• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Posts posted by

  1. Philip: Did you get two new "o-rings" for those two coolant ports with the last gasket kit? If not, make sure you get them with the next kit. If the kit does not come with them, get them seperately (GM sells them). I have had instances where the coolant was able to "seep" thru the paper gasket over time. Also, in the pictures you provided I see what appears to be some contaminiation of the sealing surfaces around the coolant ports on both the lower intake and SC. If you can't clean these up, it would be acceptible to smear a very light coating of ultra-black RTV on these surfaces before assembly.

  2. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The gasket between the throttle body and S/C seems to be fine. I used a new one (and I can say that I'm pretty darn sure it was the right one). </div></div>

    This does NOT look good to me:


    As the fellow earlier said, if coolant made it past the gasket it would immediately get sucked right into the engine. I would obtain the correct fitting gasket before proceeding.


  3. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thank you. I'm gonna go nap, and then I've got to help my brother move.

    Will look into the service manual.

    And hey, Ryan's chips have arrived! Yay </div></div>

    Check and make sure all vacuum lines got plugged back in, including the one going to the brake booster. A massive vacuum leak will prevent the engine from starting, especially on a MAF system. If you are confident all of your vacuum lines are connected properly, check for spark. Check for injector pulse. Do NOT use a conventional test light to check for injector signal from the ECM, you can fry the injector drivers. Only use approved "NOID" lights. You can get these at autozone.

    BTW, I went out to the junkyard today and found a 94 or 95 3800 Series 1 SC engine. I got to looking at the fuel rail and found the fuel pressure specs for the Series 1 SC engine printed right on the regulator: 2.7 bar. That works out to 39psi; and that would be without any vacuum or boost present at the regulator.

    TrofeoSC: Nice looking swap!


  4. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> me thinking. Accel makes high performance coils for the Magnavox unit (what I've been using but I swtched back to a Delco to avoid most ignition problems. Hard to troubleshoot with multiple problems) and also the 3 for the Delco

    Here's a link to the Delco coils from Jeg's </div></div>

    Quite honestly I don't see the need for aftermarket coils for these engines. The coil-over-plug setup sounds nice, but I don't think it is necessary. Allow me to explain...

    Concerning the Magnavox type coils, that was the same setup GM used on the Turbo Regals and Grand Nationals. There are pleanty of people out there running 9's and faster in the 1/4 mile using stock GM/Magnavox ignition components. Same goes for the newer "Delco" systems (3-coil). The Grand Prix community has proven you can run 10's and faster in a FWD car using the stock ignition system.

    I have worked with MSD and ACCEL aftermarket coils in the past, and quite honestly, I have realized that most of the time they create more problems than they solve. Personally, I wouldn't waste any money on them. The reason why is the stock coils can supply more than enough energy to light off one of these engines under boost -- that much has been proven. Secondly, a "hotter" coil is going to require more juice to activate it and I have seen many people running these aftermarket coils fry their stock ignition modules.

    If I were going to do any modification to the ignition system on my 3800's, I would save the money and do a coil-on-plug setup like TrofeoSC has done. But again, I don't think it is absolutely necessary.

  5. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While you have it off, you could paint it (and the valve covers) RED!!!!

    They should be dry by tomorrow, and you're not busy getting ED08 readings now.

    Once you have it together, y'know it'll never get COLORIZED! </div></div>

    This is the exact opposite way I do conversions. I try to make them as OE looking as possible. The only things that get attention on my Trofeo are the ignition coils (Vortec coil-per-cylinder) and the K&N cone air filter. The latter will go away as soon as I get around to building a real airbox. </div></div>

    So how did you get coil per cylinder to work with the Trofeo ECM?

  6. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The aluminum is in excellent shape. Should I use nothing at all on the gasket? </div></div>

    Honestly you shouldn't need anything on the gasket. If you didn't use any RTV sealer before and it leaked, I would say try using some. But if you did try using RTV before and it leaked, it is very possible the thickness of the RTV around those coolant ports probably caused the leak.


  7. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

    So yeah, I got it off this afternoon. The coolant leak was between the intake manifold and the supercharger, below the throttle body. It was pretty substantial...I'd consider it a trickle. I didn't see anything wrong. The two yellow O rings (these and the gasket I bought new when I assembled) were seated where they should be. The leak was enough to make a pool of coolant in the intake manifold. I can't either way if this leak was going on during my testing. I don't know too well, but I'm sure it had some type of influence on my readings and the bogging.

    Since I used the L67 intake manifold, there shouldn't be any compatibility problems that I know of. I just went out again and took another close look, but didn't find any cracks etc.

    Disassembly was pretty simple. Took less than an hour.

    Ryan (or anyone else): have there been any problems like this before? Is there a special procedure in doing this that I don't know of. On both sides of my gaskets I've been using this Permatex stuff...comes in a short, little plastic can with a brush in the cap and is kinda brown. Is this good? Is this one of those times to use RTV?

    Thank you. </div></div>

    I don't normally use RTV between the SC and lower intake manifolds on the engines I work with unless there was a lot of pitting of the aluminum. If you are going to use RTV, I suggest permatex ultra black or ultra copper for this application.

    Padgett, you have a PM.

  8. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Some time ago I put together a CD with an enormous amount of data on 5B (code in the PROM for a 3800) engines and the Motorolla chipset including disassemblies of the ECM and BCM and a number of the different PROMs used on Reattas plus a few L-67s. Sent it to a few people but nothing ever came of it.

    However I have never put it all together so if anyone has the time and inclination to put it together, drop me a line and I'll burn a copy. Also be glad to advise on specifics but have too many projects now and am happy with mine. </div></div>

    I wouldn't mind a copy. PM or email me and let me know how much you want.


  9. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Alas, I'm going to have to tear off the top of the motor to get the supercharger off and replace the seals and gaskets. I'm pretty sure it only started today or at least since I last ran it, because I've spent a while under the hood of it with it running and never noticed this leak. My dad, nor my local mechanic hasn't either. It's right under the throttle body.

    Never knew the dollar sign could stand for anything other than money grin.gif. But I thank Ryan, Padgett, Greg, and everyone else thats helped out on this undertaking. If I was old enough, I'd buy you guys some beers. Or, from another thread, a "cee-ga"! I don't smoke or drink but I don't see any harm in it if its once in a while and not harming anyone </div></div>

    Philip, I don't smoke or drink either but my car sure does! (tires and race gas that is). I don't expect any compensation since this is turning into a learning experience for everyone. I feel as though all of this information should be in the public view so it can be the best help to the community.

    TrofeoSC: you have a PM.


  10. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

    LV8 really isn't a table, it's a calculation based on MAF and RPM. Adjusting the MAF tables adjusts LV8.</div></div>

    I was under the impression that there is "something" in the programming that tells the ECM how to assign LV8 readings. If it isn't a table, is there a constant? (my information on $5B1 and $5B2's is quite limited, so any info you can provide would be quite helpful).

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I question if John has the scalar right in the 94-95 .tdf file. I've seen MAF scan values in the 200+gm/sec on these cars. The Tunercat program has it's own scalar that is separate from the scalar used in the .bin file that's actually loaded in the car. I don't have a .bin here for the 94-95 PCM, but if you could take a look at location $8E78 and let me know what's loaded in there I could tell you what is actually used.

    Here is the MAF table from my Series 1 S/C engine running the 8253:

    MAF.jpg </div></div>

    As I mentioned earlier, my information on the earlier 3800 computers is quite limited. TrofeoSC, I noticed you have reset the scalar on your $5B2 MAF tables so you could attain 256 gm/sec flow rates (stock maxes out at about 171 gm/sec), do you have a "good" commented disassembly of the $5B2 or $5B1 codes you would be willing to share? Please understand I don't want to take your hard work and use it without giving you due credit and compensation. However, any light you can shed on this issue will help the Reatta community.

  11. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sorry I was away from a computer for a day.

