Turbo V6 Camaro

[Jon Early]

Post cleaning flow test. Grand!

ZZP says that I'm out of warranty so they won't replace the one injector. That's fine, but they won't sell me a single injector either. I have to buy a full set which is super lame. I'm thinking about just running it for a bit with one fat cylinder until I fix whatever else is going on. Then I'll probably call Full Throttle since they have their own cleaning service and sell single injectors. I'm sure they can give me some more reasonable advice.

 

[MCH86GN]

Post cleaning flow test. Grand!

View attachment 369629

ZZP says that I'm out of warranty so they won't replace the one injector. That's fine, but they won't sell me a single injector either. I have to buy a full set which is super lame. I'm thinking about just running it for a bit with one fat cylinder until I fix whatever else is going on. Then I'll probably call Full Throttle since they have their own cleaning service and sell single injectors. I'm sure they can give me some more reasonable advice.

That's messed up that you can't get a single injector from ZZP? I will make note of this for future purchases, since I am converting my SC 2000 Regal to turbo charged sometime here in the future.

 

[MCH86GN]

Haha I tried to talk myself into that for a while, but I think the real issue is having two projects in the first place. I'm having a blast in my beater, and the biggest disappointment about it is needing to waste time time and money maintaining two old daily drivers and a GN that never hits the road. If I can get the car sold for more than I paid and find a good deal on a beater hot-air car or something I might change my mind. A L67 powered GN with a th400, big turbo, and everything else needed to run TSM would be pretty gnarly. I've seen that 3800s are legal in that class. I just don't know what they consider a "stock location exhaust header" when 3800s never came with a turbo. Regardless, I really want to see somebody go be competitive with their worthless production block, stock crank, stock caps, and no girdle. It should be very doable.

I'm dreaming though. I don't have that much time or money, and the cost of beater GNs still aren't exactly cheap. As much as I dislike F-bodies, part of my love for the build is never fearing to mess it up, get a scratch, or "ruin" a "nice car". The Camaro is trash, and I like it that way. I'd rather put the money toward a nice new truck and a vacation. Two garage spaces and three very needy cars isn't very good math anyway. lol

That's why I bought my 2000 SC Regal. So I don't have to worry about destroying my GN. I am getting to the point that I wonder why I am keeping my Grand National. I only drove it once last summer for about 30 minutes after spending $100 for an oil change.

 

[Jon Early]

That's messed up that you can't get a single injector from ZZP? I will make note of this for future purchases, since I am converting my SC 2000 Regal to turbo charged sometime here in the future.

Nope! I don't like trash talking vendors, but ZZPs lack of customer care is very blatant these days. I thought it was messed up that they admitted to just replacing single warranty injectors, but not selling singles to customers who already bought a set. Whatever. I actually bought an entire new set from TRE because they had a sale. They're being sent to the same buddy with the flow bench so that we can compare.

 

[Jon Early]

That's why I bought my 2000 SC Regal. So I don't have to worry about destroying my GN. I am getting to the point that I wonder why I am keeping my Grand National. I only drove it once last summer for about 30 minutes after spending $100 for an oil change.

I would have too big of a hole in my heart if I didn't have a Grand National, but I have to say that this market makes it tempting! I've been trying to sell the aluminum wheels I used to roll on and got more serious offers for the car than the wheels.

For a while I thought that selling both the Camaro and GN to build a junkier GN with a 3800 and a stick would fulfill my V6 desires while also allowing me to get a GS 455 or something. However, I just don't think I have it in me to sell either one. If I sell the GN, I don't think I'll ever have one quite as nice again. If I sell the Camaro, the only car left from my childhood that I really care to own will be gone! I still ache over selling my grandpa's LeSabre even though it was becoming a worthless money pit. I don't want to feel that sort of regret again.

I did finally get rid of that Volvo 240 last week though! Now I should be able to dedicate my garage time to the Camaro this winter.

