Fiero

My 944 E/P car had the fuel cell in the passanger compartment within the 12 rule. right off my right elbow. corner weights we great. if any part of the orginial tank is within 12 of the new it makes the cut for the rules.

Lawrence
 
As an aside, I don't really think that putting the tank in the frunk is a good idea. You'll be adding to the polar moment of the car, and I think your turn-in characteristics would be hurt more than the improvement in balance you'd gain. I suggest a better alternative location is in the cockpit on the passenger side of the car, as close to CG as possible, or slightly forward.

Ben, no action on the car. Burned out mentally and financially, and it's not a priority right now. First focus is to get the NX2000 back online (we had to disassemble the top end after the ARRC race) and then I'll start playing with the Toyota.

But, of course, I have a lot of optimism for it. Consider the bogey for the class right now is the NX2000, Acura Integra, and Mazda Miata; the question you have to ask yourself is "can this car beat those?". If I didn't think so, I wouldn't bother. However, the MR2 overtook dominance in SSB after the NX's reign, so that's a plus; despite the strut suspension I believe the better balance and RWD characteristics would indicate an improvement in handling versus the egg.

So, the only other unknown is power: can the MR2's 2.2L stroker engine develop the legs in comparison to the NX? That remains to be seen. But at only 30 pounds heavier than the NX I think it'll be a fun fight... - GA
 
Good point on the polar moment. Chuck was kind enough to share some pics - he did a pro job on the cell and that cell is within 12 no problem.

I'll try eliminating the push with springs/bars and see if I can get the power down without lifting the inside front - chuck relayed that has prevented him from putting down power on exit. I do the dyno tomorrow morning - taking the day off to play.
 
Bad news - the car made really, really crappy power. 110 hp 160 lbs. It didn't run great at the top end and was breaking up. No room for a motor project/budget so this car might not get built. Hopefully it's electronics or fuel.
 
Is that a stock motor? If so, that's not bad at all for an A car Ben and I would think the torque is "class leading."

If you get 25% with an IT build, you are looking at over 130 whp and nearly 200 ft lbs of torque!

Why is this disappointing?
 
IMO, Ben's torque number is in the ballpark (given dyno variations, of course) for a stock 2.8l. But the horsepower is way down relative to torque. This makes perfect sense if the engine is breaking up at the top end. IIRC, dyno charts I've seen on this (stock) engine would typically show 125-ish hp with that sort of torque, and peaks at around 5000 and 3500, respectively.
 
You won't see that kind of increase in torque with an IT build. I bet 145whp and 175ft/lbs is very doable. A 100% IT build would really wake this baby up. I had an 88 Formula with a custom cat-back that ran 15.4 in the 1/4 mile...and these cars are NOT light...2750lb curb weight.

Do a nice tune up, cap, plugs...catalytic converters a know to get clogged up as well.
 
Andy, good info. Even with "just" (LOL) 175 ft lbs, that looks like a strong A car except for the weight.

Did you autox yours? Did it turn?
 
I did. The 87's had 15x7's on all 4 corners so a decent amount of tire could be used. The 88's had 6" front wheels. The issue will be low speed corner exit. With all that torque and stock springs (in solo) the front got pretty light and induced some push.

When looking at an interesting IT project I see things from two angles. One, you have a car that will handle and stop great but you have to work SUPER hard in a finite landscape for power (ITA Miata) or two, you have a car that will make great power but you will have to work SUPER hard to get it to turn (NX2000 and Fiero). I think the latter is a better POTENTIAL package should you conquer the demons.

IT prep allows you to do some cool stuff for handling so I think you can get it to where it won't kill you in the turns but you knock people down on the straights. And remember, a car like this would be REAL hard to pass.
 
Fiero seems like the A equivalent of the TR8. Torque monster with adequate handling.

Agree on your theory that it is easier in IT land to solve handling problems than power problems.

How are the brakes on the Fiero?
 
Thanks for the words of encouragement. Couple of points on why the power might have sucked: the straight pipe that was supposedly fitted didn't fit and we couldn't test with it so I was using a really crappy exhaust. I think the breaking up could be solved by a basic tune up and perhaps going back to the stock chip.

The shame of it is that this is a built motor - granted it has some miles on it but it was balanced and blueprinted, injectors were balanced and it should really be putting out some better numers. If she won't jump into a good range of performance after that I will dump the car since I'm not in the mood to pour money into a new engine when I have a brand new gorgeous stock car to play with.

But ITA looks like a pretty fun playground....... not bailing out quite yet since the winter only just started and this will keep me busy. :snow_cool:
 
Ben,

The exhaust could have been clogged, causing some of the issues. I would check that... a 2.5" exhaust really helps these cars a lot. I would also check the harness around the coil... see if there is any damage, dry rot, ect. (this could go for the entire harness as well). The tach filter can cause a world of problems. Lastly, what chip are you using? Was it a custom chip or stock?

Were the numbers at the rear wheels? If so, that's not bad. I would guess GM figured the stock numbers at the flywheel.

hoop
 
Hi Hoop,

It's a custom chip but not sure of the origin. I do have the stock chip. Regarding the exhaust, I'll be putting the straight pipe on it, doing a tune up, ohming everything to make sure electronics are good, confirming fuel pressure is set properly and injectors are working, check the timing and then bring the sucka back to see what that does.

I'm surprised folks think 110 isn't bad - that won't put this car anywhere near the front. I'd be dicing with ITC guys. Andy's Miata is lighter and makes 20 more HP and will out handle this car on any part of the track. Unless I can get some real power without doing a motor project this will stay a street car.

Thanks for the heads up on the coil - I was thinking of replacing it during the tune up since they can't be much $$.

Cheers
 
I'm surprised folks think 110 isn't bad - that won't put this car anywhere near the front. I'd be dicing with ITC guys. Andy's Miata is lighter and makes 20 more HP and will out handle this car on any part of the track.

[/b]
Click to expand...

Don't forget the 60ft/lb advantage you have... :114:

I would estimate a stock example would make 115hp and 160 ft/lbs at the wheels...all from 135 stock crank hp.
 
Ben if it makes you feel better, I had a high rpm miss on my car (a torquey motor) and it put out 125 whp and 185 ft lbs of torque. As I think Hoop indicated above, a high rpm miss really hurts your hp without affecting the torque as much because the miss occurs at high rpm where the hp is made.

I cured the miss and came back with 160 whp and 195 wtq.

Cure the miss, take the cats and emissions stuff off, and see what you get. I think an IT build on that car ought to get you 135-140 at teh wheels at least and probably some of the best torque numbers in ITA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top