I sped read this this morning, and made an account just to follow this. I considered myself an engineer before this. Good work, great build can't wait to see more
I sped read this this morning, and made an account just to follow this. I considered myself an engineer before this. Good work, great build can't wait to see more
Finished all the buckets and shims on head 1. Decided to shim a little looser than last time....the software likes the intake at .011 and exhaust at 6 or 7 iirc....then the cam grinder said 8-10 intake and 10-12 exhaust. I decided to go with what ever the looser number so 11-13 on the intake and 10-12 exhaust. If the intakes are making noise I'll go a little tighter next time the covers are off...but the intake has very long accel/decel ramps so tight costs a good deal of bottom end power....or so says the software
mke said:APEowner said:I find it concerning that you can feel the marks. I would consider 4-5 tenths as being insignificant if it weren't in a part that's supposed to be some where between 50 and 60 Rockwell C. How much effort is it taking to pollish the marks out?
Feel the marks is relative I guess....its more about being able to catch a nail than actually feel I guess...like a burr, it doesn't take much and when you can see it I guess you believe you feel it whether you do or not?
They are hard. I can't mark them with a screwdriver. I did the first one by hand and it took about 90 minutes. The next 11 I cheated and "lapped" on a running DA sander. I get 2 at most from a sheet of 40 grit, then 2-3 with the 80 grit...very light, they barely get warm. Then spend about 10 minutes by hand 100, 220, 600. Maybe 20 minutes total. so I now have 12 after about 5 or 6 hours total time...so paying by the hour it would be WAY cheaper to just replace them, but currently I'm time rich and cash poor so lapping it is. A very big vodka drink helps.....
You're probably good. I'm still thinking that the lapping was unnecessary but it probably didn't hurt anything.
They say 2 heads are better than 1...so 2 it is
I had to steal a couple shims from the 1st head to finish the second as most of the stuff I offered to top up the kit didn't arrive, I'll replace and double check when they do arrive.
So now it will be busy work until the black and crank come home. There are some little scratches on the cams, I'll polish those up a bit. The headers could stand some clean up...wires laying under the dash.....I'm sure there's more.
On the busy work list I've been thinking the NBO2 sensors were not working and I should make a change. Currently I have 18 O2 bungs. 12 in each cylinder, 4 in the 1st collectors, 2 in the 2nd (bank) collectors. Sensors wise I have 4 NB O2 in the 1st collectors and 2 WB in the banks. I was thinking the ECU was just not reading the NB sensors correctly...all the analog inputs have a 5V pullup which can be very helpful but isn't current for a NBO2 sensor so when I got what looked like gibberish result I wasn't surprised. That got me to thinking a better setup would be 4 WB sensors and I've been pondering how to explain that to Lana as it will cost money.
This evening I spent some time digging through log data...the NB sensor are working just not the way I expected. I was displaying a lambda based on a simple lookup table created from the bosch data sheet...but it looks like the pullup is buggering it so the table was all wrong. its supposed to be 1.0 lambda at about 0.5V, rich above, lean below with a big dead zone from like 0.3-0.7. that's what I planned for but not what I have....it looks like I'm reading 0.5-1.5V with 1.0 lambda at about 1.0V, lean below, rich above so backwards and offset 0.5V
So I went back and looked directly at the voltage from each sensor
11=1-3
12=4-6
15=7-9
17=10-12
This shows i had a problem in the 10-12 group with 1 dropping out intermittently
here is where its clear something has gone wrong in the 7-9 group with that NB not in anyway matching the others
So I spent time today looking over ECU stuff on the PC and remembered I was planning to change the oil pressure sensor to send reads to the ecu then let the ecu run the dash gauge. I did a little hunting for a suitable pressure transducer....was getting ready to add it to the card when I noticed a not, "you last bought this item June 2017....hmmm....that's when I was running the engine and seeing low oil pressure which I ASSUMED meant the sending unit had failed because new engines don't have low oil pressure...yeah, the sending unit is probably just fine but I found the new sensor in the shop along with a package of adapters to make it fit the engine. It also looks like I added to the ecu code, found a mistake but still its mostly ready to go. Nice!, go me!
Also found a spare WB sensor giving me 3 (but only 2 controllers). I think the OEM oil pressure units are NLA.....that might buy me a WB controller or 2.....probably time to make the change to 4 WB sensors.
More ECU looking....part of the plan with sending oil pressure to the ECU is to light the slow down light (I plan to use it as a general check engine light) but also to literally slow down and trigger a 2500 redline or so and only allow very light load when oil pressure is low, this is an electronic throttle setup so can add some code to limit the throttle...another thing on my to-do list.
"Honey I need to get some sensors to make sure the engine is running safely and doesent blow up again, Luckily I can re-use the wwter temp gauge, and I have a solution for oil pressure, but I will need somewhere between 4 and 18 oxygen sensors..."
DDT said:"Honey I need to get some sensors to make sure the engine is running safely and doesent blow up again, Luckily I can re-use the wwter temp gauge, and I have a solution for oil pressure, but I will need somewhere between 4 and 18 oxygen sensors..."
That was the general idea for how it needed to go :)
Several calls with the machine shop today and while the rods are all matching sizes , the block main bores...well....they aren't really al the same size so a line bore is probably in order. It was line bored before the last assembly so this is confusing particularly since he said they all seem mostly round just different sizes. Anyway, this shop can't do it, which honestly surprised me, but he's got a guy he's calling. That means more money.....sensors discussion is probably off the table for now.
Time to start a Patreon and monetize your fan community!
Every day I post a new video of the engine running on my OnlyFans!
Never even heard of those things 
The truth is this project is supposed to be ending and all the fun (aka stupid) stuff is done. Now its just a pretty vanilla rebuild.
Speaking or which I spoke to the shop again today and wave them numbers on the crank so they can get that done along with honing the cylinders. Not sure when it will be done but its rolling again. the linebore thing is still open a bit....if that goes I need the heads on so the plan is pick it up so I'll talk to them at that time and decide what I want to do.
It's been a while...not sure where to start exactly 
Lolz at the EFI guys who say carbs are complicated.
ShawnG said:Lolz at the EFI guys who say carbs are complicated.
No doubt...carbs and points are dead simple.
In fact after staring at it a bit and then moved to something I understood and replaced the fuel pump. Way back in like June 2017 I realized there was a fuel pressure problem and ordered a new pump then realized there was also a whole engine problem and parked. new pump installed, pressure problem should be sorted. Instructions say it should be on a 30A circuit, no wonder it was popping 15A fuses 
So.... a MAP sensor per cylinder. Where is the port for each of those on each cylinder? Right after the TB?
In reply to NorseDave :
Yes
Is that just a pressure port? Could you be getting bad readings?
BA5 said:Is that just a pressure port? Could you be getting bad readings?
Yeah, just normal hose barbs. Sure I guess the reading could be bad but I don't see anything unexpected to make me question them. When I had that board made I was interested in getting a good strong MAP signal from the ITBs that any ECU could read. Normally with ITBs the MAP signal is sad because the standard answer is to build a little plenum and connect the MAP sensor and all the TB to it. That works and you get a pretty smooth signal but not a very strong signal because basically for every 1 cylinder pulling vacuum there are 3 leaking vacuum....you get a decent signal at idle with the TBs all mostly closed but as soon as you crack the throttle the MAP reading goes from like 70kPa to 90kPa so 10%-100% load is measure by the sensor reading 90-100kpa giving very little resolution and the massive pressure change coming off idle tends not to be very repeatable so the tuning is always just "off" and trying to fix ends in nothing but frustration.
The easiest solution is don't use the MAP sensor for load sensing, use the TPS. The TPS is the most sensitive (a lot of throttle change for relatively small airflow change) near WOT so on the track that is a great solution but no the street where most time is not at or near WOT which is why most street cars use speed-density (MAP load sensing) and why ITBs have a reputation as being race only.
The setup I have is 1 sensor per cylinder so there are no vacuum leaks. Each sensor sees the full vacuum in it's cylinder and the simple circuit (not my design, mostly lifted from the MS forum) sends the highest vacuum reading of the group to the ECU as the MAP signal. With this setup I was seeing 45kPa at idle and a smooth linear pressure change as the throttle opens. That is much stronger vacuum than I expected to see with the cams I have...with 12 cylinders and each a 240deg intake that means 4 are in part of the intake cycle at any given time and the multiMAP is picking off the strongest of the 4, it works great.
There is a some "saw tooth" to the raw signal as the cylinder hits peak vacuum then starts to fall before the next passes it and the pattern repeats. That happens in a normal plenum intake but you don't see it on the sensor because the relatively large volume of air in the plenum damps it out but with my relatively small volume individual runners I see a clear sawtooth signal. Easy fix is to just clean the signal up in the ECU with running average, but the more averaging you use the more lag or delayed response so I use a table uses less points at higher rpm and high throttle position where the signal is smoother anyway and you want to minimize lag. The result is a very strong, clean signal just as I had hoped.
What's going on now is seeing the sawtooth got me thinking..."hey!, those peaks are the cylinders, I think I can see each cylinder's MAP reading here!" which turned out to be true...but I'm wasting a LOT of the ECU processors time picking them out of the already combined in the multiMAP signal. Adding the AN input expansion box will mean I go from using , 20-30% or the processors time trying to create individual signals to maybe 1% to simply read them. It also means I have results idle to redline, right now at about 3500 there just isn't enough time (computers run on clocks, more rpm, less clock ticks between peaks) and the peaks aren't tall enough to be sure anymore. So I have 2 options, just disable the cylinder MAP stuff above 3500 or find a way to be sure about the signal.
That's kind of where I am with this....try some additional hardware figuring worst case is I make the ECU run better but still end end turn off the MAP corrections above 3500 or 70kPa or whatever.....that's how development goes, try your best guess and see what happens.
This is the multiMAP so you don't need to go back 30 pages looking......simple little thing that was designed fo r2-12 sensors, literally just saw the board to the number you need. there is a place for a baro sensor too, you can see the outline near the wires.....most ECUs send 5V to the MAP but the circuit needs like 6 to work right so there is a voltage double (the little IC) ...or feed it 12V , leave off the voltage double bits and and have the baro sensor...its like $10-$15 per sensor this way so pretty cheap. again, I didn't design it and wouldn't know how, I just told someone who does know how what what it should do.
In reply to ShawnG :
Carbs are extremely simple as long as you don't care about easy starting in all weather with the engine hot or cold, or part-throttle driveability, or consistent and correct AFR, or fuel consumption.
In reply to Syscrush :
pick your poison right? hard to setup with nothing to maintain, or easy to setup with seasonal maintenance 
In reply to mke :
It is a pick your poison situation, for sure.
For my application, I'm going EFI because: the carbs on my bike are specific to that bike and new OEM parts are NLA, there are only about 5 people on the face of this earth who have the expertise to properly rebuild them and those guys are all in their 60's-70's now, nobody can guarantee that it's even possible to get the carbs working well with my rare aftermarket exhaust (which I want to keep for sentimental reasons), and the bad fuel consumption means poor range & increased stress on road trips.
There are a lot of applications where carbs can work great - there's no doubt. But the entire automotive industry has moved to EFI for more than one reason.
Even so, looking at homebrew EFI solutions the genuine successes are awfully rare. Choosing to go EFI doesn't mean we get the expertise, data, or experimental resources that the OEMs get. It's a precipitous path either way.
Seeing what you've accomlished in this thread makes me a lot more optimistic bout your chances with this motor than mine with my bike. Keep up the great work!
Syscrush said:In reply to mke :
It is a pick your poison situation, for sure.
Even so, looking at homebrew EFI solutions the genuine successes are awfully rare. Choosing to go EFI doesn't mean we get the expertise, data, or experimental resources that the OEMs get. It's a precipitous path either way.
Seeing what you've accomlished in this thread makes me a lot more optimistic bout your chances with this motor than mine with my bike. Keep up the great work!
In my experience, even with something as basic as the TBI kits on the market from Holley and Fitech, you are going to have to embrace the EFI learning curve as a hobby unto itself or you will become frustrated. In my case I was not looking for a new hobby and had bought the system as the easy button that would "self learn". Been the most frustrating part of my build.
The worst part about those TBI kits is the limitations of TBI and they still need an EFI fuel supply, so you have the work of installing a proper fuel system and don't get the benefit of port injection.
They make it sound as if you can simply bolt on a carb like device and have EFI. In the real world there are way too many factors to consider and TBI introduces some of it's own. It is next to impossible to create something that will self tune on anything you bolt it to.
Marketing.....
You'll need to log in to post.
