WHY IS MY 13B A SLOW TURNER?

[bldn10]

Ever since I got this ex-SpeedSource car it has been somewhat difficult to crank. I hear other cars crank right up like a street car but this one doesn't. Now I can't get it to start. :bash_1_:

I have changed the starter, charged the battery, and have it on a battery booster pushing 22+ volts but it turns over very slowly. (I'll worry about firing later but I'd like to get this issue behind me.) Probably 120 rpm. Often it will get slower and slower. It is not battery posts because I get >12 volts in the wire inside the cables. Can the engine itself or flywheel do this? Makes no difference if in neutral w/ clutch in or out.

[dickita15]

well rule one with electrical problem (and this may or may not be electrical) is check for bad ground. run a jumper cable from the engine block to the negative battery post.

[seckerich]

Bill it sounds like you have a current problem to the starting circuit. Check the size of wire used to run the loop to the kill switch, the kill switch itself, and the ground as mentioned in the previous post. Don't overlook the cable ends to the battery as well. With a new starter it should really spin fast. Might want to pull the plugs with the fuel pump unplugged and see if it spins faster. Bad timing will cause it to spin slow and the no plug check will help eliminate this.

[bldn10]

The block is already grounded in 2 places but I made a good one w/ a jumper cable and that is not it.

I decided to check the wires to the starter by applying current directly to the + starter lug. When I do that on the bench w/ the old starter, it spins like crazy. I am not applying current to the solenoid so, correct me if I'm wrong, the starter should not engage the flywheel, the engine should not turn over, and the starter should spin as it does on the bench. Right? Noooooo. The engine does indeed turn. So the starter is apparenty at all times engaged w/ the flywheel and is being turned when the engine is running. Right? No wonder it gets so hot! The solenoid is working properly so do these starters need to be shimmed so that the starter teeth clear the flywheel? FWIW I can see where the teeth have been in contact w/ the flywheel and it is a good 1/4". Is there a spec on this?

[Eagle7]

Bill, I believe the solenoid is simply a high-current relay that connects the battery cable to the motor. When the motor turns it also extends the gear to engage the flywheel. Steve's post suggested that you check for a voltage drop between the battery and the battery post on the starter. Your cutoff switch is in this circuit and it or the wires to/from it could be the problem.

Put a voltmeter on the battery and measure while cranking. Then put the meter from the motor terminal to the starter case and measure while cranking. If it's significantly lower, you've got a problem in either the supply circuitry or the ground. Progressively move the meter leads out further away from the starter to determine where the problem is.

[bldn10]

Marty, it is my understanding of starters that the solenoid is what allows the gear to jump out and engage the flywheel. Indeed, on the bench you can see and hear the gear jump out by applying current to the solenoid terminal. If you just apply current to the + lug the solenoid is not activated and the gear does not jump out, but the motor spins. I called myself testing the voltage theory by connecting a hot jumper cable directly to the starter - no cable, no kill switch, no nothing in between - so doesn't that eliminate that as a problem? The question at the moment is about the engagement between starter and flywheel; I don't think it is supposed to be unless you are cranking it.

[ITS51RX7]

Bill,
There is not any engagement of the fly-wheel and the starter unless you apply 12 volts to the solenoid.

Do you have a lead ( 6 awg min ) from the neg side of the battery directly tied to the engine ?

I had a starter that was also turning over very slow, I changed the starter then I could not crank it at all.
Turns out that I had one bad starter motor and one bad starter solenoid.

Do you know if you have a know good starter.

[bldn10]

Michael, both starters spin fine out of the car. I just got under there and looked through the hole in the bottom of the bellhousing and I could see that the starter pinion gear is indeed meshed w/ the flywheel. By a good bit too. I'll have to shim it w/ thick washers. Has anyone ever had to shim their starter? If not, what's the deal here - can the flywheel be protruding too much?

