KR-Throttle bodies-megasquirt-mk1

But this change in charachteristics isn't any different to that experienced when altering the size of the inlet trackt, in an equivalent manner, on a single TB, especially at WOT. And for the rest, you can virtually forget part throttle with itb's on a road engine anyway.

 

What calibation work did you perform to the engine to confirm you had optimised it before concluding this was the case. Also was this a VW E827 16v engine.

Part load issues? Apart from throttle cam issues, found on bike throttles on initial opening, has not been a problem when good calibration is performed. Even better with good linkages.


It is up to the OP but I say if you have the skill to carry out the work why not? I really do not see the problem. Might even build and engine like this for my 'WOLF CC'

 

Sounds like you speak from a bad calibration experiance. Spend a bit of time to get it right and there is never a need to forget part throttle. ITB's can be as drivable as a plenum it is all in the setup and calibration. After a fair bit of tweeking from Eddies original mapping sessions mine is back to easy crisp responce on part throttle openings. Which feels far far better than a two stage KR butterfly or the very weak responce of the ABF stepped TB.

Come drive mine sometime Just becuase the ITB Lotus was not all you hoped for does not give you the right to be so negative to all who want/enquire about ITB's. You have a limited knowledge compared to a few on here who have offered their views which comes from years of experiance.

 

Of course, but in that case I stand by my first post, #5. Which a lot (including you) have taken issue with.

 

As already said.. can be setup to accept 0-5 volt output from wideband

^ this is what I have in my MS1v3

Having it operate from lambda feedback is not needed unless you are using a catalyst for emissions

Also with no diagnostic functions in place, if your sensor is faulty (and they can fail), your controller will be fed useless info and could possibly run annoyingly rich, or dangerously lean.

 

Ok so i would need something like the lm-2 http://www.innovatetuning.co.uk/product/index.php?cat=hand if i wants to have a go at mapping it myself.

 

No you do not have to use this you can run the LM 1 which has a guage and tune from this. It will at the same time link with MS and give a reading on the Screen whci is handy for calibrating and work with autotune.

What you have linked is what a tunner would use and take fom car to car - and therefore is more expensive. the LC 1 uses the same sensor as the one linked.

 

An alternative to the Innovate LM-1 is the AEM UEGO gauge/controller

similar priced, does same job

 

Ok thanks for clearing that up.

http://www.rspec.co.uk/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=712

Can you get one with a gauge then or is this what i needs. sorry for the questions just want to get it to go as smoothly as possible.

 

that is excessive for your needs you want a permanent fixed gauge / controller / sensor / boss kit

http://www.rspec.co.uk/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=114&products_id=713

^ like this from the same website for example

saves you some cash

 

here is the innovate kit
http://www.grahamgoode.com/innovate/new/dbs.html

and here is the AEM kit (I bought mine from here (not affiliated with them or anything, just decent price and UK based)
http://www.efi-parts.co.uk/index.php?productID=204

 

Thanks you two really helped

 

Maybe some of those with more experience than me want to share exactly how many b.h.p. a set of itb's is worth w.r.t. a single (large enough) tb. Any engine, any configuration, so long as the only change is the throttle.... None of this K-jet -> electronic injection at the same time mist tho............ It's not just me, there are a lot of un-experienced KR tuners with big power figures and only one tb who need your help too

BTW, limiting somebodies knowledge and experience to what you've read on here is a very poor assumption!

The Lotus was exactly what the owner hoped for, and i know exactly where all the extra 19 b.h.p. came from thank-you

 

Are you suggesting that the comparison should be using the same level of control system?

To test close to what you suggested is to a compare:
- car running KR w/ single TB and aftermarket control unit
- car running KR w/ ITBs and aftermarket control unit

^ meaning the only major difference is the intake system used (takes use of EFI out of the equation)

 

+ Ben,

 

instead of the usual modified engine on standard or (adjusted) K-jet or OEM ECU. Then being converted to itbs and fully mapped for fueling and ignition at the same time, but miraculously all the credit for the extra power going to the itbs.

 

To be fair, this was done by vw_singh, and all credit went to the ECU & mapping - it was on a plenum before and after. Thread in the Members Gallery.

 

I'm inclined to agree that the peak power and torque figures might be no better on ITB's, but there could still be benefits in terms of throttle response. Ryan the OP is building a car purely for track use, so road driveability and fuel economy concerns don't matter to him.

Also, the fabrication costs and issues that would steer most folks down the route of a single TB don't really apply in this case, as it'll be on a mates rates basis, and the resources are readily available.

Using the results from Gurds' ABF as a guide, I think it would be really interesting to see what a Megasquirted KR can deliver - hopefully something in the 155bhp/145lbft region, on stock hardware. That'll be enough to make this Mk1 fly, and make a good platform for future cam/head/compression/capacity upgrades - it'll weigh about the same as a packet of Marlboro Lights (as opposed to heavy old Bensons).


There's a lot of knowledgeable commenting people on this thread, and while there's no harm in a debate or disagreement, let's keep it civil. I don't want to start having to chop this thread because it starts getting personal.

 

They already have, Eddie made the point very clearly early on hence my responce. Mike has also reliterated the part of the point that it is not a peak figure you gain, it is the throttle responce and torque shape.

My responce was ment to be a little tongue in cheak,

Ok fair point but i did ask you to substantiate your points with some evidence or at least your own experiances! As the people who have given info have had a huge amount of experiance with these types of engines running ITB's, plenums, EFI, Kjet etc

My personal veiw is that ITB's on a standard engine will be great fun. Having had ITB's on a stock ABF for a while it was great, had loads of mid range, part throttle and throttle responce was very sharp, driving through london trafic was easy, the top end was animal like. Sound was great I have nothing bad to say about this setup. So Mark I would go for it as you will not be disapointed.

Would this setup have a higher peak BHP than Gurd's baseline ABF EFI? i do not know as i never had it dynoed or optimised. I have never driven Gurd's or simular setup so cannot compare that way either. What i can compare is running a standard 150bhp ABF on standard Digi 3 management in a mk1. The stock ITB ABF in a stripped MK2 would eat it for breakfast, and i have spoken to a tunner who ran ITB's on a stock ABF and it made simular peak figures to Gurd's - but i never had chance to compare Graphs and it was different dyno's so could be way off etc etc.

If Mark you do then start to mod the engine, then my experiance is, add cams and a P&P head you may see 180/190 bhp and over 160lbft. The torque will hold on for longer before dropping off. But peak figures do not give you the full story. Add higher comp and you can probably start to push the 200bhp barrier fairly easily.

Would a valver on a plenum with the same mods make the same peak figures - probably close but it will be very hard work to get over 200bhp. I do not know of any valvers with these mods that have run on the tough love dyno that i have quoted for the figures of mine and Gurd's. I would love to see it happen and hope Gurd's gets some cams soon as that will end all of the speculation.

 

I had a similar experience with my mk1 Golf with an Audi TB, with no other mods. It felt EPIC (as i'm sure others on here can testify, as it's a common mod) but at the end of the day i was just flooring it early and there was no extra power.

To be fair you can make a big improvement to the the response of an ABF with a chip. IMO you could get exactly what you've experienced in the mk2 with one equivalently large throttle, on TPS and mapped properly.

Personally I don't like over throttled cars, of any type. The throttle is your only interface with the engine while driving. I don't see the point in condensing all the airflow managment capabilities (and therefor fuel and ignition mapping) into a fraction (nearer 50% than 100% for a standard ABF on itbs) of the throttle action.

Anyway itb's aside, as in post #5, i still recon a wide-band is worth its weight in gold for any such tuning project.