BadAss SRT-Z - 2.4L / A568 - Update!!! [Archive] - Page 7

Reeves

10-12-2010, 05:15 PM

cordes

10-12-2010, 05:25 PM

For 2 step, a chipped stocker computer staging rev-limiter works great. Under 2mph, you have a lower rev-limiter. Do you have any MPH input?

For WOT shifting, I added this to Mom's SRT. Tested it this past weekend. Works AWESOME!!!

http://www.npcompleteperformance.com/wotbox

It uses the clutch up switch, so as soon as you touch the clutch pedal while at WOT, it kills ignition for settable amount time. Shifts like butter now.

Yeah, it's probably going on OMNI now.

I had a 88 Shelby Z with cruise. It DID NOT have a clutch switch. I didn't think any thing back then did. :confused2:

Even a 89 Caravan I recently robbed of 5 speed parts DID NOT have a clutch switch but DID have cruise.

My 90' Shadow had cruise, but doesn't have a clutch switch either. IIRC the cal cuts the cruise off if the RPMs fly up while you're cruising along. I've had to panic stop in the shadow while using cruise before. The cruise let goat 4-5K when I hit the clutch and brakes without turning off the cruise IIRC.

Shadow

10-12-2010, 05:32 PM

For 2 step, a chipped stocker computer staging rev-limiter works great. Under 2mph, you have a lower rev-limiter. Do you have any MPH input?

For WOT shifting, I added this to Mom's SRT. Tested it this past weekend. Works AWESOME!!!

http://www.npcompleteperformance.com/wotbox

It uses the clutch up switch, so as soon as you touch the clutch pedal while at WOT, it kills ignition for settable amount time. Shifts like butter now.

Yeah, it's probably going on OMNI now.

I had a 88 Shelby Z with cruise. It DID NOT have a clutch switch. I didn't think any thing back then did. :confused2:

Even a 89 Caravan I recently robbed of 5 speed parts DID NOT have a clutch switch but DID have cruise.

Ha! That's exactly what I have for the Charger! Just didn't get the chance to hook it all up. :( I did have an 84 S/C in the back that had cruise and DID have the clutch switch though! :)

turbovanman²

10-12-2010, 08:02 PM

sunday! Sunday! SUNDAY!

:D

Lets hope for good weather, :nod:

turbovanman²

10-12-2010, 08:19 PM

BadAssPerformance

10-12-2010, 09:16 PM

Lets hope for good weather, :nod:

Hell yeah, hope it is!

BadAssPerformance

10-12-2010, 09:18 PM

For 2 step, a chipped stocker computer staging rev-limiter works great. Under 2mph, you have a lower rev-limiter. Do you have any MPH input?

For WOT shifting, I added this to Mom's SRT. Tested it this past weekend. Works AWESOME!!!

http://www.npcompleteperformance.com/wotbox

It uses the clutch up switch, so as soon as you touch the clutch pedal while at WOT, it kills ignition for settable amount time. Shifts like butter now.

Yeah, it's probably going on OMNI now.

I had a 88 Shelby Z with cruise. It DID NOT have a clutch switch. I didn't think any thing back then did. :confused2:

Even a 89 Caravan I recently robbed of 5 speed parts DID NOT have a clutch switch but DID have cruise.

Interesting. No stock cal here, and I already have a 2-step in the DIS-2 Plus so I'll see how that works

turbovanman²

10-12-2010, 09:32 PM

Hell yeah, hope it is!

Isn't it snowy season over there yet? :eyebrows: :lol:

Reeves

10-12-2010, 09:36 PM

Pretty cool. :nod:

Are you going to put it on the Omni? If so, how?

I was thinking of adding a proximity sensor to the clutch pedal arm so that as soon as I tap it, it starts the ignition cut and the timer. I like solid state switches like that.

The TPS signal will work for WOT sensing.

Interesting. No stock cal here, and I already have a 2-step in the DIS-2 Plus so I'll see how that works

I know you don’t run a stock cal. LOL. I was just stating that MPH is another way to use a 2 step.

Also, a WOT/Clutch tap ignition kill could really help us out on the shifting issues we’ve had this year.

turbovanman²

10-12-2010, 09:37 PM

BadAssPerformance

10-12-2010, 10:28 PM

I know you don’t run a stock cal. LOL. I was just stating that MPH is another way to use a 2 step.

Also, a WOT/Clutch tap ignition kill could really help us out on the shifting issues we’ve had this year.

Yeah, I got no MPH input in mine...

maybe maybe...

bakes

10-13-2010, 12:01 AM

I was thinking of adding a proximity sensor to the clutch pedal arm so that as soon as I tap it, it starts the ignition cut and the timer. I like solid state switches like that.

The TPS signal will work for WOT sensing.

I know you don’t run a stock cal. LOL. I was just stating that MPH is another way to use a 2 step.

Also, a WOT/Clutch tap ignition kill could really help us out on the shifting issues we’ve had this year.

Now that would be cool I wounder if Rob could write some code for are Ecm's

BadAssPerformance

10-19-2010, 05:00 PM

Went to the last Import War of the year at Grove this past Sunday... Weather was awesome, always a good day at the track, right!? Thanks to Marybeth and Jaren for the help crewing an get pics/video too :thumb:

First 3 runs were on the tires backwards to try to fix them again, which did help and then I ran the last 2 runs with them back on forwards - yes they are directional slicks, LOL!

Overall a bitter/sweet day, read on...

Run #1 - Right off the trailer, spun hard out of the hole, spun in 2nd, hit third, had to pedal clutch, hit 4th and got some shake and drove thru it.

R/T: .177
60': 1.836
330': 4.986
1/8ET: 7.411
1/8mph: 105.42
1000'ET: 9.444
1/4ET: 11.142
1/4mph: 133.76

Run #2 - spun in 1st and 2nd, missed 3rd, shook in 4th...

R/T: .347
60': 1.763
330': 4.889
1/8ET: 7.385
1/8mph: 103.25
1000'ET: 9.419
1/4ET: 11.114
1/4mph: 134.04

Run #3 - Spun in 1st, missed 2nd, stumbled in 3 and 4

R/T: .499
60': 1.753
330': 5.067
1/8ET: 7.480
1/8mph: 105.75
1000'ET: 9.503
1/4ET: 11.256
1/4mph: 128.42

Run #4 - Spun in 1st and 2nd, had to pedal clutch in 3rd, 4th was OK

R/T: .328
60': 1.745
330': 4.763
1/8ET: 7.159
1/8mph: 106.26
1000'ET: 9.157
1/4ET: 10.825 <== new best!
1/4mph: 135.97 <== new best!

Run #5 - Spun in 1st and 2nd, seemed OK during the run... heard a rod knock on the return road, saw 0psi oil pressure and shut it down.. I'm guessing it killed another oil pump. :(

R/T: .527
60': 1.757
330': 5.051
1/8ET: 7.545
1/8mph: 103.16
1000'ET: 9.589
1/4ET: 11.309
1/4mph: 132.06

Well, that's racing... glad I finally laid down a better time with this turbo, too bad I never got it to hook well. This is kind of my R&D car anyways so maybe its time for a change? Luckily this happened at the end of the season so I have time to get it all together for next year...

Shadow

10-19-2010, 05:12 PM

BadAssPerformance

10-19-2010, 05:18 PM

LOL, yeah... It was on borrowed time all season, maybe I'll post pics of the bearings that were in it after the last pump SNAFU :o

turboshad

10-19-2010, 06:15 PM

Huge congrats on the new PB :clap: Sucky for the break but at least you have all winter to make it better. It sure beats breaking in May. Did you get your LC up a running for this event?

Rampage16V

10-19-2010, 07:42 PM

Congrats on the new best times!!! Wish you were closer , would love to come out and watch!
Sorry to hear about the problems. Time for a pricey vibration dampner?

Aries_Turbo

10-19-2010, 09:48 PM

Time for a pricey vibration dampner?

or at least try a stock damper.

Brian

BadAssPerformance

10-19-2010, 09:58 PM

Huge congrats on the new PB :clap: Sucky for the break but at least you have all winter to make it better. It sure beats breaking in May. Did you get your LC up a running for this event?

Thanks! and yeah, I used it on every run, seemed to work OK, was just getting to the point of lowering it to try to tune out the wheelspin, LOL :o

Congrats on the new best times!!! Wish you were closer , would love to come out and watch!
Sorry to hear about the problems. Time for a pricey vibration dampner?

Thanks! We got video, I just gotta get it uploaded! I'm thinking of the damper or the billet OP rotor or both...

or at least try a stock damper.

Brian

Stock pulley is not as much of a damper as it is a mass... its huge and will get in the way of all my timing stuff ... but still a possibility

BadAssPerformance

10-19-2010, 09:59 PM

OK, just did the math... 2750lb @ 135.97mph ~ 580whp

bakes

10-19-2010, 10:05 PM

Time for a dry sump oil pump system:eyebrows:

Nice 1/4 times to end the year with:clap:

BadAssPerformance

10-19-2010, 10:09 PM

Thanks. Yeah, I thought about the dry sump... or is that spelled Dry $ump?

bakes

10-19-2010, 10:19 PM

just have to watch ebay they come up once and while cheap
http://cgi.ebay.ca/BBC-BIG-BLOCK-CHEVY-PETERSON-3-STAGE-DRY-SUMP-OIL-PUMP-/190457438836?pt=Race_Car_Parts&hash=item2c5825e274

turbovanman²

10-20-2010, 02:46 AM

Nice finish, that thing is hauling, :hail: Bummer you broke it but at least you didn't window it, :eyebrows:

OK, just did the math... 2750lb @ 135.97mph ~ 580whp

Seems awfully high, I found one, came out at 484 crank hp, lol. :p

Aries_Turbo

10-20-2010, 07:38 AM

Stock pulley is not as much of a damper as it is a mass... its huge and will get in the way of all my timing stuff ... but still a possibility

it does damp though. there is a center hub, a rubber layer and an outer iron ring.

there are all different sizes of timing wheels. :)

Brian

glhs0426

10-20-2010, 09:33 AM

If you need a pump to put the billet gears in LMK.

SebringLX

10-20-2010, 10:40 AM

Congrats on the new best times! Wish I could have been there! Hopefully you can get all this stuff sorted out by the time the track opens back up in the spring, plenty of time. :D

Shadow

10-20-2010, 10:46 AM

Seems awfully high, I found one, came out at 484 crank hp, lol. :p

JT's WHP estimate is deff closer than whatever calculator You used Simon.

The Charger is right around 515WHP on a Mustang Dyno the way I ran it at the track. It typically traps 135-136MPH as is. I recently weighed it on a semi-trailor weigh scale. 2690 with me in the driver seat, that's street weight and with a full tank of gas.

When I put on the slicks I shave 40lbs off the front tire/rim combo, when I swap on the matching rears I shave another 15lbs (really need to get some lightweight rear tire/rims!) My race seats save me another 40lbs and draining the rear tank saves me another 80lb or so. But the 3gal fuel cell is about 30lbs when I fill it. I can also drop my exhaust to the downpipe and save another 60lb if I so choose (I usually just open the dump)

So 2690-145 = 2545lb race weight, 2485 IF I drop the exhaust.

JT's car weighs 265lb more which would prob take at least 40 more WHP at this type of speed/E.T. to make up for the weight. (prob more!)

That's 555WHP Minimal by real world comparo as far as I can tell........

SebringLX

10-20-2010, 11:20 AM

Simon is just upset because his Ostrich won't talk to him anymore, and refuses to run as fast as JT's car. :p

BadAssPerformance

10-20-2010, 01:23 PM

it does damp though. there is a center hub, a rubber layer and an outer iron ring.

there are all different sizes of timing wheels. :)

Brian

I'll have to take a look at one.

If you need a pump to put the billet gears in LMK.

Well I need a pump either way, LOL! Got a new one on the shelf?

Congrats on the new best times! Wish I could have been there! Hopefully you can get all this stuff sorted out by the time the track opens back up in the spring, plenty of time. :D

Simon is just upset because his Ostrich won't talk to him anymore, and refuses to run as fast as JT's car. :p

Thanks Josh, wish you were there too! I'll get the video up tonight...

I'm pretty sure Simon doesn't like calculations because they don't have a factor in them for tool-shed-like vehicles ;)

BadAssPerformance

10-20-2010, 01:30 PM

JT's WHP estimate is deff closer than whatever calculator You used Simon.

The Charger is right around 515WHP on a Mustang Dyno the way I ran it at the track. It typically traps 135-136MPH as is. I recently weighed it on a semi-trailor weigh scale. 2690 with me in the driver seat, that's street weight and with a full tank of gas.

When I put on the slicks I shave 40lbs off the front tire/rim combo, when I swap on the matching rears I shave another 15lbs (really need to get some lightweight rear tire/rims!) My race seats save me another 40lbs and draining the rear tank saves me another 80lb or so. But the 3gal fuel cell is about 30lbs when I fill it. I can also drop my exhaust to the downpipe and save another 60lb if I so choose (I usually just open the dump)

So 2690-145 = 2545lb race weight, 2485 IF I drop the exhaust.

JT's car weighs 265lb more which would prob take at least 40 more WHP at this type of speed/E.T. to make up for the weight. (prob more!)

That's 555WHP Minimal by real world comparo as far as I can tell........

Nice explanation Rob. I had way too much tire spin to really trust the mph to be 100% accurate but it's definitely closer than the ET for calculated whp, LOL!

You said you trap 135-136, but your best ET is at 134, I'm guessing that run had a better short time? What 60's do you usually get on those 26"s?

turbovanman²

10-20-2010, 02:54 PM

Simon is just upset because his Ostrich won't talk to him anymore, and refuses to run as fast as JT's car. :p

Hahhaa, it ignores me, head must be in the sand, :lol:

I never will run as fast at JT, too much weight, :o

I'm pretty sure Simon doesn't like calculations because they don't have a factor in them for tool-shed-like vehicles ;)

Yeah, there is no tool shed math, :eyebrows:

JT's WHP estimate is deff closer than whatever calculator You used Simon.

The Charger is right around 515WHP on a Mustang Dyno the way I ran it at the track. It typically traps 135-136MPH as is. I recently weighed it on a semi-trailor weigh scale. 2690 with me in the driver seat, that's street weight and with a full tank of gas.

When I put on the slicks I shave 40lbs off the front tire/rim combo, when I swap on the matching rears I shave another 15lbs (really need to get some lightweight rear tire/rims!) My race seats save me another 40lbs and draining the rear tank saves me another 80lb or so. But the 3gal fuel cell is about 30lbs when I fill it. I can also drop my exhaust to the downpipe and save another 60lb if I so choose (I usually just open the dump)

So 2690-145 = 2545lb race weight, 2485 IF I drop the exhaust.

JT's car weighs 265lb more which would prob take at least 40 more WHP at this type of speed/E.T. to make up for the weight. (prob more!)

That's 555WHP Minimal by real world comparo as far as I can tell........

Interesting, either way, he's flying, :amen:

What method are you guys using? I just googled a caculator, ;)

Shadow

10-20-2010, 02:58 PM

Nice explanation Rob. I had way too much tire spin to really trust the mph to be 100% accurate but it's definitely closer than the ET for calculated whp, LOL!

For our 2 cars it's pretty easy to compare. Very close in MPH and E.T. both MTX cars, and both running the same gearing. Only real difference is weight.

Now most ppl still think along the lines of 100lb=10hp=1/10 sec. Just like HP calculators, that works well for car in the mid 11 - mid 13 sec times. Once you start exceeding 120mph trap speeds, wind resistance and other factors come into play and you start to need More to do the same thing!

I remember working down through the 11's. In the high 11's I would shave 1/10th for every MPH I would gain and at about 10WHP. By the time I reached the 10's I was only gaining 1/10 for about every 2MPH I would gain. So 1/10th was now costing me more like 20WHP.

In comparison, we pulled 100lb off a 13 sec car 10 years ago and it gained 3 1/10ths!

Calculators can make a slow car look good and a fast car look bad, specially a FWD with a real high MPH! So you were right to use a MPH calculator rather than E.T.

In comparison, Simons calculator would prob be very close on his own application, because he fits in that accurate middle ground area. ;)

You said you trap 135-136, but your best ET is at 134, I'm guessing that run had a better short time? What 60's do you usually get on those 26"s?

Actually, that run had one of my worse 60's (for one of my faster runs)

I cut a 1.81 spinning the 26's through 1st but still went 4.83 to the 330'

In comparison, my 10.99 run was on a 1.72 60' going 4.85 to the 330'

I believe the difference is the clutch, otherwise how do I gain 1/10th from my 60' to my 330' ? So even before last year my clutch was slipping a bit on the launch!

And don't forget, I was going against a 30mph headwind, so my MPH would have prob been 135.xx on that run as well if not higher.

I have cut 1.6x 60's with this car, but in the last two years I've only got to the track twice! Not enough time to really dial in the car with the new clutch/power it's making. :mad:

turbovanman²

10-20-2010, 03:09 PM

In comparison, Simons calculator would prob be very close on his own application, because he fits in that accurate middle ground area, ;)

That's not nice, :(

Shadow

10-20-2010, 03:25 PM

That's not nice, :(

It was at least AS nice as you suggesting JT had 480 crank HP! :lol:

Shadow

10-20-2010, 03:31 PM

My bad, just noticed 2 things JT. Your still running 24' slicks and your 3.50 geared (thought you were straight up 568)

Interestingly enough, that still pretty well evens out to my 26' slicks with 3.85 gearing.

Even more interesting, I would prob pick up a couple mph IF I went back to 24' slicks.

EVEN MORE Interesting, my best 60's are still from when I was running those 24's! :banghead:

turbovanman²

10-20-2010, 03:55 PM

It was at least AS nice as you suggesting JT had 480 crank HP! :lol:

WHP, not crank, :nod:

Shadow

10-20-2010, 04:10 PM

Seems awfully high, I found one, came out at 484 crank hp, lol. :p

Really?

turbovanman²

10-20-2010, 04:13 PM

Really?

Yeah, lol, I didn't mean crank HP, that's just silly, :p

shadow88

10-20-2010, 05:11 PM

Congrats and that sucks.

After reading about Dean's pump failure, do you guys join brains and come up with a solution to help you both? Maybe a solution to make him tear apart the Daytona to fit a new pump?

BadAssPerformance

10-20-2010, 06:09 PM

Interesting, either way, he's flying, :amen:

What method are you guys using? I just googled a caculator, ;)

Thanks, now only if it could hook!

WHP = Race Weight{lb}*(Trap Speed{mph}/228.4)^3

I cut a 1.81 spinning the 26's through 1st but still went 4.83 to the 330'

In comparison, my 10.99 run was on a 1.72 60' going 4.85 to the 330'

I believe the difference is the clutch, otherwise how do I gain 1/10th from my 60' to my 330' ? So even before last year my clutch was slipping a bit on the launch!

My bad, just noticed 2 things JT. Your still running 24' slicks and your 3.50 geared (thought you were straight up 568)

Interestingly enough, that still pretty well evens out to my 26' slicks with 3.85 gearing.

Even more interesting, I would prob pick up a couple mph IF I went back to 24' slicks.

EVEN MORE Interesting, my best 60's are still from when I was running those 24's! :banghead:

It could be clutch, or it could be the 24.5's were spinning in 2nd when the 26's were not? If BOTH were spinning thru 1st, the 24.5's should net a better 60' due to better gear ratio?

BadAssPerformance

10-20-2010, 06:09 PM

turbovanman²

10-20-2010, 06:32 PM

Ack, what does "^3" mean?

Directconnection

10-20-2010, 07:07 PM

WHP= mph/234 cubed mulitplied by your raceweight.

This one works out REALLY good! Plug in Reeves MPH and his raceweight (2,450 or 2,500 now I think) He pulled just over 500whp on the dyno.

Same thing for other people's cars I've plugged in.... and knew the end results (Dynojet #s)

Shadow

10-20-2010, 07:31 PM

It could be clutch, or it could be the 24.5's were spinning in 2nd when the 26's were not? If BOTH were spinning thru 1st, the 24.5's should net a better 60' due to better gear ratio?

