Turbo Kit for Acura TL '04-'08
02-09-2011, 08:11 PM
#4681
Team Owner
Hi guy's, I'm a rookie in ACURAZINE. After reading all the comments, mi biggest concern is the tranny! Hondas are know to suffer in the third gear drum (AT Tranny). I already rebuilt my gearbox at 93K, and the transmission was in excellent condition excluding the third gear drum, was shot. Imagine a 500hp TL, better make the tranny out of some hefty stuff! I am still interested in learning more about that a 10psi turbo project!
02-10-2011, 07:01 PM
#4682
02-10-2011, 08:00 PM
#4683
^^
3rd Gear Pressure Switch (28600-P7Z-003)
4th Gear Pressure Switch (28600-P7W-003)
https://acurazine.com/forums/3g-tl-2004-2008-93/110-diy-guide-replacing-3rd-4th-gear-pressure-switch-3g-tl-2004-2006-a-729149/
^^ here is the DIY to replace them.GL
3rd Gear Pressure Switch (28600-P7Z-003)
4th Gear Pressure Switch (28600-P7W-003)
https://acurazine.com/forums/3g-tl-2004-2008-93/110-diy-guide-replacing-3rd-4th-gear-pressure-switch-3g-tl-2004-2006-a-729149/
^^ here is the DIY to replace them.GL
03-14-2011, 01:53 AM
#4685
I have not been driving the car but I was playing with the fuel map in the fic today and taking the advice of mhassett regarding the fuel trims. I was typically seeing (after a day or 2 of driving) -20 ltft and -20 stft pretty much all the time.
In the cells from 10psia to 0psia from 700 to 7000rpms, I changed the value from zero to -39. After a 20 mile drive, the ltft were at +18 and the stft were at +40
In the cells from 10psia to 0psia from 700 to 7000rpms, I changed the value from zero to -39. After a 20 mile drive, the ltft were at +18 and the stft were at +40
03-14-2011, 10:27 AM
#4687
@libert69
Since you have some time to play with your current setup, have you thought about modifying your extension harness to make use of the O2 tables in the F/IC? I'd be willing to bet you could get your trims a little closer to 0 with it.
Since you have some time to play with your current setup, have you thought about modifying your extension harness to make use of the O2 tables in the F/IC? I'd be willing to bet you could get your trims a little closer to 0 with it.
03-14-2011, 04:20 PM
#4690
Yeah, it's not too hard actually. Yank your harness and splice the 2 pink O2 wires coming from the F/IC to the VCENT B1 & B2 wires on the ECU 'B' plug. They should be pins B13 & B21 respectively.
Once they're tapped, open up your settings dialog in the F/IC and select the "High level drive" option in the O2 box on the right. That'll setup the F/IC to alter the values by current instead of voltage. Then in your O2 table, select all cells and set their value to 2.5. That should put you at the factory readings. You should be able to build your voltage-to-O2 table after that and then adjust accordingly.
Send me a PM if you have any other questions and I can get you steered in the right direction.
Once they're tapped, open up your settings dialog in the F/IC and select the "High level drive" option in the O2 box on the right. That'll setup the F/IC to alter the values by current instead of voltage. Then in your O2 table, select all cells and set their value to 2.5. That should put you at the factory readings. You should be able to build your voltage-to-O2 table after that and then adjust accordingly.
Send me a PM if you have any other questions and I can get you steered in the right direction.
03-17-2011, 12:18 AM
#4696
Received my rods from Pauter for the j32. They made a few extra sets as well to keep them in stock. They also have rods in stock for the j35 and j37. All their rods come with arp bolts. Ive been told arp no longer makes rod bolts for the oem j series rods
03-17-2011, 08:01 AM
#4699
Looks good, bert. I never got the chance to compare the stock rods to the Pauter ones when I dropped mine in so it's cool to see a comparison of them side by side.
Hopefully you won't run into any of the same issues I had with dropping their J37 rods into a J32 block.
Hopefully you won't run into any of the same issues I had with dropping their J37 rods into a J32 block.
03-17-2011, 08:32 AM
#4700
Burning Brakes
Oh Libert those look so sweet ,which i had gotten some but now I guess we will see the the limits of those stock rods ,with this new ecu and full control over all parameters that control the engine ,I'm really looking into installing an oem motor and test it's limit , once I get around to finding a decent one ill most likely do it, as I'm yet to push this motor to total destruction ...
03-17-2011, 02:56 PM
#4702
Well, I had a couple of problems with them. Initially, the top end (smaller part that goes in the pistons) was too wide. They had to be sent back to Pauter so that they could be machined down. The next issue was that the big end, when measured from opposite corner to opposite corner, was too big to fit down the sleeves in the block.
I ended up having to feed the rods up through the bottom of the block and attach the pistons and wrist pins while the rods were in the block. I wrapped the big end of the rods with cloth to prevent them from either being damaged or damaging the bottom of the sleeves.
You most likely won't run into the issue though. I believe the J37 rods have a wider main bearing surface than the J32 rods which would push the corners of the rods out another .100" or more from each other.
If you have a caliper, you can measure the maximum distance, kitty-corner, from one corner to the opposite corner on the big end of the rods and make sure it's not longer than 3.49".
I ended up having to feed the rods up through the bottom of the block and attach the pistons and wrist pins while the rods were in the block. I wrapped the big end of the rods with cloth to prevent them from either being damaged or damaging the bottom of the sleeves.
You most likely won't run into the issue though. I believe the J37 rods have a wider main bearing surface than the J32 rods which would push the corners of the rods out another .100" or more from each other.
If you have a caliper, you can measure the maximum distance, kitty-corner, from one corner to the opposite corner on the big end of the rods and make sure it's not longer than 3.49".
03-17-2011, 05:37 PM
#4703
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
03-17-2011, 11:16 PM
#4704
Team Owner
Well, I had a couple of problems with them. Initially, the top end (smaller part that goes in the pistons) was too wide. They had to be sent back to Pauter so that they could be machined down. The next issue was that the big end, when measured from opposite corner to opposite corner, was too big to fit down the sleeves in the block.
I ended up having to feed the rods up through the bottom of the block and attach the pistons and wrist pins while the rods were in the block. I wrapped the big end of the rods with cloth to prevent them from either being damaged or damaging the bottom of the sleeves.
You most likely won't run into the issue though. I believe the J37 rods have a wider main bearing surface than the J32 rods which would push the corners of the rods out another .100" or more from each other.
If you have a caliper, you can measure the maximum distance, kitty-corner, from one corner to the opposite corner on the big end of the rods and make sure it's not longer than 3.49".
I ended up having to feed the rods up through the bottom of the block and attach the pistons and wrist pins while the rods were in the block. I wrapped the big end of the rods with cloth to prevent them from either being damaged or damaging the bottom of the sleeves.
You most likely won't run into the issue though. I believe the J37 rods have a wider main bearing surface than the J32 rods which would push the corners of the rods out another .100" or more from each other.
If you have a caliper, you can measure the maximum distance, kitty-corner, from one corner to the opposite corner on the big end of the rods and make sure it's not longer than 3.49".
03-18-2011, 07:29 AM
#4705
@I hate cars
Luckily, yes. The rod to block clearance was just fine even with the significantly wider rods and the longer stroke. No notching necessary.
The pins do float, but not without a little heat from a heat gun. I believe the manual even specifies to heat the rod/piston to ~150 degrees so that they slide right in.
Luckily, yes. The rod to block clearance was just fine even with the significantly wider rods and the longer stroke. No notching necessary.
The pins do float, but not without a little heat from a heat gun. I believe the manual even specifies to heat the rod/piston to ~150 degrees so that they slide right in.
03-25-2011, 08:28 AM
#4706
@libert69
While I think of it, Pauter should have included a small yellow spec card with your rods. Out of curiosity, what does it say the width of both the big and small ends are?
For the J37A1 rods that I bought from them, they have the small end width at 1.00" (which has since been machined down to 0.7405") and the big end width at 0.7405". If your big end width is less than that you'll be OK.
While I think of it, Pauter should have included a small yellow spec card with your rods. Out of curiosity, what does it say the width of both the big and small ends are?
For the J37A1 rods that I bought from them, they have the small end width at 1.00" (which has since been machined down to 0.7405") and the big end width at 0.7405". If your big end width is less than that you'll be OK.
04-01-2011, 02:11 AM
#4710
^1290. Yes they still use the x beam design
Little update.
Ever since I saw the first video of JandR's new ecu which has the ability to remove the rev limiter, I started thinking about the valve train.
One thing Ive said quite a few times was that sport shift mode was a much easier way to control the shifting for 2 reasons. First was getting stuck in 2nd gear and ss eliminated that. Second reason is the ability to bring the rpms a few hundred rpms higher in 2nd and 3rd gear helping the following gear to stay higher in the power band.
The reason I want the rev limiter removed is this. Trying to time when to make the shift in ss is pretty hard when you want to take the car all the way to redline. Most of the time I would bounce off the rev limiter 1 or 2 times because when using ss, a few hundred rpms go by from the time you shift to the time the shift occurs.
The few different dyno sheets I had showed hp was still climbing at 6700 rpms.
So I decided to pick up the valve train package from KMS. Springs, titanium retainers, stainless steel valves, valve guides and valve guide seals. Decided against the blockguard.
Whether its 7500 or 9000rpms, we will have to see what happens on the dyno and find out where the power starts to level off to find some nice shift points.
To compliment the KMS package, Im going to be using the type-s heads as well. After hearing from Rodney about the huge difference in mid range power with the type-s heads vs the base heads, I was sold.
Little update.
Ever since I saw the first video of JandR's new ecu which has the ability to remove the rev limiter, I started thinking about the valve train.
One thing Ive said quite a few times was that sport shift mode was a much easier way to control the shifting for 2 reasons. First was getting stuck in 2nd gear and ss eliminated that. Second reason is the ability to bring the rpms a few hundred rpms higher in 2nd and 3rd gear helping the following gear to stay higher in the power band.
The reason I want the rev limiter removed is this. Trying to time when to make the shift in ss is pretty hard when you want to take the car all the way to redline. Most of the time I would bounce off the rev limiter 1 or 2 times because when using ss, a few hundred rpms go by from the time you shift to the time the shift occurs.
The few different dyno sheets I had showed hp was still climbing at 6700 rpms.
So I decided to pick up the valve train package from KMS. Springs, titanium retainers, stainless steel valves, valve guides and valve guide seals. Decided against the blockguard.
Whether its 7500 or 9000rpms, we will have to see what happens on the dyno and find out where the power starts to level off to find some nice shift points.
To compliment the KMS package, Im going to be using the type-s heads as well. After hearing from Rodney about the huge difference in mid range power with the type-s heads vs the base heads, I was sold.
04-01-2011, 04:01 AM
#4713
Oil gurus,
Ive been using redline 5w30 for a while now. My last blackstone analysis showed nothing but good things for this oil.
With the new motor we are going to be putting more power then before. I would say upwards of 500 to the wheels (tranny permitting lol).
Is 5w30 still a good choice? 5w40 maybe?
Ive been using redline 5w30 for a while now. My last blackstone analysis showed nothing but good things for this oil.
With the new motor we are going to be putting more power then before. I would say upwards of 500 to the wheels (tranny permitting lol).
Is 5w30 still a good choice? 5w40 maybe?
04-01-2011, 08:52 AM
#4714
Glad to see you ponied up with the valvetrain! I'm running the same type of setup, minus the Type-S heads. Though I have something else in store for that.
Are you concerned about having cylinder walk at your targeted power levels, and with the additional RPMs? Even a set of block guards can help out in that area and they're about 5x cheaper than full sleeves at around $300 installed. The KMS ones even appear to have the cooling holes drilled in the same location and size as the holes in the head gasket.
Are you concerned about having cylinder walk at your targeted power levels, and with the additional RPMs? Even a set of block guards can help out in that area and they're about 5x cheaper than full sleeves at around $300 installed. The KMS ones even appear to have the cooling holes drilled in the same location and size as the holes in the head gasket.
04-01-2011, 10:39 AM
#4715
I'm not speaking from experience here but wouldn't the crank etc need to be rebalanced with the new vavle train upgrade or increase in rev limiter pass like 7.5 8k?? Libert I'm assuming you went w the ss valve train? I've read the titanium is too aggressive for dd and is not really designed/intended for high mileage.any further info on the valvetrain would help, I have been continplating this upgrade for some time. Due to lack of finances and knowledge on the matter I have not proceeded.GL
04-01-2011, 01:12 PM
#4716
Team Owner
Oil gurus,
Ive been using redline 5w30 for a while now. My last blackstone analysis showed nothing but good things for this oil.
With the new motor we are going to be putting more power then before. I would say upwards of 500 to the wheels (tranny permitting lol).
Is 5w30 still a good choice? 5w40 maybe?
Ive been using redline 5w30 for a while now. My last blackstone analysis showed nothing but good things for this oil.
With the new motor we are going to be putting more power then before. I would say upwards of 500 to the wheels (tranny permitting lol).
Is 5w30 still a good choice? 5w40 maybe?
The heavier oil will give you a little more protection especially at high torque levels and lower rpms where cylinder pressures are really high and oil pressure and flow is lower.
I know this doesn't help much but I think you will be fine with the 30wt and the 40wt might give a little more protection under some conditions.
If you go with the 40wt, I suggest the 10w-40 over the 5w-40.
04-01-2011, 02:11 PM
#4718
Team Owner
I wish I could edit my last post but you gain almost one full point in HTHS with the 40wt Redline, it's probably worth it to switch. That's as high as some 60wts. Use the car stuff obviously, the motorcycle oil has no moly.
04-01-2011, 04:35 PM
#4719
Are you concerned about having cylinder walk at your targeted power levels, and with the additional RPMs? Even a set of block guards can help out in that area and they're about 5x cheaper than full sleeves at around $300 installed. The KMS ones even appear to have the cooling holes drilled in the same location and size as the holes in the head gasket.
He gave me a long reason why the blockguard is not needed but I really dont remember what he said.
I'm not speaking from experience here but wouldn't the crank etc need to be rebalanced with the new vavle train upgrade or increase in rev limiter pass like 7.5 8k?? Libert I'm assuming you went w the ss valve train? I've read the titanium is too aggressive for dd and is not really designed/intended for high mileage.any further info on the valvetrain would help, I have been continplating this upgrade for some time. Due to lack of finances and knowledge on the matter I have not proceeded.GL
regarding the re balancing of the crank...My intentions are to build a motor that can handle abuse if I want to beat on it. With that said, I dont plan on revving into 9k. I just want that little room for error that the kms valve train provides and will compliment the auto transmissions shifting characteristics. Once again, according to JandR, the crank does not need to be re balanced for this type of setup
Oil pressure and fuel pressure gauges
Well its not one of pauls builds but im certainly using all those parts and rest assure the car will take a beating.
04-01-2011, 04:47 PM
#4720
Team Owner
^^^ Is your engine together yet? There are some very simple machining processes to help eliminate or reduce cylinder walk.