5DIGITS on electronics, engine calibrations and wiring...

Duane wrote:
Does any one know if all of the Turbo logic modules have the same pin out on the main EPROM. IE can I take a EPROM from an L-Body Module and socket it in to a H-Body module ??  I know the Red and Blue connectors have different pinouts.

Duane,
The chips are interchangeable. But there are some considerations, to keep in mind (generally speaking).
1.) A manual calibration installed in an automatic vehicle CAN (but not always) produce drive ability issues.
2.) The recipient vehicle may be subject to the option content, of the donor vehicle. (i.e. cruise, shift indicator light, etc..)
3.) Although the module may "physically" appear the same, there were many changes made to veh. hardware, I/O manipulation, etc...

The SAFE bet is to swap chips, while maintaining a specific model year module.

Steve and Dee wrote in about the factory boost level on their 1987 CSX...
 
I get it home and was thinking about the control box in the kick panel. I pull it out, nothing special. A date of 5/29/87 and a CS1-079 was on the only tag I could find with a bar code. Maybe my boost gauge ain't accurate, don't know. Questions: What is the stock boost level when it left Whittier, CA?

The stock boost level was 12psi.
The "079" part number equates to the original calibration.

Does this thing have an ND Chip in it and where can I find it?

Typically, close inspection can expose chip removal (modified). Most modified chips may be socketed, have a hand written label, a "darkened stain"/solder resin on the under side chip legs. An ND chip may be buried in a moderate epoxy.

Is there any special chip numbers that will clue me in to what this module is set up for?

Yes. Typically on a module label and/or written on the red module connector and/or on the chip itself (sticker).

Part numbers:
"079" = 1987 CSX Stage-I CS module
"641" = 1987 CSX Stage-II CS module

If it's still Stock Shelby, what chip number should be in it?

"079" = 1987 CSX Stage-I CS module

On knock control...

 ...only getting 11psi boost...  Now I read on the slip of paper that came with the computer and it said make sure the timing is set at what the manual says( I think 14 degrees) well I bumped mine up ( 16 degrees I believe) I know it  was 2 degrees more that it was supposed to.  Could this be my problem?

YES.
The stock setting is 12 degrees.
The module monitors knock and will reduce boost if the knock persists. Remember that the knock system, on these vehicles, was primitive. Increased boost (even without spark knock), worn followers, higher lift cam, or an injector body that physically touches the manifold can generate "noise" that can be misinterpreted as knock. The sensor accuracy was not good enough to be able to differentiate between these "noise makers".

Why even bring this up?

Add some boost...
An increase in combustion chamber pressure (higher boost) can produce an increase in audible combustion chamber noise. Simply placing an oscilloscope on a knock sensor circuit or monitoring knock voltage with a scan tool, at two different boost levels, will indicate this.

Add some timing...
As the combustion chamber pressure increases, the desire for higher spark advance decreases. Not until a proper/higher octane fuel is utilized, will the engine benefit from higher spark advance.

BTW: With 100+ octane, it is still possible to knock (detonate). Too much spark advance, via the distributor OR calibration, can result in broken pistons, failed head gaskets, etc..

Consider the computer control...
The boost, spark, and knock are all manipulated (or monitored) by the computer. In this case, 1987 electronics are in use.  If knock is detected,
AND timing is retarded (by the module)
AND the timing reduction amount reaches a specific level
AND knock still persists..
THE BOOST WILL BE DE-RATED.
In this case, to a level that is currently being observed. All this CAN occur, without ever hearing audible knock.

Possible fix:
Place the timing at 12 degrees and try another test run.
** Consider resetting the module, at this time. This will reset the learned/stored values, that may have been  obtained while the engine was detonating, IF knock was occurring.

Additional thought:
The module pins, in the red and blue connectors, can back out. And the module pins can also corrode and fail, due to condensation build-up. The plastic bag that is supposed to cover the module can fall short, when trying to keep water/moisture out. Many abnormal symptoms can occur, if there is a poor circuit connection. Make sure this is not the issue, by close inspection of the connectors, terminal pins/sockets, and where the wire is crimped to the terminal.

I also thought I may have a vacuum leak. Would this do it?

It is possible. Although, with the '87 Turbo-II plumbing, a "control" leak will typically produce an over-boost condition. Control = wastegate lines (to and from solenoid), MAP sensor,  baro-read solenoid-to-MAP, etc.. (boost control hardware).

