Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

you could always run the thing on flintstone power that would sort out your map sensor woes.

Or you could set it up and tune it off the tps only

"Some ITBS don’t use a map sensor because they have no way of reading vacuum from all 4 ITB’s this is where you need to tune a car from the TPS sensor only using a method of tuning called Alpha-N, which can also be used in combination with a atmospheric pressure sensor to detect how high or low you are above sea level" (stolen from a honda site)

but i've been doing a lot of reading and all the 4ag boys all seem to use tps vs rev tunning only and have no issues

you can also combo tune with tps ans map sensor, having a though map (manifold absolute pressure) sensor so if you running na with equal length runners ect would the absolute pressure be equal over each runner?? or could u feed a vacum line from each throttle body/intake into a big collecter then into map sensor would that equalise/adverage the map??

the reason people take the itb's off gtrs is because of how hard they are to tune with otherwise every car would have em if they were easy

Also just a thought without a manifold you would need a vac pump so feed for your brake master as you'd have no vacum to grab, and how do you go about ur idle control fuel pressure reg ect??

Heres a pic of an sr20 with itb's into a custom plenum which is your second idea, i think it will end up being the easiest/cheapest and if set-up probperly i dont think you would loose that much throttle response, also easier to set up some sorta cold air feed

post-21352-1204812816_thumb.jpgpost-21352-1204812860_thumb.jpg

post-21352-1204812917_thumb.jpg

plus a link to the artical http://www.turbomagazine.com/features/0704.../car_specs.html

This is what an engine should sound like toyota v8 with itbs ohh sounds soo hot

Here's a guide on how to build and set-up with lots of great info except about the map sensor set-up grrrrr

http://www.v8soarer.com/itb/index.shtml#Vacuum

ok think thats enought to think about for now, after spending the last half hour listening to itb set ups on Utube has convinced me next car even if its turbo is going to have some itb's set up sounds so hot

Adaptronic e420c ECU.

It runs either MAP, TPS or MAP crossed with TPS.

The mapxTPS is a special setup, first used on the 4AGE with the quad throttles.

There's issues with multi throttles and getting a good pressure source.

So Andy (Owner of Adaptronic) has a beautiful way to tune with MAPxTPS tuning.

Works beautiful for great power, insane throttle response, and economy!

Heres a pic of an sr20 with itb's into a custom plenum which is your second idea, i think it will end up being the easiest/cheapest and if set-up probperly i dont think you would loose that much throttle response, also easier to set up some sorta cold air feed

I think Im going with a R33 intake manifold, adapter plate, RB26 itb's, runners (undecided length), bell mouths, maniflold type plate (with bell mouths nicly set in), and im thinking CARBON FIBER manifold and 4" intake pipe down to a Q45 afm (or 2 :D ) and massive pod in a cold air box. I think I will run individual vacume hoses to a colector to use for brake/fuel pressure, Im going to see how the gtr's get around this + idle. Im doing it on the cheep for now as I think me jobs going up the s#!tter :D .

No job = more tinker time in shed :laughing-smiley-014:

More tinker time in shed = less cash money for toys

Less cash money for toys = less things to tinker with in shed

Less things to tinker with in shed = god forbid :D more time spent with the misses (this has its good and bad points, lets not forget wink.wink)

More time spent with misses = will lead to arguments over unenployment

and it will just spiral down from there realy

Found a thort inspiring page in the states though http://www.rossmachineracing.com/intakepartspage.html filled my head with ideas

Insperation from BMW and honda

post-38617-1205216975_thumb.jpg

post-38617-1205217003_thumb.jpg

post-38617-1205216937_thumb.jpg

BMW ideas would be the way to go, start with the E46 M3.

the main hurdle isn't the components required, it's the tuning and like you said the runner lengths.

ideally you would initially get adjustable runners and spend hours on end on the dyno to get it right. then you would get the CF ones fabricated at the set length. however the minute you change timing, fuel mixture, tune, etc. the lengths may need to be changed again. each variable affects one another differently and each time you modify the 'optimal setting' shifts.

that said, you would only do that if you were chasing the last poof-teenth of a kilowatt. most people don't care.

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...