Pelican Parts
Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   Pelican Parts Forums > Porsche Forums > 911 / 930 Turbo & Super Charging Forum


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average.
Author
Thread Post New Thread    Reply
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by turboteener View Post
Wouldn't the airflow (mass) be lower at elevation though due to the lower atmospheric pressure feeding the turbo? Yes a turbo will generate the same level of boost at elevation as it will at sea level, it may take more rpm(turbo) for the turbo to reach that level. Your increased compressor outlet temps would come from the compressor working harder on less air, right?
Yes, you are correct. Temperature rise will be based on differential pressure (work done to the air). And the turbo will need to spin a little faster, so your lag will be exaggerated. However, a higher pressure boost spring will not change the compressor curves. Max pressure will be higher, but the time to max will be the same.

At very high elevations, the compressor wheel design would need to be modified.
Old 03-09-2008, 11:09 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #21 (permalink)
Crotchety Old Bastard
 
RarlyL8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 13,551
Garage
I thought the resulting effective C/R of the standard increase to 1.0bar on a 7.0:1 930 engine interesting because it falls nicely within what is considered a safe zone on your graph.
The operating environment for any vehicle can be very wide, from well below freezing to well above 100F at varying elevations. Having this graphed or mathematical information is necessary to make decisions of how far you can push your engine parameters given the environment it will operate.
__________________
RarlyL8 Motorsports / M&K Exhaust - 911/930 Exhaust Systems, Turbos, TiAL, CIS Mods/Rebuilds
'78 911SC Widebody, 930 engine, 915 Tranny, K27, SC Cams, RL8 Headers & GT3 Muffler. 350whp @ 0.75bar
Brian B. (256)536-9977 Service@MKExhaust Brian@RarlyL8
Old 03-09-2008, 12:15 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #22 (permalink)
Registered User
 
copbait73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Chesterfield IN
Posts: 1,316
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by RarlyL8 View Post
I thought the resulting effective C/R of the standard increase to 1.0bar on a 7.0:1 930 engine interesting because it falls nicely within what is considered a safe zone on your graph.
The operating environment for any vehicle can be very wide, from well below freezing to well above 100F at varying elevations. Having this graphed or mathematical information is necessary to make decisions of how far you can push your engine parameters given the environment it will operate.
I agree entirely, I would do it for street. I may be cautious on the very few extreme summer days here in IN. Regarding the factory TURBOS, there should be some leeway. These engines have mechanical timing and no knock sensors so there must have been some built in consideration for marginal octane and high ambient temperature.
Old 03-09-2008, 12:36 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #23 (permalink)
Registered User
 
beepbeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by copbait73 View Post
Goran, there is no claim to HP on this chart however the only thing that is odd is the engine you just mentioned. Is the race fuel methanol? Please get more details, street?
Hello!

My comment was maybe a bit hasted, I wrote it after few beers. Sorry.

Engine was a turbo-converted 964 N/A 3.6 with hot cams, twin Garrett GT35R's, twin huge intercoolers, cams hotter than GT2-evo and Rochester 1000cc-ish injectors. Pistons were 993tt stock pistons and it had H-beam steel rods. It was dynoed at 2 bar using standard (?) race fuel...I forgot which sort. On ordinary 98 octane RON fuel, boost could be upped to around 1.6 bar w/o knock. It had twin plugs as well (having N/A 3.6 heads)

I belive the graph is accurate but I suspect graph assumes 100% VE and low air temp. What I'm trying to say is that typical working installation is going to have different dynamic C/R at different revs, despite constant boost pressure.

As turbochargers go trough their different efficiency ratios, so does discharge temperature. The more heat in the air, the less oxygen is introduced into combustion chambers. Also, VE is going to vary wildly depending on cams, runner length etc.

Of course, Porsche aircooled heads aren't as good when it comes to knock as modern pent-roofed 4v designs with plug in the middle, but there are numbers of tricks one can use to prevent knock despite soaring dynamic C/R ratio. Ignition retard, twin-plugging, high octance juice and efficient intercoolers are some of them.

P.S. It's quite amazing what kind of boost you can run on modern engines. I have an old Audi UrS4 (93' model) that boosts 1.5 bar of boost on the top of it's 9.3:1 C/R.
__________________
Thank you for your time,

Last edited by beepbeep; 03-09-2008 at 01:28 PM..
Old 03-09-2008, 01:25 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #24 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Bayside Wi
Posts: 2,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by jurhip View Post
Yes, you are correct. Temperature rise will be based on differential pressure (work done to the air). And the turbo will need to spin a little faster, so your lag will be exaggerated. However, a higher pressure boost spring will not change the compressor curves. Max pressure will be higher, but the time to max will be the same.

At very high elevations, the compressor wheel design would need to be modified.
Which brings me back my earlier inquiry on this thread and "930 timing specs for higher HP turbo" thread inquiry that at least in the beginning of Porsche turbo development low compression had its advantages especially under race conditions and for many years tuners such as Andial, Kremer and others, built to a known quantity standard. Now on to try to improve my motors using the applicable evolution, to adapt the benefits of more recent technology to update,tune what is there without changing every thing, as it my be applicable, to my 80s style motors. Lots of thoughtful information that may be good for me ,and other readers so far on both threads. I have been away from "hands on tuning and upgrading" for many years.I need a tune up before I proceed with these tasks.Thanks Tony@voitureltd

Last edited by voitureltd; 03-09-2008 at 01:36 PM..
Old 03-09-2008, 01:25 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #25 (permalink)
Registered User
 
copbait73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Chesterfield IN
Posts: 1,316
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by beepbeep View Post
Hello!

My comment was maybe a bit hasted, I wrote it after few beers. Sorry.

Engine was a turbo-converted 964 N/A 3.6 with hot cams, twin Garrett GT35R's, twin huge intercoolers, cams hotter than GT2-evo and Rochester 1000cc-ish injectors. Pistons were 993tt stock pistons and it had H-beam steel rods. It was dynoed at 2 bar using standard (?) race fuel...I forgot which sort. On ordinary 98 octane RON fuel, boost could be upped to around 1.6 bar w/o knock. It had twin plugs as well (having N/A 3.6 heads)

I belive the graph is accurate but I suspect graph assumes 100% VE and low air temp. What I'm trying to say is that typical working installation is going to have different dynamic C/R at different revs, despite constant boost pressure.

As turbochargers go trough their different efficiency ratios, so does discharge temperature. The more heat in the air, the less oxygen is introduced into combustion chambers. Also, VE is going to vary wildly depending on cams, runner length etc.

Of course, Porsche aircooled heads aren't as good when it comes to knock as modern pent-roofed 4v designs with plug in the middle, but there are numbers of tricks one can use to prevent knock despite soaring dynamic C/R ratio. Ignition retard, twin-plugging, high octance juice and efficient intercoolers are some of them.

P.S. It's quite amazing what kind of boost you can run on modern engines. I have an old Audi UrS4 (93' model) that boosts 1.5 bar of boost on the top of it's 9.3:1 C/R.
Goran, no problem on the comment. I often wish I wasn't geograhically displaced from ALL you guys so I could buy you all a few rounds.

Thanks for the information about this engine. Is this going to be a street engine?

We have talked of the importance of flowing, modern turbos and their efficiency (I like the name Garrett) and killer bar/plate charge air coolers (Garrett also).

Now assuming this engine has one other enabling technology, knock sensors, (only shown on the 3.6N.A. data point) how much have they entered into your moving this motor to very high TURBOcharged power levels?

Last edited by copbait73; 03-09-2008 at 01:45 PM..
Old 03-09-2008, 01:40 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #26 (permalink)
Registered User
 
beepbeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,565
Nope, no knock sensors. Just standard "deaf" MAP-based EFI and heaps and heaps of fuel and boost.



It did have it's share of problems though, until everything was buttoned up:


But amazingly, it never suffered from knock-induced damage. Head split after severe mapping-induced backfire. When you have injectors flowing that much juice, it just take one wrong cell in fueling table to hydro-lock the cylinder and do all sorts of nasty things.

I believe that best way to postpone knock in aircooled 911 engine is twin-plugging, efficient turbochargers and intercoolers, lot's of cooling fuel (=rich) and one thing that is often omitted: cool heads! Fan was severely overdriven on this engine, in order to keep the heads cool. So much that it actually munched trough several failed generators and belts until gen got moved and got it's own belt.

As far as I understand, alloy used in 3.6 heads will only take up to 240 deg. C before it goes soft (like plastic deformation) or ruin the things by pinging. If you push double or tripple HP trough heads while retaining same airflow, they will get hotter and ruin the day. Also 3.6 curved fan is quiet(er) but flows approx 70% of noisy straight-bladed turbo fan.

but yes, this is pretty academic discussion as nobody would run 2-bar on the street.

But I've seen guys turbo-converting othervise stock 10:1 C/R Alfa Romeo V6 and running up to 1 bar of boost using E85 fuel! I also experimented myself with E85 and couldn't get darn corn-juice to ping no matter what I did
__________________
Thank you for your time,

Last edited by beepbeep; 03-09-2008 at 01:59 PM..
Old 03-09-2008, 01:55 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #27 (permalink)
Registered User
 
copbait73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Chesterfield IN
Posts: 1,316
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by beepbeep View Post
Nope, no knock sensors. Just standard "deaf" MAP-based EFI and heaps and heaps of fuel and boost.



It did have it's share of problems though, until everything was buttoned up:


But amazingly, it never suffered from knock-induced damage. Head split after severe mapping-induced backfire. When you have injectors flowing that much juice, it just take one wrong cell in fueling table to hydro-lock the cylinder and do all sorts of nasty things.

I believe that best way to postpone knock in aircooled 911 engine is twin-plugging, efficient turbochargers and intercoolers, lot's of cooling fuel (=rich) and one thing that is often omitted: cool heads! Fan was severely overdriven on this engine, in order to keep the heads cool. So much that it actually munched trough several failed generators and belts until gen got moved and got it's own belt.

As far as I understand, alloy used in 3.6 heads will only take up to 240 deg. C before it goes soft (like plastic deformation) or ruin the things by pinging. If you push double or tripple HP trough heads while retaining same airflow, they will get hotter and ruin the day. Also 3.6 curved fan is quiet(er) but flows approx 70% of noisy straight-bladed turbo fan.

but yes, this is pretty academic discussion as nobody would run 2-bar on the street.

But I've seen guys turbo-converting othervise stock 10:1 C/R Alfa Romeo V6 and running up to 1 bar of boost using E85 fuel! I also experimented myself with E85 and couldn't get darn corn-juice to ping no matter what I did
I'm speachless. That engine looks more like one of the hydrogen fueled main stage rocket motors on the space shuttle. Probably consumes fuel at the same rate...I love it!
Please help me understand, is this a dragrace type car? 1.6/2.0 Bar at what RPM?
Do you have any shots of the rear bodywork all buttoned up?
All of your comments on cooling are right on. At this power level there is so much waste heat energy in the cylinder/head system limits are reached in short order.
Still, detuned it's a very strong motor.
Thanks

Last edited by copbait73; 03-09-2008 at 03:13 PM..
Old 03-09-2008, 02:21 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #28 (permalink)
Crotchety Old Bastard
 
RarlyL8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 13,551
Garage
Here you go:

The IF2 thread
__________________
RarlyL8 Motorsports / M&K Exhaust - 911/930 Exhaust Systems, Turbos, TiAL, CIS Mods/Rebuilds
'78 911SC Widebody, 930 engine, 915 Tranny, K27, SC Cams, RL8 Headers & GT3 Muffler. 350whp @ 0.75bar
Brian B. (256)536-9977 Service@MKExhaust Brian@RarlyL8
Old 03-09-2008, 03:52 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #29 (permalink)
Registered User
 
copbait73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Chesterfield IN
Posts: 1,316
Garage
Brian, thanks for the link. Lot's of reading, now I'm up to speed on project.
Old 03-09-2008, 04:36 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #30 (permalink)
Wo ist die Rennstrecke?
 
DonE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Brooks, GA
Posts: 1,211
Once you've chosen your turbo, IC and twin plug, there are only two things you can manage to reduce detonation: timing and fuel. In my opinion, adding fuel to cool the charge to reduce detonation only works to a certain point. I've seen motors run at a very low AFR that successfully eliminates detonation only to wash the cylinders of oil and severely accelerate cylinder/ring wear (as well as dilute the engine's oil supply) and trash your valves. Being able to properly tune a modified, air-cooled, 30 year old turbo motor is kind of an art. For my motor, my lowest AFR is 11.8 and timing at .8 bar, 6000 rpm is 18 degrees.
Old 03-09-2008, 06:54 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #31 (permalink)
Registered User
 
copbait73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Chesterfield IN
Posts: 1,316
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonE View Post
Once you've chosen your turbo, IC and twin plug, there are only two things you can manage to reduce detonation: timing and fuel. In my opinion, adding fuel to cool the charge to reduce detonation only works to a certain point. I've seen motors run at a very low AFR that successfully eliminates detonation only to wash the cylinders of oil and severely accelerate cylinder/ring wear (as well as dilute the engine's oil supply) and trash your valves. Being able to properly tune a modified, air-cooled, 30 year old turbo motor is kind of an art. For my motor, my lowest AFR is 11.8 and timing at .8 bar, 6000 rpm is 18 degrees.
Well just to stur the pot.........here goes. You all ready have a killer engine but you can cool the charge AND cool the flame with water/alcohol injection. That is a third option. W/A injection is more than intercooling. Wow, now I've asked for it.
Old 03-09-2008, 07:52 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #32 (permalink)
Registered User
 
beepbeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by copbait73 View Post
Well just to stur the pot.........here goes. You all ready have a killer engine but you can cool the charge AND cool the flame with water/alcohol injection. That is a third option. W/A injection is more than intercooling. Wow, now I've asked for it.
Well of course. Water injection has been used from beggining of time on aircraft engine, to prevent pinging and improve mass flow. Unfortunately, I personally find it a bit cumbersome to carry extra system containing water/methanol. Also, there is a issue of redundancy...what if/when water runs out and pump stops? Do you pay for it by ruined pistons?

Personally, I find E85 solution much more elegant than gasoline/water/methanol combo. First of all, it takes roughly 40% more E85 than gasoline to reach same lambda. Second, E85 has octane ratio of 104, third, it's specific vapor energy is *four times* higher than for gasoline.

With other words, E85 will use 4x1.4=5.6 more heat from charge air to evaporate compared to gasoline (which keeps EGT's cooler), is very knock-resistent and negates the need of external water-injection system.

All-in-one solution and quasi enviromentaly-friendly too
__________________
Thank you for your time,
Old 03-10-2008, 07:32 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #33 (permalink)
Registered User
 
turboteener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 301
But E85 is close to 6.00$ US a gal to make. You can't buy it in many areas all over the country and most 930s get bad enough mileage as is. Actually the number is about 27% more E85 than regular gasoline, but you can make some huge power out of it.

Unfortunately E85 is a myth that keeps being perpetuated by the media. It is more expensive to produce than Gasoline and we don't have the land to actually supply it consistently.
__________________
Brett
Old 03-10-2008, 09:51 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #34 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 643
I am not sure I understand the point of all this. You can probably get a 930 3.3 motor to easily break the 1000hp mark by a large margin. Its called good theory plus trial and error. Even today's OEM's work that way, but given advances in computing, the error part is reduced.
People running big block V8's could "theoretically" hit the same HP figures as top fuel cars. Is that a discussion worth having...

But, for all of these, you will pay in engine life.

But we can just go on naming more and more expensive and unrealistic (for the street) methods of making power.
very high octane fuel, high CR, optimized valve overlap and timing, valve sizes (heck - 4 valve per cyl, with water cooled heads), huge air to water intercooler, huge turbo, high boost pressure, blue printed engine, stripped car for weight, blah blah blah.
Old 03-10-2008, 10:25 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #35 (permalink)
Registered User
 
beepbeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by turboteener View Post
But E85 is close to 6.00$ US a gal to make. You can't buy it in many areas all over the country and most 930s get bad enough mileage as is. Actually the number is about 27% more E85 than regular gasoline, but you can make some huge power out of it.

Unfortunately E85 is a myth that keeps being perpetuated by the media. It is more expensive to produce than Gasoline and we don't have the land to actually supply it consistently.

Hmm....I'm quite sure it takes roughly 40% more volumetric flow to get same lambda as gasoline. My WBO2 measurments also show this to be true.

Gasoline:
44 Energy content [MJ/kg]
735 Density [kg/m3]
305 Vapor energy [kJ/kg]

Ethanol
27 Energy content [MJ/kg]
785 Density [kg/m3]
840 Vapor energy [kJ/kg]

1L gasoline contains 735 [kg/m3] * 44 [MJ/kg] = 32340 MJ/m3 = 32.3 MJ/L
1L ethanol contains 785 [kg/m3] * 27 [MJ/kg] = 21195 MJ/m3 = 21.2 MJ/L

With other words, you need 52% more volume to obtain same amount of energy from pure ethanol ( 32.3/21.2 = 1.52 )

E85 usually contains 85% ethanol, 12.5% gasoline and 2.1% MTBE, so volumetric flow to obtain lambda 1.0 is usually around 1.4 of gasoline instead of 1.5 which would be the case with 100% ethanol.

So number is not 26% more but roughly 40% more.

I won't delve into enviromental merits of E85 as they are somewhat dubious. But as high-performance fuel for tuned turbocharged engines, it's quite handy. Fortunately, it's available at almost every pump overhere and cost's less per litre than gasoline. MJ per MJ, it costs roughly the same...

Regards,
__________________
Thank you for your time,
Old 03-10-2008, 10:58 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #36 (permalink)
Registered User
 
A.Wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by beepbeep View Post
Hmm....I'm quite sure it takes roughly 40% more volumetric flow to get same lambda as gasoline. My WBO2 measurments also show this to be true.

Gasoline:
44 Energy content [MJ/kg]
735 Density [kg/m3]
305 Vapor energy [kJ/kg]

Ethanol
27 Energy content [MJ/kg]
785 Density [kg/m3]
840 Vapor energy [kJ/kg]

1L gasoline contains 735 [kg/m3] * 44 [MJ/kg] = 32340 MJ/m3 = 32.3 MJ/L
1L ethanol contains 785 [kg/m3] * 27 [MJ/kg] = 21195 MJ/m3 = 21.2 MJ/L

With other words, you need 52% more volume to obtain same amount of energy from pure ethanol ( 32.3/21.2 = 1.52 )

E85 usually contains 85% ethanol, 12.5% gasoline and 2.1% MTBE, so volumetric flow to obtain lambda 1.0 is usually around 1.4 of gasoline instead of 1.5 which would be the case with 100% ethanol.

So number is not 26% more but roughly 40% more.

I won't delve into enviromental merits of E85 as they are somewhat dubious. But as high-performance fuel for tuned turbocharged engines, it's quite handy. Fortunately, it's available at almost every pump overhere and cost's less per litre than gasoline. MJ per MJ, it costs roughly the same...

Regards,
Agree on the e85 comments and yes it is closer to 40% + to match gasoline.
The water met setup is easier here than finding and modifying a stock fuel system to accommodate e85....

Regarding the damaged engine , i would dis-agree that it was just a backfire that caused that damage , it looks like excessive EGT's , coupled with an engine misfired midbore ( lean condition) the resulting Cylinder pressures lifted and torched the cylinder head .
Old 03-10-2008, 03:17 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #37 (permalink)
Registered User
 
beepbeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Wayne View Post

Regarding the damaged engine , i would dis-agree that it was just a backfire that caused that damage , it looks like excessive EGT's , coupled with an engine misfired midbore ( lean condition) the resulting Cylinder pressures lifted and torched the cylinder head .
Well I guess we'll never know for sure but there were no signs of excessive EGT's. Pistons showed no pick-marks/melting typical for lean mixture (actually I believe piston survived but was binned beacuse of ovality). Head just exploded...clean break edges, no melting. It's somewhat atypical operating range for OEM 3.6 head though...
__________________
Thank you for your time,
Old 03-10-2008, 03:53 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #38 (permalink)
 
Forced Induction Junkie
 
WERK I's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,291
Garage
Excessive EGT's on that head don't appear the case. The head is soot riddled. I have heard that twin plugging our heads do weaken them somewhat. It does look like it started near or at the second plug threads. Was that a 930 head or a 3.2 head?
__________________
Dave
'85 930 Factory Special Wishes Flachbau
Werk I Zuffenhausen 3.3l/330BHP Engine with Sonderwunsch Cams, FabSpeed Headers, Kokeln IC, Twin Plugged Electromotive Crankfire, Tial Wastegate(0.8 Bar), K27 Hybrid Turbo, Ruf Twin-tip Muffler, Fikse FM-5's 8&10x17, 8:41 R&P
Old 03-10-2008, 04:52 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #39 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 66
i would like to get your input. I am currently having the following work done on my '91 965 engine:
8:1 JE pistons
Clewett Engineering crank fire twin plug system
UTCIS didgital WUR
0.6 bar (large yellow) spring for TIAL wastegate
Blitz dual solenoid boost control

I have full a B&B exhaust system with a Zucz cold air intake on the car. What boost can I safely run on this setup and what else should I have done to the engine (sort of while your in there)?

I am hoping that the additional upgrades address the under the curve laziness while keeping power under boost. I am not considering EFI conversion at this time, but does the choice of parts (except for the UTCIS digital WUR) make sense with EFI?
Old 11-26-2009, 10:37 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #40 (permalink)
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

 


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:03 AM.


 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page
 

DTO Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.