Volvo P1800ES...kinda

NOHOME said:

 

Is there any event where the hydraulic lifters could "pump up" and keep the valves open to some degree?

Not if you went through the proper procedure to set up the rocker arms.  Been through it more times than I care to admit with all the mods to mine over the years.  

Well, moved the ball if nothing else.

Leakdown test showed no issues. So the valves seal.

The E-cam is on the bench and an Exploder cam is in the hole. Lifters back in, cam chain dot-aligned and lash set.

Immediate change of note is that the cranking cylinder pressure is up 20 psi from the e-cam and over 150 across the board. That is a good thing I think. Does it explain the constipated performance that was observed, not really.

Gonna button it all back up and see what happens. The option was to toss in a different engine, but since I have not seen that one run, it seemed like a gamble. Besides, I want to learn something at the end of this puzzle. 

Pete

Fingers crossed for you.

I maybe would have looked for a stock 5.0 HO cam, the exploders had better heads but weak cams.  I guess if you already had one on hand why not.  

Just learned that the E-303 cam is a Crane product. I always thought it was a Ford manufactured device and that is why I was dismisive of its critics; Factory engineers are often boring, but seldom make mass produced junk. Had I known that the E-303 was a Crane Cams product I would have set fire to the garage before I put it in the Volvo cause I have a hate for all things Crane. On general principles more than technical ones, but there you go.

So, after a couple of days, here we are

It is a new pic. Cant you see the cam change!?

Compression is up 20 points and almost oddly even across the board.

It was like 11:30 and  a bit late to fire the car up with open headers, so will have to wait till the week-end to see if anything changed.

In the off chance that there is a Fitech Guru reading this post, I have a question:

I removed the secondary return spring from the Fitech because the return force on the Fitech is akin to a bear sized springtrap. Seriously WTF is up with that?

1-Will the minor amount of throttle play in the secondary barrels affect idle control? I could look for a weaker spring if so. I am struggling to understand why the return springs on the Fitech are so powerful. I am left wondering if it is to correct for some design flaw  with keeping the throttles closed tight at idle?

2-With the spring off, I was able to get a look at the secondary throttle shaft where it enters the body. It literally rattles in the bushing. That does not seem right but maybe it is acceptable for the Fitech?

Pete

I sure hope that solves your issue!

In reply to java230 :

There is another plot twist  hiding around the corner, but I will wait a bit before I reveal that story.

Pete

tease!

Sounds like you're on the right track!

I just read/skimmed through a large chunk of this thread in fascination. The progression from "weld two totally different cars together" to "intensive body smoothing and sanding and painting and sanding for countless hours" to "bitchin' car that looks amazing but doesn't quite run just right yet" is a heck of a ride. I can't wait to see this thing really running good.

LOL - Pete, I mentioned several pages back that Crane designed and built the E303 for Ford and marketed it themselves as the Powermax 2040 or some such number.  Even detailed the other changes they recommended with it....

From page 96 --- 

"...was able to (finally) find what I was looking for - on your behalf as you begin to really sort the Voliata out.  Crane Cams actually designed and built the E303 for Ford Racing/Motorsport.  Back in the day (at least 10 years ago) you could buy the exact same camshaft directly from Crane - they called it PowerMax 2040.  It no longer shows up in their catalog.   .498" peak valve lift with 1.6 ratio rockers, 220/220 @ .050"; 282/282 @ .006" lift with a 110 LSA.   The valve events on the cam card were identical -- because it's the same cam.  Unlike the Ford Racing catalogs, Crane had a decent set of "recommendations" for each of their cams.  Since it's no longer in their catalog, that footnote is no longer showing up at Crane's site.  But I found it in a 15 year old post on corral.net --- every now and then, blind squirrel, acorn, etc.  Crane said about their cam -- Recommendations - better flowing intake, exhaust, heads, valve springs to match cam, minimum 3.55 gear and manual transmission.  The relatively narrow 110 lobe separation angle of the E cam allows for a fair amount of overlap -- this is what contributes to low(er) vacuum levels at idle and why Crane didn't recommend it with an automatic.  Much of that can be 'crutched' with a looser stall converter.  Doesn't mean, of course, that it won't work --- just that Crane didn't think it was the best idea."

OK...So the thing idles like a limo. I just set the Fitech back to default, re-entered the engine data by telling it it had a "1" on the performance cam level and hit start. Sweet. 15 inches of vacuum and all is wonderful.

For a few minutes...

The engine runs right up to 2000 rpm and hits a brick wall. It is like if the brakes were locked on if I were on the ground and I was running up against the torque converter, but I am not, I am on axle stands and the car is in park.

At first, I thought it was a Fitech thing. And berkeleyed around with fuel settings and checking fuel pressure and injector duty cycle and Pulse With and fuel pump PWM and what not.  All the time thinking "Odd, it had this same issue when I ran the Holley to fire the engine and do the first drive"

While taking a break and scratching my head, a buddy walks in and ask why fluid is pouring out under the car? The AOD was ejecting transmission fluid from every possible source: front and rear seals, pan gasket  ( especially the rear DS corner) and speedometer drive. I mean this thing was full Linda Blair. The only place it did NOT leak was out the dipstick tube.

So now I am wondering, I was looking at pulling the engine again after I got it running properly, because the front seal was leaking and there was some evidence of pan leakage. With the current development I wonder if the seal is really an issue or is there a way that this thing has runaway internal pressure? Technically, from an AOD design standpoint, how could that even happen? What regulates internal ( lline?) pressure in an AOD gearbox? Is it worth finding a core and just pulling the valve body off and swapping it in hopes that what is wrong is some assembly error from the guy that rebuilt it? Maybe he misse one of the 500 ball bearings that live in the rat maze?( that was a few years ago and I doubt I would get relief from the builder if I took it back other than "That will be another 2K".

Is this a sign from God that the wife needs to learn to drive a T5?

Pete

"Honey, I think we should go with the manual trans now to get it on the road and hopefully over this teething issue. It'd be a good time to try learning, and if you don't like it, we can still plan to swap an auto back in."

Hmm...there's gotta be a dual-clutch flappy paddle semi-automatic that would fit in there, right? 

Because someone had to be the jerk;

Advance Adapters Ford to Chevy Transmission Bellhousing Adapters 712588-A

I hope you can figure this one out without it getting costly.  Much fun pulling the trans itself and then running the engine in the car without it in the way?  

In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :

Thought did cross my mind. I guess the gearbox should come out on its own since the engine came out on its own last time.

First step is going to be to put a 300 psi gauge on the main line pressure port and see what it is doing. The thing feels like it is building pressure to the point where the engine can't drive it any more. Surprised if something aint broke by now.

What device are you using Pete to get vacuum readings?  15" with the Explorer cam seems low to me.   I'm at 18"-19" with the previous mildly custom-cammed 5.0L and on the box-stock LS3.  I would've guessed you'd see 20" of vacuum with the truck cam.  Was thinking - if you're pulling vacuum readings from the efi set up, and they're not accurate - that might mess with the FITech set up.  If you've confirmed with a good gauge, then never mind.  Besides, have to evict the tranny gremlins from the premises first!

In reply to MichaelYount :

Using both the Fitech readout and an analog gauge. They both agree.

Trying to think if the engine is fighting the AOD all the time if that might also result in a lower vacuum reading.

I have to admit that I did not see the drivetrain being the Mongolian clusterberkeley that it is.

“Trying to think if the engine is fighting the AOD all the time if that might also result in a lower vacuum reading.”  I think you’re right.

In reply to NOHOME :

I actually knew a guy that the aod locked up on him and it ending up causes his motor to let go.  

I think someone said you should ditch that aod a long time ago...

Glad your figuring it out.  

In reply to bigfranks84 :

The option would be a C4 if the AOD were to go.  Even if I were to somehow get acceptance for a manual conversion, a T5 is 4k  Cnd $$$ away and the bucket of $$$ is getting low. 

Then again, with the proffered adapter, maybe a powerglide would suffice if combined with a 2.87 rear gear.  Who needs all that shifty stuff anyways?

Pete

In reply to NOHOME :

Uhhhh what's the cost for making the wife DD a stick?yeah go with whatever auto floats your boat, it's less. 

In reply to NOHOME :

I liked the c4 that I built for my 93 notch. But I didn't drive alot of freeway speeds at the time.  But it was a simple build, just red Altos clutches and plates and a shift kit with a ratchet shifter.  Thing would chirp the tires going into 3rd. And it's cheap to build, you can easily buy a new kit with bands for couple hundred and a core is usually pretty cheap.  The c4 has to be one of the easiest transmissions to build. 

I'd never pay money to put a t5 in.  I've blown up far too many of them over the years. Everyone I had was dieing, that was behind mild 2.3T setups and m I'll ld 5.0ho setups and most were the world class and one was even the t5z

In reply to bigfranks84 :

On the same page with the C4; got one under a friends bench and he can rebuild it in his sleep for couch change. A 2.87 would go out back.

One of the reasons I did not argue much about the AOD was because after having been raised on a diet of MGB, Miata and FRS shifters, the T5 gear actuation makes driving a manual not worth the going. AND every single one that I have driven came with a caveat about how to drive it cause it was wounded.

Hydrogen, Stupidity and Mrs NOHOME not driving a Stick are all universal constants..

Once again though, despite the being pissed off at the whole thing, a part of me is still fascinated with the problem because me and the other two Petes  will fix it somehow and be a bit wiser than if it did not go wrong. 

Working with  P2 in the shop to see if we can make sense of the  weird AOD issue.

Put a pressure gauge on the main line feed. On a 0-300 psi gauge, bent the needle at 300 psi at idle.  

Pulling the valve body apart, seems half the valves are stuck and several blow-outs in the gaskets. 

Gonna guess the guy who rebuilt it gave it a coat of paint.

Live and learn.

Pete