blew my engine
well after getting the car together and to my shop i found that it was idling like a bridgeported motor on my streetported engine. 
so i checked a few things and the map sensor was reading 0 in FCedit so i checked the map sensor and it had a check valve in line to the map sensor instead of a filter..
supposedly this was not changed and i am going to assume that it could have been the cause of the failed engine which wasn't all that old.
moral of the story i suppose is do not put a check valve in line to your map sensor, even if it makes your car sound like a mock bridge port.
the map sensor would read boost ok but not release the pressure, i don't really see how it was drivable but i can't find any real reason why the engine failed in the first place aside from the modified eccentric shaft oiling holes for the stat bearings.
so i checked a few things and the map sensor was reading 0 in FCedit so i checked the map sensor and it had a check valve in line to the map sensor instead of a filter..supposedly this was not changed and i am going to assume that it could have been the cause of the failed engine which wasn't all that old.
moral of the story i suppose is do not put a check valve in line to your map sensor, even if it makes your car sound like a mock bridge port.
the map sensor would read boost ok but not release the pressure, i don't really see how it was drivable but i can't find any real reason why the engine failed in the first place aside from the modified eccentric shaft oiling holes for the stat bearings.
In this case maybe somebody confused a check valve for a filter.
i figured it was what happened but that can have catastrophic results. this one was installed backwards however so i just don't see how it ever ran even remotely right. it was dumping twice as much fuel as needed in any below vacuum position, since it was pushing as much fuel as 0"Hg would require.
i remember this thread...
the rebuild did chip an Atkins seal(another reason i don't use Atkins seals on turbo engines any longer) a few months back after a retune with single turbo by a third party @450whp so i upgraded the seals again to the Goopy Performance seals and i did the tune on it this time.
dynoed the new engine(which still had 1/2 of the parts from the original catasrophic failure) a few nights ago and it was up to 484whp before we ran into a fuel volume issue and had to call it a night with the tuning at 19.5psi with the 35R.
it is still the most ugly looking engine i ever tore apart initially, but what's in the past is in the past. i was even having difficulty keeping it off the rev limiter but it never skipped a beat..
the rebuild did chip an Atkins seal(another reason i don't use Atkins seals on turbo engines any longer) a few months back after a retune with single turbo by a third party @450whp so i upgraded the seals again to the Goopy Performance seals and i did the tune on it this time.
dynoed the new engine(which still had 1/2 of the parts from the original catasrophic failure) a few nights ago and it was up to 484whp before we ran into a fuel volume issue and had to call it a night with the tuning at 19.5psi with the 35R.
it is still the most ugly looking engine i ever tore apart initially, but what's in the past is in the past. i was even having difficulty keeping it off the rev limiter but it never skipped a beat..
Last edited by RotaryEvolution; Jun 2, 2013 at 01:38 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
