Average repaint cost?

[Chuck Leeper]

To test Eric's theory you need to remove the air filter and run without it and you need to do this before changing the governor.
How long is your filter? I ask because it looks like the same filter I have. The dirtier it is,the sooner it will collapse.
You asked in an earlier post if that turbo needed to be run at 30 PSI. It doesn't need to be,but it will produce alot of power at 28-30 psi in your application.

One experience with the filter being the culprit.
We had a Syclone on the chassis dyno. Wasn't putting up the #'s we expected.
While the engine was allowed to cool, we pulled the filter. A fairly large K&N cone, AIRC.
This resulted in a 15 RWHP increase.
In the current discussion, I'm wondering if the MAF being directly connected to the filter could be an issue.
I would suggest a back to back test, using a length of tube, that replicates the filter. This can help with straightening the air flow, prior to entering the MAF.

Back under my rock.

 

[Pronto]

Or even a maf air flow straightener. They look like a honeycomb and come in sized that fit the LS mafs. I friend of mine has a 2002 Camaro and had some mods and tune. He ended up getting one of those straighteners to fix some tuning funkyness.

 

[mikestertwo]

Here is your complete post so you can't accuse me of taking your words out of context. You say that you thought it looked like a rev limiter issue and noted that the IDC didn't drop. The fact that the IDC didn't drop proves that fuel wasn't being cut off which is the only way that these chips limit revs. I'm simply pointing this out for someone else who comes along and reads your post so they can put rev limiter out of their mind and look elsewhere. Just like it can't be valve springs,it can't be a rev limiter issue because power would immediately return as soon as the revs dropped.

Calling me dumb doesn't do anything to help your rev limiter theory.

First of all I didn't call you dumb! I said it ACTS like it has a rev limiter on it...I didn't say it had one on it. The fact that it shuts down so abruptly at pretty much the same rpm and the O2's go to virtually 0 yet the injector duty cycle stays acts like the ignition is being shut down. It's just an observation from the data. From the OP's posts it sounds like he really doesn't know what he has or exactly what mods were done to the car. How many times have people posted issues with a car and then later on come to find out there was a modification or add on to the car they were not aware of. I'm sorry that I offended you....I didn't mean to. I suppose in the future I will be more concise in my wording so people don't miss-understand what I am saying.

 

[Ttype6]

Not sure on the filter length or age. What a wake up call this will be if it is the problem. I should have given more thought to the condition of the air filter...but honestly, it didn't even cross my mind.

Ok, will run it without a filter and report back. Since the car has never shifted into 2nd gear at WOT, I have no idea when it will change gears(will be over 5,900 at least). At what RPM should I lift off the gas(if it doesn't shift into 2nd) to avoid spinning it too high and possibly causing valvetrain damage or worse?
FWIW, the reason the shift points are so out of whack is because the trans is suspected to be from a Monte Carlo or SS or something other than a GN. It doesn't have the BRF valve body and the governor gear is green.

Awesome to know about the turbo. The 3200 stall converter seems to work well and spool up isn't bad at all.

If it doesn't shift by 6,000 or a little higher,let off. You just want to see if it falls on its face. If it doesn't,put the filter back on and test again to make sure. A stock Monte Carlo valve body and governor doesn't shift that high and no valve body governor combo shifts at more favorable points than the BRF,so you'll want to get the BRF stuff.

 

[Ttype6]

I would suggest a back to back test, using a length of tube, that replicates the filter. This can help with straightening the air flow, prior to entering the MAF.

I think that is a very good idea. Perhaps a piece of scrap 3.5" exhaust pipe from a muffler shop.

 

[6gunn]

If it doesn't shift by 6,000 or a little higher,let off. You just want to see if it falls on its face. If it doesn't,put the filter back on and test again to make sure. A stock Monte Carlo valve body and governor doesn't shift that high and no valve body governor combo shifts at more favorable points than the BRF,so you'll want to get the BRF stuff.

Do you think that the trans would have shifted into 2nd all along if the MAF lock had not been reached due to (possibly) the air filter collapsing? I plan to try Chucks idea as well. Though, I was thinking about using a piece of PVC pipe cut to the same length as the filter and what ever the diameter is of the filter neck(3.5"?). Might as well take a log with the PVC extension and without just to see if there's a difference in the smoothness of the airflow. Should be interesting.

 

[Chuck Leeper]

Though, I was thinking about using a piece of PVC pipe cut to the same length as the filter and what ever the diameter is of the filter neck(3.5"?). Might as well take a log with the PVC extension and without just to see if there's a difference in the smoothness of the airflow. Should be interesting.

Shouldn't make a difference as to the pipe material. As long as it is a smooth wall.
Another "what if" test could be a radiused inlet bell, on the tube. Or, just a bell on the inlet side of the MAF, and no pipe?
The cone filter has, by design, a sharp edge at the tube opening. Pulling air over that edge has to disrupt the laminar flow from further out on the filters length. w/ the MAF right at that point, how much does the MAF reading's accuracy vary? Maybe, the above test can tell us something.
I have entirely too much free time, to think up "stuff".

An "aside". I had to modify the driveway drain pipe configuration. When doing a search for a new culvert pipe, I did some math. Using a smooth wall composite pipe, vs a corrugated steel pipe, of the same diameter, and length, in flow volume, increased water flow by a significant amt.
Makes me wonder just how efficient those convoluted, cold air intake systems really are. That testing would be interesting.
I'm sure there's some "what if'rs" with turbo Buicks, that are looking for new "mouse traps".

 

[6gunn]

I'd be curious to know how much of a vacuum can be pulled on this air filter before it collapses vs. how much of a vacuum can be pulled on a new air filter of the same size. Also wonder where it is collapsing, but would imagine it to be in the middle somewhere. Perhaps over oiling may have contributed to the failure? Too much oil ended up causing a restriction? Should be able to find out this Sunday and will either laugh or cry at the results.

 

[No disintegrations]

It would be cool to put a gopro under the hood and see what happens.

 

[Chuck Leeper]

Perhaps over oiling may have contributed to the failure? Too much oil ended up causing a restriction?

Over oiling can/will screw up the MAF readings.

 

[1KWIKSIX]

I learned this the hard way, many years ago had to scrap a MAF sensor that got damaged from my trip to Krown Rustproofing . Too much spray oil underhood and it buggered it up

 

[bison]

If this is a stock cam, head engine it will be a turd past 5000 rpm unless you really let it eat. Like 35+psi. Usually a 6776 sucks on a stock engine. Its lazy and the engine is too inefficient to swallow the potential of it. If the converter is right it will never make enough power to be over 5700rpm in 3rd with 3.42 gear and 28" in the quarter mile no matter what you do short of using nitrous. Engine should only be past 5100rpm-5200 in 3rd if it has the steam to pull it. If you had a really efficient engine the 6776 would run out of steam sub 25psi.

 

[Ttype6]

If this is a stock cam, head engine it will be a turd past 5000 rpm

It's not stock. It revs to 6,000 rpm.

Usually a 6776 sucks on a stock engine.

It's not stock

 

[6gunn]

Air filter wasn't the problem. Didn't see any signs that it was collapsing either. Also nosed over a little sooner than the other pull with the filter. Could have been because this pull was just made tonight vs the other pull that was made during the heat of the day. Going to just proceed with the governor mods. Log attached.

 

[Eric Stage I]

Can you confirm your MAP sensor is a 3-bar and not the stock 2-bar? Seems odd that the MAP reading fully maxes out at WOT.
Do you have a boost gauge?

 

[6gunn]

The map part number shows it as a 3 bar(up to 44psi). there are 2 map sensors feeding off the same boost/vac line. The PO did this. I figured one is for the factory boost gauge and the other is the 3 bar

https://imgur.com/dzNcA76

https://imgur.com/0PfuHIG

https://imgur.com/485yRcW

Yes, I have an Autometer boost gauge but it doesn't coincide with the boost reading in PL. It shows about 10psi lower than PL. I figured the boost gauge was fubar, so I bought a new Autometer gauge. Haven't installed it yet though. Before running PL with the KOEO, I always zero out the boost reading in PL by pressing ctrl B while the PL is monitoring.

 

[Ttype6]

Going to just proceed with the governor mods.

That's what I would do. Again,I can't stress enough how important it is to get BRF stuff eventually.

 

[Pronto]

One is probably for the alky. Is it an Alkycontrol system? Do you have an analog dash? The only thing the MAP does is give a signal for the indash "boost" gauge, if you want to even call it that. Top one is a 3 bar ie; 28psi MAP. That second MAP is some off market thing.

 

[6gunn]

One is probably for the alky. Is it an Alkycontrol system? Do you have an analog dash? The only thing the MAP does is give a signal for the indash "boost" gauge, if you want to even call it that. Top one is a 3 bar ie; 28psi MAP. That second MAP is some off market thing.

Yes, analog dash and it is an alkycontrol system.

 

[6gunn]

It's not stock. It revs to 6,000 rpm.

It's not stock

When I was doing the gov spring pin and 700 filter/pan, I noticed the valve body had either "KF" or "KC" in white marking on the side of it. Did some research and find that the KC valve body is used to attain 6K shifts where the BRF valve body isn't ideal for that and/or can't be used when wanting to shift that high. This brings the question...why did the PO install a KC valve body if the motor wasn't up to the task of making power at that RPM? Not saying he had a good reason to use a KC valve body, but just saying he thought it was necessary for some reason. Another head scratcher.