Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I've been chatting at work to a bloke who's got a damn good mind!

I want to know if there is a sensor avaliable to show pressure in and electronic signal?

We want to put sensors before the turbo(s); between the turbo(s) and the intercooler and between the intercooler and the inlet manifold (or in manifold, which ever is easier)...

What, how etc etc?

Any thoughts/ideas etc?....

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/43271-tech-heads-need-some-answers/
Share on other sites

http://www.autospeed.com/cgi-bin/browse.cg...oduct=888800079

Pressure/Vaccumn switch, basically it won't give you a measurement, but you can make it trigger at certain pressures.

its a start, it also has links to some articles that might give you or your mate some ideas.

Bass Junky, permanently... We wanna rig up a digital display that shows what the air goes into the turbo at; what it comes out of the turbo at (turbo effieciency or whatever you call it) then what it goes into the manifold at (ie what loss is caused through the pipes and intercooler etc....

Don't really wanna spend a fortune converting the car to MAP for that you know?....

just need 3 lil sensors that we can plumb into the pipes to send the pressure as a digital signal....

Does that help?

You dont need to convert the car to MAP based management...

A map sensor is a small, relatively cheap device that converts a pressure signal (ie from your intercooler plumbing) to an electrical signal...

Stock 33 boost guage is driven by a MAP sensor...

funky, I had a look at that and it looks good too...

I was just picturing something cheap and simple that could be tapped into the pipes like the O2 sensors in the dump pipes.... any thing like that? is that what a MAP sensor would be like?

Permanently: You would then have to weld little lugs to the places you want the signal to be taken from and then attach a MAP sensor to each lug.

From there you would have to output that signal to some sort of display unit.

I can't really see this as being a cheap thing to do......

The alternative it to plumb up three seperate boost gauges....

I think Autometer now have digital readouts which have the outputs from two sensors displayed on the one guage. You can configure them to be whatever you want. (might not be autometer.... but it's someone.

BASS OUT

Yeah, the drilling/welding shouldn't be too expensive if we know a welder though should it...

We're going to design our own display unit, using the 3... so the 3 boost guages would be a waste of money....

So how much do you think it would be for the 3 MAP sensors?

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...