RE: Lack of engine power and Convertible top.
20 views
Skip to first unread message
Hamish Freeman
May 17, 2012, 9:09:01 AM5/17/12
to beaufo...@googlegroups.com
I agree entirely about the timing on a carb'ed engine. Injected engines
should not be able to go wrong if the ECU is getting all of its signals from
the flywheel sensor and rotation sensor.
A couple of other points that might occur:
1) If the engine is injected rather than carb'ed - if there is a road speed
feedback from the gearbox (on the speedo cable outlet from the gearbox on
Ford engines) to the ECU, then the latter is expecting to see a pulse
proportional to whatever was the original engine speed to road speed ratio
on the original engine installation to put the timing and fuelling in the
correct part of the respective maps over the load and speed range. If this
signal is wrong or missing then this will totally confuse the ECU as it
measures engine speed directly off the flywheel but is getting a different
signal back from the gearbox. This may be enough to put the ECU into
"Limp-home" mode, which is very much reduced in power to avoid potential
overheating and seize-ups.
2) If the engine is injected, does it have a Lambda sensor on the exhaust
(Heated Exhaust-gas Oxygen Sensor in Ford parlance)? If yes and this is not
working then the auto override on mixture strength will not function and the
mixture could be anywhere until the auto-learn function gets to grips with
the situation but normally it need the HEOS to enable the learning process
to happen. If it is injected but is old enough not to have a catalyst, then
there should be a CO2 adjust pot somewhere around on the wiring loom that
can tweak the mixture a small amount - mostly for the MOT test rather than
over the speed and load range. General advice is to set the pot mid travel
(it may be multi-turn, typically about 10 turns) with around 2.5 Volts on
the wiper and then either set up the idle CO2 with a meter or without set to
the best idle.
A few more obscure thoughts:
3) What air filter are you using? The use of an air filter that is too
small will strangle the engine and all of the subsequent control gear will
be confused by too high a vacuum level.
4) If the original engine had a tuned inlet system and this no longer
exists, low speed torque could be disappointingly low as the ram effect to
increase volumetric efficiency will not be there. Look for something
between 0.75 and 1 metre long on the original installation - this may
include a Helmholtz resonator box built around the pipe with an included
volume of at least 25 litres.
5) Exhaust - are you using the original exhaust that was fitted to the
engine or a Beauford'ised version? Engines are calibrated at particular
back pressures over the speed and load range and anything outside this range
will screw up the mixture at a number of operating conditions. It is much
better (and cheaper) to use proprietary manufacturers components wherever
possible as a) they are available over the counter at most reasonable motor
factors and b) they are likely to be cheaper than some "bitsa" system that
has been made to fit. There is so much space under a Beauford that using
the engine maker's system should not be difficult.
6) If injected, have you looked at the ECU output on its diagnostic socket?
This could save a lot of time and effort if something else is screwed but is
not infallible. On my 2.0 Ford DOHC, I had a failed manifold vacuum sensor
which did not turn up in the fault codes but caused plenty of trouble before
the car ever went on the road.
Re convertible top, it just so happens that I have been looking at the same
problem as my Beauford has steel reinforcements in the area that abuts to
the side screens to reduce air noise (well I tried!) and this makes stowing
the hood very different to a normal system and even more long winded.
Ironically it goes in a smaller space! I have been looking at how the hood
folding was achieved on cars of the 30's and the Dusenberg at Haynes has
come out with the least number of folding parts but not quite suitable for
what we require as it had no supports off the B posts. It is too long since
I did the geometry of folding mechanisms at university and all my notes went
up in the house fire but I have started to teach myself from scratch using
meccano the rules that govern folding mechanisms and hope to be able to
apply this to a new design IF I keep the car but that is another story - a
magazine article perhaps, or even two if the hood thing comes to anything.
Good luck!
Hamish
-----Original Message-----
From: beaufo...@googlegroups.com [mailto:beaufo...@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Polishingpete
Sent: 17 May 2012 08:41
To: Beaufordclub
Subject: Re: Convertible top.
Hi Chris,
I thought Hamish gave a good answer, I had carried out the same comparisons
as he had (engine, wheel speed and diameters) in the spread sheet but on a
bit of paper and came to the conclusion I wanted a 4.15:1 diff. One other
point, it has been a surprise how much the ignition timing can have on the
'wrong gearing' effect. Check your timing!
If you have any pictures of the roof I would appreciate a look at them.
Kind Regards
Peter
On May 15, 8:59 pm, chris gregory <tarotc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your reply Peter
> That confirms my thoughts on the gearing.
> As for hood design,I have spent ages working on various layouts and
> now have one that works.I have the std. 4 door model, but the design
> could
> be altered for the long body I would have thought.
> Regards Chris
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Polishingpete
> <peter_cornw...@lineone.net>wrote:
>
>
>
> > My Beauford has been on the road for three years now, I chose to
> > make a non standard roof as I thought the factory one was not well
> > thought through. Turns out my own roof falls into the same category!
> > I use the car (a 4 door lwb) for weddings so want something which is
> > resonably quick to put up and down and looks good.
> > This coming winter I want to redo the roof frame/top and before I
> > come up with another idea am asking if any of our members has
> > created a roof they are happy with which I could copy.
> > I would appreciate any feedback you can give me.
> > Kind Regards
> > Peter
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > Groups "Beaufordclub" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to beaufo...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > beaufordclub...@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/beaufordclub?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Beaufordclub" group.
To post to this group, send email to beaufo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
beaufordclub...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/beaufordclub?hl=en.
should not be able to go wrong if the ECU is getting all of its signals from
the flywheel sensor and rotation sensor.
A couple of other points that might occur:
1) If the engine is injected rather than carb'ed - if there is a road speed
feedback from the gearbox (on the speedo cable outlet from the gearbox on
Ford engines) to the ECU, then the latter is expecting to see a pulse
proportional to whatever was the original engine speed to road speed ratio
on the original engine installation to put the timing and fuelling in the
correct part of the respective maps over the load and speed range. If this
signal is wrong or missing then this will totally confuse the ECU as it
measures engine speed directly off the flywheel but is getting a different
signal back from the gearbox. This may be enough to put the ECU into
"Limp-home" mode, which is very much reduced in power to avoid potential
overheating and seize-ups.
2) If the engine is injected, does it have a Lambda sensor on the exhaust
(Heated Exhaust-gas Oxygen Sensor in Ford parlance)? If yes and this is not
working then the auto override on mixture strength will not function and the
mixture could be anywhere until the auto-learn function gets to grips with
the situation but normally it need the HEOS to enable the learning process
to happen. If it is injected but is old enough not to have a catalyst, then
there should be a CO2 adjust pot somewhere around on the wiring loom that
can tweak the mixture a small amount - mostly for the MOT test rather than
over the speed and load range. General advice is to set the pot mid travel
(it may be multi-turn, typically about 10 turns) with around 2.5 Volts on
the wiper and then either set up the idle CO2 with a meter or without set to
the best idle.
A few more obscure thoughts:
3) What air filter are you using? The use of an air filter that is too
small will strangle the engine and all of the subsequent control gear will
be confused by too high a vacuum level.
4) If the original engine had a tuned inlet system and this no longer
exists, low speed torque could be disappointingly low as the ram effect to
increase volumetric efficiency will not be there. Look for something
between 0.75 and 1 metre long on the original installation - this may
include a Helmholtz resonator box built around the pipe with an included
volume of at least 25 litres.
5) Exhaust - are you using the original exhaust that was fitted to the
engine or a Beauford'ised version? Engines are calibrated at particular
back pressures over the speed and load range and anything outside this range
will screw up the mixture at a number of operating conditions. It is much
better (and cheaper) to use proprietary manufacturers components wherever
possible as a) they are available over the counter at most reasonable motor
factors and b) they are likely to be cheaper than some "bitsa" system that
has been made to fit. There is so much space under a Beauford that using
the engine maker's system should not be difficult.
