65GS.com - Buick Gran Sport Enthusiasts!
Other Buicks and Years => Other Buicks => Topic started by: elagache on February 16, 2016, 06:06:09 PM
-
Dear fans of “assertive” 1965 Buicks,
My trusty 1965 Buick Special is finally running again after a long struggle to fit her with a big-block Buick engine, a 200-4R transmission, and bunch of other changes. When I first ordered the engine in 2011, I was persuaded to switch from a carburetor to the EZ-EFI 1.0 (http://www.fuelairspark.com/fas/efi-systems/ez-efi-reg-self-tuning-fuel-injectionhtml) electronic fuel injection system built by FAST (Fuel Air Spark Technology) (http://www.fuelairspark.com/). Given the car’s history, it didn’t take a lot of persuading.
As it turns out, my wagon has been relatively unlucky with both carburetors and now electronic fuel injection systems. I don’t know well the car performed when I as a kid, but there was enough of a cold starting problem that my Dad opted to back-fit a manual choke (more on that later.)
In addition, my Dad and I undertook the risky project of rebuilding the Carter AFB carburetor sometime around 1975 or so, certainly before 1978. I don’t why Dad thought this was necessary, but he clearly thought it was. What made this project risky was that we only had one car at the time, so if something when wrong with the rebuild we were stranded. Here is a snippet from the rebuild instructions. I still have the sheet after all these years:
(http://www.canebas.org/Biquette/Images/Carter%20AFB%20rebuild%20manual.jpg)
Note the date in the top left corner!
Somehow we got the carburetor back together at the end of the weekend and "Biquette" (that’s the family name for the car) was back in service. I started to drive in the late 70s and soon came to really hate that manual choke. Often I was sent to pick up my Dad from the train station after work and I would frequently forget to release the choke during the short drive. As a result, when I tried to stop the engine - the dieseling was most unpleasant!
In 1979 we had Biquette’s engine rebuilt a first time and I pleaded for an automatic choke. During the rebuild, Biquette was fitted with a 1968 Chevy carburetor (with a working automatic choke) which it was hoped would improve her fuel economy. Alas, Dad never did learn which model of carburetor or which Chevy cars had them. You can see were that would lead.
That unknown Chevy carburetor was a dependable performer. It ran from 1979 until well past 2000. Somewhere along the way, I found at (J.C. Whitney of all places) an electronic ignition conversion kit that put an end to replacing the points every 3 month.
Alas, finally that Chevy carburetor gave up the ghost and nobody was able to identify which model it was. Actually the real problem was that the repair shop I was going to was losing interest in older cars, but I didn’t realize that at the time.
Since I knew Biquette had been originally fitted with a Carter AFB, I managed to get my hands on one of those rebuilt. Alas it only lasted about 2 years before the rebuild - broke. I sent it back to be rebuilt yet again, but the my repair shop just couldn’t install it correctly - nobody knew how to work on Biquette anyone.
At this point I was desperate and eventually found a new repair shop: Orinda Motors. It turned out there was a lot of neglected maintenance to catch up on and as part of this Biquette was fitted with an Edelbrock Performer carburetor. At least this carburetor worked, but it didn’t work particularly well. It was necessary to leave the idle unusually high to keep the engine stable.
So what this long story shows is that - carburetors and I have never exactly gotten along. So I leapt at the chance to switch to electronic fuel injection.
Fast forward to today and introduce a new and unexpected problem. The EZ-EFI 1.0 system has a known annoyance: it periodically “hunts” for the lowest stable idle. It does this even after it has supposedly completed its self-tuning procedure.
For most muscle cars this is only an annoyance. The idle is a bit rough, but the computers never allow the engine to stall completely. As soon as you step on the gas, the computer shifts into another mode of operation and the hunting problem goes away.
The fly in the ointment for my wagon is that I’m trying to keep the engine at as low an operating RPM as is practical to get better fuel economy. Most muscle cars run with a comparatively short rear end, so the car won’t move without stepping on the accelerator pedal. My wagon has a 2.78:1 rear end ratio which effectively allows her to operate more like a modern car. On a surface road at 35 mph, the 200-4R transmission shifts into overdrive, and she coasts at idle. In addition, such a tall rear-end means that the car will maneuver with the engine at idle.
It is these situations were the EZ-EFI 1.0 “hunting” at idle is no longer a minor annoyance. Instead of being easy to control, the car can lurch unexpectedly because the fuel injection system will cause the idle to drop below what is stable and then give a shot of fuel to allow the engine to recover. If you are trying to enter the garage, such lurching is most unwelcome! (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/angry.gif)
Okay, given that this seems to be a software/firmware sort of problem, my first thought was to see if there was an upgrade for the EZ-EFI 1.0 system. The only known update goes back to 2010 - before this model was purchased! So there was no remedy available for the existing system.
The guys at Orinda Motors struggled with the problem a bit and eventually learned of a fellow by the name of Richard Nedbal who is based the Sierra foothills of California and is a specialist on FAST products. Here is the website of his outfit:
http://www.fastmanefi.com/ (http://www.fastmanefi.com/)
Rich explained that the EZ-EFI 1.0 system is little more than a legacy product and FAST is now concentrating on their EZ-EFI 2.0 systems and later products. He recommended the XFI Sportsman Throttle Body EFI (http://www.fuelairspark.com/fas/xfi-sportsmantm-throttle-body-engine-control-systemhtml/) model. It has a similar installation footprint to the system already installed so the upgrade won’t be as painful. This system is a hybrid in terms of tuning. Unlike many systems, it does not require the car to be transported to a chassis dynamometer and tuned manually by a specialist. However, it does allow you to modify the tune using a laptop and special software. So unlike the EZ-EFI 1.0 system, if there is something unpleasant about the tuning of this system, there is a way to correct it.
In addition, Rich recommended having the fuel injection system also take over control of the ignition. To do this he recommended the E6/E92 Ignition system kit (http://www.fuelairspark.com/fas/ignition-systems-components/e6-e92-ignition-system-kithtml). These components will then be hooked up to a “dumbed down” MSD distributor that will simply serve to distribute the spark to the individual cylinders.
This is a radical upgrade but it is really what I was desiring all along. My goal was to modernize Biquette so that she could perform comparatively well with our modern cars. The EZ-EFI 1.0 system was not a modern system, but basically a “smart” carburetor and, as it turns out, it isn’t very smart. This new system will take advantage of the modern developments in fuel injection and control so that the engine will perform better on less fuel.
I placed the order for the FAST components and MSD distributor last week. Alas, FAST is waiting for a shipment of air temperature sensors and won’t be able to ship their parts until this Friday. Realistically, installation won’t start until the beginning of March. Still I thought you guys might be interested in this more radical makeover of a 1965 Buick. I’ll report on this thread on the progress as the work unfolds.
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
By all means, keep us posted Edouard. Sounds like an interesting project that many could learn from.
Chuck
-
I have thoughts of this every so often too. Will be following along!
-
Dear Chuck, Jim, and fans of high-tech mid-60s Buicks,
Thanks guys! I'll definitely keep you posted on how this project unfolds. It isn't the sort of thing that will work if you are seeking 100% originality of course. However, with a little clever hiding of components, I think you could have this sort of modern functionality in an engine bay that looks very close to what rolled off the assembly line in 1965.
By the way I got a chance to test another one of those modern conveniences yesterday. We literally had a February heat-wave and yesterday when I had my wagon out for some exercise the car got hot enough that I needed to run the air conditioner! (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/sunny_happy.png) The Vintage Air system did work great, but I sure would appreciate if the earth's climate would remember this is - after all - winter! (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/rain_happy.gif)
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
Cheers, Edouard
-
Dear fans of “assertive” 1965 Buicks,
.... The EZ-EFI 1.0 system
.... The idle is a bit rough...
.... Most muscle cars run with a comparatively short rear end, so the car won’t move without stepping on the accelerator pedal. My wagon has a 2.78:1 rear end ratio....
...... the car can lurch unexpectedly because the fuel injection system will cause the idle to drop below what is stable and then give a shot of fuel to allow the engine to recover.
It's not the difference in rear axle ratio, that's insignificant.
The stall speed of the converter is too low. A higher stall converter will slip more under those conditions (high idle) and the car will not creep or lurch (with brakes applied).
The 65 and 66 Buicks had a nice feature in the ST300 transmissions.... the 'switch pitch' converter.
I have a lumpy cam in my blue car (old Isky grind). With car stopped and converter in the 'low stall' position, it will pulsate when stopped.... the rumpity-rump of the engine transfers some power to the rear wheels (thru the 4.11 rear) and it does pull against the brakes in a pulsating way.
But with the converter in 'high stall' it slips enough so the engine can do it's rumpity-rump thing without the power getting to the rear wheels. It's perfectly content sitting at a stop light, smooth as can be.
Once under way, the converter switches back to low stall for more efficient operation.
Perhaps your "Biquette" would be much happier with a good ole Nailhead and st400!
-
Dear Walt and mid-60s Buick fans of stealthy high-tech,
First I must stand corrected. I was describing the system that will be going into Biquette incorrectly. It doesn't really have anything to do with the EZ-EFI 2.0 besides using the throttle body to house the injectors. The Sportsman is much closer to the FAST XFI line of electronics. The correct name (according to Rich) is:
XFI Sportsman Throttle Body EFI System (http://www.fuelairspark.com/fas/xfi-sportsmantm-throttle-body-engine-control-systemhtml/)
I updated my original post to correct the name.
It's not the difference in rear axle ratio, that's insignificant.
The stall speed of the converter is too low. A higher stall converter will slip more under those conditions (high idle) and the car will not creep or lurch (with brakes applied).
Unfortunately, no that isn't the problem. For starters I wanted the stall converter to be as low as possible so that the fuel economy is better. More importantly, my problem isn't when the brakes are applied but when I'm trying to move the car at engine RPMs very close to idle. If you apply the gas the EZ-EFI changes mode, but if you are moving Biquette on a flat surface, Just releasing the brakes is enough to allow her to start moving. If the idle was smooth enough everything would be under control. However, if the EZ-EFI system causes the RPM to dip as say you are starting back toward the garage and then gives a shot of gas to avoid the engine stalling out, the car lurches unexpectedly instead of moving steadily toward the garage as you were expecting. My foot is on the brake, so Biquette doesn't get anywhere, but this is really annoying.
According to Rich, the EZ-EFI 1.0 is simply obsolete even if it is still being sold. It's time to move on to something sophisticated enough to keep the idle smooth no matter what.
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
If you have noticed this thread has been lacking any updates, there is a good reason for it - da' parts still aren't here! Apparently the new XFI Sportsman is a very popular addition to the FAST product line and FAST is having a hard time meeting demand. The ECU is supposed to be shipped by now and should show up in my hands probably late next week.
In the meantime, the ignition components have arrived. Here is a photo of the E6 ignition box:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-q2d2Vd6/0/XL/FAST%20E6%20Ignition%20box%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-q2d2Vd6/A)
As you can see by the ruler, this is a big box of electronics. I wasn't sure what this device was supposed to accomplish, but is a lot fancier than I first imagined. It has multiple spark functionality. Quoting from the FAST product description:
This E6 Digital CD Ignition Box features multiple spark functionality, meaning the engine will fire multiple sparks per cylinder while the engine is below 3000 RPM. The multiple-spark feature provides a more complete burning of the fuel in the combustion chamber, resulting in a smoother running engine and better fuel economy.
Apparently this technology has a positive effect on engine performance, but this description fails to explain how this improvement is achieved. I did some searching on the web and came across this video that describes the MSD version of this system:
https://youtu.be/1aZ4qcz9KW8 (https://youtu.be/1aZ4qcz9KW8)
It includes demonstrations of the difference between a stock ignition spark and the MSD version of multiple spark technology and it is impressive!
Honestly, I'm not sure how much of a difference this setup will make on my wagon, but I'll take a smoother engine and better fuel economy any day!
In the meantime, we all will have to be patient . . . . (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/patience_emoticon.jpg)
Until the ECU and throttle body finally shows up next week.
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
I was going to ask if it used a throttle body . But looks it does. Is it a 4 port throttle body? Does it used knock sensors and a air flow sensor?
-
Nice set up you got there Edouard,
I put a FiTech Go efi 4 on my 455 in the black Skylark I have and just love the thing. I did not go the cheap route but put a Tanks Inc. tank with their in tank pump and sending unit, russel twist-locks and filter all the way.
What I really like about the FiTech is the lack of boxes for the brain and electronics (and the lower price), everything is built into the tbi unit. I am using the tbi for controlling fuel pump and the electrical fan for cooling (it also carry a full ignition module like the MSD6 so you can run everything from your hand held monitor fully adjustable) and of course totally self learning if you do not want to play around.
I will ad some pictures later today.
Br Anton.
-
Dear Nail_Lark, Br Anton, and mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
I was going to ask if it used a throttle body . But looks it does. Is it a 4 port throttle body? Does it used knock sensors and a air flow sensor?
Hmm, not entirely sure what you are asking. The throttle body is the same as is used on the EZ-EFI 2.0 system:
http://www.fuelairspark.com/fas/ez-efi-2-0r-self-tuning-engine-control-system-base-kithtml/ (http://www.fuelairspark.com/fas/ez-efi-2-0r-self-tuning-engine-control-system-base-kithtml/)
So it has 8 fuel injectors. However, the system only uses as many injectors as it needs to deliver the fuel that the engine requires.
I can't find any reference to a knock sensor, so I don't know on that one. I don't think it uses an air flow sensor though.
I put a FiTech Go efi 4 on my 455 in the black Skylark I have and just love the thing. I did not go the cheap route but put a Tanks Inc. tank with their in tank pump and sending unit, russel twist-locks and filter all the way.
I also went the "do it right" route with a Spectra Premium tank with internal fuel pump.
What I really like about the FiTech is the lack of boxes for the brain and electronics (and the lower price), everything is built into the tbi unit. I am using the tbi for controlling fuel pump and the electrical fan for cooling (it also carry a full ignition module like the MSD6 so you can run everything from your hand held monitor fully adjustable) and of course totally self learning if you do not want to play around.
Definitely also sounds interesting. I'm suffering (believe it or not) because of technology obsolescence. When I ordered this engine in 2011, EZ-EFI 1.0 was state of the art. Today it is definitely - limiting. I decided to stick with FAST products to make the transition as painless as possible. We'll see!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
I've talked to lots of people on the Power Tour running the FAST system and it is reliable. They also give one away every year including installing it while people watch. Unfortunately I didn't win it.
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high-tech,
Well it has definitely taken forever, but finally the remaining components of the XFI Sportsman Throttle Body EFI System have arrived. I put my camera to work and captured these views fresh out of the box. Here is the ECU unit:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-SCrZdTs/0/XL/XFI%20sportsman%20ECU%20unit%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-SCrZdTs/A)
Here is the top of the throttle body:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-spsjd9z/0/XL/Throttle%20body%20-%20top%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-spsjd9z/A)
Here is the front of the throttle body:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-xPzmZQQ/0/XL/Throttle%20body%20-%20front%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-xPzmZQQ/A)
Here is the passenger side of it:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-ksNQ4BK/0/XL/Throttle%20body%20-%20starboard%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-ksNQ4BK/A)
Finally here is the driver's side with the linkage for the accelerator:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-Rv5GMbc/0/XL/Throttle%20body%20-%20port%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-Rv5GMbc/A)
I have made the most important first checks. Yes, it appears everything will fit in the engine bay! The throttle body looked larger than the EZ-EFI 1.0 system that's there now, but it still fits under the dropped air cleaner.
You may have noticed that the ignition box and ECU units are - well - "very red." I am concerned that won't improve the appearance of an engine bay with such nice looking nailhead green valve covers. I had started exploring the idea of painting the bulk of the ignition box, but leaving the FAST logo and other critical parts in the original red. Now that I have the ECU unit in hand, it appears to me that might be able to mask off the logo and LEDs and paint the remainder black so it isn't such a large swath of red to have on the fire wall.
I'm going to give myself the weekend to explore the idea. Stay tuned! (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/tune_in_TV_emoticon.gif)
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
The red color will fit right in on the 66 GS nailheads!
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
Sorry to have not caught everybody up on this project but . . . . well it was happening!
Well, to be perfectly precise things were seriously stalled until today but for a very unexpected reason. My great painting caper ran into an unexpected obstacle. The ignition box appears to have an anodized coating. This is very strange because somehow they managed to get a painting defect anyway, but it definitely isn't easy to either paint or remove.
Adding to the issues was that the instructions that come with that box insist that it is sensitive to heat. The recommend installing it the - passenger cabin - uh excuse me? If it was sensitive to heat, an additional coat of paint might be enough to cause the electronics inside to overheat. So my plan-A of painting portions of it black was now out. No worries I thought, if I can't put paint on, then I'll remove some of that paint and expose the bare aluminum. The effect should have been really delightful. Alas, that's were the toughness of the anodized coating did me in. I didn't want to use something too aggressive, just in case I would need to take advantage of the warranty. What I felt safe to try didn't get any of the surface coating off. So I was defeated.
If I could tone down the color of the Ignition box, it made no sense to paint the ECU unit either. Both are going to end up on the back of the firewall. Hopefully there will be enough space between the engine and these components to avoid too much clashing between the nailhead green valve covers and these red components - we'll see.
Since my end of things was exhausted, it was time to bring my trusty wagon over to Orinda Motors to those guys to do in the actual installation. I went in this morning and everything was going fine until Greg (their classic car guru) started to look for the installation instructions. There aren't any paper documents included with the XFI Sportsman Throttle Body EFI System at all. I scratched my head and did a Internet search for installation instructions - no luck. I was puzzled by this but honestly I had forgotten with the failed painting caper.
This afternoon, Greg called - "where's the instructions?" I immediately remembered my previous failed attempt and contacted the dealer who sold me the system: Richard Nedbal. Rich informed me that all the instructions are included in the help section of the engine tuning software - even the instructions to install the components!
Adding misery to this strange way to provide product documentation, I've been a Mac guy since 1988 and the engine tuning software only runs on Windows. I might have a emulation software system to run it, but I didn't have a chance to try it. Rich was a good guy and he extracted the sections of the manual that describe the actual component installation. I printed those up and I'll run them over to Orinda Motors tomorrow so that the project can get back on track.
Still, it does seem a bit - cheap. If you spend thousands of dollars on a state of the art fuel injection system, it doesn't seem to be asking too much to have a printed manual included. It is difficult to work on a car without printed instructions, and asking the owner to print those instructions is . . . yeah, cheap.
Stay tuned, this is only the beginning!
Cheers, Edouard
-
Mounted on the firewall, it may see a lot of heat from the headers. Easy enough to check with a thermometer and a test drive.
I mounted a MSD box on the inside of my car, on the firewall above the glove box. Your air conditioning likely consumes that space.
The front radiator support is a possibility.
Wonder if it will fit IN the cowl area. Lots of airflow to keep it cool. The wiper mechanism will consume some of that space.
-
Hi Walt and mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
Mounted on the firewall, it may see a lot of heat from the headers.
The only free space on the firewall would be precisely in the middle, so it would be as far away from the headers as is possible on the firewall.
I mounted a MSD box on the inside of my car, on the firewall above the glove box. Your air conditioning likely consumes that space.
Alas indeed the Vintage Air system is much larger than the original 1965 Buick A/C system. There just isn't much room behind the dash.
The front radiator support is a possibility.
Wonder if it will fit IN the cowl area. Lots of airflow to keep it cool. The wiper mechanism will consume some of that space.
Interesting ideas. I need to drop off the instructions this morning. I'll ask Greg about it when I do.
Thanks for the suggestions! :thumbsup:
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
Quickie update on this project. I put into Greg's hands the instructions so he could finally procede as FAST intended! Greg had already gotten the throttle body installed at 10 am this morning. Here is the front view:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-w4S29zN/0/XL/Biquette%27s%20Sportsman%20throttle%20body%20-%20front%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-w4S29zN/A)
Here is a passenger side view:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-XKBSwGc/0/XL/Biquette%27s%20Sportsman%20throttle%20body%20-%20starboard%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-XKBSwGc/A)
However, Greg and I weren't sure where to install the E6 Ignition box. This afternoon I posted a question on the FAST technical support forum, but so far no answers. Doesn't FAST know where to put these ignition boxes? :dontknow:
Stay tuned . . . . .
Edouard
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
The installation of the new fuel injection system in my trusty wagon is continuing. Greg got most of the ignition components installed today and was supposed to start on the wiring harness of the ECU unit sometime this afternoon. Here is a photo of the MSD distributor:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-WZJsBB8/0/XL/Biquette%27s%20new%20distributor%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-WZJsBB8/A)
All of the MSD electronics have been disabled so that the E6 controller box will control the ignition. Nonetheless, you do need an ignition coil. Greg parked the FAST E92 coil on the driver's side inner fender:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-NGfPxt2/0/XL/Ignition%20coil%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-NGfPxt2/A)
I posted a question on the FAST technical support forum about whether or not the E6 Ignition box can withstand a little moisture. The reply was anything short of actually immersing it in water should be fine. So that opened up many other locations with better airflow. Greg finally put the box between the driver's side inner fender and the headlights:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-H5Qk2cd/0/XL/E6%20Ignition%20box%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-H5Qk2cd/A)
That location should be cool enough for the box to avoid overheating.
FAST technical support warned against having the ignition coil wiring being anywhere close to the ECU wiring harness. Fortunately, in this arrangement the ignition wiring is on the driver's side of the engine while the ECU and its wiring is on the passenger side.
If all goes well, Greg was hoping to try to start up and tune the engine on Friday . . . . . .
Stay tuned!!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
Sorry to fall behind on this saga, but it has been a crazy week. The ECU finally got installed by Friday:
(https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-7ffp2BD/0/XL/Sportsman%20ECU%20unit%20-XL.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Sportsman-EFI-install/i-7ffp2BD/A)
There is also a new fuel pressure sensor but alas I botched the photo of that module. Since the E6 Ignition box is in an out of the way location, I might go back to look at my scheme to paint the ECU unit leaving a stripe at the top for the LED displays and the FAST logo in red, but toning down that big red assembly.
Alas, one electrical adapter was needed and it wasn't supposed to arrive until the end of Friday. So my trusty wagon had to wait once more. The hope is to try to start the engine sometime on Monday. However, it may not be possible to set all the tuning parameters for a few days. We are expecting some rain until the end of Tuesday. Since I still haven't upgraded the tires and the engine might once more be doing 500 hp, it might not the best of times to be driving my trusty wagon on slick roadways!
Stay tuned!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
I just got off the phone with Orinda Motors and the engine is running!! (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/yahoo.gif)
Of course this was expected, but whenever you make such a drastic change in an old car, there is always the fear of surprises! :BangHead:
Greg is going through the engine tuning procedure as I type. I should have some sort of a report by the end of day. Depending on the situation I might even have photos or video.
Stay tuned! (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/tune_in_TV_emoticon.gif)
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Good news, congratulations!
-
Dear Jim and mid-60s Buick fans of high tech.
Good news, congratulations!
Thanks!
Sorry for not explaining what is going on until now - crazy week. Like I believe all of the FAST XFI line-up, the Sportsman is "semi-self-tuning." It needs a "program" to start the engine and then you use a laptop and software provided by FAST to adjust various parameters of the ECU to get good performance out of the engine. Rich at FAST-Man-EFI (http://www.fastmanefi.com/) will provide you with the initial program to get the engine started as part of your purchase of the equipment from him.
I suppose getting the engine started is a little rough, but you need to get the engine warmed up before you can adjust any of the parameters. Once that is done you can use the FAST software to progressively improve the tune. The system is able to do some self-adjusting based on the sensor inputs. Greg was very pleased to see that this electronic fuel injection system was doing a much better job at reducing pollutants than the old EFI system, implying that it was indeed promoting more efficient combustion.
We had rain yesterday, so Greg decided to defer the road test portion of the tuning. I just checked and that is what is going to happen this afternoon, hopefully that will be sufficient time to complete that phase of the tuning. Traditionally, Orinda Motors keeps a car one more night to make sure that it starts well from cold. If that turns out to be the case, I'll be bringing home my trusty wagon sometime on Wednesday.
I promise to take a video once she is finally all tuned up!
Cheers, Edouard
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
Yesterday I took a number of videos of my trusty wagon settling into the Sportsman EFI system. I finally was able to put them up on YouTube this morning. Here is a short video of the engine idling just after being started. It starts out rough, but the self-tuning recovers relatively quickly:
https://youtu.be/7JCXZlJdaQs (https://youtu.be/7JCXZlJdaQs)
Here is a 5 minute video taken during a test drive on a local freeway.
https://youtu.be/Mnnz8Ng1qX0 (https://youtu.be/Mnnz8Ng1qX0)
Unfortunately, I don't have a comparison video, but when the engine is quiet, it seems so much quieter than before. My 51 year old wagon is almost as quiet as our 2000 Buick Century!! Once the engine got warmed up, the idle is indeed extremely stable. At some points, the car is literally cruising in overdrive with the engine at idle.
There is still some tweaking to do, but so far I'm extremely pleased with this upgrade!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Edouard,
Ever get that shim installed for the starter??? Sounds like it may still need one.
Tom T.
-
That looks like a great setup! Your car is quiet, even with the big headers.
-
Dear Tom, Jim, and mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
Thanks guys! My trusty wagon is doing very well on the preliminary tune and Rich and Greg have made some significant improvements that they hope will be good enough so that she can come home tomorrow.
Ever get that shim installed for the starter??? Sounds like it may still need one.
Sorry, I had forgotten about that suggestion. I'm a little puzzled though, neither video shows the starter in action!
Honestly, about the only thing that the old EFI system was doing well was starting the engine. Almost always, the engine would start up right away. Getting the configuration to start up a big engine is something of a "seat of your pants" matter according to Rich. I'll find out tomorrow if Rich and Greg found a nice formula when they try to cold start my wagon after sitting overnight.
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high-tech,
My trusty wagon got a bill of good health and got to home up this afternoon. The XFI Sportsman continues to automatically adjust the tune, so the control isn't perfect and in particular, the idling starts out a bit rough before settling down. Nonetheless, the car is much easier to control and and on the road, the engine continues to be steady in its idle. At last I could bring her onto the driveway and into the garage without being afraid of hitting something!
I'm very nervous about having my wagon out around holidays because she was hit the Wednesday before Thanksgiving 2010. So she will spend Friday and the weekend in the safety of the garage. Sometime next week, I'll try to get her back on the road so she can continue her tuning "education." Before putting her into the garage though, I took a quick video of the engine starting so that Tom could see if he still hears the noise that suggested to him the starter needed to be shimmed. Here's the link:
https://youtu.be/lkNg7fSgKKU (https://youtu.be/lkNg7fSgKKU)
Unfortunately, the radiator fans start just before the engine starts to it is difficult to hear. However, to my ears the engine is starting up very smoothly. Opinions?
Thanks for your support! :icon_thumright:
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high tech,
I thought I had brought my wagon home and all that was left to do was let it self-tune. However, it turned out that Greg at Orinda Motors hadn't gotten back to the FAST distributor Richard Nedbal with key piece of information: the current state of the tuning program.
At least the Sportsman (and perhaps the entire FAST XFI line,) are truly hybrid systems. Unlike traditional EFI systems that have no self-tuning, they will improve the tune over time on their own. But completely different from automatically self-tuning systems, you can access the state of the tune as a set tables and manually adjust them.
Just before sending my wagon home, the guys at Orinda Motors took my wagon for a long drive and enabled a feature of software that comes with the Sportsman: Logging. Those logs provide information on what the engine is actually doing and suggest modifications to the tune. Orinda Motors sent the log data to Rich, but not the current state of the tuning program. Since the Sportsman is self-tuning, without the current state of the tune, the logs were meaningless.
Well, I had two choices. I could have brought my wagon back to Orinda Motors to download that tune program or I could have tried to get myself. For most guys, it would be easy, but I'm one of those hard-core Mac guys since 1988 and the FAST software is of course for Windows. Nonetheless, I really am a hard-core Mac guy, so with a little extra work, I managed to get the FAST software to run on a Mac. The gory details are on this post on the FAST technical support forum:
http://www.cpgnation.com/forum/threads/running-fast-software-on-a-mac-using-crossover.25909/ (http://www.cpgnation.com/forum/threads/running-fast-software-on-a-mac-using-crossover.25909/)
If you just want to see the proof of concept here is a YouTube video showing my MacBook launching the FAST Sportsman software using a environment called Crossover:
https://youtu.be/9QvPSRSMdb0 (https://youtu.be/9QvPSRSMdb0)
With this advance, I was able to download the tune program myself and send it over to Rich myself. The next morning, he sent me a revised program with a few adjustments given what he observed in the logs. Now it was time to see if I could upload a tune program to my electronic fuel injection system - and the answer is . . . .
https://youtu.be/EflXYoDUVKk (https://youtu.be/EflXYoDUVKk)
YES! :hello2:
Now I started up the engine and I took this quick video of my engine idling while connected to the Mac:
https://youtu.be/PmgN0JfDBKY (https://youtu.be/PmgN0JfDBKY)
Once all this software stuff was done, I got my wagon on the road and . . . . . WOW!!! There is such an improvement in control that it feels almost like a new engine. There is more power than I can ever handle, but when I need to make a precise control, the car moves at my command. There was another revelation. The engine is even quieter than it was on Thursday when I brought her home. As the tune gets more precise, the engine only gets the fuel it needs for the job. As a result it is quieter and saves gas!
The FAST line of electronic fuel injection systems really allow you to have your cake and eat it too. You don't have to have your car towed to a chassis dynamometer to get a great tune. A FAST dealer like Rich can send you a startup tune program that is good enough to get the engine started and then you can follow the instructions to get the car working well enough that you can drive it. After that, you can use the logging feature to collect precise data on how your engine is running to send back to someone like Rich. Then the FAST dealer can remotely adjust the tune until the car is really running like a top.
So this is a completely new scheme for electronic fuel injection. It greatly lowers the cost of getting a quality tune and doesn't leave you at the mercy of self-tuning. If it doesn't work as you want, log the problem area and send the tune back to be adjusted.
There is always a concern about how well high-tech and classic cars will mix. But in this case, it is absolutely a spectacular success!!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Congrats Edouard. I can see the big smile on your face from the words you wrote!
:cheers2:
Chuck
-
Dear Chuck and mid-60s Buick fans of high-tech,
I can see the big smile on your face from the words you wrote!
Thanks! Yes indeed I'm feeling a whole lot better about driving my wagon now. I had a few too many close calls were the car lurched instead of moving as I need her to. Power is wonderful, but you still need to be able easily maneuver into the garage!
The one downside is that the Sportsman ECU is definitely a visible distraction in the engine bay. I don't know if there is any other system that allows you to take control of the tune but is better hidden in the engine bay. As far as I can tell, the FiTech Fuel Injection systems (http://fitechefi.com/) are 100% self-tuning with no sort of override. I'm extremely impressed and pleased at how the FAST Sportsman can be adjusted by a professional tuner without needing to do anything more download the tune from the Sportsman, than exchange some emails, and then upload the revised tune to the Sportsman. That sure beats hoping that the self-tuning will eventually get it right.
Cheers, Edouard
-
Elagache,
How about mounting that XFI box on the other side of the cowl??? The eyesore would be out of the way, hidden & since you live where you do have little to worry about via rain or driving in the rain. It would ALSO stay cooler in that location. Saves you from painting & trying to make it look good/blend into the surrounding area.
Just a thought.
Tom T.
-
Dear Tom and mid-60s Buick fans of a clean engine bay.
How about mounting that XFI box on the other side of the cowl???
I haven't looked carefully, but this car has a Vintage Air system and a lot of the spaces that would be available are already - occupied! The guys at Orinda Motors routed the A/C lines in the heater housing to save the passenger side vent and leave room for the kick-panel speaker.
I haven't had time to look into this one yet. There seems to be one more tweak needed in the fuel injection system itself. I need to figure out how to collect the log data and see if this can be adjusted.
Stay tuned!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
I still want to see a nailhead green Star Wars air cleaner on this wagon just to confuse everyone.
-
Dear Dan and fans of mid-60s Buicks that bring smiles to people's faces,
I still want to see a nailhead green Star Wars air cleaner on this wagon just to confuse everyone.
Well, . . . . I'm not sure I want to go that far, but my wagon had a busy day between bringing home the groceries and an afternoon run to pickup a family member dropping off another car at Orinda Motors. Not everybody "got the message" about what the throaty exhaust really was all about, but those who did definitely had a big smile on their faces! (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/smiley.gif)
I hate to admit how many electric cars we have around here, but no matter how green those cars might be, they ain't got nothing on my wagon as far as "announcing her presence!"
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high-tech,
So sorry to have not kept you'all up to date on this project. I had started to collect a lot of material to explain how the turning process is done - only to realize what I was going to explain was completely wrong!
In the end, I had the good fortune of having Richard Nedbal come by and work his tuning magic while he was on a tour of the Bay Area for other customers. It took him about 2 hours and he was nice enough to explain what he was doing. I was extremely impressed by his expertise and how much he improved the quality of the tune! It wasn't free, but it definitely was worth it!
I'll try to recall what Rich taught me and try to explain in detail how this sort of electronic fuel injection really works. However, in a nutshell it frees you from the burden of having to have the car transported to a dynamometer and have it tuned there. The XFI Sportsman is sophisticated enough in its self-tuning that you can get the car running on your own. If you are willing to sweat the details, you can learn how to get a quality tune. Alternatively, you could drive your car to a professional like Rich. That would greatly reduce the expense of getting professional tune.
I'm extremely pleased with this system. It avoids the limitations of self-tuning systems, and avoids the full expenses of professional tune at a dynamometer. It does leverage the advantages of each alternative while avoiding their respective weaknesses.
Stay tuned!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high-tech,
Sorry, I haven't kept this thread up mainly because I haven't made a progress on the last lingering issue: some hesitation when starting cold. When the car got tuned up by Rich who clearly is pro, he tried to dial in the cold start by starting the engine a few times from cold and stopping it immediately. The trouble with that is that a big-block . . . . well, they do produce a lot of heat! So I think by the third or fourth start - it wasn't a cold start anymore. So I need to run some tests where my wagon really sits overnight and I just haven't had the time.
Still I have a buddy who built his own sleeper muscle car by putting a Chevy ZZ383 crate engine into a 1971 Chevelle Malibu. It has some sort of an Edelbrock carburetor on it. As he describes it:
You probably have not heard my car start from cold. She starts right up and then howls and vibrates (minorly) for about 30 seconds before settling into a smooth bellow. It has the high idle set at around 2200 RPM, which seems a little much to me, so I kick her down to around 1600 for the rest of her warm-up. The only problem with this is occasional Sunday mornings when I take her out for an early drive. I like to get going around 6:00 which must be a little hard on the sleeping neighbors. I keep the garage door shut until the 1600 RPM kick-down, but there is still plenty of sound after that. So far I have had no complaints. Both garages have small continuously running exhaust fans so the fume build-up does get extracted.
2200 RPM for the high idle!!! Indeed that must be quite a roar!
In contrast, here is what my trusty wagon sounds like when starting from cold (another video on You Tube:)
https://youtu.be/bVoqF1zhAHQ (https://youtu.be/bVoqF1zhAHQ)
The problem I'm struggling with is the long period of cranking before the engine finally starts. Even so, once the engine starts it runs and runs very smoothly even from cold. Here is a graph showing the RPM:
(http://www.canebas.org/misc/Capto_images/Start%202016-05-10%20RPM.png)
The FAST Sportsman system is able to get the engine to run in a very stable way from cold at about 1000 RPM. The RPM then drifts down to the target idle RPM of 850. That's a whole lot more comfortable than 2200 RPM!
The FAST C-ComWP Sportsman software allows you to log the engine's parameters so that you can look over a start and see how the engine was performing. You can even "play back" that log as a movie of those parameters changing over time. Here is the first 30 seconds of the engine starting as a movie of those graphs:
https://youtu.be/0mnxXdwtmxQ (https://youtu.be/0mnxXdwtmxQ)
I'm displaying only two items on the graph: the RPM and the actual fuel-air ratio. The RPM is like the graph above, but the fuel-air ratio gives some idea of how well the engine will perform. Because of the chemistry of gasoline, engines perform best at a ratio of 14 parts air to 1 part fuel. If you look at that graph, it starts by going rich immediately after the engine starts. I'm guessing that's a result of the engine taking too long to start and all that fuel getting into the intake manifold while the engine cranked. After that it goes a bit lean with not enough fuel for the available air. I'm guessing that makes the engine a bit rougher than it has to be. I'm hoping to adjust the cold start parameters to get the start to remain closer to 14-1 during that process.
This clip doesn't go on that far, but the original movie of the engine eventually shows how much quieter the engine gets once it has warmed up. If you watch the movie to about a minute and a half, the sound level will drop noticeably even on this movie. So you can see for yourself the effect of this fuel injection system.
This still isn't an explanation, but perhaps an illustration of what laptop tuning can do for you if you put the effort into it.
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
If you look at that graph, it starts by going rich immediately after the engine starts.
Normal....A cold engine needs a richer mixture. An older carb equipped engine uses the choke for that purpose. Choke the air= more gas.
As for the excessive cranking, you can try turning the key on, wait a few seconds, then crank. That may help pressurize the injectors with gas. May or may not help.
Your system is a TBI, not port injection, so it won't fire until gas actually makes it's way through the manifold and into the cylinders. Will take some cranking.
-
Dear Walt and mid-60s Buick tinkerers,
If you look at that graph, it starts by going rich immediately after the engine starts.
Normal....A cold engine needs a richer mixture. An older carb equipped engine uses the choke for that purpose. Choke the air= more gas.
Yes, the Sportsman has an equivalent mechanism to a choke. I'm just not sure sure it should go that rich. The old fuel injection system would start the the engine right up without that immediate hesitation, so I think I might want to tweak something so the mixture doesn't go quite that rich at first.
As for the excessive cranking, you can try turning the key on, wait a few seconds, then crank. That may help pressurize the injectors with gas. May or may not help.
Your system is a TBI, not port injection, so it won't fire until gas actually makes it's way through the manifold and into the cylinders. Will take some cranking.
The old fuel injection system was also a throttle body and it didn't take that long to start, so I'm fairly sure this system isn't giving the engine enough cracking fuel. This is the table I need to tweak to give the engine a bit more fuel:
(http://www.canebas.org/misc/Capto_images/Cranking%20fuel%20table%202016-04-26.png)
As you can see the adjustment is based on coolant temperature. I think what happened is that when Rich set the cold start, he did it by starting the engine and immediately cutting it off as soon as I could see something in the data. Unfortunately, it took me a few tries and by then the engine had warmed up some. As a result, it is a bit too lean when the engine is really cold. However, it is rather close because my first attempts to nudge up the values made things much worse! So I need to very cautiously nudge these values up a bit to see if I can get a more responsive start. It should be possible. The problem isn't a lack of adjustments but - too many!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high-tech,
I’m still fiddling with the tune on my trusty wagon to improve the cold start. I realized that if I’m going make any progress on this problem I’m going to have to be more systematic. So to help myself, I created some tables with the various fuel injection parameters I’ve tried so that I could compare the videos and logs in some meaningful way. For example here is the table I made listing the parameters I can adjust for the so-called after start correction:
Temperature
| 4-15-2016 tune
| Rich's final tune
| 5-11-2016 tune
| 6-8-2016 Target
|
0
| 57.6
| 29.4
| 33.3
| 31.5
|
36
| 52.2
| 23.1
| 30.2
| 26.6
|
73
| 43.5
| 15.3
| 25.5
| 20.4
|
109
| 31.8
| 9.0
| 16.9
| 13.0
|
This fuel injection parameter is adjusted by the coolant temperature which is the first column of the table. Each of the success columns was an attempt I had made to adjust these values. In the middle is the setting that Rich chose when he came over and tuned the engine.
At the moment, these numbers are nothing more than mumbo-jumbo. However, I also have been very diligent about taking videos and data logs of the engine starting. So for example, here is a video corresponding to the engine starting after Rich completed the tune:
https://youtu.be/bVoqF1zhAHQ (https://youtu.be/bVoqF1zhAHQ)
Here is my failed attempt to improve the cold start on May 11, 2016:
https://youtu.be/NVTdMcGCmXs (https://youtu.be/NVTdMcGCmXs)
In this case I overdid the correction and the engine ended up running rich for several minutes. Here is the latest video where I think I’ve finally got the after start correction where it needs to be:
https://youtu.be/a8ZWDjcpqx8 (https://youtu.be/a8ZWDjcpqx8)
Because this is a software driven tune, you can also look at the logs to understand why the engine is so much more stable after starting. As you can see below, I tweaked the after start correction so that now the air fuel mixture is much closer to the actual targets:
(http://www.canebas.org/misc/Capto_images/Cold%20start%20log%202016-06-08.png)
However, you don’t need the log to see that the engine is running a whole lot better with these settings than the previous two attempts.
It occurred to me that this is a perfectly good strategy to adjust the cold start on any car, even one with a carburetor. The problem with cold starts is that you wait a few hours at least before being able to change the adjustments - so you can easily forget how the engine ran the previous start. Most of us now are saddled with a smart phone so we have the video camera already. Even on a car with carburetor, you might have some setting that you adjust using an ignition analyzer (such as the fast idle speed.) So that’s a number you could store in a table.
As to those fickle screw adjustments, well you can keep track of those as well. You could simply keep track of the relative changes to the settings - for example: clockwise 1 quarter turn. Alternatively, you could move the screw to a known stop and count the turns to current location.
While I used a computer, a piece of paper is all that you need to keep track of your previous settings and some place to store the videos.
Videotaping could be specially handy for a car that is completely stock and continues to use mechanical points. Once you get the car tuned as you like it, videotaping your success will give you a reference point to achieve for the next time you replace the points. A quick review of the video will allow you to decide if the car is idling as it has in the past.
So any car guy can use a bit of high-tech even if that high-tech isn’t actually part of the car.
Some more food for thought!
Cheers, Edouard
P.S. As you can see, the engine still isn't starting as nicely as I think it should. So that's the next area I'm going to focus on.
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high-tech,
Well believe it or not I'm still fussing with this fuel injection system and . . . . it still isn't behaving exactly as I want it to. I've been noticing something puzzling. About 3 minutes or after a cold start, the engine would labor a bit. Checking the logs this was the time when the fuel mixture was really rich - something like 12:1 when it should be closer to 14:1.
This was a problem because manipulating all the startup settings that could get my hands on wasn't helping at all. After exploring the situation a bit further, I realized something even more disturbing. All the tables related to starting rapidly take their effect. In a minute, all the settings I was tweaking were already disabled.
This was a serious problem. On the one hand, when the engine was really warmed up this problem didn't occur. On the other hand, I couldn't find anything else that could be causing this - or so I thought!
Finally I did some more digging and discovered yet another tuning table and this table adjusted the fuel based on the . . . . coolant temperature! Of course at 3 minutes into the engine's start the coolant was still relatively cool. BINGO! This table was set too rich. My suspicion is that for an engine with the normal mechanical components of the 1960s this extra fuel is needed to overcome the extra friction that remains while the oil warms up. However, the "super-deluxe" engine in my trusty wagon has a hydraulic roller cam, roller rockers, and other modern technology. As a result, it simply doesn't need this extra fuel and rumbles a bit as a result.
Of course it - should be - easy enough to adjust this table, but alas tweaking this table will throw out of whack all the other startup adjustments I've made. So it is sort of a throw back to square one.
So this is a very long way of saying sadly . . . . stay tuned! (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/tune_in_TV_emoticon.gif)
This twisted tale is most definitely still not over!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high-tech,
I haven’t updated this thread in a while, so here is the latest puzzling developments. For a few months now, I’ve occasionally had the engine stall after a hot start. This has always happened after I returned from a trip and had stopped the engine so I could unload the car. When I would start her up, the engine would mysteriously die. Trying to restart the engine it wouldn’t even turn over.
It didn’t happen very often and I discovered that simply allowing the engine to cool allowed me to restart the engine and finally get her in the garage. With so many other things to troubleshoot I put it on the back burner at first. My initial suspicion was that the problem was the E6 Ignition controller box was overheating.
Of course any sort of overheating issue would get worse as the temperature increased in the summertime. So it isn’t surprising that now I have to deal with this problem. I managed to log the problem occurring and sent the log to the fellow who sold me the system: Richard Nedbal (http://www.fastmanefi.com/). He spotted that the fuel pressure was dropping just before the engine died.
With this information, I decided to run another test. I hadn’t tried to restart the engine after it had stalled while logging the data. Yesterday I was able to run this experiment and here are the results:
(http://www.canebas.org/misc/Capto_images/Biquette%20hot%20start%20log%202016-07-22.png)
You can view this graph as a movie with the actual values of the various engine parameters changing in real time:
https://youtu.be/Z1cRiMDGbeM (https://youtu.be/Z1cRiMDGbeM)
Instead of failing to start after the stall, the engine does restart, runs for a brief period and then the fuel pressure starts to drop and the engine dies a second time.
You can see how the engine is starved until it stalls on this video of the engine itself.
https://youtu.be/7FDDNpJ9FbM (https://youtu.be/7FDDNpJ9FbM)
Looking carefully at the log, you will notice that the fuel pressure starts dropping before the voltage, so this isn’t an electrical problem. So the obvious explanation is either the fuel pump or the pressure regulator are malfunctioning. However, that doesn’t explain the role of the hot engine bay. Shortly before those videos were taken, I started the engine from cold and as you can see in this video the engine runs fine for 5 minutes:
https://youtu.be/4YmaTgmCMz4 (https://youtu.be/4YmaTgmCMz4)
I still need to adjust the fuel enrichment vs. coolant temperature table, but other than that the engine is doing just fine. After this video was taken, I took my wagon out for a 5 mile run to complete warming up the engine - no problems.
It is extremely unlikely that the fuel pump is at fault. My wagon has a modern EFI fuel system with a Spectra Premium gas tank and built-in fuel pump:
http://ecat.spectrapremium.com/prod/GM37EFI (http://ecat.spectrapremium.com/prod/GM37EFI)
So the pump isn’t effected at all by the engine bay heat. That leaves the pressure regulator, but it is a straightforward mechanical regulator that came with the first EZ-EFI fuel injection system of 2013. It is not impossible that it is failing from excessive heat, but it would be rather strange.
As in previous cases, allowing the engine to cool down for about 40 minutes allowed me to start the car once more and put her back in the garage. Once more the engine was behaving as normal.
At this point I don’t think I have much of a choice but to bring her over to Orinda Motors and see if they can troubleshoot this problem but clearly it is a very strange one.
Stay tuned!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
P.S. Something that may surprise you’all is the air intake temperature (top row, second from the right in the log data movie.) It starts out a 120? F and almost reaches 130? F - with the hood wide open! The ambient air temperature at the time was the mid-80s so the engine was using air ~ 40? hotter than was available outside of the engine bay. So if you ever were considering some sort of a cold air intake, here is more incentive to actually install one!
-
Ed, Does your system include a return line for unused fuel from the regulator to the tank?
-
Sounds like vapor lock, but is that possible with a hi-pressure fuel pump?
The return line Dr F mentioned should ensure the fuel stays a liquid.
Doesn't explain the 'engine wouldn't even turn over' aspect. Maybe that's a different problem. An overheated starter or solenoid can cause that.
A fix for the solenoid is to install a remote Ford-type solenoid.
-
Dear Good Dr., Walt, and mid-60s Buick fans of high tech.
Ed, Does your system include a return line for unused fuel from the regulator to the tank?
Yes it does. I was concerned about the reliability of taking short cuts with the fuel system, so my wagon has a fully modern fuel delivery system with a return line.
Doesn't explain the 'engine wouldn't even turn over' aspect. Maybe that's a different problem. An overheated starter or solenoid can cause that.
A fix for the solenoid is to install a remote Ford-type solenoid.
I haven't been able to reproduce that aspect of the problem. One of the reasons for my tests was to see if indeed the starter or solenoid was at fault. I do remember the engine stalling and being unable to get it to even turn over, but it isn't do this at the moment. Yes this too is a bit odd. I'll keep an eye out for it.
Thanks for the suggestions! :icon_thumright:
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick fans of high-tech, . . .
Here is a quick update on my trusty wagon's hot start problems. I made some additional adjustments to the cold start parameters and logged another sequence of hot starts. The logs very clearly show that the fuel pressure drops dramatically when the engine is warm:
(http://www.canebas.org/misc/Capto_images/Biquette%20fuel%20pressure%20variations%202016-08-02.jpg)
The white line almost in the middle of the graph is what is being displayed in the data below. At the moment, the fuel pressure (lower left corner of the data boxes) was 20.6 PSI. The regulator is supposed to keep the fuel pressure at 43 PSI! With only 1/2 the required pressure, it is no surprise that the engine is starved of sufficient fuel and quits.
I bought this graph over to Orinda Motors and asked their ace classic car mechanic Greg about it. Without a doubt he concluded that the fuel pressure regulator was defective and was failing to keep the fuel pressure at 43 PSI. Greg didn't explain, but apparently pressure regulators can have difficulty holding pressure when the fuel is extremely warm. That pressure is supposed to keep the gasoline liquid even with an engine bay at 150? F.
Yesterday I ordered a new fuel pressure regulator from - where else? - Summit Racing (https://www.summitracing.com/). (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/yahoo.gif)
Alas, . . .Bummer dude!! . (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/unhappy_grumble_smiley.jpg) . The regulator already cleared the free shipping limit, so I had no excuse to buy "toys" . . . . (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/driving_steering_wheel.gif)
The part should arrive tomorrow and Orinda Motors is scheduled to replace it on Tuesday . . . . . so
We shall see . . . . .
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick owner with an eye to high-tech,
On Monday I went back to my routine of checking the status of the FAST XFI Sportsman electronic fuel injection system in my trusty wagon. Just to size up the situation I took a video and logged a cold start. I could see immediately that the engine wasn't idling as well as remember it used to when starting from cold. I have the videos to prove that. Here is the previous cold start video I took on September 2, 2016:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Videos-related-to-adjusting-EFI-system/i-nf9ST2M/0/2bc6134d/M/Biquette%20cold%20start%202016-09-02-M.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Videos-related-to-adjusting-EFI-system/i-nf9ST2M/A)
This video is being hosted on SmugMug but should work like any other video service. Here is the video I took this past Monday:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Videos-related-to-adjusting-EFI-system/i-zPfQCrW/0/97707268/M/Biquette%20cold%20start%202018-06-26-M.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Videos-related-to-adjusting-EFI-system/i-zPfQCrW/A)
So the 64-dollar question was why? Here is the log I took of the start on September 2, 2016:
(http://www.canebas.org/Automotive/65GS/Forum%20illustrations/EFI%20tuning%20illustrations/Biquette%20cold%20start%20log%202016-09-02.png)
It is a bit difficult to see, but what I found is that this engine doesn't like to have much cold start enrichment. Within 2 minutes, the actual air-fuel ratio was very close to the 13.81:1 ratio that was found the engine ran best when hot. It had taken me a while to ascertain this, but I was clearly satisfied I made no changes after September 2nd. Here is the log of the Monday cold start:
(http://www.canebas.org/Automotive/65GS/Forum%20illustrations/EFI%20tuning%20illustrations/Biquette%20cold%20start%20log%202018-06-26.png)
As you can see, the engine is now running substantially rich. The instability is what I had observed in the past and clearly the engine isn't doing as well as possible. Now here is the kicker - none of the parameters had been changed! The only possible explanation is that the work of Mike Tomaszewski and his TA-Performance team reduced the mechanical resistance of the engine such that it takes less fuel to get the engine rotating when cold.
I thought this engine was running a lot better, but to me at least now there is objective proof! Hat's off to Mike Tomaszewski and his guys! (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/tip_hat_smiley.gif)
Have a great weekend everybody! (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/sunny_happy.png)
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
AWEEESOOOMMMMEEEEEE !!!!!!!!!
-
......
The only possible explanation is that the work of Mike Tomaszewski and his TA-Performance team reduced the mechanical resistance of the engine such that it takes less fuel to get the engine rotating when cold.
.....
I don't think that's it. I suppose less drag could make it spin faster via the starter. Did they switch to low tension piston rings?
I do see the fuel pressure is now 48.2 vs the old 40.8 psi. That would shoot more fuel through the injectors and richen it up, making for a quicker start. Cold engines like a richer mixture, which is the purpose of a choke on a carbureted car.
Significant difference in battery voltage too....14.6 vs 11.9v, that's gotta help! That might explain the higher fuel pressure and it would also help the starter spin the engine faster.
Great to hear it's , I mean, SHE is doing well! Did you get it out on the highway yet?
-
Just curious, what is the can profile look like in this engine? All this EFI stuff is very intriguing.
Jerry
-
Dear Walt, Jerry, and mid-60s Buick owners who are curious about high-tech,
Thanks guys! :hello2:
I don't think that's it. I suppose less drag could make it spin faster via the starter. Did they switch to low tension piston rings?
It does appear that starting has less resistance. Biquette doesn't get jerked around as much when starting now as before. However, this isn't just at starting. The air-fuel mixture is too rich for 4 minutes. The engine is getting more fuel than it can use all that time, where as in September 2016 it was burning all that fuel. I'm not sure how to explain it, but I double-checked and the cold startup parameters haven't changed. In particular there is a table that provides extra fuel while the coolant temperature ramps up. That's the table I found had values that were too high and I lowered to improve the cold start idle. Once more it appears that I need to reduce these values still further to insure a smooth idle as the engine is warming up.
I do see the fuel pressure is now 48.2 vs the old 40.8 psi. That would shoot more fuel through the injectors and richen it up, making for a quicker start. Cold engines like a richer mixture, which is the purpose of a choke on a carbureted car.
Significant difference in battery voltage too....14.6 vs 11.9v, that's gotta help! That might explain the higher fuel pressure and it would also help the starter spin the engine faster.
Those are instantaneous values that are where the cursor is located and will vary significantly but for extremely brief periods. So I don't think those are issues.
Great to hear it's , I mean, SHE is doing well! Did you get it out on the highway yet?
I haven't had a chance yet, but I'm trying not to drive her too much until the tires get replaced. They are the 8 year old tires that the car sat on while the engine was away. I really need to get on with the rear end change and switch to the new tires.
Just curious, what is the can profile look like in this engine? All this EFI stuff is very intriguing.
I could dig up the cam specs if you like but it is a variation on the Buick Stage-1 cam. It is relatively mild, but has more bite than the passenger car cams that Buick would have used in the day. The electronic fuel injection definitely helps with smoothing the idle, but that's where getting the parameters set properly is really important. Gasoline engines really can run under a surprisingly wide set of conditions, but you won't get the best performance that way. If you can actually set the parameters carefully, you really can get the engine to run more smoothly than either with a carburetor or even a self-tuning EFI system. It is a matter of systematically adjusting the parameters and carefully observing how the engine responds to the changes.
Thanks again gang!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14:
-
Dear mid-60s Buick owners who are curious about high-tech,
Before heading out to fetch the groceries last Friday, I documented Biquette's cold start after modifying the warm-up fuel enrichment table to make the cold start less rich. The results were truly puzzling. To put things back into context, here is the video of the cold start I made on September 2, 2016.
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Videos-related-to-adjusting-EFI-system/i-nf9ST2M/0/2bc6134d/M/Biquette%20cold%20start%202016-09-02-M.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Videos-related-to-adjusting-EFI-system/i-nf9ST2M/A)
Here is the video I took on Monday, June 26, 2018:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Videos-related-to-adjusting-EFI-system/i-zPfQCrW/0/97707268/M/Biquette%20cold%20start%202018-06-26-M.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Videos-related-to-adjusting-EFI-system/i-zPfQCrW/A)
Finally, here is the video taken on Friday, July 6, 2018:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Videos-related-to-adjusting-EFI-system/i-JsNTF39/0/1295717a/M/Biquette%20cold%20start%202018-07-06-M.jpg) (https://canebas.smugmug.com/Biquette/Drive-Train-makeover/Videos-related-to-adjusting-EFI-system/i-JsNTF39/A)
My reasons for relisting the previous two videos is to my disappointment that remains the ranking from smoothest idle to worst. Perhaps to help (or I fear confuse) here are the parameters that are in that warm-up fuel enrichment table at various stages of tuning the engine:
| Temperature | 4/26/16 | 9/2/16 | 7/6/18 |
| 0? F | 39.8 | 68.3 | 54.0 |
| 17? F | 39.1 | 67.1 | 53.1 |
| 34? F | 36.7 | 63.0 | 49.8 |
| 51? F | 32.0 | 54.9 | 43.5 |
| 68? F | 27.3 | 44.3 | 35.8 |
| 85? F | 20.3 | 30.9 | 25.6 |
| 102? F | 12.5 | 16.9 | 14.7 |
| 119? F | 7.0 | 9.4 | 8.2 |
| 136? F | 0.0 | 3.1 | 1.6 |
| 153? F | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 170? F | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
The first row after the coolant temperature values are the settings as Rich Nedbal had left them after he came by to tune the engine on April 26, 2016. As you can see, I had to enrich the warm up settings quite a bit by September. As I noted in the previous posting, what was almost spot on for the target air fuel mixture back then, is now significantly rich almost 2 years later. Here is the log from the cold start of July 6:
(http://www.canebas.org/Automotive/65GS/Forum%20illustrations/EFI%20tuning%20illustrations/Biquette%20cold%20start%20log%202018-07-06.png)
If you compare it to the log of June 26, it isn't very different. Even if the enrichment settings has been significantly reduced, the actual air fuel mixtures are very similar. When I view the last two videos, I'm tempted to go back to providing more fuel during the warm up since the engine was idling significantly better on June 26 than on July 6. However, when I compare all 3 videos, there is absolutely no doubt that the cold start of September 2, 2016 has the smoothest idle by far.
I arrived at the fuel enrichment values for my test of July 6 by taking the average between Rich's values and the values of September 2, 2016. Since I don't understand too clearly what is going on, I think I should once nudge the values further down by the same procedure. I need to determine whether or not the engine truly does idle best when the air fuel mixture is close to the final target after warm-up. Looks to me like I'll have to continue some trial and error to find out!
Cheers, Edouard :occasion14: