It's baaaack...
And it's still leaking coolant from around the #2 intake port 
And the ignition system and MAP based EFI are just unhappy with the whole situation. I don't have enough time to play with it so I'm going to be running a borrowed car in tomorrow's rallycross.

And the ignition system and MAP based EFI are just unhappy with the whole situation. I don't have enough time to play with it so I'm going to be running a borrowed car in tomorrow's rallycross.
Is leaking on the outside of the motor around the sleave, or inside and burning coolant? That really sucks that you put everything together and its still not right. You think the damage is outside the realm of JB Weld?
I am unsure at this time. I ran out of shop time and quite frankly I was disgusted at how poorly it was running.
I am going to try converting my MS to TPS based fuel control after doing the usual compression checks etc.
I am going to try converting my MS to TPS based fuel control after doing the usual compression checks etc.
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 31,835
Likes: 3,233
From: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
map based on an na motor is not very ideal anyways. we did it on a stock s5 na, and tps was more linear
I am not much of a fan of TPS based since it can go out of whack so easily.
I will probably try a restrictor orifice first, so the MAP reading isn't so lunatic. I really wish the MS used an external MAP sensor so I could (easily) 'scope it and see how much it's fluctuating.
Oh - and I would have to upgrade the firmware to go to MAP based and I don't think that will be possible.
I will probably try a restrictor orifice first, so the MAP reading isn't so lunatic. I really wish the MS used an external MAP sensor so I could (easily) 'scope it and see how much it's fluctuating.
Oh - and I would have to upgrade the firmware to go to MAP based and I don't think that will be possible.
Ive seen big cam V8 guys and a few high over lap rotaries run a vacuum canister before. I know it is supposed to help for the brake booster, could it also smooth out the craaaaazy vacuum signal these motors create? Also, doesnt megasquirt have the option to run both MAP and TPS?
Also, doesnt megasquirt have the option to run both MAP and TPS?
I have seen people complain about tuning a PP motor with a MAP based setup... The suggestion that seems to normally be thrown out there is to use a TPS based setup, this seems to normally work for them.
I love how you did this build, especially on your budget. I have to say that it has inspired me in alot of ways, which isnt easy to do.
- Chris
I love how you did this build, especially on your budget. I have to say that it has inspired me in alot of ways, which isnt easy to do.
- Chris
Yeah, I wasnt totally confident about what I was referring to. The vacuum canisters I was referring to are mainly used to maintain vacuum a bit longer for power assist brakes on vehicles with eratic idle. To be honest, it was a hairbrained idea and I wasnt sure whether a larger cantainer like that could dampen down the vac signal enough to run smoothly. Since youre Ford throttle body has a newer style TPS, you should be fine running that way.
But *I* can't run TPS based because part of the smokin' deal I got with my MS box was that it apparently can't be upgraded. So I have to work with MAP based.
Once I put new plugs in it, it actually works pretty well.
Once I put new plugs in it, it actually works pretty well.
Good to hear. I didnt realize the old MS couldnt run TPS at all. I thought you meant they just couldnt run TPS AND MAP. Good to hear you got it working though. What's it idling at?
No, it reads the TPS, it's just that you can't run TPS-only or TPS-blended unless you have the newer firmware, which my borked hardware won't do.
Simple fix is just swapping boxes. My wiring harness is a "duzitall".
Simple fix is just swapping boxes. My wiring harness is a "duzitall".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr7vU3cbH6E
Yes, it likes 4 injections/cycle over 2
The map from the 13B is completely unchanged except for three things:
- 4 squirts/cycle
- REQ_FUEL changed from (6.2ms?) to 6.0, which was divided to 3 when I changed the number of injections/cycle
- Cranking pulsewidths changed to 25.5ms hot and cold. This is STILL not enough fuel, the engine will not start without starting fluid/carb cleaner. This is a MS limitation that I'll just have to live with.
Yes, it likes 4 injections/cycle over 2

The map from the 13B is completely unchanged except for three things:
- 4 squirts/cycle
- REQ_FUEL changed from (6.2ms?) to 6.0, which was divided to 3 when I changed the number of injections/cycle
- Cranking pulsewidths changed to 25.5ms hot and cold. This is STILL not enough fuel, the engine will not start without starting fluid/carb cleaner. This is a MS limitation that I'll just have to live with.
peejay, you should add a momentary switch so you open the injectors manually from the driver's seat. What would happen if you left them open for half a second while cranking? Too much fuel possibly? They'll get too hot? They'll be at 100% duty cycle but it's for a very brief period of time. Just an idea.
Cold start/running enrichment has zero to do with cranking pulsewidths. Cranking defined as engine RPM below 300.
There are two variables, pulsewidth at 170F and pulsewidth at -40F. The ECU will linerarly interpolate between those two points. IIRC my pulsewidths for the 13B were 20ms at -40F and 5ms at 170F.
For this engine I have it set at 25.5ms, and 25.5ms. It's an 8 bit processor that calculates to the tenth of a millisecond so 25.5ms is the longest injection it can do.
At 200RPM, there are 150ms between injections, so 25.5ms is 17% duty cycle... lotta fuel!
I am hoping the reason this is such a trouble is just because tubular intake manifolds suck and the fuel is just wetting out against the smooth walls instead of actually making it into the engine in any useful capacity. (With a carb you can just pump your accelerator pump until you get enough fuel!)
Last night I picked up a new hatch for my Golf. While I was there, I asked if he had a cold start valve from a CIS equipped car. (They're a full time fifth injector that is thermostatically activated, in lieu of ability to tweak fuelling on a temperature curve) The old Turbo Dodge school of thought has it that the VW cold start valve is with 15hp. The plan is to activate it via the start signal wire and plumb it in at the intake manifold as close to the engine as possible. This should be trivial to do. I will worry about it after I get the engine's tuning in otherwise-decent condition, though.
There are two variables, pulsewidth at 170F and pulsewidth at -40F. The ECU will linerarly interpolate between those two points. IIRC my pulsewidths for the 13B were 20ms at -40F and 5ms at 170F.
For this engine I have it set at 25.5ms, and 25.5ms. It's an 8 bit processor that calculates to the tenth of a millisecond so 25.5ms is the longest injection it can do.
At 200RPM, there are 150ms between injections, so 25.5ms is 17% duty cycle... lotta fuel!
I am hoping the reason this is such a trouble is just because tubular intake manifolds suck and the fuel is just wetting out against the smooth walls instead of actually making it into the engine in any useful capacity. (With a carb you can just pump your accelerator pump until you get enough fuel!)
Last night I picked up a new hatch for my Golf. While I was there, I asked if he had a cold start valve from a CIS equipped car. (They're a full time fifth injector that is thermostatically activated, in lieu of ability to tweak fuelling on a temperature curve) The old Turbo Dodge school of thought has it that the VW cold start valve is with 15hp. The plan is to activate it via the start signal wire and plumb it in at the intake manifold as close to the engine as possible. This should be trivial to do. I will worry about it after I get the engine's tuning in otherwise-decent condition, though.
Yeah, I haven't touched it since last month 
Way way way too busy to even think about it.
I did drive it - the tune is way off. It idles well and pulls nicely (no throttle needed to pull away from stop
) but on the road it has a serious lack-of-fuel issue. Problem is that the cruise RPM/pressure is the same as idle and it wants more fuel under cruise than at idle, so I need to change to TPS based fuelling, and to do that I need to change-out the processor in my computer.
Also it started smoking (oil) heavily after that cruise... may have something to do with the rotors being mildly rusted after the box they were sitting in got waterlogged. I didn't even remove the seals, just hit them with a wire wheel, sprayed with carb cleaner, and threw them in the engine
Time was really short.
I'm currently building-up a S4 13B. I want to get TII end housings but time (again) is short so I'm just going to do a 6 port. I would like to cut the rotors for high RPM clearance but I won't have lathe-time until next month, sooo... the monster 4-port power-killer will have to wait.

Way way way too busy to even think about it.
I did drive it - the tune is way off. It idles well and pulls nicely (no throttle needed to pull away from stop
) but on the road it has a serious lack-of-fuel issue. Problem is that the cruise RPM/pressure is the same as idle and it wants more fuel under cruise than at idle, so I need to change to TPS based fuelling, and to do that I need to change-out the processor in my computer.Also it started smoking (oil) heavily after that cruise... may have something to do with the rotors being mildly rusted after the box they were sitting in got waterlogged. I didn't even remove the seals, just hit them with a wire wheel, sprayed with carb cleaner, and threw them in the engine
Time was really short.I'm currently building-up a S4 13B. I want to get TII end housings but time (again) is short so I'm just going to do a 6 port. I would like to cut the rotors for high RPM clearance but I won't have lathe-time until next month, sooo... the monster 4-port power-killer will have to wait.
I work at a machine shop!
I don't want an IDA. For one an IDA would cost more than the entire car including the cost to build the engine. For two, tuning an IDA would be heinous because jets and stuff are expensive *mail order* items. For three, I don't like carbs anymore for tuning nasty engines. I want drivability.
I don't want an IDA. For one an IDA would cost more than the entire car including the cost to build the engine. For two, tuning an IDA would be heinous because jets and stuff are expensive *mail order* items. For three, I don't like carbs anymore for tuning nasty engines. I want drivability.






