LT1 with 24x LS1 No Start!
At this point, he's as frustrated as I am and wants a solution or kick it out as its holding up other customers he's holding off. We even plugged into another similar car to compare what we should see at crank and start. He did notice the motor isn't cranking as fast as an LS does and wonder if there is a minimum cranking RPM the PCM needs? I researched HP and didn't find anything saying there was other than 400rpm for fueling. The pump works correctly, the injectors are pulsing correctly.
Help!
The PCM will actually fire injectors and coils without the 1x cam signal...which is not to suggest the cam signal not required for proper operation.
Your cam sensor housing is correct in that there is no through-hole from the sensor to the reluctor. An oscilloscope will verify that you are getting a signal from the cam sensor.
That assumes the harness is correct and the PCM is not defective.
(24x crank signal) + (good PCM) + (proper wire harness) = spark and fuel
It's really that basic.
We see no cranking rpms, signals out of the PCM into a HP tuners live, EFI live or a snap on scanner. Makes NO sense!
I removed my FAST XFI set up, new harnesses and ign control box as it did the same thing using EFI connections 24x kit. The VATS is off, we've cranked it with the key and with a push button. All voltages are correct except for the alternator signal with that's a 4.7v
Something is back feeding the PCM or GND are insufficient or...
While I'm not familiar with the GM test procedure for the crank sensor, observing a functioning sensor does not mean that the reluctor is in alignment to receive the proper 24x crank signal.
No cranking rpms in the scan tool suggests to me that the PCM is not getting the correct 24x signal. Even if the PCM only had power, ground, ignition, and crank signal - and nothing else - a scan tool will display cranking rpm.
IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND
Our initial 24x crank reluctor (pictured left) was designed on a stock engine - an engine using all proper crank and timing set geometries. This 24x reluctor has two rows of teeth and the crank sensor must "read" both rows of teeth to output the proper 24x signal. On a stock engine, the reluctor installs within the crank sensor range.
We began to see problems when customers were using aftermarket parts with geometries that did not match the original GM parts. The biggest problem was related to double row timing sets that sometimes move the crank reluctor forward - due to a thicker than stock crank timing sprocket - and out of the crank sensor range. We recently released a new 24x crank reluctor (pictured right) with only one row of teeth. This reluctor requires a different crank sensor and harness connector. This reluctor/sensor combination outputs the same 24x signal to the PCM. This reluctor is much more forgiving when aftermarket parts move the reluctor forward.
The engine in this thread is using a stock single row timing set. Assembled properly - nothing between the crank timing sprocket and 24x reluctor - I see no reason the PCM is not receiving the correct crank signal.
Trending Topics
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Your email reply indicates the crank reluctor is installed 0.026" forward of the proper location. This may be enough to move the reluctor out of the sensor range. The oscilloscope will reveal if this is the case.
As for the 1.026 reluctor distance. As you've mentioned, 1" is a critical dimension, you don't state a +/- variance. Do I mill .026 from the timing gear, more to get it under the 1" dimension? Wouldn't the PCM seeing any type of wave try to fire or is it looking for only a certain wave pattern? We're going to play with the scope a little more today, to make sure we're using it correctly to eliminate that as a factor. I'm also looking for another #411 PCM to rule that out. It's possible we not only damaged this one, we might of damaged the test PCM from another vehicle used to try. We will know that shortly when that motor install is complete.
That data is not available.
Given your 1.026" measurement, my recommendation is to put no additional time and money into anything other than verifying the oscilloscope trace.
What we're doing now is using the ocylloscope on the truck to compare waves. I'll publish the results of that test soon, but, I'm betting the sensors will compare similar. This whole project has been quite educational. It comes down to one of 2 problems being the culprit: 1 is the harness is somehow not correct, but, after plenty of hours by three different guys going over it, I put it as the problem as very low. 2 is the 24x reluctor and/or it's placement. .026" doesn't seem logically too far from EFI's spec, I'm leaning to that being the reason of the "no spark" problem.
For me, I'm too far into this project not to finish it now, but, Nick has run out of space at his shop with other projects that he's put off to get mine done and I don't have garage space now with my other projects and winter setting in, that I have to put the car into storage until spring. Neither Nick or I want to stop when we're so close, but, it'll take a couple of weeks to pull the front back off of the motor and send the 24x back to EFI to swap for their updated kit, he graciously said he'd do. I'll update tomorrow what we found with the wave comparison test and what we decide to do with this for the year.
Let's say this engine did not receive a 24x conversion. Something is moving the crank timing sprocket forward by about 0.026". Either Eagle's crank is not machined to GM spec or the NAPA timing set is not manufactured to GM spec. In either case, the result is a crank pulley that is out of alignment by 0.026" and possibly a cam timing sprocket that is out of alignment by 0.026". I don't understand why the aftermarket does not manufacture to GM specs and not make the consumer aware of this.