As to the ground, I don't have one from the battery to the block except for the OEM one that goes on that long bolt that goes through the block and through the upper starter "ear." However, I did try that directly w/ a jumper cable and it made no difference so I think I'm adequately grounded.

[ITS51RX7]

Bill,
As you stated that both starters spin fine off of the car, But there is zero load on them at that time.

The only time the starter gear should come in contact with the fly-wheel is when the solenoid is engaged, as for shiming with thick washers this should not be required.

If the starter gear is in constant contact with the fly-wheel you have a problem with that starter, sounds as if the gear does not retract after the solenoid is de-energized.

[lateapex911]

Right...that could be, i suppose, an improper flywheel, or a solenoid that is sticky on the return, or has a broken return spring. On the bench, I think the gear should pop out when the solenoid is engaged and the thing should spin like crazy. If it's already out, then the solenoids the issue and it isn't returning.

Try looking at your spare to see the range of travel t the starter gear should be traveling through, and compare to the version in the car.

I've never seen or heard of a case where there was shimming needed.

[bldn10]

Guys, I'm, tellin' you that both starters appear to be OK. I checked out the "new" one before I installed it and checked the "old" one when I took it out. On both the pinion does not jump out unless and until the solenoid is energized. I suppose it is possible that neither have enough torque to spin the crank but right now I want to resolve this gear engagement issue.

[lateapex911]

OK, so, both starters pop the gear when the solenoid is energixed. Measure the distance in in and out conditions from the mounting flange to the gear, and compare it to the car. IF the flywheel to mounting flange dim matches the "IN" poistion, you know that you've got the wrong alignment or flywheel (wrong year??? (I have seen that on 12As).

If the distance matches the "OUT" position, then theres an issue with the solenoid hanging up and not disengaging. NAPA might have a cheap swap?

[dickita15]

It would be bizarre if the starters were staying engaged. Shimming is a bad option. My hunch is you are going down the wrong road. Has the motor run. If not can you push start the car and get that out of the way. do you have another car available to try one of the starters. Street, race, whatever. If you drive a hour to test the starters you will save time in the long run. You need to eliminate variables.

[AntonioGG]

Bill are they rebuilt starters? New? Used?

I ask because on my Miata I had a similar problem. I rebuilt my starter and I put the yoke from the solenoid to the gear backwards and it actually left the starter engaged all the time.

As far as spinning the starter on the bench, that is not a good test since you don't have a load on it.

[bldn10]

HISTORY: I bought this car for the 2004 season. From the outset it turned slowly. From time to time it has been better and worse. In 4/05 I actually had the reverse problem - the pinion did not extend far enough! Bought a rebuilt starter at AutoZone and installed it but it did same thing. I widened the mounting hole a bit and it then worked. (Not using same tranny now.) The other day I replaced the AutoZone starter w/ one from my '89 parts car. So, 1 starter is a year and a half old and the other very old but w/ around 75,000 miles on it.

I'll pull the starter and take the measurements.

[Daryl DeArman]

How easy is it to turn the motor over by hand?

It is not like a piston motor, it should be MUCH easier to turn over by hand for comparisons' sake.

Did it turn over faster without the plugs firing?

[bldn10]

The motor turns normally by hand and it made no difference w/ the coils unplugged.

OK, forget the shim thing - the starter pinion is not in contact w/ the flywheel when I first insert it. However, after engaging the flywheel it will not let go. Either there is too much contact/friction between the 2 or perhaps the flywheel just needs to be spinning faster for the pinion to release. I'd like to think the latter.

So, back to the initial issue - why is it turning so slowly? If I leave the start button on for several seconds it will literally grind almost to a halt. And I am on a booster.

[dickita15]

did you try the voltmeter at the battery and then again at the starter terminal while cranking

[bldn10]

"I called myself testing the voltage theory by connecting a hot jumper cable directly to the starter - no cable, no kill switch, no nothing in between - so doesn't that eliminate that as a problem?"

