• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

98 Excellent

About 2seater

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender:
  • Location:
    near Daves89
  • Interests:

Recent Profile Visitors

631 profile views
  1. There are Bosch 3's available with the EV1 connection, but you do need to look out for that when purchasing. I have 24# ones in my engine right now for use with my low boost turbo setup and the chip was modified to match so the integrator and BLM read correctly. They do seem to have a smoother idle and low speed operation. The output design isn't really much different than our Bosch 901's, both are a director plate type, but the 3's have lighter internals.
  2. To sort of pile on the Reatta isn't a performance car wagon: it weighs almost 100# MORE than a 4-door LeSabre of the same year. Sad but true. I have spent many years fooling around with this engine, which is a bit of an orphan in that there is essentially no aftermarket for it, but there is a lot for the later iterations. The closest thing to a plug and play is to install a Series I supercharged engine. It is pretty well diagnosed and engineered already and many have done so. I have decided to do it the hard way, and have tried my hand at turbocharging, with mixed results. It's easy to add more fuel, without changing injectors, just turn the pressure up. The limiting factor is the amount of air that can be ingested, and that is pretty limited. Without air to combine with the fuel, nothing good can happen. For the most part, the camshaft is the limiting factor. The heads are pretty good, but need cleanup work and they respond well. Of the stock camshafts for this engine, the 1988 model had the most lift and duration, but good luck finding one. It is pretty much the reason that boost works well on this engine, you don't need a lot of internal work to make it work well. Regarding what can be done externally, Ronnie's suggestion is valid, and there is a built in restriction in the rear manifold that should be corrected. I can't find my photo of it at the moment. Replacing the cat. with a modern replacement flows better too. We know this will flow better, but the question becomes, how much of that does the engine really use? How about this for a heretical idea, convert to E85. Where the system is air flow limited, using a fuel that carries some of it's own oxygen, allows you to burn more. Yes, the fuel is less energy dense, but you can burn more, so there is a net gain. The problem is you use 30%-35% more. Some could be re-gained by having flat top pistons made of install 3.8 Ford piston with a tiny dish to get the compression up two or three whole numbers This is my suggestion for attempting to quantify any gain. Use the diagnostics to monitor the MAF reading. Make a few full throttle runs through second gear. It doesn't have to be from a standing start which is hard on the transaxle. A rolling start will do and record the maximum reading observed. Record the weather conditions as well, temp., barometer, humidity etc.. After a change/improvement is made, do the same thing and compare. Generally, a bone stock Reatta will be around 125 gm/sec. The multiplier is 1.32 x MAF reading for approximate hp.
  3. I'm not clear on the last statement "someone who isn't expected to actually take care of their car"? Marginal performance improvement may be had but it isn't worth the expense to be saddled with running premium fuel full time. I had one many years ago from Ed Wright @ Superchips but I think it has been re-programmed at some point over the years. IMHO the stock chip is pretty well optimized for the air flow capability of the engine as it is and 87 octane. More useful changes can be made to the chip such as reprogramming the cooling fans to a lower temperature to match something like a 170*-180* thermostat, modifying the torque converter lockup to a higher threshold and maybe eliminate it in lower gears, which keeps the rpm's up a little in semi-urban areas, modify the idle rpm for better a/c performance in stop and go travel etc.. Any additional would involve mechanical changes, such as low restriction intake, open up the rear manifold restriction, a new replacement catalytic converter etc.. For anything more meaningful, internal engine changes are needed, head work, camshaft etc.. Boost is the easiest answer but then again, the chip becomes required.
  4. There should be no issues with alignment for reassembly. There is no direct connection between the engine and the frame bracket except for the little shock absorber, which is a flexible item. The impact should work fine and as a matter of fact, I use an impact to remove the nut from the bottom of the shock absorber too, so I don't need to try to hold the shaft.
  5. Did it have a performance curve available? Just curious, as some makers don't seem to be very forthcoming with that info. If it is a replacement for the O.E.pump used in the supercharged cars, it should be fine. Running lean on a boosted engine is not good.
  6. I wondered about checking the response of the sensor also but the impression I got from drtidmore was they are pretty dependable and the connection may be more problematic. It looks like we have reasonable confidence we can predict and test the sensors at normal ambient temperatures and apply an external correction of needed. A hi and low temperature chamber could be pretty small, and may have other uses, but I don't think there is much low hanging fruit regarding the sensor we are concerned with at present. JMHO
  7. I'm guessing the calibration might need to be changed a bit and I would guess the response time wouldn't be as fast not being in contact with the actual refrigerant, but may have possibilities as a fall back idea. There are two ideas, including the one above, that sound like a good garage project. As the Brits say, "get thee to the shed".
  8. I need to find a mating plug for the sensors to make a better way to measure the sensor itself. It is easy to bend that fine pin in the sensor with a mini-alligator clip. I thought I had some of the little Weatherpack/Metripak pins/sockets but I must be out? I am sure you are correct about the cooling not being optimized, but that will likely wait until I drain the system and replace the compressor. I might just switch the two temp. sensors as the high side one seems to be pretty accurate. Maybe a little junkyard searching will yield a few sensors? That Ronnie is on the ball with just the right part. Unless I am wrong, it is unfortunate the system has to be drained to pull the sensor. I cannot find any of my local shops I use have equipment, or will do, R12 systems. Maybe they just don't want to mess with it? Thank you for the information on the sensor shift.
  9. I lost my long winded reply :(( I will stop looking at tweaking the curve as it seems we are pretty close now, unless it would be helpful to verify the numbers in the ambient temperature area where the average user would test, say 15*C-35*C. If we are good enough now, great. My math skills seem to be having difficulty. This is just an exercise to get the concept down but this is my example: Per Ronnie's link I checked bd27 = 21*C, bd28 = 19*C against my temp. gun = 20.9*C. So I would need to reduce my resistance approx. 200 Ohms, in this fictional example, to correct bd28. I know nothing about the performance of thermistors, but if 25*C is a common rating point, it would seem 2.75k-2.8k would be in line with what we need. I defer to drtidmore on all things related to this subject.
  10. I used the calculator to get predicted values based on my data points of 23*C, 10*C and 0*C. I added a second column of predicted resistance values to the right of the original numbers. The predicted values worked perfectly and showed the correct value in diagnostic bd28. This also provides a little more definition of the range of acceptable resistance for each temperature. The only place the prediction was off was at temperatures above the 23*C I used for the calculator. It predicted 2.501k would be 26*C, but bd28 showed 27*C. I found from the previous test that 2.62-2.66kOhms works for 26*C so perhaps I should have used a higher value in the calculator to cover the entire range? I will try that to see if the predictions fall more line. EDIT: I ran the numbers again using 37*C as the top number and everything falls in line nicely and the low temperature stays within the needed range. I guess that calculator is smarter than I am original-predicted indicated temperature Open -39 9.96k 9.893 -2 9.67 9.436 -1 8.99/9.17 9.00 0 8.64 8.583 1 8.18 8.184 2 7.46 7.439 4 6.97 7.091 5 6.72 6.758 6 6.57 6.441 7 6.17 6.137 8 5.63 5.847 9 5.57 5.570 10 2.62/2.66 26 this matches the high side indicated
  11. I know this has sort of taken on a life of its own but it appeals to my curiosity. I did a quick hand plot of the readings I posted.and I noticed a couple of obvious outliers. I think I will try this in reverse based on the predicted values from the online calculator to see how close it is. The high temperature area seems pretty smooth, even done by hand, so I will try just the lower temperature area.
  12. Unfortunately it is unknown how close the readings are to the borders between cells, so that may be part of the issue in getting a precisely predictable curve. I am sure it is reasonably close, and of course more data points in the calculator would probably help too. In a perfect world, a series of trimmers in the desired ranges, or maybe a ten turn pot, plus a way to watch as the dashboard indicator changes would better establish the center of each cell. The ECM is decoded pretty well. Too bad the BCM isn't. On a related subject, if this drift is normal, how well can we trust the plethora of other similar ones, all through the systems, coolant, air temp, even in the MAF? I'm sure GM expected some of that, but maybe not for going on 30 years
  13. I should have switched to a lower resistance pot as the 10k gets really fiddly down low, but it worked out okay. This what I found: k ohms indicated temp. *C 2.918 23 2.660 26 2.390 28 2.110 31 1.885 33 1.784 35 1.675 37 1.555 39 This my plug for the sensor with pins inserted. Maybe not the best choice for background but you can see it is different than any illustration or photo I have seen?
  14. Well, it's in the fifties and raining right now, so a little time in the garage would be a good diversion. Welcome to the first day of summer.
  15. Yikes! I think I got lost around the second line, but the calculator is pretty cool. I must admit, the two different curves shown are a bit confusing, at least to me. It looks like the calculator sort of idiot proofs it though giving hard numbers rather than trying to interpret the curve. Would it be helpful to widen the range of the readings or hone in on the areas we are interested in? I am guessing that temps. around normal ambient would be what users might first encounter, engine off and after sitting for a while? The two readings that both indicate zero were discovered by accident and not by plan. The trimmer pot is not the easiest to finally adjust with Homer Simpson fingers :)) If we have enough data, I am good with that too.