Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

^^^ Yah it will, as the AFM isnt seeing movement due to BOV when you back off.

that depends on where it is. if the bov is after the afm then you will still have the problem as all the air in the system will go past the afm and make it run rather rich.

The second positive being less restriction before the turbo so you may get some free power.

but you are adding restriction after the turbo so you negate any power increase.

i have seen a 33 that had it done, but the way that they had set it up added about 1m of extra intercooler piping. they had it after the intercooler (hybrid style) and had the cooler pipe run up the from where it came through from the inner guard, then up to the back of the engine bay (the afm was in this section of piping) then a big loop around the back of the plenum befofe going into the plenum.

that depends on where it is. if the bov is after the afm...

Apologies, I thought the intended meaning of I.cooler > BOV > AFM was quiet obvious

but you are adding restriction after the turbo so you negate any power increase...

If i rem my physics correctly, a restriction in a pressure scenario, is less of a restriction then

if so in a vacuum section (all other things equal of course)

Plus, the slightly hotter air would flow around the AFM probe easier no?

…you may have some mixture problems. As the air is denser coming back from the intercooler.

I have thought about this previously, and would suggest that the max air temp going past the AFM and into the plenum, wouldn’t be that much hotter then through the AFM of a stock setup on a 50degree day.

If the density being read was an issue, wouldn’t it crop up in the stock setup, where the AFM in front of the turbo see's a greatly diff temp (density) then that, that enters the plenum?

Hope this helps, these are my corrections to your theory that Ill believe until corrected :D

  • 1 month later...

1 question. why did this happen.....

a friend of mine tried this dose pipe thingo... it sounded pretty awesome. but made his car very sluggish. a civic could probably beat him AND it would cut out on big boost. )15psi not big but big enough for a stock turbo. we went to certain VL mechanics and renown ones too... and all said it looks pretty normal and the problem was the afm was too sensitive.. we even changed the afm but it didnt change. so unless we done something wrong...

my advice is dont do it unless u have a aftermarket computer and u wouldnt have to put the afm just a pipe off the turbo IF u want to do it. if anyone does know a solution to why his car started to run sluggish it would be great to hear about. thanks

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • ..this is the current state of that port. I appreciate the info help (and the link to the Earls thing @Duncan). Though going by that it seems like 1/4 then BSP'ing it and using a bush may work. I don't know where I'd be remote mounting the pressure sender... to... exactly. I assume the idea here is that any vibration is taken up by the semiflexible/flexible hose itself instead of it leveraging against the block directly. I want to believe a stronger, steel bush/adapter would work, but I don't know if that is engineeringly sound or just wishful thinking given the stupendous implications of a leak/failure in this spot. What are the real world risks of dissimilar metals here? It's a 6061 Aluminum block, and I'm talking brass or steel or SS adapters/things.
    • And if you have to drill the oil block, then just drill it for 1/4" and tap it BSP and get a 1/8 to 1/4 BSP bush. The Nissan sender will go straight in and the bush will suit the newly tapped hole. And it will be real strong, to boot.
    • No it doesn't. It just needs an ezy-out to pull that broken bit of alloy out of the hole and presto chango - it will be back to being a 1/8" hole tapped NPT. as per @MBS206 recco. That would be for making what you had in alloy, in steel. If you wanted to do just that instead of remote mounting like @Duncan and I have been pushing. A steel fitting would be unbreakable (compared to that tragically skinny little alloy adapter). But remote mounting would almost certainly be 10x better. Small engineering shops abound all over the place. A lathe and 10 minutes of time = 2x six packs.
    • Ahh. Well the block damage is a problem, you really need to run a tap or thread chaser through it to see if the threads can be saved, but any chips are likely to be bottom end bound which is bad. Earls seem to have what you need if you want to stick with mounting direct on the block: https://rceperformance.com.au/parts/earls-straight-adapter-1-8-npt-male-to-1-8-bspt-female.html, but as I said above I'd recommend remote mounting the sender
    • I'm not quite understanding or I'm missing steps here, (I appreciate people are trying to inform my brain but I am of the dumb, especially today) - All I want to do is mount the male BSPT of the OEM sender into the system somewhere without it snapping the adapter via vibration. The Nissan sender has a male 1/8 BSPT output. The block has a (very destroyed) 1/8 NPT input. I'm not really sure how a lathe assists with that, and also don't know anybody with a lathe, nor specifically what I would want to buy. I'm not really sure how adding additional adapters creates a better, more leak proof resilient seal here.
×
×
  • Create New...