Never ran 10's on the 24's, both those runs were on the 26's, only difference was clutch and I was richer on the 10.89 run.

shadow88

10-20-2010, 07:32 PM

Thanks and right on man...

Dean got a damper... I might... got some ideas now.

He was talking about some groove that dcr adds to the pump and getting it coated? I knew a place that did the treatment he was asking local to me, but he never got the pump rotors to me, so I guess it never happened.

turbovanman²

10-20-2010, 07:57 PM

WHP= mph/234 cubed mulitplied by your raceweight.

Puts me at 317 hp, I made more than that on the dyno at 22 psi, ran 29-30 psi at the track to run 104 mph. :confused:

JT's puts me at 352 whp, closer but I still think I was around 400 whp.

black86glhs

10-20-2010, 08:36 PM

Puts me at 317 hp, I made more than that on the dyno at 22 psi, ran 29-30 at the track to run 104 mph. :confused:

JT's puts me at 352 whp, closer but I still think I was around 400 whp.

317 hp at the crank sounds right. LOL.

turbovanman²

10-20-2010, 08:40 PM

317 hp at the crank sounds right. LOL.

I would say yep to that.

BadAssPerformance

10-20-2010, 09:15 PM

OK, got the videos uploaded...

11.11 @ 134mph

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkFsgVKuKt4

10.82 @ 135.97mph

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5a4LH64tNA8

10.82 @ 135.97mph REDUX

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0082Pil0XE

...and

Last year's 10.84 @ 134mph to compare...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-g1VxFeA_8

You can tell TWO differences from last year's 10.84 and this year's 10.82... well, other than the extra 5mph, LOL!

1 - The old rear air shocks bounced more than the rear Konis do now
2 - The old turbo was much more noticeable through the exhaust

turbovanman²

10-20-2010, 09:30 PM

BadAssPerformance

10-20-2010, 09:43 PM

Damn dude, mad driving skillz, :hail:

Love the killing the WRX out of the hole, :nod:

Weird how you can hear the turbo like you said. What was that one, what is this one, I forget, :( Could be turbine size?

Also weird how at the same place in the track, your front end does a dippity do, :lol:

Thanks... it's a fun car to drive :)

LOL, the WRX had a 1.692 60' to my 1.763, BUT, my sleepy (not even trying) .347 r/t got his .425 :D

Last year: T03 S-III .63a/r / T04 60-1HiFi B cover
This year: GT3582R

...so maybe the journal bearings are a little noisier? Or was it the 3" exhaust vs. this year's 4"?

The dips are the shifts... last year's 10.84 granny shifted 2 and almost WOT 3 and 4 ... This year's 10.82 granny shifted all of them...

turbovanman²

10-20-2010, 09:50 PM

Thanks... it's a fun car to drive :)

LOL, the WRX had a 1.692 60' to my 1.763, BUT, my sleepy (not even trying) .347 r/t got his .425 :D

Last year: T03 S-III .63a/r / T04 60-1HiFi B cover
This year: GT3582R

...so maybe the journal bearings are a little noisier? Or was it the 3" exhaust vs. this year's 4"?

The dips are the shifts... last year's 10.84 granny shifted 2 and almost WOT 3 and 4 ... This year's 10.82 granny shifted all of them...

WRX must have been, WTF happened? :lol:

I didn't know you put the GT35R, you sly devil, :p What A/R turbine housing?

You can't hear mine out the exhaust but the intake side is deafening, Boost Geek said he could hear me spool at just before half track when I was staging, :wow1:

BadAssPerformance

10-20-2010, 10:04 PM

WRX must have been, WTF happened? :lol:

I didn't know you put the GT35R, you sly devil, :p What A/R turbine housing?

You can't hear mine out the exhaust but the intake side is deafening, Boost Geek said he could hear me spool at just before half track when I was staging, :wow1:

Honestly the turbo is not that much larger than what I had on it...

Comp wheels - Very similar sizes
Comp housing - Went from a T04B to a 4" inlet S cover (intake temp reduction noticed)
Turbine wheel - Went from Stage 3 to GT wheel which is close to a stage 5
Turbine housing - From .63 a/r to .82 a/r
CHRA - From journal bearing to GT BB

So it picked up ~5mph and in addition to the turbo, it also went from 3" exhaust to 4" exhaust and a different head with a little more exhaust porting... if the turbo added more power probably due to comp cover more than anything. Hell even with the BB it spools later than the old turbo

Reaper1

10-20-2010, 10:56 PM

turboshad

10-20-2010, 11:12 PM

Looks like you have the squats like me JT. Group buy on some 1000lb/in springs? :D

I should mention nice runs. I can only aspire to be a half second quicker :clap:

BadAssPerformance

10-20-2010, 11:20 PM

I have a set of 600lb springs here that never made it onto the car :o

Thanks man, yer almost there! :)

22shelby

10-20-2010, 11:43 PM

yeah car is making the power, but after seeing the pic then the vids....i guess were fight the same as the IRS cobras..... too much camber movement during launch your only using 1/2 ur tire... not to mention the energy loss with the weight transfer...

maybe a ratchet strap suspension mod????lol.....

bakes

10-20-2010, 11:54 PM

The question is do we set the camber to 0* and toe to 0" at rest or when the front lifts?

Aries_Turbo

10-21-2010, 08:01 AM

The question is do we set the camber to 0* and toe to 0" at rest or when the front lifts?

you have someone take a pic or vid of the car launching and the jack the car up to that approx height and set the toe and camber at the launch height.

Brian

22shelby

10-21-2010, 08:58 AM

you mean something along these lines????

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs763.snc4/66325_10150104495654899_570199898_7524914_3128331_ n.jpg

BadAssPerformance

10-21-2010, 09:17 AM

^^^^ THIS ... needs to be fixed :nod:

Shadow

10-21-2010, 09:27 AM

The second HP calculator puts me within 10hp of what I know the car actually puts down using the known actual weight of the car and me in it. I'd say that's pretty darn close, but I'm within that "average" area, so I don't really count! LOL :thumb:

What do you mean, you don't count? The "average area" is generally the Most acurate, so you count The Most! :love:

contraption22

10-21-2010, 09:28 AM

Shadow

10-21-2010, 10:19 AM

Never ran 10's on the 24's, both those runs were on the 26's, only difference was clutch and I was richer on the 10.89 run.

After thinking about this, there was 1 more difference. The 10.99 was on the stock cam @ 38 psi boost and the 10.89 was on the F4 cam @ 34psi boost.

Shadow

10-21-2010, 10:41 AM

Puts me at 317 hp, I made more than that on the dyno at 22 psi, ran 29-30 psi at the track to run 104 mph. :confused:

JT's puts me at 352 whp, closer but I still think I was around 400 whp.

Have you tried an ET calculator? Might be closer as your mph is low, prob from your undergearing. Makes it look like your going faster on less hp.

Interestingly enough, Steves mph calculator seems pretty darn tootin!

We ran a Daytona about 8 years ago that I figured had to be just over 300whp. It was 2980 + 160 (driver) for a total of 3140lbs. It went 13.1 @ 108mph on street tires with a 2.1 60'. When I plug in the #'s it gives me 308.7 WHP. Seems pretty reasonable.

Here's where it really gets interesting. If I plug in the #'s from my 10.89 run at 142mph it only shows me at 466.65WHP. But if I plug in the #'s from my 136mph passes from last year it shows me at 507.5WHP!

Now here's the interesting part. When I was running last year I didn't drop the exhaust and I didn't drain the tank, but it was a calm day, so the extra weight + accurate mph (no headwind) and it seems pretty darn close!

The 10.89 run this year was against a 30mph headwind (prob knocked 1-2mph of my traps) I was running 2 extra psi fuel preasure and 1lb less boost because I didn't have a W/B anymore. I also dropped the exhaust and drained the rear tank (try to make up for the headwind) So the car was lighter, richer, less boost and the headwind was robing me some mph, really no surprise then that it only shows 466.65WHP! Again, seems pretty accurate! :nod:

Reaper1

10-21-2010, 10:50 AM

What do you mean, you don't count? The "average area" is generally the Most acurate, so you count The Most! :love:

Thanks! :thumb: It's nice to matter sometimes! LOL

22shelby

10-21-2010, 11:01 AM

Nice runs, JT. I would say try the 600lb springs, but some say being TOO stiff in the rear with an MTX car can be a problem too.

You can always try airbags inside the rear springs. That way you have some adjustment to play with.

this is what i did.....im not any where near the hp level JT is how ever i did notice a major diff on short times w/ the bags....DR side is up to 30 psi, while pass is at like 8 psi...

turbovanman²

10-21-2010, 11:30 AM

Honestly the turbo is not that much larger than what I had on it...

Comp wheels - Very similar sizes
Comp housing - Went from a T04B to a 4" inlet S cover (intake temp reduction noticed)
Turbine wheel - Went from Stage 3 to GT wheel which is close to a stage 5
Turbine housing - From .63 a/r to .82 a/r
CHRA - From journal bearing to GT BB

So it picked up ~5mph and in addition to the turbo, it also went from 3" exhaust to 4" exhaust and a different head with a little more exhaust porting... if the turbo added more power probably due to comp cover more than anything. Hell even with the BB it spools later than the old turbo

Hmmmmmmmm, very interesting.

Have you tried an ET calculator? Might be closer as your mph is low, prob from your undergearing. Makes it look like your going faster on less hp.

I'll PM you to avoid cluttering the thread some more.

turboshad

10-21-2010, 11:37 AM

Nice runs, JT. I would say try the 600lb springs, but some say being TOO stiff in the rear with an MTX car can be a problem too.

You can always try airbags inside the rear springs. That way you have some adjustment to play with.

I run 600lb springs in the rear and in my slow mo you can still see it squat and unload the slicks. I don't think I am squatting as much as JT but I would say 600lb/in isn't too stiff for heavy cars like ours. Maybe for a feather light L-body ;)

Shadow

10-21-2010, 12:26 PM

I run 600lb springs in the rear and in my slow mo you can still see it squat and unload the slicks. I don't think I am squatting as much as JT but I would say 600lb/in isn't too stiff for heavy cars like ours. Maybe for a feather light L-body ;)

I'm only running 450lb springs in the back and as good as the Charger Might have looked launching in the 10.89 vid, (didn't squat much) I was spinning all the way through 1st and only a 1.81 60'.

So, gonna have to wait till I Really hook it up to see how things look.

That's where that Slowmo S#IT would come in real handy like! :nod:

BadAssPerformance

10-21-2010, 01:13 PM

I run 600lb springs in the rear and in my slow mo you can still see it squat and unload the slicks. I don't think I am squatting as much as JT but I would say 600lb/in isn't too stiff for heavy cars like ours. Maybe for a feather light L-body ;)

Yeah, I got 600 thinking it would be a good compromize between the track and street, but stiffer springs will be a phone call away, LOL

turbovanman²

10-21-2010, 01:20 PM

What about 800?

BadAssPerformance

10-21-2010, 01:23 PM

I'll let you know after I try the 600's, i can get them in 50lb increments :thumb:

Reeves

10-21-2010, 03:30 PM

The question is do we set the camber to 0* and toe to 0" at rest or when the front lifts?

Yes. Or about -3 camber and 1/4" toe out at rest.

you mean something along these lines????

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs763.snc4/66325_10150104495654899_570199898_7524914_3128331_ n.jpg

Holy REAR SQUAT Batman!

I run 600lb springs in the rear and in my slow mo you can still see it squat and unload the slicks. I don't think I am squatting as much as JT but I would say 600lb/in isn't too stiff for heavy cars like ours. Maybe for a feather light L-body ;)

I went from 450 to 650 rear springs this year. Didn't notice much of a difference. Want to make a bigger jump next time (1000).

bakes

10-21-2010, 03:49 PM

You have to see Dicks (boostgeek) car squat i swear its on the stoppers!!!!

Reaper1

10-21-2010, 05:50 PM

Yes. Or about -3 camber and 1/4" toe out at rest.

I went from 450 to 650 rear springs this year. Didn't notice much of a difference. Want to make a bigger jump next time (1000).

Did you REALLY mean *-3* camber? I think that's a bit much. Even -1.5 was on the edge of being too much in my car on a hard launch ("verified" on smooth, clean concrete). I wouldn't got past -2 (of course that street tires, but I'm also thinking auto-x and road course).

I think we are concentrating too much on changing the wrong parts to get a good launch. Yes, stiffer springs will help squat, but can hurt if the don't have the right amount of dampening control.

I personally think that either changing the moment arm that the weight shift has to work against durning launch (read: make the wheelbase longer), or adding more anti-lift to the front suspension, or possibly both, is the way to go.

To change the wheelbase you don't have to go as far as Brian Slowe did...just put on wheelie bars! Honda's and such have been doing it for years and it works! Now, JT might argue that you can't drive around very well with long friggin wheelie bars hanging out the back of the car (which you can make them removable, but anyway).

OK, then time to modify the front suspesion and add more anti-lift to it. This will require either modifying the stock K-frame, or making a custom one. The second choice will allow you to even loose some weight if you choose to do so!

Yes, both of these are not as easy or cheap as springs, but I think they are better options for a good solution. Yes, there are people that have been sucessful without either of these modifications, but I'm willing to bet their set-up isn't exactly the same as this one.

black86glhs

10-22-2010, 01:49 AM

Did you REALLY mean *-3* camber? I think that's a bit much. Even -1.5 was on the edge of being too much in my car on a hard launch ("verified" on smooth, clean concrete). I wouldn't got past -2 (of course that street tires, but I'm also thinking auto-x and road course).

I think we are concentrating too much on changing the wrong parts to get a good launch. Yes, stiffer springs will help squat, but can hurt if the don't have the right amount of dampening control.

I personally think that either changing the moment arm that the weight shift has to work against durning launch (read: make the wheelbase longer), or adding more anti-lift to the front suspension, or possibly both, is the way to go.

To change the wheelbase you don't have to go as far as Brian Slowe did...just put on wheelie bars! Honda's and such have been doing it for years and it works! Now, JT might argue that you can't drive around very well with long friggin wheelie bars hanging out the back of the car (which you can make them removable, but anyway).

OK, then time to modify the front suspesion and add more anti-lift to it. This will require either modifying the stock K-frame, or making a custom one. The second choice will allow you to even loose some weight if you choose to do so!

Yes, both of these are not as easy or cheap as springs, but I think they are better options for a good solution. Yes, there are people that have been sucessful without either of these modifications, but I'm willing to bet their set-up isn't exactly the same as this one.

I was thinking about removable wheelie bars too. Stop whining about them JT and just get on board.....LOL. <-----J/K

BadAssPerformance

10-22-2010, 08:46 AM

Pat

10-22-2010, 08:57 AM

To run wheelie bars on a FWD like they were used 10 years ago (pre-loaded) is illegal by NHRA rules and bad for the track. They can be used effectively but the car has to squat to let them contact the ground...

I have stock suspension geometry on this car with only rear KONIs and MP AutoX springs... there are a lot of things I can play with before adding wheelie bars. A few on the list:

1 - Front coil overs
2 - CSRacer style adjustable rear spring perches
3 - Stiffer springs all around
4 - Upgrade to dual pivot K-member/LCA's

5- lighten the back of the car, particuarly behind the rear axle/move weight forward. That will help weight transfer and effectively increase your spring rate.

Isn't your fuel cell in the back? Stock hatch? Rear bumper?

BadAssPerformance

10-22-2010, 12:40 PM

Yeah, the car is heavy... probably 5 gallons in the 8 gallon cell in the spare tire well.

Its still a street car so it wont get gutted/lightemed too much.

Aries_Turbo

10-22-2010, 12:51 PM

how often do you drive it on the street? just curious.

Brian

Pat

10-22-2010, 12:56 PM

Yeah, the car is heavy... probably 5 gallons in the 8 gallon cell in the spare tire well.

Its still a street car so it wont get gutted/lightemed too much.

Even if you don't want to lighten, where the weight is located is just as important. Any weight behind the rear axle uses the distance from the axle as a lever against the rear suspension. Figure out a way to get a cell in front of the axle and you'll make a difference with that alone.

BadAssPerformance

10-22-2010, 02:10 PM

how often do you drive it on the street? just curious.

Brian

I drove it to several cruise nights last year, this year not as much cuz the begining of the year I wasnt sure the engine was gonna make it after the first oil pump and also was lazy and left the slicks on it, LOL... So it didnt get driven too far. But it is all plated an stuff :)

Even if you don't want to lighten, where the weight is located is just as important. Any weight behind the rear axle uses the distance from the axle as a lever against the rear suspension. Figure out a way to get a cell in front of the axle and you'll make a difference with that alone.

Yeah, I thought about that, but havn't wanted to go to a smaller cell or cut the floor...

Pat

10-22-2010, 02:20 PM

Yeah, I thought about that, but havn't wanted to go to a smaller cell or cut the floor...

It's just metal...cutting wheel and a welder and you can do whatever you want. And put it back if you change your mind.

BadAssPerformance

10-22-2010, 02:22 PM

LOL, true... I like the stock-ish look tho ;)

Reaper1

10-22-2010, 02:45 PM

To run wheelie bars on a FWD like they were used 10 years ago (pre-loaded) is illegal by NHRA rules and bad for the track. They can be used effectively but the car has to squat to let them contact the ground...

I have stock suspension geometry on this car with only rear KONIs and MP AutoX springs... there are a lot of things I can play with before adding wheelie bars. A few on the list:

1 - Front coil overs
2 - CSRacer style adjustable rear spring perches
3 - Stiffer springs all around
4 - Upgrade to dual pivot K-member/LCA's

You don't have to preload them. Using squat just like the RWD guys do will work fine. But afte reading your list of other things to work with...yeah, wheelie bars aren't exactly your only option here! LOL

I'd say the K-member should be the FIRST thing on your list! I didn't realize you were still using the old style! :confused::yuck:

I'd do 1-3 as a complete set. It removes weight from the car, adds adjustibility, and you can ONLY bennefit from it (well, your wallet won't, but anyways).

22shelby

10-22-2010, 06:21 PM

BadAssPerformance

10-23-2010, 10:31 AM

Exactly... Here's a couple pics from various times I've been out with it... yes, that one is driving right by the Police Department, no worries, full exhaust is quiet :D

That reminds me, need to get Tom to post the video of our cruise in Belvidere too!

Aries_Turbo

10-23-2010, 11:19 AM

didnt you know Brian everything here in chitown is a street car..... you'll see come next June ...mmmmm Bacon street car.......ughhhhhhhhh!http://imgtn3.ask.com/ts?t=11650780576663688008&pid=23168&ppid=16

mmmmm bacon. i just ate some lol.

yeah i know the "street" car deal. wait to you see my "street" k car in a few years lol.

Brian

135sohc

12-24-2010, 06:55 PM

The FSM shows the proper part being C-6371. However that does not turn up any good results on google.

C-4660 is the one for the 525 which shows what the 523/568 one should look like. I wonder if it would even work with the larger bearing?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=280400934704&crlp=1_263602_263622&ff4=263602_263622&viewitem=&guid=6c5bbbf212a0a0266f70a9d0ffe0cc97&rvr_id=129654099714&ua=WXS%3F&itemid=280400934704#ht_832wt_939

Old posting but since I just went through this issue I thought I'd share. The 4660 is the proper tool for grabbing the inside of the bearing and the outer cup tool 6371 is used in conjunction with it. The service manual doesnt make that part very clear.

BadAssPerformance

12-24-2010, 09:30 PM

Good info, thanks! :thumb:

I ended up making some fixtures to use on a hydraulic press but forgot to get pictures :( I will next time tho!

30 PSI SHADOW

12-25-2010, 09:53 AM

27671 You mean like jonny Bs old csx-t?

BadAssPerformance

12-25-2010, 11:10 AM

^^^ wow!

turbovanman²

12-26-2010, 04:45 AM

27671 You mean like jonny Bs old csx-t?

Is that RWD?

BadAssPerformance

12-26-2010, 10:28 AM

Although it squats like LarryB's RWD Sundance I'm pretty sure that one is FWD...

"Top Fuel" Bender

12-26-2010, 11:51 AM

I thought Hoagie's charger squatted bad !

22shelby

12-26-2010, 12:40 PM

brings a whole new meaning to on the bumper

Rampage16V

12-27-2010, 07:24 PM

Yeah that baby needs a set of casters!!

turbovanman²

12-28-2010, 02:07 AM

Although it squats like LarryB's RWD Sundance I'm pretty sure that one is FWD...

Damn, :wow1:

BadAssPerformance

01-31-2011, 02:45 PM

Update - Head and cams are scraped up a bit... but I think they are salvagable! :)

cordes

01-31-2011, 03:06 PM

Update - Head and cams are scraped up a bit... but I think they are salvagable! :)

That's great to hear JT. Just going to clean up the journals a little bit and run them?

BadAssPerformance

01-31-2011, 08:36 PM

Yep, thats the plan!

cordes

02-02-2011, 01:09 PM

Yep, thats the plan!

That's great. Nothing like being able to salvage stuff you thought was a total loss.

BadAssPerformance

05-11-2011, 01:50 PM

Update in the works...

:D

Reeves

05-11-2011, 01:53 PM

Update in the works...

:D

Ready now?

How about now?

---------- Post added at 01:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:53 PM ----------

Update in the works...

:D

OK, now?

bakes

05-11-2011, 03:30 PM

ok how about now.

Reeves

05-11-2011, 04:01 PM

Now? :confused:

bakes

05-11-2011, 04:05 PM

Mabey we should try again in 5 mins????

Aries_Turbo

05-11-2011, 04:34 PM

30 min have past.... surely everything should be completed now......

Reeves

05-11-2011, 04:48 PM

WTH is going on?

contraption22

05-11-2011, 04:55 PM

"Your posts are important to us. Please stay on the thread, and your posts will be answered in the order in which they were received."

135sohc

05-11-2011, 05:03 PM

finally give up and put a torque converter in there ?

BadAssPerformance

05-11-2011, 05:09 PM

finally give up and put a torque converter in there ?

NEVER...

LOL @ "how about now" and other comments

... just teasing a couple days till iti goes under the knife ... maybe some shiny parts pics on the way tho ;)

dodgeshadowchik

05-11-2011, 05:17 PM

Pics! Pics! :)

Reeves

05-11-2011, 05:27 PM

^ AT sig pic:

I thought it was "Pushing....my 5.Slow....with my rag top down but my hair won't blow?"

bakes

05-11-2011, 05:28 PM

Come on JT how about a teaser??????

dodgeshadowchik

05-11-2011, 05:30 PM

There's also an entire song by him called "Rollin' in my 5.0". It's really stupid, but quite humorous.

Reeves

05-11-2011, 05:58 PM

There's also an entire song by him called "Rollin' in my 5.0". It's really stupid, but quite humorous.

Other than "Ice, Ice, Baby?"

contraption22

05-11-2011, 10:02 PM

NEVER...

LOL @ "how about now" and other comments

... just teasing a couple days till iti goes under the knife ... maybe some shiny parts pics on the way tho ;)

No torque converter? You put together the first ClutchFlite for FWD?

Reeves

05-11-2011, 10:23 PM

No torque converter? You put together the first ClutchFlite for FWD?

Circle track use?

Use the mustang to push you around to get 'er started?

Reaper1

05-11-2011, 10:47 PM

I have a friend of mine that we ALMOST built a "ClutchFlight" back around 2001. I chickened out... :(

135sohc

05-11-2011, 11:21 PM

Just for JT I ground the hell out of 2nd & 3rd tonight :o I think too much oil can be just as bad as not having enough ?

BadAssPerformance

05-11-2011, 11:55 PM

Come on JT how about a teaser??????

Well... getting something shipped... FINALLY got a pro number tonight! :D

No torque converter? You put together the first ClutchFlite for FWD?

I will hand build a LENCO style transaxle before I go hydro :p

Just for JT I ground the hell out of 2nd & 3rd tonight :o I think too much oil can be just as bad as not having enough ?

LOL, gee thanks ;) ... but Oooooooh ouch :( you have a point to too much oil, stuff needs room to move?

135sohc

05-12-2011, 12:07 AM

Theres still plenty of room but I wonder if having the oil level too high and keeping the synchronizers between 1/3-1/2 submerged in oil is just to much for them ? like they cant 'spin' the excess out when the fork moves the selector ring over to grab the gear cone/fiber ring so they slip (and subsequently grind).

BadAssPerformance

05-12-2011, 12:09 AM

right... being submerged, fluid becomes solid so maybe holding the cones apart

bakes

05-12-2011, 12:22 AM

is that a production # or pro number for you or the car?

dodgeshadowchik

05-12-2011, 10:13 AM

Other than "Ice, Ice, Baby?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUkD4CY7YAQ

LOL... Need to remake this to the tune of "Rollin' in my 2.4"

BadAssPerformance

05-12-2011, 01:06 PM

is that a production # or pro number for you or the car?

shipping number... :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUkD4CY7YAQ

LOL... Need to remake this to the tune of "Rollin' in my 2.4"

Um, yeah... about that... LOL

135sohc

05-12-2011, 03:05 PM

Are you still moving forward with the bronze/brass fork pads ?

BadAssPerformance

05-12-2011, 05:48 PM

Yes, still testing...

BadAssPerformance

05-14-2011, 02:20 AM

Overnight parts from...

turboshad

05-14-2011, 02:35 AM

Yes, still testing...

I'm still waiting for my set to help with testing ;)

Reaper1

05-14-2011, 03:16 AM

Yeah...we need to see if they work in a 555 too, so you need to send me a set for testing as well! :thumb:

BadAssPerformance

05-14-2011, 11:03 AM

...overnighte parts are in...

bakes

05-14-2011, 12:25 PM

I blew the pic up and i could make out what looks like a short block but i couldn't read the waybill .

135sohc

05-14-2011, 12:54 PM

So chrysler is blowing out the remaining old school 2.4 blocks ?

BadAssPerformance

05-19-2011, 11:44 PM

Nope, not a new one... but it has shiney pistons and rods in it :D

Here are some other new parts...

dodgeshadowchik

05-19-2011, 11:52 PM

YAy!!! :)

Wait.. where's the other pictures?

BadAssPerformance

05-19-2011, 11:56 PM

These pics? ...

THIS is the reason for the new bottom end, billet OP gears and ATI damper... :(

This last pump was FUBAR even more than the first (seen to the right of it in the side-by-side pic) Note this one also broke the rotor ring and the pump housing...

dodgeshadowchik

05-20-2011, 12:00 AM

OH wow... well time to make some decorative pieces for the house out of those! ;)

Hope the new billet one holds up to the PoWa!

BadAssPerformance

05-20-2011, 12:03 AM

This car has made a big pil eof knick knacks through the years, LOL

...fresh paint on the fresh motor...

bakes

05-20-2011, 12:58 AM

Is there a procedure for aligning the pump to the block like on the Ls1 or is the front cover self aligning Jt??

blk86trbo

05-20-2011, 01:10 AM

Looks great so far JT, you've got some nice stuff there...the way you are going, you ought to be able to drive it to the meeting Saturday! Hell yeah :thumb:

Aries_Turbo

05-20-2011, 08:20 AM

nice oil pump gears. its good to see an actual damper going on the crank snout too.

where you get the gears? have them made?

brian

Reeves

05-20-2011, 09:00 AM

Did you have any knock at all JT? I have heard that the pumps can't stand any type of knock.

SebringLX

05-20-2011, 11:23 AM

Looks great so far JT, you've got some nice stuff there...the way you are going, you ought to be able to drive it to the meeting Saturday! Hell yeah :thumb:

Trailer queens don't get driven. ;)

Reeves

05-20-2011, 11:24 AM

Trailer queens don't get driven. ;)

OOOOOoooooohhhhh.......burn!

Austrian Dodge

05-20-2011, 06:22 PM

JT, beside all that UDP talking, what do you think was the reason the OP gears broke?

BadAssPerformance

05-20-2011, 06:43 PM

Is there a procedure for aligning the pump to the block like on the Ls1 or is the front cover self aligning Jt??

Not really, it just sort of lines up... unless I'm missing something?

Looks great so far JT, you've got some nice stuff there...the way you are going, you ought to be able to drive it to the meeting Saturday! Hell yeah :thumb:

Thanks Paul... Probably a week away from running, picking up the new OP housing tomorrow.

nice oil pump gears. its good to see an actual damper going on the crank snout too.

where you get the gears? have them made?

Yeah, belt AND suspenders this time... Oil pumo from a GB on SRTforums from Mole'

Did you have any knock at all JT? I have heard that the pumps can't stand any type of knock.

No knock sensor but a way conservative tune .. only knock I did hear was the rods on the return road letting me know no OP ;(

Trailer queens don't get driven. ;)

LOL... it saw a lotta trailer time due to explosive OP hardware... this year it WILL terrorize the streets :D

JT, beside all that UDP talking, what do you think was the reason the OP gears broke?

From all of the research I have done it is most likely due to the vibrations from evertyhing and lack of damping of the UDP.

turboshad

05-21-2011, 12:23 AM

Looking good JT! My billet gears have taken me past 8 grand so you should be good to go. :thumb:

BadAssPerformance

05-21-2011, 10:34 AM

Thanks DJ, and good to know! I never spun the last motor past 7500...

BTW, what oil/wt do you run?

Juggy

05-21-2011, 10:43 AM

dont you run oil pressure cut off switches?!? ouch thats some carnage. typical 2.4 lol

BadAssPerformance

05-21-2011, 10:44 AM

One of those would have helped, LOL

turboshad

05-21-2011, 12:46 PM

Thanks DJ, and good to know! I never spun the last motor past 7500...

BTW, what oil/wt do you run?

I run 10W30 Mobil 1. It hasn't done me wrong yet............where's the wood knocking smiley? I'm planning to move my shift point up to 8000 this year as those BC4s just keep on pullin. :D

BadAssPerformance

05-21-2011, 04:26 PM

Hmmm... I've run 10w40 and was thinking of going 5w30... Whats your Oil Pressure? Hot idle? On the run?

*knocks on wood for you*

turboshad

05-22-2011, 12:57 PM

90ish cold, 25-30psi at hot idle and hig 50s to 60 at cruise from what I can remember. Sure wish I could just take it out right now and get you a solid answer. :(

Shadow

05-22-2011, 03:42 PM

FWIW I've been running Mobil 1 10w30 from day one and haven't suffered a single engine failure Or turbo failure. (or tranny failure for that matter) (Big Knock on wood! :)

BadAssPerformance

05-24-2011, 01:40 PM

Sooo.... it turns out the early 2.4L blocks and 2001+ 2.4L blocks are a little different. The oil tap on the back on the later blocks lines right up with the starter :( I took pics for a KC article (whenever we un-F the KC... Frank?)

After some boss grinding.... primer is drying

135sohc

05-24-2011, 01:43 PM

Rbryant had an article showing the differences between the early 2.4, late 2.4 and the turbo 2.4 blocks.

contraption22

05-24-2011, 02:00 PM

I'm pretty sure those arent the only differences. Check your oil passages.

glhs0426

05-24-2011, 06:31 PM

I'm pretty sure those arent the only differences. Check your oil passages.

Specifically the oil return on the front of the block between cylinders 3 + 4. The block on the right is an early production (before 12/31/2001) block from a PT. The block on the right is also from a PT but after 01/01/2001. Some cylinder heads have the corresponding large boss and a large oil return. Some clylinder heads had a large boss cast into the cylinder head, but had a small return hole. This cylinder head would work with either block. Early heads had a small boss and oil return and will have a crankcase leak when used with a block having the large oil drainback.

31120

There are other differences. I can't remember if you use the factory crank sensor, but the later blocks (?2003? NGC computer) had the crank sensor on the front of cylinder 4, and the earlier blocks had the crank sensor on the rear between cylinders 1 + 2.

BadAssPerformance

05-24-2011, 10:38 PM

I noticed that boss was larger there, but the hole looks like it will work...

Old and New pics attached... Both are N/A blocks, old one I think is '97, what year is the new one?

You can also see the oil boss on the back I had to grind down (pic pre-grinding) for starter clearance

Shadow

05-24-2011, 11:08 PM

whenever we un-F the KC... Frank?

Ya, what's the hold up!

glhs0426

05-25-2011, 04:50 AM

Learned more information. Thanks JT. You have a block made after 01/01/2001. It has all the block revisions, but not all the block machining. The oil drain will work with your 97 cylinder head.

BadAssPerformance

05-25-2011, 01:10 PM

Cool deal... so whats that other block you have from?

glhs0426

05-25-2011, 05:43 PM

Cool deal... so whats that other block you have from?

2004 PT turbo. When I finally get to building the 2.4 that is the block.

BadAssPerformance

05-25-2011, 08:24 PM

Gotcha... is the N-SRT-4 block the same then?

glhs0426

05-25-2011, 09:27 PM

Gotcha... is the N-SRT-4 block the same then?

Yes, even as far as the same longblock. The differences were the accessories and intake manifold. The non-turbo used the same bare block except for the turbo drain not being machined. Same idea as the 2.2 Turbo vs. non-Turbo.

BadAssPerformance

05-25-2011, 10:51 PM

Cool...

BadAssPerformance

05-28-2011, 01:19 PM

31189

cordes

05-28-2011, 09:51 PM

31189

Looks great JT. Sorry for missing it, but why the new block? Did the oil pump destroy things?

BadAssPerformance

05-28-2011, 11:24 PM

cordes

05-29-2011, 12:23 AM

Thanks :)

Well, after pump #2 I figured I would just start with a fresh bottom end and see what I could salvage off the old one and keep as a spare? Not sure how that plan is gonna go tho... I think I posted a pic of the chip filled sludge in the pan? :(

New shortblock is bolted in! old one on the stand for diagnosis...

Thanks. That's what I was thinking you had going on. I'm eager to see what the score is with the old block. That was an interesting problem.

I'm just as eager to see what you will do with all those shiny new pieces. This should be a great year for you.

BadAssPerformance

05-30-2011, 12:07 PM

Update... head is on, just set up the timing and bolted on the ATI damper... still got the alternator, manifolds, turbo, downpipe, IC piping, etc, etc to put on, re-plumb oiling, fabricate new crank trigger setup... ok, back to the garage!

Austrian Dodge

05-30-2011, 02:28 PM

cordes

05-30-2011, 04:10 PM

BadAssPerformance

05-30-2011, 10:01 PM

thats exactly what i'm interested in ;) :D
is that damper a press fit on the crank?

Yes, its made for the 2.4L so bolts/presses on like a stocker or any of the aftermarket pulleys. I have pics of the installation tool I made too, works awesome! Need to make into KC article...

Here is my old MSD trigger custom mounted to the old UD pulley:
31226

Here is the ATI installed. Note the 3 bolt holes where the trigger ring will mount :thumb:
31227

You can kinda see in the pic I still need to move the pick-up about an inch towards you as the ATI has two belt grooves and the old UD pulley's outer belt groove was removed.

I really hate how all of those little things add up.

Yes they do! Got pretty far today... still lots to do...

31228

black86glhs

05-30-2011, 10:42 PM

That is looking good. I like how the ATI looks compared to the MSD wheel.

BadAssPerformance

05-30-2011, 10:51 PM

Thanks. The ATI damper will be covered with the MSD wheel this week LOL

turbo2point2

05-31-2011, 06:28 AM

Looking good JT. If you haven't already keyed the damper to the crank, it would be good to do it now. You don't need another headache down the road.

SebringLX

05-31-2011, 08:27 AM

Yes, even as far as the same longblock. The differences were the accessories and intake manifold. The non-turbo used the same bare block except for the turbo drain not being machined. Same idea as the 2.2 Turbo vs. non-Turbo.

No oil squirters for the pistons on the NA block either. Doesn't seem to make a bit of difference though. I wish I had the oil return port on the block, but having a return drilled into the oil pan works too.

BadAssPerformance

05-31-2011, 08:39 AM

Looking good JT. If you haven't already keyed the damper to the crank, it would be good to do it now. You don't need another headache down the road.

Thanks. ...and I didn't yet, was hoping the press would be enough? I'm guessing you keyed yours? Pics?

turbo2point2

05-31-2011, 10:12 AM

Thanks. ...and I didn't yet, was hoping the press would be enough? I'm guessing you keyed yours? Pics?

I keyed mine right after I first got it running. It rotated 20* on the dyno and of course threw the timing off. I'll see if I can get a pic of it. I drilled it undersize then used a 1/4" reamer and slid a .001" over dowel pin in. I did it on the car so even with you having the motor in, you should be able to do it fairly easily.

turbo2point2

05-31-2011, 10:45 AM

Here ya go...

3124931250

BadAssPerformance

05-31-2011, 12:02 PM

Awesome, thanks Brian! Did you use any fixture to line up the drilling or just your mad skillz? ;)

BTW... I realized after I asked that the BSX has a 2.2L bottom end? Which car is this in?

turbo2point2

05-31-2011, 12:19 PM

Awesome, thanks Brian! Did you use any fixture to line up the drilling or just your mad skillz? ;)

BTW... I realized after I asked that the BSX has a 2.2L bottom end? Which car is this in?

No fixture, just measured where I wanted the dowel to be and center punched it. Just took my time and made sure I was nice and straight. The damper was on the BSX until I broke the snout off of the crank.

BadAssPerformance

05-31-2011, 12:26 PM

So mad skillz it is :thumb:

ooooh, I gotcha... so that pic of the timing sprocket includes the end of the crank that broke off? ouch.

Whats on there now?

BadAssPerformance

06-03-2011, 12:12 AM

No project is complete without having to fab something up... The ATI has two belt grooves where the old UD pulley had one (I had cut the outer one off on a lathe) so I needed to increase the reach of the sensor bracket... noticed it used to vibrate a tad so I added a rib for good measure :thumb:

Austrian Dodge

06-03-2011, 02:44 AM

Yes, its made for the 2.4L so bolts/presses on like a stocker or any of the aftermarket pulleys. I have pics of the installation tool I made too, works awesome! Need to make into KC article...

Here is my old MSD trigger custom mounted to the old UD pulley:
31226

Here is the ATI installed. Note the 3 bolt holes where the trigger ring will mount :thumb:
31227

i've heard that it tends to rotate, resulting in wrong ignition timing when having a trigger wheel on the crank.

keyed mine also, but had the crank out and did it on a mill.
http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/photopost/data/837/crank_with_pulley.jpg

i've also opened up the inside of the UD pulley a tad, so that it slides on easier and not having to use a puller every time.
might also be possible on the ATI damper....maybe brian slowe knows ;)

Rampage16V

06-03-2011, 10:30 AM

Sweet pics JT Hopefully I can check it out in person soon

BadAssPerformance

06-03-2011, 12:12 PM

i've heard that it tends to rotate, resulting in wrong ignition timing when having a trigger wheel on the crank.

keyed mine also, but had the crank out and did it on a mill.
http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/photopost/data/837/crank_with_pulley.jpg

i've also opened up the inside of the UD pulley a tad, so that it slides on easier and not having to use a puller every time.
might also be possible on the ATI damper....maybe brian slowe knows ;)

Thanks for the info/pic! Got some 1/4 dowels... waiting to pin it until after I get it running to make damn sure the trigger wheel is where I want it LOL!

Sweet pics JT Hopefully I can check it out in person soon

Thanks, hope we can meet up too... and Ditto, I want to see the RWD monster!

turboshad

06-03-2011, 01:51 PM

BadAssPerformance

06-03-2011, 02:08 PM

Can't you make base ignition offset adjustments in your software? I just checked mine with a timing light and adjusted the MS to match.....though being a stock crank sensor it was pretty much dead on.

