[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SVO - svo Digest - V01 #64



take me off your list, I'm not getting any benefit from the postings. Please
do not send any more e-mail
-----Original Message-----
From: svo-request@SMARTWORX.COM <svo-request@SMARTWORX.COM>
To: Svo <svo@SMARTWORX.COM>
Date: Monday, December 15, 1997 5:07 AM
Subject: SVO - svo Digest - V01 #64


>svo Digest    Mon, 15 Dec 1997 00:01:45 -0500   V01 #64
>
>Today's topics:
>     'Re: Curious as always :>)'
>     'Re: SVO:  Blow-off valve'
>     'Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts'
>     'Web page'
>     'Re:Crushing cars with construction equipment'
>     'Re: Rare SVO For Sale'
>     'Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts'
>     'Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts'
>     'Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts'
>     'More parts For sale'
>     'Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts'
>     'Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts'
>     'Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts'
>     'bypass valve'
>     'Upper intakes...What's up??'
>     'Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts'
>     'Re: SVO:  Upper intakes...What's up??'
>     'More DIY G-tech info'
>     'shaving heads'
>     'Re: SVO:  Upper intakes...What's up??'
>     'Re: All present and accounted for'
>     'Re: SVO:  More DIY G-tech info'
>     'Re: SVO:  shaving heads'
>     'Intakes'
>     'Intakes'
>     'Re: SVO:  Upper intakes...What's up??'
>     'RE: Upper intakes...What's up??'
>     'Re: SVO:  RE: Upper intakes...What's up??'
>     'Valve noise fixed!'
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 2 Dec 1997 07:36:51 -0700
>From: "Brad Hardway" <bhardway@interlocsystems.com>
>Subject: Re: Curious as always :>)
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dave Compton <DCompton@JNPCS.COM>
>To: Brad Hardway <bhardway@interlocsystems.com>
>Date: Saturday, December 13, 1997 4:47 PM
>Subject: Re: Curious as always :>)
>
>Sorry for the confusion I added Extreme's Post because I was referring to
>his questions about settings for stuff
>I wish I had the big Vaf etc... I have the 83 GT Turbo stock EEC  w/88 TC
>motor .  I forgot my sig. file guess
>that added to it.
>
>83 Mustang GT Turbo
>(1 of 556)
>HTTP://WWW.NTDATA.COM/BHARDWAY
>"Site in work " Needs alot of it too...
>
>
>>Is Brad and Extreme the same person?
>>
>>If you have an SVO, your VAF is already the big one.
>>
>>exhaustexhaustexhaust.
>>
>>the rest should be maintenance and upgrades allowing the car to stand the
>>added power.
>>
>>Dave
>>Home Page:  http://www.SmartWorx.com/Dcompton
>>Subscriptions to SVO and TC Listservers:
>>http://www.SmartWorx.com/Listserver
>>Turbo Tek Toys  http://www.SmartWorx.com/TurboTekToys
>>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 00:39:34 +0000
>From: "Chris Roth" <caroth@holly.colostate.edu>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Blow-off valve
>
>
>> Is there an easy way to add one to a SVO w/ stock IC, TB, etc without
>> drilling a hole in the IC.
>
>On a different (but same) note, I was at the Volvo shop checking out
>Turbo stuff and checked out their popoff valve.  It is mounted
>directly to the outlet of the Compressor  housing.  We could not find
>a different setup, but the NEW Volvos might be different.  We were
>looking at 94 and older stuff.
>
>I have a Volvo Intercooler, it is HUGE, but trying to set it up on a
>SVO will be tricky.  I will post the dimenional and photograph links
>soon.
>
>Chris Roth
>98 Black Contour SVT
>85 Bright Red SVO
>86 Silver Metallic SVO
>http://holly.colostate.edu/~caroth
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 00:54:30 -0800 (PST)
>From: "Neil G. Chirico" <neil@saleen.com>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts
>
>
>Paul,
> You sound better but, Bug Bug sounds worse.I say crank up the
voltage!!!!!!!
>                                               Neil
>At 07:04 PM 12/13/97 EST, SVO8ntno50 wrote:
>>Well, my therapy is going well(when do these burn marks go away?) and I am
>>still cleaning the garage out so I can work inside when its cold. Found
some
>>more stuff to get rid of. All of the following parts are Free for those
who
>>want them:
>>
>>-Cast Iron 4 barrel intake for a 429/460
>>-Mustang Gas tank straps(2 sets)
>>-84 SVO gas tank sheild(the small plastic cover for the front of the tank)
>>-84 SVO Rear interior panels(the large ones)
>>-83 GT Rear interior panels(the large ones)
>>-85 Turbo coupe console shell(Red)
>>-85 Turbo coupe mini spare(steel)
>>-85 Turbo coupe Door panels(Red)
>>
>>We finished parting out the 85 Turbo coupe and filled it full of junk
metal.
>>It is currently on its way to Dave's house(got directions from Mike) Hope
>your
>>ready for it Dave, I gave you a weeks notice it was coming. The Tow truck
>>driver has instructions to "Dump and Run".
>>The CCA SGT @ Arms was here to help and scored many free parts during the
>>carnage of my attempt at cleaning up the garage(sometimes I just get
>disgusted
>>and start tossing stuff out the door) Maybe this shock therapy has sent me
>>over the edge!
>>
>>Paul (CCA Pres.)
>>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 04:28:57 -0500
>From: Chris Costanzo <BugBug@net-thing.net>
>Subject: Web page
>
>
>        Hey Everyone,
>  My web page is finally up.  It is pretty cool and has alot of pictures.
>Check out my "Flaming EXP".  It has sections for 2.3L turbo performance and
>a buildup page for the "Quick 8" Capri, but neither are running.  The parts
>for sale page is working though.  Not many SVO parts, but some Merk parts
>and alot of 5.0L stuff (I can hack them apart without feeling guilty,
>besides, Tim keeps beating me to the SVO's).  Check it out.  Also, anyone
>who wants a link to their page posted, drop me a line (Dave and Scott's are
>already on the list to be added).
>                                                        Bug Bug
>
>http://www.net-thing.net/~tonyc/bugbug.htm
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 08:08:38 EST
>From: SVO8ntno50 <SVO8ntno50@aol.com>
>Subject: Re:Crushing cars with construction equipment
>
>
>In a message dated 97-12-13 19:38:35 EST, BugBug@net-thing.net writes:
>
><< Tow truck?  I got an easier way (and it's ALOT more fun too).  At
> the truck yard where I store my stuff, they have a Trojan loader.  This
> puppy stands about 30' tall w/ 8' tall tires.  I just fire that puppy up,
> use the 1500 lb forks to smash the roof down and then play Bigfoot!  I
> turned an old Subaru wagon into a 2' thick pancake in a few minutes.  It's
> more fun than digging for Lamont.  You guys gotta try it.  We just dump
the
> crunched cars on a flatbed trailer and take `em away.
>                                                 Bug Bug
>  >>
>That would be fine but I think the Maryland and Virginia State Police would
>have a problem with me driving something like that around the beltway with
a
>car loaded on the front.
>Years ago I worked for a Concrete construction company as a mechanic(while
in
>college) At the time I had an 81 Firebird Formula as a daily driver and
bought
>a Trans Am with a 400 for parts(you know where the 400 was going, that 301
>sucks) anyway, I parted it out at the shop and when done torched the Trans
am
>into 2 pieces and then drove over it repeatedly with a Mustang(Same as a
>bobcat diff maker) ,Poetic justice huh? I think to this day(7 years later)
the
>mashed up T/A is still in the scrap pile out in back of the shop. We didn't
>have any real heavy equipment that would crush it like a bug but the small
>forklift and many Loaders(Mustangs and Prime Movers) were fun to crush with
>=).
>
>Paul (CCA Pres.)
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 08:23:33 EST
>From: SVO8ntno50 <SVO8ntno50@aol.com>
>Subject: Re: Rare SVO For Sale
>
>
>In a message dated 97-12-13 22:26:44 EST, shidel@suntan.eng.usf.edu writes:
>
><< Forgot hat on backwards....
> But have my hair short most of the time, so I guess I am an Xr Dork.....
