Close



Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default 80-82 T bird Electronic Dash, LTD voice syth, MPG meter

    Fox bodies, including T birds from 1980-1982, 83 LTD's, and certainly Continental Compacts and LSC's have some really cool 80's tech Electronic VF dashes, sythersizers, and on board trip computers. How easy are these to get these days? Anyone here have Tbird, LTD experience?

    I'm busy fitting up a whole raft of electronic sensors on my 81 Stang for road roughness, but I was suprised to find O2 sensors and this VR sensor were standard on all Foxes around my year and onwards. Bit of a joke fitting 1 grand on top notch gear from the UK, when Ford had all the stuff on the options list of most Fox bodies.

    Here is the doodad that I set up, only to find that the cruise control runs off a variable Reluctor disk on the standard cable speedo drive



    What follows is my set up of proprietry on board trip meter. Its fine, and it works, but I've seen standard systems like this as regular Ford options, like the Lincoln Mk VII/LSC and early Thunderbird Fox stuff, and I'm wondering how easy it would be to source. I've seen other X-shell guys do some cool stuff with later electronic dashes, like http://www.maverickcomet.com/TechArt...icCluster1.asp


    Cant say enough about my experiences with the Brantz set up. Its serviced in NZ, and the sensors have got better and better each year. The current Bernstein sensor yields a 4.2 to 2.0 volt square wave form. In my case it was 4.95 to 0.79 volts.



    It glows green when polling, and it can fit on the dust sheild of any Ford with a little thought. Mine polls the four 4.25" studs like it would in a Cortina 6. The X-shell Falcs have 5 on 4.5", so that's where the sensor has to go



    It allows distance and speed for Brantz Survey Master, and other applications. When I hooked it up to my Mustang, I had both the Fox VR sensor from the cruise control which does tailshaft speed and this one on my front LHS wheel

    Last edited by xctasy; 07-02-2012 at 08:20 AM.

  2. #2
    FEP Senior Member Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Richmond, ME
    Posts
    967

    Default

    It's available. I do electrical and electronics (shipboard for a living, Ford for a hobby, household for sanity) so we should probably find a time to have a more detailed discussion.

    My focus, like yours, has been EEC-V control of non-EEC-V engines, although (to make the Focus part a pun) I gave up a little and moved over to tweaking of pre-existing EEC-V (for example, the Focus-in-a-Volvo-Amazon project). It means making a lot of new and old tech work harmoniously...a lot of very "different" sensors give similar signals, and a lot of "similar" sensors give very different signals.

    I have a lot of literature and test equipment that gets used for tweaking--we should definitely chat. The items you seek may be in a bin somewhere in the piles of boxes stuffed in the "future master bedroom".

  3. #3
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Haha, I remember you and your awesome ovloV from the CI message board!

    I've discovered that the Fox body was the shining example of American smarts. Its body engnieering was copied by Toyota for the first front drive]Camry. EEC3 was still going strong in 160 hp 5.0 HO Mustangs in the mid eightees after late 70's roll out. I spent 8 grand on two 16 bit Campbell Scientific data loggers and sensors, only to find that FoMoCo's EEC5 can do the same thing for significantly less.

    My background for last 19 years has been road roughness using a spin off of the GM Proving ground Mays Meter. I used one at Opus International Consultants from 1993 to 2000, and then I made 'my' first one, a single bump integrator Mays meter, in October 2002 with a contracting company.



    [/url]








    It's been replaced by a later incarnation just before I left in July 2009, and the new one uses much improved systems and is not related to the one above. Since there is a five year statue of limitations, I'm free to talk about it without hurting my former company at all.



    It's calibrated against an industry standard ISO compliant laser profilometer, which drives an assortment of roads, and then gives you a benchmark calibration to hang your devices numbers off.

    So I'm really interested in the Fox technology, since all the stratergies seam to be repeated in other cutting edge technology.
    Last edited by xctasy; 07-07-2012 at 07:35 PM.

  4. #4
    FEP Senior Member Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Richmond, ME
    Posts
    967

    Default

    I agree, when Ford created the Fox chassis it was a real achievement. As an American car, it was remarkably forward thinking and carried EEC-I through EEC-V/OBD2 electronics through a lifespan of over 25 years (if you include the SN updates) as well as being redesigned to carry technology that, if not cutting edge, was certainly a good combination of affordable, reliable, and easily upgradeable.

    One of the nicest parts of the technology used is that, with 25 years to examine it--interfacing (mechanically, electronically, etc) to it is really easy and a lot of people have done a lot of work to improve it. I'm actually retrofitting SN95 brake and suspension parts to the Volvo.

    So you're looking at two industry-accepted devices needing a little bit of bridge work to get to a common communication platform? Definitely possible.

    As for post-Fox stuff, it's gotten too smart for itself in a lot of ways, too much engineering to engineer and not enough time spent being a driver in the car. It's not Ford, or not only Ford--I honestly think GM engineers must take public transportation to work. I doubt any of them drive the stuff I've rented lately, or it wouldn't be on the road.

  5. #5
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    I'm busy rewiring my Fox at the moment for the data loggers. Got lights, camera, but no action just yet.

    Last time I did this was exactly 10 years ago on my HiLux





    Todays effort was at least on a Fox



    Last edited by xctasy; 07-03-2012 at 07:18 AM.

  6. #6
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Fox body stuff is able to be made to fit OBD2 stuff easily. The last factory Right Hand Drive Mustang SN Cobras and Explorers we got down here (2002/2003) were standout cars because they were so easy to work on, with US backup which shows Motor City still knows how to throw a car together in a factory with love. And those engines were such honies compared to the Jap stuff we got in our Mazda based Rangers. Even though the Cobra was no match for the Monaro (gto) of those years, it had the worlds most delectable engine, and the Explorer was so much more edept in 2003 than it was in 1998, the IRS version was the envey of beam axle Range Rovers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywolf View Post
    So you're looking at two industry-accepted devices needing a little bit of bridge work to get to a common communication platform? Definitely possible.
    Yes. Chip stratergies and unpack binaries aren't such a jump as they used to be. I've been doing low order real time downloading with my 4 liter SOHC 1998 UR Explorer ODB2 files using Alex Peppers Car Code, and so the EDIS ignition map and part of the fuel map have been really easy to reverse engineer into the 200/250 engines (An Australian EEC4 EFI calibration was used on 164 hp x-flow 4.1s from 1985 to 1987, so I've been working on a full Explorer EDIS6/5R55 trans/EFI to 250 log head conversion to get 205,207, 210 hp stock of the N and E code Mustang/Explorer/Ranger sohc Cologne V6's put out).

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywolf View Post
    As for post-Fox stuff, it's gotten too smart for itself in a lot of ways, too much engineering to engineer and not enough time spent being a driver in the car. It's not Ford, or not only Ford--I honestly think GM engineers must take public transportation to work. I doubt any of them drive the stuff I've rented lately, or it wouldn't be on the road.
    It's just the same with these..data logging has gone up a notch with ESP and with the body control computers, and it lookes to me 8 grand spent logging binary codes is better than 8 grand buying other peoples slower clock speed computers. Ford and GM are the biggest seller of computers in the world, after all, not Microsoft.

    I spent more money on information technology calibration than on my cars...website forums like this allow me to devote most of my time to focused tasks like vehicle dynamics and enhanced suspension and engine power with little extra effort. For instance, to laser profile four sites for my road roughness vehicle cost 6 large, but now I am able to spent O dollars and debug vehicle handling equations with a Street Bump Andriod app which measures and reports realtime x, y,z co-ords.



    We used to do that with ball bank surveys and budgets of tens of thousands. And skid resistance, a can use a set of hardened TRX's and log the left front wheel sensor verses the Fox VR sensor, and tell you the slip speed when I brake traction on public roads. This stuff my be over the top, but it answers real world problems;-)
    Last edited by xctasy; 07-03-2012 at 01:05 PM.

  7. #7
    FEP Senior Member Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Richmond, ME
    Posts
    967

    Default

    Neat stuff! I love it when technologies overlap.

    That's part of why I'm working on (unobtrusive) home automation as part of my Victorian house renovation, and modifying the Volvo and Zephyr so ruthlessly while trying to keep the original character (or at least the parts of the original character that matter to me).

    I get back to shore in about 2 weeks. It sounds like we'll have to put some time aside for a bit of technology/parts/idea sharing.

  8. #8
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Sounds gooood.

    My son and I had to do some repeat calibrations of my de facto Vehicle Speed Sensor. Again, we should have the stock ones for the Fox...if they were okay for feeding EEC III and IV, and the Cruise control, on board MPG trip computer and digital dash board, and Voice Synthersizer, then that's what we should have used. I'll use them for the skid speed measurement, where front speed in mph can be compared with the fastest drive shaft speed as per a non limited slip diff skidding under sustained loss of traction.

    Anyway, the inner brake disc housing from my 9.3" item was making inconsistant readings because the locating tangs were hitting the side of the sensor four times each revolution.




    The sensor was 19 threads in, and too far from the four 4.25 pitch studs early Fox bodies use.



    The required 4.2- 5 and 2 to 0.5 volt square wave form wasn't their, as the running clearance was much more than 60 thou.

    So we took off the cleated with a big drill, and a die grinder barrel bur, but mounted it to my drill press chuck.





    I removed the cleats, then ground down the 'as cast' flash off the four 4.8 grade bolts. We wound out the sensor bolts so 22 threads were exposed, and then checked we had a 40 thou running clearance by shoving some blue tack on each and then replacing the disc four times.






    Results were great. Due to the Brantz meter controll box counting every fifth wheel lug as a count, we got a consistant 335 pulses for 3280.8 feet on the 190 65 HR 390 TRX's.
    Last edited by xctasy; 07-07-2012 at 01:37 AM.

  9. #9
    FEP Senior Member Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Richmond, ME
    Posts
    967

    Default

    To play the devil's advocate (since I know you're fond of those hardened TRX wheels!)...have you considered swapping to an SN95 brake setup (5-lug) which adds ABS sensors at each corner?

    Then you can use the VSS for your nominal speed and each individual wheel speed to show slip at the corner.

    I intend to use these sensors with a small box of my own design which will function as follows and has 4 settings and one light:
    1. Normal-light off: Reads and compares all 5 sensors. If one wheel is more than 8% off any of the others, or more than 20% off the VSS, an orange light on the dash comes on. If it's 20% off, the light turns red (actually going to use a 3-color LED). No action, just info which can be interpreted as wheel slip, spin, or a low tyre.
    2. Launch Control-green light: Uses Coyote throttle retard on ECM to cut electronic throttle if rear wheels are more than 40% over front wheels. Orange/red light as above.
    3. Stability assist-orange light: Cuts throttle if wheels exceed VSS by 15%. Red light when throttle chopped.
    4. *IF* I add the ABS from the Cobra I got all the other parts from... engages stock ABS and Traction Control programs. Throttle limited to 35 or so (enough to drive it in moderate traffic/bad weather). This is severe weather / inexperienced driver mode. Light always red.

    The Coyote PCM/ECM setup allows throttle chop directly; it also has a mode where it can detect a "valet key" which can be programmed with a maximum rpm and mph figure. I will use that input tied to a hidden switch which must be pressed to allow the car to come out of valet mode/mode 4 above, EVERY TIME the engine is started.

    Aren't electronics fun?

  10. #10
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Sure, electronics are a delight. But technology fortifies human pride, so running TRX's is sort of like running stock crossplies in your J2 Oldsmoile 372...they'll most likely save my life rather than making me push the outer limits. Time and time again, old cars on old roads with old technology can take on a snow storm without getting into difficulties more modern electronically assisted machinery can't cope with. Back in the 80's and 90's, brakes and tire upgrades were low priority items for Americans with classic rides, now, the whole scene has become charged with very competent kits for not much money. The SN95 stuff is hugely advanced, with dynamic upgrades hard to pass up. The 2002 NZ market Cobra was a charismatic cult or personality far in access of the common Fairmont rootes we know and love. Technology like that Fox 4 stuff is great to imbibe and drip feed into our rides.

    I've seen the S197 and emerging SUV EEC5 or whatever features. They are that involved, but they take the sanitisation process too far, because there is no limit to what Joe Public will do in his Ford, and make Dearborn pay for the trip (Pinto crash tank gas tank, t-bar shifters comming out of N, Bronco II and Explorer roll over stats, tire fretting stats; and Ford has to then try another New Idea to Ameliorate, and electronics and good engineering force Ford into these systems).

    I am totally interested in what you propose.


    Meantime, I'm back to the basics, another F=m.a night shift for me and the FoxStang.



    Shock movement guy wire to encoder, sprag clutches, sensors to cr1000, power supply, a cross check for Street Bumps lateral acceleration figures via Ball Bank Side Thrust Gauge....I'm longing for the day when just a few plug ins to a donated Ford body computer will do all this hard work for me...

    When you measure wheel movement, vehicle roll, acceleration, deacceleration, coast down, skid resistance, fuel consumption and can journal, report and tune from it, then you become of real use.






    Meantime, my data logger and Real World Dyno System await...
    Last edited by xctasy; 07-09-2012 at 06:23 AM.

  11. #11
    FEP Senior Member Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Richmond, ME
    Posts
    967

    Default

    Technology problems resulting in double posting. Real content below.
    Last edited by Greywolf; 07-09-2012 at 12:27 PM. Reason: Doubleposted.

  12. #12
    FEP Senior Member Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Richmond, ME
    Posts
    967

    Default

    On the heels of what you said above, and after a long day so I confess to just skimming.

    Yes, technology is wonderful stuff, but it doesn't replace the driver. And if it overdoes its thing, it either becomes a miserably dull machine, or gives too much confidence to someone who doesn't warrant it. Or both.

    That's why I want the OFF switch, and better still, the intermediate steps from all there to not all there. Sort of like my mind.

  13. #13
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Oh year, I love the personal responsibility button. It's the bomb!

    The following relates to the US Fairmont Fox program in that the Aussies took a 23 year 'gap decade times 2' out from it for what some may think to be very strange reasons.

    The reason I live my life like its 1978 (the year of the Fox?), is that the same engineering arguments re-aprear all the time. In NZ, a huge proportion of our roads are unsealed or seal extensions with no geometric improvements. So that makes really rough, dangerous roads with nasty geometrics, probably worse than some parts of Australia and as bad as sections of the Andies or Africa and Asia. So testing the bad stuff is probably the best means of making money and measurable helping the collective roading network improve. Improving the vehicles that drive these roads is important too, especiall when so many vehicles tow trailers or are technically doing an SUV or 8000 pound GVW job based on the loads they carry.

    Like all things, the technology becomes a legal, um, crutch. It does so because of the danagerous nature of what happens when a vehicle skids. Even to record skid requires some carefull neogiation. I remember an animated conversation I had with a Dunedin roading engineer who said Ford were crimininally negligent when the Pinto fuel tank was downgraded from a potential race bladder system. They weren't, they were found not guilty, but there seams to be a desire to make the horse breader quilty of owner/operator negligence!. In courts, even to consider saftey on a cost benifit basis forces you to become a legal bait for a dilligent lawyer looking after the best interests of the clients. For this reason, I only report instances of tracting loss, not the charactieristic of the event. The whys and wherefores become my intellectual property.

    What I like and love is the reasoning behind a major automakers systems. They show that legal side again and again. Its the Bob Geldof argument...if you knew someone was dying from something, and you didn't do any thing, is that not murder? That's the legal case for systems.

    I've been researching load instances from road roughness data, and as a beackground to an 800 page book on vehicle dynamics by a father and son development engineers, I had to do some research.

    Fox car development was denied by Ford Australia, becuse of the durability of design verses cost argument, and Broadmedows engineers took time out of that pivotal, sucessfull Fox car/s-shell program to correctand sort out the engineering of its X and T-shell cars (Falocn and Cortina). And you can see why. About that time, Holdens V-car (Commodore) was being pounded over the roughest roads as the World Car ethos hit Australia. I like the Fox car better, and dynamically, it was probably a bette base than a Commodore going forwards, but it never got an Aussie style development cycle thrown at it untill the 2001 Mustang Cobra.




    In terms of loads and what sort of road roughness could be thrown at a production car, the GM Holden was pivotal in doing that work on lighter World Cars.





    After testing,


    even more telling was this little graph showing how much rougher even an Aussie proving ground was than a German one







    The permission to use systems is based on engineering scope, and I'm interested in in betweener systems, where the data is an avenue for action. In my studies, I found about four things I wanted out of my data logging.

    1.Vehicle dynamics improvement in terms of vehicle pitch and roll verses road roughness. Sort of like the stiffen the suspension an it will handle argument. Its easy to make a car beat a skid pan like the 1984 Corvette did, but how about one which won't take your bodywork or kidenys out?
    2. A better response in a loaded vehicle basis, even if its 600 or 5000 pounds extra. Often, US and German developed vehicles fail the road of life test. The XK200 project 1961 Aussie Falcon, the 1971 TC Cortina (British car made in Aussie, but German Taunus based) and the preporduction 1978 GM Commodore fell apart on Australian roads, yet they had really excellent engineers who were unable to get better data to help them build better cars.
    3. A standard international load case external to internal programs used by big multinational companies. Due to the liablity issues, GM, FoMoCo and Chrysler have been forced to put there engineers on retainer to protect there costs and future vehicle developement. As such, some of there expertise is locked up and unfathomable by vehicle suspesnion tuners.
    4. And a way to "pay my way" via each assessment above.

    So I set up four road roughness test sites, and have done some trailer load applications, and this is my result. What I'm finding is major US and German developements are based on roads which are too smooth and have much more latent grip than our Kiwi or Aussie roads. So I use American Fords, which I know have excellent developement work, and throw them against our roading conditions, in order to tune there suspension to local conditions without loosing too much of the sterling engineering work Dearborn has done.
    Last edited by xctasy; 07-09-2012 at 02:52 PM.

  14. #14
    FEP Power Member Forever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    TEXAS BABY !!!
    Posts
    1,138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xctasy View Post
    Haha, I remember you and your awesome ovloV from the CI message board!

    I've discovered that the Fox body was the shining example of American smarts. Its body engnieering was copied by Toyota for the first front drive]Camry. EEC3 was still going strong in 160 hp 5.0 HO Mustangs in the mid eightees after late 70's roll out. I spent 8 grand on two 16 bit Campbell Scientific data loggers and sensors, only to find that FoMoCo's EEC5 can do the same thing for significantly less.

    My background for last 19 years has been road roughness using a spin off of the GM Proving ground Mays Meter. I used one at Opus International Consultants from 1993 to 2000, and then I made 'my' first one, a single bump integrator Mays meter, in October 2002 with a contracting company.

    It's been replaced by a later incarnation just before I left in July 2009, and the new one uses much improved systems and is not related to the one above. Since there is a five year statue of limitations, I'm free to talk about it without hurting my former company at all.

    It's calibrated against an industry standard ISO compliant laser profilometer, which drives an assortment of roads, and then gives you a benchmark calibration to hang your devices numbers off.

    So I'm really interested in the Fox technology, since all the stratergies seam to be repeated in other cutting edge technology.
    ENGLISH PLEASE LOL ....
    I'm holdin on your rope, got me 10 feet off the ground

  15. #15
    FEP Power Member Forever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    TEXAS BABY !!!
    Posts
    1,138

    Default

    I have always wanted a HEADS-UP display

    I would build my own, but I dont know how to build electronics
    I'm holdin on your rope, got me 10 feet off the ground

  16. #16
    FEP Senior Member Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Richmond, ME
    Posts
    967

    Default

    Hang on, Xctasy and I are still playing on the input side. Outputs come next (and yes, HUD has been on my mind for years too, even back when I had my Triumph Spitfire and I was reflecting LEDs off an old Oscilloscope glass).

    English? This is ELECTRONICS!

  17. #17
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywolf View Post
    Hang on, Xctasy and I are still playing on the input side. Outputs come next (and yes, HUD has been on my mind for years too, even back when I had my Triumph Spitfire and I was reflecting LEDs off an old Oscilloscope glass).

    English? This is ELECTRONICS!
    Da, Count Zborowski Scope, da!

    Made one last night. Hooked up the battery supply at the back,


    slammed the hatch down,


    and, Oh Zee Silli Scope Hi stop light fell off.



    Then, the repair by normal Newtonian Physics

    Result? Heads Up Display

    Quote Originally Posted by Forever View Post
    I have always wanted a HEADS-UP display

    I would build my own, but I dont know how to build electronics


    Foxed!
    Last edited by xctasy; 07-11-2012 at 04:31 AM.

  18. #18
    FEP Power Member Forever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    TEXAS BABY !!!
    Posts
    1,138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xctasy View Post
    Result? Heads Up Display
    a heads up display is a thing in the dash that projects "info" on the windshild ... usually it is just the MPH
    I'm holdin on your rope, got me 10 feet off the ground

  19. #19
    FEP Power Member Forever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    TEXAS BABY !!!
    Posts
    1,138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywolf View Post
    English? This is ELECTRONICS!
    Oh yeah good point LOL ...
    well I should have said "lamens terms" ???? lol
    I'm holdin on your rope, got me 10 feet off the ground

  20. #20
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Got it all up and running.


    I guess this fits into emerging Fox technology, in this case, a prelude (ooh, can I say an H word?) to me running IRS later on.

    My son and I hit the asphalt jungle to calibrate it again this evening...




    I also took it over four of the roughest gravel roads and gave it a real hard low speed punch over washboards, potholes, rutts and shoves.


    I guess I have to rework the nose tension to make sure the wire doesn't slip on the measuring wheel. There was some evidence of 6 feet of movement under the roads with International Ride Indices of over 6. I had two Champion C101-27 3 3_4 X 1_2 X 17G Stainless 316 springs per wheel, which were at 25% of hook load spring yield (1.923 lbF @ 4.851 Loaded Length), so I have decided to ditch the extra spring per side, and will rework the ends to remove hook yield, and wind it up to closer to the previous max hook yield (In this case, 85.5% of it, or 6.387 lbF @ 9.8065 Loaded Length).

    Back in 2010 when I got the car, I saw an exceprt on the Fox Mustang rear suspension



    http://www.bentleypublishers.com/for...ery-163-3.html

    This was indespensible stuff for the set up of the roughness meter.

    When I go IRS sometime in the next year, I'll have a crap load of good data on the Fox rear axle.
    Last edited by xctasy; 07-12-2012 at 05:18 AM.

  21. #21
    FEP Senior Member Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Richmond, ME
    Posts
    967

    Default

    Or you could do like I did on the '80 and throw in an '02 Cobra rear. IRS, already ready (or ready already?). It's the one part of the car I've finished.

  22. #22
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywolf View Post
    Or you could do like I did on the '80 and throw in an '02 Cobra rear. IRS, already ready (or ready already?). It's the one part of the car I've finished.
    Good one. Our old "gran-papies axe 6.75 inch " diff bounced around like a chuck wagon over the roughest gravel road we could find. We found the axle movement specs,



    and then compared them with what we got on a rough road



    I can feel the rear end creating bump steer, even with really good tires, great suspension and rubber bushings. Good thing is, I can factor out what rear end roll squat is doing to the front. The Side Thrust Gauge and Street Bump can factor out the speed induced roll, as long as the rear wheels don't leave the ground.
    Last edited by xctasy; 07-12-2012 at 10:51 PM.

  23. #23
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    oops magnets on the wrong way...dough!!!

    Oh dear. Last week, I had to re-glue some stuff with famous Loctite 401.


    I was all happy to get my square wave form digital suspension measuring device up and running for my Real World Dyno System and , oh darn, all 144 magnets except for 6 were glued on the wrong way.

    I did a little check, and found my little 40 thou high by 80 thou round rare earth N52 magnets were pushing the south pole of the magnet stack, not pulling, so I'd just messed up the process by gluing them on the WRONG way. Ughhhh1 :bang:



    What got me was that when I hooked the sensor on, I got a whole lot of negative voltages and the digital sensor would fail to acknowledge.




    Never mind, if that's my only mess up in a multi thousand dollar project, I should be happy with that.

  24. #24
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Ah, I love it when electronics produce a nice 0 to 5 volt square wave, just like magic!




    Boy did it take an unprecendented amount of time though.

    I'm downloading a couple of YouTube video for files for your benefit. The first is a video of my basic Fox Mustang data logger set up, as put together for my Road Roughness Project.

    http://youtu.be/gysEPJ9EHMA

    The second is a Night Riding profile of the XEC Road Warrior Dyno System in Dunedin August 2012, while I was recaliabrating the road roughness components.
    http://youtu.be/_B9B_en_Hdo

    It uses the same set up depending on what my job is...my job as a roading technician puts me out measuring road roughness or just auditing road networks with my visual data recognition package.

    One day, being chased by white Right Hand Drive SN95 Mustang Cobras


    .... the next data logging road defects and pot holes.


    (Not that I find many of those down here in the South Island)

  25. #25
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Destroyed my Bernstein sensor on a speed bump/Fallen Policeman a while back, the balljoint hit the sensor.


    So I've decided to upgrade to a 8 bolt sensor hub behind the disk.

    I did a full scope of the Variable Relucutor Cruise control sesnor, and it didn't help much. Its a pretty cool system though.

    In the end, I JB Weld epoxied a few more 3/4" bolt heads on the back of the disk, and furnished the heads so they were flat by putting a few allen head hex sextions in with Selly's Araldite.

    http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...t-verses-speed

    Quote Originally Posted by xctasy View Post
    wELL, I've tried to make the Fox VR sensor work, but its designed for other purposes Ford engineers had in mind in the late 70's, not for a roading technician's list of must haves. I was hoping that the 8 plips per revolution reluctor would allow a square wave form logging down to "stop start" walking speed, as required by Autocross Halda, Brantz and other Route position meter. But it doesn't. There are other speedo pickups that do, the Fox system isn't really difficult, but I wanted a truly digital solution. Ford system is half digital, half anologue, and it hasn't helped me.


    I had no choice but to set up another Bernstein proximity sensor, and JB Weld/Devcon expoxy in four extra M10 30 mm long set screws with the hex head filled in with a cut down Allen keyhead Arildited to the set screw.

    Mr Bernstein, JB Weld, Mr Allen and Mr Tu Pack Araldite® from Selley's Australia saved my life

    Attachment 81832

    Attachment 81829

    Attachment 81830

    Attachment 81831


    It was a lot harder, I thought I could just drill four holes, and run an M10 1.5 MM tap and die through it, but there wasn't enough metal to do it.

    The requiremnt I have is to be able to log distances of 9-1/2 inches along the road, and with a four stud wheel and 77 inch rollout (loaded) 190/65 390 tire, I can get down to only 19.3 inches with four studs, or 15.5 inches five stud.

    I can't fit 10 studs on the inner wheel pitch center diameter, so I'm stuck with 8 3/4" bolt heads on a 108 mm 4-1/4" PCD, and that's going to have to be used when I go Five stud as well.



    I'm scratching my head on how to make a 10 bolt even spaced sesnor ring on the back of a five stud brake disk...that's my next project.

    Hope this has helped somone here...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •