nismo.capri Posted November 30, 2006 Author Share Posted November 30, 2006 im pissed off, just went to pickapart the only throttle body there was off the engine, in the car. i was like MINT at the start, but then realised the fuel side was broken off would have been a good deal for $27 if it was sweet. managed to get me a free TPS and loom connectors though Fukka.... I'd have got it anyway 27 dollars is cheap for 2 spare injectors. Al so they split so you could replace the top broken part. nismo, do you need that cold idle shit on the side? Nope... that said I'm looking at hooking it back on to see if I can get the Link talking to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corrupt Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 can get one with 2 year warrenty from the wreckers for $70, or from another wrecker for $50 no warrenty. quite funny, i haggled the first wreckers down from 190! lol they wanted 120 for the tb and 70 for the tps, then realised it was rip off and no one would pay it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismo.capri Posted November 30, 2006 Author Share Posted November 30, 2006 can get one with 2 year warrenty from the wreckers for $70, or from another wrecker for $50 no warrenty. Both are good deals, the only problem these seem to have is that the injectors die which is not surprising since the engines can do 400,000+ kms during their life time. So the extra $20 for the warrenty could be well worth it. quite funny, i haggled the first wreckers down from 190! lol they wanted 120 for the tb and 70 for the tps, then realised it was rip off and no one would pay it. Lol you don't even need the TPS if you use an ECU that uses a MAP sensor like the Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corrupt Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 Lol you don't even need the TPS if you use an ECU that uses a MAP sensor like the Link you do for what im doing *taps nose* remember nismo? or dont i? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaMpylobacter Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 Lol you don't even need the TPS if you use an ECU that uses a MAP sensor like the Link I fail to see how you could have an economic, and smooth system running without a TPS and instead relying solely on vacuum for the mixtrue control on the inlet side.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowlancer Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 TPS=throttel position sensor? My microtech needs one and it uses MAP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaMpylobacter Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 pretty much anything with electronic injection NEEDS a TPS to be half decent. otherwise better off with a carb IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corrupt Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 will be using it to activate the electronic clutch on the supercharger, at a certain amount of "foot to the floor" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismo.capri Posted November 30, 2006 Author Share Posted November 30, 2006 Lol you don't even need the TPS if you use an ECU that uses a MAP sensor like the Link you do for what im doing *taps nose* remember nismo? or dont i? yeah right...... Brain isn't working to well at the mo' Mrs has been away for the week and I've had visitors every night and ended up pissed... starting to pay for it now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismo.capri Posted November 30, 2006 Author Share Posted November 30, 2006 pretty much anything with electronic injection NEEDS a TPS to be half decent. otherwise better off with a carb IMO Why's that? MAP + Revs is much more accurate at WOT than TPS+revs because the sensor is measuring the actual inlet pressure of the air the engine is using (which also means by definition it's altitude compansated) The TPS is just a vairable resistor telling the ECU how open you have the throttle plate, it's more telling the engine what you are doing as opposed to sensing what the engine needs. For the absolute best fuel control you can't go past a Mass Air Flow sensor(MAF). A MAF directly measures the Mass of the air which means it can then add in the correct mass of fuel. This is fully self compansating for altitude and temprature, A MAP sensor wont compenstate for the charge temp only altitude and a TPS compensates for neither. ALso with the Link LEM ECU's they can only MAP OR TPS not both which sorta sucks as TPS is better for lumpy cam at idle, (the MAP doesn't like the wild pressure changes) but MAP has a far better resolution for WOT. The Ford ecus use MAP, MAF and TPS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismo.capri Posted November 30, 2006 Author Share Posted November 30, 2006 I fail to see how you could have an economic, and smooth system running without a TPS and instead relying solely on vacuum for the mixtrue control on the inlet side.... Lets go back to basics The amount of fuel required is directly related to the mass of air entering the engine. The mass of air is proportional to the air density, which is proportional to the absolute pressure and inversely proportional to the absolute temperature. PV = nRT RPM dictates how much air mass is leaving the intake manifold and entering the cylinders. (Engine Mass Airflow Rate) ≈ RPM × (Air Density) or equivalently (Engine Mass Airflow Rate) ≈ RPM × MAP / (absolute temperature) So there you go a Speed Density algorithm using a MAP and Temp sensor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaMpylobacter Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 I see... never knew the link was unable to run both TPS and MAP. running both will always be better than one, but as you said, MAP is the better of the two, if only one can be used Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismo.capri Posted November 30, 2006 Author Share Posted November 30, 2006 I see...never knew the link was unable to run both TPS and MAP. running both will always be better than one, but as you said, MAP is the better of the two, if only one can be used I still get annoyed when I'm in the config and see the choice of MAP or TPS ....but hey like LowLancer said you get what you pay for! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 What cam are you running in your van and does it still sound lumpy or has the map sorted this to a smooth idle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismo.capri Posted December 1, 2006 Author Share Posted December 1, 2006 What cam are you running in your van and does it still sound lumpy or has the map sorted this to a smooth idle? I have A Keford GT & half grind, It's basicly the biggest grind that works with the factory valve springs it's a good fast road cam... dyno will tell the story soon Because I'm using the MAP sensor the idle is lumpy but consistant, if that makes sense. Lumpy cams cause reversion (Pressure waves runing back up the in take) which causes the inlet pressure to bounce around. I've been told I could get it to idle smoother if I used TPS but I like a bit of lumpy idle with a worked engine..... who doesn't! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Yeah the lump is where its at. Im running a Kent FR32 with a 1600 head which sounds pretty lumpy. Suppose I might as well use my injection manifold etc that I have however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismo.capri Posted December 1, 2006 Author Share Posted December 1, 2006 Yeah the lump is where its at. Im running a Kent FR32 with a 1600 head which sounds pretty lumpy.Suppose I might as well use my injection manifold etc that I have however. Sierra EFI manifold? Ported and big valves? ....I hope so as it would be awsome to have a comparison between the 2 inlets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Yeap Sierra EFI manifold. I just dont like the look of it. Dont want to cut it up tho as I know how expensive they are to buy. I also have a telstar(from memory) manifold which is alot smaller and damn close to fitting the ports. A spacer would need to be made up but its only 5mm/10mm max out on some ports. I might fiddle with this later. The 1600 head has the ports tidied up and has 2l valves. Nothing to special. Runs at 10.5:1 compression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corrupt Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Yeap Sierra EFI manifold. I just dont like the look of it. You and your damn efi manifold they look sex you n00b#!@# Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismo.capri Posted December 1, 2006 Author Share Posted December 1, 2006 Yeap Sierra EFI manifold. I just dont like the look of it. Dont want to cut it up tho as I know how expensive they are to buy. You paid for it so cuts as much as you want! I also have a telstar(from memory) manifold which is alot smaller and damn close to fitting the ports. A spacer would need to be made up but its only 5mm/10mm max out on some ports. I might fiddle with this later. That's better than cutting up the sierra jobbie.... Why don't you do a custom one then? The 1600 head has the ports tidied up and has 2l valves. Nothing to special. Runs at 10.5:1 compression. With that compression and a cam she should be very decent. Do you have an ECU? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.