Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

Bit of a copy paste job from the OS88 vs Holinger thread but I'll plonk it here also...

 

For those interested in an OS88, here is the oiling issue that needs to be rectified before you put it in the car. 

The little slot where the light is coming through is the breather for the box. There is no cover for it and the gear acts like a paddle wheel and pumps oil up the hole and through the hose. So a cover will be made to stop this.

The oil breather fitting also needs to be drilled and tapped. My fitting popped out once it got in the car. OS must use clag glue to secure the fitting... it doesn't last.

I am also changing the sensor that lives in the bell housing. 

i should have the box back by the end of the week ?

IMG_1969.JPG

IMG_1970.JPG

IMG_1974.JPG

IMG_1971.JPG

 
  •  
  • Like 3
  • 3 weeks later...

Finally, something worth updating about!

Gearbox is back in!

Fabrication of PS res is mostly done. The 2 x 4 port MAC valves are mounted.

Airbox, gate lines will hopefully be tomorrow.

Transfer case to front diff shaft uni joints are rooooooooooted. Thats away getting sorted ATM.

2D8250FD-115F-43B8-948B-DB4BE040E3BC_zps

E6CA88E0-FA61-4B0D-B57C-88B6B97EB7B0_zps

  • Like 2
24 minutes ago, iruvyouskyrine said:

Why 2x 4 port valves? Twin gates I guess?

A 4 port gives better control over a wider spread of pressure. You can get away with less spring in the gate incase you want to turn it down (wet track day etc). Scott wanted 2 valves and considering I didn't have a setup yet, that's what went on. One valve per gate.

Going off "Intune's" car, a combo of 1 bar springs gave a gate pressure of 19 psi or so (going off the tial spring sheet). I've put 0.9 bar springs in. See how we go.

  • Like 2

Airbox almost completed. A much larger filter is going in. A K&N RF-1041 which measures 6 inch flange, 7.5 inch base, 5 inch top and 7.5 inches long. Going through the airbox is a spun up 6 inch to 4 inch funnel. The factory airbox snorkel will be also used then off to get coated black!

With any luck, gate lines tomorrow.

IMG_2188.JPG

IMG_2189.JPG

  • Like 2

It is what it is, Pete.

Not using rubber around there, that's bloody lunacy! I'd much prefer not have a rubber line fail and a gate not open when hard up it. Braided -3 lines with heat shield. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...