    Uh, yeah. So Ryan, do you wish that I send my memcal back to you? I'm pretty tired at the moment, so I'm not fully reading on this MAF stuff.

    Was able to get the injector numbers. I found 927, 467, and 0-280-150-934. It had a symbol on it too. Not sure if it was Bosch </div></div>

    Actually what I think I am going to do is lend you an adapter that will plug in between your mem-cal and the ECM. This adapter has a socket on it which will allow you to swap out individual EPROM chips. That way I can send you a couple of different chips to try out.

    Give me a couple of days to get the new chips done, but I should get them sent out to you in time to be there by next weekend.


  12. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

    I would guess GM spaced the rings on the balancer differently to prevent them being switched, but the reason baffles me? The internal construction of the engine indicates the only difference is that some of the s/c engines used a floating piston pin. Maybe something else? </div></div>

    Very possible. I looked up some GM part numbers and have the following conclusions...

    88 LN3 crank is different than 91-95 L27 and L67 cranks; I already knew this because all LN3's I have seen had a 6-bolt flywheel flange and the L27/L67's had 8 bolts. Crankshaft part numbers are the same for both the L27 and L67.

    Connecting rods: LN3 and L27 have same p/n. L67 has different part number. Of the engines I have seen apart, the L67 connecting rods are much beefier than the n/a applications; IE: heavier.

    Pistons and pins: Again, LN3 and L27 uses identical part number. L67 is different and is beefier than n/a counterparts.

    Since the 3800 engines are externally balanced, most of the weight change to account for the differences between the SC and N/A differences must be made at the balancer and flexplate/flywheel. That is probably why the L67 dampener Philip got wouldn't work with his crank sensor.

    As far as the tuning is concerned, it would be nice to have some LV8/load data to see if the ECM is going into "high load" too soon. Not only would this give the engine too little timing, but it would probably give it too much fuel. I use Tunercat also and there is no defined table in the $5B1 (88 LN3) programming that assigns LV8 values based on MAF and RPM. In fact, in all of the 3800 platforms I support, such a table does not exist.

    With that being said, there is another thing we might want to consider. Concerning MAF calibration tables, I noticed they were nearly identical between Philip's stock LN3 tables and the 1995 L67 tables I pulled from a stock .bin file. However, when I look at 92-93 L67 tables (use a different computer than the 94-95 L67), the MAF values are much different. See below...

    Stock 1988 LN3 MAF calibration tables:


    Stock 1994-95 L67 MAF calibration tables:


    Now here is the one that is really different... 92-93 L67:


  13. Sorry its taking me so long to post replies to this thread, guys. I am really busy in the shop right now so I am getting to this thread as often as I can...

    As far as the timing goes, I have set up Philip's main timing table as close to the stock 95 3800 SC timing table as I felt was "safe". Given this, it is very possible to see only 6 deg of timing at lower RPMs...

    The stock 94-95 3800 SC timing table:


    Philip's timing table on the chip I made for him:


    This is my first attempt at using an LN3 ECM to control a supercharged engine, so please bear with me. As far as the reluctor wheels are concerned, I don't think that is the problem here. However, the LN3 and L67 balancers do have different counter-balance factors, as the 3800's are externally balanced. While I don't think this is causing any of the tuning problems Philip is experiencing, this is something that must be considered when trying to use the L67 parts on an LN3 engine.

    What we need to determine next is if the LN3 computer is traveling into higher load fuel and spark maps too soon in relation to actual engine load. My tuning software does not show me every table that exists in the LN3 and L67 computers, it is very possible there is another table that I cannot see in the L67 programming that has an impact on engine load based on supercharger logic. Obviously the LN3 computer won't have this table. If this is the case, I can rescale the MAF tables to work around this problem.

    At this point I am inclined to believe the MAF scaling is a problem between the two systems. Based on what Philip has provided as far as data, it sounds like what may be happening is the LN3 computer is thinking the MAF is flowing a lot more air than it actually is; at least above a certain flow rate. I agree it should be very difficult for one to get into the higher LV8 portion of the timing table while the vehicle is in neutral. With this happening, the computer can be dumping way too much fuel causing the bog. Philip, sounds like we need to try another chip with different MAF values.


