Dave what size/PSI pully did you go with? Nice lookin' kit, did you photoshop the shine or what
I need a belt that is maybe 1/2" shorter from stock S belt -- anyone got some online sources I can order from?
No wood close by so I'll not discuss valve float yet -- but I did drop my spark and fuel limiter down 8200/8300 -- gotta be the most simple change I've done to my EFI -- it's a very soft limiter too. Probably drop it down to 8000/8100 for track use -- the joy of being able to easily change this as needed.
Oh phil, thanks for the tip of exhaust TPS 5000/33 works GREAT!
It's not that hard, really. I consider myself "average mechanical skills". I've replaced and built engines before, it's really not that hard. It gets "difficult" when you need special tools and measuring to 1000th's -- I usually avoid those areas. It's all a one person job. I was able to remove the motor without messing with axle or tranny - key was removing the idle pully wheel before removal which provided much more side to side motion.
I had a more difficult time working on a Ford 4.6 DOHC -- I did actually need a few special tools for that job, but for the 2ZZ no special tools at all. I can see why Lotus went with this motor, it is one of the most simple engines I've ever worked on.
The stock SC does need a little "angle wrangle" and never tight down all the bolts until everything is in place. Stock intake manifold is a biatch -- had to grind down a 12mm box wrench to get to that center nut. Removing the clam really makes it very easy to access everything and clam removal is at most 1 hour on my S. Of course Phil's is hinged (cheater).
Murix, agree -- I'm really just a Monkey wrencher following procedures and sometimes make up my own ... high IQ not required, nor really any special ability or skills -- it's just a big Lego set.
Now if it's a matter of can't be bothered or don't wanna get dirty or whatever, then sure - hire someone to do it. I've been there plenty of times.
I work on my Lotus for:
1. the love of it
2. nobody does as good a job as I do
3. I like to learn
4. helps me separate fact from fiction
Now I would probably think twice if I were working on a Ferrari or Porsche (lots of special tools and assembly/disassembly required). But this is really just a Toyota in a Lotus chassis with some fiberglass stuck to it -- and that's just fine with me.
I think someone like me would get this job done in a day, someone like Phil in 1 hour, but in either case, it would be done.
Can't wait to see some track data for this lovely bit-o-kit. Like I said before, I bet this SC turns up in factory backed Lotus within the next year or two. The lower noise alone is probably a big selling point and the side benefit of lower air charge temps. It certainly does have all the makings of a factory S280 no IC followed by S300 with IC. It's a very cheap and natural progression of the car.
Well you folks are crazy for drag racing these cars I tried this on a stock clutch at only 255 wHP and three runs pretty much killed the clutch and I upgraded to Toda clutch/flywheel.
Before the stock clutch was deemed dead, I was able to pull a 12.2 @ 112. or was it 111, close to that. But my tranny has suffered somewhat from it so haven't wanted to go again -- just want some road course time now (I need it).
Post drag strip, stock clutch started slipping a lot in all gears and I was only at 188 tq.
LMP and TEP - cracking up. I'm saving my TEP for the GoGo motor I'm working on. Can't wait to get clutch, chassis, tranny feedback when you cold weather folks finally get to the track. Seriously, climate controlled dyno room -- WTF is that?
Kris, yes I'm very interested!! Need to talk to you -- filling up my tank after every track session is a pain in the ass.
Phil, that FP drop seems insignificant to me on the dyno - would love to see track data.
Got a ton of track data yesterday that I need to go thru -- you can see my video in here. I do have concerns that FP is dropping on a long turn 2 at Thunderhill -- I'll post my "problem" video later that I think it is fuel tank slosh related, the pump itself is probably fine, but the slosh is killing the car. I agree that some "real" return system or something that can cure the slosh and allow me to run the car on anything other than a full tank. And I'm on an MP62 with 550 and only 9psi.
Dyno does NOT tell all, no way Jose. Sorry, I'll never buy into that.
But I do agree that fuel delivery in the Lotus is lacking, but my current primary concerns is fuel slosh. Even with a full tank, I got fuel readings < 3 gallons even only after a couple of laps (hence the red light on my RacePak dash) - I was burning about 2.8 - 3.0 gallons per 20-25 minute session.
An FP gauge is the next step for me, but I'll take track data any day over dyno data.
My point being, I think you're harping on a fuel delivery problem that is more than just a fuel pump, it's the entire fuel delivery system that needs an overhaul (even on a stock S). Why Lotus puts 255 pumps in the Cup car but not the S is beyond me?? What's the difference in cost, $10?? At most. But it goes beyond that, and I assume cup cars have fuel cells not fuel tanks which should help reduce slosh to some degree.
What I do know is that the current fuel delivery regardless of what SC and injectors one is running is complete crap. I don't know how you folks that track these cars are avoiding the slosh problems -- especially given the fact one has to really toss these cars around to go fast.
Right now I feel like taking this car to Lotus R&D and say "WTF, did you folks even f'in drive this car on the track?" And you bet I'll be looking at whatever Kris/EFI have to offer to "safely" manage this car during fuel delivery problems at the track. But again, this is with the stock SC. IMHO, this car should NOT have been delivered to anyone without a serious fuel system upgrade (especially when it costs 70K+).
MORE POWER!! I sure wanted some last weekend at Thunderhill. Motor #3 was gonna be Turbo based, but now Phil has me rethinking ... grrrr
On a side note Phil, my MP62 + RLS IC + sealed shroud + opened mail slot + VonHep + no Cat and I saw max post IC air temps at 145 (boost even had a few spikes to 10.3 psi). I'm gonna guess your bit-o-kit would reduce that even further and have plenty of room to grow.
Turbo or TVS ... I'm not sure I even want more than 280 wHP on the track in a car that I have no plans to put a full roll cage in.
I'm thinking so much about your kit Phil that I'm sending my EFI to Kris for data logging and Fuel Pressure protection setup... -- so you know where I'm heading.
Darth, you're cracking me -- don't know what you'll do if Charlie stops "playing" with ECUs - sell the car?
I draw the line when I see people "Declining" to help because of ego conflicts. I've seen this so many times before just with different faces and names -- ultimately it screws the people that want product. My way or the highway services no one.
Alternatives are good that drives people to be better.
People come and go in your business, it's never safe to place one's eggs in one and only one basket and that is a valid and real point.
Cooperation produces the most efficient progress in any area be it tuning, going faster, etc. etc. Best way to realization is when you bring on the opposing view and explore it and if your information is indeed a better solution to the end goal then that will be realized -- aid those in discovery.
Where this goes wrong is when the aiding of discovery is warped by a strong belief because one hasn't really explored the alternatives and/or conflicting ideas. 3 years isn't a long time. I've been racing vehicles in various forms since 1999 and I still find myself learning everytime I hit the track in whatever race vehicle I happen to be in (same with software development - that's why I like it).
Everyone wants a piece of the consumer pie, especially because Lotus owners seem to have more dispossable income that Toyota owners -- my point is share the pie, it's good for everyone. Phil doesn't come off as an unreasonable person to me, he's certainly someone worth exploring ideas with.
Ok Charlie, so what about the design of the TVS do you not like? Tuning is tuning that can be sorted with your work or with EFI or with some other options. Fuel delivery can be sorted. So what specific objection do you have to the twin screw??
Data gathered so far would seem to indicate lower air charge temps and less noise in the dyno world.
My 2 cents on TQ and HP. TQ breaks more stuff (tranny, axle, chassis, clutch, mounts). HP tends to break valves, bearings, etc. When I was racing American Iron series with NASA, there was a HP/weight rule (9.5:1) -- so everyone would build motors and tune motors for a ton of TQ while keeping the HP as low as possible. So a lot of people were blowing up motors AND trannies, rather than just motors.
No idea what the TQ limit is for this Matrix tranny? No idea how much TQ stock engine mounts/chassis can take? Anyone?
21 - 40 of 129 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.