Went to the track... highly disappointed, and found a major problem.

[Wills7MGTE]

Yeah those older camaros are pretty slow, but I've been told its all because of thier tranny and rear end setup GM did a shit job on them. I raced a few loud as IROC's that didn't run me as hard as some of the 5.0 stangs did, and personally between mustang and camaro I like the camaro but mainly the 1969 or the 99 to 01 or whenever they quit making them.

 

[Doward]

The V6 Camaros ran 3.42 rear gears... they simply had no power (135hp in the 2.8)

That's why I slapped a 16g on there, and pushed more like 222rwhp, with 291rwtq @ 7psi... never did dyno with the T70 @ 12psi tho

Anyway, I gotta recharge the battery... buddy of mine helping me managed to leave the damn key in run all night :3d_frown:

Only leaks I can find now when I pressurize it, are the rings At least, I'm pretty sure it's the rings... I've got air coming out of the valve covers, so I'm pressurizing the crankcase, obviously. Gotta be the rings, lol. The engine's cold, so eh... I can't expect the rings with 188k miles to seal perfectly, now can I?

 

[Doward]

Ok, fixed those small leaks, letting her warm up right now, after resetting the ecu.

Warming up, idling at 14.2-14.3, Vf to E1 reads 1.06-1.065v. I'll let her completely warm up (2-3 cycles of the thermostat) and see where it is from there.

Just idling right now, but free-reving it seems a hell of a lot peppier!

Going off of this -

http://www.supramania.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23763&highlight=Vf

It seems safe to assuming my engine is wanting to run about 12-15% richer than it needs to.

*Edit*

Got back from a quick test run, fully warmed up, I'm still idling low 14s, high 13s... under boost, I hit low 12s, high 11s, until I got to around 4000rpm - then I shifted down to kiss a 10.0 flat.... Hell of a lot better than just flatlining, that's for sure!

IJ, you're right - heavy part throttle had me holding mid 13s until the rpms got up a little, then I hit 12.5 and floated to 12.2, staying in the low 12s.

I'm going to do some more testing with the original O2s, see what happens to Vf, but if the car it just flat running rich, looks like I'll be investing in an AFPR. :3d_frown:

*Edit2*

OK, I've got a Bosch 4 wire here... with the 3 wires (the one ground, I'm not sure where to hook it up?) I'm registering 2.21v on the Vf, and 3.6 mV on the OX... Perhaps the Bosch O2 that came with my ZT-2 has finally given up the ghost?

 

[IJ.]

Doward: Good progress!

I make my statements on the assumption that everything is correct in the car but that goes out the window if there are any unresolved faults

 

[jetjock]

A couple of things. Check the CTS when it's hot, not cold. Or just unplug it after the engine is hot and see if the AF ratio changes. Regarding your earlier question the O2 sensor will begin working as soon as it gets hot enough but the ECU won't go into closed loop until the coolant is hot.

With vacuum leaks the engine should've run lean, not rich, so I dunno what's going on there. Fixing those leaks should have shifted it more rich.

It does sound as if you're WB was not outputing the right MB simulation to the ecu though. This is one reason I don't like using them for AF compensation. Leave that to the stock sensor and use the WB for monitoring.

3.6 mv on the stock sensor is wrong. You're either not measuring it right or your meter can't average it. Does the meter have a min/max/avg mode?

Lasty, how can your Vf now show no correction and yet you're still running slightly rich? Makes no sense. I'm beginning to think that WB isn't right. What's it showing in cruise or with the car parked and the engine held at 2500 rpm?

 

[Doward]

The latest tests were done on a Bosch 4 wire universal that I wired up, not on the WB02.

I measured across terminals OX and E1... OX directly to the ground actually produced a -62.4mV on my DMM.... The DMM didn't deviate much when I measured the 3.6mV, up to around 3.7, and down to about 3.4...

I'll double check the CTS after warming it up. As a matter of fact, I'll go do that right now

 

[jetjock]

That's not right. It must be your meter. Do you still have the WB installed for checking AF or do you only have one port? If so you're stuck unless you get something that'll read the signal accurately. A gas anaylzer would be even better. A Vf of 2.5 or so indicates no fuel correction is being made but that doesn't mean the mixture is right.

 

[Doward]

Only one port... stock elbow (for now, I'm damn well working on that one, lol)

I'll upload the ZT-2 log I just took.

Zero change when I pulled the unplugged the CTS. Car idled for about 5-6 minutes, upper hose good and hot... idling ~14.2 AFR, pulled the plug, CEL illuminates, and ZT-2 shows zero change.

I'll post my logs in a second, lemme get them from the laptop

 

[jetjock]

So it's not the CTS. Hook it back up and clear the code.

I'm confused. You have the WB back in there and connected to the ECU? 14.2 is well within the accuracy of a lamba sensor so what's your beef? What is the AF at 2500 rpm?

 

[Doward]

@ 2500rpm under load, or 2500rpm free rev in neutral?

My biggest beef is the 1.06 Vf with the WB02... I can't check the stock sensor vs the WB02 until I get a 2nd port

I've got a 2.21 Vf with the Bosch, though.

*EDIT*
13.7-13.8, under load or free reving.

 

[jetjock]

I'm still confused...if you have only one port how are you reading AF ratios with the Bosch?

You're WB signal to the ECU obviously isn't right. That's why the difference in Vf. You've still got a minor problem somewhere else too.

 

[Doward]

No no... I swapped the sensors. I put the WB02 in, read it, including what the ECU is outputting via Vf, and then I shut the car off, put the Bosch 4 wire back in, and do the same.

Also, any AFRs I am reporting, are via the WB02, when it is installed.

 

[jetjock]

So the WB is also running the ECU when it's installed? You don't see a problem with doing that? Lol, I give up

 

[Doward]

LOL, I do, I know... but without a 2nd O2 bung, I can't do much about it.

When I hook up the Bosch, I do totally remove the ZT-2, so it's not influencing the ECU

I had thought about just removing teh NB simulation - but then the ECM's gonna flip out with 'OMG NO O2 SIGNAL!' so... dammit. I need a new elbow that will let me run both!

 

[jetjock]

Yeah, by doing what you're doing you're just spinning your wheels. It's a worthless test.
How do you know what the AF is when the NB is in there? You don't. You're implying it from Vf and that's only marginal help. You the don't the adapter for sticking the WB up the tailpipe?

If not what you need to do is install the NB and get something to either measure it's signal accurately or use a gas anaylzer. Or put the WB on a known good car to check it. It's obvious at this point something is wrong with it though....or at least with it's NB simulated output.

 

[Nick M]

With vacuum leaks the engine should've run lean, not rich, so I dunno what's going on there. Fixing those leaks should have shifted it more rich.

My good man, that depends on his engine load.

 

[jetjock]

I'm focusing on idle right now Nick. But thanks for pointing that out

 

[Doward]

Doing some thinking (I know, dangerous, no?)

http://www.supras.com/06/techcenter/display.php?QID=80

According to this, I should be getting 5 stepped voltages from the Vf. I'm not. I've got an '88 Auto Turbo here, so... is this correct? Does the Vf output 1 of 5 definitive voltages?

Further... if I'm running a 2.21v on Vf with the Bosch O2, that means the ECU isn't doing a hell of a lot of correcting... but with it running a 1.06V with teh ZT-2 hooked up via NB-Sim, that would mean the ECU is doing a good bit of trimming, to get the O2 where it needs to be?

JJ, where exactly do I measure to find the correct voltage of OX? I'm getting 3.6mV with the Bosch, and 2.2mV with the ZT-2. (this is E1 to OX)

 

[Doward]

Wait a second... I'm sitting here reading through my '87 TSRM, and I just thought of something... why the hell... would I want my NB simulator to output to the Vf terminal of the ECU? Why WOULDN'T I want it going through the OX terminal?? The OX terminal IS, after all, where the STOCK NARROWBAND O2 INPUTS ITS SENSOR DATA INTO THE ECU, right? If I'm 'simulating' the stock O2, wouldn't my 'simulated' freaking data go to the same damn place as the stock O2 sensor data would?

 

[jetjock]

Congrats on the thinking but you're not doing enough

Yes, Vf has 5 steps. You won't see them all unless you introduce a problem to drive it there. Pull off a vac line or add propane to the intake....it should go to O or 5 volts.

Right again, the NB seems to make the ECU happy. That's why I'm condeming the WB. But you still don't know what the AF truly is with the NB unless you can measure it or the NB signal. Shove the WB up the tailpipe or measuse the raw NB sensor signal between OX in the diag connector and battery negative. You need to have the meter set to averaging, DC millivolts. You're looking for around 450 mv.
If your meter won't do this you're screwed. It's why you really need a scope to work on these cars.

edit: Huh? You've been running the WB simulator signal to the Vf terminal?? Please don't tell me that.