  14. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Haha! I got the cat sawzall-ed off and she revs up fine! We're calling about having a new cat installed </div></div>

    Outstanding. Check with Jegs or Summit as you can get hi-flow cats for about $50 or so.

  15. Philip: about this glowing exhaust issue... Is this the first time this has occurred? If so, something has changed since you swapped out plugs and wires (assuming that is the last thing you changed). Doublecheck your firing order.

    I have only experienced glowing manifolds a couple of times over the years and the cause was incorrect ignition and/or cam timing or incorrect firing order (ign wire hookup). I haven't personally experienced a lean condition causing this to happen, at least not at very light loads. Furthermore, if the O2 voltage is still moving around and is not stuck rich or lean, than the ECM isn't having trouble adjusting the A/F ratio so I doubt that is the issue...assuming the O2 sensor is not sending a false signal to the ECM or being mislead by a misfire condition.

    Again, I would try unhooking the cat just to see if there is any change with the bogging. As far as the stock LN3 exhaust manifolds being a restriction; the very first L67 swap I did a 1992 L67 was used which had a very poorly cut hole in the rear exhaust manifold for the exhaust dump (outlet to the cat). After discovering this poorly designed restriction, I promptly ported it out and performance increased. However, previous to that, no misfires or bogs were occuring because of it's presence. Therefore I am not inclined to believe this is causing the problem.

    Philip, I'd advise you not try running the stock LN3 injectors (which flow 19 lb/hr) with the chip I have done for the SC because the L67 programming is set up for 29 lb injectors. However, you can try running the LN3 injectors if you reinstall a stock LN3 chip; although I strongly suggest you DO NOT attempt any boost operation. The LN3 programming will not give the now-supercharged engine enough fuel and will give it too much timing under boost which can result in serious damage.

  16. First of all, Philip can no longer run a stock Reatta or any other stock LN3 mem-cal (chip) in his car because he is using the larger L67 injectors. If he tries using a LN3 chip, he will flood out his engine.

    It sounds like your fuel pressure readings have improved with the new pump, however, I am troubled by the fact the fuel pressure isn't changing when you unplug the fuel pressure regulator. With the engine running at idle, with the vacuum line plugged in, your fuel pressure should be 35-38psi; as you indicated you had. However, that pressure should have jumped to approx 42-45psi when you unplugged the regulator. Was there vacuum present at this vacuum line at idle? If not, there must be a vacuum leak somewhere. As far as fuel pressure under boost is concerned, again; I don't have specific specs but I am pretty sure it should be above 50psi at about 10psi of boost.

    Philip, you INT and BLM counts look MUCH BETTER than they were. However, since the bogging problem hasn't changed whatsoever (even though the INT and BLM counts have improved) tells me we MIGHT be dealing with a mechanical issue here. Checking for a clogged catalytic converter is a VERY GOOD idea as well. As the guy said earlier, unbolt your exhaust system from the manifold and see if the bog still exists. But I am not ready to rule out a computer tuning issue just yet. The O2's shouldn't move around under "WOT" but since you are getting a bog, or misfire, this is probably the cause of the irratic readings.

    As far as bringing the car to me, that shouldn't be a problem. Contact me via email and we will discuss time and date.


  17. If it is ok with Philip, I think too it would be a good idea to continue the discussion here so the bulk of the Reatta community can use it as a reference...

    Yes, I knew what injectors philip was using when I did the chip but the reason why I asked again was because he was talking about swapping parts back on from the LN3. I just wanted to make sure.

    I would like to take a moment and explain what I have done with Philip's programming. I have tried a unique idea in which I have attempted to marry as much of the L67 programming as I could with the LN3 computer system. I am confident we can get the LN3 computer to work with the supercharger, although I am sure it is going to take some trail and error until we get it working right. For this application, I suggest that Philip use the L67 throttle body and MAF sensor since that is what the chip I did for him is programmed for.

    As far as INT (Integrator) and BLM (Block Learn) counts are concerned, here is how that factors into the fuel equation...

    Integrator is short term fuel trim. The median value is 128. The computer will adjust this value rapidly in order to satisfy stoich fuel ratio (14.7:1). Any number higher than 128 tells us that the computer is having to add fuel to the base fuel map in the programming in order to get the A/F ratio rich enough to meet the 14.7:1 stoich value. Any number lower than 128 tells us the computer is having to remove fuel from the base fuel map in order to lean out the A/F ratio to meet the 14.7:1 stoich value. These same numbers apply to the BLM counts.

    The BLM is long-term or stored fuel trim. Most GM cars have a 16 BLM cells, or memory points where the learned fuel trims can be stored. The cells are divided up by RPM and LV8 (load). BLM learning is not always enabled. Even if the system is in Closed Loop, there are still additional parameters/requirements that must be met in order for BLM cell learning to take place. These parameters are different from vehicle to vehicle.

    In any case, if your INT counts are hovering around say the 160's, you should notice the BLM counts slowly moving towards that level. As they do, the INT's should come back down. Once the INT comes back down to 128, the BLM's will stablize and the ECM may decide to store that new BLM value to the approprite memory cell for future use (lookup).

    Also in these computers there is a function known as PE (power enrichment). On stock LN3 programming, the ECM is instructed to enter "PE mode" around 50-60% throttle, depending on the RPM level. On stock L67 programming, PE mode is entered at about 40-50% since boost can build on these engines with relatively low throttle openings. Nevertheless, when PE mode is active, the INT and BLM counts will freeze, no BLM cell learning will be enabled, and the O2 sensor signal will be ignored (the computer will not attempt to make any adjustments to the fuel trims during PE). That is why we need to know what the O2 voltage or exhaust A/F ratio is doing when in PE mode. A wide-band O2 sensor is far more accurate in this area, but the factory narrow-band O2 sensor does give us a ballpark idea of what the fuel mixture is. However, if misfires are occuring, this will allow raw oxygen to enter the exhaust system which will throw O2 sensor readings off.

    There are a couple of things Philip and I need to figure out with his car. We have already determined the fuel pressure isn't rising to spec of the L67 engine. Once he gets the fuel pump replaced (I would advise changing the fuel filter at the same time if it hasn't recently been done), we can proceed with further diagnosis. There is nothing more difficult than trying to "tune-around" a mechanical or electrical issue that exists; especially on a project like this.


  18. Wow, there are so many good questions in this thread. Lets see if I can help out...

    For the boost gauge hookup, you don't need to tap and drill anything on the lower intake manifold, at least not with this intake. That black vacuum block that sticks out of the top-front of the SC does "see" boost. The fuel pressure regulator and boost bypass solenoid should already be connected to this block. You can connect a boost gauge here.

    As far as the MAF's are concerned, the LN3 and L67 units are definitely calibrated differently. I have reprogrammed Philip's chip to work with the L67 MAF sensor.

    Plug gap on stock L67 engines is 0.060" using platinum plugs. If one were using copper plugs, I suggest a gap of 0.050" as a starting point.

    Fuel pumps and pressure. I don't have the base fuel pressure specs for the Series 1 L67 right off hand, but I do know without the vac line plugged into the regulator and the engine running the pressure should be about 40-45psi. With boost pressure, the fuel pressure should rise 1psi for every 1psi of boost. If it is not, or the fuel pressure actually drops under boost, then the stock fuel system is not keeping up with the fuel demands of the engine. Which brings me to my next point.

    Stock, naturally aspirated fuel pumps are designed to supply an adequate amount of fuel for the engines they are designed to work with; usually up to 45psi. However, at higher pressures these same pumps cannot supply the required fuel flow volume boosted engines demand which is why I suggested Philip install a pump designed for "boost duty".


  19. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We bought Claret as a legal steal, so we already have a convertible laying around. And convertibles are fun cool.gif

    We're exchanging emails with Ryan of GM tuners/Sinister Performance on doing the work.

    Ryan and I did some research. We're using an ECM from a 1991 Reatta (Jim Finn). The problem we had before was the typical Reatta ECM could operate the L67, but could not register enough airflow under boost. However, the 1991s used the Tuned Port Injection (TPI!) 3800, which can properly register the airflow and control the L67. Instrumentation will work perfectly fine (we predict) since the ECM is from a Reatta with a similar instrument panel. An '88-89 dash and ECC would be very difficult, if not impossible to get to work with the 1991 ECM.

    Transmission will be a performance built 4T60e, as used in the 1991s also. </div></div>

    I think I MIGHT have just come up with a potential solution to the airflow issue. I am currently working with another custom chip customer of mine concerning a his particular 3800 Series 1 turbo using a non-SC computer.

    I did some thinking concerning MAFs and realized that the GN guys are using the newer GM-type MAF's (LT1) and a MAF Translator aftermarket module. They also use something called the "extender" chip in their computers which allows their computers to operate beyond the stock MAF limits. Anyway, what I am getting at is you Reatta guys may be able to do something similar, although it may not require the use of any aftermarket modules. Allow me to explain...

    The stock 3800 Series 1 n/a MAF sensor outputs the following frequency per air flow value, according to the stock GM programming...





    .... ....





    As you can see this MAF sensor's boundries are between 2.00 kHz and 10.4 kHz. Now, lets take a look at the 94-97 LT1 V8 MAF sensor...








    .... ....










    Now you may notice the LT1 MAF has a larger window of operation (approx 1.5 kHz - 11.2 kHz). Although the Reatta ECM will only be able to interperate between 2.0 and 10.4 kHz, this should give us enough room to try what I propose...

    I have noticed on the stock Reatta chips, while I cannot tell the computer to register airflow higher than 170 gm/sec, I can set the airflow as low as I want in any of the 8 MAF tables. This means we MIGHT be able to reprogram this computer to work with a LT1 or similar type MAF sensor and force the computer to deliver the correct amount of fuel and timing for boost. Effectively, we will be rescaling the load values in the spark table to give the computer enough "room" to recognize the increased air flow. I don't know if this is going to work yet nor how well it will work but this priliminary information and brainstorming looks promising.


  20. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ryan,

    What is the general procedure and part needs and sources for the 3800 II swap? (Your list below) I am considering it for my 270,000 mile 88 coupe, the mandrel bent exhaust seems like the hardest part to find or have fabbed. Do you need to replace the half shafts? Thanks from a shade tree mechanic. Maybe you could put together an instruction manual wink.gif


    Modified Shift Accumulators

    Adjustable Modulator

    OBD1 3800 PCM

    3.4 SC Pulley

    3.0" Cold Air Induction

    2.5" mandrel bent exhaust downpipe w/ aftermarket hi-flo flex

    2.5" high flow cat and mandrel bent cat-back exhaust

    OEM muffler </div></div>

    As far as procedure, the mechanical aspect of the swap is pretty straightforward, as I documented on this forum:

    Obviously the wiring and exhaust are the biggest issue most people will face. The trans CV shaft issue will differ depending on what trans you use. The left side axle is the same from stock Reatta and can be used with the 4T60-E. The right side axle will have to be shorter because the 4T60-E is longer than the Reatta's 440-T4 (and/or 4T60). Keep in mind the 92 Riviera came with a 4T60-E from the factory and shares the same body platform as the Reatta so I would assume you could just use they axles from that car. However, the 3800 Series II SC engines came with either HD versions of the 4T60-E (1996 only) or the 4T65-E. These "HD" versions used larger inner CV shaft tripod sizes than the regular 65/60 and earlier OD trannys. You would need to disassemble your Reatta CV shafts and the HD shafts from the donor car and assemble a hybrid shaft using parts from both. Again, the Riviera was produced into the 4T65-E HD era so you might look to this car for donor parts if you end up using a HD 60-E or 65-E trans.