Yes I can, but it still has to be within a certain range... minimum of 10° before your highest advance, etc... blah blah blah...

BadAssPerformance

06-04-2011, 09:11 AM

contraption22

06-04-2011, 09:42 AM

Would have had ti running last night if I had oil pressure... The pump would just not prime... great *sigh* I knew the billet rotor felt a little loose :( OK, time to take it all back apart and put the powdered metal grenade back in, yay!

Is there any OE oil pump for a 2.4 with better construction? I know certain year non-turbo PT's used steel instead of powdered metal, but they are on intergallactic backorder.

cordes

06-04-2011, 09:48 AM

Would have had ti running last night if I had oil pressure... The pump would just not prime... great *sigh* I knew the billet rotor felt a little loose :( OK, time to take it all back apart and put the powdered metal grenade back in, yay!

That's horrible JT. Did they include any special directions or anything? I can't imagine having to pull the oil pump after all the work you've done. Best of luck.

dodgeshadowchik

06-04-2011, 10:06 AM

That is horrible... :(

Hope that you can figure something out today. What do the SRT4 people use on their high HP builds? Do they try to get the aformentioned pump that's on intergalactic backorder?

contraption22

06-04-2011, 10:11 AM

That is horrible... :(

Hope that you can figure something out today. What do the SRT4 people use on their high HP builds? Do they try to get the aformentioned pump that's on intergalactic backorder?

A bunch of them bought the same pump that JT did. I am wondering ig they are all having the same problems. If memory serves, this guy said it would be the last batch he made, which might leave DCR as the only remaining option.

dodgeshadowchik

06-04-2011, 10:33 AM

Ah, ok.

Gawd, thats such a bummer...

turboshad

06-04-2011, 10:50 AM

Did you pack it with vasoline or something or put it in "dry"?

bakes

06-04-2011, 02:15 PM

Did you pack it with Vaseline or something or put it in "dry"?

+1 on packing the pump. I put my pump back in the Lancer and i forgot to pack it and i had 8L in the pan so i used the internmate shaft to prime the pump ,took 1 min to get the pump to prime.

contraption22

06-04-2011, 02:56 PM

Did you pack it with vasoline or something or put it in "dry"?

Uh.... are you implying that his engine is f***ed?

turboshad

06-04-2011, 03:08 PM

Uh.... are you implying that his engine is f***ed?

No, not at all. That is what assembly lube is for. The vasoline is just nice and thick so it stays in the pump after it is assembled. When you first start it it will seal the pump like the oil does to create suction to prime better. It will just dissolve into the oil and come out with the first start and idle oil change. So now you know that vasoline can be used for more than buying parts from DCR. :confused:

raccoon

06-04-2011, 03:12 PM

^^ +1

I wonder if there is a way to "wet" the pump while its installed. spray it will somekinda lube in a can.

Aries_Turbo

06-04-2011, 06:31 PM

does the oil filter passage go straight to the pump or are there any valves in there?

you could use an oil filter adapter to backfeed oil to the pump.

Brian

contraption22

06-04-2011, 06:51 PM

No, not at all. That is what assembly lube is for. The vasoline is just nice and thick so it stays in the pump after it is assembled. When you first start it it will seal the pump like the oil does to create suction to prime better. It will just dissolve into the oil and come out with the first start and idle oil change. So now you know that vasoline can be used for more than buying parts from DCR. :confused:

Sorry, I was making a play on the words "packing it with vaseline vs. putting it in dry"

"Top Fuel" Bender

06-04-2011, 08:07 PM

Did you pack it with vasoline or something or put it in "dry"?

Does work good though :lol:

No, not at all. That is what assembly lube is for. The vasoline is just nice and thick so it stays in the pump after it is assembled. When you first start it it will seal the pump like the oil does to create suction to prime better. It will just dissolve into the oil and come out with the first start and idle oil change. So now you know that vasoline can be used for more than buying parts from DCR. :confused:

OUCH !!! but true

does the oil filter passage go straight to the pump or are there any valves in there?

you could use an oil filter adapter to backfeed oil to the pump.

Brian

I was thinking the same thing but isn't the oil filter lower then the pump?

Aries_Turbo

06-04-2011, 11:29 PM

I was thinking the same thing but isn't the oil filter lower then the pump?

trans funnel full of oil and a hose down to the adapter. let it sit overnight.

Brian

BadAssPerformance

06-05-2011, 12:29 AM

Well, last night (Friday) I went to prime it... pump was "dry" and no prime... so I pulled the pan and primed the pump with assembly lube and still, no prime... well it kind of did when I was feeding ti lube by hand but then assembled wouldnt get aything even to teh filter.... This morning I took the pump off and measured the thickness of the billet rotor... .4175 then I took the brand new powdered metal rotor (the one I took out of the new pump housing to put the billet one in) and it measured .4220 thick. I then re-installed the pump with the PM rotor and did get it to prime at least enough to get oil past the filter ... yay! Still not enough to get to the gauge but I called it a day early in the afternoon so Dave and I could go scout out the rally route :thumb: Will mess with it more tomorrow...

contraption22

06-05-2011, 12:41 AM

That sucks JT. And must be frustrating. What's your next move?

BadAssPerformance

06-05-2011, 12:58 AM

Yeah.... getting quick at dissassembling and reassembling everything tho, LOL!

Next move? Gonna see if it will prime better after sitting... assuming that goes well... gotta finish putting it back together (mounts, etc) put plugs in, fire it up, set base timing, change oil, drill dowel hole in damper...

Already sent a PM to the gear provider.... we'll see what he says... I took pics of the digital caliper measurements of the rotors to send him... Actually when originally putting it together I told him I thought the rotor felt a little loose/thin and he said thats how they are... shame on me for not measuring it then :banghead:

Between this pump, the ACT disk I had to re-rivet and another part I cant use, I am really wondering if part manufacturers have a quality control proceedure? Ya know, like a final inspection or measurement before sending stuff out the door?

turboshad

06-05-2011, 01:21 AM

That all just sucks JT. But .0025 seems like it would be a decently tight tolerance. That being said I have no clue how tight things need to be in the pump to make it suck.

Sorry, I was making a play on the words "packing it with vaseline vs. putting it in dry"

LOL....ah I get it now, sorry I'm a bit slow. If it helps I was a little surprised you thought it might have f****ed the engine. :)

black86glhs

06-05-2011, 01:45 AM

JT, what about making a shim to take up the difference between the billet and PM ones?

BadAssPerformance

06-05-2011, 09:08 AM

That all just sucks JT. But .0025 seems like it would be a decently tight tolerance. That being said I have no clue how tight things need to be in the pump to make it suck.

.0025? Whats that? The difference between the two rotors was .0045 and I didnt measure the cavity they set in to see what the clearance is... prolly would have to use plastigage and clamp it up?

JT, what about making a shim to take up the difference between the billet and PM ones?

I thought about that but both the housing and the cover have detail that needs to be exposed to the rotor and ring to work... the cover detail is kinda visible in the bottom of this pic... Its stuff like this that make me guess the thickness makes a big difference and if its too thin its easy for oil to slip past?

31355

raccoon

06-05-2011, 09:50 AM

might just need to spin a tad faster to get going, as long as youve got the pump sealed and its not sucking air in. I feel it should just work.

did you prime your last 2.4 this way?

turboshad

06-05-2011, 11:31 AM

.0025? Whats that? The difference between the two rotors was .0045 and I didnt measure the cavity they set in to see what the clearance is... prolly would have to use plastigage and clamp it up?

Whoops, bad math :o

Page 1051 says the oil pump rotor minimum thickness is 0.421 so it seems like it was way under spec.

http://www.carbide-red.com/service_manual/srt4_service_manual.pdf

Aries_Turbo

06-05-2011, 01:28 PM

was it supposed to be a little loose cause the new material expands more when hot?

mill the cover except where the oil pump gear is?

BadAssPerformance

06-05-2011, 07:10 PM

might just need to spin a tad faster to get going, as long as youve got the pump sealed and its not sucking air in. I feel it should just work.

did you prime your last 2.4 this way?

The last 2.4l primed "dry" with no issues with both stock pumps...

Whoops, bad math :o

Page 1051 says the oil pump rotor minimum thickness is 0.421 so it seems like it was way under spec.

http://www.carbide-red.com/service_manual/srt4_service_manual.pdf

Thanks for the spec DJ!

was it supposed to be a little loose cause the new material expands more when hot?

mill the cover except where the oil pump gear is?

I was wondering that but steel is steel so not sure how much less PM steel would expand than billet...

Didnt mess with it today, maybe later

Directconnection

06-05-2011, 07:24 PM

At work, we have the simple, yet effective way of priming an engine. It's simply one of those little portable airtanks modded with a regulator and air fitting, and an area to dump a few quarts of oil into. Screwing it into the oil filter fitting makes priming work everytime. You can see the lifters getting oil... which is scary... as sometimes it takes a few minutes for them to bleed the air out and prime with oil.

Works everytime!

BadAssPerformance

06-05-2011, 10:19 PM

Neat idea!

Warren Stramer

06-05-2011, 10:28 PM

JT, something OTHER than a .0045 thinner rotor is your problem. I cant believe that small amount of extra clearance could cause a no prime.

What viscosity oil are you starting with? Try 5W20 weight. Or even 10W to prime

could you show side by side pics of the two rotors?
I like Steves idea for priming, would be easy to set up, and once you have it running with pressure it should stay primed. you could feed the oil in a galley plug with the filter on.

Also, You could plug your crankcase venting and rig up regulated shop air (1.5 or so psi) to your dipstick tube to create a slight crankcase pressure differential.
attach battery charger when cranking for max rpm, with spark plugs removed.
of course you probably already tried that.

BadAssPerformance

06-05-2011, 10:45 PM

Had the billet rotot in, entire pump and pick up tube filled with assembly lube... pan full of 10w40, oil filter filled with 10w40... could not get anything event to the filter ... using starter with plugs out... didnt have the battery on a box but it was 12.5V

Pics... Stock left, Billet right.

The stock rotor is fairly loose (thicknesswise) already so the billet piece was even looser... and under spec from what DJ posted.

Aries_Turbo

06-05-2011, 10:56 PM

BadAssPerformance

06-05-2011, 11:11 PM

I forget who suggested that when I was trying to prime the first broken OP before I knew it was broken... I think the packing it all with something is to help create suction and make sure no air pockets in it...

Ya know I REALLY am starting to to miss the OP driven of the I-shaft like the 2.2L :(

Aries_Turbo

06-05-2011, 11:24 PM

yeah i understand the theory, i just think it may be too thick to pull up the tube.

yeah no kidding. hit that i shaft with a drill with the timing belt off and oil pressure galore!

i was thinking with all the oil pump issues with the 2.4L, maybe it would be a good idea to mod the balance shaft assembly to house an old school td oil pump and drive it with a chain off of the crank. :)

Brian

Mike M

06-05-2011, 11:29 PM

Aw sorry to hear about your luck JT. On the same note, yes, I do love my intermediate shaft... I was priming my system this afternoon to feed me new turbocharger, wouldn't pick up a prime with the starter, so within moments had the belt off and duck taped a 18mm 3/8 socket to my wobbly 1/4 extension (couldn't get anything else to work) - hit the shaft with the drill, as soon as it primed my duck tape broke and I knew I was ready to go, lol :)

bakes

06-05-2011, 11:40 PM

I told you to go dry sump!! lol
is the a difference in pans ports on the 2 blocks?

Warren Stramer

06-06-2011, 09:51 AM

wait, you had the pickup tube filled with assy lube? isnt that going to draw up the tube much harder than oil?

try some of the other trick and see if you can get it to prime before giving up on the stronger gears.

brian

X2, What sort of assembly lube are you using?? Get rid of the 40W oil!, Fill pump with STP/10w30 mix, fill pan with 5w20, remove assbly grease from pick-up tube, attach batt.charger set to boost (15-16Volts), and crank away. those rotor gears are fine.
If you are racing with 10w40 you are overloading that pump, PM gears will break. Lower the viscosity and go faster. I race with 0w20 Mobil 1. bearings are fine.

BadAssPerformance

06-06-2011, 10:26 AM

X2, What sort of assembly lube are you using?? Get rid of the 40W oil!, Fill pump with STP/10w30 mix, fill pan with 5w20, remove assbly grease from pick-up tube, attach batt.charger set to boost (15-16Volts), and crank away. those rotor gears are fine.
If you are racing with 10w40 you are overloading that pump, PM gears will break. Lower the viscosity and go faster. I race with 0w20 Mobil 1. bearings are fine.

Just general engine assm lube...

Interesting on overloading the pump... I was planning to start it on 10w40 and then switch to 5w30 this year, but have run 10w40 in it before... do you think that may have been a cause of breaking the previous pumps?

I measured .4175 on the billet rotor... thermal expansion of steel (7 micro-in/in/°F) and even at 300°F it is only .41911 If the min thick on the stock part is .4210... I think it will have significantly lower oil pressure then?

Maybe the housing is out of spec or on the large side? I could not find specs for that, but with the billet rotor in there it was "ringing the dinner bell" so to speak with a visibly large clearance between the rotor and backing plate...

dodgeshadowchik

06-06-2011, 10:44 AM

Interesting thoughts...

I know that the newer cars have been using the lighter weight oils for some time now due to tighter clearances. But from reading through some stuff on SRTforums, these people seem to be all over the board as to what they use. But looks like *most* seem to stay with a 5w30, or a 0w40.

Thought this was interesting... of course this is the internet, so it might not be true. But its interesting to think about since it seems hit and miss on people with pump problems.
"the manual states either 5w30 or 10w30 but one of the main guys from the srt development team has recommended 0w40. in terms of switching over most are switching over at 2-3k and I've been using synthetic for a few oil changes now without any consumption issues."

Ninja Edit: 0w40 Mobil 1 Synthetic is what they are using when going with a 40 weight. Appaprently it is a thinner 40w for some reason. Perhaps because its a Synthetic? But from everything I've read thus far they do not recommend a 40W oil at all. So the post above about getting rid of the 40W is good advice. +1 on that Warren!

Warren Stramer

06-06-2011, 11:21 AM

Just general engine assm lube...

Interesting on overloading the pump... I was planning to start it on 10w40 and then switch to 5w30 this year, but have run 10w40 in it before... do you think that may have been a cause of breaking the previous pumps?

I measured .4175 on the billet rotor... thermal expansion of steel (7 micro-in/in/°F) and even at 300°F it is only .41911 If the min thick on the stock part is .4210... I think it will have significantly lower oil pressure then?

Maybe the housing is out of spec or on the large side? I could not find specs for that, but with the billet rotor in there it was "ringing the dinner bell" so to speak with a visibly large clearance between the rotor and backing plate...

JT, could you quantify what you mean by "visibly large clearance" I was under the assumption there was only .0045 difference between the two rotor gears.

BadAssPerformance

06-06-2011, 12:05 PM

JT, could you quantify what you mean by "visibly large clearance" I was under the assumption there was only .0045 difference between the two rotor gears.

The .0045 is between the two rotors, I have not tried to measure rotor to housing clearance with either one... not sure how I would do that, plastigage maybe?

What I was refering to with clearance...

With the OE rotor in the housing, with the cover bolted down, it easily slides around but you can only barely move it side-to-side (direction of rotor axis) in the housing.

With the billet rotor in the housing, with the cover bolted down, there is a visible gap between the rotor and housing and when you move it side to side it in the housing it moves far enough it goes "tink tink" like ringing the dinner bell.

So what is a normal oil pump clearance? I am guessing the billet pump is somewhere on the big end of normal plus .0045?

Shadow

06-06-2011, 01:09 PM

Just an FYI; AMS recommends running 20/50 in they're 2.4 1000WHP capable mtrs. So are they purposfully building them "looser"? Haven't heard of one failing yet.

Warren Stramer

06-06-2011, 01:44 PM

OK, found what I was looking for in the FSM. 2.4l-clearance over rotors-.004 Max. If you remove the pump cover with the rotor gears still in the pump, and layed a straight edge over the rotor gears bridged on both ends of the straight edge by the pump housing, what size feeler gauge can you fit between the straight edge and gears? More than .004 and the book says its too much.
It would have lower oil pressure, but I'm surprised it will not prime.
I believe you could get it to prime but if you can hear it clinking when you move the assembled pump then dont waste your time.
And I still cannot think of one good reason to run heavy viscosity oil in a drag or street car.

turboshad

06-06-2011, 02:36 PM

When I was looking for my gears I remember reading that part of the DCR design was more clearance but I don't know how much or where that clearance was added. I assumed it was between the inner and outer rotor, not the case and rotor but I have nothing to back that up. I would have to agree with Warren that it still seems odd it won't even prime. Don't be offended by this question, but you did remember the o-ring on the pickup tube right? Is your assembly oil more of a lube or grease? I've only ever packed the pump just to get suction and not the whole tube. If it is a higher viscosity grease I could see that making it harder to prime with the pickup full of it. If it wasn't such a PITA I would pull mine off and take some measurements for you. Being you are so good at it now you are more than welcome to come over and take a shot. :thumb: Here are some pics of mine though I don't know if they will help any.

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g103/turboshad/93%20Shadow/Engine/DSC01756.jpg

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g103/turboshad/93%20Shadow/Engine/DSC01757.jpg

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g103/turboshad/93%20Shadow/2010%20Rebuild/DSC04974.jpg

Shadow

06-06-2011, 02:39 PM

And I still cannot think of one good reason to run heavy viscosity oil in a drag or street car.

I think it's because ppl think the high viscosity will give them more protection under sevear load. When I was a teenager it was common practice for ppl to go to 20/50 for drag or any high demand applications on the "old school" v-8's.

I think this ideology just "carried forward" to the new gen of mtrs. (as ideologies often do, for no other apparent reason)

dodgeshadowchik

06-06-2011, 03:40 PM

^^

I think you are correct. It's hard to convince some of the "old school" people that there is really no need to summer/winter oil anymore either. Ran into that at the parts store quite often. And if the car is a Ford and something happens to that engine... Ford will void your warranty if they run a test and find anything but 5w20 in it.

Directconnection

06-06-2011, 06:13 PM

I would have to agree with Warren that it still seems odd it won't even prime. Don't be offended by this question, but you did remember the o-ring on the pickup tube right? Is your assembly oil more of a lube or grease? I've only ever packed the pump just to get suction and not the whole tube. If it is a higher viscosity grease I could see that making it harder to prime with the pickup full of it.

The pickup tube was packed with assembly grease? I tend to think that might not be a good thing as it could be causing a blockage rather than picking up oil? I've only packed my pump with the white assembly grease (lithium grease I think they call it?) in the past, and it worked awesome from the get-go.

BadAssPerformance

06-06-2011, 06:38 PM

Hmmm... forget where I heard the lube in the tube from... probably 14 months back in this thread? Anyways... gonna go play with it here in a bit... stay tuned

contraption22

06-06-2011, 06:58 PM

Good Luck JT!

cordes

06-06-2011, 06:59 PM

Hmmm... forget where I heard the lube in the tube from... probably 14 months back in this thread? Anyways... gonna go play with it here in a bit... stay tuned

Just to clarify, are you saying that you filled the tube completely up with a paste like lube?

glhs0426

06-06-2011, 07:19 PM

Pro Stock engines run something on the order of 0W10 or lighter oils these days.

Pat

06-06-2011, 07:26 PM

I forsee oil pressure shortly.....

Wishful thinking always helps. :-)

BadAssPerformance

06-06-2011, 11:09 PM

Thanks for the good luck team! :thumb:

As the sun set and the moon rose, darkness set in.... and the beast was awaken from its slumber... It's ALIVE! :D

...and is it evil that it happened on June 6th? You know... 666 day? Muahahahaha! :evil:

Plenty of oil pressure with the stock pump and 10w40... will drain that out and try some of that new fangled light weight 5w30 I've been hearing y'all talk about.

I pulled the ATI damper off and will get it ready to key... Tommy had a good idea to us an alignment tool to drill the crank so Ima see if I can make one tomorrow. :nod: