FCD is a better fuel pump needed?
07-09-06, 07:10 PM
#26
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: ATL
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=speed_monkey]Wouldnt you have to take into consideration that it's a rotary and not a piston engine? 
They need more air per horsepower than a piston engine, so they would also need more fuel correct?
my guess would be yes which is why i set the BSFC at .70
and adrock3217 how can the stock fuel pump not keep up with 119lph if it pumps at 180lph?
and everyone i started this thread in reference to light basic power mods (i.e exhaust, ported wg FCD...maybe even an intake) in mind.... plz post with that in mind it would be more helpful
They need more air per horsepower than a piston engine, so they would also need more fuel correct?my guess would be yes which is why i set the BSFC at .70
and adrock3217 how can the stock fuel pump not keep up with 119lph if it pumps at 180lph?
and everyone i started this thread in reference to light basic power mods (i.e exhaust, ported wg FCD...maybe even an intake) in mind.... plz post with that in mind it would be more helpful
Last edited by TURBODUECE88; 07-09-06 at 07:13 PM.
07-09-06, 07:15 PM
#27
Boost in..Apex seals out.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Maryland, 21794
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Turbonut
A FD pump will not overpower the FPR. Have been running one for 6 years.
DUH! That is exactly the point. Once you find the sec injector size that you need, it will cycle the same as the factory injector, but will provide more fuel to the engine. Simple as that. Isn't this what you need when you're running 10/12 lbs, and especially if using a fcd.
Better start doing some reseacrch, as your facts are not correct.
DUH! That is exactly the point. Once you find the sec injector size that you need, it will cycle the same as the factory injector, but will provide more fuel to the engine. Simple as that. Isn't this what you need when you're running 10/12 lbs, and especially if using a fcd.
Better start doing some reseacrch, as your facts are not correct.
Ok, so, lets say I'm at light throttle at 4000 rpm, not under boost..the secondary injectors are indeed squirting, but hm, lets see. I'd say you will be getting a lot more fuel then needed, as you will be putting in more fuel, when the car is in an area of the RPM range where more fuel is not needed (then stock).
Your method can and will work, but it will not work correctly at all RPM's. If you loose boost in the upper RPM, as normally the stock turbo cannot keep up..WOT, 720cc secondaries, lets say you bleed off to 6psi. Hmm, it would appear that you would be injecting a lot more fuel then necessary .......
07-11-06, 08:41 AM
#29
I'm a boost creep...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by Turbonut
Just because a pump has a higher flow rate doesn't equate to more fuel being injected into the engine, unless a monster pump is installed which can overwhelm the fpr.
The pressure regulator will control the flow, regardless of the pump capacity, so no reason a higher volume pump will increase injector flow without electronics upgrade.
To put it simply, I'll assume it to be like an air compressor. If I have the compressor to turn off at 150 psi, but the regulator/filter is set at 40 psi, I'm going to receive 40 lbs.
Why install a pump if the injectors cannot take advantage either through larger injectors, or better electronics.
In your recap, your'e not even certain of the amount of fuel the larger pump would supply to the engine, so I consider this as uncontrolled...........Your term.
Have no idea what you're referring to as uncontrolled upgraded injectors.
I'm suggesting replacing the secondary injectors with 720's and keeping the original ecu. It will allow more fuel without a more expensive system, and he'll have the pump to maintain the fuel flow.
I'm suggesting replacing the secondary injectors with 720's and keeping the original ecu. It will allow more fuel without a more expensive system, and he'll have the pump to maintain the fuel flow.
People have done this for years, actually decades, since the TII was produced.
A FD pump will not overpower the FPR. Have been running one for 6 years.
Better start doing some reseacrch, as your facts are not correct.
07-11-06, 02:24 PM
#30
NZ:
It seems as though the topic of the thread has been greatly expanded, and the bashing unrelated to the thread subject.
My reply was to put in larger secondary injectors, a FD pump, along with the exhaust and FCD. I still stand by this economical way of gaining HP with the 3" exhaust, along with the added safety of additional fuel.
Is it as good as a full electronics upgrade, of course not, but not everyone has the resources to do what you suggest is the "correct" method. Some would need to spend more than what the purchase price of the car might be, that's why they use (your term) crude and lazy tuning.
As for the 2 stage pump, it was designed for longevity, not because of flow capacity and the FPR. When fuel not needed, it will run along on 9 V, then jump to 12. People that do a rewire don't have a problem with running a constant 12V, at least the ones I know.
