• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

1984 245T mLPT B274FT Project

skld said:
This car is gorgeous! When I saw it at Carlisle, I knew it was a t-bricker's car because of the Hello Kitty on the oil cap, and the dolphin catch can. :lol:

Good work, kind of an interesting story behind the car too.
Click to expand...

this is the car with the dolphin can? Ive had that pic saved on my comp for quite a while! funny stuff! great car :cool:
 
DaytonAE86 said:
So is it running yet????
Click to expand...

Sort of. Had some issues with the computer and after swapping injector drivers several times and temporarily taking the MAP sensor out of the picture, it will now start reliably. However, starting is not really the same as "running."

Starting the engine revealed a few oil leaks, one of which was fairly easy to fix, one of which was internal to the center bearing and required a re-engineering of the scavenge pump wiring (just finished last week), and one of which is external to the center bearing that I am still trying to get access to.

After leak fixing is done, it's adjusting fuel maps and throttles to get a good idle, good A/FR, etc., and then back to figuring out why MAP sensor input was keeping it from from starting.
 
pwschuh said:
Sort of. Had some issues with the computer and after swapping injector drivers several times and temporarily taking the MAP sensor out of the picture, it will now start reliably. However, starting is not really the same as "running."

Starting the engine revealed a few oil leaks, one of which was fairly easy to fix, one of which was internal to the center bearing and required a re-engineering of the scavenge pump wiring (just finished last week), and one of which is external to the center bearing that I am still trying to get access to.

After leak fixing is done, it's adjusting fuel maps and throttles to get a good idle, good A/FR, etc., and then back to figuring out why MAP sensor input was keeping it from from starting.
Click to expand...

pulling vaccum on the map sensor puts the fuel map at a different load bin (normally, not familiar with your system specifically, might have some sort of cranking subroutine elsewhere), which may or may not be mapped correctly.

Can't wait to see that badass car on the road & dyno.
 
blkaplan said:
His car would be awesome with some x10 or x 11 wheels all the way around
Click to expand...

I guess it might be ok because he doesn't drive it much, but I think a staggered set would result in something nicer to drive, and is easier on wheel bearings. You need roughly et-15 to run a 10" wide rim on the front.

I agree that pulling is better if you purely want function, but cut and paste is better for looks, the rear arch lips are just way too small on 240's and it is very satisfying to "fix" it.
My car looks "right" now- 90% of people don't even notice it has been widened because the car's proportions are actually better than stock.

I really want a pic of my car beside paul's some day. Like a father and son pic. :rofl:
 
Captain Bondo said:
I guess it might be ok because he doesn't drive it much, but I think a staggered set would result in something nicer to drive, and is easier on wheel bearings. You need roughly et-15 to run a 10" wide rim on the front.

I agree that pulling is better if you purely want function, but cut and paste is better for looks, the rear arch lips are just way too small on 240's and it is very satisfying to "fix" it.
My car looks "right" now- 90% of people don't even notice it has been widened because the car's proportions are actually better than stock.

I really want a pic of my car beside paul's some day. Like a father and son pic. :rofl:
Click to expand...

lol, i posted that in june. asleep at the keyboard?

I do agree though, on strut cars its nicer to keep the front width less then or equal to 9 to keep the scrub and geometry happy
 
blkaplan said:
lol, i posted that in june. asleep at the keyboard?

I do agree though, on strut cars its nicer to keep the front width less then or equal to 9 to keep the scrub and geometry happy
Click to expand...

LOL Ya, majorly asleep, I don't really check the projects forums much. And that is exactly what I have found regarding the front width. The x9" et9 on mine are pretty much the max without having to do anything really really weird. They are very close to the strut and barely inside the front arches. anything more aggressive would be a problem. No room for more backspacing and no room to stick out any further. Just how we like it. :oogle::nod:

edit: just noticed this isn't even in the projects forum. lol.
 
Last edited:
Yeliwmots said:
anything new?
Click to expand...

No. Turbo is out of the car awaiting arrival of new inlet fitting. (Needed to change to a banjo on the inlet.) Assuming it's here by the end of this week and a new hose can be made next week, I should be putting it back together next weekend.
 
Donny said:
This thread has been referenced on Jalopnik in their engine of the day feature.
Click to expand...

Yes, woodenpuddin made a separate post about it in off-topic.

244tiCanuck said:
is it running yet?
Click to expand...

Yes, after a fashion. It has a rough tune that allows normal around town driving. I haven't figured out boost compensation in the software yet as I was going to start that when my left rear parking brake disassembled itself. Trying to fix the brake now and if all goes well, I hope to have it on the dyno in late May for a quality tune up to 1 bar.
 
Just noticed the use of a GT30R- fairly conservative choice for a 2.7L, no? Any thoughts?

Should spool nice though!
 
Captain Bondo said:
Just noticed the use of a GT30R- fairly conservative choice for a 2.7L, no? Any thoughts?

Should spool nice though!
Click to expand...

Well, you have to know that I bought the turbo in 2005, back when the 30R was more of a big deal. I was looking for something that would spool quickly. I think this will fit the bill. Remains to be seen if it will run out of breath. Garrett says it's good for 500 hp on engines up to 3 liters.

I also have clearance concerns. My header design is definitely a compromise. It was built with too little regard being given to fitment in the 240 engine bay. Turbo compressor is VERY close to frame rail. I don't know how much bigger the diameter of a 35R or 40R is, or if they will fit without clearancing the frame rail (like I've already had to clearance the strut tower and firewall).
 
Cool I hear ya. Your sentiments mirror my own- I have an HY35 for the T6 which is arguably "too small" as well.

:nod:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top