HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: welty@cabot.balltown.cma.COM (richard welty)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Octane reduces pinging (was Re: Fuel octane versus power)
Date: 15 Apr 92 19:48:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: cabot.1992Apr15.194807.4742
Organization: New York State Institute for Sebastian Cabot Studies

In article <3380042@hpldsla.sid.hp.com> tonya@hpldsla.sid.hp.com (Tony Arnerich) writes:
>High Octane = difficult to ignite. It does not equal more energy available.

quite; lower octane fuels generally have more caloric content.  the
advantage of high octane gasoline is that it allows you to build
a different, more powerful engine, or to tune your engine for more
power.  high octane gasoline in and of itself will not make your car 
faster, with the exception noted in the discussion below:

> one manufacturer that I know of (maybe there's more by now) does get 
>more power from higher octane fuel. On the Turbo SAAB's of the last 5 years
>or so, the turbo boost is increased until the knock sensors detect pre-
>ignition, then back off a little bit. This cycle is continuously repeated.

several manufacturers have done something similar but not identical;
they use knock detectors to control the timing, advancing it until just
short of detonation.

cheers,
  richard
-- 
richard welty                            518-393-7228
welty@cabot.balltown.cma.com
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: tgl@slee01.srl.ford.com (Tom Leone)
Subject: Re: Mustang V6 pings
Organization: Ford Motor Company Scientific Research Labs, Dearborn, MI
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 13:12:00 GMT

bell@flounder.nosc.mil (Tom T. Bell) writes:
: I have an '85 Mustang 3.8L V6 that has a pinging problem.  I've tried using
: different gas and octane boosters to no avail.  I've replaced the ignition
: coil, thick film ignition unit, distributer stator, rotor, and cap, and the
: plugs and wires.  I've also adjusted the timing within specs.  The car
: has 130,000 miles on it so I figure it must be carbon build-up.  Does this
: sound likely?  Is there any way to remove carbon in the combustion chamber
: without removing the head?  Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

I have heard people recommend spraying water down the carb while
goosing the throttle to "wash away" the carbon.  Never tried it
myself.  If you are mechanically inclined, it's not too
horribly difficult to remove and clean the heads.

You might also double check that it's not a heat-related problem:

    (a) Flush out cooling system, make sure thermostat, water pump,
        and other parts are working properly.  You can even install
        a lower-temperature thermostat very cheaply.
    (b) Make sure that intake air "flapper" valve is not stuck (this
        collects hot air from the exhaust manifold for cold starts).
    (c) Do a general car "check-up" to look for things that might
        be making the engine work harder (and hotter) than normal.
    (d) Eliminate "hot spots" in the combustion chambers, like incorrect
        spark plugs (these come in different "heat ranges") or burrs.

-Tom Leone <tgl@slee01.srl.ford.com>
From: koziarz@halibut.nosc.mil (Walter A. Koziarz)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: trivia answer WAS: Re: Turbocharger VS. Supercharger.
Date: 12 Apr 92 15:16:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: nosc.5335
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego

In article <1992Apr11.231725.3948@bb1t.monsanto.com> sekell@bb1t.monsanto.com writes:

>In article <johnson.702862833@wrs.com>, johnson@wrs.com (David Johnson) writes:

>> And for more trivia:
 
>> What was the original 6-71 developed for?
 
>> It was originally developed by GM as a low-cost compact engine for the
>> "disposable" landing crafts of WWII.
 
>How would this function as an engine? I always thought it was designed as an
>exhaust scavenger for large GMC diesel engines.

*chuckle* 'Hot Rod Mag' miss-information strikes again....

the 6-71 designation belongs to the *family* of in-line 6 cylinder
GMC/Detroit-Diesel engines that displace 71 cubic-inches per cylinder (note: i
say GMC/Detroit as i am not *quite* sure where the distinction begins/ends).

the so-named 'GMC 6-71 Blower' is a roots-type positive displacement airpump of
the required capacity to scavenge the exhaust of the afore-mentioned engine.

side note -- a 6-71 is hardly a 'large' Diesel...  a 12V-92 is beginning to be
able to be considered 'large' :-) (designation indicates V12 with 92cid per
cylinder).

walt k.
From: rghoff@bb1t.monsanto.com
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Electric Fuel Pump Noise: normal ?
Date: 14 Apr 92 11:23:16 CST
Organization: Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MO

In article <1992Apr13.164322.9720@Csli.Stanford.EDU>, crimmins@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Mark Crimmins) writes:
> 
> I have an '84 BMW 318i, which has an electric fuel pump back by the
> gas tank.  I have had no performance problems (such as poor
> performance at high revs), but I worry about the noise I hear from the
> pump.  Normally it makes a fairly quiet hum, together with a kind of
> nervous "scritchy" sound that sounds a bit like a high-pitched
> slurping (could it be cavitating?), though it may well be a "loose
> parts" noise or a grinding; another description of the noise: like
> someone lightly shaking twenty lead pellets in a small hard plastic
> box.  After extended highway driving, though, it complains with a
> medim-high-pitched wail---not loud, but definitely a complaint rather
> than a purr.  Is this normal from an electric fuel pump, or am I
> liable to be stuck on the highway someday soon?
> 

Hi Mark,

	Has it always made those sounds, or just started?

	My MG had an SU fuel pump in the trunk wall. It used to sound
	like a steam locomotive taking off at times (chug-a chug-a) and
	other times it sounded like someone was locked in the trunk
	knocking to get out. It acted like that from the time I bought
	it to about 4 years later. (It finally died and I replaced it
	with a Carter --- No noise).

	Rick.
From: koziarz@halibut.nosc.mil (Walter A. Koziarz)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Turbocharger VS. Supercharger.
Date: 7 Apr 92 19:41:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: nosc.5312
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego

In article <gt2t7th@rpi.edu> stiegg@aix02.ecs.rpi.edu (Gregory Mark Stiegler) writes:

>And I suppose you refer to detonation as Thermal Preignition of Combustables
>many of us here don't want a college symposium here...there is a differnce,
>most of us are practical, not theoretical.

well, if i did, i would be incorrect since detonation and preignition are
distinctly different phenomena.  seems like an appropriate time to recall that
this *is* rec.autos.TECH and that technical and technological correctness is
appropriate here.  

walt k.
From: dibb@dg.UUCP (James Dibb)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Fuel Pump in a 82 Jetta
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:23:59 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Data General Corporation, Westboro MA

I had to replace the relay in my 78 Scirocco once (I've long since sold it).
Had the same problems.  Since it is a very good possibility (IMHO) that
the relay is your problem, I would suggest replacing it, especially since
they are probably under $15.  
If it fixes it, great.
If not, you have a spare relay.

Good luck.
Jim
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: ak333@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Martin Linsenbigler)
Subject: Re: 2.8 liter V6 in GMC Jimmy
Reply-To: ak333@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Martin Linsenbigler)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 05:27:06 GMT


In a previous article, koziarz@halibut.nosc.mil (Walter A. Koziarz) says:

>In article <1992Apr3.011729.1@scivax.stsci.edu> wilcox@scivax.stsci.edu writes:
>
>	[ someone else wrote ]
>
>>>>What criteria did you use to project with certainty during April of >>1992
>>>>that your 1988 engine will "easily last well beyoud 200k miles?"                  
>>        I pretty certain the engine in my >>1988 Beretta which was built and 
>>        bought in Feb >>>1987 will last beyond 200k miles due the maintenance
>>        schedule and proven track record. Chevy engines are top-notch.
>
>as a counter-point, one of my co-workers' *1988* 2.8 liter Berettas has already
>had a new engine (cracked block under warranty) and a new transmission (cracked
>case, not under warranty).  while i wish you continued success, chevy engines
>are *far* from 'top-notch'.  the best that can be said of them is that a small
>block chevrolet engine will run with *more problems* than any other engine i
>have personally ever seen.  chrysler engines are closer to 'top-notch'...
>
>walt k.
>

   I have a 1983 S-10 2wd chevy blazer with the 2.8 liter V6.  It has
   106,000 miles at the present time.  I have had this vehicle from the
   very first.  With regular maintenance ( all by myself ) it uses just
   a little oil, very little.  I have had NO problems with this vehicle.

   I also have a 1980 Olds 98 Regency. Bought from the original owner
   whom I know.  It has 110,000 miles now and has performed flawlessly.
   Even better than the V6.  This 98 has the 350 5.7 liter Olds V8 with
   the Turbo 400 trans.  Excellent engine!

   Both vehicles are carburated not fuel injected.

   C-ya..... /\/\artin
-- 
  This communication is sent by    /\/\artin   University of Arizona Tucson
  =========================================================================
  ak333@cleveland.freenet.edu   mlinsenb@ccit.arizona.edu  mlinsenb@arizvms
  DEATH HAS BEEN DEAD FOR ABOUT 2,000 YEARS ****** FOLLOW THE KING OF KINGS
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: bn879@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jason Scott MacDonald)
Subject: Just a test...
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 06:00:46 GMT


This is just a test of the news program...
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: ghg@en.ecn.purdue.edu (George Goble)
Subject: Re: Freon Freeze!
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 09:27:23 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.032754.3442@cco.caltech.edu> hacker@cco.caltech.edu (Jonathan Bruce Hacker) writes:
>jh26@prism.gatech.EDU (Jay Harrell) writes:
>
>
>>I would say that LPG in an A/C would be dangerous because you are piping
>>it through the inside of the car.  If a leak develops, you could fill
>>the interior of the car with flamable gas fairly quickly.
>
>Don't many of us have essentially an unlimited supply of
>natural gas piped inside our homes?  If that's safe what's
>so bad about a little LPG in an AC line?   Besides, some of that 
>noxious aroma added to natural gas could also be added to the 
>LPG refrigerant to act as a warning in the unlikely event of a 
>leak inside the car.
>
This is true.  Many of the people who scream "flammable!" also have
other motives, like selling $25/lb refrigerants and/or $1000-$1400
"retrofits" (ripping out your old A/C and installing a new R-134a
system).  The materials cost for a "recharge" using isobutane/propane
would be somewhere around $.50.  There is no money to be made??

Central A/C systems use R-22, that can be drop-in replaced with
straight propane. Average charge 2-3 lbs in a home system.  I saw
one study, that even in the event of leaks on the inside coils,
the concentration stayed below flammable limits.

The isobutane/propane mixture I ran in a car a couple of years back,
had the mercaptain odorants in it.  It had no harmful effects on
the A/C system.  That isobutane came from "AGA".

The isobutane (8% of the blend) used in GHG R-12 substitute comes from
Phillips 66 (Borger TX), it is 99.0% grade "pure", and contains no
oderant.  One cannot smell anything when sniffing it.  One problem with
"hamburger grade" propane, is that it is often "wet", which makes it
unsuitable for refrigeration, unless it is dried out with refrigeration
driers.
>-- 
>Jon Hacker
>Caltech, Pasadena CA
>hacker@tumbler-ridge.caltech.edu


--ghg
From: jhart@qa1.WichitaKS.NCR.COM (Jim Hart)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Oil change - pressure prime
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:22:55 GMT
Reply-To: jhart@qa1.WichitaKS.NCR.COM (Jim Hart)
Distribution: world
Organization: NCR Corporation, Wichita KS

I cannot recall any net traffic on this subject - if there was, please
forgive....
A lot of engine wear seems to occur during the initial engine start-up
following an oil change.  It takes several seconds for the pressure to
build and during that time you can usually hear a slight knock or other
no-oil-related sounds.  Question - short of pulling the distributor and
priming/pressurizing using a reversible drill with the appropriate shaft
tool in the chuck, is there any product/device that will perform this
function?  If such device is available, would its cost be reasonable
enough to offset the amount of wear that would occur over the normal
engine life?  
This no-lube-noise-wear has always grated on my nerves (as well as on
bearings :-) ).  Anyone know of a solution, keeping the above restriction
in mind?

-- 
Jim Hart                                      (316)636-8434
NCR PPD-Wichita                               (800)325-SCSI  (800)325-7274
3718 N. Rock Road
Wichita, KS 67226                             Jim.Hart@WichitaKS.NCR.COM
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: johnson@wrs.com (David Johnson)
Subject: Re: What the $#&! is with the oil??
Organization: Wind River Systems, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 08:27:29 GMT

This is turnig into a FAQ.

The sludge may well indeed be just condesation, in which case a long drive
followed by an oil change will cure the problem (until the next time).
Or it is the infiltration of cooling water into the oil, in which case
you've gat problems (most likely a head gasket or crack head/block)

You might check the * a)ll * section, there may still be some posts
under WHITE GUNK!

>DAVE (johnson@yuba.WRS>COM)

>92% of Americans think that they are above average drivers.
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: garrison@robbie.acns.nwu.edu (Mark F. Garrison)
Subject: Stalling
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 19:44:59 GMT

	I have an 83 Olds Omega.  Whenever I take it on the highway and  
then come to a stop it stalls.  I can start it back up, but it wont go  
back into gear without stalling again.  I usually just wait a few minutes,  
and it works again.  Does anyone know what the problem is other than the  
age of the car?
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: jbm@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Jeffrey Mulligan)
Subject: Re: Are Bendix disk brakes supposed to drag? ('78 Scout)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 03:46:47 GMT

troby@diana.cair.du.edu (Thorn Roby) writes:

>I recently had my front disk rotors replaced at Meineke. They said
>the calipers and pads were fine (pads have about 10k on them). I
>noticed that both wheels dragged slightly when rotated. The mechanic
>said that was normal for Bendix brakes of this era. Another mechanic
>at Midas who seemed pretty familiar with Scouts said that was wrong 
>and the calipers needed to be rebuilt. The drag is stronger at some
>points of the rotation than others, and stronger on one wheel than the
>other. Brakes work fine and I haven't noticed any overheating. The 
>mechanic who said this was normal said that the pads were designed to 
>run slightly hot because they grabbed better that way. None of this 
>made much sense to me but I found it hard to believe he would be making
>it up and losing a brake job in the process. Opinions?
>-- 

In a disc system (unlike drum brakes) there are no springs to pull the
pistons back in after an application of the brake, so it is normal
to be able to detect a slight amount of drag when turning the wheel
by hand when the car is jacked up.  If you apply the brakes and
release the pedal, and there is a noticeable resistance to rolling
the whole car forward, then the pistons are probably sticking
a little in their bores.  I observed this after replacing the pads in
my car; the new thicker pads caused the pistons to be pushed further
back into the bores (to an area that had not seen pistons for a long
time, and had some corrosion).  A few weeks of driving and the back and
forth motion of the pistons seemed to make the problem go away.
Sooner or later I will have to replace or rebuild the calipers,
but it's pretty low on the list.

Uneven resistance during a rotation is due to runout in the disk.
If these were old rotors which had might be due to warping,
or if they had been resurfaced it could be caused by a bad lathe
arbor or loose wheel bearing races.  Since these rotors are new
they should be flat; I think that a thousandth or two of runout
is normal.  Any more than that and the discs should probably be shaved.



-- 

	Jeff Mulligan (jbm@eos.arc.nasa.gov)
	NASA/Ames Research Ctr., Mail Stop 262-2, Moffett Field CA, 94035
	(415) 604-3745
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: floyd@eng.umd.edu (Mike Hughes)
Subject: Re: Braking: Use brakes or transmission ?
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 92 15:46:57 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland
Distribution: usa


	I think that there is a time for engine braking and a time for brake
braking, and a time for engine/brake braking.  I drive a '76 208Z, and feel
that my driving methods are the most convient and cost effective.  Here's how
I do it:  

	When I know I must stop completly (with no chance of a green light or
new traffic pattern), I lift my foot off the gas and depress the brake.  When
the RPM's  get just under 1000 (my idle speed), I gently push the transmission
into neutral (no clutch action).  I continue decelerating in neutral until I 
have stoped, and then accelerate just like everyone else (well, maybe a LITTLE
faster  =8^).

	When there is a chance for a green light or something, I lift my foot
off the gas and brake until I see 1000 RPM's.  At this point, I depress the
clutch, rev-match, downshift one gear increment (unless there's a 5.0 'Stang
nearby!), and let the clutch out.  This is all accomplished while keeping 
constant but light pressure on the brake, so wide-sole shoes are helpful.  I 
repeat this process until I reach 2nd, and then persuade the transmission into
neutral without the help of the clutch.  Of course, when the 'Stang sees that
the light is changing, I downshift into a gear that will get my RPM's within
my powerband, and nail that thang.

	Hills are where I use engine braking alone, so as to not overheat the
rotors.  

	Another neat thing to do...when coasting up to a light that's gonna
be red for a while, especially on a hill, I try to set my parking brake at
just the right tention to stop me where I need to be, without using the brake
pedal at all.  If you have a foot operated parking brake, please don't try this
in my neighborhood, as it can be tricky to pull that damn brake release and 
you might loose control if the rear's lock up.

	Gad I love driving...-Mike

:Suicidal Tendencies=====> He's a carrier of death a stork in reverse,        :
: =8^) Mike Hughes  =8^( : he blesses you with sickness cause love is a curse.:
:Mail---floyd@eng.umd.edu: The arsenic in your Koolaid, the bomb in your mail,:
:Voice--(301) 340-0922   : he disappears in motion but leaves a bloody trail. :
From: mvanmeet@ub.d.umn.edu (Michiel van Meeteren)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: AC/Delco Filter Fun facts (Also Fram filters for 350's)
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:28:20 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Minnesota, Duluth. Information Services.

In article <36761@gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com> jslee@nrtc.nrtc.northrop.com (John Lee <jslee>) writes:
>I found the following fun facts poking through AC/Delco manuals:
[snip]
>JSLee

Yes, there are many substitutions for oil filters.  Here is my personal
experience.  I have a truck with a Chevy 350 in it.  At first (before I ran
the block number)  I had no idea what filter went on there.  So I looked up a
few years in the Fram guide.  For most passenger car 350's, a PH30 was
listed.  Then I noticed for heavy duty appications(cop cars, heavy trucks,
etc)  a one-quart spin on filter was recommended. (PH13)  So I took the
filters and compared them.  The gasket and threads were exactly the same, so
I opted for the bigger filter.  Never had a problem.  The only difference I
could see is that the oil capacity might increase by a half a quart or so.
But the extra filtering area is worth it for me, so add to the list:

Fram PH30 (on chevy 350)  use PH13, if you have the room.

Just thought you should know.  


-- 
(~)/~)/~)  o  /    __  | I cant figure it out, when it said <HIT ANY KEY>, 
 /  /  /  /  /_/  /__) | and I hit <SHIFT>, nothing happened.  Then I hit
/  /  (__/__/  \_/\__/ | <CAPS LOCK>, and still nothing happened!!               
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: pauly@netcom.com (Paul Yoshimune)
Subject: Re: What the $#&! is with the oil??
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 92 07:27:56 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: na

Hate to tell you this, but generally that milky junk in your oil indicates
water/antifreeze in your oil.  This can be from a leaky intake manifold, but
is usually more indicative of a blown head gasket or cracked head.  Time for
the grand and glorious leakdown test...

-- 
-Paul Yoshimune [pauly@netcom.com]
From: tonya@hpldsla.sid.hp.com (Tony Arnerich)
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 01:53:15 GMT
Subject: Re: Octane reduces pinging (was Re: Fuel octane versus power)
Organization: HP Scientific Instruments Division - Palo Alto, CA
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech

In rec.autos.tech, JBEST@ESOC.BITNET (Jon) writes:

>  Does anyone out there know how a change in octane rating affects power?
>  AND BEFORE YOU LEAP IN and say higher octane - more power, what I'd like
>  to know is whether there's a fixed relation between octane and power.
>  F'rinstance if you bump up the octane by x% how can you calculate the
>  percentage change in power?

>  Just curious!

>     Jon

High Octane = difficult to ignite. It does not equal more energy available.

Only one manufacturer that I know of (maybe there's more by now) does get 
more power from higher octane fuel. On the Turbo SAAB's of the last 5 years
or so, the turbo boost is increased until the knock sensors detect pre-
ignition, then back off a little bit. This cycle is continuously repeated.

The effect of this is to burn as much fuel as the cylinders can hold before
bad things happen. So in effect, just as any turbo will make the engine
appear to be of larger displacement, the SAAB turbo engine gets "as big as
it can", automatically tracking the octane rating of the fuel it gets.

Obviously, combustion efficiency is not proportional to octane rating in
this engine; just the amount of air/fuel mixture. Think of it as the excep-
tion that proves the rule (literally).

tonya@hpldsla.sid.hp.com

Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech