Made a tiny bit of progress today. While catching up on the last few episodes of Mighty Car Mods doing their 11 second Subaru sleeper build, I picked up some inspiration and started tearing the e38 wire harness apart that I have. Haven't got anything unpinned yet, but got all the plastic sleeves off, which is a major chore in itself, thanks to all the clips and electrical tape. Maybe I should buy some 3M stock.
Since I've decided to go with VVT, I've also been trying to decide on what cam to use. Currently am leaning toward a stock L92 cam, and using 1.7 rockers. That should bump the valve lift up to 0.509, based on the 0.479 lift value I've found stated as stock for the L92 (same on both intake and exhaust).
I am pretty sure the stock rocker ratio on all LS(x) engine is 1.7 minimum (some are even higher). So unless you go with a 1.8 or a 1.85 you won't see any significant gains. I really like the stock rocker arms and would just run them as is or do the trunnion upgrade to them and never look back (and get a camshaft ground with the desired lift). There are several threads on LS1 tech about broken roller rockers and valve train instability at higher RPMs and they switched back to stock and it went away. That round metal roller on the end really changes the energy required to pivot the rocker back and forth vs. the stock setup (which has a really light tip).
Since you are not keeping DoD, I would push the lift much, much closer to .600". With VVT it is the opening/closing events (and ramp rates) you have to be concerned with (piston to valve interference only happens near TDC) vs. overall valve lift, and why comp cams sells their hardware with built in limiters that work "safer" with the larger aftermarket camshafts.
For $25 to $40 you can have Pat G custom spec a camshaft for your application and using your parts. Here is the one he spec'd me that should deliver a solid 400 whp with my application. With this camshaft I go from 2 degrees of overlap at .050 lobe lift to -2 so it should have an improvement on the bottom end as well.
This cam profile features EPS HiRev custom lobes ground under license by Cam Motion on both intake and exhaust. These lobes are designed for long spring life and quiet operation with stock ratio rockers and offer outstanding valvetrain stability with high ratio rockers. These lobes will be extremely stable under high boost & high rpm, even with large heavy valves compared to cams utilizing Comp XE-R, LSL, LSR, LSK, and XFI hydraulic roller lobes. The cam core utilizes 8620 grade chrome moly steel, which allows the cam to wear longer than the steel used in Comp Cams.
Static/Dynamic compression with new cam: 10.0:1 SCR, 7.85:1 DCR. Recommended pushrod length: 7.400” chrome moly. Recommended valve springs: PAC 1519 or PSI 1511 beehive with stock retainers.
[This message has been edited by fieroguru (edited 07-27-2014).]
Thanks guru. I'll have to do some more research on the rockers I guess. I thought they were 1.6.
Today it was a bit rainy most of the day, so I didn't get any progress on making room in the garage. But I did get the engine harness tore down pretty much the rest of the way. I don't have the tiny tools necessary to de-pin the ECM connector ends, so I just went ahead and cut most of the wires near the ECM connectors, so I could get the job done. If I stick with using an e67 instead of the e38, I'm probably going to have to re-pin most of the wires anyway, When the dealer gave me the harness, they stuck it in a giant box. Now it all fits in a small box about 1/16 the size of the original box they put it in.
Now I just need to get everything else done, so I can put a harness back together with everything positioned correctly and cleanly, and with all the wiring the right length for the swap.
Started trying to do some work on the Monte Carlo steering column after work today, to try and get the ignition lock cylinder swapped out. I have a new Pontiac lock cylinder with new keys, but all the Pontiac cylinders are dash mounted. The Monte Carlo switch is in the column. But the lock cylinders are a bit different. However, I'm having a little trouble finding info on how to get the cylinders pulled apart, so I can swap the tumblers (or just plug in the Pontiac one, if the core of the cylinder will actually fit directly into the column.
Does anyone have any info on how to get these cylinders further disassembled? The column is from a 2007 Monte Carlo, I think, and the Pontiac switch/cylinder is for a 04-08 Grand Prix.
If I can get that done, it'll be one more tiny step closer to getting this car done, at least.
