TeamSwift

Home of the Suzuki mini-compacts ! Your Home for all things Suzuki Swift, Geo Metro, Holden Barina, Chevy Sprint, Pontiac Firefly, and Suzuki Cultus. TeamSwift is a technical performance oriented community!
It is currently Thu Oct 19, 2017 6:32 pm

Underbody braces, turbos and more!

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 9:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 2:36 am
Posts: 881
Location: Vancouver BC
What a difference. Well done!

I've always liked the T3 for balance between fuel economy and performance. Hill climbing is my favorite activity on this car.

Expect about 10 percent less fuel economy than your NA car in the city. Less difference on the highway at higher speeds.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 11:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 46
Location: Gibsons BC Canada
Everyone
Thanks for the compliments. It was work, but it was fun work, and quite frankly, I'm surprised she cleaned up as good as she did. It's too bad I couldn't have saved her earlier, but as is often the case, owners won't sell until they think that because the car looks like junk, it is junk, so they decide to sell or scrap, which ever comes first.

BT,
The car has a recent N/A transmission in it. I was going to start a thread in the appropriate section as to what the differences are between the N/A and Turbo transmissions, but as long as we're here perhaps I can get way with this. I have heard that the Turbo models had a higher final drive ratio because of the 13" wheels as opposed to the 12" wheels for N/A. Can anyone tell me what the ratios were for the N/A and Turbo Mk2s? In the next few days I am going to try and compare my speedometer readings to what a GPS tells me to see if that will give me an idea of what I might have. I'll also have to take into consideration the non stock tire size.

I've also read that the switch to the GM Syncromesh transmission fluid is good for many things, especially fuel economy. Makes sense to me, and shortly after I bought Suzie, I did the switch. Her transmission was kind of noisy when I bought her, probably bearing noise, but I can nurse a lot of life out of a vehicle and nothing has changed. Did Syncromesh help? I don't know, but I don't think it hurt anything and it probably helped with economy. It's pretty hard to beat the economy I got with her. I've always told people "she practically makes fuel". Is there an equivalent for Syncromesh, or is it in a class of it's own?

What I will probably do is run a few tanks of fuel through her and record my economy, then switch over and see if there is any difference.

CJ,
Don't be jealous. I just hope to be able to prolong her life a bit longer, but thanks.

ST,
I can see why you like hill climbing with the T3. I've had a lot of vehicles over the years, but this is my first turbo and I am blown away (pun intended). Here on the Sunshine Coast, there are no straight out highways. It is either town or country twisties with 80 KpH limits. I doubt that Rosie will ever see much if any freeway driving again. So far, she seems to thrive on this stuff. The tough part will be trying to keep the manifold pressure gauge pinned on zero.

While on a search the other day, I found these two sites:

http://www.automobile-catalog.com/curve ... turbo.html
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/curve ... matic.html

Now, I realize that they are for the Mk1s and the graphs are computer generated, but from my driving experience with Suzie ('91 N/A) and my limited time with Rosie ('90 Turbo) they seem very realistic. Suzie had almost nothing below 2000 and seemed to pull best around 3000. So far, Rosie seems to pull best from ~ 2500 to ~ 4000, but it's a bit early to tell for sure.

In any case they are both great little cars, and I thought the early Beetles were hard to beat.

_________________
Robert
91 Sprint N/A 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (320,000km, retired for parts)
90 Turbo Sprint 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (Rescued from certain death, daily driver)
95 Ford E-150 4.9L I6, Custom MSnS-Extra (work van)
92 Winnebago Elante 33RQ Ford 7.5L V8, Custom MSnS-Extra


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 8:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 9:27 pm
Posts: 824
Location: walsh,alberta,canada
turbo trans has 4.10 gears (13inch tires) n/a 3.79 gears (12 inch tires)

stock 13'' tires are 165/65r13-good luck finding those. 175/70 13 is a good replacement size.

_________________
89 1.0 turbo firefly
2"exhaust,no cats/resonator
3 tech 6*gear
3 tech turbo grind cam
3 tech cylinder head/w/port,polish,blend,oversized s/s valves
gti brake swap
89 white gti twincam....need I say more?
92 metro aka ''blue lump of coal''
92 white metro lsi vert
91 blue chevy sprint (gas sipper)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 7:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 46
Location: Gibsons BC Canada
I took Rosie out for a romp today with my old Garmin Etrex Venture GPS. The refresh rate is pretty slow, and there are not of places I can hold a steady speed, but all things taken into consideration I'm pretty sure that my final drive ratio is in fact 4.10:1.

From what I have been able to determine, the stock P165/65/R13 tires have a rolling circumference of 1661mm. The tires on her now are P205/60R13 with a published circumference of 1810mm. They are nearing end of life and my best measurement is a circumference of ~1716mm. This is more or less in line with a speedometer error of ~ 9%, actual being faster than indicated. Now, there is probably some speedometer error, some tachometer error, some GPS refresh error and some just plain error on my part, but it's close enough to determine final drive ratio because if I do the numbers with the 3.79 ratio they are quite a bit off.

Looks like I'd better be careful when the Blue Meanies are out with their radar or I could end up having a rather bad day.

_________________
Robert
91 Sprint N/A 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (320,000km, retired for parts)
90 Turbo Sprint 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (Rescued from certain death, daily driver)
95 Ford E-150 4.9L I6, Custom MSnS-Extra (work van)
92 Winnebago Elante 33RQ Ford 7.5L V8, Custom MSnS-Extra


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 6:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:23 am
Posts: 1745
Location: Washington, DC
The final drive gears in the transmission are not going to effect the reading on your speedometer. The stock 165/65-13's are the same diameter as the 12" tires on the Metro, they will work with the white speedometer drive gear. 175/70-13 are about the same diameter as the 14" GTi tires or the 13" GEN3 (95-01) tires, they will report correctly with the brown speedometer drive gear. Keep the speedometer drive gear with the tire diameter it came from and it will read right in any transmission.

_________________
91 Pontiac Firefly Turbo
10 Suzuki Kizashi


Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
Should be the name of a convenience store, not a government agency


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 10:33 am 
Offline
Suzuki Elder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 12:47 pm
Posts: 11669
Location: columbus, ohio
remember that this car wants to be a performance machine. in my opinion, any tires with an aspect ratio higher than 60 will give you less than "sporty" handling.

my go to size for a turbo3 or twincam car is the 185 or 195/60 14. that tire has a shorter sidewall that doesn't flex in corners like a 70 series tire.

60 series 13" tires are really hard to find in the states but i have found a number of good tires available in the 14" sizes.

again in my opinion, the best choice of rim will be the suzuki 7 spoke rims that were optional for the swift gt. they are lighter than almost every other aftermarket rim and one of the best features of a turbo3 car is the light and quick steering response. you need to pay attention to unsprung weight so the weights of the rim and the tire are pretty important to maintaining that whippy zippy steering you get from a turbo3. :wink:

another benefit of moving to the 14" rim is that you can do a bolt on upgrade of the brakes by mounting the gt cars' calipers with gt rotors that have been modified by cutting down their diameter by about 10mm (5 mm on the radius.) 13" rims very rarely have clearance for the bigger calipers.

i'm not convinced that the effort of maintaining an exact speedometer reading is all the necessary. the speedometers in these old cars weren't very accurate when the cars were new. finding a speedometer that perfectly registers speed is like looking for a needle in the hay stack anyway. at the very best the speedometers were only accurate within 10% between speeds of 45 and 50 mph. if you want accuracy, use a gps based metering device.

_________________
1991 Blue Geo Metro Convertible highly modified 1.0L Turbo3 5 spd. - 1991 Red Geo Metro Convertible customized with a Twincam 5 spd.

My Turbo3 Project
My Cardomain Page -Ol' Blue
My YouTube Channel
My Photo Gallery
SAAB Sonett II


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 46
Location: Gibsons BC Canada
Woodie,
An internet search showed the P165/65R13 tires as having a circumference of 1661mm new. The tires on the car now are P205/60R13 which show a circumference of 1810mm new. The tires are well worn and I measure ~276mm from the centre of the wheel hub to the ground. If my math is correct that should give me a rolling circumference of ~1733mm and my actual speed should be ~4.3% faster than indicated on the speedometer.

Assuming that the transmission has a 4.10:1 final drive ratio and I have my ratios correct, 3'd has an over all ratio of 5.25:1, 4th has an overall ratio of 3.45:1 and 5th has an overall ratio of 3.11:1.

With the original tires at 1661mm rolling circumference:
2250 RPM in 3d should be 42.7 KpH
2000 RPM in 4th should be 53.2 KpH
2000 RPM in 5th should be 64.1 KpH
2600 RPM in 5th should be 83.3 KpH

Now, I have tires that are ~4.3% larger circumference than original, so If I adjust those numbers by 4.3% I should see 44.5, 55.4, 66.8 and 86.9 KpH respectively.

I did some more tests with the GPS.

2250 RPM in 3d read 40 KpH on the speedometer, should be 44.5 KpH, GPS read 45 KpH, 12.5% error.
2000 RPM in 4th read 50 KpH on the speedometer, should be 55.4 KpH, GPS read 56 KpH, 12.0% error.
2000 RPM in 5th read 60 KpH on the speedometer, should be 66.8 KpH, GPS read 67 KpH, 11.6% error.
2600 RPM in 5th read 80 KpH on the speedometer, should be 86.9 KpH, GPS read 87 KpH, 8.8% error.

Having done all that, I'm pretty confident that my final drive ratio is 4.10:1. Would the number on the transmission show the ratio someplace?

I'm not all that concerned about the speedometer error, it is consistent, so I just take that into consideration when I am driving.

T3,
These tires wouldn't have been my choice, but they are what I have now, and the wheels do kind of dress her up a bit (form over function). This fall when I have to think about better tires for winter I'll probably get a set of all seasons that will be closer to stock size and still fit on these wheels. As I mentioned, I am not an aggressive driver and this is just my little beater, it's just prettier and more fun to drive than my '91 N/A was and I'm not prepared to pour a whole bunch of money into her.

_________________
Robert
91 Sprint N/A 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (320,000km, retired for parts)
90 Turbo Sprint 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (Rescued from certain death, daily driver)
95 Ford E-150 4.9L I6, Custom MSnS-Extra (work van)
92 Winnebago Elante 33RQ Ford 7.5L V8, Custom MSnS-Extra


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 5:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:23 am
Posts: 1745
Location: Washington, DC
No markings on the case to determine gear ratio, at least not that anyone has figured out. But someone has figured out how to turn over the engine by hand and count the rotation of the wheel to divine what's inside: http://geometroforum.com/topic/4187023

_________________
91 Pontiac Firefly Turbo
10 Suzuki Kizashi


Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
Should be the name of a convenience store, not a government agency


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 9:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:17 pm
Posts: 1405
Location: Alberta, Canada
You almost certainly have 4:10 ratio. Both n/a and turbo mk2&3 cars have 4:10. In this trans style only the 4cyl swifts got different ratios, 3:52 for 89-94, 3:79 for 95-01. 12" tire 89-94's have 4:10's across the board except maybe the xfi models?
I think perhaps the mk1 non turbos sometimes had 3:79 ratio with na and 12" tires, hence the confusion on ratios from turbo to na ratios. The mk2&3 were the same, but the turbo differential carrier is bigger, and maybe a wider crown wheel. Certainly a na trans seems to do fine in them, other than extreme abuse situations.

_________________
1995 Swift w/16V 4.39s, 3tech cam, Esteem t-body, Header, needs more.
1995 Gt Mustang "Boss Shinoda" package.
1999 F150 4x4 Supercharged
1967 Mustang 428 auto, never ending expensive project
1993 Civic si h22a, fell in my lap, couldn't resist!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 11:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 46
Location: Gibsons BC Canada
I had found that thread regarding the method of determining ratio in car. It took me some time to figure out how the math worked, but once I clued into the fact that with one wheel locked, there was a 2:1 ratio, then it all made sense. I didn't actually try it though because I was confident that, according to my observations, I had to have 4.10:1 gears. I wasn't aware that the Mk2's all had 4.10:1. Thanks.

The car's been on the road for almost a week now and so far, so good. It will be interesting to see what the fuel economy and oil consumption is. Even in her less than perfect state, she does turn heads. I even had one fellow stop me on the road to compliment me on her. He has long been a Sprint fan and we talked for about 10 minute. Pretty rewarding.

_________________
Robert
91 Sprint N/A 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (320,000km, retired for parts)
90 Turbo Sprint 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (Rescued from certain death, daily driver)
95 Ford E-150 4.9L I6, Custom MSnS-Extra (work van)
92 Winnebago Elante 33RQ Ford 7.5L V8, Custom MSnS-Extra


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2016 6:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 46
Location: Gibsons BC Canada
Another update,
About 350 KM later and Rosie developed indigestion. Power was way down and she could hardly make any boost at all. I suspected that some more catshit had come adrift and lodged itself in the exhaust system. Also, the fuel gauge didn't work since I had the tank out and the previous owner thought it was working when parked, so, up on blocks she went, exhaust system off and fuel tank on the ground.

My suspicions proved correct, there was some more stuff in the first bend of the tail pipe. I was able to clear that out as well as some small pieces in the muffler, but it was evident that the cat had to be completely gutted or this would happen again. I thought I might have to cut it open to get the stuffing out, but I thought I'd try poking away at it with a length of 1/4" round stock. The first attempt yielded some ceramic bits and dust. "That's a good sign", said me to myself, and kept poking. It wasn't long and I was able to get it all out. Exhaust system clear.

Next I turned my attention to the fuel gauge issue. I checked the fuel pump resistance, just because I was there. 2.9 ohms to ground. Then I checked the fuel sender. 133 ohms to ground, empty tank, right side up. 17.9 ohms, empty tank, upside down. So, it looks like as long as the float would float, all is good in the tank.

Then I checked for voltage at the sender (Y/R) wire at tank to ground. Nothing. I was able to remove the instrument cluster with not too much difficulty after dropping the steering column and disconnecting the speedometer cable at the transmission. The printed circuit panel on the instrument cluster looked good and I had what I would reasonable resistance readings from the pins on the fuel gauge to ground and supply. Then I checked for continuity of the wire from the gauge to the sender. Open circuit.

OK, where to start to find the open? I figured I'd start at the back and work forward. When I removed the back seat I saw the 3 wires that go to the tank. The ground and pump supply was in a 2 terminal connector that was good. However, the wire for the sender unit went to a single plug connector that looked suspicious. Sure enough, it was pulled apart, just.

I think what happened was when I first pulled the tank, it put too much strain on the wires and pulled that connector apart. To fix things I spliced in some more length to all 3 wires and put some split loom around for protection. I did some more tests before I committed to getting the tank back in and all looked good.

I put about 15 L of fuel back in the tank and gauge came off the stop. That was a good sign, so I went for a test drive. That was a very good experience. The engine seems very happy and will make just over 8 PSI boost at 3000 RPM and an honest 9 PSI at 4000 RPM.

The exhaust note is still quite quiet, perhaps a bit too quiet for my liking, but I'll just leave well enough alone, at least for now.

This car is waay too much fun to drive!

_________________
Robert
91 Sprint N/A 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (320,000km, retired for parts)
90 Turbo Sprint 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (Rescued from certain death, daily driver)
95 Ford E-150 4.9L I6, Custom MSnS-Extra (work van)
92 Winnebago Elante 33RQ Ford 7.5L V8, Custom MSnS-Extra


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 1:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 2:36 am
Posts: 881
Location: Vancouver BC
Glad to hear you sorted out the gauge, and plugged cat.

On my spare fuel gauge sender unit, I measure 5.0 ohms to 125 ohms through the full range of motion. Adding 15 liters to a completely empty tank should give you just under a 1/4 tank gauge reading. (Suzuki's famous fuel reserve strategy).

btw, I posted a notice for a possible coffee gathering and chat coming up May 21 or 22 somewhere in the Lower Mainland for TS members, date and location to be adjusted depending on interest and member proximity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 11:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 46
Location: Gibsons BC Canada
The first time I filled the tank it took 35.09L. I estimated I had ~8L in the tank already, but that could have been out a few litres. As I understand it, this tank should hold ~ 40.125L. After getting the fuel gauge working, I fueled when it read ~empty. It took 26.08L to top it right off. So, if my math is correct, the "empty" reading on the gauge still has 14.05L in tank. Pretty much on the mark to what you say. Just as a point of interest, full fuel reads ~7/8 full. I don't really care that it is not accurate, just as long as I know approximately what the error is. Ultimately, when I can establish what my average fuel consumption is, I just go by the odometer any way, but it is nice to have some kind of warning to check the odometer reading.

_________________
Robert
91 Sprint N/A 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (320,000km, retired for parts)
90 Turbo Sprint 3dr hatchback 1L 5spd (Rescued from certain death, daily driver)
95 Ford E-150 4.9L I6, Custom MSnS-Extra (work van)
92 Winnebago Elante 33RQ Ford 7.5L V8, Custom MSnS-Extra


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group