~Slideways~

12 hours ago, Regan said:

You might not have seen a minesite. Having worked on a lithium mine I know what it takes to get it out and the transport, storage, employees and everything else you’ve mentioned still applies. Was just an opinion, sorry for getting ‘triggered’. Will find another thread. 

I'm thought the big difference was that battery raw materials are reusable? Oil is burnt and turned into carbon, so I suppose it is reused and becomes trees, but it takes a lot more time to make it into oil again.

Plus Lithium is only the current best option for batteries from what I understand, others like sodium might be viable. Also isn't lithium hugely abundant?

On the other hand I'd love there to be a viable synthetic fuel like the one Porsche are apparently making. But I can't help but think that will be for a niche market (expensive).

 

13 hours ago, keltik said:

You might be right, but I don't have any good reliable unbiased data to show the overall efficiency of oil prospecting, building and maintaining an oil rig, extraction, building a refinery, refining, creating barrels and tanks for storage, transport across the planet in a ship built for that purpose, all of the people that need to be employed to make this stuff happen and final consumption in a 50% (at best) efficient engine...compared to the EV pipeline of extracting fancy dirt for batteries

It's a complex equation. But the second we find a cleaner battery technology, EV will immediately become the clearly superior technology

The fact that that whole process of getting crude oil out of the ground and delivered to your tank is massive and multi-country/ocean, versus electric which can be produced at home. At worst produced in NZ (as an example) with water/thermal and even coal if you have to.

Surely that take out a huge part of the problem. I can't imagine how old fashioned people from the future will view sending 100's of massive tankers back and forth across the world will be, while burning the same stuff to do it.

Don't get me wrong, I want ICE to last forever, at least in a fun car form but EV as an appliance makes so much more sense.

9 hours ago, fletch said:

This!

My 200sx occupied my hoist for close to 2 years.... not ideal. But I did park stuff under it. Always had earthquakes in the back of my mind too.

Got it all sorted and back on the dyno to run in and see what it can do.

I drove it around the block to test for leaks etc and had no misfire. So put on trailer ready for dyno.

Sounds like it behaved on the dyno which is a relief after so much work.

Had an arbitrary goal of a responsive 300kw at the wheels, made 290kw @ 18psi around 6k, so plenty of revs left, seems to be limited by the turbo.

Looking at the graph it trails off earlier with more boost. So probably exhaust wheel/housing (12cm twin scroll). Maybe the 25nb runners, but that doesn't explain it trailing off earlier with higher boost (well maybe but the exh ports match that size and I've seen 25nb runners on a 1jz make more).

Peak at around 6k so maybe later I'll try a bigger turbo. Either a Holset with a known exhaust wheel/bigger housing or a Pulsar something or other, but I don't really want to have to change plumbing etc.

I really just want to drive it and finally confirm if the intermittent misfire is gone. I can't really be happy until I've done that since it had been fighting me for so many years.

But two explanations for the misfire and melted piston. One injector became unhappy and flowed less and the major was finding a factory fitted solder blob on the Link.

 

So suuuuuurely after all of this, including a full rebuild I can enjoy the car now right? Come on car gods, don't fuck me up again lol

Next up wof, then actually test drive it more than onto a trailer.

 

21 hours ago, Honda Ass Dragger said:

Toyota G16E and box your sorted - else just just build ya 4age 200kw will be plenty fast  

Yeah I reckon this is the one, old stuff now but plenty still around and heaps of support.

My old ae92 had 220kw at the wheels with a basic viscous lsd e58 and with good tires it was great for a fwd.

I'm sure you know, but this is some pretty big scope creep and direction changes, it could take 10 years to finish and in that time K swaps will be also 'old'. 

 

If it was me I'd continue with the awd path but go back to good old 4age. Use a blacktop head, 4agze bottom end (8.9:1 stock pistons, stock rods, twin scroll manifold and aim for relatively conservative 250kw at the wheels.

Maybe use the ae95 gearbox if you can figure out the ratios since they have a live rear axle of 2.9:1

 

 

Don't buy JAS branded stuff:

2year and 5 months ago I replaced the alternator on my '08 GS350 fitted it myself, surprisingly easy. Mechanic supplied a JAS one, was $618 so I assumed it was decent.

Out of nowhere wife reported dash lights and no power steering.

Found it's over charging 16.2v at idle and 17+ with any revs. Battery nuking stuff.

Dropped it off to the mechanic next morning, they said they'd see what the supplier says. Supplier refused warranty even though it only 5 months out. Maybe 20k km's since fitted. 

Went to go pick it up instead of leaving it at the workshop over the weekend, got there after hours and it's totally dead which I thought was strange.

Jumped it and got it home. Put on charger, CTEK seems to be CTEK'ing. Then on Sunday found it totally dead even with charger connected. 

Connected another battery with jumper cables and got dash power but nothing with start button. Noticed security light flashing (literally never gave the factory security system a second thought the whole time we've had it). The internet tells me I need to lock and unlock 3 times with the remote to fix it, which it did.

Pretty certain the alternator now has a short, which explains the drained battery. Disconnected the battery and charged it. The CTEK seems to think its fine.

 

So it's probably a bin job then, even if I find a regulator (if that's all that is wrong) I don't think I'd ever trust it. We took it up the country not that long ago, would suck to happen then.

 

Apparently JAS threw out $1 Million worth of stock recently. Mechanic said he had the same failure on a mates car.

 

 

So fuck JAS basically.

 

It's not the race car that Roman had, and interestingly the 1SZ is iron block with the exhaust on the front end. 

It looks like they put some decent effort into the exhaust manifold too, sort of equal length and nice collector, hilariously tiny bore though.

I needed a run around that I didn't care about. Sold my ae82 Sprinter and bought a manual 1.0L Yaris, 2000 model, so 12 month Wofs.

I bought it completely untested from a $1 trade-in auction and it runs perfectly, gearbox feels good is totally fine for a 1.0L, factory spec is 69hp. 

Rev's to around 6500 and pulls best around 4000.

Feels much better than a 1.2L auto swift I drove for a while. Is it all just because it's manual? 

It's a 1SZ with VVti so I guess that'll help it a bit.

Weird UK import though so indicator on wrong side, odo in miles and digital dash looks a lot like my old '83 ae86.

No A/C which I thought wasn't even a thing anymore in 'modern' cars.

 

Really interested to see what the average km/l will be, as boring as that sounds haha

 

Drum brakes on the back so the handbrake works really well.

 

These seem to go for around $2-3K these days. Mostly 1.3L but I'm finding the 1L pretty fun just because its so ridiculous.

My dad has one of these, paid a man for a reflash and gained a significant amount. I'll have to go back and find out how much, I was impress based on the fact it was all in the reflash so completely stock otherwise.

I drove it and really liked it. It runs out of turbo very quickly though, so it's not a high revs type thing at all. Which I thought was weird for a little 1.4L

In fact, back to back I hated his 2010 WRX STI (2.5 auto) and loved the Swift. Just so much fun.

15 hours ago, Roman said:

I've had really random looking trigger issues from it not liking the arming threshold settings. 

Could be worth a try bumping them up. 

Also if the VVTI is stable you could try advancing the cam and see if it goes away when the cam moves out of that zone. 

I've increased for the crank trigger but no cam, so will give this a go.

12 hours ago, kpr said:

have a tune here off a running  vvti  2jz,    vvti offset  172  and   trigger offset 200.     

I would be double checking the  cam timing isn't a tooth out.  

when setting vvti offset,   try set it a number or 2  higher  than what its reporting in the cam angle test.  as it can walk a bit.     once you get it working log the vvti target vs the vvti position.      Put zero in the vvti target map.  if the position is  hanging higher than the target when target is zero,  you can  wind the offset back.   but keep it reading a touch above zero.  as can get unhappy  if the cam angle trys to go below zero

Thanks for the advice, I'll try increasing the number reported in the cam angle test.

Will double check the cam timing again.

 

Thanks for the input guys.

Here is a trigger scope around 2000rpm. Is the cam signal just on or just after the crank gap a problem? 

Map sensor is doing map things:

OK bit of progress, the RPM limit was happening when the Cam trigger 2 offset was set to 85 which is the lowest number I get in the cam angle test.

I was reading somewhere that this can happen if it is too close to the timing of the missing teeth on the crank. Causing it to think the crank has 'jumped' 360deg

So if I set it to 170 which doesn't match any of the reported cam angles, it runs OK and does not RPM limit and revs ok but still has a constant trigger error counting up.

 

 

Here is the Cam Angle Test runtime screen, the most telling thing is that while running it says 'Error Cannot Sync' next to Inlet/ LH Signal (where the below screenshot shows 'no signal')

 

So it really seems like a cam timing and/or signal issue. But why?

Maybe I need to increase the trigger arming threshold, possibly too low?

4 minutes ago, mjrstar said:

Maybe slop in the cas drive if you have a really short term rpm spike, you could temporarily raise the rpm limit to a million so long as your confident in the throttle setup not jamming open, or some other fuckery.

Its a reluctor sensor reading 3 teeth on the cam. It is giving me 3 consistent readings on the cam angle test so I think it's ok. But the actual reading/position may be wrong, this is where the Link help file for this engine suggests the cam offset should be 170 but you use the Cam Angle Test to find the correct number. Mine gives me 85, 325 and 565 and I'm not sure why and if that is an issue. 

5 minutes ago, mjrstar said:

 

Fuel:

Are the injectors batch fire or sequential?

Is your fuel pressure regulator set and confirmed pressure.

Have you confirmed the map sensor is playing the game ( watch a live trace of fuel or ignition? The reason I ask is I'd assume 3000rpm feels like about where it might be sitting at low or no vacuum - similar reading to no hose on.

Ignition:

It could be retarded if it feels happier up in the Rev range where maybe it's got more timing in the map. I'd add 10 degrees in a plateau around it's current idle land, just 6 or 8 cells in the table to see if there is any decernable difference. 

Trigger errors  - how many is lots.

20 year old me had an engine with the cam timing out by 2 teeth on both cams and it idled smooth as silk but lacked power up top. (It still made 190 wheel kw) but after fixing the cam timing it made 240kw from a 2 litre.

Injectors: Sequential.

Fuel Pressure: 43psi on the FPR gauge while cranking. I haven't watched it while running (have to hold pedal).

Map: I can watch the fuel table trace moving around with a little vacuum or pressure but will try logging it.

IGN: OK will try adding 10 deg. I did try using the ign table from my old map as well as a base map. 

Trig errors: I can seeing it counting up in single digits while cranking, then after a few seconds of rough running it's up to 60+. I don't know what is 'acceptable' but something is very wrong for the rpm signal to spike for a split second from idle to over 7500rpm and immediately applying the rpm limit cut, every time I slightly press the pedal. This is only in the logging graph, not physically revving that high. It triggers the RPM limit warning, it didn't do this at first so I will have to go through everything again.

17 minutes ago, shrike said:

Have you used a timing light on it as well to make sure the timing matches to what the link is saying?

I can't remember if your using wasted spark or not but if you are remember that the timing will read double with  a digital timing light as its reading it twice (this caught me out in the past)

All your sensors are reading and plugged in? its not something silly like the O2 sensor not being calibrated and the target AFR table trying to dump more fuel in? or your cold start enrichment table?

If it was me id triple check timing, check all sensors are calibrated/plugged in/ reading as expected and see if that helps.

Then if it doesn't make a difference throw a base map at it and adjust that for injectors

That should remove a lot of your variables

Silly question but have you done a compression test?

Yep confirmed with timing light.

It's Coil on Plug, had to use a extension to be able to use the timing light but it worked fine and was adjusted in the link to match 10deg.

As far as I can tell off the top of my head, getting TPS (calibrated), MAP (calibrated), 2 x Trigger (crank and cam), Water temp, Air temp, Wideband isn't actually wired into the Link, it's an Innovate MTX-L which I don't really trust the readings of anyway. They don't have the best reputation unfortunately.

I have been tempted to take it all apart and recheck the vvt pulley and cam belt but hoping there is something I've missed which will avoid doing all that again.

I haven't done a compression test no, this is the first time running since rebuild so rings won't even be bedded in etc. But since I am getting Trigger errors, it's the most likely thing to start with. Just not sure why really.

The Crank sensor is new too, well maybe a few 100km old. 

OK this thing is fighting me, I've got it running but badly. Starting but very reluctant, rough at idle (have to hold pedal open) and runs like arse.

At first it was very rich due to going back to the 1000cc injectors, updated dead times.

Changed the master fuel to 7ms and lowered the fuel table until it wanted to run (much lower than the Link 1jz vvti base maps I could find - one for 1600cc inj and one is stock). But still terribly. 

I did find that once at around 3000rpm it would rev cleanly which is positive (maybe indicating cam timing issue?)

 

Timing:

Timing marks all line up.

Timing light showing 10deg with Link on the timing config screen.

I have it set to 196 offset, while recommended is around 200 but this is probably from a shaved head and block. 

 

Fuel:

Emptied tank and put fresh 98 in.

Checked the fuel filter, fine but changed anyway.

Tested the injectors with Link and can hear clicking.

Removed injectors and tested with some pressure from carb cleaner spray can and tapping terminals with 12v. All seems fine.

 

Spark:

Tested all 6 coils for spark and all seems fine.

 

Triggers:

Trigger scope looks ok as far as getting a clean signal I think, maybe there is an issue with the cam tooth overlapping with the crank missing teeth position?

A while ago I realised that the crank trigger polarity was wrong according to a few Link forum posts stating that the missing tooth gap on the graph should be rising not falling. So I swapped it, but with all of the running issues it didn't seem to make a difference.

From what I understand, it will work either way with reluctor sensors but can cause it to read the missing tooth gap as an actual tooth, due to being a 'fall' in the gap and miss read the crank position.

Maybe I should test it both ways but getting my head around it seems like the below photo is correct.

Excuse the phone photo's, it was late...

 

 

Cam timing (trigger 2) offset:

The other issue is that the Link help file suggests the Trigger 2 (cam) offset should be around 170. But if I run the Cam Angle test I get 85 / 325 / 565 (ish) and the Link forum suggests you should use the lowest number, so I used 85.

There are 3 teeth on the cam, none are anywhere near 170, so is this my problem?  

I thought maybe the intake cam was 'stuck' within the VVTi pulley since I took it apart to replace the o-ring ages ago. So I took the cam cover off and moved the cam with a spanner (non interface so should be fine but I also loosened the oil feed to release any pressure), it moved fine and about 30deg or so while the vvt pulley/cambelt stays in position. I THINK it shouldn't matter where it is before starting since it is non-interference the 'slack' should be taken up when the cambelt turns the pulley and the VVT solenoid should not be applying any oil pressure to the pulley internals.

 

Trigger thresholds:

I tried lowering the Voltage thresholds but made no difference.

 

VVTi solenoid:

I also took out the VVT solenoid and tested it with 12v to see if it is moving. Movement seems to be working fine. Also ran the Link PWM test at different settings and all seem to be ok.

 

After all of this I am now worse off, it is now getting trigger errors and it is getting RPM spikes with a tiny amount of throttle which trigger the RPM limiter. I can see it spike from around 1000 rpm to over 7500rpm and lots of triggers errors. I only have time to do this late at night so its a small gap of testing a few things then the battery dies and it's too late to wake everyone up anyway. So maybe I have forgotten a change I made since I was previously able to get it to rev cleanly around 3k.

 

All I can think of is that the cam timing is out or the polarity is actually wrong now, I remember being meticulous with putting the vvti pulley back together but I am now second guessing myself.

 

 

Cars man. 

 

 

 

21 hours ago, nick_m said:

My friend Nic at Christchurch auto services just finished buttoning up a fresh 4g93 bottom end for a fwd turbo mirage he has. I’m a bit light on specifics but his was a combo of Toyota mitsi Nissan like you’re talking. All after market bits. So think ca18 eagle rods 4age cp pistons. 3sgte head studs. 
could be off there. He’s not on here but I’m sure if you have him a shout he would be happy to answer any questions. 

Thanks reckon it's been done enough times to know it'll work. Except maybe the valve to piston clearance with the mivec head.

Good to know about the 3sgte studs, I saw that mentioned somewhere I wonder if it'll work with the Mivec head too.

Haha is a sharpy the new banana-for-scale?

1 hour ago, Honda Ass Dragger said:

Just send it on the stock bottom end

Far too many people killed them on 12psi and a stock TD04, so I'd be risking a Mivec head getting mangled with piston bits...

Hopefully I can get this Nissan/Toyota/Mitsi hybrid thing to work.

 

Dug this out to measure it and lol'd once again at its lack of girth. 

12 hours ago, mjrstar said:

Ooh, just had a random thought, I seem to recall (but please dyor) that b16a /b18c exhaust manifold is very close to fitting the mivec 4g92. I'm short on exact details, but I I bet there are heaps of b series turbo manifolds to cater to any budget.

Hmm yeah could be an option, although most aftermarket stuff always seems to be single scroll and thin stainless, but worth keeping an eye out for something suitable.

4 hours ago, fuel said:

Evo X turbo wont bolt in place where a IV-IX turbo was and vice versa. The X turbo orientation is actually the same as the earlier VR-4 and Evo1-3 turbo because the turbo sits at the back of the engine on the firewall side while retaining inlet pointing at passenger side. The IX turbo is really good though - the 10.5T exhaust flows plenty (Evo X is larger at 12T in comparison).

There are a some different compressor wheel and shaft configs for the IX turbo though which you should probably be aware of. No doubt most of the IX turbos available in NZ will be JDM variants which have a Magnesium compressor wheel that tends to shatter when running higher boost than stock.

The options are:

TD05HR-16G6C-10.5T - USDM (regardless if MR, GSR or RS)
TD05HRA-16G6C-10.5T - JDM (maybe GT model?)
TD05HRA-16G6mC-10.5T - JDM RS model
TD05HRA-155G6mC-10.5T - JDM MR RS model
TD05HRA-155G6C-10.5T - JDM MR GSR model

HR just means Reverse orientation (ie Evo IV to IX)
HRA is Titanium Alloy shaft/turbine
m in compressor part number means Magnesium alloy

I have the USDM TD05HR-16G6C-10.5T without the fancy TiAl and MgAl parts but it means I can push through 25+psi without it flying to bits. Full boost comes on fairly strong at ~3000rpm and keeps pulling almost to the red line. 

The X compressor wheel is a 152G6 which helps with quicker spool and doesn't seem to be impact the top end too much. The JDM IX MR and even VI TME RS use the smaller 15G based compressor wheel and they are still putting out the same power as their 16G counterparts just with better response. 

I have a 20G compressor wheel and slightly back cut turbine wheel in my VR-4's stock TD05H-16G-7T frame and it was only ever so slightly laggier than the stock big16G with full boost coming in strong around 3500rpm and pulling until the red line. If I were to do a turbo change I would use a twin scroll X turbo with a custom manifold - much better response and would still be able to flow just as much.

Really good info thanks, didn't realise the X turbo was mounted on the rear (due to new engine I guess).

I'll keep an eye out for some TD05 options.

The one I saw for reasonably cheap is a TD05HA 152G6-12T, advertised as an evo X turbo but was on some home made looking manifold. I read quite a few reports of boost trailing off after 6000rpm-ish in X's which wouldn't be good for a 4g92 Mivec head since it should be wanting lots of flow above 6k.

 

 

1 hour ago, mjrstar said:

My evo made 257kw at the wheels on an evo9 td05, with td06 20g wheels installed, on the factory cast exhaust manifold and dump pipe. But more importantly (I'm my opinion) it made 200 kw at 4000 rpm. So that frame turbo can flow around that number under the right conditions.

Engine was pretty much stock except some really early version kelford 264 cams I bought for cheaps second hand.

 

I liked that punchy combo so much I've pretty much replicated the specs in the Mazda, except it has a billet compressor wheel and newer spec kelford tx264's (also second hand) ams some second hand wiseco pistons, on the vr4 rods so expecting similar results at 2 wheels should be enough in a car that's 400kg's lighter.

As far as future proofing, if you are making a manifold then the td05 flange is very limited if you want to go bigger,  say for instance you want to go drag racing / or push for 300kw. Then you'd want to start off with a t3 or maybe t4 flange.

 

Yeah I've been thinking the same, if I make a manifold there isn't much reason to limit myself to the TD05 flange.

Except of course that sometimes a cheap one comes up. I saw an evo x turbo cheap but I know they flow less than the 9 from what I've read.

I've been super impressed with the spool of the HX35 twin scroll on my 1JZ, that's a 12cm housing (Holset sizing doesn't match TD05 cm sizing) and can get a 10cm housing and heaps of other options reasonably cheap.

Twin scroll is meant to work well on inline 4's and unlike 4g63's the 4g93 never got the advantage of twin scroll manifolds.

Alternatively a modern turbo like a G25-550, there are so many versions now. Even a turbobits.co.nz branded one.