So, I managed to get some tumblers swapped into the lock cylinder, and got it mostly working in the steering column switch today. It's a little finicky though, so I think maybe there's a slight misalignment or something, but haven't figured it out yet exactly. It's mostly working great though, and and it'll be nice to be able to use a late style single key with the car, once I get the column swapped in, and new door/trunk locks to go with it.
Figured out the issue with they ignition key cylinder sticking. Was the stupid automatic trans safety lock. Will take that thing off, as soon as I can find the right socket (tiny external torx) for it.
Looks like the clock springs I have don't fit the column either. I thought I had a couple more than I apparently do, and one that fits, but I don't know where they are, or might be, since they're not with the rest.
Since I can play with the wiring and getting the steering column ready to swap in, in the house, the rest of the work on that will make for good rainy day projects. Hopefully over the next few days, I'll be able to cut some dead branches out, and some bamboo and brush. Then I can hopefully get a nice big shed installed to house all the lawn equipment and some of the spare parts I've got lying around. And then I can have some room inside the garage to get some real work done.
Why not just power it from a battery? That's what I use for a 12v power supply.
I need a benchtop power supply anyway for other electronics projects. Batteries are heavy and have to be recharged. Plus, if it does draw almost 10A continuously, a cheap battery isn't going to last long. Bigger batteries cost as much as the power supply would.
And all the spare 12v batteries I have lying around are all bad. I need to take them off to be recycled.
There are lots of other vendors out there. Think about two way radio repair supply houses. You can easily find one for $100 or less.
Yeah, I'm not having trouble finding different models to think about purchasing. I was just curious about the nominal current draw the ECM places on the electrical system in the car, so I could make a better decision about which one to get.
Yeah, I'm not having trouble finding different models to think about purchasing. I was just curious about the nominal current draw the ECM places on the electrical system in the car, so I could make a better decision about which one to get.
Considering that most cars go years without blowing that fuse, it has several 9's of reliability. This means that the current draw is well below the fuse rating.
A fuse is like a lightbulb filament... 9.5A of continuous current will eventually blow a 10A fuse.
Originally posted by Will: Considering that most cars go years without blowing that fuse, it has several 9's of reliability. This means that the current draw is well below the fuse rating.
A fuse is like a lightbulb filament... 9.5A of continuous current will eventually blow a 10A fuse.
Right. I just don't want the continuous draw to be 6.5A, and end up with a power supply that only puts out 3-5A.
No matter though. I've ordered a power supply that can do up to 10A now, so I should be good on that front. Just need to get an OBD2 connector and should be able to make a bench harness for my ECM.
I haven't been able to get anything done really. Quickly turned to fall/winter weather here, so it's generally cold and almost always either raining or windy, neither of which makes for efficiently cleaning up a half acre of leaves or cutting out bamboo and trees. Supposed to be sunny, clear, and almost 60 this weekend, so hopefully I can some cleanup done then.
Still looking for a cam. All the aftermarket VVT cams are not that great though. All the ones I've looked at so far require installing the mechanical limiter which almost completely disables VVT, which I'd rather not do. So I'm going to put together some math to figure out what the limits on duration and lift are, to be able to get the maximum advantage with the most VVT range, and avoid having a piston launch a valve straight up through the decklid at 8000 RPM. I'm sure I could just call up Pat G or Comp or someone to get recommendations for custom grinds, but would prefer to do all the work myself, and learn and understand all the pieces that I don't already fully understand or know. I'm not doing the swap just to have a V8 Fiero. I chose the swap, and altered what I'm doing with it, specifically for the challenges involved in it.
At top dead center there is only about 1/8" or so of clearance between the piston and the closed valve. So as you go with more duration, lift, and more agressive lobe rates (more lift sooner), then the intake opening position becomes very critical.
A fun exercise would be to install a cam timing wheel, find TDC, measure the precise piston to valve clearance on both valves, at 2 degree increments for 10-15 degrees on both sides of TDC. This will give you a graph of the available valve lift room at various degrees around TDC. Then you could install a small setup spring on one intake and exhaust valves and measure the valve lift every 5 degrees from TDC for 20 to 30 degrees. This will let you see where the stock camshaft is in relation, and you could also calculate how many degrees you could phase the came in both directions while still maintaining about .090" piston to valve clearance. From there you can start looking at camshaft specs and see how different the IVO position already is, which is largely the reason to limit motion some.
