| Author |
Message |
raygreenwood
Samba Member
Joined: November 24, 2008
Posts: 21521
Location: Oklahoma City
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:43 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Tram wrote: |
Oh, so my thread is for "beginners" now?  Bastids. You guys modify stuff because you can't fix it right. Just admit it. 
Actually, I'm glad to see this happen. Now you mod guys (and gals) can have your fun whilst us stock Nazis can keep it real on the stock repairs, etc. |
You gotta know that I agree with what Tram is saying....insofar as it would appear that he and Russ....work very hard to make nearly identical running engines as factory.
If you do everything exactly as well and to the same level as factory....(which is really not that hard to do.....its just that most people don't)......then a stock, un-screwed with, correct part #'s MPS....should bolt right up and do a very nice job.
There is still a level of variance that was common within factory tuned engines that ranges from very slighly rich but acceptable, very slightly lean but very acceptable and nearly spot on...just because of normal manufactring tolerance.
That being said......it when you change exhaust, have slightly larger cam, diferent ignition, changes to valves.....or pretty much any combination of changes from subtle to serious....that does not allow the factory MPS settings to operate well......that you MUST readjust the MPS.
Only you can analyze what you have and whether its working correctly with the stock MPS settings. Ray |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Adriel Rowley
Samba Member
Joined: October 12, 2006
Posts: 4748
Location: Mesa, Arizona
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Russ Wolfe wrote: |
| Bleyseng wrote: |
So what type of MPS does a late type 3 with a "E" ecu need? number?
anyone know the inductance settings using a Wavetek meter? |
There is much FI info available on my web site.
It is in kind of disarray, but it is there.
|
That is what I gave him. Thank you for posting the actual image.
I use the search function. In put F.I., and the manual comes up.
_________________
Please consider I am Autistic, so I process information differently and still working on social skills. Thanks.
Dad's 1964 Beetle purchased September 1968.
https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9252810#9252810
1971 Sunroof Squareback with Fuel Injection
http://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=219811&highlight=squareback+rejuvenation |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raygreenwood
Samba Member
Joined: November 24, 2008
Posts: 21521
Location: Oklahoma City
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tram wrote: |
Dang, Dude. Take some supplements. Your humor receptors are a little atrophied. 
What I'd like to see for starters here is what injectors one would use to accommodate a bigger engine like a 1776 or a 1914... and what other mods or "tweaking" (not that there's anything wrong with that) one should do to run them with stock FI. |
Perfect...and thats exactly what I had in mind.
The injector thing is not that hard. I can tell you now that I have run type 3 injectors in my type 4 1.7L with nothing more than a fuel pressure tweek. The flow rates of the 2.0 D-jet injectors from the chart I saw were almost identical...but the advertized difference of the 2.0 injectors from what I have been told is that they are more stable/accurate running for extended time at maximum pulsewidth.
For a 1776......you could simply run a 1.7L D-jet injector and be done with it.
THe combination of a lot of little tweeks can make a lot better power and smoother throttle response with D-jet (or any injection for that matter).
The first major mod.....and this usually starts a sh*tstorm....is to get a really good harness. Personally...I say to quit screwing with D-jet connectors altogether....but if you must... at least go with new terminal ends. get rid of these rag-tag patched together harnesses. This crap about keeping the original harness for originality sake.....is just that...crap.
There is nothing very original about failure, or sitting still or running poorly. And since this sticky is about "tuning" and making things run better....I expect no argument. If you don't want to change your harness...thats' your prerogative.
Here is why a rock solid harnies is a major tuning factor:
Question from your neighbor: why are you tuning and fiddling with that car?....it seemed to be fine when you were driving it yesterday.
Your answer: It always runs well....but I noticed a slight miss....then it went away. Or .....for some reason it was just slightly harder to start...Or....it seems to lack a little power when its hot or cold or wet, but otherwise it runs perfect....or fill in the blank with the constant littany of "mystery" crap.
And...the next person that chimes in with "these are old volkswagons....the rough running, oil leaking always having to work on something...thing, is part of the charm and adventure" ....load of sh*t....I'm going to reach through the computer and slap you!
Thats a LOAD! Brand new and/or properly running D-jet....runs like a top, runs and starts in any weather...idles smooth as glass...and has seamless acceleration. No...they are not supposd to run poorly or have problems at all. Now...whether certain parts have the designed in reliability to stay that way for a 100k miles....thats debatable. The harness is one of these parts. The TVS is another.
Observation: we tune/tweek our vehciles when we notice something odd or different. We react to something we could sense, feel or hear.
Old harnesses cause a butt-load of this. They won't stop you dead very many times...but they cause a constant low level of adjusting and tweeking in reaction to that odd miss or idle change.
The fact of the matter is that most people compensate for these inconsistencies by tweeking the timing, idle or fuel mixture up or down a bit until the problem "appears" to have gone away or settle down to where you can live with it...or is just plain masked.
You adjust any of those things and get an acceptable result (whether its the correct one or not)....why would you ever go looking for an electrical issue?
Th fact is that when you are running with any main parameters off of best possible.... to mask an electrical issue...you are not producing as much power and throttle reponse as you could. That means you cannot tune as much out of the enegine. Thats why you need a really good harness. So you know what its NOT...so you can properly adjust ...what it is...that may be wrong with your car.
I'll make a list of the tweeks.....mostly non-stock...that are 100% known to (a) give you mor choices for tuning and (b) are known to actually work. Ray |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raygreenwood
Samba Member
Joined: November 24, 2008
Posts: 21521
Location: Oklahoma City
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Russ Wolfe wrote: |
| Bleyseng wrote: |
So what type of MPS does a late type 3 with a "E" ecu need? number?
anyone know the inductance settings using a Wavetek meter? |
There is much FI info available on my web site.
It is in kind of disarray, but it is there.
|
Russ....you don't really exist do you? You probably don't even have a Volkswagon.
I'm betting you are a lowly intern at the national archives dropping these pages to us on your lunchbreak....
Yes...nice collection! Ray |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KTPhil 
Samba Member
Joined: April 06, 2006
Posts: 34023
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| raygreenwood wrote: |
| I'm betting you are a lowly intern at the national archives dropping these pages to us on your lunchbreak.... |
Witness protection program does wonders, doesn't it?
What I need is witLess protection, though...
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raygreenwood
Samba Member
Joined: November 24, 2008
Posts: 21521
Location: Oklahoma City
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JSMskater wrote: |
you lost me here -- what is the drill and ring terminal method... and which L-jet style pigtails? I've never seen L-jet plugs with more than 2 connectors. I suppose my question is -- What can I do to either use the D-jet connectors for the multiple connector components or what plugs will work with modification? at that point, what mods do I need to do?
I feel that -- once this harness is done -- I won't have to be pulling the plugs out all the time!! thus reducing the "cycling" method that wears them out. But if there is an easy solution then I'm willing to try it. |
The L-jet style connector is a "family" of connectors. I think the old name for the family as used by AMP was miniature timer connectors...and several other family names.
Look around in any European electronically fuel injected car made after about 1975. There are quite a few 3,4,5 and 6 pin plugs and more that use L-jet connectors. My current D-jet distributor is using and odd 3 pin L-jet plug that I found in an Audi.
This is hard to explain. I will probably have to photograph it. But....I am testing for instance....a TVS. Instead of using a D-jet plug (with an unreliable connector system)....and since I can't yet fit L-jet connectors into it..........I have drilled .045" holes through teh outer plastic plug assembly...through each masle connector. I cleaned aned and polished all of them.
I have a bad of sub-minature nickle plated brass ring terminals that have .050" holes in then and OD's that are slightly wider than the male prongs.
I am bending carefully the outside edge of both sides of the ring terminal downward to have flaps that allow it to align over the hole in each male prong......and teh flaps cause the ring terminal to not want to turn from side to side...as I tighten a small self tapping machine screw through the ring terminal and the male spade. They all have .050" lock washers. they will not come loose until I loosen them.
I then brush on green circuit board varnish after cleaning with acetone. They are now waterproof.
So how do I disconnect the TVS from the harness? Simple....each component now has a L-jet style male-female inline flug to disconnect the component and its discrete pigtail from the main harness.
Its nowhere near stock...but will be sleek and effective...and very clean and tight connections. I will not need to remove the the ring terminals until that component needs to be replaced due to wearing out.
I came up with this looking at other types of resistance sensitive electronic equipment installations that are in high vibration and dust probe areas. Its not original...just adpated.
Yes...I would rather solve the issue and make a D-jet style plug that accepts L-jet connectors....but thats not dead simple. Ray |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Russ Wolfe
Samba Member
Joined: October 08, 2004
Posts: 25187
Location: Central Iowa
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| raygreenwood wrote: |
Russ....you don't really exist do you? You probably don't even have a Volkswagon.
I'm betting you are a lowly intern at the national archives dropping these pages to us on your lunchbreak....
Yes...nice collection! Ray |
I can supply a 4gigabyte DVD full of stuff like that. I just never throw anything away, and with a good scanner, you can do wonders.
_________________
Society is like stew. If you don't keep it stirred up, you end up with a lot of scum on the top!--Edward Abbey
Gary: OK. Ima poop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith Park
Samba Member
Joined: August 13, 2006
Posts: 225
Location: Clifton Park NY
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:24 pm Post subject: Tuning the MPS |
|
|
Hi all,
OK... NEW 914 Raby 2056, with the D jet cam, I have 73 ECU, excellent harness, but need the 037 MPS.
I HAVE 3 unmolested good tested 007 Type 3 (C type) MPS's, can I use one of these and tune it for the 2056 or are the internals different and not able to meet the larger engines needs?
I have access to very good inductance meters and read Ray's writeup on the forum, but if I can adjust it which of the 3 (or all 3) of the adjustments will I need to change? Will I know when they are right with driveability or will i need to somehow measure emissions or mixture?
Thanks for any help
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adriel Rowley
Samba Member
Joined: October 12, 2006
Posts: 4748
Location: Mesa, Arizona
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:46 pm Post subject: Re: Tuning the MPS |
|
|
| Keith Park wrote: |
Hi all,
OK... NEW 914 Raby 2056, with the D jet cam, I have 73 ECU, excellent harness, but need the 037 MPS.
I HAVE 3 unmolested good tested 007 Type 3 (C type) MPS's, can I use one of these and tune it for the 2056 or are the internals different and not able to meet the larger engines needs?
I have access to very good inductance meters and read Ray's writeup on the forum, but if I can adjust it which of the 3 (or all 3) of the adjustments will I need to change? Will I know when they are right with driveability or will i need to somehow measure emissions or mixture?
Thanks for any help
Keith |
I suggest you read the M.P.S. thread Joe linked to, which explains more than I could here. Then, get on board the "push Ray to do a M.P.S. adjustment thread" train. It be best to get a sniffer, as it will make things more accurate, and the ability to set a better starting point; might not need further adjustment.
Oh, Ray! Where art thou?
_________________
Please consider I am Autistic, so I process information differently and still working on social skills. Thanks.
Dad's 1964 Beetle purchased September 1968.
https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9252810#9252810
1971 Sunroof Squareback with Fuel Injection
http://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=219811&highlight=squareback+rejuvenation |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JSMskater
Samba Grease Gorilla
Joined: February 01, 2006
Posts: 5362
Location: Murrieta California
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:47 pm Post subject: Re: Tuning the MPS |
|
|
| Keith Park wrote: |
Hi all,
OK... NEW 914 Raby 2056, with the D jet cam, I have 73 ECU, excellent harness, but need the 037 MPS.
I HAVE 3 unmolested good tested 007 Type 3 (C type) MPS's, can I use one of these and tune it for the 2056 or are the internals different and not able to meet the larger engines needs?
I have access to very good inductance meters and read Ray's writeup on the forum, but if I can adjust it which of the 3 (or all 3) of the adjustments will I need to change? Will I know when they are right with driveability or will i need to somehow measure emissions or mixture?
Thanks for any help
Keith |
Ray, I'm sure, has the legit answer but as far as I can see I don't see any reason why you can't use them-- as long as it's not a B or earlier type with the separate WOT pressure switch you should be fine. My guess is you'll have to adjust all three settings, to a slightly richer condition but again, Ray will know for sure.
_________________
71 Squareback-FI -- 73 Bay (subaru powered)
TOOB Member #3
I make D-jet FI connectors |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JSMskater
Samba Grease Gorilla
Joined: February 01, 2006
Posts: 5362
Location: Murrieta California
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:48 pm Post subject: Re: Tuning the MPS |
|
|
| Adriel Rowley wrote: |
| Keith Park wrote: |
Hi all,
OK... NEW 914 Raby 2056, with the D jet cam, I have 73 ECU, excellent harness, but need the 037 MPS.
I HAVE 3 unmolested good tested 007 Type 3 (C type) MPS's, can I use one of these and tune it for the 2056 or are the internals different and not able to meet the larger engines needs?
I have access to very good inductance meters and read Ray's writeup on the forum, but if I can adjust it which of the 3 (or all 3) of the adjustments will I need to change? Will I know when they are right with driveability or will i need to somehow measure emissions or mixture?
Thanks for any help
Keith |
I suggest you read the M.P.S. thread Joe linked to, which explains more than I could here. Then, get on board the "push Ray to do a M.P.S. adjustment thread" train. It be best to get a sniffer, as it will make things more accurate, and the ability to set a better starting point; might not need further adjustment.
Oh, Ray! Where art thou? |
He should NOT start a thread -- thats what THIS thread is for 
_________________
71 Squareback-FI -- 73 Bay (subaru powered)
TOOB Member #3
I make D-jet FI connectors |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adriel Rowley
Samba Member
Joined: October 12, 2006
Posts: 4748
Location: Mesa, Arizona
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:01 pm Post subject: Re: Tuning the MPS |
|
|
| JSMskater wrote: |
| Adriel Rowley wrote: |
| Keith Park wrote: |
Hi all,
OK... NEW 914 Raby 2056, with the D jet cam, I have 73 ECU, excellent harness, but need the 037 MPS.
I HAVE 3 unmolested good tested 007 Type 3 (C type) MPS's, can I use one of these and tune it for the 2056 or are the internals different and not able to meet the larger engines needs?
I have access to very good inductance meters and read Ray's writeup on the forum, but if I can adjust it which of the 3 (or all 3) of the adjustments will I need to change? Will I know when they are right with driveability or will i need to somehow measure emissions or mixture?
Thanks for any help
Keith |
I suggest you read the M.P.S. thread Joe linked to, which explains more than I could here. Then, get on board the "push Ray to do a M.P.S. adjustment thread" train. It be best to get a sniffer, as it will make things more accurate, and the ability to set a better starting point; might not need further adjustment.
Oh, Ray! Where art thou? |
He should NOT start a thread -- thats what THIS thread is for |
Brain laps, I thought I said post... 
Hey Joe, going to be in S.L.O. Friday and Saturday; Friday on campus, Saturday in town. Know not how to contact, as no phone...
Now, onto more important things...
You can run your F.I. without a generator. 
_________________
Please consider I am Autistic, so I process information differently and still working on social skills. Thanks.
Dad's 1964 Beetle purchased September 1968.
https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9252810#9252810
1971 Sunroof Squareback with Fuel Injection
http://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=219811&highlight=squareback+rejuvenation |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JSMskater
Samba Grease Gorilla
Joined: February 01, 2006
Posts: 5362
Location: Murrieta California
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:04 pm Post subject: Re: Tuning the MPS |
|
|
| Adriel Rowley wrote: |
| JSMskater wrote: |
| Adriel Rowley wrote: |
| Keith Park wrote: |
Hi all,
OK... NEW 914 Raby 2056, with the D jet cam, I have 73 ECU, excellent harness, but need the 037 MPS.
I HAVE 3 unmolested good tested 007 Type 3 (C type) MPS's, can I use one of these and tune it for the 2056 or are the internals different and not able to meet the larger engines needs?
I have access to very good inductance meters and read Ray's writeup on the forum, but if I can adjust it which of the 3 (or all 3) of the adjustments will I need to change? Will I know when they are right with driveability or will i need to somehow measure emissions or mixture?
Thanks for any help
Keith |
I suggest you read the M.P.S. thread Joe linked to, which explains more than I could here. Then, get on board the "push Ray to do a M.P.S. adjustment thread" train. It be best to get a sniffer, as it will make things more accurate, and the ability to set a better starting point; might not need further adjustment.
Oh, Ray! Where art thou? |
He should NOT start a thread -- thats what THIS thread is for |
Brain laps, I thought I said post...
Hey Joe, going to be in S.L.O. Friday and Saturday; Friday on campus, Saturday in town. Know not how to contact, as no phone...
Now, onto more important things...
You can run your F.I. without a generator. |
you have a PM.
_________________
71 Squareback-FI -- 73 Bay (subaru powered)
TOOB Member #3
I make D-jet FI connectors |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raygreenwood
Samba Member
Joined: November 24, 2008
Posts: 21521
Location: Oklahoma City
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:58 am Post subject: Re: Tuning the MPS |
|
|
| Keith Park wrote: |
Hi all,
OK... NEW 914 Raby 2056, with the D jet cam, I have 73 ECU, excellent harness, but need the 037 MPS.
I HAVE 3 unmolested good tested 007 Type 3 (C type) MPS's, can I use one of these and tune it for the 2056 or are the internals different and not able to meet the larger engines needs?
I have access to very good inductance meters and read Ray's writeup on the forum, but if I can adjust it which of the 3 (or all 3) of the adjustments will I need to change? Will I know when they are right with driveability or will i need to somehow measure emissions or mixture?
Thanks for any help
Keith |
Sorry...I was on the road. Had to trip to West Virginia to visit a technical school.
In a nutshell you are dealing with the differences between a 2.0L and a 2.1L engine. They are the same stroke right?
So the main differences other than volume (which we will need maybe 10% more fuel for) are the cam and exhaust (which will be a dynamic change which will primarily affect the outer load stop)...and probably slightly higher idle vacuum signature due to using the original intakes and plenum from the 2.0 (which will affect the main armature).
To start with I would make one adjustment to fuel pressure of about 10% higher to account for higher swept volume across the board. Based on a start point of 28 psi...add 2 psi...maybe 3 max. If you were at 30...add 2 psi.
The next adjustment will be the main armature (the center flat-head screw adjustment). If your vacuum signature of the 2056 ends up being 2-3 inches higher than the original 2.0.....that means that you will be leaner at idle and faster reacting upon opening the throttle. You will need to enrich that slightly.
DO NOT touch the inner load stop. Make sure it does not move. There is a slight possibility that you may have problems getting the car to idle if the vacuum is greatly higher at idle than the engine the MPS was originally designed for. This can usually be seen by the wavetek unit. It will only happen if the inner full load stop is not adjusted properly in the first place.
Once you establish idle and midrange running.....and stable fuel pressure......if you get lean or rich stumbles off the line, its time to adjust the outer full load stop.
The center armature screw and the outer full load stop are the only two adjustments that you do to the MPS...unless you can see from tuning and driving...or from the wavetech....that the armature is being pushed to far into the field coil by excessive vacuum at idle. If thats the case....it either was moved and you did not know it......or was set to close to maximum sensitiovity by the factory.
The object of setting the inner stop with an induction meter....is to make sure that the armature rod does not go so far into the coil that it becomes so lean that you stall.
The method is to find out at what vacuum level that happens with your MPS.
Technically...it should NOT happen if inner stop has been set correctly.
You can test this also by installing the MPS on the car...and start it. If you can get the car to idle with the hose disconnected (hard to do)....and then apply vacuum with a hand pump.....you can apply more vacuum than the engine is capable of...about 18" max. If this stalls the car.....you could use a readjustment of the inner stop.
Now...that just tells you that you need one. You should read it with the wavetech also at that vacuum level for a benchmark. Then adjust...and read at each adjustment so you have a graph. Ray |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith Park
Samba Member
Joined: August 13, 2006
Posts: 225
Location: Clifton Park NY
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2009 6:31 pm Post subject: will the 007 work? |
|
|
Thanks Ray, this is VERY helpful!
Next question I have is can I adjust a 007 to work with this 2056 engine?
the 007 is a Type 3 unit for a 1.6L (C/D system) and I have several untouched ones at a fraction of the cost of the Porsche calibrated one.
my 2056 has the big valve Porsche 2L heads too...
Thanks
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gizmobob
Samba Member
Joined: December 06, 2006
Posts: 1001
Location: Apple Valley, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have a question... What's Fuel Injection?
J/K
I have no idea what you guys are talking about, but sure sounds important. If anyone has any Solex 32 PHN Side-Draft questions, I'm here for you! 
Bob
_________________
"And now, in the interest of equal time, here is a message from the National Institute of Pancakes: It reads, and I quote, "Fuck waffles." " - George Carlin
'61 Type 311-Black
'62 Type 311-Gulf Blue (Germany)
'62 Type 313-Anthracite (Germany)
'62 Type 311-Gulf Blue (Italy)
'63 Type 361-Anthracite (Sweden)
'64 Type 343-Pacific Blue/Blue-White (Germany) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raygreenwood
Samba Member
Joined: November 24, 2008
Posts: 21521
Location: Oklahoma City
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 4:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gizmobob wrote: |
I have a question... What's Fuel Injection?
J/K
I have no idea what you guys are talking about, but sure sounds important. If anyone has any Solex 32 PHN Side-Draft questions, I'm here for you!
Bob |
Sidedraft?......siiiiiide-draaaaaaft.  ?
Is that where the beer comes out at an angle?
If the 007 has the same configuration....ie...copper diaphram in back for late model usage....it will be adjustable to work. What can make it even closer to working with less adjustment...is if the frame horn that covers the main spring is the same length on both units...ie either long or short.
The funny thing is...the Porsche units are worth no more than VW ones....in the big scheme of things. They are selling the Porsche ones at a premium simply because they are already adjusted for those "fair-weather" Porsche owners who believe that anything Porsche touched should never be altered.
They will find their MPS....even a sealed one....to not be causing their precious bone stock 914 to run right...and assume its broken.....because they would NEVER deign to adjust it.....or even remove the anti-tamper seal and in doing so... fall to the sniveling, lowly, most un-clean level ....of....  "tampered" with.....unoriginal...non-stock......
They will buy these hallowed MPS's with correct part numbers and install them ...only to run....about the same....but run none-the-less. In reality....the problem is usually that the signature of the engine has changed enough that the factory adjustment is no longer correct on an out of the box MPS.
If I dissassembled a 411/412 E series and a 007 and an 037 and shuffled the pieces.....most people on this planet would be stupified to see or measure any differences in ANY parts save for the length of the spring horn....maybe a slight varitaion indifferences of make in style of a screw or plate here or there....and some slight variations within the anti-chatter/backflow valve on the vacuum nipple.
All of that is tunable.
Just be sure to save your old MPS....so you can inspect for obvious differences...like measurement of the gap inside of the inner stop adjustment. You can check that with a wire type feeler gauge. Write down what is in your old one and new one.
With a flashlight, some very light disassembly and a small mirror you can inspect to see that the anti-chatter valve is ....probably pretty similar......and go ahead and carefully remove the anti-tamper plug from teh back but do not unseat the large aluminum plug until you are ready to install and start testing. This goes for both old and new MPS.
If your old MPS runs but has a cracked plate...repair that plate with epoxy...just enough to get teh car running...so at idle...you can measure signature vacuum....and measure the number of turns that the outer plug was installed to. This is a good starting point. Ray |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JSMskater
Samba Grease Gorilla
Joined: February 01, 2006
Posts: 5362
Location: Murrieta California
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
so in my physics lab yesterday we were playing with circuits, resistors, and capacitors and I has a bit of a brainwave --
one of the things we had was a variable resistor, with a knob that you could essential dial into any resistance you wanted within a certain range. I was wondering if, for those people who have head temp. sensor 1 out of whack, could one of these adjustable ones be installed to essentially "dial in" the mixture by adding resistance (in series) or reducing it (in parallel) and then getting the nicest mixture? I thought it was an interesting idea...
_________________
71 Squareback-FI -- 73 Bay (subaru powered)
TOOB Member #3
I make D-jet FI connectors |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raygreenwood
Samba Member
Joined: November 24, 2008
Posts: 21521
Location: Oklahoma City
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I did that about a year ago! You are on the right track gwasshoppa. I don't know if I posted about it in the Samba, but I have mentioned it several times in the STF. I no longer use a normal CHT attached to the cylinder head.
I have built them two different ways. I started out with a 0-2000 ohm variable resistor and a couple of small ballasts...attached to ground and plugged into the CHT wire. With a stop watch....I warmed up the car....watching oil and head temps..and dialing the resistor down to keep perfect running. I recorded the ranges I stopped at for each adjustment. I had an adjustment about every 1.5 minutes for a 10.5 minute warm up cycle (spring and summer mode). I recorded the reistances at each bench mark that worked well. Its clear...that the system really does not have too much resolution. It does not seem to even see the Ohm numbers between teh graduations I list below. By that I mean....for instance wen I switch from 2100 to 1700 ohms....it makes a difference. It corrects the slight change is running you start to noctice. But 2100 to 2000 or 2100 to 1900 is not nocticable. It will be different on every engine.
I had to test this on a buddies 914 as I am building my engine now. I tried the same on my rabbit last year. It works great...and works consistently....but each engine has different warm up characteristics and will require different benchmark Ohm readings. I also found that I had a cold weather pattern and a warm weather pattern. Since the warmed up ohms number is the same in both seasons......but the cold weather upper end ohms was longer as well as the cycle time (about 14 minutes compared to 10.5).....I have a differnt plug in set up for cold weather.
The method that works the best so far has a relay housing with a fixed resistor board with 2100, 1700, 1300, 800,500,300 and 200 ohm resistors solder into circuit traces. (warm weather) For winder it goes from 2500 1900, 1300...and back to 800, 500 300 and 175 ohm.
Right now I have an electrical rotary timer relay I got from a friend who got it from Chromlox. You turn on the engine...the relay powers up and cycles through the seven contacts in 10.5 minutes. It feels and runs seamless. There is never any reason that my 412 should see anything below 175-200 ohms. At maximum head temps...that is as lean as it needs to be...or can be and not start dropping idle.
I am working on a bimetallic strip that screws onto an extender for the CHT bore hole in the head....to move the rotary dial on the circuit board.
i have not found a potentiometer with the correct ohm breaks....I also tried this originally with a variable ceramic resistor (the one I was testing with). A bimetallic strip can adjust that very easily...but those resistors are not made for tens of thousands of adjustments.
A variable ballst IS teh way to go in my opinion. Ditch the CHT if you can. Ray |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith Park
Samba Member
Joined: August 13, 2006
Posts: 225
Location: Clifton Park NY
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:51 pm Post subject: 007 instead of 037 |
|
|
thanks again Ray,
My problem is that I dont have ANY 037, not even a bad one. I have 3 007's but Id be starting from scratch to calbrate it for my 2056. Is this doable? Does it matter in this case if I have a short or long spring version? What should I measure or look for with the 007's I have in
seeing If I can recalibrate for a 2056?
Will I be able to start and run the engine with a virgin 007 on there so I can break in the cam and such? Will I be able to drive it at all before I try and calibrate it?
Thanks,
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
