TimZ

I had the same problem - next time I go, I'm thinking of running a water spray of some sort on the IC. A constant mist might be enough - I dunno.

Did you actually see the stub broken off? There is a known issue with the CVs popping out if the travel limiters aren't installed, and the symptoms would appear the same - well, except for the potential wheel falling off thing... Glad nobody got hurt.

Just don't blame me if your muffler blows off! Seriously - it probably won't, but it might. Depends on how rich and how lean at the transition. ...as an aside, I'm not sure that the retarded timing really causes higher combustion temperatures - it will cause higher EGTs due to the later start of the combustion process and the increased likelihood that the fuel is still burning when the exhaust valve opens (as BLKMGK pointed out)

We are talking about programmable EFI here, right? If you want flames on decel (more like a bunch of backfires), program the fuel mix to be lean and retard the timing on high vacuum/high rpm only. This will cause a rich/lean transition on decel from high rpm, and won't affect the WOT power. You probably aren't using part throttle at 5k+ rpm very often anyway, right?

I guess it depends on your goals - I don't know what the weight difference is - it will definitely depend on what electric setup you end up with. Sounds like your goal is Targa Newfoundland, and I would suspect that the ambient temps aren't going to be terribly hot there. So, if it's a couple of pounds lighter and that matters, an electric fan setup would probably work fine for you. My issues are more for being able to drive the car under any circumstances, like hot summer day in stop and go traffic. Also, since it looks like you are n/a, you won't have as much 'stuff' restricting the airflow through your cooling package - probably just the rad and maybe an oil cooler. This should be a much easier situation to handle.

I think I've mentioned this already, but I think that the power gains to be had are pretty minimal, especially vs. the viscous clutch fan. I know that I've never been able to tell the difference. IME the difference in cooling performance IS very noticeable. If the viscous fan setup won't package in jintu's vehicle then the point is moot, but I wouldn't recommend the electric setup on the grounds of power gains alone.

oops - didn't see the age of the post...

Well, almost... if you are running rich the one thing that you need is OXYGEN, which usually gets supplied by a subsequent rich-lean transition (rev limiter fuel cut, drop throttle fuel cut, general lean spot). If the exhaust is short enough to maintain enough heat all the way to the outlet, then the oxygen gets supplied there.

If you take the TPS off the throttle body and rotate its shaft input, you should see voltage changing linearly from 0 to 5V. It sounds like the d-shape on the TB shaft isn't lining up properly with the one in the TPS. If this is the case, you could probably do like Joel suggested and modify the tps.

How many pins are on the connector that you are using and how did you determine which one was which? Also, does the voltage change linearly with throttle opening now? Aside from the voltage being lower than you expected, does the voltage look like what you would expect? If your throttle body wasn't originally from a 240sx, it's possible that it just doesn't move the tps through the same amount of travel. For instance, on my TWMs, the GM tps only reads from ~.75V closed to ~3.5V WOT.

On my car, it couldn't keep up. I tried several different options, including running it on a Kenne Bell boost-a-pump and bumping the supply voltage when the water temp got above 195 or so. No help. I've since gone back to the mechanical pump and viscous clutch fan - it's dead simple and reliable and I no longer have overheating problems. On my last set of dyno pulls, the water temp never exceeded 195, which is the t-stat setpoint. That never happened with the electric setup. I was bummed that the electric pump didn't work well enough for me, as I really liked being able to run the pump after shutting the engine down.

Yep, and it's most likely colder now, too (more dense). So, if you just want to make the same power as before, you will be able to run less boost. OR...run the same boost as before and add more fuel and make more power.

Plug them... http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=107364

My vote is for viscous over electric. If you mount the fan in a "pusher" configuration in front of the radiator, it will be less efficient. I just mentioned this in another post, but after having messed with electric fans for quite a while and gone back, I'm pretty well convinced that its hard to beat the performance of the stock clutch fan with a proper shroud. Many modern engines don't have the option of running anything but an electric fan due to package constraints, and they probably help a bit for fuel economy, but I think that the "free horsepower" notion is a bit overblown.

I think you would have a very tough time outperforming the stock mechanical viscous clutch fan (in good condition, of course) with a pair of slim electric fans. I've tried several different combos of electric fans and even the CSR electric water pump, and haven't found anything that works better than the stock clutch fan with a shroud. Also, I'm using a 195 degF thermostat. Me neither - I've never bought into the notion of water needing to flow slower to cool better. I think the main reason that restrictor plates work in some cases has more to do with increasing the backpressure in the system, which makes it harder for cavitation to occur.

Looks like you got an answer, but you wold get more responses if you posted in the correct forum. EMS = Engine Management System - this forum is for posts about aftermarket fuel injection systems other than MegaSquirt.

R1 = 381.6 R2 = 2.3 You have to enable the "Analysis Toolpak - VBA" Excel Add-in (Tools -->Add-Ins...) for the calculations to work. I thought Pete mentioned that somewhere, but I couldn't find where he said it just now. Sorry, didn't mean to sound like a jerk - its been a long week...

Read it again - you just need to use the variant of the gauge that is intended for the Ford (73 ohms Empty and 8-12 ohms Full) sender instead of the GM one. This works - I'm currently using the Cyberdyne blue ice fuel gauge in my car.

http://alteredz.com/gagecalibration.htm Thank Pete, not me...

It's a TEC3

...and that is appreciated, Jeff. Exactly the reason I didn't post a response/defense on zcar - I had a strong suspicion that the "peanut gallery" over there was pusing in that direction, and that wasn't the reason for posting my results in the first place. I'm not going there. I noticed Tony posting about this, too. I'm assuming you are using the LM-1? Are you using the analog out as a signal, or just using it standalone. I've found that it's an absolute necessity to buffer the LM-1's output with a differential amp - too much ground noise from the heater circuit without it. My LM-1 correlated very closely with the dyno's WB, and read down to 9.5 AFR with no issues. Also, I appeared that mine was running the best at around 11.5:1 AFR. 12:1 netted essentially the same power, but with increased EGTs. I think I at least alluded to this earlier, but my Manifold Air Temperature was running alot higher than what I have been seeing on the street for a similar pull. It appears that I'm simply not getting enough cooling air to the intercooler on the dyno. I know this was costing me significant power, but I'm not sure how to remedy it without being accused of cheating - my initial thought was to run a water mist on the IC during the pull, to acheive representative air temps. Here's a MAT plot of my next to last dyno pull: ...and here's a comparable run on the street: LOL c'mon Jeff - it's NEVER a done deal...

Okay - specifically, what are the MAP fuel settings at the following points: -24 0 15 ...and whatever MAP value that corresponds to the place where things crap out.

I thought I responded to this yesterday, but apparently the post didn't "take"... I did a quick read of the SDS manual online, and have a couple more questions for you. First, what do your MAP FUEL values look like, and what MAP sensor are you using? From what I could tell, the RPM FUEL settings are used to set the VE characteristics of the engine, and then the MAP fuel settings sort of fine tune you to the particular sensor that you are using. If, for instance, you were setup for a 1 bar sensor and were actually using a 3 bar, it appears that you would get pretty much what you are describing here - you'd have to set the RPM FUEL values about 3 times higher than normal, and the more manifold pressure you ran, the farther you'd be off.

I think you'll still want to put a heat shield of some sort between the intake and exhaust, especially since the intake is powdercoated black (more heat transfer). You could just fab a simple sheet of aluminum and maybe wrap it in a heat barrier mat, like the stuff you can get from Thermotec for wrapping turbos. I know that will block the view of that very nice looking exhaust manifold, but it will make a difference.

I saw it - the implications that I was lying and the second guessing did get under my skin a bit, but I decided not to respond over there, as no good could come from it, and it would probably make me even more pissed. I did see a few hybridZ'ers come to my defense - thanks guys.