THOR Racing

John, If you want to take a look at the wiring diagram it's on my web site. Details below. There is also a bit on how to manually control the spoiler without the ECU and there it'll be obvious why you've shorted the two wires together. Makes the spoiler ECU just think it's in it's natural parked state. Hence why you need to hit the AUTO button OFF. http://www.trlperformance.com/supra click on "Active Spoiler" link Regards Pete

Do any of those books teach you how to calculate engine parameters. i.e. essentials on how to build an ECU Basics of engine control and formulas for working the fuel ratio and ignition timing out etc etc? Sorry no technical input here Terry. Pete

My 2p........ You can't do any worse than buy the following book and read about it. "Maximum Boost" by Corky Bell. (Bently Publishers) ISBN 0-8376-0160-6 Cost $35 (and I got mine through amazon I think?) It discusses how to design (or select) the correct turbo system for your car. A good read but too much info to put simply on this forum (or to scan in!) Regards Pete

Just for others benefit. I suggested (via telephone) that the odometer signal might be conflicting with the speedo converter output if the signal wire had been mistakenly spliced into the speed signal wire to the ECU rather than cutting into it. You should have the loom side of the ECU left floating and ONLY connect to the ECU side. i.e. the odometer and speedo converter might both be trying to drive the same input to the ECU and this causing an odd effect to the speedometer where there is a beat frequency occuring at 80MPH causing it to flicker about. Regards Pete

The engine manual does not list a spark plug cleaner as a SST. It lists the socket to remove them but not the cleaner. I also have the SST List/manual (lists all the SSTs) and it's still not listed. Must be such a generic thing. The manual says.... "Never use a wire brush" "Never adjust the electrode gap on warn plugs" Remove oil traces with petrol. Clean spark plugs by blowing compressed air below 85psi at it for 20seconds or less. (I think this is all the spark plug cleaner is!) Sorry I couldn't be any more help. Pete

Cheers Darren Give me a ring if you wish to discuss. 01926 777413 (Office/Fax) 07802 412969 (Mobile) Thanks Pete

Nice post Nathan. I agree with the general point of the post and with particular reference to the above quote this is precisely why the boost controller I am designing (yes, one day I'll finish it!) will have sensor inputs for temperature and output controls for boost control as well as water injection (or spray, whatever...) So the idea would be to have a boost controller that would act as a normal boost controller but if you add the additional temperature sensors you can decide at which point to turn water injection on (if you have it) or reduce boost as EGT's go above a set threshold. It will also be able to automatically monitor the water flow from the pump and should the water run out or pump fail then the boost can be reduced (gradually to avoid unstable driving but fast enough to avoid destroying anything.) But as Nathan says I wouldn't want my car on such a thin tightrope. Regards Pete

Thank guys... --------------------------- Darren, Yes. Please. If it can be controlled fast enough this would be O.K. I'm thinking update 25time a second (25Hz) Sounds like it'll be either frequency based (as you suggest) or duty cycle (pulse width modultaion) based. I like the idea of proportional control rather than just pulsing a solenoid on and off at a desired rate. --------------------------- Nathan, Well. Normal solenoid valves capable of 25Hz pulsed operation (which in my opinion are a little bulky but never the less perform) are circa £35-40. They are mainly bulky due to the large coil needed to push the actuator to move the valve fast enough. The Apexi solenoid valve replacements are about £100 (Which someone is taking the p*ss as it's way over the top) So something in the £30->£80 mark. Depending on performance and size. But ordering say 50->100 off so quantity discounts. What do you have in mind? Agreed. The Supra VSV for instance is just an ON/OFF static device, never intended to be operated in a fast switching mode. Agreed. This is why it's so hard finding something that fits the job perfectly. I can control any motor or pulse any valve but if the mechanical performance isn't up to it you might as well forget any decent control over boost. Regards Pete

I'm looking for a cheap, small sized electronically controllable bleed valve. Tall order I know...but.... I've looked into using solenoid valves and pulsing them on and off to obtain an average constriction of flow but they are bulky. I cannot find any equivalent to the Apexi solenoid valve on the market. If someone knows phneumatics then maybe you can help. Ideally I'd like a valve that would act as a complete 100% pass through, when not in use, and when under control of a microcontroller (with either stepper motor or pulse width modulation of a on/off valve) to obtain 0->100% variable/proportional flow control. I can make an electronic boost controller but it's always the solenoid valve I fall over at. Nothing I've found would be acceptable by a DIY car tuner. Just to industrial looking. I've attached a picture of the sort of thing I'm after. It stuck me that just having a stepper motor attached to a screw thread would be all that was needed. Rotate the screw into the valve and constrict the flow. Any ideas anyone??? I know I've asked this a year or so ago but I still haven't come across anything as neat as the Apexi valve or as simple as the manual bleed valve. Regards Pete

Ideally yes I will, but I don't get much time lately to work on my own car as I spend it with my 3 month old son Honestly I just need to get my ar*e in gear and do it, but I need a fuse replacing and that's been blown for 6 months Nah! Pete

Sort of, I am doing a OBDII diagnostics scanner. This will clear DTC and allow you to view active sensor information in almost real-time (as the vehicle ECU actually controls what you see so you're never to sure when in time the data changed) It won't be able to tweak values, mainly because I haven't figured out how to. I suspect it's just finding the relevant code to send and then changing the data applied. So if anyone knows more I'm keen to learn. Regards Pete

Just a cautionary note. (Sorry to sound pedantic, but I've known people this has happened to) But you could get nicked for leaving your car unattended. Noting of course you should be on private property. I do this Finally, any good turbo timer should be hooked into the hand brake signal and thus as soon as said toerag tries to move off the car will stall. Locking the door is still a good idea though, stops them nicking your ice scraper and copy of Barry Manilow. Regards Pete

You can tell if it's OBDII by reading the name printed/embossed on the diagnostics connector. This is located to the right hand side of the steering column, towards the bottom. It's like a D-type shaped connector. It'll have a plastic cap over it with OBDII written on it. This cap pops off to reveal the connector. I think the OBD changed around 97 period so you may or may nor have OBDII. Don't be fooled by OBDI, it's completely different. OBDII is a proper protocol standard but OBDI was just a serial line pulsing up and down. Which is what most people here recognise as it also flashes the Engine Check light to indicate the fault code. OBDII has one standard of communication but three physical layers to choose. Sorry but I cannot remember which physical layer Toyota use but.... J1850 VPW--The connector should have metallic contacts in pins 2, 4, 5, and 16, but not 10. ISO 9141-2--The connector should have metallic contacts in pins 4, 5, 7, 15, and 16. J1850 PWM--The connector should have metallic contacts in pins 2, 4, 5, 10, and 16. Picture of the connector is attached. The following is a good site to learn about it. http://www.obdii.com/ Specifically for the diagnostic trouble codes... http://www.obdii.com/codes.asp Regards Pete

Yes I agree. But wasn't the 3% of fuel that's just been shoved out of the way and replaced with water being used as a heat soak anyway. It doesn't combust fully and leaves the exhaust. Hence you get rich O2 sensor readings, meaning unburnt fuel. So doesn't this mean the fuel that was just going to be thrown away anyway is being replaced with water which can absorb more heat, and it too gets thrown away in the end. Neither contribute to the combustion? (skating on thinner ice here!) Yes I understand your point and agree this is the sticky point and tried to explain some reasoning above. But I thought you got reduced EGT which suggests that the water mix is doing something so it may not be perfect (not as good as a larger IC I agree) but it's doing some good. I guess you will not agree on that which is fine and I cannot convince myself 100% either. I think it has some good points and probably just as many bad points but not enough to say water injection is rubbish. Can't say as I know of anyone who has taken a full range of temps (Intercooler inlet, outlet and EGT) and placed on a dyno and run it and compared the end result. You are right and it could be a big con but I'd like to see some evidence first before I dismiss it altogether. Equally you'd like to see it prove your point which I can understand Interesting conversation though Got me thinking..... Regards Pete

I have retrofitted some HID dipped beam headlights into my car and they are excellent. Just like daylight I don't worry about the fact you're meant to have autoleveling headlamps by law. I have the 6000 Kelvin ones from AutoLamps Online specifically the 9006 6000K ones http://www.autolamps-online.com/products/90066000kit.htm HID Install on MkIV Supra Sorry but no pictures of the actual light produced so don't ask. Regards Pete