[dickita15]

Sorry you are right I had forgotten you said that. Doing this should eliminate a voltage drop problem. The only long shot is that if at the battery end you clamped the jumper to the terminal end you could have a problem between the terminal end and the battery post. Like I said that is a long shot, but you have ruled out the easy stuff.

I really think you need to either borrow a third starter or put one of your two in another car. There must be a race car or street car somewhere near you or another racer who will let you test using his spare starter.

[bldn10]

Here's the latest:

New rebuilt starter
New battery
Neg. battery jumped direct to starter case
Pos. battery jumped direct to starter motor terminal
+ 300 amp booster

Turns a little better but still too slow
Starter pinion gear still stays stuck in flywheel
No hint of firing

I pulled plugs from both rotors and it did turn faster but isn't that always going to be the case w/ no compression resistance?

:wacko:

[dickita15]

Thanks for the update Bill I was just thinking of you. I was reading a tech tip column in Grassroots Motorsports about how handy the test light is. They suggested clipping the test light lead to a good ground and touching the probe to the motor while an assistant cranks the motor. If the light glows at all the engine needs a better ground. I know that the jumper should solve this but it is a simple test to do.

My next question to any of the rotary gurus here is it possible that there is an seal in the engine that could cause extra drag during the starting process and if so would it cause a problem when running.

[ddewhurst]

***Starter pinion gear still stays stuck in flywheel***

Bill, that's ^ as queer as a nine dollar bill. Since this non returning pinion have you tested for the starter amperage draw? Might the pinion on the rebuilt starter not be square to the starter mounting surface? Did the old starter pinion disengage as it should? Can you some how remove the starter & hang it down where it belongs (have a building block on the floor & clamp the starter to the building block), attach the normal wires with a ground wire from starter to the engine & hit the starter to see if the starter spins fast & furious? Be darn sure none of the hot wires can touch anything.

It's kind of Rube Goldberg but if completed correctly what can it hurt.

Stuff shouldn't be this difficult ;)
David

[Eagle7]

Bill, it sounds like you've got a mechanical interference problem. If I understand correctly, with a prior transmission installed the gear wouldn't engage, and now it won't disengage. Both sound like too little clearance between the flywheel teeth and the starter teeth. Seems like it's got to be: rear engine housing, flywheel, bell housing dowels, transmission, or starter.

[bldn10]

I did the Grassroots test and also jumped a + to the solenoid terminal. It still does not turn as fast as it should but I think it should be fast enough to start. The pinion will release by manually turning the flywheel so I think it will be OK once the damn thing starts up.

I think I now have a fuel delivery issue. I just installed a FPR and am not getting any pressure at all. There is gas at the secondary rail supply so I think either the rail/OEM FPR or fuel pump or fuel filter is/are bad.

[seckerich]

I did the Grassroots test and also jumped a + to the solenoid terminal. It still does not turn as fast as it should but I think it should be fast enough to start. The pinion will release by manually turning the flywheel so I think it will be OK once the damn thing starts up.

I think I now have a fuel delivery issue. I just installed a FPR and am not getting any pressure at all. There is gas at the secondary rail supply so I think either the rail/OEM FPR or fuel pump or fuel filter is/are bad.
[/b]
Sounds like the fuel lines are reversed. The fuel should go in from the filter to the metal line towards the front of the motor and return from the rear line. Feeds the primary rail and then the secondary which has the regulator. The pump does not run unless the airflow meter moves to turn on the relay. If you are not drawing good air it will not run. Check it by pushing in on the AFM by hand to see if the pump runs.

[eprodrx7]

The pinion disengages from the flywheel when the flywheel speed exceeds the starter speed (when the motor starts) I believe the real issue is a lack of amperage to the starter due to old crappy wire. Go to autozone and buy a pos. battery terminal with a 3ft+ lead and run it direct to the starter. Should solve the problem. On a long shot did you get a turbo model starter accidentally? Or maybe you have a turbo flywheel and need the turbo starter?