"The FPR is not their to keep the fuel rail pressure constant, but to maintain a constant pressure differential across the injectors. That's why it adjusts pressure according to manifold pressure."
That is correct, but as in my simplistic example, the FPR IS to maintain a certain pressure, whether under load or cruising, depending on the need.
Quote:
Why install a pump if the injectors cannot take advantage either through larger injectors, or better electronics.
Because as boost increases the pump must work harder to maintain that constant pressure differential. Not only does more boost need more fuel, but the pump must push against higher manifold pressure when the injector is open.
Exactly. Read my reply. I was asking why install a larger pump if you don't upgrade the injectors, and have a FCD. You'll see no more flow than what the ecu demands at fuel cut with the 550 injectors. Once again the need for more fuel, larger injectors.Unless you're one of the people that will say, with a larger pump it will force more fuel through the injectors.........
Quote:
Have no idea what you're referring to as uncontrolled upgraded injectors.
I'm suggesting replacing the secondary injectors with 720's and keeping the original ecu. It will allow more fuel without a more expensive system, and he'll have the pump to maintain the fuel flow.
Uncontrolled as in no way of tuning the amount of fuel injected, i.e. a fuel controller. Without some form of fuel control bigger injectors will cause overly rich mixtures, which reduces power and increases fuel consumption
In the late '80's guys would add the larger secondary injectors, RB Turbo system and a FCD. Geez, their cars would kill nearly everything at that time. My cousin had an '88 and drove it this way for 4 years until he traded it. Just remember if larger injectors are used, they are still controlled by the ecu, and will be proportionally more fuel throughout the rpm, but governed by the ecu.
I know in my TII with the GForce ecu upgrade, when accelerating at a normal rate, at the transition to the secondary injectors, it's almost like shoving you’re foot down further to the floor. Even if the pedal is not moved. The car will shoot forward because of the extra fuel. Never had a flooding problem, car passes emissions each of the last 6 years, and pulls hard.
I guess you could say I did a crude and lazy tuning on my S5. Just added the GForce computer, stock air box, stock mufflers with a Bonez high flow cat, Fd pump. I was going to install a Hallman remote to take it up to 12/13, but the 10/11 has been fine.
OUT!!!!!!
It seems as though the topic of the thread has been greatly expanded, and the bashing unrelated to the thread subject.
Originally Posted by TURBODUECE88
i have a T2 and just purchased a full exhaust and an FCD. i have heard some people say they were hesitant to instal an FCD with the stock fuel pump. will doing this harm/ make the engine less stable or will it simply not allow for maximum hp gains and performance??
Is it as good as a full electronics upgrade, of course not, but not everyone has the resources to do what you suggest is the "correct" method. Some would need to spend more than what the purchase price of the car might be, that's why they use (your term) crude and lazy tuning.
As for the 2 stage pump, it was designed for longevity, not because of flow capacity and the FPR. When fuel not needed, it will run along on 9 V, then jump to 12. People that do a rewire don't have a problem with running a constant 12V, at least the ones I know.
"The FPR is not their to keep the fuel rail pressure constant, but to maintain a constant pressure differential across the injectors. That's why it adjusts pressure according to manifold pressure."
That is correct, but as in my simplistic example, the FPR IS to maintain a certain pressure, whether under load or cruising, depending on the need.
Quote:
Why install a pump if the injectors cannot take advantage either through larger injectors, or better electronics.
Because as boost increases the pump must work harder to maintain that constant pressure differential. Not only does more boost need more fuel, but the pump must push against higher manifold pressure when the injector is open.
Exactly. Read my reply. I was asking why install a larger pump if you don't upgrade the injectors, and have a FCD. You'll see no more flow than what the ecu demands at fuel cut with the 550 injectors. Once again the need for more fuel, larger injectors.Unless you're one of the people that will say, with a larger pump it will force more fuel through the injectors.........
Quote:
Have no idea what you're referring to as uncontrolled upgraded injectors.
I'm suggesting replacing the secondary injectors with 720's and keeping the original ecu. It will allow more fuel without a more expensive system, and he'll have the pump to maintain the fuel flow.
Uncontrolled as in no way of tuning the amount of fuel injected, i.e. a fuel controller. Without some form of fuel control bigger injectors will cause overly rich mixtures, which reduces power and increases fuel consumption
In the late '80's guys would add the larger secondary injectors, RB Turbo system and a FCD. Geez, their cars would kill nearly everything at that time. My cousin had an '88 and drove it this way for 4 years until he traded it. Just remember if larger injectors are used, they are still controlled by the ecu, and will be proportionally more fuel throughout the rpm, but governed by the ecu.
