Turbo Buick Forums banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello Gurus,

I recently installed Direct Scan and wanted to post my first batch of results to see what you think.

The runs were made at only 15 psi of boost and fuel pressure at 45 psi (vac. off). Note that even at this low boost level I'm seeing some knock (more in pass 1-- both
passes in same spot, temp = 70F) and fuel certainly looks good (quite rich actually!). Ideas?


Files are in both standard and comma delimited form depending on folks' preferences:

www.sit.wisc.edu/~sbscrivner/pass1.ds
www.sit.wisc.edu/~sbscrivner/pass2.ds
www.sit.wisc.edu/~sbscrivner/pass1.csv
www.sit.wisc.edu/~sbscrivner/pass2.csv

Thanks for reading and taking the time to think about these numbers-- I certainly appreciate it!

Scott


My build up:
Recently installed Red Armstrong 93 chip

Tompka Cold-Air Kit w/ K&N filter, TH 3" SS DP (no cat.), ATR 2.5" Exhaust, Poston stock-replacement headers, Hot-wired Walbro FP, ATR adj. FP reg., Blue Tops, TE-60 w/homemade adj. Wastegate., 0.63 exhaust housing, CAS V-4, Motor stock except for Comp Cams 979-12 valve springs, Transmission Built by Jimmy's Transmission, PI Vigilante 9.5" lock-up TC (pump 0)


[This message has been edited by GN SBS (edited April 30, 2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
I took a look at the files for you and saw a few thinks.

1. Your chip is calling for 21.8 degrees of timing at WOT. This is more in the range of a 100 octane chip so that is probably part of the reason you're seeing knock at 15psi.

2. You are running way too rich. O2 volts should be in the 760-780 range instead of 830-900 your at. Also you're idle BLM's are too low at 111, showing again that you're rich. You need to lower the fuel pressure to get them into the 128 range. The BLM update disable message you're seeing is normal, and is only active when highlighted which it wasn't during your runs.

3. You weren't seeing 255 from the MAF. With your mods, you should easily be able to max out the MAF. What intake setup are you using and are there any exhaust restrictions?

4. According to the DS files, you were in PE the entire time for both passes and the BLM was locked at WOT so you are definately in PE mode.

HTH


------------------
------
Rob Andersen
86 GN, Stock turbo and intercooler, Alchohol Injection, 43# Bosch injectors, MM Translator Plus w/3" MAF and extender chip, Hotwired Walbro 307, Hooker 2 1/2" duals, Hooker 2 1/2" Downpipe, Test pipe
12.39 @ 106.9 MPH
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks for the comments-- I will contact the chip maker (Red Armstrong) to get comments about the timing.

I thought the MAF #s were somewhat odd-- I have a Tompka cold air intake system (K&N filter out of engine compartment) and I couldn't imagine where an exhaust restriction would be coming from given that I have no cat. and a TH 3" DP, and ATR's 2.5" exhaust-- anyone have ideas? And they're low but don't look like the type of thing you'd see with a bad MAF, right?

Any additional input appreciated!
Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Well, I doubt it's an intake or exhaust restriction then. First thing I would do would be to lower fuel pressure a pound or two at a time and make a few more runs and see what the numbers look like. Just keep an eye on the knock. I bet leaning it out will really wake it up, being how rich it's running now.

------------------
------
Rob Andersen
86 GN, Stock turbo and intercooler, Alchohol Injection, 43# Bosch injectors, MM Translator Plus w/3" MAF and extender chip, Hotwired Walbro 307, Hooker 2 1/2" duals, Hooker 2 1/2" Downpipe, Test pipe
12.39 @ 106.9 MPH
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Spoke with Red and he suggested that DS reads a little off and the timing numbers and that what I'm observing is within the reasonable range for a 93 chip.

He nicely took a lot of time to speak with me and after considering a number of factors made the following suggestions concerning the odd low boost knock:

1. Bad tank of gas?

2. Run higher octane to rule out false knock

3. Remove 1 MAF screen (just general idea-- not related to knock).

Anyone have ideas to add to the list?

thanks,
Scott
 

·
Resident Idiot
Joined
·
11,462 Posts
Spoke with Red and he suggested that DS reads a little off and the timing numbers and that what I'm observing is within the reasonable range for a 93 chip.
Until someone proves otherwise.. 21.8* of timing on direct scan equals 21.8* timing! That sounds hokie to me.

Is your boost gauge not accurate? Maybe running higher boost than you think?

IC not too efficient? Maybe dirty or clogged/leaking?

Running AC 43 Plugs?

------------------


Stock Turbo, Stock Heads, Stock CAM, V4, MSD50's, TH DP, JayJackson 62mm TB, 16position MaxEffort Chip. 3750# with Driver
12.35 & 108.39 Street Trim
11.92 @ 111.77 Race Ready
mailto:[email protected][email protected]</A>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Orlando and others-- thanks for the continued support.

Orlando, assuming DS was reading correctly (and I agree, the lack of accuracy argument sounds odd), what do you think about this amount of timing for pump gas?

My V-4 is clean and I am running AC 43 plugs, though they are 6 months old or so. Will check and replace as needed this weekend.

I have a miti-vac turbo checker unit with the built in gauge and will check the boost gauge against this as well...

Scott
 

·
Resident Idiot
Joined
·
11,462 Posts
what do you think about this amount of timing for pump gas?
My opinion:
~22* of timing with todays 93oct would be too much for my car. Would it run 15psi without knocking? I don't know, and really don't care to find out. I think you will realize that boost makes more power than timing. So why not run a chip with 18* WOT timing and a few more pounds of boost?

The stock GN PROM shows 22* of WOT timing. Also remember the gas was better 14years ago, and the stock boost level was around 14psi. Plus all of this was achieved when everything on the car was brand new. Couple that with your larger turbo which moves more CFM at any given boost, and I think you are over the edge.

I have been meaning to look at your DS files. I will look at them later today, and post some more.

hth's.

------------------


Stock Turbo, Stock Heads, Stock CAM, V4, MSD50's, TH DP, JayJackson 62mm TB, 16position MaxEffort Chip. 3750# with Driver
12.35 & 108.39 Street Trim
11.92 @ 111.77 Race Ready
mailto:[email protected][email protected]</A>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,652 Posts
I went back and looked at an old DS file when I ran the RA93 and bluetops and the timing was 21.4*. I ran 17# boost with the stock turbo, 45# FP and a mix that was probably 100-octane. O2s were about 800 and it has 3.2* spark retard on the 1-2 shift. I agree with Mike, bigger turbo and pump gas is probably on the edge. Follow his advice and check the boost gauge and check for any clearance problems that could be causing false knock.

Been there and now chasing false knocks.

------------------

Scottie's GNZ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Checked boost gauge using my nifty Miti-vac turbo kit and it as low by maybe .5 psi at most. So this probably not the problem.

Looked for possible false knock objects and saw that tranny cooler lines are close to DP and might contact under WOT. Will fix and test later.

Still would false knock persist throughout a run or be a one time event?

May dump some race gas in this weekend to test for continued knock-- seems like timing is just too much?

Scott
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,652 Posts
I would venture a guess that if you dropped in some race gas (50-50 blend of 93 and 110 = 101+) you would get the same results I did and might even be able to run 1 or 2# more boost. That would probably mean less boost on the street with 93 and crank it up a little more at the track with a blend. Of course you would probably have to jack around with the FP and that is where the Max Effort shines.

Are we having fun yet?


------------------

Scottie's GNZ
 

·
Resident Idiot
Joined
·
11,462 Posts
I just looked at the files.

I say too much boost for that octane vs. the ambient temp. Looks like it was about 70* to 75* out when you were stabbing it. Also, is your O2 sensor old? The cross counts looked lazy, and that could attribute to the car not running good.

On a side note, I filled up the other day with some off brand 93 octane gas. Hess I think. I cained it today and got all kinds of knock at 17psi. I usually don't get any knock at 17psi, but there are so many factors involved like a heat soaked IC & compressor housing, the brand of gas, and ambient temp outside. It's getting warmer in Florida, and I think it's time to dig out the alky kit to get away with 17psi on pump gas. To top it off, I was running my 20* max effort instead of my 18*, so I am sure that didn't help.

I just bought an Extech Dual Peak/Hold thermometer. It will read intercooler inlet and outlet temps at the same time, and log them to the laptop. I am very interested in intercooler efficiency and how all this relates. Once I play around, I'll post with some real numbers.

------------------


Stock Turbo, Stock Heads, Stock CAM, V4, MSD50's, TH DP, JayJackson 62mm TB, 16position MaxEffort Chip. 3750# with Driver
12.35 & 108.39 Street Trim
11.92 @ 111.77 Race Ready
mailto:[email protected][email protected]</A>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Thanks for the continued support-- my O2 sensor is about 2 years old. I have a new one that I've been saving for a failure, but maybe it's a good time to test this now.

Seems like a couple of messages:

1. 22* timing may be a bit (or a lot) much for 93 pump gas.

2. I'm running rich, could perhaps benefit from a new O2 sensor, and removing 1 MAF screen might help.

3. Could be an odd variable like a bad tank of gas. Or maybe even false knock.

I'll take care of 2 and 3 (add some race gas) and see what the results are when I get some time.

thanks again,
Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
So i just added 3 gal of 108 and ran with NO knock whatsoever. Rules out false knock and seems to point to timing being too high. Comments?

What do folks suggest that I ask Red to adjust timing to? Why would he set it so high-- I'd imagine this would cause probs for many folks... Suggestions?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Like I said before, I would first drop the fuel a few pounds to lean it out to where you should be (760-780 O2's at WOT). Just keep an eye on the timing retard. Sometimes an verly rich condition can produce some knock, but it seems like the higher timing on pump gas is your problem. With just straight pump gas I would run an 18 Degree chip on the street. This should allow you approximately 18psi with little to no knock. HTH

------------------
------
Rob Andersen
86 GN, Stock turbo and intercooler, Alchohol Injection, 43# Bosch injectors, MM Translator Plus w/3" MAF and extender chip, Hotwired Walbro 307, Hooker 2 1/2" duals, Hooker 2 1/2" Downpipe, Test pipe
12.39 @ 106.9 MPH
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,652 Posts
My suggestion is based on what I would do. Since I would be running the car at the track, I would get an adjustable wastegate actuator then turn the boost down from 15# until I got 0 knock on pump gas. Since you got 0 knock with the 108 mix, for the track I would add the mix and turn the boost up from the street setting until I got a little knock then back off. Now I would know when I got the track with my 108 mix, that it takes x turns of the rod to get the right boost and when I am done racing how to set it back to run pump gas.

If you plan on running just pump gas, you could get Reds to reduce the timing, but I think others will agreee there are better pump gas chips out.

------------------

Scottie's GNZ
 

·
Resident Idiot
Joined
·
11,462 Posts
What do folks suggest that I ask Red to adjust timing to? Why would he set it so high-- I'd imagine this would cause probs for many folks... Suggestions?
I bet the older the chip is, the more timing it will have. I just looked at some other Red's chips that I have on file here. These 93oct chips have 21* timing. Too much in my opinion. I even have a street lethal chip here for stock injectors, advertised as street chip with 27.1* timing at WOT ?!?! Obviously a chip from back in the day when the gas was good, and the cars were new..

In my experience 1 pound of boost vs. 1 degree of timing is no comparison. Boost makes more power than timing. Of course you have to find a happy medium. But, my reciepe that keeps me happy is 18* no matter what. Whether I am running pump gas, or a full tank of 112oct... I have found the difference in performance to be minimal. I actually have some very accurate numbers.

I hot lapped the last (2) runs at the Moroso track rental awhile back. The results stunned me.

Full tank 112oct. About 23psi.
Making passes with 30* timing, I got a best ever of 11.92 @ 111.77mph.. Now the car got some knock, and I didn't feel like getting a 4 hour tow home. So, for the last run, I didn't even do a cool down, flipped the MaxEffort over to the same setting, but just 18* timing. The car went 12.025 @ 111.35.

I have since tested this theory again at a later date, but using 22*, 24* and 26*. I did this because I thought 30* was a little extreme, and maybe it wasn't a good test after all. What I found was very, very little difference between how the car runs with 18* vs. 26* or anything in between.

What's the point of all this? I say get an 18* chip and get the maximum tune out of it like that. When you want to go faster, increase boost, and add octane.

For anyone who cares, I'll type in the (2) timeslips I was referring to above. It's interesting to note that the only difference between the (2) runs was the subtraction of 12* on the second run.

60' 1/8 1/4 Timing
1.667 [email protected] [email protected] 30*
1.676 [email protected] [email protected] 18*

------------------


Stock Turbo, Stock Heads, Stock CAM, V4, MSD50's, TH DP, JayJackson 62mm TB, 16position MaxEffort Chip. 3750# with Driver
12.35 & 108.39 Street Trim
11.92 @ 111.77 Race Ready
mailto:[email protected][email protected]</A>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Thanks for the continued support.

Three items:

1. I have a similar thread going at turbobuick.com in their scan tool tech department and have gotten similar responses RE the timing. The odd thing is that Ron Joseph indicated that the timing seemed OK-- is this a controversial topic? He generally seems like an extremely informed guy, but is in the minority on this issue. Opinions?

2. I get the feeling that those here are not big supporters of Red's pump gas chips-- who produces the "good" or "modern" pump gas chips? I asked around before choosing Red and his name came up a lot. I've only run Thrasher in the past.

3. In your opinion, is his 108 Race chip likely to be scary as well? (I recently got one of these as well...)

thanks again,
Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
I have a few friends that have Reds 108 chips and their cars run Very Well. One is a GN (11.94 23psi) the other is a Turbo T (11.83 21 psi).

Their only mods include:
Adj fuel regulator
XP pump
KN filter
3" dp open dump
Adj. wgate
Ported heads stock valves
Stock Turbo,Inj.,IC,T-body,Trans/conv.

Based on their experiences I think Reds 108 chips are very good for "stock" type cars. I have no opinion on a more modified car although I would try one.

Kevin


------------------
87GN, 12.05 @ 111, SIXTY FOOT 1.60-LAUNCH 15#, BOOST 25-26 LBS (YEP OVERKILL FOR COMBO), BONE STOCK LONG BLOCK, STOCK I.C. (BELL MOUTHED), STOCK TRANS/CONV, TE44, 009'S, RED'S 107 CHIP. HOME MADE 3" DOWN PIPE. RUNS CONSISTANT 12.10'S-12.11'S.

http://www.geocities.com/kdslaby/solidworks.html

[This message has been edited by KEVINS (edited May 01, 2001).]
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top