Not i

I have seen a number of folks using a vacuum manifold to sample the MAP from each ITB and then provide a single source to the ECU. I have ITBs/MS3 on my -6 and the vacuum inputs from each ITB are "daisy-chained" using "T"s from the last one on the bank to the next and the next and then over the fan to the other side where the input from the 2nd bank is added and then connected to the MS3 ECU.

Is the use of a manifold with individual vacuum lines a superior solution? Does it make a difference?

I have my car set up like yours is.
The use of single vac lines that all meet at a vac manifold/reservoir will help to stabilize the MAP signal to the ECU. That's the only purpose for it AFAIK. In your TunerStudio dashboard, watch your MAP signal at idle. Assuming you're using speed density, or a combination of speed density and Alpha-N...If it's jumping around more than 10kpa, it's making fueling adjustments trying to keep up with the changing MAP pressure. This can cause the idle to hunt and generally run less smoothly. If you have stock cams, or mild cams, the MAP fluctuations may be low enough to be manageable. I have DC19 cams in my car and I added a lawn-mower inline fuel filter to dampen the MAP pulses a little bit while I tune the car. I'm hoping to remove it, but I have no assurances at this time. If your cams have a lot of overlap, you'll get reversion and that will make your MAP signal pretty instable at idle. IDK a way around a vac manifold/reservoir if that is your situation. But I'm still new to ITBs on these engines. So there is plenty I don't know.

I'm curious about this. PMO specifically states that the spacers they provide are not capable of sealing over the injector cutout in a CIS head and will leak. I saw somewhere else that they refused to even sell them to a customer with a CIS head.

Do they have a different spacer available? Or does Clay's kit get enough pressure on the spacer and gasket there to prevent vacuum leaks?

Oh, and what is the purpose of the phenolic spacer, anyway?

the spacers do keep the manifolds and throttle bodies cool since the plastic is such a poor thermal conductor. I can come home from an hour long drive and rest my hands on them without any discomfort. You can't rest your hand on them without the spacers unless you want some nasty burns.
With carburetors they prevent vapor locks (carbs have a bowl full of fuel that turns from liquid to vapor much quicker if its heated). I guess it can happen with efi too but there isn't a bowl of fuel sitting there so less of a problem.

If my memory serves me correctly - i ended up using a spacer kit from parts claissics (Can't type the actual name so you'll have to decipher it)
https://bit.ly/2T4S6b8

David ....can you provide a link to where you saw the PMO statement that the spacers they provide are not capable of sealing the CIS intakes........that just does not match my experience. So i suspect that there is a misunderstanding.

I order and install quite a few PMO systems every year and PMO provides spacers and gaskets cut specifically for installing their EFI ITBs to CIS intake ports. Richard, at PMO, is very detail oriented and his order form for EFI systems asks for the specific intake type.......and for CIS systems he provides a spacer and gaskets cut specifically to work with CIS intakes.

Both the PMO manifolds ports and matching spacer/gaskets are shaped to seal the CIS port..............however, the old, stock Weber manifolds/gaskets do not seal as well on the CIS port...
regards,
al

Here is the link for what I found: Heat Insulators

The way I interpreted it is that they're saying they're only cut to match the PMO manifolds and wouldn't work for others on CIS heads.

Here's the thread where PMO was rejecting sales: http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/989162-itb-heat-insulators.html

Now that I look, though, I see there's a note that they will sell them but you have to send photos of your heads and manifolds. I wonder if somebody put spacers in and borked an engine, blaming PMO for the loss.

Edit: And thanks for your input and expertise, it's great that you're available for questions like this.

Yes,
It looks like, in both of the cases that you've linked to. PMO couldn't guarantee proper fitment or seal, unless you are using PMO manifolds that are designed to work with the CIS ports.....I have Richard review all of my system/applications and he really is very careful regarding the application of his products and wouldn't sell you something that he couldn't be convinced will work well.

The Oil Analysis statement you linked to, if you read it carefully is just saying the same thing

I.E. the spacer, by itself cannot handle the pressure, unless you use the PMO manifold that has a flange shaped the same as the spacer and gaskets that backs up the spacer and provides the added strength required to handle the pressure and minimize the chance of leaks.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1589398879.JPG

A basic question, but what are you guys using to mount various sensors to the ‘firewall?’ Thread cutting screws? I’m planning on mounting my fuel pressure regulator and MAP to the firewall similar as Clay has mounted his MAP.

I drilled holes through and welded nuts to the inside of the backseat to mount my FPR and my fuel filter. I then sealed them up with seam sealer and gave them a quick spray of paint.

Rivnuts may work as well.

Wiring sequence, priorities
 

Hi Clay,
I’m getting ready to do an EFI install and your suggestion of wiring the engine on a stand, then take the harness off to do the install makes a lot of sense to avoid fighting it in tight spaces.
Tell me how you might modify/improve on the following approach:
1). With engine out, drill an access hole through the back panel below the passenger side rear seat, mount the box under the passenger seat and route the loom through into the engine bay, temporarily secure the wires so they lay down cleanly.
2). Mount relays, O2 controller, ignition components and any other bits not mounted on the engine.
3). Plan roughly how the loom will be safely run in the engine compartment and temporarily secure the loom to the car. Adjust as needed to safely avoid moving parts, high current or voltage components, then establish a fixed reference point on the chassis next to the loom and make a corresponding mark on the loom, to give an idea of where you want the engine mounted loom to arrive at when the engine gets back into the car.
4). Plan loom routing to previously set components in the bay and on the engine.
5). Remove loom and box from car, locate reference mark on loom, add 12 inches, (or what ever additional length you feel comfortable with), then establish where the chassis mark is to give yourself a solid starting point to route wires to the components and install their connectors. There is a similarity here to wiring a house - set the boxes where you want the receptacles, switches and electrical components and run your wire from the boxes to the panel, securing the wire as you go, then trimming the wire, once run and finally, make up the boxes.
6). Remove the newly trimmed and terminated harness from the engine and install it in the car, then install the engine and hook up all connectors and computer.

7). Alternatively, would it be possible/preferable to leave the loom connected to the engine, do the engine install, pulling the harness, (loom), and feed it from engine bay to the interior for final hook up.

At what point do you want to hook up the brain box and start verifying connections?
I’m starting to locate components for fuel and EDIS and getting them mounted

Thanks,
chris

If you are going to run an AEM Infinity I will suggest:
Mount it in the engine bay on the left inner fender where the CDI use to reside.

These ECUs are weatherproof and while i don't know exactly how high of a temp they are tested internally at AEM, i've been told its much hotter than a 911 engine bay. I'm going on my 4th year with mine installed in the engine bay with zero issues.

I used the existing power wires and the factory fuel pump wiring that exist in the engine bay (the 12 and 14 pin connectors). The only wires that i had to run out of the engine bay were for my two-step and the MIL.

I'm having a difficult time with the ITBs closing on their own. It takes some effort to turn the center pivot by hand. Are the manifold nuts you are referencing, the nuts holding the ITB assembly to the intake manifold? I also saw you mentioned the fuel rail bracket being straight.. Any tips from anyone that had trouble with this would be great!

Correct, disconnect the center pivot so it's just the linkage on each bank connected. Loosed the nuts holding the ITBs to the manifold and exercise the linkage. This should help straighten out and align the ITBs, then tighten them down.

You can try loosening the screws holding the fuel rail on, and doing the same as outlined above, then re-tightening.

Both things should relive any binding.

Still struggling with the linkage. I have both banks opening and closing freely. But the rod length is uneven. How close is everyone to 9” on the linkage rods? This is with both rods right near 9” from eyelet to eyelet. If adjust them to fit the left bank will be more like 8.5” and the right over 9”
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...0abeea4e35.jpg

The rods need to be as even to each other as possible.

Try adjusting them so they’re equal length and meet the pivot. It’s okay if the pivot is not square to the manifolds

Hi Clay,

Just FYI, your Website is down, is there a technical Problem or is this on purpose?

Cheers,
Lukas

I’m no longer selling the ITB kits - so the website is down indefinitely.

All manifolds are gone and i don’t plan on doing another run.

I still have linkage, fuel rails, vacuum kits and some miscellaneous parts but no ITB manifolds.

Anybody happen to have bought the Weber rain hat adapters from Clay that they'd part with? Clay graciously sent me a diagram for his adapters but none of the machine shops around here seem to want to help me.