Slashdot Mirror
Hack Your Ignition (Before Someone Else Does)
guanxi writes: "IEEE Spectrum has an interesting article about hacking and specifically, the "hacker's nirvana on wheels", all the way from hot-rodding to reprogramming your digital ignition. Of course, I neither endorse nor recommend any of the procedures mentioned, any of which may be inherently dangerous to your life and your warranty. "
How about hacking digital odometers?
I'd imaging it is just stored in memory somewhere. Set'er back to 0 and no one would be the wiser!
I've got a nice hack for ya.
New Ford F-150's, Expeditions, ect.
Unplug the main harness going to the digital display, and locate a gray wire, with a black stripe. (your VSS wire) Place a small strip of tape over the metal pin, and
VOLIA
no mo miles
In most cases, the manufacturer of most sports cars (corvette, etc.) has a liscensed third party like shelby for Ford. These suppliers and aftermarket manufacturers have certin chips that can be installed without ruining you entire warrenty. Sometimes, the warrenty is just modified to take out the changed part of the car.
The first time I heard of aftermarket ROMs (for the fuel injection computer) the car in question was the 1984 Pontiac Fiero, GM's short-lived (1984-1988, I think) mid-engined sports car.
-Tom Duff
Why would you waste your time hacking a car that fights you every step of the way (physically, electronically, and financially)? I only own and drive open sourced cars. My daily driver is a 1974 Volkswagen Beetle. There is not a single part for this car I couldn't write a check to replace. I also haven't paid a mechanic since I bought it. There're no computer diagnositics I have to pay some guy with his name on his shirt to run for me. All I need is a good chest full of Craftsman metric tools and my ears. Your stock Beetle not fast enough for you? $2000 worth of NEW parts will build a complete engine to your specifications that will propel that 870kg car to speeds you'd never thought possible. Countless books have been written that detail every system in the Beetle inside and out. Why would you buy a car that tries to keep you out with complex computerized systems? Want to modify the ignition timing? All you need is a 10mm socket. Ferdinand Porsche designed my car. Who designed yours?
Brandon D. Valentine
First, the original poster: The audi S4 only goes from 250 crank hp to about 310 crank hp with a computer. YOu can get up to about 350 or so with an intercooler and some other low cost tweaks.
Anyway, second poster: cars today are engineered way way way beyond the use they will see in stock form. An audi s4 most likely will be reliable at 400 crank hp. They have sleeved cylinders and a strong bottom end (amongst other features). 500 would most likely be pushing it. And the S4 will run through tires at the same rate with 250 hp as it would with 600hp. Its all about the weight, not the power, unless you do lots and lots of huge smoky burnouts. The first poster's S4 will actually be no more expensive than stock in the long run, and it will not be any less reliable.
Also, an S4 is not a light little car. It weighs about 3500 lbs, which in my book is a very heavy car. Thats only marginally lighter than a bmw 5 series.
Ferraris are in the shop every 3000 miles for a number of reasons:
Ferrari's reputation isnt based upon having reliable cars- that is Honda's little dance. If Ferrari starts making reliable sorta-fast cars, then they will be written off as having lost touch with their heritage (porsche cayenne anyone? blech)
They arent engineered to be super reliable, they are engineered to be weekend toys for the rich. Ferrari makes a lot of concessions to performance and a lot of concessions to "tradition" since many people buy ferrari because they want to buy into ferraris old racing image. People want gated shifters, a loud whiny exhaust and they want it painted red.
They have more complicated valve trains with a ton more moving parts. A ferrari v12 has about 60 valves and 4 camshafts, non of which are self adjusting (another concession). Sooo, once a year or so, you have to bring your ferrari in and have everything looked at. VERY expensive. About 3 times more labor involved than opening up a dohc 4 cylinder- this before you factor in the traditional ferrari price gouge.
Ferraris have a special formula of oil you can only get at the dealer.
Ferrari parts arent exactly mass produced. Its cheaper to do preventative maintenance than to drive it until it explodes and then replace the engine.
"They stared at me as though I'd just showed them a mouthful of partially chewed black beetles"
This is as good as the other article a few months ago where the guy said:
"As cool as the other side of the pillow."
Definitely two phrases I'm going to try and work into conversation, with proper attribution of course.
----
Please win this beer store.
Wax on, wax off baby!
Respectfully, I disagree.
p adakis.html - Stephan Papadakis - who broke just about every record for front wheel drive cars.
I believe many slashdot readers would be interested in your "rice burners". Racing a honda is an exercise in science over brute force, something slashdot readers can appreciate. To equate it, it would be the difference between getting just any old pentium 4 1.5 Ghz system, and getting an athalon 1.2 Ghz and tweaking it by using better hardware, a cleaner OS install, faster standards, and some code tweaking to get the performance level up above that of the P-4.
In the same fashion, you could take your '71 Nova SS 350 and blow away a stock 1995 civic. But you could also take the civic, add Nitrous, replace the hood with a fiberglass one, change the gears on the transmission, get a forced air kit, some traction bars, and a new set of cams, and run 11's. You have to remember with that big steel car and the small block 350, you're pulling a lot of weight. You're getting much more horsepower per liter out of a honda.
Just for kicks, check out http://www.nhrasportcompact.com/2002/drivers/S_Pa
And just for the record, I still cringe when I see a honda roll down the street with just the exhaust done, cause it sounds bad and looks retarted. My brother has a '71 Nova SS w/ 350, traction bars, lunati cams, poroso throttle or something, you name it, it's got it. It puts about 410 Hp on the ground and has an ET of 12.2. But it also gets about 5 miles to the gallon. I'd rather have the fast-if-you-want-it-fast honda, which also gets 37 miles to the gallon.
~z
sig?
Old rotary engines?!! Rotary Engine technology has come a LONG way since the 70's... and even more so since Mazda stopped importing the RX-7 in 95. The latest Rotary Engine rebuilders put in 3mm ceramic coated apex seals, ECU's that contain 3D reprogrammable fuel maps, boost controllers that employ fuzzy logic to activate the turbo's waste gate, ignition computers that increase spark, knock sensor computers that keep the engine from pinging/grenading, and intercoolers that cool 30-40% better with less pressure drop through them. Porting is now a fine art, and there are at least 20 different general ways to port a rotary. With minimal effort, and money ($3k-4k) you can get 300 horses and 300 ftlbs of torque out of a 13B-REW. Most tuner shops drop the stock twin turbos in favor of one large one, that pushes past the 500hp barrier... there have been a few that have 700 hp. And this is all with 1.3L 2 rotors. Those lucky engough to have 3 rotors (imported from japan) start out with 400 hp, and go up from there!
<sidenote>I'm putting down 313 Rear Wheel Horse Power, and 301 ftlbs or torque with basic bolt on 'hacks' (mods)...(Here is my dyno sheet) Intake, exhaust, intercooler, and computer. I replaced the engine at 130,000 miles because a vacuum hose popped off my wastegate, and caused the turbos to boost well past 15lbs, with no extra fuel to compensate... ping! Apex seal blew. I'm now at 150,000 miles, zip-tied vacuum hoses, and have had nothing but dependable and fun to drive Mazda Zoom Zoom-y-ness </sidenote>
Mazda is re-introducing the rotary later this year with the RX-8. Now called the RENESIS, the engine is a non-turboed multi-side-port 1.3L rotary, that is projected to put out 255-280 HP . The computer should be easy to hack, and a turbo kit will be available shortly after the introduction of the car. I would estimate about +330 HP from a turboed RENESIS.
1.3L, 3 moving parts, 280 HP, no Turbos, wanna Race? RotaryNe
I don't have the link, but I saw a video on Consumption Junction of a Viper getting owned by a shitty little Civic.
It's unlikely, but not impossible.
Acceleration is all about power to weight ratio, and then how well you get that power to the ground.
First off, economics. I can go to a wrecking yard, spend $50 for a used Chevy 350 from a junked taxicab, spend $1000 having it machined and then another $2000 on assorted parts, assemble it myself, and get (conservatively) 400HP from it.
To get anywhere near that kind of power from a smaller engine (1.6L = ~95 CID), the engine must be revved up all to hell, and the machining tolerances must therefore be extremely tight - spending lots of labor having pistons balanced to within 1/100th of a gram, versus 1/10th of a gram like you could do with the 350. Yes, the newer engine's head will flow better than a 350, yes, there's less reciprocating mass because it's just a sewing machine. But to get the volumetric efficiency and torque curves high enough to do that without grenading, you're adding a turbo, porting the heads, etc. Aftermarket parts are far more expensive for those motors, and the knowledge base of guys who've built up Civics for serious power is a lot less than the skill and number of guys who've built up 350s. Expect to spend $10-15k by the time all is said and done.
Now, gearing. A Viper's first and second gear are agressive, but the car is designed for top-end speed, which is reflected in the design of the brakes and suspension. The Viper will be quick off the line (1st and 2nd) but the motor will have more room to wind in 3-6, to allow the RPMs to be reasonable at 100+MPH.
If the Civic is anywhere near as quick as the Viper off the line, he's obviously not only built up the engine but also the drivetrain (which would break if too much power was applied to it). While building a tough engine, therefore, the guy in the Civic would have had to build a transmission to survive the forces the engine is passing through it. At the same time, he would have changed the gear ratios for acceleration.
A big strong guy on a bicycle stuck in tenth gear won't out-accelerate a puny guy shifting his derailleur from 1 through 5.
Having said that, even geared for speed rather than acceleration, a Viper still turns low 13s. That's about 13.2 seconds from stopped to the end of a quarter mile. It's quicker than most production cars, but certainly not fast when you're talking about building for performance. My (stock) 1976 Ram with the 400 (6.6L) engine does it in about 14.8.
By comparison, I built a Chevette with a Buick 3.8L V6 under the hood. It turned 12.8 seconds on the 1/4 mile - slightly faster than a Viper. But, there's no way it could attain let alone maintain 150MPH the way a Viper could. Buy a Mustang 5.0, slap headers, cam, 4-bbl intake and carb at it, and you're faster off the line than a Viper.
We still haven't even gotten into a question of driving skill. Lots of people who own Vipers know nothing about cars. They're dot-com CEOs and accountants who don't know anything about cars. Is he sidestepping the clutch to hold the engine at its peak torque curve? If he's not, he's not making full use of the power.
A V12 getting owned by whatever is in those Rice Burners..I'm not sure if it's possible for an inanimate object to possess another inanimate object.
Last Viper I drove had a V10, actually, rather similar to this one which you can order at the parts counter at any Chrylser dealership. And, while I imagine you understand the concept of cylinders, I will assume that you don't understand the concept of displacement. Here's the relationship in a nutshell: All other things being equal, a Ford 300 inline 6-cylinder would probably outperform a Ford 302 V8. Why? The 6-cylinder motor has two less pistons dragging up and down, two less pairs of valves, two less connecting rod bearings - but still pumps through almost (2 cubic inches difference) as much air as the V8.
Cylinders are not everything. You don't get your power from having more cylinders, you get it from having more displacement. Cylinders merely divide the displacement into manageable chunks.
By the way, you'll note that the Viper's motor is 488 cubic inches. About 8.0L.
Even if the dude in the Viper could not drive worth a shit, as the car approached 100 I am sure the V12 would have quite a bit of influence... If you were correct, then the Viper would have won.Yup. Though it does take nearly a quarter of a mile for a Viper to get up to 100MPH from a stop. Most street races are significantly less than that.
Even so, either the guy in the Honda spent more doing that than it would have cost him to buy a Viper, or the guy in the Viper was the typical Viper-driver.
Ask yourself this. The Viper has a large displacement engine (488CID) and is rear-wheel-drive. The Honda has a small displacement engine (~95CID, too lazy to calculate it right now) and is front-wheel-drive.
Virtually all performance cars have a large displacement and are rear-wheel-drive - From Aston-Martin to Vector to Viper, with Porsche, Ferrari, Llamborghini, 1960s-1970s American musclecars, NASCAR, NHRA, serious ralleye, etc. in there.
Virtually all economy cars have a small displacement and are front-wheel-drive. The Honda is in the same high class as Tercels, Ford Escorts, Renault 5, VW Rabbit, Dodge Aries/Plymouth Reliant, Nissan Micra, etc.
Ask yourself why.
Now, go play with your automotive Celeron.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
I agree - I drive a Grand Marquis, with the performance pack, and I love the kids who think that "big boat car = slow". They forget that the police drive Crown Victoria's for a reason - a cop friend of mine had his Crown Vic over 130MPH in a pursuit. 4.6l with EFI can move.
Now, when I have to replace my car, I'd love to get a Grand Marquis Marauder - going from normally aspirated to supercharged would be even better. The only problem is that the Marauder has crap I don't want - leather seats and a very distinctive trim package. I like q-ships - its great fun to surprise a kid with what's under the hood of a normal looking car. Besides, driving an "arrest me red" sportscar gets you far too much attention from the police - they really don't look twice at a sedate-looking sedan, especially one with a 2M antenna and 440MHz antenna on the trunk....
(and a moment of silence for my previous car - a 1973 Mercury Monterey Custom with a 400 that was killed when the idiots at United Engine Specialists, West Kellog, Wichita, USA botched the engine rebuild and the poor thing oil starved, collapsed it's lifters, ate the #2 intake valve and finally siezed solid 700 miles from home. Needless to say, I don't recomend United Engine Specialist's work.)
www.eFax.com are spammers
a cop friend of mine had his Crown Vic over 130MPH in a pursuit. 4.6l with EFI can move.
What? I don't want to be a troll here, but just last summer me and a friend were doing 150MPH in a basic, unmodified 2.5V6 '94 Opel Omega. That's a V6, 170bhp engine, nothing spectacualar (considering we spent some time the year before putting a BMW M3 E30 tunned to 320bhp through its paces.)
I'm reading about all these American cars, with huge (5-7l) engines and I don't really see any startling numbers. I know that the M-Series cars from BMW are toned down to be street legal in the US, and it seems that none of the other manufacturers are doing anything special. What's the deal? Has America lost its prowess?