|
So between Jim Beam commercials and movies, Mila Kunis helps you with your builds?
|
Originally Posted by woodmv
(Post 12125269)
So between Jim Beam commercials and movies, Mila Kunis helps you with your builds?
|
Big updates over the next month or so. Dying with finals coming up and insane amounts of lab projects, but it'll all be worth it.
|
So if you're all about getting everything right, then that steel-center 9" Ford axlehousing is a fail. At least run a Currie aluminum-center version with a Strange aluminum 12-bolt third-member. If that doesn't fit the budget, the aluminum-center Dana 44 from a Jeep is even lighter, more than strong enough for your build, and uses the same guts as the Viper.
But if you want a steel center, the Ford 8" is lighter, and still strong enough. What do you think you're gaining by running a reverse Satchell, which is nothing more than an upside-down 'Fox"-chassis Mustang triangulated 4-link, which sucks for anything but drag racing, over a 3-link plus Watt's link? Being arrogant is ok when you're over 40 and actually have life experience to back up your schooling, but building your ideaology ( spelling? ) will have you driving in denial. Being in your 20s is like that. Eventually you learn that whatever you did accomplish with that build didn't make it a McLaren P1-killer, nor will it make you the next big name in custom car building. When I get pushy, I'm trying to save others from repeating my past mistakes and regrets. Pushing something just because it is theoretically correct is a whole different matter. Like stiff springs with corrected suspension geometry. It does help for road-race tracks and autocross, but for a grand tourer, it sucks. BTDT. These cars already have the advantage of loading the chassis through a coilover. This allows more wheel rate with less spring rate, as opposed to something like a '79-'85 Mustang or Camaro. If you're willing to invest a lot in an old production car to make an extreme performer, the better starting point would have been an '84-up 'vette, or at least an '84-'89 300ZX. These cars can be made to handle decently, but the best, wisest use of them is drag racing. For anything else, start with something else. |
Economiser,
I'll let the SirLaughs respond to most of what you wrote but with respect to the suspension design selected here - it is not at all simply an upside down Fox Mustang. For one thing the roll center is at the bottom of the diff not the top like it is on a Fox Mustang. second, this suspension design has been used successfully in National level SCCA Solo (Frank Stagnaro CP Mustang), Trans Am (Roush Capris/Mustangs ran this setup on street courses like DesMoines) and in SCCA Club Racing. A number of us building E Production/Super Touring cars discussed this design as alternatives to the three link and 4 link setup that are the norm on these cars. We had difficulty fitting a 3" exhaust around the lower tubes however. I will be watching to see SirLaugh's solution. It is a beautifully simple design and It imposes none of the space issues encountered with a Panhard Rod or a Watts link. |
Originally Posted by economiser
(Post 12125930)
So if you're all about getting everything right, then that steel-center 9" Ford axlehousing is a fail. At least run a Currie aluminum-center version with a Strange aluminum 12-bolt third-member. If that doesn't fit the budget, the aluminum-center Dana 44 from a Jeep is even lighter, more than strong enough for your build, and uses the same guts as the Viper.