> I cant live with long hair....I'm only 23, and the 80s ended a long time
> ago:)
>  >>
>Yes I did forget the backwards hat(sorry). its not necessarily the short
hair
>but the short hair Style, I'm not sayin everyone has to have a hair style
like
>the 80's Bands, just that it seems the dorks have the same style hair cuts.
>Maybe there is a barber shop that specializes in the "I'm cool and have the
>fastest thing around" haircut.
>
>Paul (CCA Pres.)
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 08:28:35 EST
>From: SVO8ntno50 <SVO8ntno50@aol.com>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts
>
>
>In a message dated 97-12-13 23:43:16 EST, hoofbt@juno.com writes:
>
><< Man, One of these days Im hopin' he'll screw up and throw some sets of
> keys....:D
>
> Later , Eric
>  >>
>Nice try but not likely. Except maybe the keys to that 79 Coupe (:-P).
>
>Paul (CCA Pres.)
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 08:54:28 EST
>From: SVO8ntno50 <SVO8ntno50@aol.com>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts
>
>
>In a message dated 97-12-14 03:59:31 EST, neil@saleen.com writes:
>
><< Paul,
>  You sound better but, Bug Bug sounds worse.I say crank up the
voltage!!!!!!!
>                                                Neil
>  >>
>Well Bug Bug, seems that other CCA members feel you are not getting enough
>juice so we are going to take it up another couple of notches. Dont worry,
we
>are cranking up the juice on Dave too, he was too happy about finding a
>loophole.
>Remember, you cant take a car in trade for another, Cash is better, Cash is
>better. come on you can say it......good, now keep repeating that.
>
>Paul (CCA Pres.)
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 11:37:26 EST
>From: SVO8ntno50 <SVO8ntno50@aol.com>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts
>
>
>In a message dated 97-12-14 10:54:27 EST, you write:
>
><< Alright you need to get these rules straight!
>
> What credit do I get for donating the Cadillac to the salvation army?
>  >>
>Wait a minute, you did not mention having any cadillac. Withholding
>information from the CCA is a serious crime. I will open this to your CCA
>Peers.
>
>Alright guys, do we give Dave a break for donating this car (that he never
let
>us know he had) or do we show sympathy and not raise the voltage during his
>next treatment.
>The choice is up to you all......
>
>
>Paul (CCA Pres.)
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 12:04:10 EST
>From: SVO8ntno50 <SVO8ntno50@aol.com>
>Subject: More parts For sale
>
>
>Still going through the garage. At least now I can close the door and work
on
>the car that was previously buried with room for the heater to run. I found
A
>couple more things:
>-Quad shocks with brackets $10/Pair, I think I have a couple of sets of
these.
>-79-82 Taillights $5 each, I have 3
>-4 84 Mustang GT wheels, 14" with the square slots(includes center caps)
$80
>for the set.
>-8.8 rear out of 88 T-bird with V8(2.73 Traction lock) $150
>-Front fenders (off 83 GT) $35 each
>-Doors(off 83 GT) all manual locks and windows. $50 each
>-Hatch off 87 LX(includes spoiler and brake light) $50
>-Hatch off 82 GT(includes 3 piece spoiler)$100
>-79 Pace car front nose and 3 piece front spoiler(includes fog light
>bracket)$100
>
>Thats it for this post, I will post more as I dig out.
>Thanks,
>Paul (CCA Pres.)
>86 SVO red
>87 LSC-R (still at the body shop)
>84 GT conv.(waiting to go in the garage for work)
>88 LX 5.0 (Motor and trans coming out for upgrades)
>79 GT conv.(unburied and work in progress, will be for sale at Ford
>Carlisle...hopefully)
>78 Ford Van (the parts hauler)
>65 Fastback (never ending project)
>85 Turbo coupe (work in progress..changing from red to grey interior)
>
>83 GT (parting out)
>79 Coupe (the poor unwanted car who needs a loving home)   :(
>The Ghost of a parted out 85 Turbo coupe...soon to be on the shelves of
your
>local grocery store-Gave up life for Erics TTA project.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 12:27:53 EST
>From: hoofbt@juno.com (Eric T Crouse)
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts
>
>
>CASH IS COOL!!!  You can buy more parts/cars with it!!
>
>Lookin' for cash, Eric(CCA SGT@ ARMS)
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 12:27:53 EST
>From: hoofbt@juno.com (Eric T Crouse)
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts
>
>
>I say we give him a break, after all he DID get rid of a car...  So,
>obviously the therapy is doing something.....
>
>Eric, master of the therapy machine(ZZZZZAAAAAAPPPPPP)
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 12:27:52 EST
>From: hoofbt@juno.com (Eric T Crouse)
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts
>
>
>
>On Sun, 14 Dec 1997 08:28:35 EST SVO8ntno50 <SVO8ntno50@aol.com> writes:
>>In a message dated 97-12-13 23:43:16 EST, hoofbt@juno.com writes:
>>
>><< Man, One of these days Im hopin' he'll screw up and throw some sets
>>of
>> keys....:D
>>
>> Later , Eric
>>  >>
>>Nice try but not likely. Except maybe the keys to that 79 Coupe (:-P).
>>
>>Paul (CCA Pres.)
>>
>HMMMM, there is the motor & trans in the 83....AHHHHHHHGGGGG !!!!   who
>put the therapy machine on autopilot!!!
>
>Eric, as I pat out the small fires on my shirt, (CCA SGT@ ARMS)
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 17:16:50 EST
>From: CTaylor930 <CTaylor930@aol.com>
>Subject: bypass valve
>
>
>I think the bypas valves are pretty cool.
>
>    1.  I was told/read that when your turbo is running at a bizillion rpm
and
>you just slam shut the only door for the air to get out of (throttle body)
the
>compressor wheel can actually get spun backwards ouch!!!  I did not heed
this
>warning and I have a very broken T3 to show for it.
>
>    2.  when road racing I'm constantly on and off the gas with the bypass
>valve the turbo is able to maintain a higher RPM thus reducing the lag
(ugly
>word) when I exit a corner to pass that 944.
>
>    3.  if you mount the bypass valve near the throttle body you also gain
a
>perk on dead space in the pipeing and intercooler (not very important for
>stock SVO/TC but very important for me/volvo guys)
>
>chuck
>85.5 GT1 SVO
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 17:35:46 -0500 (EST)
>From: Dean and Terri Rich <dtrich@golden.net>
>Subject: Upper intakes...What's up??
>
>
>Fellow svoer's
>
>i was at the Corral today reading some of the messages when I came across
>this one regarding the upper intakes of the late style 87-88 t'coupe. It
>went on to say that because this intake is shorter(overal height) this was
>the best performance oriented intake to get. But in order to use one you
>also need to use the 87-88 t'coupe valve cover, because it's recessed to
>handle the 1/2" shorter runners.
>Now,,,, let's all pool our collective knowlege. We already know that after
>the 87/88 t'coupe the 2.3turbo engine would die(a moment of silence).
> So why did Ford modify the hieght? I don't think the t'coupe hoodline
>needed such a low profile for fitment. From what I know about intakes the
>longer the runner,,, the better lowdown grunt/torque, the shorter the
>runner,,,,the better top end power. This engine needed all the grunt it
>could get! What's the deal??
>
>> Callaway was rite, "there is
>>no substitute for positive manifold pressure"!
>
>Those are words to live by buddy!!!
>Dean84SVO
>SVOOA#1449
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 18:15:42 -0500 (EST)
>From: "Scott Shidel..." <shidel@suntan.eng.usf.edu>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Productive Day at CCA Headquarters=Free parts
>
>
>> Alright guys, do we give Dave a break for donating this car (that he
never let
>> us know he had) or do we show sympathy and not raise the voltage during
his
>> next treatment.
>> The choice is up to you all......
>>
>
>Give him the chair, hih hih, yeah yah, the chair
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> The Pinto Page:  www.eng.usf.edu/~shidel
>
>**Join the turbo 2.3 mailing list by sending your subscription request to:
> ericksco@mhd1.moorhead.msus.edu
>
>Scott
>-71 Pinto, stock 2.3 turbo, 13.67@98, radials
> 8.1@85 1/8th mile on slicks
> Big intercooler ON!