 

[Jon Early]

New injectors didn't change anything. I did get to make a clean log though which at least proves my re-wiring job to be worthwhile. Hopefully somebody with more experience than myself can decipher what's going on. All I can see is that it's very lean and my duty cycle at idle is below 2%. I'm reading that rockers don't require a tune, but it's really the only thing I've changed besides letting the car sit for ten months.

Darn. Turbobuick doesn't allow .hpl attachments.

 

[dezldave961]

Try adding a bit to the MAF table based on the %diff between commanded and actual WB A/F numbers. I do this on an external spreadsheet, but I think HPT has a tool to help with that (always used DHP until getting my HPT this spring, but same math).

 

[Jon Early]

My buddy lent me a smoke machine so that I could search for vacuum leaks

I left it there for a couple minutes and didn't see anything. I'm at a huge loss. Either I need to put the stock rockers back in or I can...

Try adding a bit to the MAF table based on the %diff between commanded and actual WB A/F numbers. I do this on an external spreadsheet, but I think HPT has a tool to help with that (always used DHP until getting my HPT this spring, but same math).

I like this idea because it means I can be lazy, screw around on the computer, and drive the car a little. Frankly, I'm VERY tired of wrenching on this thing and I just want to enjoy it.

@dezldave961 is it true that a rocker upgrade alone shouldn't require a tune since the valve timing hasn't changed at all? My impression has been that the MAF would be able to make up for this little change.

 

[dezldave961]

The MAF will read the airflow coming in, and apply the fueling that is in that cell. If you happen to go up 1-2 cells from a bit more valve opening from rockers, it's not going to really be much.

However, if the amount of air getting in from that extra lift, combined with possibly being a few % from perfectly on the money with fueling before, it'll compound how much it's out of range of minor MAF coverage.

Rockers don't have a huge effect on the general demeanor of the engine's airflow in/out, since overlaps and such are basically the same, but it wouldn't be worth the money and effort if it wasn't changing the amount of air you now need to make sure you're feeding fuel to.

 

[Jon Early]

Thank you. That's solid. I've used the multiplier in the past. I'll do some math and see if I can get the fueling a bit better tomorrow.

 

[Jon Early]

The car must have decided that I was getting too close to figuring out the problem. I set up my MAF error histogram, plugged in, started the car, and never even put the car in gear.

I guess my wiring wasn't the problem after all. My wideband is still intermittently not displaying on HP all the time. The short time you see it at 18:1 (sensor pegged lean) is when I had the key on but engine off. Then it goes to a solid 7.31:1 (sensor pegged rich) with the engine running. The frustrating part is that the actual gauge is displaying believable numbers.

I'm going to unplug the pro link and hook a meter between ground and the signal wire. If it only shows 0 or 5V steady, then I know my issue lies on the gauge side. If it sits somewhere in between then it's a problem on the HP side. I'm not looking forward to further diagnosis on either side nor the possibility of replacing more expensive stuff.

 

[dezldave961]

Interesting. Not sure what the signal numbers from AEM are, but I assume similar to others just controlling the Bosch sensor for the 5v output however they chose to scale values.

I've been a big fan of PLX widebands, and along with putting some in for other guys, I own ~3 (on my Regal, from my retired GTP, and one setup to scan other cars from the passenger seat). They're kinda limited to 10-20:1 AFR range, but it works on gas, and I think it's going to be fine skewing for E85 later. I've even parked the car for a couple years at a time and still see solid values (probably more due to Bosch quality than the controller, as it's usually those that fail).

Good luck. About to drop my engine back in, too, so we should both be rolling into new frustrations simultaneously.

 

[Jon Early]

I fixed the wideband by connecting the signal negative to the Pro link ground wire.

Then I made a log, added some fuel, got the car running (fuel wise) about how it should, and still couldn't get it to smooth out. I'm at a loss. I'm thinking about throwing a spare ICM on the car since it's easy, but beyond checking cylinder leak down (already checked compression) and changing the rockers back to stock, I'm at a loss.

 

[dezldave961]

It's most likely the tune needing love. You can base all fueling at the low-mid throttle regions on the fuel trims from the NB O2 and adjust MAF accordingly (MAP/VE is usually just stock on mine, since we don't have bigger LS1 tables that can really run off then).

Leak-down isn't really going to tell you anything compression didn't say, seeing as the pressure's only there for a moment. You can try pressurizing the coolant system, and leave the plugs out to turn it over without them before closing it back up, just to be safe.

I'd focus on getting the PCM to a simple happy place. There's no magic to it, the MAF table is almost the only thing required for adjustment.

 

[Jon Early]

I was adjusting it based on MAF error which seemed to maybe smooth things out a tiny bit but it might have been wishful thinking too. I haven't really looked at fuel trims. Long terms are locked, and short terms seem to hover close to 0 which makes it seem fine. It's all giving me a headache. lol

 

[dezldave961]

I have no idea what MAF error is, unless you mean comparing %error (%difference) between actual WBO2 A/F and commanded A/F... I only do that for open loop, PE area, when in throttle above 30-40%.

I usually compare low-mid range STFT (LTFT disabled at 0) to apply that avg % for each MAF range to the curve, and manually smooth it some.

 

[Jon Early]

I threw in the towel. The roller rockers are on the bench, stockers are back in the car, and the old time is reloaded. No change.

I then changed the ICM. No change. I did a case learn because I realized that I never did that after pulling the crank sensor off. Still no change.

 

[dezldave961]

Like I said, it's just in need of getting the tune right. Think of it like getting a knot tied right... If you keep doing wacky things to it, you're making it worse to untie and get back to a good way you want it. Set many of the things back near stock, aside from the couple fueling things required for the stuff you need (injector table, MAF, etc.). Your setup isn't really far from stock in the grand scheme of things, so you shouldn't be changing everything under the sun until you're lost in a maze (insert another analogy here).

K.I.S.S. works... Whip out the laptop and a drink, and just tinker at getting it squared away. It's better than dealing with a screwdriver and jets, you just need to get a handle on it.

 

[Jon Early]

So the car is mostly fixed. You probably won't believe me when I tell you what I did, but here it goes.

The crank sensor was replaced a couple years ago with a very cheap rockauto part that never fit nicely. When I did the timing cover gasket, I remember it being a particular pain in the rear to get reinstalled because it didn't want to clear the dowel pin. I figured that it was worth a look. I pulled the balancer and two bolts off, but the crank sensor wouldn't move. There isn't a great place to pry on it, so I just kept wiggling until it finally broke free. The amount of force it took to remove only to reveal a relatively clean dowel pin made me think that the sensor hole was too small. Driving it home with the bolts was sure to turn the sensor into a banana if I tried to install it again. I kissed the hole with a 1/4" drill bit which got the sensor to slide on and off the dowel with no play and sit flush on the block without the bolts. I'm not saying that was the problem. It certainly could be a wiring issue that I temporarily fixed by unplugging and replugging the harness, but the car runs a million times better.

I still have some breaking up if I stab the throttle too quickly, but I can at least drive the car around town without any issues. There is also some funny tapping noise that you can actually hear pretty clearly in the video below. I'm not sure what that's about yet either. Overall, I'm just happy that that progress was finally made! Whether it's the sensor itself of the wires, I know for sure that something is going on with the crank sensor signal. A new Napa Gold sensor will be installed tonight to replace the junky sensor for good measure.

 

[dezldave961]

Ah, well hopefully that removed at least some gremlins. I usually just go with whatever junkyard OEM sensors I have, but I try to keep a decent stash on-hand, if you survey my recent video showing just what I keep for engines (the totes and shelves are overstocked with things I'll never need).

I'd say just get your AE settings decent and watch the fueling numbers in that crossover from closed to open loop, and if your spark gap is happy, it should be solvable (I forget where I'm at, but not crazy tight and it's happy with 25psi, maybe 0.035"?).