and then go for a top speed run, you will blow up your engine--probably hole a piston. The mixture needs to richened with increasing time at WOT to keep the pistons cool. Can MS do that? I've never heard of that capability. The $8F code includes a commanded AFR vs. time function that allows the mixture ratio to be richened as required during sustained WOT operation.

How do the short and long term fuel trim functions operate in a Megasquirt? Does MS even have them? The integrator and BLM's in a production program form the foundation of an autotune capability in future releases of TunerPro that will be based on a NARROW band O2 sensor. As a computational problem, that's way beyond what MS autotune capabilities can do.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 04-16-2009).]

11

*chuckle*

Will knows his stuff, and has a 32-valve DOHC 4.6L V8 in his Fiero, and was one of the first few to do that Northstar swap, and he's an engineer working for an advanced Aerospace corporation on launch platforms, etc. He's essentially a rocket scientist, heh. Hardly carburetors and points distributors. LOL
There is much, much more that he's done in the way of technology and the cutting-edge, but I won't go on about it.

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: On the subject of the spirited debate you and I have engaged in I would like you to know that I appreciate your conviction to the TunerCat product (I might even think that you had some vested interest in the company) but whatever your reasons are, you seem to have a fanatical dedication to this product to the point of delirium.

Reading comprehension helps one go a long way...

quote Originally posted by Will: Check out ... http://tunerpro.markmansur.com/ ...

In addition to Tunercat, he listed Tunerpro, which is completely free and does pretty much exactly the same thing. He is telling you that the factory ECU is a very good platform to tune from, not that Tunercat is God's tuning tool. LOL


*another chuckle*

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: 1988 Fiero Formula 1990 3.1 turbocharged engine at a junk yard

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: I looked at TUNERCAT and using that 20 year old computer in my car...

You mean you can't use that 20 year old computer in that 20 year old car with the 20 year old engine? LOL

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: Many people have said I should use a 3400 or 3500 60 degree v6

You mean the more advanced, more efficient, newer engines than the one you chose to use? Who's old technology attitude was that again?

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: Your old technology will still do attitude...

*chuckle again*


Now listen, Will does understand that some people like to choose different paths, but when you spew out incorrect info about something he knows a lot about all the while coming off as bragging that your path is the better way, he's going to correct you, and rightfully so.

I am doing nearly exactly what you are (except with the 'primitive' '730 ECU and $8F code, and an '88 GT) and it's well underway, so I'd like to see your progress (Even with the well-proven, but less advanced, Megasquirt). Just don't come off as a know-it-all while at the same time contradicting yourself, and everyone will be happy.
We would all love this build thread to turn out successful, I'm sure.

[This message has been edited by ALLTRBO (edited 04-17-2009).]

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: I appreciate and welcome your input on my project no matter how hostile your responses are, they are enjoyed and I have looked at TunerCat closer because of your input (still using MegaSquirt) thanks.

*Chuckle*

Business:
You *were* completely oblivious to what production engine management can do. Now you're started to scratch the surface. Keep looking at ALL the links I posted above and just read. You wanted input? This is input. Don't be surprised if there are fields of information out there that you've never even imagined were there.

Production engine management was designed to be implemented across tens of thousands of cars in all climates in all use cases everywhere in the world. The aggregate number of engineer-hours, development and testing invested in OE engine management makes even the most top of the line aftermarket systems look like tinkertoys. Like I said, there are SEVERAL TIMES as many tunable parameters in $8F as in MS. If you exploit them all to the fullest, you can just about make your turbo talk to you.

I coached the guy who developed the 7730/$A1 combo for the Northstar. He re-wrote code in the factory program to change the RPM divisor and create a variable that increased maximum reported RPM from 6375 to over 8900. Does that sound EXACTLY like the kind of modifications you can make to an MS program?

I will eventually play with a megasquirt... but it won't be because it's advanced... it'll be because it's open source. There are a lot of algorithms I'd like to fiddle with and try. I want to see if MS can run a nitrous injected DIY turbine engine, for instance.

BTW, have you heard of "equation coefficients" used in modern GM computers that control variable cam phasing and multi-mode intake manifolds? http://www.hptuners.com/for...howthread.php?t=8490 Take a look. If you still think that MS is advanced, there's probably no hope of illuminating you.


Pleasure:
I don't know if you missed the memo or what, but MS was designed to be SIMPLE and CHEAP. If you think it's cutting edge, you're living under a rock. You can drop 5 figures (maybe even 6) on a Motec that'll just about drive the car for you AND make coffee. Look up any of the big names: Big Stuff 3, Electromotive TEC 3, Autronic, Motec... there are dozens. MS is at the back of the pack.

The Fiero is an old cheap chassis. The TGP engine is and old cheap engine. MS is a cheap simple computer. If you want to see cutting edge, look at Corvettes, Panteras, Lamborghinis or any chassis that has the engine, driveline and well-heeled enthusiasts to stand a chance of being built with 1,000 HP and beng able to put it to use. You can buy from Nelson Racing Engines a 427 cid twin turbo SBC that can put down over 1,500 HP on race fuel. There's a V10 M5 on Bimmer Forums that just ran faster than any Fiero on this board ever has or has ever even CLAIMED (and probably ever will) with just slicks and a 150 shot. Shrink your head down and figure out where you ACTUALLY ARE in the hierarchy of hot rodding.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 04-17-2009).]

Will, I will not argue that you know your GM ECMs but when was the last time you actually looked at the Megasquirt project? I am not saying it is the best thing since sliced bread but its not exactly low tech... Note: I am here for the discussion not for a flame war, so if anything comes off that way, that was not the intent.

quote The OE program is MUCH more robust than the Megasquirt program and you'll be dozens to hundreds of man hours ahead in starting with a production calibration vs. a map full of zeroes.

You don't start with a map full of zeros... there are configuration utilities that assist in base programming, while not perfect, its not zero. MegaTune is a little more powerful than I think you may be giving it credit for, and real time tuning via WBO2 feedback cuts the time required drastically.

quote Calling something "old" is just an excuse for not taking the time to learn what its virtues and vices really are.

I agree completely. But the same could be said for tossing something asside and disregarding it as being 'cheap and simple'.

quote MS uses the 332 processor and is an outgrowth of the EFI332 project, while the 7730 uses a 68HC11 variant.

Megasquirt uses the 68HC908 processor and the Megasquirt II uses a MC9S12C64, while these are obviouly not modern 32bit microcontrollers, MSII does support CAN and there are a lot of variations on code that allow for more than just what Bowling & Grippo came up with. While the MS did grow out of the EFI332 project, it is almost completely unrelated now.

quote The number of tuning parameters available in production code is HUGE compared to what can be tuned with MS... maybe 10X more.

From some of the tables that I have seen some of the 10x more are not required my MS... some of special 'modes' that GM defines seperately in their code as additional tables to be edited are just included in the main table of the Megasquirt where those conditions are present or some are defined as variables instead of tables... lean cruise mode comes to mind.

You do have a point with the WOT enrichment feature but that is something that the code in MS could be modified to do... this system has been used by cars at the track and on the salt flats. I just don't see where the 7730 is that much more advanced. Like I said we are not talking about the ECM for the 3.6VVT or 3900 here... it is not my intent to get into a pissing match about which is better, just that there are other viable options to 15-20 year old factory computers. Its also a give that MS has no real ability to control a lot of accessories by itself... although they are developing a general purpose I/O board to be used with the CAN interface, much like a BCM. They are also developing a transmission controller based on the GPIO board as well... it really is neat stuff when taken for what it is. A DIY project.

