![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() Enthusiast ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Joined May 25, '06 From Hong Kong Currently Offline Reputation: 256 (100%) ![]() |
Ingridients
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Fitted on a scrap engine ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() This post has been edited by vincent_doggy: Sep 18, 2009 - 11:31 AM -------------------- |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() Enthusiast ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Joined Feb 11, '08 From Auckland, New Zealand Currently Offline Reputation: 0 (0%) ![]() |
TB spacers on the other hand actually increase overall plenum volume. My guess the theory is that the MAP sensor is calibrated with the factory plenum volume, u increase the volume and there should be more air in the plenum, more so than the factory ecu recognises therefore this is a very rudimentary way of tuning the A/F ratio towards the lean side, more power is made on the assumption that the factory ECU runs rich just to be safe.
This theory can fail when you take into consideration a tuned exhaust and a cold air intake, which also adds more air (but gets metered correctly on an untampered plenum and throttle body) starts to bring the A/F ratio closer to stoich and the engine close to peak efficiency, the TB spacer will give the MAP sensor false readings and the A/F ratio leans out too much and cause the knock sensor to tell the ECU to retard ignition. Im talking out of my ass just like everyone else, its all just theory until the dyno charts of before and after come out. -------------------- Mike W
1996 Toyota Celica ST205 GT-FOUR GT2860RS turbine, TiAL mvr44, JE 86.5φ piston, Clutchmasters FX400, APEX P-FC 269awhp / 273ft-lbs |
![]() |
|
![]() Enthusiast ![]() Joined Aug 24, '09 Currently Offline Reputation: 1 (100%) ![]() |
TB spacers on the other hand actually increase overall plenum volume. My guess the theory is that the MAP sensor is calibrated with the factory plenum volume, u increase the volume and there should be more air in the plenum, more so than the factory ecu recognises therefore this is a very rudimentary way of tuning the A/F ratio towards the lean side, more power is made on the assumption that the factory ECU runs rich just to be safe. This theory can fail when you take into consideration a tuned exhaust and a cold air intake, which also adds more air (but gets metered correctly on an untampered plenum and throttle body) starts to bring the A/F ratio closer to stoich and the engine close to peak efficiency, the TB spacer will give the MAP sensor false readings and the A/F ratio leans out too much and cause the knock sensor to tell the ECU to retard ignition. Im talking out of my ass just like everyone else, its all just theory until the dyno charts of before and after come out. You are correct!! For everday street application this conversation is a little irrelevant. Most people never hold there vehicle at high rpms on the street for very long for any problems to occur. Now on the track excessive leaning out could rear its ugly head and cause some problems real quick. My avg rpm on the track is 5k-8k for a solid 6-8 minutes. Then again I am not using this type of modification to get horsepower because as you stated it could have some detrimental affects. I am going about it correctly with a standalone that monitors the wideband and if it gets to lean it compensates. |
![]() ![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: July 19th, 2025 - 12:27 AM |