But if you want a steel center, the Ford 8" is lighter, and still strong enough. What do you think you're gaining by running a reverse Satchell, which is nothing more than an upside-down 'Fox"-chassis Mustang triangulated 4-link, which sucks for anything but drag racing, over a 3-link plus Watt's link? Being arrogant is ok when you're over 40 and actually have life experience to back up your schooling, but building your ideaology ( spelling? ) will have you driving in denial. Being in your 20s is like that. Eventually you learn that whatever you did accomplish with that build didn't make it a McLaren P1-killer, nor will it make you the next big name in custom car building. When I get pushy, I'm trying to save others from repeating my past mistakes and regrets. Pushing something just because it is theoretically correct is a whole different matter. Like stiff springs with corrected suspension geometry. It does help for road-race tracks and autocross, but for a grand tourer, it sucks. BTDT. These cars already have the advantage of loading the chassis through a coilover. This allows more wheel rate with less spring rate, as opposed to something like a '79-'85 Mustang or Camaro. If you're willing to invest a lot in an old production car to make an extreme performer, the better starting point would have been an '84-up 'vette, or at least an '84-'89 300ZX. These cars can be made to handle decently, but the best, wisest use of them is drag racing. For anything else, start with something else. I took a lot of design cues from Winfield Coachman of Coachman Performance (Elwood) when designing a rear suspension setup. It's a Toyota 8", which by all accounts is stronger than any domestic axle of similar sizing and weight. Decades of road racing experience from Paul Yaw of Injector dynamics, Mike Shaffer of Shaffer's Offroad, my buddy Orlando, who's done Baja and KOH more times than I can think of, Abel Ibarra who's world renown for rotary engine development and knows a thing or two about vehicle design, my fabricator, and good friend Tony Ruiz, who's been doing custom 914s, e30s, offroading rigs, etc. There are so many great minds that I speak to on a weekly basis... I didn't go into this blindly. Currie or Similar Ford 9" - Look, I dealt with these axles when I worked at Lucra Cars (alongside CRB Fabrication) down in San Diego. They are WAY overkill for a 2500lb car. If a Dana 44HD C4 Corvette rear end with 2.7 FD ratio and 335 NT01s can handle 700hp day in, and day out, on a 2200lb car, then this Toyota 8" can EASILY handle whatever I throw at it. Schooling in itself didn't bring me here. I don't learn well in class and my skill sets (one being the ability to find interconnectivity of varying backgrounds) aren't utilized. I do my best learning alone with books of my choosing, and connecting with people who I can share information with. That being said, I do have an air of arrogance. I worked my fucking ass off to get this done and to simplify things. I even went as far as laying it all out on this site for people to replicate if they so wish to. What you're missing out on is the finer details. If you've seen any of the recent photos and videos, you'll find that it maximizes the space I had available to work with, while only taking up unseen space inside the cabin (which my storage bins will still work as intended and I'll still have room for battery, amp, etc in that location). Dealing with NVH there won't be as hard as you'd think, and the whole car will be structurally sound. The geometry is the big player in Solid Axle Design. I have my roll center exactly where I want it, very minimal anti-squat (because this IS NOT a drag racing vehicle, and I want my suspension to do suspension work and my links to do location work), and most important of all, my pinion angle changes fractions of a degree per inch of travel, which is the #1 downside of the factory rear suspension. If you don't like it, that's fine. If you don't like me, that's just fine as well. Can't please em all. What I'm stumped on is how you're not appreciating the dedication and development time and money I've put into this vehicle. I'm confused as to why you think they aren't good for gran touring. The build quality is excellent, glass is thick, it's the perfect balance of lightness and rigidity in all the right places, etc. It may not be YOUR dream car, but it is one of mine. I'm just happy to share my experiences with those of similar passions. |
Originally Posted by mustanghammer
(Post 12126066)
Economiser,
I'll let the SirLaughs respond to most of what you wrote but with respect to the suspension design selected here - it is not at all simply an upside down Fox Mustang. For one thing the roll center is at the bottom of the diff not the top like it is on a Fox Mustang. second, this suspension design has been used successfully in National level SCCA Solo (Frank Stagnaro CP Mustang), Trans Am (Roush Capris/Mustangs ran this setup on street courses like DesMoines) and in SCCA Club Racing. A number of us building E Production/Super Touring cars discussed this design as alternatives to the three link and 4 link setup that are the norm on these cars. We had difficulty fitting a 3" exhaust around the lower tubes however. I will be watching to see SirLaugh's solution. It is a beautifully simple design and It imposes none of the space issues encountered with a Panhard Rod or a Watts link. Only took about 60 designs to land on this...ohhh the numbers. :nod: If you have a chance, check out the most recent video on my YouTube page and how I was able to package everything. REALLY nailed it, I thought. |
Just picked up a few parts at the shop for the Direct Bolt On Turbo setup that I'm selling.