I know in my TII with the GForce ecu upgrade, when accelerating at a normal rate, at the transition to the secondary injectors, it's almost like shoving you’re foot down further to the floor. Even if the pedal is not moved. The car will shoot forward because of the extra fuel. Never had a flooding problem, car passes emissions each of the last 6 years, and pulls hard.
I guess you could say I did a crude and lazy tuning on my S5. Just added the GForce computer, stock air box, stock mufflers with a Bonez high flow cat, Fd pump. I was going to install a Hallman remote to take it up to 12/13, but the 10/11 has been fine.
OUT!!!!!!
07-12-06, 08:45 AM
#31
I'm a boost creep...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by Turbonut
It seems as though the topic of the thread has been greatly expanded...
My reply was to put in larger secondary injectors, a FD pump, along with the exhaust and FCD. I still stand by this economical way of gaining HP with the 3" exhaust, along with the added safety of additional fuel.
Is it as good as a full electronics upgrade, of course not, but not everyone has the resources to do what you suggest is the "correct" method. Some would need to spend more than what the purchase price of the car might be, that's why they use (your term) crude and lazy tuning.
As for the 2 stage pump, it was designed for longevity, not because of flow capacity and the FPR. When fuel not needed, it will run along on 9 V, then jump to 12.
People that do a rewire don't have a problem with running a constant 12V, at least the ones I know.
That is correct, but as in my simplistic example, the FPR IS to maintain a certain pressure, whether under load or cruising, depending on the need.
I was asking why install a larger pump if you don't upgrade the injectors, and have a FCD. You'll see no more flow than what the ecu demands at fuel cut with the 550 injectors. Once again the need for more fuel, larger injectors. Unless you're one of the people that will say, with a larger pump it will force more fuel through the injectors...
In the late '80's guys would add the larger secondary injectors, RB Turbo system and a FCD. Geez, their cars would kill nearly everything at that time.
Just remember if larger injectors are used, they are still controlled by the ecu, and will be proportionally more fuel throughout the rpm, but governed by the ecu.
I know in my TII with the GForce ecu upgrade, when accelerating at a normal rate, at the transition to the secondary injectors, it's almost like shoving you’re foot down further to the floor. Even if the pedal is not moved. The car will shoot forward because of the extra fuel.
Never had a flooding problem...
07-12-06, 03:18 PM
#32
NZ:
I wasn't going to respond, but hey, I'm sitting around the house recovering from shoulder surgery and it gives me something to do.
It's going to be short and will condense all the gibberish into the following. Seems someone can run larger injectors on a stock ecu and NOT flood the engine out. It may be 25 years old ingenuity, but getting it done on a stock ecu with stellar results.
From Rohnert Park, CA.:
I’m running about 300 crank HP out of my S5 engine with the RB 3" exhaust, but more fuel is needed to feed the increased boost.
A SupraTT or Cosmo fuel pump are good choices and quieter than the Walboro. I run the SupraTT, and you'll be best off with some 680-720cc secondary injectors too. I run 800cc secondaries and they are well matched to the 14psi of turbo pressure. I run no fuel control trickery, just stock ECU pulse widths. I used to run 680's with my old S4 setup around 12psi,it was also very well matched with no fuel controllers.
To safely control the increased boost to match your new found fuel delivery, you'll need a boost controller. Don't skimp, get a good one. I run an Apex ACVR with excellent results.
I've run my setup for years and years with very good results and excellent manners from the stock S5 ECU and full smog gear intact.
I wasn't going to respond, but hey, I'm sitting around the house recovering from shoulder surgery and it gives me something to do.
It's going to be short and will condense all the gibberish into the following. Seems someone can run larger injectors on a stock ecu and NOT flood the engine out. It may be 25 years old ingenuity, but getting it done on a stock ecu with stellar results.
From Rohnert Park, CA.:
I’m running about 300 crank HP out of my S5 engine with the RB 3" exhaust, but more fuel is needed to feed the increased boost.
A SupraTT or Cosmo fuel pump are good choices and quieter than the Walboro. I run the SupraTT, and you'll be best off with some 680-720cc secondary injectors too. I run 800cc secondaries and they are well matched to the 14psi of turbo pressure. I run no fuel control trickery, just stock ECU pulse widths. I used to run 680's with my old S4 setup around 12psi,it was also very well matched with no fuel controllers.
To safely control the increased boost to match your new found fuel delivery, you'll need a boost controller. Don't skimp, get a good one. I run an Apex ACVR with excellent results.
I've run my setup for years and years with very good results and excellent manners from the stock S5 ECU and full smog gear intact.
07-12-06, 03:40 PM
#33
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Originally Posted by Turbonut
NZ:
I wasn't going to respond, but hey, I'm sitting around the house recovering from shoulder surgery and it gives me something to do.
It's going to be short and will condense all the gibberish into the following. Seems someone can run larger injectors on a stock ecu and NOT flood the engine out. It may be 25 years old ingenuity, but getting it done on a stock ecu with stellar results.
From Rohnert Park, CA.:
I’m running about 300 crank HP out of my S5 engine with the RB 3" exhaust, but more fuel is needed to feed the increased boost.
A SupraTT or Cosmo fuel pump are good choices and quieter than the Walboro. I run the SupraTT, and you'll be best off with some 680-720cc secondary injectors too. I run 800cc secondaries and they are well matched to the 14psi of turbo pressure. I run no fuel control trickery, just stock ECU pulse widths. I used to run 680's with my old S4 setup around 12psi,it was also very well matched with no fuel controllers.
To safely control the increased boost to match your new found fuel delivery, you'll need a boost controller. Don't skimp, get a good one. I run an Apex ACVR with excellent results.
I've run my setup for years and years with very good results and excellent manners from the stock S5 ECU and full smog gear intact.
I wasn't going to respond, but hey, I'm sitting around the house recovering from shoulder surgery and it gives me something to do.
It's going to be short and will condense all the gibberish into the following. Seems someone can run larger injectors on a stock ecu and NOT flood the engine out. It may be 25 years old ingenuity, but getting it done on a stock ecu with stellar results.
From Rohnert Park, CA.:
I’m running about 300 crank HP out of my S5 engine with the RB 3" exhaust, but more fuel is needed to feed the increased boost.
A SupraTT or Cosmo fuel pump are good choices and quieter than the Walboro. I run the SupraTT, and you'll be best off with some 680-720cc secondary injectors too. I run 800cc secondaries and they are well matched to the 14psi of turbo pressure. I run no fuel control trickery, just stock ECU pulse widths. I used to run 680's with my old S4 setup around 12psi,it was also very well matched with no fuel controllers.
To safely control the increased boost to match your new found fuel delivery, you'll need a boost controller. Don't skimp, get a good one. I run an Apex ACVR with excellent results.
I've run my setup for years and years with very good results and excellent manners from the stock S5 ECU and full smog gear intact.
Also his #'s alone go to show how innefficient his setup is... ~260whp @ 14psi is NOT good... I can't even believe you would listen to someone who has such a ghetto trailer park setup... I don't understand why you would not believe NZ or HAILERS, since the information they've given you is all based on pure FACTUAL evidence... It's been tested... It's been proven... Get over yourself and take their advice!
07-12-06, 03:45 PM
#34
Wherever you got that info from the guy is completly ignorant.
Everything NZ is saying is correct.
The reason there is so much misconception is because running rich (especially under boost) is actually a more reliable (although produces less power) than running more near stoichimetic ratio.
Rotaries blow up when they go lean, especially boosted ones. And every engine experiences more wear the more power it produces. So by running excessivly rich you reduce both sources of premature failure. To a point....because when you get VERY rich you cause other problems.
Further your never going to flood the engine out (as NZ already stated) with larger secondarys) its just going to produce less power (and if really rich) missfire like crazy durring WOT high RPM driving.
The down sides of running rich (even if its only high RPMS) other than less power from overly rich mixtures are these. You will foul your plugs faster, and you will destroy your catalytic converter (if you are still running one).
Excessive fuel delivery will not increase boost, actually quite the oposite. Overly rich mixture will reduce the boost created by the turbo....again a source of backing into longevity through lack of tuning.
The reason people swear by adding secondaries is because they by default run too rich and produce less power, both (to a point) increase longevity of the motor and turbo...
Everything NZ is saying is correct.
The reason there is so much misconception is because running rich (especially under boost) is actually a more reliable (although produces less power) than running more near stoichimetic ratio.
Rotaries blow up when they go lean, especially boosted ones. And every engine experiences more wear the more power it produces. So by running excessivly rich you reduce both sources of premature failure. To a point....because when you get VERY rich you cause other problems.
Further your never going to flood the engine out (as NZ already stated) with larger secondarys) its just going to produce less power (and if really rich) missfire like crazy durring WOT high RPM driving.
The down sides of running rich (even if its only high RPMS) other than less power from overly rich mixtures are these. You will foul your plugs faster, and you will destroy your catalytic converter (if you are still running one).
Excessive fuel delivery will not increase boost, actually quite the oposite. Overly rich mixture will reduce the boost created by the turbo....again a source of backing into longevity through lack of tuning.
The reason people swear by adding secondaries is because they by default run too rich and produce less power, both (to a point) increase longevity of the motor and turbo...
07-12-06, 05:13 PM
#35
Originally Posted by RockLobster
Wherever you got that info from the guy is completly ignorant.
Everything NZ is saying is correct.
The reason there is so much misconception is because running rich (especially under boost) is actually a more reliable (although produces less power) than running more near stoichimetic ratio.
Rotaries blow up when they go lean, especially boosted ones. And every engine experiences more wear the more power it produces. So by running excessivly rich you reduce both sources of premature failure. To a point....because when you get VERY rich you cause other problems.
Further your never going to flood the engine out (as NZ already stated) with larger secondarys) its just going to produce less power (and if really rich) missfire like crazy durring WOT high RPM driving.
The down sides of running rich (even if its only high RPMS) other than less power from overly rich mixtures are these. You will foul your plugs faster, and you will destroy your catalytic converter (if you are still running one).
Excessive fuel delivery will not increase boost, actually quite the oposite. Overly rich mixture will reduce the boost created by the turbo....again a source of backing into longevity through lack of tuning.
The reason people swear by adding secondaries is because they by default run too rich and produce less power, both (to a point) increase longevity of the motor and turbo...
Everything NZ is saying is correct.
The reason there is so much misconception is because running rich (especially under boost) is actually a more reliable (although produces less power) than running more near stoichimetic ratio.
Rotaries blow up when they go lean, especially boosted ones. And every engine experiences more wear the more power it produces. So by running excessivly rich you reduce both sources of premature failure. To a point....because when you get VERY rich you cause other problems.
Further your never going to flood the engine out (as NZ already stated) with larger secondarys) its just going to produce less power (and if really rich) missfire like crazy durring WOT high RPM driving.
The down sides of running rich (even if its only high RPMS) other than less power from overly rich mixtures are these. You will foul your plugs faster, and you will destroy your catalytic converter (if you are still running one).
Excessive fuel delivery will not increase boost, actually quite the oposite. Overly rich mixture will reduce the boost created by the turbo....again a source of backing into longevity through lack of tuning.
The reason people swear by adding secondaries is because they by default run too rich and produce less power, both (to a point) increase longevity of the motor and turbo...
I never said NZ wasn't correct, in fact I agreed with aftermarket fuel controls, but I challenged his statements that a fcd, larger secondaries, RB 3" exhaust, larger pump, would not work, that they make less power. They don't from example. Could the above make more power if a stand alone was used, then tuned properly, providing you don't blow the engine when do so, certainly, but I rest my case, 'cause I've seen guys go this route dozens of times. You'd need to change the secondaries anyway as the stock injectors would be maxed out, but it's a start.
If you want to knit pick, he also mentioned on his first reply, that the 2 speed TII pump was reduced because of volumn and the FPR. When I corrected that and stated it wasn't because of volumn, but it was to ensure pump longevity, he then said he knew that!!!!!!!!!!!!
G Figure
07-12-06, 05:37 PM
#36
Boost in..Apex seals out.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Maryland, 21794
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, with these statements, I kinda have to step in.
I don't know who's account that is, but I wouldn't trust their opinion... For one, it's amazing they recommend both the Cosmo and the Supra pump, when they are the same Denso part #...
Well, if you tell someone just Cosmo, and they can't find one, they would be like "****, Walboro it is." But if you tell them BOTH, chances are they will be able to find one or the other. That is probably the most efficient way of communication....
Also his #'s alone go to show how innefficient his setup is... ~260whp @ 14psi is NOT good... I can't even believe you would listen to someone who has such a ghetto trailer park setup...
I have for one never seen someone make over 265rwhp on a stock S4 or S5 turbo. So...those seem to be quite excellent numbers...
I don't know who's account that is, but I wouldn't trust their opinion... For one, it's amazing they recommend both the Cosmo and the Supra pump, when they are the same Denso part #...
Well, if you tell someone just Cosmo, and they can't find one, they would be like "****, Walboro it is." But if you tell them BOTH, chances are they will be able to find one or the other. That is probably the most efficient way of communication....
Also his #'s alone go to show how innefficient his setup is... ~260whp @ 14psi is NOT good... I can't even believe you would listen to someone who has such a ghetto trailer park setup...
I have for one never seen someone make over 265rwhp on a stock S4 or S5 turbo. So...those seem to be quite excellent numbers...
07-12-06, 07:36 PM
#37
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Originally Posted by adrock3217
I have for one never seen someone make over 265rwhp on a stock S4 or S5 turbo. So...those seem to be quite excellent numbers...
If all you have done is an FCD/exhaust/etc, and you're wondering whether you need a fuel pump, I highly doubt you're running a larger intercooler, which is also a big setback... I wonder if that "300bhp with no fuel control" guy ever got it on a wideband?
07-12-06, 08:55 PM
#38
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: ATL
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i realized that the source of the problem with an FCD isnt the stock fuel pumps inability to supply enought fuel but its lack of knowledge of how much fuel is needed. as you all know the FCD tricks the ecu into beliving the boost is lower than it really is. as a result if the motor is boosting at 10 PSI the ECU thinks the motor is only boosting at 7 or 8 PSI and as a inturn gives the engine fuel that is necessary to sustain the fictional 7 or 8PSI instead of the actual 10PSI. while this problem can be solved by installing a larger fuel pump and larger injectors to force an unknown amount of extra fuel into the engine, as many people have said, this is a rather uncontrolled solution and with todays gas prices rather uneconomical. the cheapest, easiest, and safest way to solve this problm is to make sure the WG is ported to a large enough diameter, keep the stock air box, and use either a racing cat, stock cat, or presilencer for back pressure to keep the boost levels at 10PSI or below and wait until you have enough money to properly upgrade with a programable ecu. while you wont be able to ralize the full potential of your boltons for a while, atleast your motor will last until you can get the money to do so.
07-13-06, 05:35 AM
#40
I'm a boost creep...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by Turbonut
Seems someone can run larger injectors on a stock ecu and NOT flood the engine out.
It may be 25 years old ingenuity, but getting it done on a stock ecu with stellar results.
I never said NZ wasn't correct, in fact I agreed with aftermarket fuel controls, but I challenged his statements that a fcd, larger secondaries, RB 3" exhaust, larger pump, would not work, that they make less power.
If you want to knit pick, he also mentioned on his first reply, that the 2 speed TII pump was reduced because of volumn and the FPR.
Originally Posted by TURBODUECE88
i realized that the source of the problem with an FCD isnt the stock fuel pumps inability to supply enought fuel but its lack of knowledge of how much fuel is needed.
as you all know the FCD tricks the ecu into beliving the boost is lower than it really is. as a result if the motor is boosting at 10 PSI the ECU thinks the motor is only boosting at 7 or 8 PSI and as a inturn gives the engine fuel that is necessary to sustain the fictional 7 or 8PSI instead of the actual 10PSI.
07-13-06, 06:21 AM
#41
Jason:
Let me start by saying that over the years that I've been on this forum, I don't believe anyone can match your overall knowledge of the FC. It seems as though you have an answer for any problem, question, or theory that is posted. Reading your answers, one might even believe you were involved with the rampup of the FC. I even have copies of threads saved, with your responses, that I felt might help in certain situations.
Having said this, I certainly wasn't challenging your quick and valid responses, but only suggesting that there was a viable "build up" solution using the poster's parts that would be satisfactory, and nothing more. I've stuck my neck out further than I should, so I'm bowing out, and hopefully haven't offended anyone.
Let me start by saying that over the years that I've been on this forum, I don't believe anyone can match your overall knowledge of the FC. It seems as though you have an answer for any problem, question, or theory that is posted. Reading your answers, one might even believe you were involved with the rampup of the FC. I even have copies of threads saved, with your responses, that I felt might help in certain situations.
Having said this, I certainly wasn't challenging your quick and valid responses, but only suggesting that there was a viable "build up" solution using the poster's parts that would be satisfactory, and nothing more. I've stuck my neck out further than I should, so I'm bowing out, and hopefully haven't offended anyone.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
trickster
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
25
07-01-23 04:40 PM
KAL797
Test Area 51
0
08-11-15 03:47 PM