I like the Megasquirt II and I have purchased and built one to use on my 3400 swap if I ever get to it. Would I use it on the car I rely on to get me to work every day? No probably not, but on a hobby car? Why not... While I don't think that it is the be all, end all solution for engine management, it does bother me when someone tries to wholesale throw it out the door as being simple and cheap as compared to the 7730. Not all the intelligent people in the world work for car companies, and I do like the fact that it is open and being modified daily by crazy DIYers around the world.

Scoobysruvenge - I don't quite know where you get the idea that joining a forum and attempting to mock someone you know nothing about will get you additional help, but you may also want to try 60 Degree V6 when it comes to what works and what doesn't when mixing and matching different generations of the 60*. Your little tirade against Will about the capabilities Megasquirt does nothing to support or promote your case for using it other than irritate the people that you are asking for help and making you look a little fan boyish.

Edit due to ADHD crazyness, randomness

[This message has been edited by carbon (edited 04-18-2009).]

quote Originally posted by carbon: just that there are other viable options to 15-20 year old factory computers.

Which is my point... the OE computer IS an option to be considered on the same terms as the other options; it has far too much going for it to just disregard; MS is in the same boat. However, like the trainer who hit the mule in the forehead with the 4x4 said: "First you've got to get his attention".

quote I do like the fact that it is open and being modified daily by crazy DIYers around the world.

Which, as I said, is why I'd use it. I could recode it to run a turbine or CAN two together to run a V12, etc...

quote Your little tirade against Will about the capabilities Megasquirt does nothing to support or promote your case for using it other than irritate the people that you are asking for help and making you look a little fan boyish.

But *I* had fun... Isn't that what matters?

I don’t have a lot of time for to dork all over the internet to plagiarize what ever would be facts some of you might scavenge to make whatever point you have championed so I will take this time refute ate some of the unfounded slander some of you are throwing around and clear my good name:

It seems some of you think you know how an ECU functions. I quote Will

“The 7730 was designed when RAM cost $500 a megabyte... it does NOT waste computational power. I don't know where on earth you got that idea.”

Now I don’t know a lot about Will but I can read, and one of best books on
turbo charging (Maximum Boost Page 86) written by Corky Bell (engineer for Bell Helicopter as well in Formula One racing) states the following.

“The EFI computer gathers data from a group of sensors, that tells the engine how fast and what the load on the engine is at a given moment. With that data it looks at its stored information for how long it should leave the injectors open to satisfy the engines speed and load conditions. When that information is found it is pulled out of the memory and relayed to the injectors as a voltage pulse of a certain duration. These durations are measured in thousandths of a second or milliseconds. When a cycle is complete the program tells it to do it all over again but be alert for new conditions. All this data acquisition, analysis and distribution takes about 15% of the computers attention. The remainder of the time it just sits.

, I feel his work can be considered as acceptable reference material but I am sure someone will disagree.

I quote Will
“Quit trying to show off (because... umm... you failed at that) and do some honest reasearch.”

I quote Will

I have NO idea why you think fan control, shift lights and tach output are fancy features... The FIERO ECM controls a shift light STOCK and it's a brick compared to the 7730. The $8F code in the 7730 does boost control. HELLO, it was used in a production turbo car... It even includes boost ramping functions that can be tuned to be primitive traction control.

As I stated previously MegaSquirt has 25 available I/Os to program as you wish, this means I could run pulse oil injection on the piston crown only when it fires that cylinder to cut down on pumping losses, I could control a nitrous system in multiple stages and still have 23 I/O ports to control whatever I choose, you should take a closer look at the MS processor and the programmable capabilities that can be exploited I feel no need to provide you with the specifications and abilities of the MS system, so maybe you should do some research.

I quote Will

Try this on for size: If you tune your engine on a dyno or a dragstrip and then go for a top speed run, you will blow up your engine--probably hole a piston. The mixture needs to richened with increasing time at WOT to keep the pistons cool. Can MS do that? I've never heard of that capability. The $8F code includes a commanded AFR vs. time function that allows the mixture ratio to be richened as required during sustained WOT operation.

Will you continue to insert your foot in your mouth Tuning a fuel curve at WOT is one of the basic fundamentals of tuning (especially on a dyno) but fattening the AFR will not cure a detonation problem and if you are fattening the AFR because of a detonation problem at long WOT intervals you have an engine cooling problem not a tune problem, piston temps should be handled with oil injection and ceramic coatings not more fuel that the charge can burn, also inadequate radiator and cooling system can cause detonation simply putting in more fuel is a band aid for fixing what ever the real problem is. I beginning to wonder about all this faith you guys have in Will.

I quote Will

How do the short and long term fuel trim functions operate in a Megasquirt? Does MS even have them? The integrator and BLM's in a production program form the foundation of an autotune capability in future releases of TunerPro that will be based on a NARROW band O2 sensor. As a computational problem, that's way beyond what MS autotune capabilities can do.

Here Will quotes features that aren’t even available and wants to know if MS can do it, that’s classic.

I would like to finish by saying that I have an open mind and did not state any thing that I have not researched in great detail, I could waste my time trying to prove some mundane point by posting the MS systems capabilities and dorking on a bunch of website info so I can post it here so you guys think I’m cool or smart, but that’s not how I roll, I will continue with my blog and hope that you guys will continue help out with my project (Even you Will) it been a lot of fun so far.

Thanks

------------------
Scoobysruvenge

quote MegaSquirt and systems like it have become the choice for those of us who are on the cutting edge of digital horsepower and the future, so go back to your dirty little garage (if you have one) and buy yourself a carburetor and get yourself a distributer with a points ignition and enjoy the cookies technological discontent you seem to be chocking on, meanwhile the rest of us will get on with the future, unlimited in what we can achieve because we did not listen to you.

This is what I was referring to... ^ ^ ^ Yeah, sounds pretty open minded to me. You didn't specify that you were running MSII, MSI is fairly limited. Maybe you are running MS II Extra and you are really on the 'cutting edge of digital horsepower', as far as the Megasquirt goes. I would have liked to see some details of your setup but instead you went off on some manifesto rant. I was actually looking forward to someone using the MS on a Fiero project as they are few and far between in this community.

quote I don’t have a lot of time for to dork all over the internet to plagiarize what ever would be facts some of you might scavenge to make whatever point you have championed so I will take this time refute ate some of the unfounded slander some of you are throwing around and clear my good name. It seems some of you think you know how an ECU functions.

Acutally all you proved is that you can be just as big of a dick as Will was and that you have pretty low opinion of those who don't agree with you. I am sorry you are above us all and don't have the time to explain to us copy&paste simpletons why you made some of the choices you have for your setup.

quote I beginning to wonder about all this faith you guys have in Will.

It has nothing to do with faith in Will, I don't even know who the guy is or remembered that he has spent almost 5 years rebuilding his Northstar.

It looks like a great project and you obviouly know your business and I am looking forward to seeing your results, too many of these threads being left unfinished these days.

[This message has been edited by carbon (edited 04-20-2009).]

I know i'm a bit late to the the discussion, but I just wanted to add a bit of first hand experience. I've tuned with Tunerpro on a factory OBD1 computer, I've tuned a MS1 with additional addons using its Megatune, and I've tuned AEM with current setup using AEMpro.

The Megasquirt works best for a small window, the way you hear it advertised most, in racing. You can provide me 100 links with 100 fast 1/4 mile cars or a 100 fast road race cars and I will simply agree that the the Megasquirt does all that stuff they need. Now put that car under 8" of snow, and hit the remote start button on your keyfob. Tell me what happens. Go ahead and 'theoretically' press that button on the keyfob again. Car start yet? Probably not. Let me know how daily driving and lean idle/rich idle, idle speed controls, idle barometric offsets, battery voltage offsets, etc affect your daily driving. There is MORE than WOT tuning. Even simple stuff as getting the stepper motor in its proper range, resetting at key on/of, relocating its position, etc. There are designed specs for the stepper motor for current, voltage offset step gain,etc that is all incorporated and tuned for you to start with a factory ECU. The thing is, stepper control is about the most basic setup. Thats not even breaking the ice on accel fuel. Now you're getting into dTPS, sustain, coolant temp modifiers, etc. How about ignition trims, phase, dwell, etc. The list goes on and on.