Mmm, looks tidy! About 70% done on the inside, another reinforcement brace, some massaging, and cutting the box portion out of the driveshaft tunnel. https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...2d5e7ca508.jpg https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...570cfd3bdc.jpg https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...51b6d1219b.jpg https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...ff324e6904.jpg |
Originally Posted by economiser
(Post 12125930)
...Uses the same guts as the Viper.
Originally Posted by economiser
(Post 12125930)
What do you think you're gaining by running a reverse Satchell, which is nothing more than an upside-down 'Fox"-chassis Mustang triangulated 4-link, which sucks for anything but drag racing, over a 3-link plus Watt's link?
I can see you used a worm-tooth hose clamp and washers on your 3-link with the wrong size heims and swedge tube. Assuming you went with a quality 1/2" heim joint, that's still only 12k lbs load rating. (7/16" is 9k lbs load rating) I'd likely be able to break that setup with 100whp in mountain driving on 200 TW tires. https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...f17f048d8d.jpg Did you model your geometry using this 3-Link Calculator? 4x4 Excel Spresheets What figures did you aim for? Anti-Squat? Roll Center? Pinion Angle Change? What's the stroke on your dampers? Did you use the model to see what maximum travel is doing as far as Anti-Squat, Roll Center, and Pinion Angle? Besides elongation of wheelbase, was there another reason for the further-aft solid axle? Are you worried about bumpstop deformation since it's not true'd to the chassis? What about the lack of a misalignment spacer on your "Watt's Link"? https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...37cef6d487.jpg I did end up using the 79-04 Ford Mustang Rear Suspension for my car. If you looked back at my thread at all where I clearly stated Toyota 8" Solid Axle Swap and 5x114.3 Conversion, you would see the 6.15" Stroke, Double Adjustable Varishock Coilovers. If you're really wondering why Mustangs don't handle well, maybe you should drop in those dimensions into a 4-Link calculator and get back to me. So let me get this straight... Just because you weren't able to get a 4-Link to work for you, you're saying it's a crappy option? Did you fix the factory pinion angle issue? Do you even understand what these figures do to the vehicle and it's handling dynamics? How many miles a week do you drive aggressively in the tight canyons of Utah? Just because many racers who have fully gutted interiors and 10+pt cages have 3-Link setups (which they should tie into the cage), doesn't mean it's the only good option, or that it's suited for everyone. Whether it's a Watt's Link or Panhard bar, you do realize you're getting a lateral arc of travel that the entire axle moves in as you compress and droop the suspension, right? In other words, your axle shifts left to right as your rear suspension moves vertically. Those setups are inferior to a triangulated link setup. Adds weight in the wrong spot. Weight - So, even with all the bracing on this car, I might have added 50lbs of steel to the bottom of the chassis, centered, and slightly aft. Well, when you consider the V-Mount adds fore-weight, I need more weight in the aft to dial it in. You wouldn't understand corner balancing or safety with weight management though, because your battery location is about as dangerous as it gets. Why you didn't put that into a smaller metal box that could have been welded to the floor (Ultimas are sealed cell anyways) and put it in one of your storage bin areas (lower and safer in the case of an accident) is beyond me. Even just put it in the passenger corner to balance your weight out... :scratch: https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...fba5f77ddf.jpg
Originally Posted by economiser
(Post 12125930)
Eventually you learn that whatever you did accomplish with that build didn't make it a McLaren P1-killer, nor will it make you the next big name in custom car building.
Here's a list of cars that I've built or tuned over the years (I'm 26 now): 1976 Datsun 280z 1976 Triumph Spitfire 1994 Acura Integra 2005 Audi S4 2x 1997 Dodge Viper GTS 5x NA Miatas 3x NB Miatas 3x FC Rx7s 2x FD Rx7s 2x Honda S2000s 3x More Acura Integras 1x Acura RSX-S 1x Porsche 914 1x Porsche 356 Replica with EJ25 swap 12(+) x Lucra Roadsters LC470s 1x Porsche Boxter 3x Subaru WRX STi 1x Subaru Legacy 2x BMW M3 e36 1x BMW M3 e46 1x BMW M3 e30 1x 2016 Mustang GT (S550 Chassis) 5x S13 240sx 2x S14 240sx 2x MKIII Supras Various other trucks and compact cars which aren't very important. But hey, I don't know how to differentiate vehicle setups and geometry is all the same...
Originally Posted by economiser
(Post 12125930)
Like stiff springs with corrected suspension geometry. It does help for road-race tracks and autocross, but for a grand tourer, it sucks. BTDT. These cars already have the advantage of loading the chassis through a coilover. This allows more wheel rate with less spring rate, as opposed to something like a '79-'85 Mustang or Camaro.
How does 100% Anti-Squat work? Well, instead of the suspension doing it's job of absorbing vertical movement (bumps), part of that energy is transferred through the link design (the axle locators) which actually shocks the chassis (high Noise, Vibration, and Harshness, as well as misalignment of the axle itself). Guess what though, the suspension is less likely to travel...because for some reason, some moron thought travel was a bad thing, even after bumpsteer was understood and improved upon greatly. What does that do to spring rate selection? Well, if you have more anti-squat, you don't need as much spring in the rear of the car, because now the links are activated AS YOUR SPRINGS. Ouch, that wasn't smart, now was it? So 200lb springs with corrected geometry are probably perfect for a COMFORTABLE setup because my anti-squat is damn near 10% at ride height. More wheel rate with less spring rate? I think you're talking about lateral location of the coilover here. So if the springs are located at the widest parts of the axle, you can run less rate and have less deflection than if they were near the middle of the car. Whooptie doo, that's not saying much. Your wheels/tires need space, and just because the rear fenders have 11.5" of space doesn't mean you can fit a 11.5" tire in there. The axle itself, even on a perfect system, pivots around the ROLL CENTER, in which the sweep of the tire effectively cambers it, taking up at least 3/4" in either direction. A safe bet would be 10" wide tire maximum in rear, which is 255.
Originally Posted by economiser
(Post 12125930)
These cars can be made to handle decently, but the best, wisest use of them is drag racing. For anything else, start with something else.
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...62878f8f6f.jpg I'm done with you. Get out of here. |
So, let's turn the page here a bit and go further into the design details...
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...5c13b9eedc.png https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...982d30131b.jpg This wedge has a LOT more going on with it than some might notice. First off, and most importantly, it's designed to still clear the factory storage bin enclosure metal. Yep, these beautiful wedges will be HIDDEN AWAY. :egrin: Next, once the crossbar is installed and everything tidied up, the wedge and cross bar(s) will support my Phoenix Gold Elite.5 amplifier (or if I decide to run something else, that will go on the top there). Adjustments and access to the connectors on the side of the amplifier would be easy, seeing as I have two huge openings (where the bins are going to be) to get to them. The bins themselves will be cut and re-stitched to leave clearance for things. The shape in the base of the wedge is for ease of wiring. 0ga or larger off of the 270A alternator and batteries will be relocated to this bin area. So amplifier, batteries, fuel pump controller, alarm, relays, circuit breaker box, etc will all be housed here in a low-profile manner (so I still have storage room, of course). https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...73c9d68a0f.jpg https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...5b911e72dc.jpg More to come soon... :lol: |
Before I forget, the next list of immediate mods are:
4x FD Inconel Exhaust Manifold Studs (M10x1.5 @ 40mm Length) 1x Racing Beat Steel Engine to Header Flange 1x Racing Beat Exhaust Manifold Gasket 2x Steel -6AN Weld Fittings (Water Engine) 1x Steel -10AN Weld Fitting (Oil Engine) 1x 3/8" NPT to -10AN Fitting (Oil OUT) 2x M14x1.5 to -6AN Fitting (Water IN/OUT) 1x M12x1.5 to -6AN Fitting (Oil IN) <--- Really unsure about this one, I'll double check it later. |
EFRs come with -6AN fittings on the oil in already with the appropriate restrictor.
|
Originally Posted by eage8
(Post 12127686)
EFRs come with -6AN fittings on the oil in already with the appropriate restrictor.
Either way, I'm running -6AN water and -6AN IN for oil. -10AN OUT for oil. **EFR size IS M12x1.5 to -6AN!** Thank you to Full-Race for being awesome over the phone! |
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
(Post 12127702)
I think it comes with a -4AN fitting and the turbo itself is threaded to M12x1.5 to accept that -4AN to M12x1.5 fitting.
Either way, I'm running -6AN water and -6AN IN for oil. -10AN OUT for oil. **EFR size IS M12x1.5 to -6AN!** Thank you to Full-Race for being awesome over the phone! why do you need/want 6AN? Make sure you verify what the restrictor is and/or weather it's in the adapter fitting or in the turbo itself. |
Originally Posted by eage8
(Post 12127820)
My bad, it is 4AN.
why do you need/want 6AN? Make sure you verify what the restrictor is and/or weather it's in the adapter fitting or in the turbo itself. |
Welding up the Axle Housing, then Truing the Axle, then welding on the back truss, then truing again, then final assembly w/ brakes and axles, and paint.
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...8f7ebbaf51.jpg https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...ba570be5ef.jpg https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...fc49058e70.jpg https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...a44b568204.jpg https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...722d835160.jpg Subscribe For More Updates! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8R...KCCBf-MRD07-Mg |
Serious question, why did you not extend the pocket all the way to the floor? From an engineering point of view it would help stiffen everything up.
PS don't worry about the hacks https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...5c13b9eedc.png |
Originally Posted by Freeskier7791
(Post 12128657)
Serious question, why did you not extend the pocket all the way to the floor? From an engineering point of view it would help stiffen everything up.
|
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
(Post 12128930)
So I can route electronics there (270A Alternator needs some serious battery cables, and battery is located in this storage bin area). The strength in the floor there isn't really that much anyways, it's mostly gained by boxing in the 2"x 2" square tube (0.083" wall) and all the MIG work.
|
Either way, I do appreciate the input and the comment about "hacks". That cracked me up, Andrew. :egrin: :lol:
My buddy is yelling at me for not TIGing the entire housing and I'm scratching my head as to why... Just a waste of time (expensive) and definitely not stronger. The MIG is the right choice here. :lol: |
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
(Post 12129017)
Either way, I do appreciate the input and the comment about "hacks". That cracked me up, Andrew. :egrin: :lol:
My buddy is yelling at me for not TIGing the entire housing and I'm scratching my head as to why... Just a waste of time (expensive) and definitely not stronger. The MIG is the right choice here. :lol: If you have a skilled welder and use good filler, the TIG could be stronger and lighter. But really it just looks cooler. Since you aren't doing the work yourself, MIG will be fine for what you are doing. |
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
(Post 12125861)
Big updates over the next month or so. Dying with finals coming up and insane amounts of lab projects, but it'll all be worth it.
|
Originally Posted by Skeese
(Post 12129221)
I never realized you were in school or maybe I just missed it. What are you doing?
While it's still illegitimate in legal standings, I help people from across the country on a weekly basis, and in my area, I do suspension tuning and calibration services when time allows. There isn't any time. Full time ME is tough as is, and working on the weekends makes it harder still. Countless all-nighters this year... :cursing: It's all worth it though. :lol: |
So...once I finalize the accessory/belt setup, and new turbo setup, I'll be looking again to Mike @ Bell Intercoolers for a new design. Really hoping to cram some MASSIVE intercooler under the hood...but clearance and heat locations are everything.
Currently, I have a 24" x 5.8" x 3.5" Core (with Air Diverted/Divided Endtanks) flowing 1600CFM with ~ 0.1psi pressure loss. It was a PERFECT setup for the T04B V-Trim setup that I built, but has no chance in keeping the 9174 based setup dialed. Frontal Area = 24" x 5.8" = 139.2 sq. in. Internal Volume = 24" x 5.8" x 3.5" = 487.2 cu.in. (487.2 converted to cu. ft. = 0.281944 cu.ft) Lag Time = [Internal Volume / Flow Rate] x 2 [0.281944 cu. ft. / 1600 cu. ft./min] x 2 x 60s/min = 0.021s Newly proposed dimensions (not releasing them yet) will be 2100CFM with a surface area MUCH larger. Damn it. So much $$$$. :( We all make mistakes. Frontal Area = 336 sq. in. Internal Volume = 1512 cu. in. (0.875 cu. ft.) Lag Time = 0.05s Dahmmm. |
Im sure you can sell the old core. If you change the front bumper you should be able to fit a big core pretty easily.
|
Originally Posted by Freeskier7791
(Post 12130289)
Im sure you can sell the old core. If you change the front bumper you should be able to fit a big core pretty easily.
So what I really want is to use the Adaptronic M6000 in three stages of fuel injection. ID1300 Primary, ID1700 Secondary, and ID1700 Tertiary. Not sure where to locate the third rail on the intake manifold or ideal plumbing configuration. -8AN from tank, -6AN return. This makes tuning pump gas work properly, and tuning the much larger EFR 9174 on e85 much safer. Sleazy and ready for 5-600whp. Bahahaha. This is going to be nuts. |
I like the idea of multiple fuel rails, I assume there is some sort of solenoid that controls what rail is in use?
The nose of the FB is so low that it really hampers any v mount. Can you change the size of the radiator possibly to help? Maybe do a rear mount radiator?? I know its not too grand touring but it may help with the intercooler situation |
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...8689a6aa0a.jpg
Okay, as simplistic as this is, it might be the best way to do this: 1) Snag a spare Turbo II intake manifold 2) Cut off Upper Injector "Tabs" 3) Cut Inner Runners on good manifold to match "Tabs" 4) Weld "Tabs" on good manifold at identical height and angle as the pre-existing outer tabs 5) Either find a fuel rail that fits this or Modify the FFE rail for two new injectors 6) Powdercoat the Intake Manifold (again) The M6000 would control it as Primary Rail (with ID1300s) would activate first, then the two outer Secondary Rail injectors would activate second (ID1700s), and finally when necessary, the two inner Secondary Rail injectors would activate (ID1700s). I do this for a few reasons, but the main one is that I wouldn't want to initially over-saturate the center runners while having the outers dry, so by going inner, outer, and MORE inner, it makes sense. Going inner, MORE inner, then outer does not. |
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...072b7fbb20.jpg
Maybe if the larger core's extra area is located almost entirely forward (removing that lip Mike has his hand resting on, and extending on the left side of the photo), I could make it work. We also have an oil cooler between the radiator and intercooler at the back now (right side of photo). Surprisingly, height is the #1 issue here, not fore/aft space. This is what makes the radiator tilt so much further down than in the picture. Too low, and it's REALLY dangerous for bumpy canyon roads (since the lowest point of the V-Mount has the FB oil cooler attached to the base of the radiator). |
I have a better idea. Not sure if I want 3 Stages or 4 Stages now though... LOL.
|
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
(Post 12131077)
I have a better idea. Not sure if I want 3 Stages or 4 Stages now though... LOL.
It may be hard to get the intake parts to line up with cutting pieces off, I know it is more expensive but I would design fuel injector bosses that could be welded onto your existing manifold. I see your issue with the intercooler pretty clearly now. I would cut that whole lip back to where the bolts are basically. Try to get more intercooler area by increasing the "height" not the thickness. |
Originally Posted by Freeskier7791
(Post 12131127)
Can you not find the right size injector with a wide enough duty cycle to satisfy multiple fuels, or does the turbo blow that out of the water since you need so much fuel at peak boost?
It may be hard to get the intake parts to line up with cutting pieces off, I know it is more expensive but I would design fuel injector bosses that could be welded onto your existing manifold. I see your issue with the intercooler pretty clearly now. I would cut that whole lip back to where the bolts are basically. Try to get more intercooler area by increasing the "height" not the thickness. DIY Tune has EV14 Weld-In Injector Bungs with 1/4" NPT threaded top hats. I'd just tap the fuel rail with however many holes (quantity of injectors added). :lol::egrin::lol: |
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
(Post 12129458)
I'm now continuing my Mechanical Engineering Degree at San Jose State University
There isn't any time. Full time ME is tough as is, and working on the weekends makes it harder still. Countless all-nighters this year... :cursing: It's all worth it though. :lol: If I can make one suggestion though...go take and pass the EIT immediately after you graduate. No matter where you go with the degree having that behind it will serve you well and open up stuff down the road. Plus...it's a mega bitch to go back and relearn all that stuff down the road a few years. Just go knock it out right after school. Skeese |
Originally Posted by Skeese
(Post 12131402)
While we do agree to disagree on some things, I'm sure you will do well as a ME . You definitely put mechanical forethought into things and have the right mindset for this line of work. I graduated ME in 2012 and it's served me will in a variety of engineering positions.
If I can make one suggestion though...go take and pass the EIT immediately after you graduate. No matter where you go with the degree having that behind it will serve you well and open up stuff down the road. Plus...it's a mega bitch to go back and relearn all that stuff down the road a few years. Just go knock it out right after school. Skeese The EIT, ahh, yes, I'll probably do it next year. Since traveling and learning things first hand, I lost the opportunity to be a legitimate "full time" student at San Jose State. I'm taking a full time student load as an Open University Student until they accept me. This is an absolute chore... Academia is such a small portion of where I've learned Engineering, Logic, Reasoning, etc as a whole, that I find the school boards to be only interested in my GPA, not my success. Nothing like asking my peers or professors how they think I'm doing or real world stuff that I'm actually doing. Oh well, as with everything in life, it's a work in progress. I have plenty to improve upon, so I can't be passing blame or whatever else around. Here's my Fluid Mechanics Presentation: https://docs.google.com/presentation...it?usp=sharing Just as a note, the majority of my classmates did Hydropowered Dams, Hyperloop, and Tsunamis, some of which were incredibly boring and full of mis-information. I was able to sit down during this boredom and come up with real-world, modern solutions to each of their currently established systems. |
Originally Posted by Skeese
(Post 12131402)
If I can make one suggestion though...go take and pass the EIT immediately after you graduate. No matter where you go with the degree having that behind it will serve you well and open up stuff down the road. Plus...it's a mega bitch to go back and relearn all that stuff down the road a few years. Just go knock it out right after school.
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
(Post 12131459)
Academia is such a small portion of where I've learned Engineering, Logic, Reasoning, etc as a whole, that I find the school boards to be only interested in my GPA, not my success.
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
(Post 12131459)
Here's my Fluid Mechanics Presentation:
https://docs.google.com/presentation...it?usp=sharing |
Originally Posted by woodmv
(Post 12131650)
You'll find also that colleges and universities as an organization are more interested in your MONEY. Some (not all) professors are interested in you as a student and your development. The key to learning is being able to relate the classroom to actual, tangible, real world examples.
That was pretty cool - Good job. I actually LEARNED something, so thanks! Now I know how a turbo works. Never really was motivated to figure that out - just trying to put a car back together. Part time. Maybe when (if) I get done and it actually runs I'll think about going turbo. You have to play their game to get through it. This is my first semester that I can think of where my GPA is pretty damn high in all difficult classes. Hopefully they accept me as a full time student and I can just keep doin' ma thang. |
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
(Post 12131751)
I say this all the time. :lol: They're in the business to make money, not educate, so I'll get my education elsewhere (reading books at home, talking to the right people, forums, other SAE/SAE-like sources on the internet, etc)
You have to play their game to get through it. This is my first semester that I can think of where my GPA is pretty damn high in all difficult classes. Hopefully they accept me as a full time student and I can just keep doin' ma thang. I had a REALLY crappy GPA coming out of college but I absolutely killed it in every job I've been in since then. In my most recent job interview, which included a handful of PE's, we talked through a plethora of engineering topics within my history and by the end of it I'm pretty sure they were all thinking holy shit this kids seen action and gets it. I got the job, and it definitely wasn't due to my GPA. Whats your estimated graduation date? Skeese |
Originally Posted by Skeese
(Post 12131808)
What really seals the deal beyond a GPA or stats is the ability to intelligently talk to people and real world experience AKA knowing what the F you are talking about.
I had a REALLY crappy GPA coming out of college but I absolutely killed it in every job I've been in since then. In my most recent job interview, which included a handful of PE's, we talked through a plethora of engineering topics within my history and by the end of it I'm pretty sure they were all thinking holy shit this kids seen action and gets it. I got the job, and it definitely wasn't due to my GPA. Whats your estimated graduation date? Skeese Well, if I get accepted, I'm still another year and a half out. The 10yr plan! But, enough about me. #LetsTalkAboutCarsYO! |
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...6db397bc10.png
Tune is a long way from finished, but we're getting there! |
looks like you need to move the vtec engagement further down in the rev range.
|
Originally Posted by eage8
(Post 12134070)
looks like you need to move the vtec engagement further down in the rev range.
Something definitely isn't right on fuel/calibration though. I'll get to it after my finals. |
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
(Post 12134217)
There's a fueling issue. We're making 20-30whp less than it should be. Ordered a new Walbro 255HP (I think this one crapped out) and I'll see what I can do with the factory FPR (dimple mod) to raise pressure up to about 51psi (better spray pattern).
Something definitely isn't right on fuel/calibration though. I'll get to it after my finals. any easy way to tune it is to make 2 pulls, one with vtec off, and 1 with vtec on, the point at which the power curves cross (the difference between them is 0) is where you should engage vtec. |
Originally Posted by eage8
(Post 12134298)
I'm talking about the huge torque increase when vtec is engaged. Honda does this stock so the car "feels" fast. but if you actually tune it correctly (lower the engagement point), you shouldn't feel it at all and have much more torque under the curve.
any easy way to tune it is to make 2 pulls, one with vtec off, and 1 with vtec on, the point at which the power curves cross (the difference between them is 0) is where you should engage vtec. |
DOH! Well, go figure, the IAB solenoid wasn't even installed. So a crack of the throttle = fully open IAB = no grunt down low.
:egrin: Borg Warner EFR 9174 will be ordered tomorrow before my source decides to change his amazing pricing! :egrin: Tony and I will mock up the new intercooler dimensions with the front V-Mount and see if I can order the new one from Mike @ Bell Intercoolers. <3 <3 <3 BIG week! |
Rear Suspension Fully Compressed, 4-Link/Rear Coilover Conversion/Solid Axle 90% Complete, New Wheels for the FB, and Customer Car. EFR 9174 Comes in Tomorrow.
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...e146587b8a.jpg https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...ddb57f236b.jpg https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...b5dce31d19.jpg https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...620b6eec3b.jpg https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...261740699a.jpg https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...8b68f296e9.jpg https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...9068e45574.jpg https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...c603a5cb0c.jpg https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...e1db750d0c.jpg |
rear housing looks awesome, are you gonna change the bumps? Not sure how I feel about your new wheels, I'm gonna have to see them on the car
|
I won't know about the bumpstops until we get the coilovers on there. 6.15" stroke really isn't enough for what I planned to do, but I wanted to keep it Varishock in the rear and they sadly didn't have 7-9" stroke coilovers like this. :sad:
The new wheels are interesting. It just got sprung on me and I don't think I can pass them up for the cool factor alone. I'll have them fixed (the barrels are scuffed on 2) and some accent paint done on them to make it all come together. We'll see... |
It's Here! I Present To You, The Borg Warner EFR 9174 with Aluminum CHRA
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...52cf8e200f.jpg https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx7...4a7dbdc3c3.jpg |
NICE!
I got my 9180 just a few days ago but haven't made it to motor selfie time yet. Skeese |
Originally Posted by Skeese
(Post 12138847)
NICE!
I got my 9180 just a few days ago but haven't made it to motor selfie time yet. Skeese |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:04 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands