Author Topic: Titsy's Project Camaro (Read 10756 times)

Titsy · « **Reply #50 on:** June 04, 2006, 08:43:24 pm »

Quoting: F Body

just avoid the hedges

That's what the traction's for mate..... Might have to demand my money back if it let go.......... Oh yeah, I remember now, it was free!

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #51 on:** June 04, 2006, 09:26:32 pm »

fine untill you jump in one without it....

then it can go pear shaped pretty quickly..

on a side note, is there any reason why the TA should have the switch and the camaro doesn't?

55starchief · « **Reply #52 on:** June 04, 2006, 09:30:29 pm »

Quoting: philoldsmobile

on a side note, is there any reason why the TA should have the switch and the camaro doesn't?

I think it was probably because the firebird was a better spec car, it may have been an option on the maro and possibly standard equipment on the SS

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #53 on:** June 04, 2006, 09:33:43 pm »

possible....

never seen the switch at all on a camaro, not that i've actualy looked for it, but it goes without saying that both cars shared the same looms as much as possible..

i remember there being a similar switch (marked 'power') on Ians jeep.. out of curiosity i pushed it coming out of a roundabout (i was driving) and we both nearly $hat ourselves when the tranny downshifted from 3rd to 1st and the damned thing nearly took off!

Titsy · « **Reply #54 on:** June 04, 2006, 09:41:22 pm »

Quoting: philoldsmobile

on a side note, is there any reason why the TA should have the switch and the camaro doesn't?

As with most products, it is easier and cheaper to have one design, and enable different availability to functions and enhancements than build several different designs that do different things.... I this case, the performance trans mode isn't available to your average Z28 punter because they didn't fit the switch to that model, but did to higher specs... Ment they could get away with doing one production run for all the PCMs and the engine side of the loom upto the passenger footwell, and then only fit the rest of the loom and the switch to the higher spec motors to make them more attractive and make it look like they are worth the extra cuz they have things like the performance trans mode..... GM probably got away with charging a couple of hundred extra bucks for what is esentially a $20 iluminated switch (which I could fit to my motor to make it a proper mod) Suits me fine cuz it means I get something for nothing...

Thanks GM

Titsy · « **Reply #55 on:** June 04, 2006, 09:51:20 pm »

Quoting: philoldsmobile

fine untill you jump in one without it....

As was always my plan i'm using my taction system as a training aid.... Think of it like those pull down nappies for toddlers so that they can practice going to the $hitter, but if they get caught short the don't crap their slacks.... I'm getting comfortable with the car, and then when I am, I back the traction off a setting and add some abbility for the wheels to slip..... and so on until i'm in the position that I'm happy that I can handle the car without it.... Let's me get used to moving from a 98BHP FWD to a 275BHP RWD without smashing it up or killing myself straight off....

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #56 on:** June 04, 2006, 09:58:17 pm »

quite a culture shock eh?

TBH for all the grief driving aids get, i reckon 99% of the time they are well worth it, i've has some scary moments especialy in the wet, there has been more than a few over tired drives at night in the wet when traction could have saved me from a big fright..

55starchief · « **Reply #57 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:00:37 pm »

Titsy, if you give me the part number i will ask goatman for a price and if he would mail it over for me

Titsy · « **Reply #58 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:09:41 pm »

Quoting: philoldsmobile

i've has some scary moments especialy in the wet

Same here.... I got sideways in the wet on the way back from the barn to MK for Sammy's birthday meal... It scared the crap out of me....

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #59 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:12:23 pm »

most third or 4th gen owners spin them sooner or later... i have, Fubar has, hard rock has, even Martyn has (when the factory traction promptly cut in when he came to a stop!!)

in fact, deano is the only person i know of that hasn't........yet

Titsy · « **Reply #60 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:13:40 pm »

Quoting: 55starchief

Titsy, if you give me the part number i will ask goatman for a price and if he would mail it over for me

The part number is 10284641.... The guy who published the how-to for the mod says they're $36, but it would be good to know for sure..... It would be good to get a pic if he can so I know if it's worth it....

Titsy · « **Reply #61 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:15:54 pm »

Quoting: philoldsmobile

when the factory traction promptly cut in when he came to a stop!

WTF...... What happened there?

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #62 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:24:14 pm »

its slower to respond than glacial retreat.....

rather than traction, its more like a "you have just spun" alert!

Titsy · « **Reply #63 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:26:20 pm »

Quoting: philoldsmobile

rather than traction, its more like a "you have just spun" alert!

Glad I havn't got the factory fit one then..... The Racelogic one is really quick to respond.....

When I floored it out of the black-cat services from standing onto an empty duel carrageway at 80degrees from the way I was facing, all me and Graeme felt was a tiny twitch before it took off down the road, and it never let go..... That was our first test of the system and it was pi$$ing down with rain at the time.....

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #64 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:26:42 pm »

the ABS on dads tahoe is kinda like that... its not exactly refined...

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #65 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:30:31 pm »

the factory traction wont save you from much at all!!

problem is, you cant really do much with the later cars, because any outside intefearance will make the ECM to throw a snit!

believe me, we have had fun adn games with the tahoe throwing a code (random misfire) when it switches between fuels..

turns out it cant be 'fixed' (just gotta live with the light or re burn the chip) because its reacting to the slower burn rate of gas, and thinking its not fired properly. once all cylinders are on it, it thinks everything is ok again..

the avalanche i had didn't have this problem because the newer ECM was somehow able to be flashed so that it ignored the misfire detection for a split second while the fuels changed, thus it didn't see the split second while some cylinders were on petrol and some on gas.

funky...

i guess it may be possible to get the ECM of a newer camaro to ignore the miss when the traction kicks in, but it would (i guess) need some method of the traction talking to the ECU to tell it what to ignore...

Titsy · « **Reply #66 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:40:08 pm »

Quoting: philoldsmobile

problem is, you cant really do much with the later cars, because any outside intefearance will make the ECM to throw a snit!

We have an easy way round this which we have to fit to the Viper boxes as they throw an uber wobbly when you disconnect an injector when the traction cuts in.... we fit coils and resistors in the traction ECM that mimic the ring that the PCM would normally see from an injector... That way when the traction kicks in and the injector is cut the PCM in none the wiser....

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #67 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:43:24 pm »

i guess thats very similar to the injector simulators the older type gas systems have to keep the ECU thinking the petrol injectors are working on gas..

the tahoe problem wasn't due to the injector signal, but because the crank sensor expects to see a pulse however many millionths of a second after an injector pulse and a spark.. with a misfire or weak fire, the crank arrives at this point late because its made less power, thus the ECU concludes that as it gave spark and fuel, the crank arriving late means it must not have ignited properly..

i'll have to look back and see if i still have the data from the random misfire log, its scary! about 3000 events, all misfires, yet the engine never actualy misfired as such!

Titsy · « **Reply #68 on:** June 04, 2006, 10:51:01 pm »

gotcha.... The ring detection on the vipers would be a further level of diagnostics to ensure the injectors are working correctly then......

Oh well, from what I've been reading on PCM setup for my 'maro, you can turn off certain conditions for SES lights if you so desire, so i'm sure it must be possible on the newer models.... And If my PCM is detecting misfires from the traction, and causes the SES light to pop on (not that it seems to this far, the only SES lights I have seen were before the traction was fitted) I can always tell it not to.....

Titsy · « **Reply #69 on:** June 05, 2006, 06:55:38 pm »

Did a bit more research into the Performance Trans mode today.... Found out that when in performance mode the hydraulic line presure is increased, and all the shift points are moved further up the RPM range...

I also found out that I've gained no performance what so ever....

It turns out that on the Z28 the PCM is set to always be in performance mode, and what my mod has actually done is allow me to put the trans into gut-less mode.....

The Pontiacs have the selection switch so that you can drive the car with either cruising/touring type shifts for better fuel econemy, or slap it in performance mode for a bit more aggression on a more spirited drive....

So I've not really gained what I was after, but I have got an economy shift mode for long drives.... Or, I can go a bit custom on the setup for one of the modes to suit myself.....

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #70 on:** June 05, 2006, 06:59:44 pm »

figures actualy....

from what i've read the firebird was suposed to be the refined higher spec GT, and the camaro the more basic saturday night warrior...

Titsy · « **Reply #71 on:** June 05, 2006, 07:13:52 pm »

I suppose I should be greatful that the factory default was performance mode, rather than NO performance mode....

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #72 on:** June 05, 2006, 08:02:49 pm »

nah, that was the 2.5 4cyl thirdgens!

Titsy · « **Reply #73 on:** June 05, 2006, 08:05:13 pm »

Quoting: philoldsmobile

nah, that was the 2.5 4cyl thirdgens!

philoldsmobile · « **Reply #74 on:** June 05, 2006, 08:22:38 pm »

hey dont knock them, 19 second 1/4 mile from the mighty 90BHP 4 pot!!!