> Chris
>
> Sorry to hear about the rod and unable to help with any 360
> info.
>
> I am very interested in hearing your experiences with the Haltech.
> Pros, cons, installation, etc. if you'd like to share.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob Tom Burlington, Ont., Canada
> '97 Dakota Sport, 4x2, CC, Flame red, 5.2L, auto., 3.92SG
>
>
>
Thanks for the thought! It's really not to big a deal since the
dakota just wasn't cutting it performance wise, even with heads
and cam. It's my Dad's truck, and his main yardstick was my
camaro - which has run a 11.38@121 with just heads+cam+boltons
(NA) don't think the truck will be quite that fast with the new motor,
but we are definitley shooting for high 11's NA.
The Haltech unit I purchased was the E6K - I got that, the generic
harness,
and the injector harness. I piggybacked it with the stock computer (which
still retaines tranny pressure control, guages, etc.) The haltech uses GM
style
sensors so I had to install a new IAT, TPS (used a ford 5.0 unit with the
4bbl
MPI TB), coolant temp (used a NPT y-fitting for the M1 manifold location -
since thread size was larger than the guage which runs the dash; they are
both
connected now).
I couldn't get the stock distributor to interface with the haltech
correctly -
which is strange since the haltech is native to hall effect setup - I am
assuming
it's something I did, but in a fit of frustration I threw on a MSD billet
setup - works
great, but now I lost the use of the stock tach :).
Heads were stock 360 heads ported by GTP in houston (they did the heads
on my
camaro) - they flowed ~ 260cfm 28" h2o @ 0.55 lift on the intake, and right
at 200
on the exhaust, stock sized valves (Ferrerea). Titanium retainers, and some
comp cams
pacalloy springs were added, as well as MPI 1.6 adjustable roller rockers
and some
chrome moly pushrods.
Also switched to a M1 intake, 24lb/hr SVO injectors, 4bbl TB and other
stupid stuff.
Cam was a bit mild it turned out, but I couldn't seem to get much
information on how
cams reacted (seemed most of the specs were "secret") so I ended up going
with a 210/220
114lsa comp cams grind (4 degrees advance). Truck dynoed 322rwhp @ 6100
and
315ft-lbs of torque @ 3800 on a dynojet dyno - best track time was a
13.3@104 on
motor. (it's a 4x4 extended cab - HEAVY - that was with a toolbox, stereo,
bumpers, etc.)
The Haltech was a bit of a pain to get tuned - you get no base map,
settings, etc. I had
tons of problems untill I realized the ignition module in the MSD triggered
on the rising edge
(ala old points setups) - I had it on falling like most modern efi vehicles
After that it's just
a matter of setting the correct reference angle and matching timing with a
timing light to what
the computer displays. The haltech should run fully sequential but I was
having a hard time
getting the hall effect sensor on the flexplate to read properly, so I was
running it in batch
fire modeat the time. Really no power difference, but a 1-2mpg difference.
You need to come
up with a base timing map and pulsewidth map - you basically reference
everything vs. RPM
and Load (MAP sensor) - set the desired pulsewidth and advance. Crank it
up, and tune from
there. It took awhile but with the help of an O2 sensor I got part
throttle tuning down, and then
went to a dyno facility with a wideband setup and ended up around 12.8:1 as
optimum A/F ratio
for power (at torque peak, it leaned out to 13.1:1 at the hp peak). I then
added ina bit more fuel
and took out 2 degrees fromt he dyno since it's an inertial unit and is the
loading is much less than
real life. It's pretty easy to tune since you canmake changes in real time
and see the effect, it just
takes quite a bit of effort.
For 1000 it's hard to beat the haltech setup, but if you can swing a bit
more I think the speed-pro
setup with wideband option (~2000) is a superior unit. Accell DFI is
worthless - not any better
than the haltech and costs more (when you include harness, programming
software, etc.)
Hope that helped some, if you have any other questions let me know (sorry
about typing errors,
I am on a laptop right now and the keys are a little close together for my
liking).
chris bennight
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:01:44 EDT