[Eagle7]

...The pump does not run unless the airflow meter moves to turn on the relay. If you are not drawing good air it will not run. Check it by pushing in on the AFM by hand to see if the pump runs.
[/b]
I'm not sure, but I think Bill's got an S5 setup, which does not control the fuel pump through the AFM. It's controlled by the ECU.

[bldn10]

John, I have run cables directly from the battery so I don't think it has anything to do w/ wiring.

Steve, I hate to admit it but when I first hooked it up I indeed had it reversed. Didn't catch that the 2 lines cross over each other. I have it right now - I think - the return goes into the side of the FPR and exits out the bottom. The gauge is in one of the extra side ports. Is the OEM FPR closed until a certain pressure is reached? Was is it? As a test I ran a hose from the filter to the FPR and I get 39# even w/ the FPR closed off as far as it will go. So I figure I am getting 39# or so into the secondary rail ... but 0 coming out. So is 39 below the bleed-off point? Of course, at 39 I am getting fuel and it should fire up.

And Marty I think you are right because I've always had fuel pressure w/o the engine running. Also, I pulled the supply line off and turned on the pump and got gas.

[seckerich]

Forgot you were S5 so the pump should be on. I have always run the line from the filter to the inlet and have a T fitting there to read pressure. I run the outlet line to the external FPR and set from there. The stock regulator is usually 35-39 stock on these cars and we do not run the vacuum line to the FPR on the secondary rail. You will see no change in pressure until you go higher than the stock regulator. You are probably to the point with this motor that it is so washed down with fuel it will not have compression to start. Pull the stick and see if you smell fuel. Check if the plugs get wet when you crank it and it does not start. If all else fails try to pull it off in second gear and it might save you tons of time. If that doesn't solve the problem load it up and bring it over and we will get you going. :D

[bldn10]

Steve, your setup w/ the gauge in a T in the supply line should be the same as my test w/ the supply to the FPR w/ gauge. What pressure do you get? Should it not be more than 39? To clarify, are you confirming that if my gauge in the return line reads 0 then the supply pressure is < the stock FPR of 35-39? I.e the stock FPR shuts off all return up to that point? Again, doesn&#39;t that indicate a bad filter or failing pump?

[seckerich]

Steve, your setup w/ the gauge in a T in the supply line should be the same as my test w/ the supply to the FPR w/ gauge. What pressure do you get? Should it not be more than 39? To clarify, are you confirming that if my gauge in the return line reads 0 then the supply pressure is < the stock FPR of 35-39? I.e the stock FPR shuts off all return up to that point? Again, doesn&#39;t that indicate a bad filter or failing pump?
[/b]
If I understand you correctly you have the FPR before it enters the fuel rail? If so you are just setting the pressure to the fuel pump. The regulator has to be the last thing in the line before the return. You will see pressure at the FPR and have nothing at the rails. The guage hole in the FPR is reading the pressure between the inlet line and the FPR--not the outlet pressure which is just a return to the tank. The FPR acts like a dam and holds fuel back until it reaches the set pressure and lets the rest go by. You should not ever read pressure on the return side after the FPR or you have a blocked line. Give me a call and I will send you a picture of my setup.

[its66]

Bill,
This may be a silly question--did you remove/disable the stock FPR?

[bldn10]

Steve, my putting the FPR in the supply line was just a test of the pump/filter; the permanent installation is in the return line. But I was getting 0 there - so I was trying to figure out why I get no pressure in the return line but have pressure to the rails. Premise - I was not getting enough pressure to overcome the stock FPR. So I put the FPR w/ gauge in the supply just to test that - and got 39#. The pump should put out more than that so to test the filter I bypassed it w/ a line from the pump to the FPR/gauge. Still got 39# so: 1. the filter is not restricting flow; and 2. the pump is deficient. I ordered a new Walbro pump that will be here today. Of course, even w/ 39# the engine should fire up.

