[Supras] Supras Digest, Vol 35, Issue 2

[john peerzada]

lol.......any one hook a supra bratha up with a (AFM)
air flow meter...........will pay

>From: supras-request at supras.com
>Reply-To: supras at supras.com
>To: supras at supras.com
>Subject: Supras Digest, Vol 35, Issue 2
>Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 07:19:41 -0500
>
>Send Supras mailing list submissions to
>	supras at supras.com
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://supras.com/mailman/listinfo/supras_supras.com
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	supras-request at supras.com
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	supras-owner at supras.com
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Supras digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Progressive PPS years?? (Brian Walker)
>    2. Re: Progressive PPS years?? (Dave Koos)
>    3. Re: Progressive PPS years?? (Brian Walker)
>    4. Power stearing pump (Jeff)
>    5. Re: needing parts to go turbo (Jim Thomann)
>    6. Re: needing parts to go turbo (Jeff Mohler)
>    7. cygnusx1 tsrm (suprra girl)
>    8. Re: Power stearing pump (Dave Koos)
>    9. Re: Progressive PPS years?? (Dave Koos)
>   10. Re: Progressive PPS years?? (Rockey Fox)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 14:13:43 -0400
>From: "Brian Walker" <Brian.Walker at timmons.com>
>Subject: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>To: "supras list" <supras at supras.com>
>Message-ID:
>	<7FC96997A9B03C46BDCCC4A071D16AF603BE8C8C at webmail.timmons.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
>I was looking up the P/N's for lines of the PS system (Thanks Mike for
>the EPC being updated) and the P/N for the PS pressure hose lists
>several variations. On listing is for 89-92 w/ progressive steering. Is
>this something the 86-88 did not include? I had always assumed it did
>but have never had to mess with the PS system (was planning to replacing
>the old lines)
>
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Brian W-88T
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 11:45:49 -0700
>From: "Dave Koos" <dave at azsupras.com>
>Subject: Re: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>To: "Brian Walker" <Brian.Walker at timmons.com>,	"supras list"
>	<supras at supras.com>
>Message-ID: <04ad01c6e652$fbce35e0$cb996844 at nyzzle>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>Correct, the MK3 didn't get PPS steering until the 1989 model year.  The 
>hoses are different between an '89 WITH PPS and one WITHOUT PPS.  Your '88s 
>power steering rack is different from the '89+ setup.  Regardless of being 
>equipped with PPS or not.  With the subframes being different, I'm not sure 
>the '89 non-PPS rack would fit in the '88 subframe.  If you're only 
>replacing the hoses, make sure to order the hoses to match the production 
>year of your Supra.  This will make for an easy and straight-forward 
>replacement!
>
>HTH,
>
>Dave  92T & 84 P-type
>Mesa, AZ
>www.azsupras.com/suprattop.htm
>www.azsupras.com
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Brian Walker
>To: supras list
>Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 11:13 AM
>Subject: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>
>
>I was looking up the P/N's for lines of the PS system (Thanks Mike for
>the EPC being updated) and the P/N for the PS pressure hose lists
>several variations. On listing is for 89-92 w/ progressive steering. Is
>this something the 86-88 did not include? I had always assumed it did
>but have never had to mess with the PS system (was planning to replacing
>the old lines)
>
>Thanks,
>
>Brian W-88T
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 14:59:59 -0400
>From: "Brian Walker" <Brian.Walker at timmons.com>
>Subject: Re: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>To: "Dave Koos" <dave at azsupras.com>,	"supras list" <supras at supras.com>
>Message-ID:
>	<7FC96997A9B03C46BDCCC4A071D16AF603BE8D47 at webmail.timmons.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
>Thanks very much for pointing this out Dave, if this is the case, I
>could swap the rack from my 89 parts car under Scca rules but what are
>the opinions on the system? It seems like the car would have better
>turn-in, just a matter of getting used to the difference. Do you know if
>the lower speed ratio the same as the non-PPS setup?
>
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Brian W
>
>
>
>   _____
>
>From: Dave Koos [mailto:dave at azsupras.com]
>Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 2:46 PM
>To: Brian Walker; supras list
>Subject: Re: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>
>
>
>Correct, the MK3 didn't get PPS steering until the 1989 model year.  The
>hoses are different between an '89 WITH PPS and one WITHOUT PPS.  Your
>'88s power steering rack is different from the '89+ setup.  Regardless
>of being equipped with PPS or not.  With the subframes being different,
>I'm not sure the '89 non-PPS rack would fit in the '88 subframe.  If
>you're only replacing the hoses, make sure to order the hoses to match
>the production year of your Supra.  This will make for an easy and
>straight-forward replacement!
>
>
>
>HTH,
>
>
>Dave  92T & 84 P-type
>Mesa, AZ
>www.azsupras.com/suprattop.htm <http://www.azsupras.com/suprattop.htm>
>www.azsupras.com <http://www.azsupras.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: Brian Walker <mailto:Brian.Walker at timmons.com>
>
>To: supras list <mailto:supras at supras.com>
>
>Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 11:13 AM
>
>Subject: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>
>
>
>I was looking up the P/N's for lines of the PS system (Thanks Mike for
>the EPC being updated) and the P/N for the PS pressure hose lists
>several variations. On listing is for 89-92 w/ progressive steering. Is
>this something the 86-88 did not include? I had always assumed it did
>but have never had to mess with the PS system (was planning to replacing
>the old lines)
>
>Thanks,
>
>Brian W-88T
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:50:05 -0400
>From: Jeff <jprisco at optonline.net>
>Subject: [Supras] Power stearing pump
>To: Supras at supras.com
>Message-ID: <05d101c6e67d$7c49ce30$0d29f2c6 at homeepc>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>I've had a number of power steering problems over the last 8 months - 
>rebuilt the rack and replaced all of the hoses - cleaned out the screen in 
>the reservoir while changing the hoses. Problem now is that when the car 
>warms (10 minutes) the PS gets really loud and there isn't as much assist 
>as I would expect. Could it be the fluid? Is there one type that's better 
>then the other or one that's best for "challenged" pumps?
>
>TIA
>
>91 Turbo
>
>Jeff
>-------------- next part --------------
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.11/460 - Release Date: 10/1/2006
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 21:45:05 -0500
>From: Jim Thomann <list1 at thomann.no-ip.com>
>Subject: Re: [Supras] needing parts to go turbo
>To: Sean Cavanaugh <Millenia2000 at hotmail.com>
>Cc: supras at supras.com
>Message-ID: <4521CEB1.70908 at thomann.no-ip.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Aren't the differences between the Turbo and NA blocks the pistons and
>oil squirters?
>
>I haven't seen either first hand yet, but soon.  The engine is out and
>the head is ready to come off.
>
>JimT
>
>Sean Cavanaugh wrote:
> > my N/A block already blew up so i already got a turbo block in there. it
> > just has N/A externals. and i got a turbo tranny for it already (one 
>that
> > was in car with the turbo. the turbo block is better to use due to the 
>lower
> > compression ratio, the oil injectors, the oil passages for turbo oil 
>flow.
> > Can you turbo the N/A block? yes but it takes more work to make it 
>stable
> > but it CAN be done.
> >
> > -Sean
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "supraman88" <supraman88 at verizon.net>
> > To: "Sean Cavanaugh" <millenia2000 at hotmail.com>; <supras at supras.com>
> > Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 8:18 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Supras] needing parts to go turbo
> >
> >
> >
> >> Maybe someone can set me straight here, but I have seen it in a number 
>of
> >> places (and from the Techs when I used to work at a Toyota dealer) that 
>it
> >> is not a good idea to put a turbo on an NA supra. This appears to be 
>for a
> >> number of reasons, one being that the NA engine isn't as robust as the
> >> Turbo
> >> version, and that the transmission (for the 5 speed model) doesn't have
> >> the
> >> headroom required. The W58 trans is rated at 240 HP, with the NA 
>version
> >> engine rated at 200. That is why the factory Turbo has a beefier
> >> transmission.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Sean Cavanaugh" <millenia2000 at hotmail.com>
> >> To: <supras at supras.com>
> >> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 12:14 PM
> >> Subject: [Supras] needing parts to go turbo
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> I'm slowly getting the pieces i need to get my car converted to turbo.
> >>> kinda hard when im strapped for cash
> >>>
> >>> still need:
> >>>   - Intercooler
> >>>   - IC piping (gonna just use PVC)
> >>>   - Downpipe
> >>>   - cat (already taged where to get)
> >>>   - cat back exhaust.
> >>>
> >>> i'm just looking at getting parts to make it work. I'll worry about
> >>> getting parts that make it work better later.
> >>>
> >>> this will take me a while cuz im going standalone with the MS first, 
>then
> >>> switching over to turbo intake manifold , 440 injectors, and coilpacks
> >>> then the actual turbo setup.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -Sean
> >>>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 20:33:51 -0700
>From: "Jeff Mohler" <speedtoys.racing at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [Supras] needing parts to go turbo
>To: "Jim Thomann" <list1 at thomann.no-ip.com>
>Cc: supras at supras.com
>Message-ID:
>	<a969fbd10610022033i149d7c36k20fe936cfdc5e78b at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
>And no oil feed or drain for the turbo...and no drilled holes (much
>less tapped) for the knock sensors.
>
>Knock sensor solution is simple, oil feed/drain is simple for someone
>who knows their way around a machine shop.  No squirters isnt an issue
>for 99% of the list.
>
>On 10/2/06, Jim Thomann <list1 at thomann.no-ip.com> wrote:
> > Aren't the differences between the Turbo and NA blocks the pistons and
> > oil squirters?
> >
> > I haven't seen either first hand yet, but soon.  The engine is out and
> > the head is ready to come off.
> >
> > JimT
> >
> > Sean Cavanaugh wrote:
> > > my N/A block already blew up so i already got a turbo block in there. 
>it
> > > just has N/A externals. and i got a turbo tranny for it already (one 
>that
> > > was in car with the turbo. the turbo block is better to use due to the 
>lower
> > > compression ratio, the oil injectors, the oil passages for turbo oil 
>flow.
> > > Can you turbo the N/A block? yes but it takes more work to make it 
>stable
> > > but it CAN be done.
> > >
> > > -Sean
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "supraman88" <supraman88 at verizon.net>
> > > To: "Sean Cavanaugh" <millenia2000 at hotmail.com>; <supras at supras.com>
> > > Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 8:18 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Supras] needing parts to go turbo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> Maybe someone can set me straight here, but I have seen it in a 
>number of
> > >> places (and from the Techs when I used to work at a Toyota dealer) 
>that it
> > >> is not a good idea to put a turbo on an NA supra. This appears to be 
>for a
> > >> number of reasons, one being that the NA engine isn't as robust as 
>the
> > >> Turbo
> > >> version, and that the transmission (for the 5 speed model) doesn't 
>have
> > >> the
> > >> headroom required. The W58 trans is rated at 240 HP, with the NA 
>version
> > >> engine rated at 200. That is why the factory Turbo has a beefier
> > >> transmission.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "Sean Cavanaugh" <millenia2000 at hotmail.com>
> > >> To: <supras at supras.com>
> > >> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 12:14 PM
> > >> Subject: [Supras] needing parts to go turbo
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> I'm slowly getting the pieces i need to get my car converted to 
>turbo.
> > >>> kinda hard when im strapped for cash
> > >>>
> > >>> still need:
> > >>>   - Intercooler
> > >>>   - IC piping (gonna just use PVC)
> > >>>   - Downpipe
> > >>>   - cat (already taged where to get)
> > >>>   - cat back exhaust.
> > >>>
> > >>> i'm just looking at getting parts to make it work. I'll worry about
> > >>> getting parts that make it work better later.
> > >>>
> > >>> this will take me a while cuz im going standalone with the MS first, 
>then
> > >>> switching over to turbo intake manifold , 440 injectors, and 
>coilpacks
> > >>> then the actual turbo setup.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> -Sean
> > >>>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Supras mailing list
> > Supras at supras.com
> > http://supras.com/mailman/listinfo/supras_supras.com
> >
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 16:39:32 +1300
>From: "suprra girl" <suprra at gmail.com>
>Subject: [Supras] cygnusx1 tsrm
>To: Supras at supras.com
>Message-ID:
>	<fe2963440610022039o7db92b44ue72828a433a0da5d at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>hey :)
>
>just thought i'd point out that under EFI for the 02 sensors they're a bit
>arse about face hehe
>
>oxygen sensor = egr gas temp sensor
>sub oxygen sensor = oxygen sensor
>
>just thought i'd let ya know :)
>
>--
>Cheers
>
>Suze
>7M POWAH! ;)
>www.supra.co.nz
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 8
>Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 21:35:25 -0700
>From: "Dave Koos" <dave at azsupras.com>
>Subject: Re: [Supras] Power stearing pump
>To: "Jeff" <jprisco at optonline.net>,	<Supras at supras.com>
>Message-ID: <051401c6e6a5$58a68c20$cb996844 at nyzzle>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>What pump are you running?!  Aftermarket pumps absolutely SUCK!!  Your best 
>bet is to buy a re-seal kit for the factory pump and rebuild it yourself.  
>The aftermarket racks seem to be ok.  I've ran one in my MK2 for the last 
>2+ years without issue (knock on wood)!!
>
>I bet it's your pump that's causing the issues.
>
>HTH,
>
>Dave  92T & 84 P-type
>Mesa, AZ
>www.azsupras.com/suprattop.htm
>www.azsupras.com
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Jeff
>To: Supras at supras.com
>Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 4:50 PM
>Subject: [Supras] Power stearing pump
>
>
>I've had a number of power steering problems over the last 8 months - 
>rebuilt the rack and replaced all of the hoses - cleaned out the screen in 
>the reservoir while changing the hoses. Problem now is that when the car 
>warms (10 minutes) the PS gets really loud and there isn't as much assist 
>as I would expect. Could it be the fluid? Is there one type that's better 
>then the other or one that's best for "challenged" pumps?
>
>TIA
>
>91 Turbo
>
>Jeff
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 9
>Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 21:39:19 -0700
>From: "Dave Koos" <dave at azsupras.com>
>Subject: Re: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>To: "Brian Walker" <Brian.Walker at timmons.com>,	"supras list"
>	<supras at supras.com>
>Message-ID: <051e01c6e6a5$e437eae0$cb996844 at nyzzle>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>I have no idea how the '89+ non-PPS rack would feel in an '88 chassis.  Not 
>sure what else (if anything) you'd have to change over to make it work.  
>The pumps should be the same as is the low pressure line.  If your '89 DOES 
>have PPS, then you won't have it in the '88 chassis as the electrical 
>solenoid plugs into the engine wiring harness!!!  I seriously doubt the '88 
>wiring harness has the necessary wires to plug it in!!
>
>Good luck!
>
>Dave  92T & 84 P-type
>Mesa, AZ
>www.azsupras.com/suprattop.htm
>www.azsupras.com
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Brian Walker
>To: Dave Koos ; supras list
>Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 11:59 AM
>Subject: RE: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>
>
>Thanks very much for pointing this out Dave, if this is the case, I could 
>swap the rack from my 89 parts car under Scca rules but what are the 
>opinions on the system? It seems like the car would have better turn-in, 
>just a matter of getting used to the difference. Do you know if the lower 
>speed ratio the same as the non-PPS setup?
>
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Brian W
>
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>From: Dave Koos [mailto:dave at azsupras.com]
>Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 2:46 PM
>To: Brian Walker; supras list
>Subject: Re: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>
>
>
>Correct, the MK3 didn't get PPS steering until the 1989 model year.  The 
>hoses are different between an '89 WITH PPS and one WITHOUT PPS.  Your '88s 
>power steering rack is different from the '89+ setup.  Regardless of being 
>equipped with PPS or not.  With the subframes being different, I'm not sure 
>the '89 non-PPS rack would fit in the '88 subframe.  If you're only 
>replacing the hoses, make sure to order the hoses to match the production 
>year of your Supra.  This will make for an easy and straight-forward 
>replacement!
>
>
>
>HTH,
>
>
>Dave  92T & 84 P-type
>Mesa, AZ
>www.azsupras.com/suprattop.htm
>www.azsupras.com
>
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: Brian Walker
>
>To: supras list
>
>Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 11:13 AM
>
>Subject: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>
>
>
>I was looking up the P/N's for lines of the PS system (Thanks Mike for
>the EPC being updated) and the P/N for the PS pressure hose lists
>several variations. On listing is for 89-92 w/ progressive steering. Is
>this something the 86-88 did not include? I had always assumed it did
>but have never had to mess with the PS system (was planning to replacing
>the old lines)
>
>Thanks,
>
>Brian W-88T
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 10
>Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 05:19:39 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Rockey Fox <supr91tt at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
>To: Dave Koos <dave at azsupras.com>, Brian Walker
>	<Brian.Walker at timmons.com>,	supras list <supras at supras.com>
>Message-ID: <20061003121939.33741.qmail at web51601.mail.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>I'm not sure which year it started but there is an
>expensive "idle up" valve on the rear of my 91T power
>steering pump that has a vacuum line running through
>it. As that valve was too expensive to replace when it
>busted i've tried without success blocking up the hole
>but the pressure must be higher than my hydraulic
>sealer and a bolt will hold.
>I'm considering going with an earlier model pump
>without that particular goofy threaded hole in the
>back plate so I'm also interested to know if the
>earlier year model PS pump will work on the 91T.
>
>TIA,
>Rockey 91T
>
>--- Dave Koos <dave at azsupras.com> wrote:
>
> > I have no idea how the '89+ non-PPS rack would feel
> > in an '88 chassis.  Not sure what else (if anything)
> > you'd have to change over to make it work.  The
> > pumps should be the same as is the low pressure
> > line.  If your '89 DOES have PPS, then you won't
> > have it in the '88 chassis as the electrical
> > solenoid plugs into the engine wiring harness!!!  I
> > seriously doubt the '88 wiring harness has the
> > necessary wires to plug it in!!
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Dave  92T & 84 P-type
> > Mesa, AZ
> > www.azsupras.com/suprattop.htm
> > www.azsupras.com
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Brian Walker
> > To: Dave Koos ; supras list
> > Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 11:59 AM
> > Subject: RE: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
> >
> >
> > Thanks very much for pointing this out Dave, if this
> > is the case, I could swap the rack from my 89 parts
> > car under Scca rules but what are the opinions on
> > the system? It seems like the car would have better
> > turn-in, just a matter of getting used to the
> > difference. Do you know if the lower speed ratio the
> > same as the non-PPS setup?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian W
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > From: Dave Koos [mailto:dave at azsupras.com]
> > Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 2:46 PM
> > To: Brian Walker; supras list
> > Subject: Re: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
> >
> >
> >
> > Correct, the MK3 didn't get PPS steering until the
> > 1989 model year.  The hoses are different between an
> > '89 WITH PPS and one WITHOUT PPS.  Your '88s power
> > steering rack is different from the '89+ setup.
> > Regardless of being equipped with PPS or not.  With
> > the subframes being different, I'm not sure the '89
> > non-PPS rack would fit in the '88 subframe.  If
> > you're only replacing the hoses, make sure to order
> > the hoses to match the production year of your
> > Supra.  This will make for an easy and
> > straight-forward replacement!
> >
> >
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> >
> > Dave  92T & 84 P-type
> > Mesa, AZ
> > www.azsupras.com/suprattop.htm
> > www.azsupras.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > From: Brian Walker
> >
> > To: supras list
> >
> > Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 11:13 AM
> >
> > Subject: [Supras] Progressive PPS years??
> >
> >
> >
> > I was looking up the P/N's for lines of the PS
> > system (Thanks Mike for
> > the EPC being updated) and the P/N for the PS
> > pressure hose lists
> > several variations. On listing is for 89-92 w/
> > progressive steering. Is
> > this something the 86-88 did not include? I had
> > always assumed it did
> > but have never had to mess with the PS system (was
> > planning to replacing
> > the old lines)
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian W-88T
> > _______________________________________________
> > Supras mailing list
> > Supras at supras.com
> > http://supras.com/mailman/listinfo/supras_supras.com
> >
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Supras mailing list
>Supras at supras.com
>http://supras.com/mailman/listinfo/supras_supras.com
>
>
>End of Supras Digest, Vol 35, Issue 2
>*************************************