Electromotive Tec-II Kit for an SC?

ohecht · 11-29-2002, 08:40 AM

Has anyone tried the Tec-II or Tec-III kit on an SC just to move to fuel injection? What other parts are needed for a high idle (progressive or on/off) when cold, filters, intake, etc.?

This would be a street and occasional DE car.

Pelican seems to have a great price on the Tec-II system under their part number PEL-CE32610.

Is there a big difference between the II and III systems?

Olivier

dougcl · 11-29-2002, 11:48 AM

Oliver, please follow this link...
Richard Clewett Engineering

Elombard · 11-29-2002, 01:42 PM

I want one sooo bad. Think how clean the engine compartment would be not coil, no dizzy, no CD box, and you can mount the Tec II box in the middle. It makes me a little crazy just thinking about it.

Does the CIS tie in to the CD box in some way? I know people have put MSDs on SCs so there must be a way to seperate it?

ohecht · 11-29-2002, 05:10 PM

The Clewett site is where I first saw the system, and it has been on my list of long-range upgrades ever since.

That one is a TEC-III, and I noticed today that Pelican's price for the TEC-II system is about $900 cheaper (brings that long-range horizon in a lot closer)

I would also look forward to the simplicity, and I am trying not to invest too much time and money into my CIS maintenance in the meantime.

I would like to hear from anyone who has tried the system to replace CIS. Are a lot of other ancillary and miscellaneous parts necessary? Does anyone know of a product that would replicate the function of the AAR in CIS by having a progressive high idle feature, rather than a simple on/off bypass?

Olivier

BenWillis · 11-29-2002, 05:21 PM

Have a look HERE for info on my EFI installation on an SC.

rattlsnak · rattlsnak's Garage

You mean like this???

http://www.members.aol.com/rattlsnak/ignfuel1.jpeg

ohecht · 11-29-2002, 07:10 PM

I was following the Meagsquirt thread closely.

I looked into that route, but it may be too much fabrication for this project, and I could never get any response form anyone about getting the MS parts through a group buy or otherwise.

How did your project finally turn out?

Olivier

ohecht · 11-29-2002, 07:15 PM

rattlsnak,

That looks great, very clean and simple. I would love to have that kind of power, reliability (I assume), and simplicity.

Those look like the more expensive option of individual throttle bodies, or did you come up with something else?

I would love more details about the parts, assembly, performance, and sourcing.

Thanks,

Olivier

rattlsnak · rattlsnak's Garage

I got all my stuff from Richard Clewitt. The throttle bodies are actually 1 piece, but held 3 seperate fuel injectors. Kinda like the Weber carbs, three seperate chambers but molded in one housing. Once the initial programming was over it was great, ran great, good power, loved it. I ended up selling the whole engine including that setup so I could purcahse the C2T engine which is in there now.

ohecht · 11-30-2002, 07:11 PM

Given the huge price difference, what are the advantages of the throttle bodies versus the 3.2 intake?

Olivier

rattlsnak · rattlsnak's Garage

Well, to be honest, if you plan to go with the 3.2 manifold setup, you would be ALOT better off using the factory Motronic computer. Trust me, you (or anybody I know) will never get the programming on the Tec systems even remotely close to the factory. Of course if you use the throttle bodies than you'll have to. Don't get me wrong, you can get it running very nice, but not compared to the factory. Its like comparing carbs to fuel injection, carbs run good, but EFI runs great. Of course now theres another option, use the Tec system for ignition, and get some Webers!

ohecht · 11-30-2002, 08:08 PM

I had not thought of that...

What would need to be done regarding the CPS and other Motronic sensors? Or could you use the crank-fire aspect of the Clewitt setup to interface with the factory EFI setup?

Olivier

rattlsnak · rattlsnak's Garage

If you went with webers the Tec system comes with a crank pulley and sensor for igntion control, if you used the Motronic brain, then youd still have to use the Tec system pulleys for ignition, AND a factory crank sensor for the fuel side. So, there would be additional costs there, cause you'd need a different flywheel, etc. So you have a couple of choices, but in my opinion, the Tec ignition with Webers/PMO's would be the best overall choice with the least amount of fabrication and headaches.

dean · 12-01-2002, 11:26 AM

Hey Rattle,

It is that hard to get it to run right? Could you explain what you mean when you say the factory EFI runs better than the aftermarket EFI?
Thanks

CamB · CamB's Garage

My experience is a bit limited (only one engine tuned on the dyno).

I've got a older MoTeC computer controlling only fuel and ignition (not closed loop - ie no oxygen sensor). Despite a number of hours on the dyno, it isn't perfect.

The best example is that it surges at low rpm with the throttle off. I need to get this problem tuned away.

Also, as it has S cams, the idle is a bit fussy. This could be improved too. So, although I think aftermarket computers could deliver a factory quality result, it will take time (and on a dyno, this means MONEY).

TimT · 12-01-2002, 12:42 PM

The aftermarket engine management systems ARE capable of performing as well as the motronic. If you think some guy that owns a dyno can program a EMS in the fashion that Ford, GM, Porsche etc can, you are mistaken. The factory engineers map the EFI in a series of comprimises, they balance emissions, fuel efficiency, performance, and driveability.

When we install Haltech, Motec, or Electromotive we look for performance first, and usually sacrifice some other aspects driveability or efficiency.

I dont profess to be an expert, I have dyno tuned a few cars that were managed by Haltech, or electomotive. We tuned a 3.2 motor with electomotive, and got 311 RWHP, it had an incredible top end, the mid range was lacking. After we maximised the output, we now work on the midrange and driveability.

Solving the riddle that is acceptable drivability and performance is multivariable, you need to know manifold pressure , EGT, A/F ratio and correlate these with RPM etc.

We are alway fine tuning the cars. The laptop is nearby and ready.

rattlsnak · rattlsnak's Garage

>>>We are alway fine tuning the cars. The laptop is nearby and ready<<<

Exactly my point. This is not for everyone. I did it, and didnt mind it because i'm in this business, but to the outsider, it would not be fun bringing it to someone all the time.

dd74 · 12-03-2002, 11:34 AM

How does one of these systems compare to Webers? I'm not familiar with them, but they seem interesting, (and just glanced at the thread -- sorry if this question was covered earlier).

Do they eliminate the overlap problem that CIS causes?

Are they simpler than Webers to install and tune?

Are they better equipped to handle higher compression pistons and more radical cams?

Thanks.

CamB · CamB's Garage

My understanding of your questions (I hope someone corrects me if I am wrong):

Do they eliminate the overlap problem that CIS causes?

Yes, as long as they are a system which doesn't rely on either airflow or manifold pressure (ie uses only RPM and throttle position to determine fueling requirement).

Are they simpler than Webers to install and tune?

No (lotsa sensors and wiring) and no I don't think so.

Are they better equipped to handle higher compression pistons and more radical cams?

Not really but yes. If all you are concerned about is full throttle running, I understand carbs are just fine. EFI (if set up right) is superior for part throttle driveability, idle, cold start, etc etc.

(edit) and definitely for fuel consumption!

ohecht · 12-03-2002, 01:14 PM

Cam,

Do the newer systems have the capability for a progressive idle control based on temperature?

It seems that most of the aftermarket EFI systems I have looked at use a fast idle solenoid that is either on or off, rather than the progressive type like the AAR on a CIS system.

Olivier