Jim, I know we went through this once before and my understanding is that if you want more pressure you do not have to mess w/ the stock FPR. Like Steve explained, the new FPR downstream of the stock FPR will dam up the fuel that the latter lets by; thus, increasing pressure upstream. But if you want less than stock pressure, yes, you have to disable the stock FPR. [We don&#39;t have to get into this here but I have gone on record saying that I have a somewhat difficult time finding where it says in the ITCS that you can modify the fuel rail. The rule allowing after-market FPRs should be clarified to expressly state that stock FPRs may be removed or modified if and as is necessary.]

[its66]

Bill,
oops..I guess I forgot my basic physics. You are correct, that should work fine. I hope the fuel pump fixes it. I&#39;ve been chasing a fuel problem with a friend down here and know they can be pretty frustrating.

Jim

[seckerich]

Steve, my putting the FPR in the supply line was just a test of the pump/filter; the permanent installation is in the return line. But I was getting 0 there - so I was trying to figure out why I get no pressure in the return line but have pressure to the rails. Premise - I was not getting enough pressure to overcome the stock FPR. So I put the FPR w/ gauge in the supply just to test that - and got 39#. The pump should put out more than that so to test the filter I bypassed it w/ a line from the pump to the FPR/gauge. Still got 39# so: 1. the filter is not restricting flow; and 2. the pump is deficient. I ordered a new Walbro pump that will be here today. Of course, even w/ 39# the engine should fire up.

Jim, I know we went through this once before and my understanding is that if you want more pressure you do not have to mess w/ the stock FPR. Like Steve explained, the new FPR downstream of the stock FPR will dam up the fuel that the latter lets by; thus, increasing pressure upstream. But if you want less than stock pressure, yes, you have to disable the stock FPR. [We don&#39;t have to get into this here but I have gone on record saying that I have a somewhat difficult time finding where it says in the ITCS that you can modify the fuel rail. The rule allowing after-market FPRs should be clarified to expressly state that stock FPRs may be removed or modified if and as is necessary.]
[/b]
Let us know how it goes after you get the new pump. And thanks for helping feed my family with the Walbro pump purchase. :happy204: My company makes the motor housings inside those pumps.

[bldn10]

Well, I got the new pump and now I need to ask if the test I am doing of it is accurate. I have a line essentially from the pump to my FPR w/ gauge. I have the FPR cranked all the way closed, which I assume means no gas returns. I.e. a dead end or, as Steve says, a dam. It should be the same as just putting a pressure gauge at the end of the line - right? Spec fuel pump pressure is 64-85; I was getting 39 before and now 42 w/ the new pump. That still ain&#39;t good enough. Must have a bad motor housing. :P

[seckerich]

Well, I got the new pump and now I need to ask if the test I am doing of it is accurate. I have a line essentially from the pump to my FPR w/ gauge. I have the FPR cranked all the way closed, which I assume means no gas returns. I.e. a dead end or, as Steve says, a dam. It should be the same as just putting a pressure gauge at the end of the line - right? Spec fuel pump pressure is 64-85; I was getting 39 before and now 42 w/ the new pump. That still ain&#39;t good enough. Must have a bad motor housing. :P
[/b]
Problem solved!! Is there a chance that the line in the tank has a leak and is bleading off? Chance your pressure gauge is off? Just reaching here. With the aeromotive FPR My pump will go 50+ easy. You should only need 37 or so to make the S5 happy. The problem is to get fuel out of the top end.

[Tak]

DId you ever solve the cranking problem? If the motor turns easily by hand, slowly under the starter, and the stater gear stays engaged with the flywheel, I would guess one of the following:

1) Flywheel or ring gear is coming loose
2) Starter is too close the the flywheel and the gear teeth are crashing (tips of one gear crashing into valley of mating gear). Check for this by inking the entire starter gear. Install it, crank it for a few seconds, remove it, and look at where ink is worn off. The gear tips and the bottom of the valleys should both keep their ink.
3) The entire eccentric shaft is floating too much (there is a shim at the front thrust bearing that limits shaft float IIRC). It&#39;s possible that the starter engaging the flywheel is pushing it forward, causing something to rub and drag. I rate this one as unlikely, but should be easy to check with a dial indicator on the front pulley. (I&#39;ve got a 12A, so I don&#39;t know the 13B spec. It should be in the manual.)