I'm sure you know about the driving the car around town. My point is so what if its easy to tune on the dyno. How often are you really on a dyno, at the track, or even WOT? You CANNOT tune a megasquirt to be anywhere near as comfortable, smooth, or less temper mental than the factory ecu in a matter of hours, days, or sometimes even months. You simply can't replicate the barometric conditions, temperature conditions, etc to be able to do so.

Can you get the car good, reliable, and to an acceptable state of tune in a decent time? Sure you can, but its not as easy or as 'final' as a lot of MS leg humpers tend to believe.

Oh yeah, and are you sure your WB is going to be correct all the time? Widebands are good, but they're not perfect. They do drift some times, and they do go bad. You're trusting all this hard work on a single sensor. What if it decides to read a bit rich while you're WOT during that 90* summer day? Your MS auto tune will pull fuel to hit your target AFR, and the engine will lean out. Its okay because the computer will sense the engine noise and pull timing right? Oh wait, MS doesn't have knock control and knock retard anywhere NEAR the extent that the factory ecu does. Boom.

The MS has its uses, so do the other stand alones. I'm using a Stand alone on my daily driver and I wouldn't go back to the factory ecu. But you need to remember that the megasquirt is not going to make your tuning headache free. In fact it will do the exact opposite.

quote Can you get the car good, reliable, and to an acceptable state of tune in a decent time? Sure you can, but its not as easy or as 'final' as a lot of MS leg humpers tend to believe.

You are correct... that is why the manifesto above bothered me, but all of the settings that were designed for a specific application in a stock ECU go out the window when you start changing injectors, adding boost, etc, etc, etc. And as far as relying on WBO2 you can always dial in the VE table using the WB and then go back to using the VE table the way the stock ecm does... there are settings for limiting the effect that O2 feedback has on the fueling. There are really just too many points to compare just firing back and forth on the forum. But it does seem to me that a lot of people have only ever seen MS1 systems and have no idea what they have been doing with MS2. MS2 is leaps and bounds more robust than the MS1 and the 3.0 and 3.57 boards are a lot more complete and reliable than the old 2.x boards. This is like a Linux vs. Microsoft arguement that will never have a satisfactory settlement for anyone.

Carbon,

Thanks for your vote of confidence, it has not been my intention to piss anyone off or to put myself on a soapbox I admit that I have embellished some of the rhetorical language to keep this blog interesting as well as entertaining (apologies to anyone offended) I will post everything I do including a blow by blow on the whole MS purchasing, installation and tune for all to see, but I have to get the piston oil squirt problem solved so I can get the block to the machine shop.

Thanks for your interest

------------------
Scoobysruvenge

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: ...it has not been my intention to piss anyone off or to put myself on a soapbox I admit that I have embellished some of the rhetorical language to keep this blog interesting as well as entertaining...

Scooby, anytime someone new arrives on the scene, there's always a chance that their enthusiasm and self-confidence can be (mis)taken as excessive cockiness and cause somewhat of a rift with established forum members. However, as long as no one gets nasty, it'll pass.

I just want to say that I know next to nothing of what you fellas are discussing, but I enjoy your writing style nevertheless (even with all the spelling mistakes). Your first post was great.

Good luck with the project!

quote P.S. darkhorizon, thanks for not telling him that his car will only do what he wants with a turbo 3800, heh. It's much appreciated, even if your post isn't entirely accurate.

My post was fine, accurate yes, but "radical opinions" may just be a bit hard to understand as accurate in your eyes.

Anyway, injectors are never ran a 43psi... Most turbo setups will use 60psi under boost.. I run about 65-67 on my turbo setup. Calculating to a duty cycle of 80% is also a bit overzealous.. you should be fine calculating to 100% as injectors perform with some decent degree of accuracy above 100% duty. So like I said before.. save yourself a few hundred and run some 33# for awhile, and then upgrade to a 39# when you are uncomfortable with the duty cycle.

As far as the MS / OEM discussion goes... It really is a downright dumb idea to use MS, just from a non technical point of view weighing obvious pros and cons... there are NO pros on the MS side that are not on the pro side of the OEM ecu.. and the OEM has a TON of features that makes it have more pros then the MS. cons wise, there are a few really significant cons on the MS side.

Simple fact is the MS can not do anything more or better than a OEM ecu, other than be a pain in the ass. Now in my situation, if I found something that I dont like about the OBD1 setup, I would instantly switch to a OBD2 configuration, that "technically" (according to processing power, memory, size, tuneability, features, ect) will dump a few dump trucks of cow crap on the MS and OBD1 ecu, all while running the car just as effectively or better, and require a EXTREMELY limited amount of tuning adjustments over the stock file. I am sure you will find people that do not like maf sensors..

Now my confusing part about your MS argument, is the fact that you never mentioned a maf sensor. If you are all about "new technology" then you should not have any issues supporting the benefits of running one, and MS does not use a maf sensor.

So I would look at it this way... there is a giant collection of people here involved with the possibly the most commonly engine swapped car in history, and we are all hating on the megasquirt product. I would suggest you listen a bit more carefully to us, as the intense debate shown in this thread is not just 1 person promoting the tunercat product, but simply all of us fiero people telling you that this is the best path to go down.

quote The MS has its uses, so do the other stand alones. I'm using a Stand alone on my daily driver and I wouldn't go back to the factory ecu. But you need to remember that the megasquirt is not going to make your tuning headache free. In fact it will do the exact opposite.

i wanted to clarify that Jnco used the obd1 pcm on a obd2 3800 (aka he was not using the factory 3800 ecu like most of us are using, the obd1 setup is much harder to work with than the obd2 setups). In the case of AEM vs obd2, I feel that they would be extremely similar in how the motor runs, but in Jnco's situation, the extra features of the AEM gave a price advantage over the obd2 setup, as he would have needed a few upgrades to run a stock ecu in the same fashion. Now if there are very specific features you want that a standalone has that you want, then start weighing the costs out, and remember to include a time cost for the extra effort you need to put forth for tuning.

quote but all of the settings that were designed for a specific application in a stock ECU go out the window when you start changing injectors, adding boost, etc, etc,

That comment could not be more 180 of the truth.

The injector constants are EXTREMELY easy to adjust in a factory ecu, and will properly scale with the rest of the tables in the ecu. Adding boost is not any issue as you can in most cases tune accurately for a low boost level, then continue the curve up to a near unlimited boost level blindly (using a maf anyway).

[This message has been edited by darkhorizon (edited 04-20-2009).]

Darkhorizon,
You need to read more about the MS2 system. AEM is fine but MS2 is useless... whatever. As far as injectors go I pulled a parameter out of my butt sorry... but why does cost of time need to be factored in on a hobby? What is my time worth if I am doing it for myself and I am making the time to do it because I want to... like I said... there is no good answer that will make everyone happy. Why run Linux when there are no pros that can not be accomplished the same with Windows... who cares. To each their own like I said before.

When that time is layed out into gas, and the simple fact that it just takes so much time... its just stupid not to use that as a factor of a simple choice between what funny box runs your motor.

I like coffee with cream and he likes coffee with milk, is cream better than milk? lets just say we are all coffee lovers and enjoy our coffee. That being said, can we all jsut love our fiero projects and agree that we don't always need to agree on what is exactly best? I think it is the multitude of differences that make this forum unique. In our own daily lives our needs for speed, performance, mileage, and looks are different in each of our own minds. I think you all have valid thoughts and opinions about what is best and i aplaud you all. Lets shake E-hands and see where the project takes us.

[This message has been edited by jsketcham (edited 04-20-2009).]

Ok just throwing this out but why not use 3400 heads which flow a little better and what not, Side note make sure you get the metal felpro problem solver gaskets for the lower intake. The stock one leak really bad and fairly easily.

From supra forums... A automatic 2jz supra running in the 9's

quote the unthinkable happened on the last run...the AEM (which was in automatic/computer shifted mode) had some sort of glitch at WOT and decide to downshift into 1ST!! at 110mph...i literally went thru the traps backwards at 110MPH! The camera man (a friend) got so nervous he laid down the camera, missing the phnomenal recovery ( the should of been totalled). Fortunately, the car and i came out witout a scratch as i kepted it off the wall... Needless to say, i have it in 'manuel' mode from then on at the track* We think it might of been sensor related...

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: Now I don’t know a lot about Will but I can read, and one of best books on turbo charging (Maximum Boost Page 86) written by Corky Bell (engineer for Bell Helicopter as well in Formula One racing) states the following. “The EFI computer gathers data from a group of sensors, that tells the engine how fast and what the load on the engine is at a given moment. With that data it looks at its stored information for how long it should leave the injectors open to satisfy the engines speed and load conditions. When that information is found it is pulled out of the memory and relayed to the injectors as a voltage pulse of a certain duration. These durations are measured in thousandths of a second or milliseconds. When a cycle is complete the program tells it to do it all over again but be alert for new conditions. All this data acquisition, analysis and distribution takes about 15% of the computers attention. The remainder of the time it just sits.

The above is NOT the same as this:

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: I looked at TUNERCAT and using that 20 year old computer in my car the truth of the matter is that most of the computing power is lost in the shuffle and the ECU only uses about 15% of its capabilities 95% of the time so bigger is not better not to mention the old style of dynamic computing it uses, I do like the real time tune and the tuning process is available in most cases via windows GUI program, but there is no support for anything the stock ECU doesn't support this means no wideband 02 sensor input, no EGT sensor input, etc.

"Lost in the shuffle" = waste. Whatever you meant by "Old style dynamic computing" is bunk. Embedded architectures (Princeton vs. Harvard computer architectures) haven't changed, even though technology has advanced tremendously.

First, it's a GOOD thing for embedded computer applications to NOT be busy 100% of the time; that means they can respond to changing processing demands, like, say datalogging. Second, it only takes so much processing power to run a batch fire/single ignition (distributor or DIS with only one ignition signal) engine. Putting a Pentium IV on your engine won't make it run any better than it would with a 7730. Once the algorithms are optimised (which they are very well on a production calibration), then extra processing power only gets you convenience features like OBD.

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: As I stated previously MegaSquirt has 25 available I/Os to program as you wish, this means I could run pulse oil injection on the piston crown only when it fires that cylinder to cut down on pumping losses, I could control a nitrous system in multiple stages and still have 23 I/O ports to control whatever I choose, you should take a closer look at the MS processor and the programmable capabilities that can be exploited I feel no need to provide you with the specifications and abilities of the MS system, so maybe you should do some research.

Yes, but there are only so many ways to skin a cat. All of the things for which you'll find *necessary* use of those 25 IO pins have already been implemented on factory computers. You're bragging up something that's standard practice...

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: Will you continue to insert your foot in your mouth Tuning a fuel curve at WOT is one of the basic fundamentals of tuning (especially on a dyno) but fattening the AFR will not cure a detonation problem and if you are fattening the AFR because of a detonation problem at long WOT intervals you have an engine cooling problem not a tune problem, piston temps should be handled with oil injection and ceramic coatings not more fuel that the charge can burn, also inadequate radiator and cooling system can cause detonation simply putting in more fuel is a band aid for fixing what ever the real problem is. I beginning to wonder about all this faith you guys have in Will.

LOL... You put your foot in your mouth if you think for one second that an oil jet on your piston can absorb all the heat put into that piston by the combustion process. You need to study thermodynamics. The heat input to the piston, especially at the temperatures and pressures you're going to be running at WOT with 350 RWHP completely dwarfs the amount of heat any reasonably sized oil jet can take away from it.

Did you stop for a second before you posted that to think about *WHY* an AFR vs. time function is implemented in EVERY OE program? Does EVERY production car have an "engine cooling problem"? I think not. Like I said above, the heat flow into the piston is such that there is NO WAY to keep the piston cool for long periods of time (more than 15 seconds) OTHER than reducing combustion temps via richening the mixture. This is NOT a singular artifact of this "20 year old system". This is *standard practice*. If you pay attention, I can save you a catastrophic engine failure.

The higher your specific output, the sooner you need to cool the piston.

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: Here Will quotes features that aren’t even available and wants to know if MS can do it, that’s classic.

So there's no long term fuel trim in MS? I hope you don't mind retuning every time the humidity changes. I hope you have a good grasp of how to adjust the IAT scale factor in the air mass calculation. Hint: that takes more than just tweaking the value in the table if you're rich or lean...

quote Originally posted by Scoobysruvenge: I would like to finish by saying that I have an open mind

I've said this to Dennis Lagrua when he asserted that he just wanted to have an open discussion about the sticks vs. automatics: ...Actually I'll be nicer than that and just say "suuuuure ya do". 'tev.

Have a and do some thinking, don't just quote what you read in cookbooks like Maximum Boost.

Oh yeah... You REALLY need to study thermo if you think that a piston oil jet is going to have a meaningful effect on pumping loss... Just enough knowledge to be dangerous.

quote Originally posted by darkhorizon: My post was fine, accurate yes, but "radical opinions" may just be a bit hard to understand as accurate in your eyes.

Huh? I'm not sure if you're saying that your post had some 'radical opinions' that weren't meant to be taken as fact, but I was planning on mentioning just that after thinking about it. What I was referring to is this:

quote Originally posted by darkhorizon: There are very little performance gains to be made in the throttle body department of a turbo setup.

"Very little" is relative, I'll give you that, and though you didn't specifically say that it was a cold hard fact, it came off that way.
That is a very vague blanket statement, to the point that it should be refuted. Turbo/engine setups vary widely. Sometimes a bigger TB won't help much at all, sometimes it makes all the difference. I personally have had very noticeable gains with TB upgrades on my turbo cars. In general, more flow through the TB will increase the top end as with just about every airflow mod, but for turbo cars a great thing that it can do is lower the IATs a little bit (every bit helps with relatively high boost levels on pump gas, for sure) at the same manifold pressure, particularly if the engine has an unreasonably small TB for a high-flowing turbo setup such as that 52mm 3100 TB on his 3.1, because the small TB is acting as a restriction which can cause the pre-TB pressure to be higher than the post-TB pressure (which is where boost is typically measured, of course). As most turbo-nuts know, higher pressure = higher temperature. Obviously how much depends on many variables, but fairly simple measurements with IATs and boost gauges can determine that.
I think I was at least 'reasonable' in calling that inaccurate.

quote Originally posted by darkhorizon: Anyway, injectors are never ran a 43psi... Most turbo setups will use 60psi under boost.. I run about 65-67 on my turbo setup.

Huh? Injectors are almost always ran at 43psi or thereabouts, unless one increases the base FP or uses an RRFPR (which raises the base FP). Your fuel pump will see 60psi (if your base FP is 43 and you're running 17psi of 'intake manifold' pressure), but your injectors only see a 43psi differential because there is 17psi worth of pressure on the other side of the injectors, aka the 'intake manifold'. That's why turbo cars must have (at least) an FPR that is referenced to manifold pressure. If you run 50psi of boost, those 33# injectors will still flow 33# because there's still a 43psi pressure differential. Most (or all, not sure) GM cars are referenced this way. There are several cars out there that aren't, however.
C'mon man, this is basic 'Turbo 101'.