For example from my measurements the stock Intake valve sees about .085" valve lift at 18 degrees ATDC and my New Era camshaft sees the same valve lift at 3 degrees ATDC. Further more, .1275" valve lift happens at 27 degrees ATDC stock, and 11 degrees ATDC with the New Era camshaft. So depending on the stock range of the phaser, it would be possible for the New Era camshaft to have piston to valve interference. This is why they limit travel, and the more aggressive camshafts need more limiting, but do they offer a phasers with a range or limitation, or are you better off taking the stock one and limiting it just enough for your specific camshaft setup?
Still looking for a cam. All the aftermarket VVT cams are not that great though. All the ones I've looked at so far require installing the mechanical limiter which almost completely disables VVT, which I'd rather not do.
They are probably doing that because they have to in order to do something significantly more aggressive than the stock cam. You will probably run up against the same limitations unless you change things like valve pockets or stroke. -Paul
------------------ 1988 Fiero Formula 25k miles, garaged since 1988
Originally posted by fieroguru: This is why they limit travel, and the more aggressive camshafts need more limiting, but do they offer a phasers with a range or limitation, or are you better off taking the stock one and limiting it just enough for your specific camshaft setup?
I know why the limit the phaser. I haven't seen any aftermarket phasers available. All I've seen is the kit where you modify the stock phaser with a limiter insert. From what I've seen, they all limit the phaser by the same amount. I'm not sure if the stock phaser can be limited by an amount other than what all the cam makers are limiting it by.
Apparently GM has two phasers available, one that is 62 degrees of movement, and the later which is 52 degrees. The limiter kits knock that down to about 16 degrees of movement.
Originally posted by Paul.S: They are probably doing that because they have to in order to do something significantly more aggressive than the stock cam. You will probably run up against the same limitations unless you change things like valve pockets or stroke. -Paul
They are doing it so they can get a more aggressive lopey idle sound, and get much more lift. I don't really want either of those though. I just want a little more than stock, not a lot more. But I might just end up with stock and 1.8 rockers at this point, if the math points me that way.
They are doing it so they can get a more aggressive lopey idle sound, and get much more lift.
I know what you mean. It seems that to compete in the market they have to outdo the other guy and too much is not quite enough.
quote
I don't really want either of those though. I just want a little more than stock, not a lot more.
That would be very cool. I would love to be able to do something like that. I am more into drivability and midrange torque than peak hp, a market few cater to.
quote
But I might just end up with stock and 1.8 rockers at this point, if the math points me that way.
That would be more inline with my resources and abilities, and I like lift more that duration and overlap. I'll have to take a look at doing that if I get that far along. -Paul
[This message has been edited by Paul.S (edited 12-14-2014).]
Originally posted by Paul.S: That would be more inline with my resources and abilities, and I like lift more that duration and overlap. I'll have to take a look at doing that if I get that far along.
Are you doing an LS4 swap? The LS4 never came with VVT, and I'm retrofitting it to my build. If you're doing an LS4 swap, there are a LOT more options available for aftermarket cams for non-VVT LSx engines, so you might be able to find what you want with that. I was previously going to use a stock LS1 cam in my build, but then I did some research on the VVT setup in the 08+ engines, and decided to retrofit. If you're not doing VVT, then just do a hardware delete of the DoD and you can run 0.600 lift all day long. Part of the reason for the duration, LSA, and overlap that aftermarket cams tend to run, is that, as fieroguru noted above, the piston to valve clearance isn't terribly large, so to avoid interference, sometimes you just have to go wild with some of the specs, if you're going to go wild with one of them.
Originally posted by Paul.S: Any idea the minimum additional weight an LS4 swap would add to a Fiero over a 2.8L? -Paul
My 88 Formula with LS4/F40 with A/C, 13" brakes, rear coil overs, my lateral link relocation kit, rod end lateral links, & 16" wheels tipped the scales at 2807 lbs.
[This message has been edited by fieroguru (edited 12-14-2014).]
I'm still in the wish list stage. I haven't even decided on the engine yet but the LS4 makes a lot of sense.