I've got 18" Speedline Aliseo Corse wheels on my Supra and they have the correct 50m offsets and fit over the UK brakes. I've got a Jap import and fitted both the front and rear UK brake kit. (and I like the fact I have the UK rears as well) I tried fitting the wheels over the 6pot AP racing brakes but due to the wheel being a true three piece wheel the nuts on the back holding the centre to the rim interfered with the caliper. I would have had to move the wheel out by 5mm to miss. I never liked the idea of spacers and changing offsets. Just changing to 9" fronts from the 8" stock and 10" rear from the 9" stocks was enough to get a change. Offsetting them more was a no no in my book. Also a note that you really do need to get the correct width and offsets (or at least the ratio of the rears being wider than the fronts) The MkIII Supra had same front and rear but the MkI is designed to run larger rears to fronts and it'd look silly if you didn't have large rear wheels. Often these wheel places will sell you four of the same width and wrong offsets. Don't be tempted because they look good and are cheap! I fit Pirelli PZero Rossos (even better than the normal PZeros). 285*30*18 (Rear) and 245*40*18 (front) (I think.. or were they 45's ?? I'd have to go and tale a look) In fact a good bloke to try is Peter Ormrod from Performance Wheel Supplies. http://www.performancewheelsupplies.ltd.uk Regards Pete

Umm....I believe I said "both have the affect of cooling the compressed air charge down." I didn't say they used the same method. IC cools the charge down by removing heat through conduction and convection. Adding or removing nothing, apart from a drop in pressure of the charge (gas laws etc) H2Oi replaces (or adds to) the air and fuel molecules. I think diluting is a confusing term. The air to fuel ratio is the same, all you've done is add another chemical into the combustion process. One that is in fact a by product of combustion anyway. It's not used in any way during combustion (except if you have added an alcohol screen wash or something, which in inself is a fuel type) Now a certain percentage of the water will absorb heat from the surrounding air molecules. (This heat would have normally been absorbed by the fuel alone). Thus this means you have an overall cooler charge. I don't know the exact physical or chemical reactions but I can see that the air and fuel molecules are now cluttered with water molecules and that this must have an adverse effect on combustion somehow. But I suspect that the overall gain due to lower charge temps (through the water absorbing the heat) means the combustion process is in the end more efficient. MPG is generally based on cruising at a fixed speed etc. This means the engine is not under that much load and uses the closed loop response for fueling. i.e. it senses the O2 sensor and adjust fuel accordingly. The moment you hit the throttle hard it switches from closed to open loop control and the fueling is dependant on the boost pressure. You do use simple fuel controllers like the AFC in this situation but all they do is modify the boost pressure signal fooling the ECU into adjusting fueling. You do sometimes reduce fuel when it's too rich at lower RPM ranges, this sometimes gives you a better response but as to how much fuel you're going to save. I'd forget it. You go from a steady 7->10% injector duty cycle when crusing at 80mph say to >80% at WOT (sometimes pretty much 100% on a modded car). So the amount you're going to save in the 80% bracket would have to be very large to make any impact at all on the MPG figure. As most of the time you'd be hardly using the injectors. And for those that say "but I'm never crusing, I'm always racing", you're not bothered about MPG anyway! No. Not normally. Normally (most useful) the AFC is used with larger injectors to lean off the fuel (as the injectors are larger, you have to lean off the low to mid range to compensate back to the original injector size). But some people use the AFC to give a richer or leaner mid-range response, this can improve a dead spot somtimes. Not sure the improvement is worth it, if you want every last ounce out of the engine then probably yes. This type of controller cannot give you more fuel though at wide open throttle. 100% is 100% no matter how much the AFC increases the signal by. Regards Pete

The IC and Water Injection, H20i as I like to call it both have the affect of cooling the compressed air charge down. This in itself does not give you more power. After all it hasn't increased the pressure of the air has it? BUT! What it does do is indirectly give you the ability to obtain more power. Fuel is obviously mixed with air to create an explosive mixture but some of the fuel is ONLY being used to cool the air charge down (as a heat sink). So the car's running so rich to compensate for the rises in charge air temps. What a better IC and H20i gives you is lowered charge air temps thus you don't need that extra fuel anymore for cooling instead you can use it for buring to create more energy. Of course to use that extra fuel you'd need to increase boost a little to get more air to mix with it and that in itself increases the charge air temps as the turbos compress more and more air into the same space the little molecules smash together even more and create even higher temps. This is where the turbos then start to become inefficient, creating too much heat without a parallel increase in density (pressure of the air charge) The name of the game is to increase the turbo boost pressure a little so that the turbos are on the nee point of inefficiency and then add a bigger IC or H20i to compensate for the increased charge temps. It's all a bit of a game, a game of routlette at that. So you could increase the boost a lot more and still be O.K. BUT..... this is where H20i falls down. It's only as good as the pump. If the pump fails... you fail to cool the charge temps down.... the combustion temps rise and..... you get knocking which is pretty bad (often terminal) for the engine. So it's fine while its working but we like to say.... DON'T RELY ON IT! A bigger IC on the other hand is a mechanical block which you'd find pretty hard to fail and thus is a safer bet. Having said all that I use my H20i as a safety backup in the summer during spirited driving, to give me that extra protection from knock. Regards Pete ps. I may not be 100% on everything.....

Have you lost your shims (anti-squeal) for the rear brake pads? Might be the pads are moving and knocking as you move. Noise transmits through the body and makes it sound like suspension. Just a thought. Regards Pete

Yes that makes sense. This is sort of what I was saying but in reverse. Are the In/Out ports of the Skyline IC larger than the Stock MkIII one? To be sure I guess you'd have to measure the flow rate of both. So restricting the exhaust might be the key, after all that. Pete

Yes. Sounds like it. Although why adding the IC caused this I don't know. Boost creep is normally associated with the resistance within the exhaust system. Less resistance means more creep. It might be that the cooler denser air from the IC is making the engine more efficient and hence more boost than stock. But, quote "boost creep", is not normally solvable by the boost controller as it's a mechanical thing. So it may be that the IC presents a low resistance to the turbos (the exhaust is already non-restrictive you've said) and hence they spin up quicker and get to boost far earlier. The volume of the IC comes into play now as in time the IC fills up and it's resistance to air flow becomes greater (until it's full of pressurised air when it satuates to flow a constant rate of air) Now the turbo system is brought under more normal control and the boost creep as such reduces? Just thinking out aloud now...... I'm just wondering if (with Fuel Cut removed) it would overboost slightly and settle itself back down to a level below fuel cut (without electronic boost control)?? i.e. the time lag of the IC is really playing a factor ins all of this. It's got to be something to do with colder denser air, greater volume and greater time to fill it? Regards Pete

Does this happen whilst stationary? As soon as you start up? OR does it ONLY flash the TC light after you have been moving for 30s or more etc? If it's the latter then as Martin suggests it might be the ABS wheel speed sensors are faulty or something. Although I would have thought the Engine Check light would have come on as well and indicated this. If you leave the RLTC OFF all the time does it EVER happen? Regards Pete

Adam, It might be the mass of the intercooler and the time taken to fill it. The turbos are on one side BUT the sensor used to detect how much boost you're getting is on the other side (throttle body input) At least it is on the MkIV, Im sure the MAP sensor with your boost controller is fitted to the throttle body as well). So as the boost increases at the turbo the pressurised air mass fills the vast intercooler but the sensor on the other side (exit of the intercooler) has yet to see this pressure rise due to the time it takes to filter through the IC. By the time it reaches the MAP sensor the pressure at the turbos has rocketed? The boost controller can now act to control the turbos but it's all a bit too late as there is again a delay in getting the feedback from the turbos (due to the IC) and it ends up cycling up and down trying to settle to a fixed boost level. So you have an underdamped control system. Now lowering the gain of the boost controller will allow this boost rise to be slower and hence the time lag of the IC becomes less significant. Hence you appear to be able to control it better. This is maybe an overdamped control system. I could be completely wrong but I'd say the mechanics of the control mechanism for turbo boost control have been altered and that's the problem. Have you tried a full retune of the boost controller? This could allow you to get back to the critically damped control system which is optimum. Regards Pete

Disconnect the connections to the pressure switch. Doing so will trigger the pump. Regards Pete

Oil should be checked COLD on a LEVEL surface. It should never be allowed to go below LOW and should be between LOW and HIGH. Also never overfill it above HIGH. 5.0lt capacity if I remember. When you run the engine the oil gets distributed around the internal engine components and thus hardly any sits in the sump, but loads gets sprayed up the dipstick. You need to allow all the oil to drain back down to the sump and then check it. So by what you say I think you need some oil. I use Valveoline SynPower, cannot remember the spec but, it's never given me any problems on a modded car for the last 3.0 years. Mobil1 is too thin in my experience and gets burnt up really quickly by the turbo bearings. You need to change your oil at least every 5K miles and when you get more and more mods and you driving style is hard you should think about 3K mile changes. Always use Fully Synthetic oil. It's the life blood of the car so skimp on this and expect big bills later. As for fuel it's O.K. on a stock car to run 95RON but you won't be getting the best out of the car. Try using SuperUnleaded as much as you can. Especially when you start modifying the car you'll definitely need the 97RON (and more if you use an octane booster) If I put 95RON in mine now (with no choice) I have to drive like a snail as it back/misfires on high boost. Probably detonation which is not what you want. Regards Pete