Good Luck...

Tak
#29 ITA
SFR SCCA

[bldn10]

TAK, I think we have concluded that once the engine starts and the flywheel turns faster than the starter, it will release. But, no, it still turns slower than it should and it will not fire up. So I started looking at fuel, spark, etc.

[bldn10]

Steve suggested I do a more robust test of the starter than clamping jumper cables so this morning I bought a new battery cable and ran it direct from the + post to the + lug on the starter, grounded direct to the battery w/ a jumper cable, and put 12v to the solenoid. It still turned as slow as ever. Steve heard it over the phone and says it is too slow to fire up. So, does anyone have any ideas what kind of mechanical problem could cause it to turn so slowly? I have raced it 1 weekend since its rebuild. It was slow to crank then but better than now.

I put 12v direct to the new fuel pump and it went off scale so it is working just fine. Otherwise it will will run until 40-45# is attained and then quit. Looks like it only gets about 5.5v from the relay. I can hear the relay cutting on and off. Is this right? Still 0 pressure reading at the FPR in the return.

[Eagle7]

Seems like I&#39;ve heard that the S5 has two voltages that it applies to the fuel pump. Maybe to keep it from flooding during starting? I can&#39;t remember the specifics.

[eprodrx7]

Bill,
Was thinking about this more and wondered if you had checked the E-shaft end play? If the front pully has been changed or removed the spacer talked about earlier can move forward and the radial bering behind it will drop down. When the pully is reinstalled the whole thing will bind and make for a lot of friction at start up. As the motor warms up and expands it won&#39;t be as bad. I did this in my early Rotard days and drove the car like that for most of a season. End play should be .003-.005
JW

[bldn10]

Guys, I thought this had been checked but apparently not. First I took the car to a buddy&#39;s shop and put my starter in his car and his in mine. Mine worked in his but not his in mine. :wacko: On the way home I stopped at AutoZone and had them check the new battery just for the heck of it. The damn thing would not hold voltage under load! They gave me a new one (that I had checked before I left) and now it turns over fast enough to start. :birra: I had bypassed the battery + post but may have left the ground on, and perhaps that sole connection to a bad battery drew off too much amperage when it was cranking. I don&#39;t know. Anyway, there is no apparent problem w/ the E-shaft, starter, etc.

Now that that problem is behind me I&#39;m trying to get the thing to start. I still am not getting a hint of it firing even w/ ether sprayed in the intake. I pulled the plugs and they are all firing and I have fuel pressure. Tried a different CAS. No now what? What is the definitive way of confirming that the injectors are working in an engine that is not running?

[lateapex911]

Bill, glad to hear you are getting there! One thing that might be an issue is that after so many tries you&#39;ve washed the oil off the rotor end plates and housings, and have lost compression.&#39;

If thats the case, starting is tough. I&#39;m a 1st gen guy, and have been down this road. One thing that helps is ATF fluid. A little in the intake can restore the lost compression and get it running. Now, if the other 2nd gen guys concur that it&#39;s an OK idea, be sure to do it when you can air the car out, and the neighbors aren&#39;t home, as the smoke show will be the size of some of the F1 Mika Hakkinen engine grenades we&#39;ve seen, except it will last longer! No mosquitos will live though, so it&#39;s has it&#39;s upside!

just a thought.....

[C. Ludwig]

A quick check to see if the injectors are firing is to plug a spare CAS into the loom and spin it over by hand. Without the engine cranking it will be quiet enough to hear the injectors clicking. Noid lights eliminate all question.

[bldn10]

I&#39;M UP AND RUNNING! :happy204:

I finally gave up on getting it to fire w/ ether - it was just turning over like mad w/ no hint of firing. Checked plugs and injectors (the spare CAS trick really works!) and everything looked OK - just no hits. Chris, who rebuilt the engine, counseled against using ATF in a new engine so I tried it w/ 2-cycle oil, first in 1 rotor, then the 2nd. After the 2nd it fired right up. Was rough and smoky at first but cleared up on both counts. Now I have a nice, stable idle and timing. Hope to dyno it for the ARRC tomorrow. Thanks for all you help and encouragement.

[dj10]

Tried a different CAS. No now what? [/b]



What was the difference between when you originally tried the spare CAS and now?



Well, I&#39;m happier than a pig in slop for you! As long as you go it fixed, that&#39;s the main thing.

[C. Ludwig]

I&#39;M UP AND RUNNING! :happy204:

I finally gave up on getting it to fire w/ ether - it was just turning over like mad w/ no hint of firing. Checked plugs and injectors (the spare CAS trick really works!) and everything looked OK - just no hits. Chris, who rebuilt the engine, counseled against using ATF in a new engine so I tried it w/ 2-cycle oil, first in 1 rotor, then the 2nd. After the 2nd it fired right up. Was rough and smoky at first but cleared up on both counts. Now I have a nice, stable idle and timing. Hope to dyno it for the ARRC tomorrow. Thanks for all you help and encouragement.
[/b]


I&#39;d say Jake hit the nail on the head with the idea of fuel washing down the chambers which killed compression. When you were cranking it with the faulty battery there was enough juice to fill the injectors and pop them open but not enough cranking revs to seal the chamber and get it to fire. Very much of that at all you loose compression. Glad you got it sorted and glad it all turned out to be simple problems. I forgot to tell you to change the oil after your flooding issue. There&#39;s possibly a good amount of fuel in there.

[m glassburner]

Yea !!! see you at the ARRC !!! mdg #19 omni

[bldn10]

"What was the difference between when you originally tried the spare CAS and now?"

Sorry &#39;bout the typo - should have been: "So now what?" The spare CAS made no difference so I was simply saying that that wasn&#39;t the problem. The later reference to the spare CAS was re Chris&#39; suggestion to plug a spare one in and, w/ the ignition on, spin the gear - the ECU thinks the engine is running and tells the injectors to fire. It is a sure way to check if the primary injectors are at least firing w/o having to take the intake off.

[bldn10]

I wish it had never started. Went to the ARRC and still had trouble getting it to go. Missed the 1st 3 practice sessions Thurs. but finally got it started for the last one. Got it going Fri. a.m. for the 1st qual. session and it felt really good but my time sucked so I figured it really wasn&#39;t putting out the power it should. At some point we pulled and cleaned the NGK racing plugs and found that the ceramic insulator was missing on one of them. I hoped/assumed it had come off and caused the previous seal failure since the same plugs were in it then. Went out for the 2nd Q session and it sounded lame. Came in and pulled a plug from the front rotor and it clearly had lost an apex seal. I was able to see inside w/ a mirror and there is a big chunk out of it. I will caution you about these plugs. Not sure what I&#39;m going to do now - 3 engines in one season is a little much.
[attachmentid=676]

[ddewhurst]

Bill, what is the number of the NGK plug that was/is in the engine? Are you thinking the ceramic insulator fractured/busted/came apart from the ceramic body & fell into the engine?

Have you talked to the NGK racing guy that is stationed in Wixom, MI?

Thanks
David

[bldn10]

Yes, that&#39;s what I am thinking. I haven&#39;t spoken w/ anyone and don&#39;t expect any admissions or accomodations. They are the 105s - the $30 ones.

[eprodrx7]

Bill I used the same plugs in a much higher HP motor the was regulary taken to 9000+ RPM. Did you happen to see the blue and red RX7 at the ARRC? That&#39;s my old car and I built that motor 7 years ago and it is still going strong, all the time using the 10.5 plugs. I don&#39;t think the plugs are your problem.

I would guess that when the motor was rebuilt the apex seal springs were not replaced and worked just fine at idle but at higher RPM they were too weak to hold the seal against the housing. Result is that the seal bangs around in there and eventually hammers itself to death. That old seal wasted your $30 plugs and most likely the housing too.

You might want to think about a different engine builder. Sorry you had a crappy race.

[ddewhurst]

***don&#39;t expect any admissions or accomodations.***

Bill, not what I was meaning. I ment as a source of info.

[C. Ludwig]

Bill I used the same plugs in a much higher HP motor the was regulary taken to 9000+ RPM. Did you happen to see the blue and red RX7 at the ARRC? That&#39;s my old car and I built that motor 7 years ago and it is still going strong, all the time using the 10.5 plugs. I don&#39;t think the plugs are your problem.

I would guess that when the motor was rebuilt the apex seal springs were not replaced and worked just fine at idle but at higher RPM they were too weak to hold the seal against the housing. Result is that the seal bangs around in there and eventually hammers itself to death. That old seal wasted your $30 plugs and most likely the housing too.

You might want to think about a different engine builder. Sorry you had a crappy race.
[/b]


Since I was outed as the engine builder earlier in the thread I feel the need to rebuff your "guess". Quite simply it&#39;s wrong. Bill lost three engines this year. At least two to broken apex seals. This one was mine the other one wasn&#39;t. He has an issue other than bad spark plugs or old apex seal springs. IT engines don&#39;t break seals with regularity (shouldn&#39;t break them at all) without assistance from a major problem in the electronics. Be it ignition or injection. I&#39;m leaning toward the former.

[seckerich]

I have to agree with Chris, IT motors do not eat seals. With all the fuel pump and starting problems this car has had I would not be so quick to point at the builder. I had a 4 year old Speedsource motor loose a seal. Looked at the telemetry and found fuel pressure was dropping to 28 at high RPM. The electrode on L1 fell off and went through the motor. Great to give opinions but don&#39;t be so quick to point fingers. People make a living by their reputation. :rolleyes:

[bldn10]

John, the fact of the matter is that one of those plugs was pulled and the ceramic insulator was missing. Now it either came off inside the engine or outside. A newly rebuilt engine has a big chunk out of an apex seal. It is logical to assume that the insulator came off inside the engine and broke the seal. There is no reason that I know of to think that the spring had anything to do w/ it. FWIW these were carbon seals and special springs are used w/ them - so they were not OEM springs re-used.

I will have no hesitancy whatsoever about having Chris redo the engine if I decide to go that route.

[eprodrx7]

My apologies Chris I did not know that you had built the motor (missed that from before). Too many times I&#39;ve had customers come to me saying that their freshly rebuilt motor has a problem and then I find out that they had done the motor themselves or their buddy has, and they reused everything but the water seals. The corner seals are in upside down, the springs have nothing left and and the housings "looked pretty good". I&#39;m sure you have heard the same also. You have to say that it is more common then a bad harness. Sorry again and I too am dependant on my reputation.

If we cane assume that the motor was good going in then I would have to say that fuel pessure loss leading to a lean condition is the culprit. The series 5 cars have a funky voltage drop to the fuel pump issue. Bill try wiring the fuel pump direct to 12V and buy a cheap data system to track A/F ratio or exhaust temp.

[bldn10]

Once I got it turning over good and started I did note that the fuel pressure at the FPR was not reading anything w/o the engine running. At that point I did a little research and found out about the S5 fuel pump resistor/relay and how it cut voltage to the pump. Indeed, I was only getting 4-5v at the pump. When I jumped 12v to it the pressure gauge pegged. I could not find out much about this thing on the Internet or otherwise. It did appear that Speesource had done something w/ the wiring at the resistor/relay but it was not wired direct. I did go ahead and wire it direct prior to the 2nd Q session but by then the damage had been done.