85 vs 86 turbo electronics...

Why won't the '85 controllers work in the '86 vehicles?

The distributor. This was done for various reasons. One of them was that the 1985 vehicles used the G-head and the 1986-87 vehicles used the fast-burn. Using an 1986-87 controller on a 1985 vehicle (equipped with a G-head) will typically result in poor performance. Although, using a 1985 controller on a 1986-87 vehicle (equipped with a fast-burn head) can be detrimental to the engine's health, IF THE APPROPRIATE PRECAUTIONS ARE NOT TAKEN. These calibrations were SPECIFIC to the head and caution should be used, if they are going to switched. For general use, make sure that the controller matches the cylinder head being used.

1985=G-head
1986-later=Fast-burn

Rich Bryant wrote: Since the distributors are different on 85/86 they definitely wont run correctly, or at all if you only swap modules (I assume this isn't what you meant).

Correct. You must keep the modules and distributors paired to achieve a functional system. The intention of original E-mail was to expose the potential issues, when this action is taken.

Why would it be a problem to put an 85 engine in an 86 car with all 86 electronics?

This requires a close look at the heads..

G-HEAD (in general) :

1.) The G-head is a slow burn cylinder head with a very slow pressure rise.
2.) The pressure rise peak is slightly less than that of a fast-burn.
3.) A slow pressure rise will be less prone to knock.
4.) Open chamber design = low or no swirl activity.
5.) The combined characteristics of 1,2,3,&4 require a much more aggressive spark schedule to get the cylinder pressures up, for throttle response and over peak performance. This holds true on any application (i.e. N.A., Turbo, EFI, Carb, etc..)

FAST-BURN (in general) :

1.) The F.B. head is a..  well.. A fast-burn head, with a very steep and aggressive pressure rise.
2.) The pressure rise is not only quicker but it has a slightly higher spike to it.
3.) Items #1&2 makes the F.B. more susceptible to knock.
4.) Swirl port chamber has valve-shrouding and high swirl activity.
5.) The combined characteristics of 1,2,3,&4 require a much less aggressive spark schedule to achieve the desired or same cylinder pressure as the G-head. This is because the higher cylinder pressure activity is an inherent design of the F.B. head.

Now knowing the spark is more aggressive with a slow burn head; The issues with higher spark advance on a F.B. head are identified. This scenario can be the cause of head gasket failure, cracked ring lands, melted pistons, abnormal rod bearing wear, etc..

The compression ratio is the same, but the flow would be a bit different, more low end for the 86 and more high end for the 85.

Compression ratio is the measure of static cylinder pressure. This measurement does not include or take into consideration the effects of spark advance. Adding the spark advance into the equation can result in a substantial change, in cylinder pressure. Advancing or retarding the spark advance will determine if the cylinder pressure is raised or lowered. Once again, the G-head relies on the aggressive S.A. to achieve the desired cyl. pressure. Not only is this not necessary for F.B. applications but it is typically undesired!

How is this any different than putting a ported head on the engine and running a stock module?

A definition of porting is needed here. If we are discussing a F.B. head that has been de-shrouded, then we are discussing a head that has just been de-sensitized. De-shrouding a F.B. will reduce the swirl, slow down the pressure rise, and lower the peak cylinder pressure, at the same timing value. With proper porting the flow and cylinder "packing volume" will rise. This can slightly offset the de-sensitizing effects of the chamber work. But careful.. flow volume changes are independent of combustion chamber activity. This means that the volume can be increased but the chamber can be modified in such a way that the result is still a controlled peak (spike) with a slower rise.

It would be bad to put an 86 head on an 85 bottom end since the pistons are different and would raise compression.  On the other hand, many many people feel that putting an 85 G head on an 86 engine is a good thing.  They want the lower compression for higher boost, and want the G head for more top end. I realize this might not be good for efficiency, but shouldn't hurt performance. (due to more boost)  Various members of our community have had a great deal of success with this method.

This is all very possible but the original message was in reference to module/distributor swapping, with respect to PRODUCTION or STOCK components.

If you are correct in your statements in this area, a lot of people should change their strategies (not that they would accept it anyway) either way it is an interesting topic.  If I am wrong that is fine I am not even close to an expert.  It would be good to know why swapping them in each direction is bad, not just a statement that it is.

No strategy changes necessary. These posts are intended for "things to consider when doing this" information only. Knowing how the package or system will respond, ahead of time, may provide the information needed to achieve an end-result that is closer to the desired goal.

Mike wrote:  If they had that problem on the Omni from hell (the development mule for the Super 60 package) then why does my Super 60 harness use the later style thermostat mounted coil?

That harness did not start as a S-60 harness. The S-60 harness was made available by utilizing an Omni TBI harness. A few modifications later, while retaining the major portion of the TBI harness (this includes the head-coil connection), and the harness becomes a turbo application part.

Should i insulate my coil from heat?

If there are heat concerns - use the standard coil and re-locate it to the strut tower area. The head-coil had a higher failure rate than the original design, for many reasons. That coil (head) was also a manufacturing/unit cost reduction. Considering it an upgrade or fix, should be avoided.

But all things considered in good operating condition.. If a good set of wires are used, the only energy that will be lost will be the energy used to argue which location is better.

Is there anyone who could eliminate the overboost shut down on a S60 SBEC?.... would it
be safe to assume that the S60 injectors and 3 bar map would supply enough fuel to 29 psi?

The S-60 injectors do not have sufficient flow to support that boost level. At the 18psi level, they are already at a (+-2%) 80% duty cycle. 20-22psi would place the injector full-on by 5800RPM. The higher the boost - The lower the full-on RPM. Running a turbo car at "static-flow" (full-on) is a condition that should be avoided.

Referring to 88 Turbo I car wiring

Not all the cars got the wiring. (for charge air sensor) Check the 60-way pins, for the CT wires (refer to manual).

Another change:
The 88 T-I waste gate control used the "PAR" system.
The 88 T-II is the standard "inverted" system.

How to convert...

1.) Obtain a turbo-II style solenoid (3-barb). Refer to your baro solenoid (next to MAP sensor) for reference. All of these solenoids were keyed (for assembly plant). You can get around this by carefully grinding (dremel) the "key" notch out from the solenoid connector socket. Now any solenoid can be used on any plug.

Note: Old solenoids stick!

If the part you get is old or has been sitting, test it. With a connector plugged in, momentarily touch it to the battery. It should click. Why do this? The Turbo-II structure goes to mxsbst if the solenoid fails. Thus the reason for the PAR system. It goes to minimum boost with solenoid failure. It is an easy test and could avoid a bad experience, during your first run with new hardware.

2.) The orifices used on the T-I are the wrong sizes and are in the wrong places. Most came with a red and green (some blue) combination of orifices. These will be replaced by one yellow orifice. Refer to a Turbo-II plumbing schematic, for exact routing.

 Sean wrote: My '89 Daytona Shelby will bury the speedo at 125 in fourth gear,  when I shift to 5th the RPM's still climb and it feels as if the car is still accelerating, but the speedo doesn't move past 125?

The turbo-II vehicles received a slightly higher set point, than the  turbo-I's. If there were enough distance, a minimal gain in speed may be realized but ultimately would be limited.

Neil Emiro wrote:  I was waiting to see if this would come up.  The logic I mean. :)  I can tell you categorically, that none of the 89 down cars had provisions in the software for a speed limiter!  None.

Unfortunately, there was speed limiting in not only 89 but also 1988. Once again, the turbo-II vehicles received a slightly higher set point, than the turbo-I's.

Martin McCoy wrote: I have had my 1988 Lebaron TURBO GTC Convertible TI 5-spd up to 122-3 mph and that was where the limiter kicked in. My 1987 Lancer ES and my brother's old 1987 Lancer ES (both TI auto's) seem to have a bit higher limiter. I have had my Lancer up to 126-7 according to my analog speedo with-out hitting the cut-out and my brother (his with digital dash) took his Lancer up to 133 and that was where he found the cut-out point.

Tire size, trans speedo gear, and an minor margin of speedo error are the responsible for some of these variations.  The speed shut-off point can not be raised higher than 128mph. But like what is seen here, some will cut-out at 125 and some at 133mph.

This was done due to tire speed ratings. The number is actually 118mph. This will definitely be true on the T-I auto. cars. Most of the turbo vehicles came with 'H' (or less) rated tires.

Some what of the same..

There are more built-in safe guards like this. For example have you ever tried setting the cruise control to a MPH higher than 85. If a speed of 90 is maintained, the cruise is pressed, and the throttle released; The vehicle will slowly decelerate to 85.  I am not recommending that you violate the law to try this. I am simply stating a fact.

These are all simply safety features installed for the customer.