6) If injected, have you looked at the ECU output on its diagnostic socket?
This could save a lot of time and effort if something else is screwed but is
not infallible. On my 2.0 Ford DOHC, I had a failed manifold vacuum sensor
which did not turn up in the fault codes but caused plenty of trouble before
the car ever went on the road.
Re convertible top, it just so happens that I have been looking at the same
problem as my Beauford has steel reinforcements in the area that abuts to
the side screens to reduce air noise (well I tried!) and this makes stowing
the hood very different to a normal system and even more long winded.
Ironically it goes in a smaller space! I have been looking at how the hood
folding was achieved on cars of the 30's and the Dusenberg at Haynes has
come out with the least number of folding parts but not quite suitable for
what we require as it had no supports off the B posts. It is too long since
I did the geometry of folding mechanisms at university and all my notes went
up in the house fire but I have started to teach myself from scratch using
meccano the rules that govern folding mechanisms and hope to be able to
apply this to a new design IF I keep the car but that is another story - a
magazine article perhaps, or even two if the hood thing comes to anything.
Good luck!
Hamish
-----Original Message-----
From: beaufo...@googlegroups.com [mailto:beaufo...@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Polishingpete
Sent: 17 May 2012 08:41
To: Beaufordclub
Subject: Re: Convertible top.
Hi Chris,
I thought Hamish gave a good answer, I had carried out the same comparisons
as he had (engine, wheel speed and diameters) in the spread sheet but on a
bit of paper and came to the conclusion I wanted a 4.15:1 diff. One other
point, it has been a surprise how much the ignition timing can have on the
'wrong gearing' effect. Check your timing!
If you have any pictures of the roof I would appreciate a look at them.
Kind Regards
Peter
On May 15, 8:59 pm, chris gregory <tarotc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your reply Peter
> That confirms my thoughts on the gearing.
> As for hood design,I have spent ages working on various layouts and
> now have one that works.I have the std. 4 door model, but the design
> could
> be altered for the long body I would have thought.
> Regards Chris
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Polishingpete
> <peter_cornw...@lineone.net>wrote:
>
>
>
> > My Beauford has been on the road for three years now, I chose to
> > make a non standard roof as I thought the factory one was not well
> > thought through. Turns out my own roof falls into the same category!
> > I use the car (a 4 door lwb) for weddings so want something which is
> > resonably quick to put up and down and looks good.
> > This coming winter I want to redo the roof frame/top and before I
> > come up with another idea am asking if any of our members has
> > created a roof they are happy with which I could copy.
> > I would appreciate any feedback you can give me.
> > Kind Regards
> > Peter
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > Groups "Beaufordclub" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to beaufo...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > beaufordclub...@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/beaufordclub?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Beaufordclub" group.
To post to this group, send email to beaufo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
beaufordclub...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/beaufordclub?hl=en.
chris gregory
May 20, 2012, 10:38:00 AM5/20/12
to beaufo...@googlegroups.com
Hi Hamish
I found your comments on gearing very useful,so I think a 3.9:1 axle will correct the gearing.A job for the future,in meantime I will keep looking for one.
Also,I had not considered the effects of backpressure in the exhaust.I have std. downpipe with Beauford s/steel back box and autojumble
silencer and middle pipeSo will be looking for Nissan middle section.
Finally, have sent hood pics to polish pete if you are interested.
Regards Chris
Hamish Freeman
May 22, 2012, 11:28:19 AM5/22/12
to beaufo...@googlegroups.com
Hi Chris,
As far as I know, my donor car had a 3.9 axle, which is now sitting under a workbench in my workshop doing not a lot. There are two sizes of diff and I am not sure how exactly they are defined but this is definitely off my Sierra donor and not off a Granada. The standard ratios appear to be 3.9 and 3.62, any other ratio being a “special”.
The half shaft fitting is by “push-in” spline and the input is flanged. Where are you in the country - Email me direct if you are interested.
Hamish
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages