View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
chevymad Master B
Joined: 11 Jan 2004 Posts: 5472
1987 Pontiac Formula
|
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sometimes much different profiles. In highschool I had one set of tires that were square, so the tread was flat almost from the sidewall over. 245's were 12" wide. Another set of 245s were much taller and only 10" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Alphius Peanut
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 Posts: 2429 Location: Grand Mound
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28
|
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You could probably do something like a 255 width in the front and 295 in the rear pretty easily and keep the tires tucked into the wells.
I'm not sure how the wheelwells differ between a thirdgen and fourthgen, but I had a '94 Z28 with 315s on 17x11 in the back and 275s on 17x9.5 in the front. No mods and they fit fine with no rubbing. _________________ 84 Camaro Z28 - LS1/T56
85 Silverado - Low and Slow |
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't want to sound like I'm constantly moaning about things, but.....
I finally got a PC laptop and got the Holey HP EFI software loaded. Been looking at it and it is a stretch to say that it is a plug-and-play self-tuning system. All it does is create fuel maps for you. Everything else is up to you. I guess I will have to be a part-time tuner after all. Dammit.
Spent almost all day just trying to hunt down injector latency time for my injectors. Still haven't found it. Got a list of a hundred things to hunt down after that.
Bosch EV14
624 cc (60 lb/hr) @ 58 psi
FoMoCo B556V |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Alphius Peanut
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 Posts: 2429 Location: Grand Mound
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks. I definitely will be taking you up on that offer. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I got a 315/35-17 tire from a co-worker for fit up. It is a full 1.5 inches wider than my 275/40 tires.
Looks like a steam roller under the car. But I must have been around too many truck tires because it looks so short! Definitely won't look right without lowering the car further. But it seems I can fit it if I get out a hammer. The front of the wheel well will need some aggressive persuasion though.
What is the basic rule of thumb for clearance needed to avoid rubbing? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aaron_sK Member
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 8834 Location: Back in beautiful Tacompton
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
315mm is 1.6 inches wider than 275mm so the math adds up.
My very unscientific method for clearance has been to pull the springs and use a jack to cycle the a-arm/axle up to the bumpstop. Then pound 'til it doesn't touch.
It's trickier on a thirdgen though, because the panhard bar causes so much lateral movement. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm guessing a panhard relocation will help reduce lateral travel. Who sells a good kit that is focused on handling and not just exhaust clearance? Seems like everybody is trying to sell it for dual exhaust clearance. I want somebody that pays attention to it actually working! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dewey316 The Lama
Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 7295 Location: Bringing the tech
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2016 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
QwkTrip wrote: | Who sells a good kit that is focused on handling and not just exhaust clearance? Seems like everybody is trying to sell it for dual exhaust clearance. I want somebody that pays attention to it actually working! |
http://www.unbalancedengineering.com/Camaro/
But, that won't matter, with a panhard design because of the arc of travel when the suspension moves, there will always be some lateral movement.
Also note, your roll center will change with panhard relocation, you will need much stiffer rear springs because it will tend towards rolling more than having the panhard higher. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Alphius Peanut
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 Posts: 2429 Location: Grand Mound
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28
|
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2016 7:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
The UE one'll do ya good. _________________ 84 Camaro Z28 - LS1/T56
85 Silverado - Low and Slow |
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Sat Feb 06, 2016 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I figured out how to do reverse lockout with the HP EFI.
The key is getting a speed signal that the Holley HP can understand. It is looking for a Hall Effect speed sensor and the T56 doesn't have it. Holley HP software calculates ground speed (MPH) from the measured frequency (Hz) of the speed sensor. It needs the following to do the calculation:
* Speed sensor "Pulses Per Rotation" (PPR)
* gear ratio
* tire size
I already wired my car to provide a square wave by tapping into the cruise control signal of the Dakota Digital SGI-5c that I am using to operate my speedometer. Problem is that the output is 2000 Pulse Per Mile (PPM), while the Holley HP needs a Pulse Per Rotation (PPR) of the speed sensor. The trick is to input the correct PPR so the MPH calculation is calibrated to the PPM speed signal being fed to the ECU. Basically, I needed to create a virtual speed sensor.
Given:
Speed signal at 2000 Pulse Per Mile
3.73 gear ratio
26" tire diameter
Solution:
a) Distance traveled per tire rotation
(26 inch)*(pi) = 81.68 inch
b) Tire rotations per mile
(63360 inch/mile) / (81.68 inch/rotation) = 775.70
c) Virtual Speed Sensor, rotations per mile
775.70 * (3.73 gear ratio) = 2893.35
d) Virtual speed sensor, Pulses Per Rotation
(2000 pulse/mile) / (2893.35 rotations/mile) = 0.691
Only problem is the Holley HP software accepts only whole numbers. Set PPR = 1 and then fake the gear ratio to compensate.
(0.691 * 3.73) = (1 * Y)
Y = 2.58 fake gear ratio
Now I have a custom Input that measures MPH, and I can go set up a custom Output to operate the reverse lockout solenoid.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Isn't a mag sensor and tone ring hall effect? It's still creating a/c voltage. _________________ A redline a day keeps the carbon away! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think a Hall Effect sensor gives a DC square wave that switches between zero volts and some other value, whereas magnetic pick up gives an AC wave. Both have a frequency proportional to speed.
An ECM can use a DC square wave in raw form because it is basically a bunch of on-off events. An AC wave needs conditioning for the ECM to deal with it.
I might not have full grasp of this because I didn't care how things work. I just knew I had to provide a square wave so I got one. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gotcha. The old school way was to wire the lock out to the brake switch. No brakes, no reverse. _________________ A redline a day keeps the carbon away! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chevymad Master B
Joined: 11 Jan 2004 Posts: 5472
1987 Pontiac Formula
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Twilightoptics wrote: | Gotcha. The old school way was to wire the lock out to the brake switch. No brakes, no reverse. |
Don't know why... but I find the simplicity of this method vs the other hilarious! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do brake and shift at the same time. Speed based is fool proof. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe get better at shifting lol. I never had a problem. 4 to 5 is the most likely issue and up shifting with brake ? :0) _________________ A redline a day keeps the carbon away! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aaron_sK Member
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 8834 Location: Back in beautiful Tacompton
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The only possible fear is doing a 6-5 downshift with your right foot on the brake and slipping into reverse.
In practice this will never ever happen unless you are some kind of weirdo driver. The only time you ever do a 6-5 downshift in a T56 is to merge into a faster lane or when approaching an uphill stretch of highway at a low-ish speed, and you will never right foot brake in those situations. If you are downshifting for braking compression (i.e. running up against slower traffic) you will go 6-4 every time otherwise you won't get enough revs.
That said, Jon's solution is technically correct (the best kind of correct!), and if you are going to spend 20 years putting a smallblock into a Chevy you may as well do it correctly. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good news! I found a shop in town that will weld up my torque arm and a few other odds and ends I need done. And they will come get my car with an enclosed trailer so that I don't have to wait until May when the salt is off the roads. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
aaron_sK wrote: | That said, Jon's solution is technically correct (the best kind of correct!) |
Exactly. I don't know why anybody would argue that I should undo what I've already done just to do it worse!
And for the record.... my method is darn slick! LOL! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|