> T4 Compressor soon to be on!
>
>-85 Merkur, let the modding begin!
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 18:20:29 -0500
>From: Chris Costanzo <BugBug@net-thing.net>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Upper intakes...What's up??
>
>
>> It went on to say that because this intake is shorter(overal height) this
was
>>the best performance oriented intake to get. But in order to use one you
>>also need to use the 87-88 t'coupe valve cover, because it's recessed to
>>handle the 1/2" shorter runners.
>
>
>        As far as I know, this person in wrong.  I have owned both
>manifolds, and they are identicle.  I have also seen both valve covers.  If
>I'm not mistaken, the early valve covers (like my `84 T-coupe) had the
>indent for the shorter manifold (seperated runner type).  The later covers
>(like the `87-88) did not have the indent.  Besides, why would they shorten
>the manifold on the engine, when at the time, it was only available in the
>Bird.  These cars are a beast and need all the low end they can get.  I
>think this person was misinformed.
>                                                Bug Bug
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 16:35:56 -0700
>From: Carl Morris <Carl_Morris@StorTek.Com>
>Subject: More DIY G-tech info
>
>
>Taken from the DSM list:
>
>> Date:    Fri, 12 Dec 1997 11:20:48 -0600
>> From:    Kevan Riley <kriley@dseg.ti.com>
>> Subject: make your own G-tech
>> Message-ID: <#42>
>>
>> Hello DSMers,
>>
>> For those of you thinking about building your own G-tech, what good
>> timing.  It seems soemone else has answerd some of your questions in a
>> public forum, namely, Electronics Now.  The January issue has an
>> article, the cover article none-the-less, on how to build an Automotive
>> Performance Tester.  The cicuit uses an Analog Devices ADXL05 solid
>> state accelerometer, and a Motorola 68HC705P9 microprocessor, and a one
>> line LCD display.  There is an URL sited for the code, it is:
>> ftp://ftp.gernsback.com
>> file name: apt.hex
>>
>> I just thought I would point some people in this direction if some one
>> wanted to built there own.  It would seem a small step to build this
>> project into a Data Aq project.
>>
>> Kevan
>
>--
>Carl_Morris@StorTek.Com
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 18:38:43 -0500
>From: Chris Costanzo <BugBug@net-thing.net>
>Subject: shaving heads
>
>
>        Hey Everyone,
>
>   I think I asked this before, but never got an answer.  I have a head
that
>I want to shave down for compression reasons.  It's an `85 Merhur engine
>that I am going to drop in the Pinto so I can sell it (need to sell to get
>the Capri).  It will be an NA engine, so I want to shave the head to
>increase the 9:1 compression to 10:1.  How much do I need to shave.  They
>will be doing the work at my friends tech school (ATC in Exton PA) so I
need
>to know exactly how much to take off.  Anyone have any ideas?  .030?  .040?
>More?  Anyone?  Bueller?  (sorry  :)   ).  Thanks guys.
>                                                        Bug Bug
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 19:11:06 -0500 (EST)
>From: "Scott Shidel..." <shidel@suntan.eng.usf.edu>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Upper intakes...What's up??
>
>
>On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, Chris Costanzo wrote:
>
>> > It went on to say that because this intake is shorter(overal height)
this was
>> >the best performance oriented intake to get. But in order to use one you
>> >also need to use the 87-88 t'coupe valve cover, because it's recessed to
>> >handle the 1/2" shorter runners.
>>
>>
>>         As far as I know, this person in wrong.  I have owned both
>> manifolds, and they are identicle.  I have also seen both valve covers.
If
>> I'm not mistaken, the early valve covers (like my `84 T-coupe) had the
>> indent for the shorter manifold (seperated runner type).  The later
covers
>> (like the `87-88) did not have the indent.  Besides, why would they
shorten
>> the manifold on the engine, when at the time, it was only available in
the
>> Bird.  These cars are a beast and need all the low end they can get.  I
>> think this person was misinformed.
>>
>
>Nope, your misinformed...I have two if the late intakes in the trunk of
>the Merkur waiting to be shipped to joe one of these days..they are indeed
>shorter(I forget why), and the valve covers on the late models are
>indented, and the early ones aren't..I have a 88 TC valce cover and a 84
>TC valve cover in storage.....
>Also, you can get the late model intake to fit with the early valve cover,
>I think, its jus real tite and may require trimming of the linkage
>thing...
>Also, fyi, the 87-88 throttle bodies are the same size as the early ones
>too...
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> The Pinto Page:  www.eng.usf.edu/~shidel
>
>**Join the turbo 2.3 mailing list by sending your subscription request to:
> ericksco@mhd1.moorhead.msus.edu
>
>Scott
>-71 Pinto, stock 2.3 turbo, 13.67@98, radials
> 8.1@85 1/8th mile on slicks
> Big intercooler ON!
> T4 Compressor soon to be on!
>
>-85 Merkur, let the modding begin!
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 19:12:11 EST
>From: hoofbt@juno.com (Eric T Crouse)
>Subject: Re: All present and accounted for
>
>
>All the ferrets are present and accounted for...  The groundhog didn't
>show his face to us(probably cause he was raidin' the trash). Didn't
>notice the hole though....HMMMMM...Time to set some mousetraps........
>
>Later, Eric(CCA SGT@ ARMS), Taz, Merlin, Rusty, Bandit, & Daisy
>
>P.S. Notice the beer bottles for the alarms?
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 19:16:51 -0500 (EST)
>From: "Scott Shidel..." <shidel@suntan.eng.usf.edu>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  More DIY G-tech info
>
>
>> > timing.  It seems soemone else has answerd some of your questions in a
>> > public forum, namely, Electronics Now.  The January issue has an
>> > article, the cover article none-the-less, on how to build an Automotive
>
>Scott hops in the car and heads over to barnes and Noble:)
>Coincidentally, I never heard of Electrinics now until about a month ago
>when I saw they had a anemometer project.  I calculates wind speed thru a
>tube using the cooling of a transistor and reads out the velocity of air
>in MPH....Does this sound like  something familiar to anybody but me?
><final Jeopardy music playin>
>Beep beep
>its the same principal and operation of a mass air meter.  If you know the
>temp and humidity, you can calculate air density, and knowing the area of
>the tube and the velocity, you can get a rough estimate of air mass
>entering the engine..What it is really useful for i have no idea, but
>seems kinda cool...
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> The Pinto Page:  www.eng.usf.edu/~shidel
>
>**Join the turbo 2.3 mailing list by sending your subscription request to:
> ericksco@mhd1.moorhead.msus.edu
>
>Scott
>-71 Pinto, stock 2.3 turbo, 13.67@98, radials
> 8.1@85 1/8th mile on slicks
> Big intercooler ON!
> T4 Compressor soon to be on!
>
>-85 Merkur, let the modding begin!
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 19:18:23 -0500 (EST)
>From: "Scott Shidel..." <shidel@suntan.eng.usf.edu>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  shaving heads
>
>
>
>Why do you want to raise the compression if your only selling it anyhow?
>
>On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, Chris Costanzo wrote:
>
>>         Hey Everyone,
>>
>>    I think I asked this before, but never got an answer.  I have a head
that
>> I want to shave down for compression reasons.  It's an `85 Merhur engine
>> that I am going to drop in the Pinto so I can sell it (need to sell to
get
>> the Capri).  It will be an NA engine, so I want to shave the head to
>> increase the 9:1 compression to 10:1.  How much do I need to shave.  They
>> will be doing the work at my friends tech school (ATC in Exton PA) so I
need
>> to know exactly how much to take off.  Anyone have any ideas?  .030?
.040?
>> More?  Anyone?  Bueller?  (sorry  :)   ).  Thanks guys.
>>                                                         Bug Bug
>>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> The Pinto Page:  www.eng.usf.edu/~shidel
>
>**Join the turbo 2.3 mailing list by sending your subscription request to:
> ericksco@mhd1.moorhead.msus.edu
>
>Scott
>-71 Pinto, stock 2.3 turbo, 13.67@98, radials
> 8.1@85 1/8th mile on slicks
> Big intercooler ON!
> T4 Compressor soon to be on!
>
>-85 Merkur, let the modding begin!
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 21:06:10 -0500 (EST)
>From: Dean and Terri Rich <dtrich@golden.net>
>Subject: Intakes
>
>
>>I
>>think this person was misinformed.
>>                                                Bug Bug
>>
>
>Before I sent that e-mail I made sure to measure,,,it is aprox. 1/2"
shorter
>at the #2 runner
>Dean84SVO
>SVOOA#1449
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 21:17:30 -0500 (EST)
>From: Dean and Terri Rich <dtrich@golden.net>
>Subject: Intakes
>
>
>I have also seen both valve covers.  If
>I'm not mistaken, the early valve covers (like my `84 T-coupe) had the
>indent for the shorter manifold (seperated runner type).
>
>Chris;
>
>The only 2.3 _EFI_ turbo engines to get different valve covers were the
>Merkur and the 87-88 t'coupe.
>The 84 svo had the same valve cover as the 86svo, no indent.
>Your 84 bird has the indent valve cover?? Mmmmm, thats wierd, are you sure
>it's the original.
>Dean84SVO
>SVOOA#1449
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 21:08:13 -0500
>From: Chris Costanzo <BugBug@net-thing.net>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  Upper intakes...What's up??
>
>
>>Nope, your misinformed...I have two if the late intakes in the trunk of
>>the Merkur waiting to be shipped to joe one of these days..they are indeed
>>shorter(I forget why), and the valve covers on the late models are
>>indented, and the early ones aren't..I have a 88 TC valce cover and a 84
>>TC valve cover in storage.....
>
>
>        My bad.  I had it backwards.  Sorry guys
>
>                                                Bug Bug
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 21:40:44 -0500
>From: jjohn@webgate.net (James Johnson)
>Subject: RE: Upper intakes...What's up??
>
>
>If the intakes are diffrent heights, (extremely doubtful) it would be
>because the 87-88 TC needs the lower height to fit under the hood. The hood
>line between my '85 XR4Ti and my '87 TC are much different, but I don't
>think it makes that much of a difference. But I'm not about to whip out a
>tape and measure.
>
>Does anyone want to do that and get back to us?
>
>James
>I don't suffer from insanity.......I'm enjoying every damn minute of it!
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 22:06:00 -0500 (EST)
>From: "Scott Shidel..." <shidel@suntan.eng.usf.edu>
>Subject: Re: SVO:  RE: Upper intakes...What's up??
>
>
>On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, James Johnson wrote:
>
>> If the intakes are diffrent heights, (extremely doubtful) it would be
>>
>> Does anyone want to do that and get back to us?
>>
>I had em side by side the other day, and yep..diffrent hites
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> The Pinto Page:  www.eng.usf.edu/~shidel
>
>**Join the turbo 2.3 mailing list by sending your subscription request to:
> ericksco@mhd1.moorhead.msus.edu
>
>Scott
>-71 Pinto, stock 2.3 turbo, 13.67@98, radials
> 8.1@85 1/8th mile on slicks
> Big intercooler ON!
> T4 Compressor soon to be on!
>
>-85 Merkur, let the modding begin!
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 23:12:22 -0500
>From: "Carl Haines" <carlh@anadigi.com>
>Subject: Valve noise fixed!
>
>
>I posted 2 wks ago about my valve train going clack clack.  Well, it's
>fixed now.  With Nick's help I found that the assembled valve spring height
>was too high.  On one of my valves the follower was hitting the edge of the
>spring retainer, causing the follower to lift off the valve tip.  Also, the
>lash adjuster was always bottomed out.  I suspect the noise was coming from
>the follower losing and regaining contact w/ the valve tip.
>
>The fix consisted of a different set of valve keepers that lowered the
>spring height by .050".
>
>The lesson learned here is that if you need work done to your head
>concerning the valves, you should be sure you go to a shop that knows how
>to set up a 2.3l head.  Even though a shop may be good at setting up V8
>heads doesn't mean they know how to set up a 2.3l head.  If you need head
>work done and you don't know who to do the work, you might want to contact
>Nick.
>
>This is much better now.  I can actually hear the click of the injectors.
>
>Carl Haines
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>
>End of svo Digest V01 #64
>*************************