Sequential Injection on a Gen I Motor!
08-23-2006, 08:39 PM
#51
Junior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sayre, PA
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW - when I did this on my L98 the crank reluctor wheel OD runs approx 0.005" clearance(gap) from the end of the crank sensor. The sensor body is approx 0.75" diameter.
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/atta...timingseta.jpg
HTH
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/atta...timingseta.jpg
HTH
Thanks, Scot
08-24-2006, 10:00 AM
#52
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ventura, Ca
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 69 Camaro
Engine: LS1 converted to LS6
Transmission: 4L70
Axle/Gears: 12bolt 3:42
Guys I may be wrong but the LT1's have clearance issues also. I believe that your only option is to go with a single roller timing chain and the good ones are not cheap. A friend of mine already went through that. No clearance in the new motors. Scoggins Dickey has the info on what works.
08-24-2006, 08:30 PM
#53
While not exactly cheap, there should be room on the other end of the crank.
To make it cheaper, you get several made via cnc and sell the rest.
Your's ends up free if you get 3-4 made.
Some cars have room to shorten the damper and stick it between the pulley and the damper. I know this has been done with an N* wheel but I haven't seen pics of it yet.
To make it cheaper, you get several made via cnc and sell the rest.
Your's ends up free if you get 3-4 made.
Some cars have room to shorten the damper and stick it between the pulley and the damper. I know this has been done with an N* wheel but I haven't seen pics of it yet.
08-25-2006, 12:33 AM
#54
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 T/A
Engine: 441 SBC 12.5:1 0.680" Lift
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 4.10 TruTrac Moser 9"
Hmm, any folks interested in a CNC cut piece? I'm thinking of two different pieces, one for the hub to clearance the double-roller setups and one for the distributor to retrofit a MSD-type setup.
08-25-2006, 10:28 AM
#55
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dallas, TX area
Posts: 3,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 91 Formula WS6 (Black, T-Tops)
Engine: 383 MiniRam (529 HP, 519 TQ - DD2K)
Transmission: Built '97 T56, Pro 5.0, CF-DF
Axle/Gears: 4.11 posi Ford 9"
I very well could be, depending on the end cost vs. converting over to an LT1 harness conversion....
08-27-2006, 11:34 AM
#56
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 T/A
Engine: 441 SBC 12.5:1 0.680" Lift
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 4.10 TruTrac Moser 9"
Well,
I spent some time on the metal lathe yesterday. Ended up with a nice little aluminum spacer to go in between the MSD-style distributor shaft and the Vortec-style half-moon reluctor wheel.
The spacer has opposing set screws to adjust the relative rotation on the shaft, and the steel reluctor wheel is pressed onto the hub adapter. I'll probably pop a couple of screws through the reluctor/adapter interface to make sure the press doesn't come loose.
The sensor was easy, just two threaded holes in the distributor housing 'floor'. Hits right at the correct position, didn't even need to slot the sensor holes. There's loads of room in that MSD housing without all the other magnetic pickup stuff (like a little cavern in there!).
I also need to determine the correct 'clocking' of the reluctor semicircle with respect to the rotor/cap. Need to lay my eyes on a (cough) unmolested 99 Vortec style again. I can adjust that via the set screws.
For the front hub reluctor at the crank, I've decided to try out spacing the reluctor 0.200" out from the normal position. It should still hit the sensor OK, but I'm having to shave 0.200" off the balancer hub as well. Not that big of a deal really. We'll see how that works out.
I'll snap some pics of both the distributor mod and the front reluctor when it's installed. Should be pretty functional, and I won't have to hack up my pretty fuel rails. AND, I won't be stuck with a single roller chain OR a 'plastic' distributor.
Muahaha! It's getting closer...
I spent some time on the metal lathe yesterday. Ended up with a nice little aluminum spacer to go in between the MSD-style distributor shaft and the Vortec-style half-moon reluctor wheel.
The spacer has opposing set screws to adjust the relative rotation on the shaft, and the steel reluctor wheel is pressed onto the hub adapter. I'll probably pop a couple of screws through the reluctor/adapter interface to make sure the press doesn't come loose.
The sensor was easy, just two threaded holes in the distributor housing 'floor'. Hits right at the correct position, didn't even need to slot the sensor holes. There's loads of room in that MSD housing without all the other magnetic pickup stuff (like a little cavern in there!).
I also need to determine the correct 'clocking' of the reluctor semicircle with respect to the rotor/cap. Need to lay my eyes on a (cough) unmolested 99 Vortec style again. I can adjust that via the set screws.
For the front hub reluctor at the crank, I've decided to try out spacing the reluctor 0.200" out from the normal position. It should still hit the sensor OK, but I'm having to shave 0.200" off the balancer hub as well. Not that big of a deal really. We'll see how that works out.
I'll snap some pics of both the distributor mod and the front reluctor when it's installed. Should be pretty functional, and I won't have to hack up my pretty fuel rails. AND, I won't be stuck with a single roller chain OR a 'plastic' distributor.
Muahaha! It's getting closer...