The LS4 being an all aluminum V8 for under $ 1000.00 was the stuff of dreams back in the day. If your believer of the power to weight philosophy; you cant beat the LS4 package. Just my $.02
My 88 Formula with LS4/F40 with A/C, 13" brakes, rear coil overs, my lateral link relocation kit, rod end lateral links, & 16" wheels tipped the scales at 2807 lbs.
Perfect! Now all I have to do is put my 88 Formula with A/C on a scale and subtract and I will have some real world numbers! Thanks, -Paul
------------------ 1988 Fiero Formula 25k miles, garaged since 1988
The LS4 being an all aluminum V8 for under $ 1000.00 was the stuff of dreams back in the day.
A small car with a mid engine aluminum V8 was a dream of mine back in the 70's when I had a 1965 Corvair and a picture of one with an upside down transaxle and a SBC Chevy where the back seat used to be.
Now a GT with an LS4 and a rear window like this so that people walking through the parking lot can see the engine in the “back seat” seems very tempting.
quote
If your believer of the power to weight philosophy; you cant beat the LS4 package.
I like the nice cu in/lb ratio as well. -Paul
------------------ 1988 Fiero Formula 25k miles, garaged since 1988
My 88 Formula with LS4/F40 with A/C, 13" brakes, rear coil overs, my lateral link relocation kit, rod end lateral links, & 16" wheels tipped the scales at 2807 lbs.
But the real key is your corner weights! And that makes me re-think a custom cradle... Obviously has to be done right; getting the axles the length needed for engine/trans 'balance'.. something any good build 'should' take into account but is a challenge.
But the real key is your corner weights! And that makes me re-think a custom cradle... Obviously has to be done right; getting the axles the length needed for engine/trans 'balance'.. something any good build 'should' take into account but is a challenge.
Two pounds difference left to right is big enough to worry about? Because that's what fieroguru's car weighed in at. I guess you could take the passenger seat out and throw a couple hundred pound bags of concrete in the floor to balance the weight of being in the driver seat out. A custom cradle isn't going to help with that though.
Two pounds difference left to right is big enough to worry about? Because that's what fieroguru's car weighed in at. I guess you could take the passenger seat out and throw a couple hundred pound bags of concrete in the floor to balance the weight of being in the driver seat out. A custom cradle isn't going to help with that though.
No, I'm saying he achieved a really good balance, all round. A person likely doesn't get that by just arbitrarily sticking the engine/trans on a cradle - that 'fits'... so it's just kudos to him for making it work so well..... obviously a lot of thought - and design/calculations - went into it. It is food for thought for all of us who are thinking about or doing a swap etc. And not that hard to do, we just have to take that extra step. Some weigh scales would help, wouldn't they ;-) !!!!
All these swaps are incentives as well as being thought-provoking. That's part of the unspoken 'payoff ' for the guys who post them; they help someone else by giving them a prod or inspiration. Yours too. GP
[This message has been edited by 85-308 (edited 12-16-2014).]
Originally posted by 85-308: No, I'm saying he achieved a really good balance, all round. A person likely doesn't get that by just arbitrarily sticking the engine/trans on a cradle - that 'fits'... so it's just kudos to him for making it work so well..... obviously a lot of thought - and design/calculations - went into it. It is food for thought for all of us who are thinking about or doing a swap etc. And not that hard to do, we just have to take that extra step. Some weigh scales would help, wouldn't they ;-) !!!!
All these swaps are incentives as well as being thought-provoking. That's part of the unspoken 'payoff ' for the guys who post them; they help someone else by giving them a prod or inspiration. Yours too. GP
Ah, it seemed like from your previous post that you were suggesting the left-right balance in the rear was a problem. I don't think it's hard to get right in general, in the Fiero, especially with a manual transmission. Even without scales it shouldn't be too hard to get near perfect weight balance in the cradle.
I wish I could take credit for having a detailed plan to obtain the corner weights my swap ended up with, but that just wasn't the case. I was focused on dropping 100 lbs from my SBC/Getrag swap and that was it from the weight focus.
The LS4/F40 is a very tight swap with only about +/- 3/8" (or less) of available placement variation in any direction, certainly not enough room to significantly alter the corner weights.
Someone has to bug you about it until it's done. Looking forward to hearing it run.
