Jedi54

iTrader: (7)

No need to close this thread, Jeff isn't posting and we're done talking about his ban.
Lets get back on track, and things will return back to normal some time in the near future.

tdiddy: I'm gonna go back and read the last few pages. I'm confused as to why you're gonna try and run both the Int-X and the AP.

alnielsen

iTrader: (4)

Jeff just did 2 minutes ago.

Jedi54

iTrader: (7)

#@$#@!#!$!@ !!!!!!!

Either way, lets get back on track. If we keep talking about the forum politics in here, this will just get closed and won't do any of the FI guys any good.
Regardless of how you feel about MM's ban, just keep it to yourselves for now, you should all have Jeff's email address.

Hopefully Jeff will be back in the near future. Till then, lets get back to the subject at hand.

mysql

Jedi, good sentiment, but the thread is good as dead. The only one tuning for FI is banned, so what is left to discuss?

tdiddy

Part of the current problem is that the AP introduced a new set of variables that many of the turbo systems were not ready for.

Almost everybody has some version of the Greddy Kit. It was designed to work off of the MAF sensor. The piping leading to the turbo inlet is long with smooth transitions. Simply by replacing a pipe or 2 you can create an environment where the MAF is mostly happy.

However, many of the systems that have been built in the last couple of years were built with MAP (static) tuning in mind. These systems have the MAF sensor integrated into them so that the car doesn’t freak out but the designers of such systems never intended for them to be tuned with the MAF sensor (Dynamically).

Now people are starting to see the advantages of dynamic tuning but have systems that are not designed for it. Some of these people don’t care that their car has the perfect setup, they just car that it runs. Others are looking for the holy grail and may never find it.

The AP is better than the Int-X for the people who have it working correctly. The Int-X is better than the AP for the people who have it working correctly. For those of us stuck somewhere in the middle, we just want to get our cars running correctly.

Jedi54

iTrader: (7)

I think the esmiril is similar in that it's designed for maf and the AP is map based. (or vice versa)

Jeff had posted in that thread that it would be a bit trickier to tune with the AP but it was not out of the question by any measure.

\\Konig\\

iTrader: (4)

the thing is, the whole cobb discussion thread for NA guys was closed down

if its not reopened soon a new one will have to be made. Jeffs ban doesnt mean we cant talk about the Cobb anymore right? or does it? if it doesnt then there is no reason for the thread to have been closed.

Jedi54

iTrader: (7)

Konig: relax! It's being handled.
The thread was most likely closed because the admins obviously know Jeff has a vested interest in that thread and it's where he's most likely to return if he gets back on here. Closing it down temporarily removes that temptation from MM.

If he serves out his ban, stops breaking the rules, and plays nice I'm sure we'll see that thread back. I'm sending you a PM.

tdiddy

He told me that my car CAN be tuned with the AP. However, he wants me to find out what else is going on because it appears that there is something else wrong with my car. It could be a vacuum leak, it could be a fuel pressure issue, it could be an ignition issue, or it could be any possible combination of these.

I have tried to find out what is going on and just can't seem to find it. I have worked with Scott, Kane, and Ray to no avail. Scott and Kane both think it is a MAF issue. I personally just want to get the car running. If that means buying an interceptor, changing the calibration of my AP, and running them both at the same time then that is what I will do. I just won't keep looking for the needle in the haystack when there might not be one.

Kane

iTrader: (1)

tdiddy - any change of you moving the MAF around a bit first; before you go back to the Int-X?

VarneyMazda

im impressed?

I fail to realize what this has to do with the topic at hand?

anyways needing to mess with the MAF is tweaking.

Ohh and i forgot heres an e-cookie mr MIT.

mysql

Not really. The MAF works out of the box, when the car is stock. As was mentioned before, the kits until recently worked either on MAF outside of boost, then MAP in boost, or MAP all the time. With the AP it's MAF all the time, so the airflow becomes important. Something the kits weren't initially designed for.

Now that the AP is viable, new kits will likely come with better intakes. It's about $100 worth of pipes and filters to get the greddy running solidly.


Anyway, I don't consider it tweaking since this is how the car came stock. With a functioning MAF.

mysql

A 100% MAP based system is good because it's hard to faze it. If you have a billion vacuum leaks, and it can still run without showing any symptoms. Of course, you could also say that it's bad because it masks out possible problems.

Ultimately MAF is going to give you a more accurate picture of air measurement, which is why the industry has moved to it, even on FI vehicles.

tdiddy

Yes, I'm not giving up quite yet. I don't have many options but...

I am trying to get a piece of pipe but it looks like it is going to take a couple of weeks unless someone has any extra around??? If I can get an 8" long 3-3/8"ID piece of aluminum pipe I will give it another try. I plan to have metal screens welded to the inlet and outlet of the pipe. This will make it about 2" longer than it currently is with different screens to promote laminar flow. Based on Christians post, I need to move the MAF sensor away from the turbo so I will put it 2" back from the inlet. That will put it about 6" away from the turbo. This is the best I can do. If it doesn't work, I am going to have to go the other route. My car has not seen much but my garage since Nov.1, 2007.

VarneyMazda

I still feel the AP has yet proven to me with it is better besides the fact it has a better idle AFR, and elminates CEL's

and how many people had all these troubles when the INT-X came out?

staticlag

the dumb thing thats in my mind, is why someone hasn't made a wideband compatible with the interceptorX so it can chase a tune based on AFR ratios. Granted I know it would mean changing the internals a lot.

THAT would be the ideal setup in my mind a MAP computer that chases a tune.

tdiddy

The ultimate was close. Since it would use the MAF in vacuum then switch to MAP when in boost but the chase a tune feature didn't work due to bad temp readings.

Kane

iTrader: (1)

It won't be plug and play; but Dannobre and me are trying to make my software compatible for Int-X. You will have to input the values from the software *gasp* manually *gasp* into Int-X; but the historical corrections and all that would be there.

VarneyMazda

that would be awesome.

tdiddy

It kind of seems like the only people left talking in the AP for turbo thread are the Int-X people.

VarneyMazda

you wont have to worry about scott getting banned his too busy making new products


e:

Phil's 8

iTrader: (3)

I've had or have both - would not care to go back to the Int.-X. Not familiar with your problem and would most likely not understand if you explained it. Most people do not know Jeff well enough to know he will not abandon them. To Jeff's way of thinking this whole thing is a joke and game.

mysql

The ultimate worked well when it worked. However it would sometimes do something unexpected for no apparent reason. To get it 100% required a lot of fine tuning and an innate background for what the ultimate expected. Which is weird since the system appears to be upfront and simple.


Yes, you can get up closer to the edge without worrying about the tune being throw off due to climate change. The requirement for getting dyno tuned is almost eliminated (Yes, this goes against the gain of "you always need to be dyno tuned" for FI, but the base maps are hitting the moving target with pinpoint accuracy). When I reviewed my logs, what I thought was too lean AFR was actually in line with the load the car saw. It doesn't just aim for "11", it's adjusted based on many things.

You also have to consider that there is one less computer system with their hands in the honey pot. With less wiring and harness, there is one less thing to debug if something is not working.

Now, keep in mind none of this means that the int-x doesn't work, it's worked for me for a year. You just have to look at your system and choose what works best for you.

SlideWayz

How many people using the AP have moved the MAF sensor downstream of the intercooler right before the actual intake manifold? Wouldn't that be the best place for it?

+1 on MySQL's last post:

fewer parts = less complexity = fewer points of failure = greater reliability = better design

mysql

from what I've read our maf sensor doesn't work so well with a blow through setup. But you can replace the sensor ... just takes time to configure it.