08-27-2006, 02:41 PM
#57
Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Greenwich, CT
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW - You may or may not not run into it, but there is one tricky bit to sensor
alignment and gap:
The 'start-up' condition turns out to be limiting on automotive crank sensors.
The Voltage-out vs Wheel Linear Speed is usually an exponential function, as shown
by a typical Mag Pickup output curve (below):
Thus, you need to hit the right gap and sensor/wheel alignment to get an output
signal during cranking. Once the thing starts, the linear velocity takes care of itself.
I discovered this issue on something I'm currently playing around with, to my great
consernation. While I am playing with VR sensors, I expect the Hall sensor will show
the same need to make some minimum speed before it throws off a stable signal.
FWIW, I think the supplier for GM sensors is possibly AITek (in the US). Website is
here:
AI-Tek Instruments, LLC.
That site includes quite a bit of design info and sensor spec sheet information.
You might want to bench-test the sensor in your proposed crank configuration, to
establish the minimum speed needed to trigger the Hall sensor before you button the
whole thing up
.
Further FWIW: The GM Heavy Duty timing set for LT4s is a single sprocket design with
a much heavier link chain than stock. AFAIK, the heavier chain has a tensile strength
equal to or greater than a Cloyes double-roller. I used the heaviest single chain I could
find at my local NAPA store on a weekend - had I taken more time, I'd expect there are
equally heavy single-roller chains available commercially. I'm not aware of any inherent
design superiority in a double chain vs a single chain of equal strength and mass..
Good luck.
alignment and gap:
The 'start-up' condition turns out to be limiting on automotive crank sensors.
The Voltage-out vs Wheel Linear Speed is usually an exponential function, as shown
by a typical Mag Pickup output curve (below):
Thus, you need to hit the right gap and sensor/wheel alignment to get an output
signal during cranking. Once the thing starts, the linear velocity takes care of itself.
I discovered this issue on something I'm currently playing around with, to my great
consernation. While I am playing with VR sensors, I expect the Hall sensor will show
the same need to make some minimum speed before it throws off a stable signal.
FWIW, I think the supplier for GM sensors is possibly AITek (in the US). Website is
here:
AI-Tek Instruments, LLC.
That site includes quite a bit of design info and sensor spec sheet information.
You might want to bench-test the sensor in your proposed crank configuration, to
establish the minimum speed needed to trigger the Hall sensor before you button the
whole thing up
. Further FWIW: The GM Heavy Duty timing set for LT4s is a single sprocket design with
a much heavier link chain than stock. AFAIK, the heavier chain has a tensile strength
equal to or greater than a Cloyes double-roller. I used the heaviest single chain I could
find at my local NAPA store on a weekend - had I taken more time, I'd expect there are
equally heavy single-roller chains available commercially. I'm not aware of any inherent
design superiority in a double chain vs a single chain of equal strength and mass..
Good luck.
08-27-2006, 05:55 PM
#58
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: All over China, Iowa, and San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 1,692
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 92 Form, 91 Z28, 89 GTA, 86 Z28
Engine: 5.7 TPI, LG4
Transmission: 700R4, 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.27, 2.73
Hall should not have any speed requirement (if it's the window type, not so sure about others). Hall is like an ON/OFF. VR is like a comparison between what's coming and what's going away (like if it sees a tooth coming, the volts rise; when it sees a flat area, the same thing is coming and going away, so no volts; when it sees a gap coming, the volts go negative), which is why it needs a minimum speed.
08-27-2006, 07:30 PM
#59
Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Greenwich, CT
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I certainly agree with you - it's just that the AITek Manufacturing site (reference
given above) seems to say something different. Note their phrase "NEAR-Zero RPM
Operation" for Hall sensors like the L31.
The L31 crank sensor I used has a permanent magnet pole piece. As such, like a VR
sensor, it needs to 'see' some delta in the magnetic field from a ferrous target in order to
trigger its open-collector transistor. To build-in some electro-magnetic noise rejection
(prevent spurious signals) during engine operation, the designers typically set some
minimum voltage threshhold before the trigger fires. That would make these sensors
different from an 'optical window' sensor, which is perhaps what you are thinking of; or
what I believe are 2-piece magnetic sensors used on some GM applications, or the
MSD 'flying magnet' crank triggers.
See the AITek technical papers for more design information. See the spec sheets for
the National Semi LM-1815 chip for the design of an 'adaptive' amplifier that drives an
open-collector switch (i.e. Hall effect output) from a permanent magnet input (VR sensor).
That paper also has design info on how to set noise-rejection limits in either static or
dynamic form, IIRC.
The point was, for the benefit of Mr. Moates, that the L31 wheel has teeth ~0.25" thick.
If he moves the wheel 0.20" off-center of the existing sensor, it may or may not have
enough sensitivity to fire in the reduced magnetic field that results, especially at low shaft
speed. When I had mine on the bench that is something I did not try to measure. (AITek
pole pieces are typically 0.10-.020" dia, but I didn't cut the cover off mine to see exactly
what was used for the L31.)
FWIW - it appears to me that a VR sensor just uses a static inductive coil to pick-up
variations in a magnetic field, caused by the moving ferrous target previously mentioned.
That variation is manifested as a voltage(current) ~proportional to the rate of change of the
field. Whether the voltage is +/- relative to target motion depends entirely on which of the
coil wires is chosen as the (+) output side. At least that's how it works on my bench.
That's MHO anyway, YMMV. Have fun. I'll stop now, before this goes any more OT.
given above) seems to say something different
. Note their phrase "NEAR-Zero RPM Operation" for Hall sensors like the L31.
The L31 crank sensor I used has a permanent magnet pole piece. As such, like a VR
sensor, it needs to 'see' some delta in the magnetic field from a ferrous target in order to
trigger its open-collector transistor. To build-in some electro-magnetic noise rejection
(prevent spurious signals) during engine operation, the designers typically set some
minimum voltage threshhold before the trigger fires. That would make these sensors
different from an 'optical window' sensor, which is perhaps what you are thinking of; or
what I believe are 2-piece magnetic sensors used on some GM applications, or the
MSD 'flying magnet' crank triggers.
See the AITek technical papers for more design information. See the spec sheets for
the National Semi LM-1815 chip for the design of an 'adaptive' amplifier that drives an
open-collector switch (i.e. Hall effect output) from a permanent magnet input (VR sensor).
That paper also has design info on how to set noise-rejection limits in either static or
dynamic form, IIRC.
The point was, for the benefit of Mr. Moates, that the L31 wheel has teeth ~0.25" thick.
If he moves the wheel 0.20" off-center of the existing sensor, it may or may not have
enough sensitivity to fire in the reduced magnetic field that results, especially at low shaft
speed. When I had mine on the bench that is something I did not try to measure. (AITek
pole pieces are typically 0.10-.020" dia, but I didn't cut the cover off mine to see exactly
what was used for the L31.)
FWIW - it appears to me that a VR sensor just uses a static inductive coil to pick-up
variations in a magnetic field, caused by the moving ferrous target previously mentioned.
That variation is manifested as a voltage(current) ~proportional to the rate of change of the
field. Whether the voltage is +/- relative to target motion depends entirely on which of the
coil wires is chosen as the (+) output side. At least that's how it works on my bench.
That's MHO anyway, YMMV. Have fun. I'll stop now, before this goes any more OT.
Last edited by Doctor J; 08-27-2006 at 07:34 PM.
08-27-2006, 08:09 PM
#60
TGO Supporter
Further FWIW: The GM Heavy Duty timing set for LT4s is a single sprocket design with
a much heavier link chain than stock. AFAIK, the heavier chain has a tensile strength
equal to or greater than a Cloyes double-roller. I used the heaviest single chain I could
find at my local NAPA store on a weekend - had I taken more time, I'd expect there are
equally heavy single-roller chains available commercially. I'm not aware of any inherent
design superiority in a double chain vs a single chain of equal strength and mass..
Good luck.
a much heavier link chain than stock. AFAIK, the heavier chain has a tensile strength
equal to or greater than a Cloyes double-roller. I used the heaviest single chain I could
find at my local NAPA store on a weekend - had I taken more time, I'd expect there are
equally heavy single-roller chains available commercially. I'm not aware of any inherent
design superiority in a double chain vs a single chain of equal strength and mass..
Good luck.
08-27-2006, 11:27 PM
#63
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 T/A
Engine: 441 SBC 12.5:1 0.680" Lift
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 4.10 TruTrac Moser 9"
Hydraulic roller, 150 on seat, 350 at lift, 0.580 lift. Nothing big really.
08-28-2006, 01:24 PM
#64
TGO Supporter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NJ/PA
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Yes
Engine: Many
Transmission: Quite a few
ya know, thinking about this after reading about the mods you made to the distributor, you could tecnically just add the cam position sensor into the MSD distrubutor, and feed the (existing) 8x signal into the crank position sensor. Its really the same signal, other than the obvious necessary 'clocking' of the pickup. All of the triggering signals would be in that distributor then. From what I remember, you could probably trim down the cam sensor 'half moon' it's alot deeper than it needs to be, to make more room in there.
or you could just use the single roller and be done with it all.
or you could just use the single roller and be done with it all.
09-16-2006, 10:46 PM
#65
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 T/A
Engine: 441 SBC 12.5:1 0.680" Lift
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 4.10 TruTrac Moser 9"
Ok then,
Got the motor running. Seems like that 0.200" wasn't far enough to be out of the sensor range after all. But it was enough to move it out off the chain. I took 0.200" off the balancer hub to compensate for the spacer between the timing gear and the reluctor wheel.
And that transplant hub piece I made for the MSD distributor worked just fine. Actually got it to be right on the money in terms of timing! Still need to fill the gaps on the distributor cap to keep the weather out though.
Now to get the wiring harness cleaned up and add some cooling fans. Then I'll snap some good pics and share. Really wasn't bad compared to some stuff I've had to do before.
Idle's all over the place, but I've probably got a vacuum cap off somewhere. Spending time with the harness cleanup will help reveal those sorts of gremlins.
Muahaha! SFI is alive! I bet that idea on the reluctor inside the MSD distributor would work too. Might try it again later.