  21. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Two of my tools (Moates and Diacom) connect to a PC and support recording of multiple frames. That way I can make a run or two and look at all of the variables.

    Nice looking Fiero with a later CD player but no oil pressure guage or is that one under the tach ? (one way to think of a Reatta is a bigger Fiero). I keep telling Reatta people that to go really fast on the least money, buy a trailer hitch and a Fiero. (Currently Fiero-deprived but might consider an '88 Formula with 5-speed and T-Tops). </div></div>

    Yes, the oil pressure gauge is under the tach.

  22. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dont know much about that knock warning guage, but the scan tool will allow you to track more than just knock, and download results for later analysis and comparison to previous runs.


    Very true, BUT you have to be watching the scan tool readout to know WHEN you are getting knock. Try focusing on a relatively small number on an LCD screen while you are blazing down the road at WOT. Not very safe. I prefer to actually have a gauge with bright LED's light up when something is happening. The knock gauge I use looks like this:


    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

    I'm not sure what lessons the L67 crowd hasn't learned. Look at ZZPerformance , 3800 Performance , or Intense Racing . All of these vendors have figured out various aspects of the L67 to the point that there are actually step-by-step recipies for properly modding an existing L67 car depending on how far you want to go. </div></div>

    No offense to any of the vendors you mentioned but each have spent a lot of money in trial/error finding out what works and what doesn't. Most of the time they are reluctant to give out this info, rather they would prefer you just buy their product without explaination. Furthermore, most haven't even tried different ideas or even acknowledged the lessons learned by the Turbo Buick community over a decade ago. I know this because I have talked to a few of these vendors directly. The most common response I got from them was "thats a different engine that what we are using so what works for them, won't work for us". I don't know about you but thats a pretty poor attitude to have towards history when the engine you are using is based off that technology.

    Don't get me wrong; ZZP, Intense, and the others have brought some very useful products to market for the 3800 that we would not otherwise have. All I am saying is, at least up until recently, NONE of these vendors advocated the use of a knock warning gauge. Go over to and ask around and you will find out that is one of the first upgrades to get applied to a Turbo Buick after it is purchased. In my opinion, shortsightedness and ignorance of history is bad for business.

  23. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

    We also had the evidently mistaken belief that the built in knock-retard function would compensate for detonation. I suspect that it was but the damage was being done in the cycle that cause the detonation as the knock retard only occurs after the first few detonations are experienced.


    Yea, thats the whole problem with the system. Detonation must occur BEFORE the PCM can retard timing. And to add a litte bit of info on your timing tables, keep in mind the 94-95 SC engines have a taller block and longer connecting rods than the Series 2 engines, therefore the piston dwell time at TDC is longer which has an effect on ignition timing. Also, the Series 1 engines have less effecient flowing heads than the Series 2 engines. I have compared stock timing tables between the Series 2 SC and Series 1 SC engines and they are different. The Series 2 engine appears to not want as much timing advance as the Series 1 engines.

  24. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The engine builder blamed the damage on Knock. </div></div>

    This is exactly why experienced GTP/Regal GS modders will tell newbies the first "mod" to be purchased is a scan tool to monitor knock. It seems modding the Series II S/C motor is all about making sure you eliminate/reduce knock as much as possible, and check for any changes after each mod made.

    So far, I havent touched mine yet. But CAI, new downpipe/u-bend delete, colder plugs, and either a 3.5 or 3.4 pulley would be a good start if I could get the dough together. </div></div>

    I don't understand why so many in the L67 community choose to ignore the lessons learned over a decade ago by the Turbo Buick community. One of the first mods any of those guys do (including myself) was to purchase and install a Casper's KNOCK WARNING gauge kit. This gauge has several LED's that light up sequentually whenever a knock is "heard". For the L67, you will need to purchase the "stand-alone" knock gauge kit. However, I believe it is worth it. Not like you can watch a small number on a scan tool while you are performing a WOT excursion...much easier to stick a gauge near your line-of-sight.