Got the motor running. Seems like that 0.200" wasn't far enough to be out of the sensor range after all. But it was enough to move it out off the chain. I took 0.200" off the balancer hub to compensate for the spacer between the timing gear and the reluctor wheel.
And that transplant hub piece I made for the MSD distributor worked just fine. Actually got it to be right on the money in terms of timing! Still need to fill the gaps on the distributor cap to keep the weather out though.
Now to get the wiring harness cleaned up and add some cooling fans. Then I'll snap some good pics and share. Really wasn't bad compared to some stuff I've had to do before.
Idle's all over the place, but I've probably got a vacuum cap off somewhere. Spending time with the harness cleanup will help reveal those sorts of gremlins.
Muahaha! SFI is alive! I bet that idea on the reluctor inside the MSD distributor would work too. Might try it again later.
09-21-2006, 06:54 AM
#66
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Beautiful Tunnel Hill Georgia
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 67 Firebird Convertible
Engine: LB9
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.55
I'm back on my Ramjet/4L60E/OBDII project again.
Had some back problems, among other things, that set me back for a while.
The OBDII harness is about 80% installed now, and the engine is otherwise ready to fire.
Mybe I can finish up harness installation this weekend.
After S10Wildside got his project running, I'm getting excited about getting this one up and running.
Had some back problems, among other things, that set me back for a while.
The OBDII harness is about 80% installed now, and the engine is otherwise ready to fire.
Mybe I can finish up harness installation this weekend.
After S10Wildside got his project running, I'm getting excited about getting this one up and running.
10-20-2006, 10:23 AM
#67
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LT1?
I have heard of people running a L31 with the 12200411 PCM. Does anyone know if the crank sensor on a LT1 is the same as the L31 if so, couldent you do the intake mod to fit a L31 dist. and run the LT1 with the 12200411 PCM? I think most of the other sensors are the same. if that would work the the opti spark could be ditched for a vortec dist and a 12200411 pcm.
10-20-2006, 10:54 AM
#68
Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: FARMINGTON AR
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1991 Z28
Engine: 350 TPI RAMJET COMING
Transmission: T56
I'm back on my Ramjet/4L60E/OBDII project again.
Had some back problems, among other things, that set me back for a while.
The OBDII harness is about 80% installed now, and the engine is otherwise ready to fire.
Mybe I can finish up harness installation this weekend.
After S10Wildside got his project running, I'm getting excited about getting this one up and running.
Had some back problems, among other things, that set me back for a while.
The OBDII harness is about 80% installed now, and the engine is otherwise ready to fire.
Mybe I can finish up harness installation this weekend.
After S10Wildside got his project running, I'm getting excited about getting this one up and running.
10-20-2006, 12:49 PM
#69
TGO Supporter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NJ/PA
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Yes
Engine: Many
Transmission: Quite a few
to answer s10mods question, I believe the crank sensors on the 1996 LT1 engines are the same as the vortec sensor.(or is it 1995?) whichever year they switched to OBDII 100%(4 o2 sensors, etc). This part was added for misfire detection. Then you would have to drill a hole and modify the intake manifold to incorporate the distributor.(same as adapting to a regular small block).
it makes more sense to gut the opti and run the Lt1 ecm, which is almost as powerful as the next gen ecms, and use something like the delteq or other CNP/waste spark options.
it makes more sense to gut the opti and run the Lt1 ecm, which is almost as powerful as the next gen ecms, and use something like the delteq or other CNP/waste spark options.
12-08-2006, 06:36 PM
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Beautiful Tunnel Hill Georgia
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 67 Firebird Convertible
Engine: LB9
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.55
Has anyone caught the similar thread at https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/tpi/...opinions.html?
There's several threads going on different forums, and it's amazing how many people are starting or have already done the update to the 0411 PCM.
http://www.pacificp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3240 this is a good one also.
Here's another http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=3261.
And another http://www.monodax.com/forums/tunerc...-question.html
There's several threads going on different forums, and it's amazing how many people are starting or have already done the update to the 0411 PCM.
http://www.pacificp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3240 this is a good one also.
Here's another http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=3261.
And another http://www.monodax.com/forums/tunerc...-question.html
12-09-2006, 11:04 AM
#71
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 T/A
Engine: 441 SBC 12.5:1 0.680" Lift
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 4.10 TruTrac Moser 9"
I've used the 2210s with Vortec heads before, the straight plug deal. Yes, it's very close. What I did was use a 'short' plug which they all appear to be about the same although there's some longer ones, and then take the little nub at the end of the plug where the wire snaps on off. Then I cut the threaded piece coming out of the plug about 3/16" shorter and similarly shortened the female threaded nub.
That shortens up the end by 3/16", which was just enough for me. I thought of denting the header there, but it's not that easy and the plug mod worked OK. As long as they're coated, it shouldn't burn.
----------
Yes, I swapped over to the 0411. Idle controls are very good now, and I can use some of the more supported tuning tools now which helps.
It's a pin swap on the harness connectors, that's pretty much it. They're interchangeable, just a small screwdriver and about 2 hours and you're done.
I've started getting it dialed in a lot closer now, cold startup and idle is pretty well nailed. Cold tip-in is still a bit of a challenge, but overall spark mapping is waking it up big-time. I have yet to put a WB on it, but just going off of the LTFTs it's coming in line nicely.
That shortens up the end by 3/16", which was just enough for me. I thought of denting the header there, but it's not that easy and the plug mod worked OK. As long as they're coated, it shouldn't burn.
Yes, I swapped over to the 0411. Idle controls are very good now, and I can use some of the more supported tuning tools now which helps.
It's a pin swap on the harness connectors, that's pretty much it. They're interchangeable, just a small screwdriver and about 2 hours and you're done.
I've started getting it dialed in a lot closer now, cold startup and idle is pretty well nailed. Cold tip-in is still a bit of a challenge, but overall spark mapping is waking it up big-time. I have yet to put a WB on it, but just going off of the LTFTs it's coming in line nicely.
Has anyone caught the similar thread at https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/tpi/...opinions.html?
There's several threads going on different forums, and it's amazing how many people are starting or have already done the update to the 0411 PCM.
http://www.pacificp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3240 this is a good one also.
Here's another http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=3261.
And another http://www.monodax.com/forums/tunerc...-question.html
There's several threads going on different forums, and it's amazing how many people are starting or have already done the update to the 0411 PCM.
http://www.pacificp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3240 this is a good one also.
Here's another http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=3261.
And another http://www.monodax.com/forums/tunerc...-question.html
Last edited by Craig Moates; 12-09-2006 at 11:09 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
12-11-2006, 04:28 PM
#72
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dallas, TX area
Posts: 3,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 91 Formula WS6 (Black, T-Tops)
Engine: 383 MiniRam (529 HP, 519 TQ - DD2K)
Transmission: Built '97 T56, Pro 5.0, CF-DF
Axle/Gears: 4.11 posi Ford 9"
So, Craig, when can we expect to see your 3rd Gen SEFI conversion kit offered? LOL
12-11-2006, 04:42 PM
#73
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ventura, Ca
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 69 Camaro
Engine: LS1 converted to LS6
Transmission: 4L70
Axle/Gears: 12bolt 3:42
Craig I would be interested also. Do you think you could do a crank sensor and use the Vortec dist setup along with a LT1 setup? It seems that if a 41`1 PCM is used then a regular Vortec front setup would be the way to go there. I always thought the LT1 setups were cool because you got a tranny setup, sequential and both MAP and MAF setups for your choosing. My thoughts were to move the early guys to one common platform and go from there.
12-11-2006, 09:51 PM
#74
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 T/A
Engine: 441 SBC 12.5:1 0.680" Lift
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 4.10 TruTrac Moser 9"
Not so sure about all that. I'd say the biggest limb I'm out on in this project is the distributor modification. If the stock Vortec-style distributor can be made to fit, then that is probably the best / simplest solution.
In that case, all you need is the harness connectors to convert from 99 Vortec to 0411. To go from 86+ TPI, I guess you could do a similar transfer, but I'm not so sure what the gains would be. Gotta do something on the crank trigger and all that.
But certainly, if anyone needs help, I'll be glad to do what I can. I'm thinking the coil packs would be sweet!
In that case, all you need is the harness connectors to convert from 99 Vortec to 0411. To go from 86+ TPI, I guess you could do a similar transfer, but I'm not so sure what the gains would be. Gotta do something on the crank trigger and all that.
But certainly, if anyone needs help, I'll be glad to do what I can. I'm thinking the coil packs would be sweet!
12-12-2006, 08:49 PM
#77
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dallas, TX area
Posts: 3,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 91 Formula WS6 (Black, T-Tops)
Engine: 383 MiniRam (529 HP, 519 TQ - DD2K)
Transmission: Built '97 T56, Pro 5.0, CF-DF
Axle/Gears: 4.11 posi Ford 9"
The current plug and play SEFI is probably a conversion to an LT1 harness, unfortunately.
01-16-2007, 10:54 PM
#79
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 T/A
Engine: 441 SBC 12.5:1 0.680" Lift
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 4.10 TruTrac Moser 9"
Yes, retrospectively I'd say that the following would make the swap much easier:
- Single roller timing chain to avoid machining balancer and repositioning crank reluctor.
- Use injection rails etc which fit with the 'crab' style Vortec distributor to avoid headaches with cam position sensing.
Other than that, so far it's been great.
- Single roller timing chain to avoid machining balancer and repositioning crank reluctor.
- Use injection rails etc which fit with the 'crab' style Vortec distributor to avoid headaches with cam position sensing.
Other than that, so far it's been great.
01-17-2007, 09:08 PM
#80
Hmmmm. I already have the Cloyes 3145 double roller chain on a 1999 Vortec block. Sounds like some machining will be in order on the balancer when I switch over to the 12200411 PCM.
Craig also very interested in your Roadrunner EFILive product. Looks like a very sweet setup. Will it work with the above PCM flashed for a 2001 Express Van and running a L98 TPI setup? Will be buying a custom harness for that portion of the plug and play.
Craig also very interested in your Roadrunner EFILive product. Looks like a very sweet setup. Will it work with the above PCM flashed for a 2001 Express Van and running a L98 TPI setup? Will be buying a custom harness for that portion of the plug and play.
01-18-2007, 01:28 AM
#81
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 T/A
Engine: 441 SBC 12.5:1 0.680" Lift
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 4.10 TruTrac Moser 9"
I've got a Roadrunner in there right now, running on the Expressvan OS. The tables and such needed a good bit of massaging, but it's quite well behaved now. What are you planning on the distributor work?
01-20-2007, 07:23 PM
#82
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Beautiful Tunnel Hill Georgia
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 67 Firebird Convertible
Engine: LB9
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.55
I have tried to upload the cal file for the 2002 L31/4L60E to this post. If I didn't make it, someone let me know how to do it.
I loaded it and saved it from the 0411 PCM with Tunercat II.
I have one for the L31/4L80E also if needed.
Thanks,
Ron
I loaded it and saved it from the 0411 PCM with Tunercat II.
I have one for the L31/4L80E also if needed.
Thanks,
Ron
01-21-2007, 12:21 AM
#83
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 T/A
Engine: 441 SBC 12.5:1 0.680" Lift
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 4.10 TruTrac Moser 9"
I'm getting close with the 42#/hr StealthRam 383 calibration for this conversion (99 Vortec to 01 ExpressVan/0411). I'll post the full raw bin when I get done, should be a couple of weeks, after the dyno pulls. It's the 4L60E setup though.
01-21-2007, 02:43 PM
#84
For my setup I plan on running the L31 Vortec distributor. A couple of others have already done so and it clears the TPI style induction system with no problems. EFI Connection is now making a harness to convert the L98 TPI to the 411PCM. So with EFILive and Roadrunner it should work out real well.
01-21-2007, 03:08 PM
#85
Supreme Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Posts: 2,047
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 89 GTA
Engine: 5.7L Supercharged
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: Moser 9" 3.70
What is the total cost this setup is running for some of you guys? Also the tunning software how much is that going to run and which one would you say is the best out of the bunch?
01-21-2007, 03:08 PM
#86
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 T/A
Engine: 441 SBC 12.5:1 0.680" Lift
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 4.10 TruTrac Moser 9"
01-22-2007, 05:28 PM
#87
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ventura, Ca
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 69 Camaro
Engine: LS1 converted to LS6
Transmission: 4L70
Axle/Gears: 12bolt 3:42
There are 2 things that I think are very worthwhile in addition to the sequential injection. The dual O2 sensor offers better engine control and a electronic auto tranny would be great. You can't beat the instant downshifts and total control. Craig is there indivdual fuel adjustment settings in the 411 bins like the LT1's have? I would hate to do all the work for a newer lower end only to find there is no added advantage. Now if I was starting from scratch I would definately go this route.
01-23-2007, 03:22 AM
#88
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: GARDNERS PA
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume that the express van OS won't handle CNP,correct? In considering the 411 for a large bore SBC (434) for my 94 4th gen, theres no room for a dizzy. I would need to make a short distributor stub with a CMP and use a 24X reluctor for crank position. Or just jamb an LS1 in there and move on with life.
01-23-2007, 08:54 PM
#89
What is CNP? I'm new to the OBDll stuff. Also does the 2001 Express van require two O2 sensors? If so I will prepare for that. Also going to have to do the .200 spacer routine for the crankshaft reluctor. I have my cam degreed in perfectly and I'm not going to change it.
01-24-2007, 09:36 AM
#90
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ventura, Ca
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 69 Camaro
Engine: LS1 converted to LS6
Transmission: 4L70
Axle/Gears: 12bolt 3:42
Can anybody provide all the details on the crank pos sensor setup on the newer vortecs? It is my understanding that the crank is different than a normal crank so say a zz4 motor can not be converted. My next question would be can a Gen I serpentine belt setup be used?
01-24-2007, 07:02 PM
#91
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hurst, Texas
Posts: 9,969
Received 379 Likes
on
323 Posts
Car: 1983 G20 Chevy
Engine: 305 TPI
Transmission: 4L60
Axle/Gears: 14 bolt with 3.07 gears
The harmonic balancer is different.
The timing cover is also plastic, but different.
I am not sure if the timing set is or not, I used the Vortec one on my 1994 305 TBI.
I put an Express managed TPI setup on my 1994 305 TBI/ 1995 4L60E combo in my 1994 G10 Van.
The Vortecs actually use 4 oxygen sensors, but only two are needed.
Some of the Vortecs ran dual knock sensors as well.
Keep this in mind with the Knock Module in the PCM.
I would recomeend a LT4 Knock Module and LT4 knock sensor for noisy "hotrod" style engines. This would include engines with forged pistons, roller valvetrains, aggressive cams, etc.
01-31-2007, 07:44 PM
#92
Member
ATI can make custom magnetic pick up's just wondering if the sensor set-up is like a regular crank trigger with a certain number of magnets on the wheel, at a specific diameter? Thoughts?
03-15-2007, 11:29 AM
#93
Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Quebec
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 94 Firebird
Engine: 3.4L
Transmission: t5
this is such an interesting thread as I'm shopping for a new 3rd gen TPI and I want to do something you don't see often with it. What I want to know is what is the advantage of sequential injection (because bottom line, you guys do this mod for that right?) and , f-body wise, would'nt it be more cost efficiant (if not easier) to swap in an LSX engine? Because I really love the look of TPI, but I am not equipped to machine anything and it looks like some machinning is involved in the process. Just checking the pros and cons of that kind of mod thanks!
04-01-2007, 10:21 AM
#94
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Beautiful Tunnel Hill Georgia
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 67 Firebird Convertible
Engine: LB9
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.55
Re: Sequential Injection on a Gen I Motor!
Try this link. S10Wildside helped me with my harness and started his own link which is continueing on.
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/tpi/...-opinions.html
I'm trying to finish up tax season so I can finish my project truck.
Maybe in a month or so, it will come together.
Ron
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/tpi/...-opinions.html
I'm trying to finish up tax season so I can finish my project truck.
Maybe in a month or so, it will come together.
Ron
07-01-2009, 06:30 PM
#95
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Beautiful Tunnel Hill Georgia
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 67 Firebird Convertible
Engine: LB9
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.55
Re: Sequential Injection on a Gen I Motor!
I had to revive this old thread for news.
I finally got to fire up the OBDII Ramjet today.
After a couple years of health problems and helping family member out.
Mike, and all you other guys that have helped me out, I say "Thanks a Million".
It fired right up after finding a sensor that wasn't plugged in all the way. The engine really sounds great and rev's like crazy.
I can't wait to get truck so I can drive it and start tuning on it.
Ron
I finally got to fire up the OBDII Ramjet today.
After a couple years of health problems and helping family member out.
Mike, and all you other guys that have helped me out, I say "Thanks a Million".
It fired right up after finding a sensor that wasn't plugged in all the way. The engine really sounds great and rev's like crazy.
I can't wait to get truck so I can drive it and start tuning on it.
Ron
07-01-2009, 06:36 PM
#96
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ventura, Ca
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 69 Camaro
Engine: LS1 converted to LS6
Transmission: 4L70
Axle/Gears: 12bolt 3:42
Re: Sequential Injection on a Gen I Motor!
Go Ron! Glad to hear the news. I am still in home maintence hell. Looks like I will have to wait until summer is over to get my project back on the road.
07-01-2009, 06:39 PM
#97
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Beautiful Tunnel Hill Georgia
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 67 Firebird Convertible
Engine: LB9
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.55
Re: Sequential Injection on a Gen I Motor!
Now, to make a 41 Chevy pickup roadable.
07-02-2009, 02:38 AM
#98
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moorestown, NJ
Posts: 9,962
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Car: 88 Camaro SC
Engine: SFI'd 350
Transmission: TKO 500
Axle/Gears: 9-bolt w/ 3.23's
Re: Sequential Injection on a Gen I Motor!
I had to revive this old thread for news.
I finally got to fire up the OBDII Ramjet today.
After a couple years of health problems and helping family member out.
Mike, and all you other guys that have helped me out, I say "Thanks a Million".
It fired right up after finding a sensor that wasn't plugged in all the way. The engine really sounds great and rev's like crazy.
I can't wait to get truck so I can drive it and start tuning on it.
Ron
I finally got to fire up the OBDII Ramjet today.
After a couple years of health problems and helping family member out.
Mike, and all you other guys that have helped me out, I say "Thanks a Million".
It fired right up after finding a sensor that wasn't plugged in all the way. The engine really sounds great and rev's like crazy.
I can't wait to get truck so I can drive it and start tuning on it.
Ron
I recently got mine going as well, but Im using the blackbox instead of the '411. Whats odd, though, is that my setup barely ran when I first went to start it to break in the cam. It would only idle and maybe stay running with throttle, but it was real choppy. After a good ammount of tuning as well as locking it in mass airflow during steady state running conditions, it finally starts and runs decent. A lot of people comment on the later computers running good right off the bat. It sort of makes me wonder what changes where made in the switch to the later PCM. The code on the black box is basically the $0D code with lots of updates for OBD-II and a new fueling algo. It would be interesting to compare them and see what the differences are.
07-02-2009, 04:29 PM
#99
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Beautiful Tunnel Hill Georgia
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 67 Firebird Convertible
Engine: LB9
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.55
Re: Sequential Injection on a Gen I Motor!
Awesome to hear you got it running! Do you have any pics of what the truck looks like as a whole? From the engine pics, it looks like it should be a cool setup. What will you be using to tune, TC?
I recently got mine going as well, but Im using the blackbox instead of the '411. Whats odd, though, is that my setup barely ran when I first went to start it to break in the cam. It would only idle and maybe stay running with throttle, but it was real choppy. After a good ammount of tuning as well as locking it in mass airflow during steady state running conditions, it finally starts and runs decent. A lot of people comment on the later computers running good right off the bat. It sort of makes me wonder what changes where made in the switch to the later PCM. The code on the black box is basically the $0D code with lots of updates for OBD-II and a new fueling algo. It would be interesting to compare them and see what the differences are.
I recently got mine going as well, but Im using the blackbox instead of the '411. Whats odd, though, is that my setup barely ran when I first went to start it to break in the cam. It would only idle and maybe stay running with throttle, but it was real choppy. After a good ammount of tuning as well as locking it in mass airflow during steady state running conditions, it finally starts and runs decent. A lot of people comment on the later computers running good right off the bat. It sort of makes me wonder what changes where made in the switch to the later PCM. The code on the black box is basically the $0D code with lots of updates for OBD-II and a new fueling algo. It would be interesting to compare them and see what the differences are.
The engine is basically a Ramjet with some porting of the heads, LT4 stock cam, and descent set of long tube headers.
I've not gotten to drive truck yet, but tomorrow, I'm going to raise rear off floor and run it through gears.
The engine fires up with just a click of the switch. It revs really great with no hesitation at all. It just really sounds like it's ready to just back out of shop and burn rubber. Whether it will, or not, remains to be seen. I can always hope.
My 58 Vette project, that I'm doing at the same time, has the same engine, except for Miniram III, and 730 OBDI setup. When I fired it up, it hesitates, and sounds kind of ratty. I'm going to have to do a ton of tuning on it to ever get it sounding as good. I used the LT1 spark and fuel tables on it, but haven't done anything else. It's in the paint shop right now.
07-03-2009, 02:13 AM
#100
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moorestown, NJ
Posts: 9,962
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Car: 88 Camaro SC
Engine: SFI'd 350
Transmission: TKO 500
Axle/Gears: 9-bolt w/ 3.23's
Re: Sequential Injection on a Gen I Motor!
Dimented, I'm using TCII, and if you'll send the 0411 I sent you, I'd be glad to take out VATS, EGR, or whatever you need to get the black box changed out. I even have an extra set of 80 pin connectors. I also have schematic on pdf for the Express pinouts.
The engine is basically a Ramjet with some porting of the heads, LT4 stock cam, and descent set of long tube headers.
The engine is basically a Ramjet with some porting of the heads, LT4 stock cam, and descent set of long tube headers.
As for the PCM. Actually, Im thinking of cracking open the '411 this winter when it gets too cold to work on the car. One reason I've avoided it up to this point is that I didn't know how it worked and many tuning packages leave much of the important stuff out.
This is off on a bit of a tangent and Im going to ramble a bit here on a bit of an esoteric portion of the PCMs logic. However, this is the single biggest tuning issue I ran into with the SFI:
I found this on HP tuners about the LS1 computers. This is a snippet on how the fueling routines work from their early work with the LS1 PCMs,
LS1 VCM Main Airmass Calculation
=================================
A very important calculation the VCM must make to ensure correct fuel mixtures under all driving conditions is the dynamic airmass calculation...
RPM > 4000
----------
*trust MAF completely and ignore SD calcs (apart from MAF sanity checking purposes)
RPM < 4000
----------
*if RPM < 2400 and MAP < 84 kPa then
* * *Steady MAP threshold = 0.0 kPa
*else
* * *Steady MAP threshold = 0.8 kPa
*If (SteadyMAP) then
* * *Calculate MAFAirmass/SDAirmass ratio (used for Unsteady MAP operation)
* * *Correction Airmass = MAF Airmass (filtered)
*else
* * *Correction Airmass = SD Airmass x MAF/SD Airmass Ratio (calculated during Steady MAP conditions)
*Transient Corrected Airmass = previous Final Airmass + proportion of Correction Airmass
*Final Airmass = fn(MAF Airflow, previous MAF Airflow, prev 3 MAP readings, prev 3 TPS readings,
Transient Corrected Airmass)
*There are 9 coefficents to this filter (and a total of up to 16 diffent sets of coefficients depending on operating conditions). It is worth noting that the previous value is weighted heaviest followed by the 2 MAF terms, so MAF dominates IMHO).
*There are also a number of checks at the end to make sure things do not exceed certain limits
This description (with the exeption of going MAF at high RPMs) is exactly how the fueling works in my black box. Even the thresholds are the same as mine. Its hard to explain what this is, but essentially its a feed-forward predictive fueling stratagy that is a constant theme in the newer computers. Basically it uses heavily filtered airmass terms from a blend of the SD and MAF along with multipliers for feeding additional terms from the MAF/TPS/MAP into the future predicted cylinder airmass. The intent is to have the fueling be more smooth and more closely follow whats actually needed by the engine.
With the stock calibration, the engine actually idles very well when I used the right spark maps. Almost didn't know it had a cam. But, thats all it did. Just idle. As soon as I gave it even light throttle, it went so lean that it didnt even have time to backfire out the intake. It just plain shut down. When its locked in MAF w/o the transient predictive fueling logic used for the airmass, it actually runs pretty good. I drove the car a bit today, and aside from some low speed surging, its quite drivable.
Id like to use the '411, but I dont think I can until I know how it works. I suspect that I would have all the same problems all over again if I swap it in prematurely.
