PG Pump Installed

[laloosh]

Well its POURING out so i can't test it. Even though i tried. Install was a simple, the pump came with no instructions but its easy to figure out. Put the new pump in, car started on the first crank. Rolled it around back and forth just to make sure nothign leaks or stalls and it was fine. Packed the old pump, tools, and a flashlight and went for a ride. The car feels "different". Before underload at low rpm i mean sub 3500rpm it would kinda feel rough and struggle a little. Now the car feels silky smooth, i know its not in my head. It also backfires less, which is wierd. Side note, i have a 2006 r6 that was running lean after mods, backfiring liek crazy and shooting flames, installed a powercommander and tuned it, added fuel btw, flames went away and so did the backfiring. Back to the pump, i go 3k rpm in 3rd and get on it, about 4k it breaks loose and shoots to redline. Whatever, it did this before in the rain. So i tried 4th gear, car never broke loose in 4th. I get on it 4300rpm breaks loost and shoots to 6600ish, yes its spinning and yes i stayed on it, but heres the kicker boost was at 16psi at 6600rpm!!! I cannot confirm this as i dont want to die but i am going to the track tomorrow. I have done several data logged runs with the stock pump and fuel pressure maxed out at 1800psi and hovered aroud 1500-1600psi. I will datalog at the track tomorrow. I will keep this thread updated with graphs of fuel pressure vs rpm once i have comparrison. As for now, I like it, car feels smooth, and seems to hold more boost at higher rpms. Stay tuned.....

UPDATE:
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j299/laloosh04/chart.jpg
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j299/laloosh04/throttle.jpg

Data taken 10 min ago. 4th gear roll at 18psi. As you can see the throttle doesn begin to close till around 6200rpm CONFIRMING THIS FUEL PUMP KEEP THE THROTTLE OPEN LONGER!. I dont know how much more proof you want.
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j299/laloosh04/FuelPressureChart.jpg
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j299/laloosh04/TVChart.jpg

more proof my car holds more throttle and boost till redline. psi vs rpm
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j299/laloosh04/psi.jpg

This is proof of the car's performance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3Rlua6r_40

[ccann26]

sounds promising !!!

[BoostedSpd6]

this should be interesting to see what kind of diffences u guys see on the 3 side..

[northmiler89]

great to hear.. glad you are one step ahead of me!


this should be interesting to see what kind of diffences u guys see on the 3 side..

please tell me that RI is for rhode island... (flash)

[Derek88]

Subbin'

What are your other mods? I forgot.

[laloosh]

i/tbe/cpe ems/fuel pump

[boostdog]

nice laloosh...keep us posted on the results! How much was the pump?

[laloosh]

its listed at PG for 399.

[boostdog]

damn that's alot of freakin $$$ for a fuel pump still! better than a grand i guess but geez!

[Captain KRM P5]

damn that's alot of freakin $$$ for a fuel pump still! better than a grand i guess but geez!

well keep in mind we have get new pump housings from mazda so that we can rebuild these. thats a good portion of the cost right there.

[speed3shon]

but dont you charge a core fee? the pump housing cost from mazda has nothing to do with the $400 the upgrade costs.

If you look at it that way, the upgraded pump is $750.

I guess im just not sure what parts or labor are required for this upgrade that make it cost $400.

[udontknowjack]

hey ken how much to ship those fuel pump overnite to california?

[Captain KRM P5]

the parts to build the actual pump are over $350 retail. the pump housing retails from mazda for $400. the pump also goes through a tear down, cleaning and rebuilding process. plus we are not going to be the more expensive pump on the market if that tells you anything at all.

overnighting a pump to california, wow. well the soonest i could have one ready to ship is thursday. overnighting it is $100 for UPS Next Day Air

[speed3shon]

the parts to build the actual pump are over $350 retail. the pump housing retails from mazda for $400. the pump also goes through a tear down, cleaning and rebuilding process. plus we are not going to be the more expensive pump on the market if that tells you anything at all.


thats what i needed to know.
thanks ken!

[ZooMIN3]

Laloosh; how's the track? Any more good info you'd like to pass on to us speed freaks?

[udontknowjack]

he wont be back till midnite....have to wait =(

[ZooMIN3]

he wont be back till midnite....have to wait =(
midnight...california time? guess I'll have a few rounds before then!! (drinks)

[udontknowjack]

hes in new jerse i think

[palerider]

Laloosh sorry to update the thread for you but...i had to. My head is hurting.

On the other forum, Laloosh posted from the track. He hit.. are you ready..

12.9 at 111mph

with the fuel pump on street tires. I think his best times before were around 13.4 and 106. Not to be a noob but how much fvcking HP do you need to add in order to gain 1/2 a sec and 5mph trap with the same traction? This thing may be the best mod on this car so far!!

Holy crap I cant wait to hear impressions. Who wants one now?

[Haltech]

Yup, the pump helps a lot guys. There is power to made even stock just adding the sucker. Wait until he gets back into his CPE setup and starts tuning it. He should hit a 12.6 with the extra power he will be making.

[udontknowjack]

12.9 with winter tires....i think he can do way better than 12.6 with slick or some decent performance tires....

[laloosh]

12.9 @ 111mph on blizzaks baby lol With slicks the way it sits right now its a low 12 second car. Im guessing 12.3s with a nice 1.7 60. Keep in mind my launch isnt whats killing me, its my 1-2 shift, its garbage and just spin through it lol.

[udontknowjack]

which engine mount do u have ?

[laloosh]

trz derlin....shit still wheel hops its gay

[Haltech]

Excellent loosh, excellent! Wait until you get that tune dialed in with the pump now... i think you will hit a 12.6 with those shitty winter tires (alright).

11's are coming soon to the MS3 world with a stock turbo...(eekfu)

[laloosh]

im telling you guys. Intercooler/exhaust manifold/tune/meth/slicks 11s on stock turbo 100%

[driver311]

sick, my next mod. nicely done. killer trap. I told those fags on srtforums. dyno that thing like now.

[laloosh]

sick, my next mod. nicely done. killer trap. I told those fags on srtforums. dyno that thing like now.

im telling you this fuel pump is god lol. Picked up 5mph from a simple pump. The ability to shift higher(i was shifting at 6400ish) is priceless, esp on the 4-5 shift cause you land alot higher in 5th. Your freak car will probably go 11s with just the pump(kiss)(eekfu)

[Craighjr]

Damn I can't believe your times. I wish I knew you were going to the track I did nothing today.

[bova80]

i know this isn't the ms6 section but i wonder if this would do the same for it.

[laloosh]

didnt i tell you on sunday? lol Im going to the track tuesday lol Neway i didnt know you had off.....(stooges)
plus i dont think they would let you run with a broken hand. Than again i ran with tires rated to 99mph lol

[laloosh]

sick, my next mod. nicely done. killer trap. I told those fags on srtforums. dyno that thing like now.

but you need to read this and post your slip/mods in the correct order. Im feel left out in the 12s all by myself(peep)
http://www.msprotege.com/forum/showthread.php?t=123684189

[Haltech]

i know this isn't the ms6 section but i wonder if this would do the same for it.

Is the pope catholic? lol Of course it will dude!

[laloosh]

Is the pope catholic? lol Of course it will dude!

lmao response of the year

[FRUCTOSE]

You have a low 12 sec. car with only a hand full of bolt ons and and when you get a tune! 11's WOW...

Anything over 110 is f'ing fast as hell, congrats on the trap(rockon)

This is with a stock turbo, just imagine it with a big boy turbo and some cams!

[RoadRage]

thats great, you have sold me on getting one for x-mass

[bova80]

hey laloosh, did you do any datalogs with the new pump installed? very interested.

[laloosh]

yea i did, i will post them later today. Basically all you will see if a higher fuel pressure and boost holding longer

[bova80]

that is good enough proof to me that it works. but some people like to see it on paper.

[TRSpeed3]

yea i did, i will post them later today. Basically all you will see if a higher fuel pressure and boost holding longer

Thats awsome..boost staying on strong till redline or close to it...Just a question you didnt do any special tunning with the cpe for the pump correct? u just installed and went on your way to the track??

[fourthmeal]

subbing to watch this

[boostdog]

sick, my next mod. nicely done. killer trap. I told those fags on srtforums. dyno that thing like now.

man those srt guys are gay! anything that's in the same class as the srt and goes faster is a piece of crap in there opinion. they love to toot there own horn but can never share the stage with something that they might think would be faster.....dare i say - the ms3 has stolen the srt-4 neons thunder?!?!? (attn) I am glad to see better cars coming down the pipe line...the ms3 is a great car! ( just not as good as my wrx (boom08)) hahahahahha

[tsunami]

moved this to the FI forum instead of the ECU section.... good stuff there laloosh i have been very impressed with the response to bolt ons with these cars now just had a mani to it.

[Jays07MS3]

Sick, sick times Laloosh. But I'm slightly confused (happens all the time ;)). The last time you went to the track you got 13.4 @ 106mph? And all you did to get 12.9 @ 111 was add the fuel pump? I thought you also changed your tune recently and pulled a ton of fuel from the map.

And now that you're holding boost longer, is the throttle plate staying open longer as well? I believe the throttle plate closing in the upper rpms was the major cause of the boost dropping off. Maybe now that you have more fuel available, the ECU no longer closes the throttle plate. Can you log throttle position with the standback?

[laloosh]

Sick, sick times Laloosh. But I'm slightly confused (happens all the time ;)). The last time you went to the track you got 13.4 @ 106mph? And all you did to get 12.9 @ 111 was add the fuel pump? I thought you also changed your tune recently and pulled a ton of fuel from the map.

And now that you're holding boost longer, is the throttle plate staying open longer as well? I believe the throttle plate closing in the upper rpms was the major cause of the boost dropping off. Maybe now that you have more fuel available, the ECU no longer closes the throttle plate. Can you log throttle position with the standback?

13.4 @ 106 was done with i/tbe/ems at 17psi.
12.9 @ 111 was done with i/tbe/ems at 18psi (everythign zeroed out)/fuel pump. The pump and 1 extra psi picked up 5mph...thats crazy

[Finkle]

jeez now i want that pump

[Captain KRM P5]

Maybe now that you have more fuel available, the ECU no longer closes the throttle plate.

CP-e tells me that this is not the case.

[Captain KRM P5]

yea i did, i will post them later today. Basically all you will see if a higher fuel pressure and boost holding longer

if you can PM or email me these images that would be great. well done chris, awesome. this thread should quiet any naysayers :)

[krnage]

awesome times! very hard for me to resist this mod!

ken - expect an order in the new year haha

[PerformanceRacing]

Ahhh, I can't wait to install my in-tank pump and see what results I get, hope it is similar.

It is unclear if the stock pump is feeding enough fuel to the cam-pump or not

[Haltech]

Ahhh, I can't wait to install my in-tank pump and see what results I get, hope it is similar.

It is unclear if the stock pump is feeding enough fuel to the cam-pump or not

Wasted your money and your time with an intank pump and that is NOT going to solve the high pressure fuel starvation on these cars. Wont work, dont bother.

Ge the HP pump from PG, get your car on the dyno and with that GTR- turbo of yours, you should see damn near 400 hp if not more if properly tuned...

[laloosh]

if you can PM or email me these images that would be great. well done chris, awesome. this thread should quiet any naysayers :)

i can send you the files and you guys could make it all pretty if you want lol. LIke i said ill post up crude version, basic stuff tonight.

[mdogg]

13.4 @ 106 was done with i/tbe/ems at 17psi.
12.9 @ 111 was done with i/tbe/ems at 18psi (everythign zeroed out)/fuel pump. The pump and 1 extra psi picked up 5mph...thats crazy
That's quite an impressive jump, but let's be honest.... it's not exactly an apples/apples comparison if you changed something other than just the pump for those times. Definitely looking forward to some datalogging results....

[Captain KRM P5]

i don't think 1 psi - especially if it is untuned/zeroed out as it says - is going to do much, especially not shave a half second off your time in the 13s. it takes an exponential increase to do that once you are in that bracket.

i don't want people to think this is the magic key to reach 400whp either. i'm not a fan of pushing 350+ on stock internals regardless of how well tuned the car is. i do think its going to make a big difference for a lot of people.

[Captain KRM P5]

i can send you the files and you guys could make it all pretty if you want lol. LIke i said ill post up crude version, basic stuff tonight.

sure man that would be superb

[Fritch]

I would like to see the datalog with fuel pressure, boost, rpm, and TPS so we can see what the throttle was doing around 6400rpm

[BoostedSpd6]

Wasted your money and your time with an intank pump and that is NOT going to solve the high pressure fuel starvation on these cars. Wont work, dont bother.

Ge the HP pump from PG, get your car on the dyno and with that GTR- turbo of yours, you should see damn near 400 hp if not more if properly tuned...

uhh i have it done in my speed.. why dont u give this guy a chance.atleast hes putting an effort in like i did.. and ull never see 400hp without breaking ur motor with these cars internals suck. and a walbro plus the PG pump should mean results should be 50% better then stock. personally id listen to ken i dont trust my motor at all with everyone blowing them up on the 6 side.. now with the right modifications and a good tune i think we'll see some good numbers and a less of a risk of blowing shit up.

[laloosh]

first post updated with graph.

[mrlilguy157]

(thumb)

[laloosh]

keep in mind. The orginal lower values are of me maxing out the pump. You can see the pressure spikes, can't hold and drops down, car sputters and runs out of fuel, bam fuel cut till its able to supply the pressure. I bet this pump is the reason allt he ms6 guys are blowing up, not weak internals. But i might be wrong

[rodney]

laloosh i gotta question, if i threw a boost cut defender and boost controller @18psi w/ the fuel pump, should i be seeing the same outcome as you right now or atleast close minus the intercooler tho. and do you have a aftermarket BOV. oh i have sri and turbo back

[numbnuts22715]

laloosh doesnt have an intercooler.

[driver311]

laloosh i gotta question, if i threw a boost cut defender and boost controller @18psi w/ the fuel pump, should i be seeing the same outcome as you right now or atleast close minus the intercooler tho. and do you have a aftermarket BOV. oh i have sri and turbo back

Depends on the car, the driver, how good the boost holds and Im sure an intercooler will help alot. Though one thing can be said, it will haul ass for sure.

[laloosh]

you should be if you get a quality boost controller that holds boost steady. BTW im on the stock intercooler, why do poeple think i have all these god damn mods. Power mods are i/tbe with a cat/18psi/fuel pump. Thats it for power, no intercooler, no meth, no exhaust manifold, no tune

[rodney]

you should be if you get a quality boost controller that holds boost steady.

whats a decent boost controler to go with

[driver311]

turbosmart or forge

[rodney]

turbosmart or forge

are those manual boost controllers?

[Captain KRM P5]

laloosh i never asked how you liked "protegegarage turboback exhaust #1 (and only)" lol

[Captain KRM P5]

are those manual boost controllers?

yes they are

[laloosh]

laloosh i never asked how you liked "protegegarage turboback exhaust #1 (and only)" lol

i love it, i sent you guys an email talking about alot of thing...including the turboback...i guess you never got it?

[rodney]

turbosmart or forge

do you have an air/fuel guage, are your air/fuels ok with out having that fuel pump at 18psi

[Captain KRM P5]

i love it, i sent you guys an email talking about alot of thing...including the turboback...i guess you never got it?

i'll have to see if that came through, will let you know

[driver311]

Man I fell like the one with no mods. Im still on stock exhaust. LOL

[driver311]

do you have an air/fuel guage, are your air/fuels ok with out having that fuel pump at 18psi

i will be posting some dyno results this week. Ill post my true afr's at that time. But to answer your question, Yes. They are still in the low 11s high 10s.

[rodney]

thanks driver311 thats all i wanted to know

[driver311]

all cars are different and you should do your own testing. aem uego is a very accurate tool.

[numbnuts22715]

Laloosh, when can we expect to see some sort of dyno fo rthis?
also, are you going to pay someone to tune it or are you going to tune it, then dyno it? or what>?

Im really curious to see what kind of numbers youre laying down

[laloosh]

im not sure....im in the market for a wideband or a dashhawk, im just gonna do the a/f ratio for now. Tune it on the dyno when i get more mods.

[driver311]

Im guessing 320whp!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[driver311]

uego is proven to be the most accurate.there was a wideband shootout not to long ago and the uego was the best

[laloosh]

Im guessing 320whp!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lies 321! lol

[driver311]

Im real excited to see what Im doing with intake, and tmic now.

[driver311]

ps. I forgot to tell you I weighed my car the other day. quarter tank of gas and no spare tire and jack. 2970. Not to shabby

[numbnuts22715]

uego is proven to be the most accurate.there was a wideband shootout not to long ago and the uego was the best

do you have a link of where you saw this?
I'm trying to pick the wideband I want.

[laloosh]

i went in at 3169 with me in it and im 6'5 210. So it should be right around hwere yours is. I dont know how accurate the the scale is because the other time it was 3360 with me in lol, weird

[mrlilguy157]

great results once again. now you see why i'm so happy ;). glad i could answer questions for you and what not laloosh.

knowing that you're probably one of the best (if not the best) driver at the track here, do you have time slips? i believe you, you're not one to make stuff up, but as said earlier, people like paper.

[driver311]

do you have a link of where you saw this?
I'm trying to pick the wideband I want.



http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2007/06/WidebandShootout/index.php

[laloosh]

i posted time slips everywhere. Search the "official 1/4 thread" lol

[driver311]

i went in at 3169 with me in it and im 6'5 210. So it should be right around hwere yours is. I dont know how accurate the the scale is because the other time it was 3360 with me in lol, weird

Mine was 3150, so right on par.

[numbnuts22715]

Ive seen that article, but when I try to view it now, it won't let me view the 2nd page without signing up and paying. Can you see the 2nd page?

From what I remember, the innovate and eugo were really close, with a slight edge doing to the eugo. am I correct or am I forgetting something?

[Captain KRM P5]

the uego and the innovate use the same physical sensor. its the unit that displays the signal itself which makes the difference. honestly i think the AEM is great. it responds very fast compared to the innovate unit i also own.

[Haltech]

i don't think 1 psi - especially if it is untuned/zeroed out as it says - is going to do much, especially not shave a half second off your time in the 13s. it takes an exponential increase to do that once you are in that bracket.

i don't want people to think this is the magic key to reach 400whp either. i'm not a fan of pushing 350+ on stock internals regardless of how well tuned the car is. i do think its going to make a big difference for a lot of people.

I beg to differ Ken.. They said this on Ford, especially with lightnings that only had these sorry ass coated semi forged pistons with non forged rods.. i ran over 540HP to the rear wheels on that motor for 4 years with no issues.

350 on these engines is nothing when tuned correctly. These Rods are so tiny, they arent going to go exit left. If you keep it at below 11.3, your pistons arent going to give you to much trouble. Im willing to test this shortblock soon :)

[Haltech]

uhh i have it done in my speed.. why dont u give this guy a chance.atleast hes putting an effort in like i did.. and ull never see 400hp without breaking ur motor with these cars internals suck. and a walbro plus the PG pump should mean results should be 50% better then stock. personally id listen to ken i dont trust my motor at all with everyone blowing them up on the 6 side.. now with the right modifications and a good tune i think we'll see some good numbers and a less of a risk of blowing shit up.

Learn how to tune your car and you wont see it destroyed. Common Sense my friend, it goes along way. That intank pump supplies the fuel to the high pressure pump.. Thats all its going to do. Waste of time and money tp upgrade that pump anytime soon. As for these people are blowing their motors up in the 6 side for what reason? Yea. look at their mods and the safety behind them. I dont want to act like an ass, but any moron can put parts on their car and go beat on it. I cant believe the countless post i run across on here where people are tuning via piggy back with no wideband meter installed and playing " guess the calibrations ". Or the classic, bolt the big turbo on with no tuning, fuel or monitoring.. smart decision, lemme tell ya.

[Captain KRM P5]

I beg to differ Ken.. They said this on Ford, especially with lightnings that only had these sorry ass coated semi forged pistons with non forged rods.. i ran over 540HP to the rear wheels on that motor for 4 years with no issues.

350 on these engines is nothing when tuned correctly. These Rods are so tiny, they arent going to go exit left. If you keep it at below 11.3, your pistons arent going to give you to much trouble. Im willing to test this shortblock soon :)

thats cool my friend, got a shortblock and some internals here with your name on it :)

90% of the people who have popped these motors and bought new ones from me have done so under 10:1 or 11:1 rich conditions and have shot rods through the block. air fuel ratios alone will not guarantee a safe tune, lots of other factors at play here.

i'd like to see 350whp or 400whp, long term reliable, daily driven stock block DISI powered mazdas. i am sure there will be people that can pull it off. i do not forsee it being the norm.

[redrocketz]

I beg to differ Ken.. They said this on Ford, especially with lightnings that only had these sorry ass coated semi forged pistons with non forged rods.. i ran over 540HP to the rear wheels on that motor for 4 years with no issues.

350 on these engines is nothing when tuned correctly. These Rods are so tiny, they arent going to go exit left. If you keep it at below 11.3, your pistons arent going to give you to much trouble. Im willing to test this shortblock soon :)

Your lightning had twice the engine to work with also you have to remember that. I've seen the inside of Lightning engines and the inside of DISI engines and I can tell you that the mazdas are alot weaker and like said many times before it's not just AFR's that make your car run for ever. We have tuned the crap out of a Speed6 and can't get it past 330 AWHP because of limitations like Fuel and the throttle backing off. MY budy was pushing 511whp on his SRT-4 with a tune at roughly 10.5:1 and realy low EGT's but after about 4 months there went a few rods through his block and valves in the oil pan because the pressure you push at that point is going to put a shitload of pressure on those stock pistons.

[ATE BALLER]

Wasted your money and your time with an intank pump and that is NOT going to solve the high pressure fuel starvation on these cars. Wont work, dont bother.

Ge the HP pump from PG, get your car on the dyno and with that GTR- turbo of yours, you should see damn near 400 hp if not more if properly tuned...


Learn how to tune your car and you wont see it destroyed. Common Sense my friend, it goes along way. That intank pump supplies the fuel to the high pressure pump.. Thats all its going to do. Waste of time and money tp upgrade that pump anytime soon. As for these people are blowing their motors up in the 6 side for what reason? Yea. look at their mods and the safety behind them. I dont want to act like an ass, but any moron can put parts on their car and go beat on it. I cant believe the countless post i run across on here where people are tuning via piggy back with no wideband meter installed and playing " guess the calibrations ". Or the classic, bolt the big turbo on with no tuning, fuel or monitoring.. smart decision, lemme tell ya.

Bull shit. Do you have one installed? Have you been driving around with one? Then shut the hell up because you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. According to my fluid dynamics book, when you have a dual pump system (in series), and you increase the rate of one, it will in turn increase the rate of the other, regardless of what side of the system you upgrade. It's simple. If the CDFP has more fuel available to it at a faster rate and higher pressure, then the force it is exerting on the fuel (which is controlled ONLY by the speed of the camshaft) will move more of it faster and at a higher pressure. I'm not saying it solves everything but I have installed one, and it does make things a hell of alot smoother. I didn't reset my battery when I did it, so I know it's not the ECU fucking with me. The gurgling and poping has calmed down quite a bit, and it feels a bit torque-ier. On top of that, I haven't triggered a fuel cut once since I removed my ATP Boost Cut Eliminator (a day and a half after swapping pumps) even though it's dropped 45*F since the swap. I'd say it's a little more than a waste of time and money. How about the next time you want to make claims about something with which you have no experience, you just don't. That would really make things better.

[nig3]

Hey laloosh just so im on the same with you guys, what all mods do you have done now with the new fuel pump?? were you hitting fuel cut alot before this?

[laloosh]

read the thread, i dont feel like posting the same information 10 times

i/tbe/cpe ems/fuel pump

[Captain KRM P5]

let's remain civil folks

[Jays07MS3]

And now that you're holding boost longer, is the throttle plate staying open longer as well? I believe the throttle plate closing in the upper rpms was the major cause of the boost dropping off. Maybe now that you have more fuel available, the ECU no longer closes the throttle plate. Can you log throttle position with the standback?CP-e tells me that this is not the case.


Now I'm really confused ;) If thats not the case then how come your website states this:


Also, because there is more fuel available, the throttle plate stays open longer, with less of a dance for more power to redline. This is because the throttle plate doesn’t need to limit air intake because of the fuel pressure drop from the pump. The pressure drop is no more.

So does the throttle plate stay open longer with the new pump?

Laloosh, did you log throttle and boost as well as pump pressure? If so can you post it?

[clos561]

it should because the computer doesnt read fuel drop and doesnt have to adjust to it by closing the throttle

[Jays07MS3]

it should because the computer doesnt read fuel drop and doesnt have to adjust to it by closing the throttle

Thats what I'm thinking too but I want some datalogs to back that up. And the Captain said that CP-E said that it didn't keep the throttle plate from closing. Just trying to clarify all of this (scratch)

[laloosh]

my throttle stays open longer. cpe is testing a 6 not a 3

[rodney]

i dont see why there would be a difference between the 3 or 6

[ATE BALLER]

There wouldn't. They have differently configured ECUs, but the program is essentially the same other than the limited 1st and 2nd gears in the 3.

[rodney]

so then why does laloosh say his throttle stays open longer but cpe says that it makes no difference on the 6

[TRSpeed3]

so then why does laloosh say his throttle stays open longer but cpe says that it makes no difference on the 6

x2???

[laloosh]

Laloosh says the throttle stays open longer becuase on laloosh's car the throttle stays open longer.

Here is my car. Lower line is stock pump hitting fuel cut, upper line is PG pump....make your own conclusions....numbers speak the truth

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j299/laloosh04/throttle.jpg

[fourthmeal]

I think its WILD how the voltage increases with the pump. Its as if you are actually getting more throttle opening throughout with this simple mod. Amazing!

This is the most perplexing thing about this car...why the hell didn't they just put in this other pump in the first place? They'd win more people over if they could hold redline, that's for sure. I think this will be one of my first mods because it seems the MS3 computer "likes" it, and allows for a much different performance profile just due to this one change.

[laloosh]

once again to make things clear. My stock pump was cutting out and dropping fuel thus causing lower throttle imputs. I have no way of testing a not maxed out stock pump, as mine cuts out.

[mrlilguy157]

once again - yay.

[Finkle]

Laloosh what device are u using to monitor ur throttle plate, is that with the standback?

[laloosh]

everything is datalogged with the standback

[Haltech]

Your lightning had twice the engine to work with also you have to remember that. I've seen the inside of Lightning engines and the inside of DISI engines and I can tell you that the mazdas are alot weaker and like said many times before it's not just AFR's that make your car run for ever. We have tuned the crap out of a Speed6 and can't get it past 330 AWHP because of limitations like Fuel and the throttle backing off. MY budy was pushing 511whp on his SRT-4 with a tune at roughly 10.5:1 and realy low EGT's but after about 4 months there went a few rods through his block and valves in the oil pan because the pressure you push at that point is going to put a shitload of pressure on those stock pistons.

Well if you want to compare an alumn block to an iron block, thats fine, but the internals in the lightning aside from the crank, are very weak. Now im not saying the stock shortblock can hold 425+.. what am i saying, i bet it hold 350-400 just fine if you arent beating the hell out of it, day in and day out.

Ken you of all people know that properly tuned cars that arent abuse do extend the expectations of their livelihood. If i blow my motor up, so be it, but its not going to be less than 350hp worth of power if it happens. Ill buy a shortblock from you but with higher compression :)

[Haltech]

Bull shit. Do you have one installed? Have you been driving around with one? Then shut the hell up because you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. According to my fluid dynamics book, when you have a dual pump system (in series), and you increase the rate of one, it will in turn increase the rate of the other, regardless of what side of the system you upgrade. It's simple. If the CDFP has more fuel available to it at a faster rate and higher pressure, then the force it is exerting on the fuel (which is controlled ONLY by the speed of the camshaft) will move more of it faster and at a higher pressure. I'm not saying it solves everything but I have installed one, and it does make things a hell of alot smoother. I didn't reset my battery when I did it, so I know it's not the ECU fucking with me. The gurgling and poping has calmed down quite a bit, and it feels a bit torque-ier. On top of that, I haven't triggered a fuel cut once since I removed my ATP Boost Cut Eliminator (a day and a half after swapping pumps) even though it's dropped 45*F since the swap. I'd say it's a little more than a waste of time and money. How about the next time you want to make claims about something with which you have no experience, you just don't. That would really make things better.

Bust out your paypal accnt address and ill place money on this right now youngster... I have more experience than your age... (pow). Im glad you have a fluid dynamics book... but i want to introduce you to a guy named " Murphy " and how he can spoil ANY text book equation. You can throw 4 pumps together in a series all you like to increase VOLUME, but it will NOT increase pressure. VOLUME is NOT the problem with the MS3 or MS6, its PRESSURE, which is solely handled by the work of the cam driven high pressure pump on the engine! So you go ahead and wire those pumps in the tank for us, than come back with your results. Ill expect a full apology from your immature, adolescent behavior. Im not willing to take your word on your in-tank solution because i know it doesnt work. Got any before and after datalogs? Didnt think so (blah)

[palerider]

I think this will be one of my first mods because it seems the MS3 computer "likes" it, and allows for a much different performance profile just due to this one change.

lol. 12.9@111 would certainly lead us to believe that the ECU "adores" this mod. Either that or Laloosh is screwing around with "naws" on the "down low". Come on Laloosh which is it:)

And BTW.... I ordered th pump today. I wonder what I'll notice with my current mods? Should be interesting.

I also ordered the turbo manifold and plan on PNP and downpipe after the new year.

This thread has got me off my ass for sure. Laloosh needs a sponsor... hes making people some damn money.

[Jays07MS3]

UPDATE:
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j299/laloosh04/chart.jpg

Just out of curiosity, i logged a few runs today to see what the fuel pressure was doing on a basically stock car (just CAI). It seems that, at least for my car, that pressure is staying constant all the way to close to redline. And even so, my throttle plate is closing like a mofo.

So what I want to know is how putting this new pump on a basically stock car will increase performance? Since I'm not dropping fuel pressure like laloosh is, why would this mod keep my throttle plate open? Ken, when you get the datalogs please post them up. Hopefully you'll be doing a few logs/run on basically stock cars cuz I'm sure there are a lot of people including myself that are wondering what the gains will be with no other mods.

Anyways, heres my log:

[matsuda]

So what I want to know is how putting this new pump on a basically stock car will increase performance?

The simple answer is that it wouldn't.
Your datalog proves it.

[matsuda]

Laloosh says the throttle stays open longer becuase on laloosh's car the throttle stays open longer.

Here is my car. Lower line is stock pump hitting fuel cut, upper line is PG pump....make your own conclusions....numbers speak the truth

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j299/laloosh04/throttle.jpg

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j299/laloosh04/chart.jpg



That data has very little meaning without knowing the conditions of exactly how is was obtained.

[Captain KRM P5]

The simple answer is that it wouldn't.
Your datalog proves it.

his datalog proves that stock fuel pressure remains constant on stock boost and nothing more. it says nothing for what would happen if more fuel pressure was available.


Just out of curiosity, i logged a few runs today to see what the fuel pressure was doing on a basically stock car (just CAI). It seems that, at least for my car, that pressure is staying constant all the way to close to redline. And even so, my throttle plate is closing like a mofo.

So what I want to know is how putting this new pump on a basically stock car will increase performance? Since I'm not dropping fuel pressure like laloosh is, why would this mod keep my throttle plate open? Ken, when you get the datalogs please post them up. Hopefully you'll be doing a few logs/run on basically stock cars cuz I'm sure there are a lot of people including myself that are wondering what the gains will be with no other mods.

Anyways, heres my log:

i don't know that i'd recommend the pump for a stock vehicle or for someone who wants to remain stock. you would not need the benefit of added fuel pressure for a stock car that already runs rich from the factory. the shortcomings of the stock pump reveal themselves once you start demanding incrementally more from it.

laloosh is pushing a pound or two more boost with a full exhaust (no intake) . is this enough to start taxing the stock pump? perhaps it is. mazda is pretty good about engineering their cars to do so much and nothing more in my experience. what the pump has done for laloosh for example is what we had heard from mrlilguy - the throttle plate, while not remaining completely open, remains more open and for a longer period of time at the level of boost he is pushing with the modifications he is running VS the same modifications and conditions with a stock pump.

i do not nor have i ever felt that the throttle plate is controlled by one lone input. if that were the case it would be a rudimentary addition to an XEDE or Standback to clamp/control it. i do think that available fuel pressure and wideband AFR affects the throttle plate among other factors, and those are some things that this pump will affect, in turn it seems affecting the plate. is this to say that this pump would not benefit a stock car? i won't say that off hand. your fuel pressure does indeed remain constant. however incrementally higher boost requires incrementally higher fuel pressure to maintain proper AFRs. while your power output is increasing as you approach redline, your fuel pressure is not. so as i said, the car could be - stock mind you - at a limit by mazda's own design. will having more fuel pressure on tap cure the throttle plate - stock vehicle or modified? no. will it help a great deal in terms of opening up potential horsepower? yes.

the fact that five tenths of a second was shaved off and he hit 111 on snow tires at the dragstrip is a monumental achievement. honestly i'm pretty shocked that the addition of the pump would more or less do that. i too would like to see what happens on a stock or mostly stock car. right now i do not have a stock ms3 here nor the pump supplies to accommodate that. i would need a stock ms3 with nothing more than a standback basically, and where I am located at thats not available right now.

[Jays07MS3]

The simple answer is that it wouldn't.
Your datalog proves it.

Well part of the reason I ask is because of Ken's response in the "official" thread. I would just like to see some datalogs to verify everything and actually see exactly how the CDFP is smoothing out the throttle plate. And it would be nice for those of us with basically stock cars to know whether or not this pump is worth getting before some other mods.



Ken, how will this mod work on a somewhat stock car? IE: simple bolt ons, no turbo upgrade.
Since it seems that the throttle plate starts to close arount 5-5.5k on stock cars, would the instalation of this help extend the power of guys running just a CAI and exhaust upgrade?

Thanks

BTW: Got the gasket! :)

initially what was seen was a smoother and more consistent curve towards redline and less helter skelter action from the throttle plate. i am sure there would be drivability improvements from having more fuel on tap, moreso though for people wanting to increase boost.

[matsuda]

Well part of the reason I ask is because of Ken's response in the "official" thread. I would just like to see some datalogs to verify everything and actually see exactly how the CDFP is smoothing out the throttle plate. And it would be nice for those of us with basically stock cars to know whether or not this pump is worth getting before some other mods.

Keep in mind that laloosh has a CPE Standback which is controlling the fuel pressure whereas it is normally controlled by the ECU.

If I am not mistaken, the Standback will vary the fuel pressure to control the A/F ratio in a much different manner than the stock ECU will.

It is apples and oranges.

Your datalogs prove that you have no issues whatsoever with fuel pressure.

[Captain KRM P5]

Well part of the reason I ask is because of Ken's response in the "official" thread. I would just like to see some datalogs to verify everything and actually see exactly how the CDFP is smoothing out the throttle plate. And it would be nice for those of us with basically stock cars to know whether or not this pump is worth getting before some other mods.

answered this for the most part above. like i said, if i had a stock or near stock ms3 with a standback on hand i would have no problem providing datalogs for that situation.

that said, i think spending the amount of money on a pump like this for people that want stock boost and stock vehicle is not the best use of one's money. $350 to $800 can likely be better spent on breathability modifications. the purpose of this pump was never to alleviate the throttle plate, it was to provide more fuel pressure. the perceived throttle plate activity shown on laloosh's car is a nice thing to see, but its not the purpose of having this pump. if all people are looking for is a throttle plate solution, i'm not going to say this is the best option.

[Captain KRM P5]

Keep in mind that laloosh has a CPE Standback which is controlling the fuel pressure whereas it is normally controlled by the ECU.

It is apples and oranges.

the standback was zeroed out for this run i believe, so it was controlling nothing. laloosh can correct me if thats not true. its a catch 22 - you cant datalog without a standback and if you have a standback suddenly its not an accurate measurement. a larger cam driven pump is not going to be brought back down to stock pressure by the stock ECU. thats not how the pump works. similar in vein to when you install larger injectors on a car. the stock ECU has no way to tell they are larger injectors, so its going to push more fuel per millisecond of time simply by virtue of being a larger injector. standback or not, there will be increased fuel pressure. but why you'd want fuel pressure and no ability or desire to take advantage of it solely for the possibility of a more open throttle doesn't make sense - to me anyways - at the price.

[matsuda]

You can throw 4 pumps together in a series all you like to increase VOLUME, but it will NOT increase pressure. VOLUME is NOT the problem with the MS3 or MS6, its PRESSURE...
I think you have the terms VOLUME and PRESSURE mixed up.

[Fritch]

maybe laloosh can dyno with the bypass for the standback in for one time and then without it. Maybe at the strip as well. That way we could have somewhat of an idea what is going on at stock boost levels in a car without an EMS

[Jays07MS3]

the standback was zeroed out for this run i believe, so it was controlling nothing. laloosh can correct me if thats not true. its a catch 22 - you cant datalog without a standback and if you have a standback suddenly its not an accurate measurement. a larger cam driven pump is not going to be brought back down to stock pressure by the stock ECU. thats not how the pump works. similar in vein to when you install larger injectors on a car. the stock ECU has no way to tell they are larger injectors, so its going to push more fuel per millisecond of time simply by virtue of being a larger injector. standback or not, there will be increased fuel pressure. but why you'd want fuel pressure and no ability or desire to take advantage of it solely for the possibility of a more open throttle doesn't make sense - to me anyways - at the price.

Thanks Ken for taking the time to explain it. And I, by no means, want to buy this pump but leave everything else stock. Trust me, I have the desire to take advantage of many different mods, but unfortunely just not the money :(. I'm just trying to get a feel for which mods I want to get and in which order so I can better budget my $$. This one seems to be a supporting mod which is nice, but I guess I won't be able to take advantage of it until I start upping the boost.

Thanks again.

[matsuda]

a larger cam driven pump is not going to be brought back down to stock pressure by the stock ECU. thats not how the pump works.



With all due respect, I find that hard to believe. Yes, the ECU has no way of knowing that a "larger" pump was installed so it will do what it always does:

It will regulate the fuel pressure by controlling the spill valve and using the fuel pressure sensor for feedback.

Considering that the new fuel pump has the same spill valve control mechanism, I can't imagine why the fuel pressure would change one bit on an otherwise stock MS3.

In fact, if the ECU were unable to control the fuel pressure properly (for example ~400 PSI at idle), it would create a whole new set of problems.

[udontknowjack]

any luck with my fuel pump ken?>

[matsuda]

the standback was zeroed out for this run i believe, so it was controlling nothing.

Regarding the Standback, this is a quote from the CPE website:

Both the air/fuel and timing tables are based on huge 30x30 tables for enhanced tuning resolution. Fueling changes can be accomplished by either scaling the MAF sensor output voltage, or by changing the high-pressure fuel pump duty cycle. This allows very fine changes to fueling, and is unique to the StandbackTM.

This implies that the Standback is directly controlling the HP fuel pump. That would be true even with the Standback tuning parameters "zeroed out".

[Captain KRM P5]

With all due respect, I find that hard to believe. Yes, the ECU has no way of knowing that a "larger" pump was installed so it will do what it always does:

It will regulate the fuel pressure by controlling the spill valve and using the fuel pressure sensor for feedback.

Considering that the new fuel pump has the same spill valve control mechanism, I can't imagine why the fuel pressure would change one bit on an otherwise stock MS3.

In fact, if the ECU were unable to control the fuel pressure properly (for example ~400 PSI at idle), it would create a whole new set of problems.

if the piston and bore is different (which it is), the spill valve alone will not account for that difference. and since the Standback is an interceptor - not a standalone, if the ECU was going to pull fuel in that manner and to that degree it would be attempting to do so with the Standback installed as well. since all Laloosh did was install the pump and drive the car, not make changes to the pressure map, we can ascertain that this is the case. if the ECU was seeing an overtly rich condition, it would alter injector timing before it altered anything else. the pump was installed on a mostly stock ms6 and similar things were experienced - more power to redline, less negative activity from the throttle plate, etc. the car did not have a standback so it is impossible to verify that outside my own word and the owner's good word for that particular car. the best way to try and do this is to have a standback and to zero it out, then datalog it.

yes, Jay's datalog of the more stock vehicle shows no falloff of fuel pressure at stock boost. if mazda had an ounce of sense, the car would not do that by design. what will this pump on the same car? until you have someone to datalog and back up what has already been claimed you cannot rule out the likelihood that there is going to some benefit from having more available pressure.

[Captain KRM P5]

Regarding the Standback, this is a quote from the CPE website:

Both the air/fuel and timing tables are based on huge 30x30 tables for enhanced tuning resolution. Fueling changes can be accomplished by either scaling the MAF sensor output voltage, or by changing the high-pressure fuel pump duty cycle. This allows very fine changes to fueling, and is unique to the StandbackTM.

This implies that the Standback is directly controlling the HP fuel pump. That would be true even with the Standback tuning parameters "zeroed out".

it does not imply that whatsoever. if an interceptor's values are zeroed out it will not make changes to what the stock ECU is doing. a zeroed out interceptor style EMS would make the car run as stock. this is how an interceptor based system works, period. and since Laloosh made no fuel tuning changes when he put the pump in the car, the point is moot from that standpoint as well. the standback is not magically going to decide on its own how much fuel pressure to run. the standback intercepts inputs from onboard sensors and changes those signals going to the stock ECU in order to make tuning changes, but only the changes that the user themselves is going to place into the unit.

[udontknowjack]

....?

[laloosh]

That data has very little meaning without knowing the conditions of exactly how is was obtained.


umm conditions. Car was floored, data was taken. /test conditions. Stock pump was 17psi PG pump was at 18psi.

Btw lol im not running nitrous. All the car has for the last time is a cpe intake a PG prototype turbo back exhaust with a vibrant cat in the dp, cpe ems, PG fuel pump. The car has other mods, like mm, bpv, springs, but that does not alter power.

[cherryspeed]

umm conditions. Car was floored, data was taken. /test conditions. Stock pump was 17psi PG pump was at 18psi.

Btw lol im not running nitrous. All the car has for the last time is a cpe intake a PG prototype turbo back exhaust with a vibrant cat in the dp, cpe ems, PG fuel pump. The car has other mods, like mm, bpv, springs, but that does not alter power.

A few random thoughts..
Let's stop referring to the drag times...to many variables.
Whether you believe this pump is the savior or not, it is clear that there are definitive advantages to running it if you have mods and want to maximize their potential.
Clearly the next month or so should prove very interesting once the dyno's start rolling in.
If I was doing it (again) I would do in this order:
Standback
I/C
TBE
Turbo manifold
Fuel pump
Big turbo

And for what it's worth I think the stock internals will do 350whp just fine, but only time will tell. Mod smart and there should be no problems.

[palerider]

Sweet. Vibrant cat in the downpipe.... all youve got is downpipe and a little more boost than me......and lol... maybe nitrous, Im still not convinced:)

I dont have the standback, but I'll put the pump on at my dyno shop and do before and afters.... the day I get it. I bet it will add HP... noticeable. This whole argument, is the same damn argument I heard before he trapped 111 on snow tires.

I think the damn thing HAS to affect a stock car. It probably would have added almost a second and probably 7-8 trap if hed run it with summer tires. He said he launched at "idle". (Laloosh can confirm)

I just dont think you can question the results because we dont "understand" how it works. Cobb, CPE, Bell..... they have all been trying to figure out the throttle on this car for over a year. I think were one day into stumbling into a partial cure. At this point we need Cobb or CPE to weigh in.

[laloosh]

If i had to do it again it would be
an intake - either cpe or cobb
Fuel Pump - Which ever floats your boat
TBE - Whichever floats your boat
Wait for something that is pnp and picks up stock a/f and knock
Followed by ic/exhaust manifold ect ect

[palerider]

A few random thoughts..
Let's stop referring to the drag times...to many variables.

As opposed to dynos I presume?!!? An experienced driver at a track would argue that the track is the ONLY true way to measure gains.... I would assume if given multiple runs.

And secondly.... the biggest variable was his damn tires. He improved his times on friggin snow tires. How the hell is this something that would warrant us throwing the times out as a measuring stick.

The fact that this was at the track compared to some bogus dyno is what gives it credibility.

[laloosh]

Sweet. Vibrant cat in the downpipe.... all youve got is downpipe and a little more boost than me......and lol... maybe nitrous, Im still not convinced:)

I dont have the standback, but I'll put the pump on at my dyno shop and do before and afters.... the day I get it. I bet it will add HP... noticeable. This whole argument, is the same damn argument I heard before he trapped 111 on snow tires.

I think the damn thing HAS to affect a stock car. It probably would have added almost a second and probably 7-8 trap if hed run it with summer tires. He said he launched at "idle". (Laloosh can confirm)

I just dont think you can question the results because we dont "understand" how it works. Cobb, CPE, Bell..... they have all been trying to figure out the throttle on this car for over a year. I think were one day into stumbling into a partial cure. At this point we need Cobb or CPE to weigh in.

lol im not running nitrous or meth or anything like that. If you want i can take a lil video of my car right now. From tires, to chunks of rubber on my fenders, my track number is still there cause i didnt have time to wash the car, ill pop the hood zoom in on my pos beat up stock intercooler, get up near the cpe intake and go up and down it looking for nozzles, folled by going tot he trubo and zoomin on the dp which has a cat in it. Teh only possible way these time could be messed with was either nitrous or meth, i dont have either. hell many memebers on this site saw my car in person, and have been to the track with me.

[laloosh]

[QUOTE=cherryspeed;3528200]A few random thoughts..
Let's stop referring to the drag times...to many variables.
QUOTE]

As opposed to dynos I presume?!!? An experienced driver at a track would argue that the track is the ONLY true way to measure gains.... I would assume if given multiple runs.

And secondly.... the biggest variable was his damn tires. He improved his times on friggin snow tires. How the hell is this something that would warrant us throwing the times out as a measuring stick.

The fact that this was at the track compared to some bogus dyno is what gives it credibility.

i couldnt agree more. Dynos suck, track numbers is where it as it. Not even the et, but trap speeds. To gain 5mph, you know its doing something right.

[palerider]

Im TOTALLY joking about the nitrous!! Its got to make you proud of your car and runs when it draws so much attention.... Im just trying to goad you a little. We questioned Driver311 when his times were so groundbreaking this fall. Its cool to see the progress.... it gets us off the couch on the new stuff.

Another local MS3 owner came in and hung out at my work this morning and we were both pouring over the board together.... fun stuff.. and tonight I got a fuel pump headed my way!!

And secretly..... NOS:)lol I'll be the first to break into the 11's.... in tire chains to insure traction....lol.

[cherryspeed]

OK, Sorry I wasn't being clear. It was not a generalization but rather an interpretation of this situation. I never said the track results were not an indicator of a gain.My point was that it seems there was other factors at work besides the pump that may OR MAY NOT have affected the end result on the track.
Secondly we should be looking at afr's very closely with this mod. A dyno is a great resource for fuel, timing and afr data. A dyno run that is done first with a baseline without the pump, and one done an hour later with the pump installed could tell us a shit ton more about this mod than running it down a 1/4 mile. Don't get me wrong, the gains are both impressive and exciting, I just think there needs to be more data than a trap speed.
Maybe that's me though.


[QUOTE=palerider;3528213]

i couldnt agree more. Dynos suck, track numbers is where it as it. Not even the et, but trap speeds. To gain 5mph, you know its doing something right.

[laloosh]

some1 wants to pay for my dyno ill be more than happy to go. Untill then my shitty graphs and track times is all your getting(drinks). The 13.4 @ 106 was done 3-4 weeks ago in weather that was colder than the 12.9 @ 111. If anything the weather condition were better on the 13.4 run.

[palerider]

Im gonna get a dyno. And I'll do it just the way you mentioned except without the data logs. Although I'll be able to confirm A/F with my wideband. I dont trust the sniffer at my shop so I bought a couple grand worth of gauges, modules, pod.... lol

Now I can resume the power mods. Install is supposed to be 45 minutes.... it'll probably take me the full hour. AND.... my car is CAI, and essentially catted midpipe right now. Id say that its fairly stock. Ive never had fuel cut anyway.

I'll bet multiple dyno's will be rolling in within a couple weeks. Then we'll see.

[udontknowjack]

no fuel cut till u get full tbe

[laloosh]

new data on page 1

[Kooldino]

Wow, very cool! What did you use to datalog the fuel pressure?

[ATE BALLER]

Bust out your paypal accnt address and ill place money on this right now youngster... I have more experience than your age... (pow). Im glad you have a fluid dynamics book... but i want to introduce you to a guy named " Murphy " and how he can spoil ANY text book equation. You can throw 4 pumps together in a series all you like to increase VOLUME, but it will NOT increase pressure. VOLUME is NOT the problem with the MS3 or MS6, its PRESSURE, which is solely handled by the work of the cam driven high pressure pump on the engine! So you go ahead and wire those pumps in the tank for us, than come back with your results. Ill expect a full apology from your immature, adolescent behavior. Im not willing to take your word on your in-tank solution because i know it doesnt work. Got any before and after datalogs? Didnt think so (blah)

Youngster, that's funny. If you're so experienced old man (pow, back atcha), then you should know that the whole point of increasing pressure is to increase the volume of fuel to enter the cylinder. And if you re-read my post, the pressures stack up when in series as well as the volume AND the rate. The only reason we have such high pressures, is because this motor has a very small window of time to inject the fuel. The concept of upgrading fuel pumps remains the same though; to move MORE fuel into the engine. With this motor, we need to move more fuel in, in about the same amount of time, to get the gains we are working on getting (more fuel). If you are supplying the CDFP with a higher volume than stock, and it is pushing that higher volume at the same pressure, guess what? YOU GET MORE FUEL INTO THE MOTOR!! Mission (damned near) accomplished. Like I said, It's not massive gains, but it is an improvement, and it will help me achieve my own goals with the car. This CDFP is on my list of things to do as well. Before that though, I'm adding a surge tank in the engine bay (if that says anything about my intentions). You wanna know something else? This upgraded CDFP has limitations too (shhh). It can push higher pressures than the stock one, but, you have to remember, it can still only push what is provided to it. Now, on the other hand, upgrading the CDFP will cause it to suck more fuel from the in-tank pump than it is designed to, however, seeing that both our pumps are variations of possitive displacement pumps, I'd be worried about the increased wear on both of thier internals. That happens when you overwork a pump, especially a fuel pump. It's just not the way they are designed to work, that is, unless the PG CDFP is a totally redesigned vacume-styled pump, which is able to utilize suction as well as possitive displacement. I don't believe that is the case. Again, I'm not saying that this is a bad pump, but I am trying to say that somebody WILL max it out at some point, and the only other way to increase the amount of fuel to be delivered at that point, will ultimately be to upgrade the in-tank pump. I never said everyone should do it, or that it is necessary. It is for those who already know that they will be requiring a maximum amount of fuel. I'm doing something called planning ahead. It usually keeps you from messing things up in the future. So, once again, don't flap your wrinkley old gums, until you know what the hell you're talking about.

[laloosh]

Wow, very cool! What did you use to datalog the fuel pressure?

cpe ems

[laloosh]

btw if you max out the pg pump, adding an intank pump would do shit. If your theory was valid, adding a intank pump would help the stock cdfp, which it doesnt.

[Nachtsturm]

i went in at 3169 with me in it and im 6'5 210. So it should be right around hwere yours is. I dont know how accurate the the scale is because the other time it was 3360 with me in lol, weird

Wow is that light!

My car 08 sport, weighed in at 3130 without me in it. And I know this scale to be dead ass accurate. With me in it, it came to 3370.

Really stupid question. How loud is your car right now with the TBE, and solid motor mounts?

Is it getting to the point where it is obnoxious?

[laloosh]

i dont mind it, it passes the gf test. It sounds liek a subi wrx lol

[Haltech]

I think you have the terms VOLUME and PRESSURE mixed up.

Negative... Unless you would like it to be referred to as " Head. "

Volume, an amount of fuel that is pushed by adding two pumps whether parallel or in a series. The volumes pressure, will not increase with 2 pumps. Only volume will ( IE: the amount of fuel being pushed from the tank, through the lines, into the FP regulator, out to the rail and into the injectors.) Adding two pumps in a series or parallel doesnt double the flow, head or volume characteristics of the liquid, but it does increase it by almost 50%.

In a normal forced inducted, fuel injected motor, volume is extremely important as boost taxes the supplied fuel volume. IE: Lightings and Cobras use 2 pumps via Y fitting to add volume to the supply, fuel pressure is not important in that application.

The difference in the MS3/6 application is that volume is adequate for now. Pressure is the problem since this is a direct injected engine. Removing the restricted high pressure pump via cam drive and replacing it with a larger pressure pump, allows more fuel to be sprayed into the engine as boost is increased. This results in a more efficient power making recipe.

Ken pointed out that Mazda obviously engineered the fuel system to meet the demands of the stock spec's with probably no more than +10% overhead ( IE: MS CAI and CBE .) Since this is mazda's first DI engine, im sure they are learning alot, just like we are. Maybe in the future, they will give a little more head room to support more mods from their MS parts. Who knows, but the PG replacement pump does work and its needed for anyone wishing to make 30 - 50%+ power out of their car.

[Haltech]

Youngster, that's funny. If you're so experienced old man (pow, back atcha), then you should know that the whole point of increasing pressure is to increase the volume of fuel to enter the cylinder. And if you re-read my post, the pressures stack up when in series as well as the volume AND the rate. The only reason we have such high pressures, is because this motor has a very small window of time to inject the fuel. The concept of upgrading fuel pumps remains the same though; to move MORE fuel into the engine. With this motor, we need to move more fuel in, in about the same amount of time, to get the gains we are working on getting (more fuel). If you are supplying the CDFP with a higher volume than stock, and it is pushing that higher volume at the same pressure, guess what? YOU GET MORE FUEL INTO THE MOTOR!! Mission (damned near) accomplished. Like I said, It's not massive gains, but it is an improvement, and it will help me achieve my own goals with the car. This CDFP is on my list of things to do as well. Before that though, I'm adding a surge tank in the engine bay (if that says anything about my intentions). You wanna know something else? This upgraded CDFP has limitations too (shhh). It can push higher pressures than the stock one, but, you have to remember, it can still only push what is provided to it. Now, on the other hand, upgrading the CDFP will cause it to suck more fuel from the in-tank pump than it is designed to, however, seeing that both our pumps are variations of possitive displacement pumps, I'd be worried about the increased wear on both of thier internals. That happens when you overwork a pump, especially a fuel pump. It's just not the way they are designed to work, that is, unless the PG CDFP is a totally redesigned vacume-styled pump, which is able to utilize suction as well as possitive displacement. I don't believe that is the case. Again, I'm not saying that this is a bad pump, but I am trying to say that somebody WILL max it out at some point, and the only other way to increase the amount of fuel to be delivered at that point, will ultimately be to upgrade the in-tank pump. I never said everyone should do it, or that it is necessary. It is for those who already know that they will be requiring a maximum amount of fuel. I'm doing something called planning ahead. It usually keeps you from messing things up in the future. So, once again, don't flap your wrinkley old gums, until you know what the hell you're talking about.

You cant increase the fuel pressure little man if you dont have volume to back it up in a fuel injected engine. Now, we are dealing with DIRECT INJECTION, which is a whole different ball game. The entire internals of the PG pump is redesigned and cnc milled replacement if that means anything to you. The only thing left remaining in stock form is the actual fuel pump housing.

And you are right, someone WILL max it out down the road, but that problem can be dealt with much easier than before. Your insight about increasing the volume of the in-tank pump to fix the fuel pressure problem at the engine holds no merit and is NOT the fix for the stock DI pump.

If you would like to plan ahead, build a larger cam driven pump that holds a larger volume of fuel using incoming #AN fittings, larger fuel rail, 3/8 line and a aeromotive inline pump from the tank. Goodluck on that venture and your " book . " You're going to need it (drinks)

[Kooldino]

Haltech - enough with the condescending tone.

The guy has fuel pressure logs, I'm not sure what else you want.

And FWIW, running two pumps inline in a car isn't anything new. People have been doing this for quite some time with good results.

[redrocketz]

The CDFP has a pressure bleed off if it gets too much pressure from the in-tank pump so pushing shit loads of fuel into it that the pump can't do anything with just gets bled back into the tank. The pump is mechanical it can only get soo much fuel into it since your soo smart you should know that you can't compress a liquid so shoving more fuel into the same spot isn't going to work it will get shot right back into your tank.

[ATE BALLER]

btw if you max out the pg pump, adding an intank pump would do shit. If your theory was valid, adding a intank pump would help the stock cdfp, which it doesnt.

I don't see your logic, or how you have tested this. How are you so sure it doesn't increase the potential of the stock CDFP? Considering that I'm the only one that has done this, and that I have seen improvements, I would say it deffinately has an effect on it.


Negative... Unless you would like it to be referred to as " Head. "

Volume, an amount of fuel that is pushed by adding two pumps whether parallel or in a series. The volumes pressure, will not increase with 2 pumps. Only volume will ( IE: the amount of fuel being pushed from the tank, through the lines, into the FP regulator, out to the rail and into the injectors.) Adding two pumps in a series or parallel doesnt double the flow, head or volume characteristics of the liquid, but it does increase it by almost 50%.

In a normal forced inducted, fuel injected motor, volume is extremely important as boost taxes the supplied fuel volume. IE: Lightings and Cobras use 2 pumps via Y fitting to add volume to the supply, fuel pressure is not important in that application.

The difference in the MS3/6 application is that volume is adequate for now. Pressure is the problem since this is a direct injected engine. Removing the restricted high pressure pump via cam drive and replacing it with a larger pressure pump, allows more fuel to be sprayed into the engine as boost is increased. This results in a more efficient power making recipe.

Ken pointed out that Mazda obviously engineered the fuel system to meet the demands of the stock spec's with probably no more than +10% overhead ( IE: MS CAI and CBE .) Since this is mazda's first DI engine, im sure they are learning alot, just like we are. Maybe in the future, they will give a little more head room to support more mods from their MS parts. Who knows, but the PG replacement pump does work and its needed for anyone wishing to make 30 - 50%+ power out of their car.


You cant increase the fuel pressure little man if you dont have volume to back it up in a fuel injected engine. Now, we are dealing with DIRECT INJECTION, which is a whole different ball game. The entire internals of the PG pump is redesigned and cnc milled replacement if that means anything to you. The only thing left remaining in stock form is the actual fuel pump housing.

I'm not sure why you keep deffending the CDFP as I have not disagreed with one statement about it. The only thing I've disagreed with was the statement that upgrading the in-tank fuel pump is a waste of time and money. It clearly isn't. By your reasoning, the CDFP doesn't need an in-tank fuel pump at all. It would be able to feed the motor all the fuel it needs on it's own. If that was the case, Mazda wouldn't have put a pump in the tank at all, let alone a descent Denso unit (the stock one is identical to a denso at least from the outside).


And you are right, someone WILL max it out down the road, but that problem can be dealt with much easier than before. Your insight about increasing the volume of the in-tank pump to fix the fuel pressure problem at the engine holds no merit and is NOT the fix for the stock DI pump.

If you would like to plan ahead, build a larger cam driven pump that holds a larger volume of fuel using incoming #AN fittings, larger fuel rail, 3/8 line and a aeromotive inline pump from the tank. Goodluck on that venture and your " book . " You're going to need it (drinks)

I didn't reset my ecu, so my interpretations of the it's effect aren't false. I'm not making ANY claims about throttle or boost. The hesitation upon tip in...gone. Fuel cut...seems to have subsided. Just this morning, I did a WOT pull from low in 2nd to about half way through 5th, all shifting at 6000 rpm (where I always do when I'm "getting on it"). I also dug out from 2500rpm in 5th gear. I was unable to trigger a fuel cut by either of these "tests", even though it was 24*F outside acording to my ambient temperature display. I used to get fuel cut anywhere between 3000 and 4500 rpm anytime it got below around 60*F (with and without the ATP boost cut eliminator which is now removed). I'm not exactly sure what to make of that, because right after I swaped out the pumps, I would still hit it high in the rpm range, but only until I removed the ATP. I was expecting it to cut out and I was even waiting for it, but it just didn't happen. That's with an intake, a TBE, my E-01 (set to hold 18psi), and the fuel pump. No tuner. I'll try it again at 19psi on my lunch break if you want. I'm not saying I won't ever get fuel cut, because I don't have any data to make such claims, just like you don't have any data to make the claims that you are. I don't have a laptop anymore since it was stolen, but I still have my AE logger, so if anyone around St. Louis/St. Charles MO wants to do a ride along with thier laptop to log at least what it's doing now, I'm game. We could compare those with logs posted of an MS6 with similar mods. I know it's not the same as using pre-fuel pump logs from my own car, but it's all I can offer at the moment and it could give us a vague idea of what is going on. I had plenty of pre-fuel pump logs on my laptop, but like I said, it was stolen.

BTW, adding an in-line pump has the same effect as upgrading the in-tank pump (sending more fuel to the CDFP). So, if upgrading the in-tank pump is a waste of time and money, then so is adding an in-line pump.

All I'm saying is that more data needs to be collected and examined to draw any credible conclusion about the in-tank pump. As it stands right now, I'm the only credible source that has any experience with a better fuel pump in the tank. Others are soon to follow, and I'm sure at least one of them will be doing before and after logs.

Also, if PG or CP-E wants to bench test thier upgrades with stock supply vs. upgraded supply, I'll send them my stock fuel pump to use, then they only have to get a Walbro unit (which I'm sure they can get ahold of for cheap). At the very worst, it'll work as normally, at the very best, it could push thier pump a little farther. No one knows until it's been tested. I've handled the real world, everyday testing, and have come to the conclusion that not only is it operational, but, at least on my car, it has made thing alot smoother. If you need more proof, talk to CP-E or PG about bench testing or wait until someone that can log gets done with it.

[mrlilguy157]

By your reasoning, the CDFP doesn't need an in-tank fuel pump at all. It would be able to feed the motor all the fuel it needs on it's own. If that was the case, Mazda wouldn't have put a pump in the tank at all, let alone a descent Denso unit (the stock one is identical to a denso at least from the outside).

The intank pushes fuel to the camdriven pump, which then pressurizes it and feeds the fuel into the motor. The camdriven pump cant suck fuel from a line from the tank, it needs to have a pump push the fuel to the CDFP/motor from the tank.



I did a WOT pull from low in 2nd to about half way through 5th, all shifting at 6000 rpm (where I always do when I'm "getting on it"). I also dug out from 2500rpm in 5th gear. I was unable to trigger a fuel cut by either of these "tests",



cool



BTW, adding an in-line pump has the same effect as upgrading the in-tank pump (sending more fuel to the CDFP). So, if upgrading the in-tank pump is a waste of time and money, then so is adding an in-line pump.

yup. but i can tell you for sure that if the intank pump ever does need to be replaced (it probably will, but not for anybody's uses as of right now) a walboro 255lph inline will do the job, and will be a much easier install.




All I'm saying is that more data needs to be collected and examined to draw any credible conclusion about the in-tank pump. As it stands right now, I'm the only credible source that has any experience with a better fuel pump in the tank. Others are soon to follow, and I'm sure at least one of them will be doing before and after logs.

Also, if PG or CP-E wants to bench test thier upgrades with stock supply vs. upgraded supply, I'll send them my stock fuel pump to use, then they only have to get a Walbro unit (which I'm sure they can get ahold of for cheap). At the very worst, it'll work as normally, at the very best, it could push thier pump a little farther. No one knows until it's been tested. I've handled the real world, everyday testing, and have come to the conclusion that not only is it operational, but, at least on my car, it has made thing alot smoother. If you need more proof, talk to CP-E or PG about bench testing or wait until someone that can log gets done with it.

indeed this is true too

conclusion: i dont think the intank pump NEEDS to be replaced, but it doesn't hurt anything in doing so. a 255lph walboro inline can be had for about $150. that doesn't hit the wallet too bad and does indeed add more security, which is never a bad thing.

either way, i still dont think it needs it and won't be upgrading it. i would suggest it to the gt35r guys, if they ever arise.

[ATE BALLER]

The CDFP has a pressure bleed off if it gets too much pressure from the in-tank pump so pushing shit loads of fuel into it that the pump can't do anything with just gets bled back into the tank. The pump is mechanical it can only get soo much fuel into it since your soo smart you should know that you can't compress a liquid so shoving more fuel into the same spot isn't going to work it will get shot right back into your tank.

Yes, it sure does most of the time, but during WOT it is pretty much forced to push as much as it's given minus maybe a slight bit that is able to escape at those speeds. Oh, and all fluids can and do get compessed every day (some more than others). That's kind of how our CDFP builds the crazy high pressures it does (assuming it's really pretty much the same as the VW guys'). Fuel enters it's pumps cavity, fuel supply gets closed, fuel is compressed, path to fuel rail opens, fuel flies into the rail. All during one revolution of the cam-shaft. Fuel can compress slightly, but slightly is all we need when you consider how many times per minute this hapens. The other part of the story, is that the pressure regulator at the rail forces any extra fuel back in front of the CDFP (not back to the tank), so by your reasoning, upgrading the CDFP is just as worthless because the fuel rail can't hold any more.

What I think is happening, is since my pump is supplying fuel to the CDFP at a higher pressure/rate/volume, the CDFP cavity fills up faster, alowing it to pressurize inside the cavity before the CDFP starts to pressurize it. If you mechanically pressurize say 65psi of fuel, and then do the same with 100psiof fuel, you will absolutely see more fuel going through the latter system. You guys have a shop with a clean room, so test it. I'll send you my stock in-tank pump, and I'm sure you guys have better ones than that in your own inventory. Hook up one of your CDFPs with the stock in-tank pump feeding it. Log the CDFPs output pressure, rate, and volume. Then do the same with an in-tank pump that is better than the stocker. Are you afraid I might be right, and that people will have cheaper alternative for untuned, bolt-on cars? Man up and take the Walbro challenge, I bet you'll be suprized.

[mrlilguy157]

The CDFP has a pressure bleed off if it gets too much pressure from the in-tank pump so pushing shit loads of fuel into it that the pump can't do anything with just gets bled back into the tank. The pump is mechanical it can only get soo much fuel into it since your soo smart you should know that you can't compress a liquid so shoving more fuel into the same spot isn't going to work it will get shot right back into your tank.


you made me giggle. silly silly.


. Oh, and all fluids can and do get compessed every day (some more than others). That's kind of how our CDFP builds the crazy high pressures it does (assuming it's really pretty much the same as the VW guys').


fuel at 120-130bar is noice ;)

[ATE BALLER]

The intank pushes fuel to the camdriven pump, which then pressurizes it and feeds the fuel into the motor. The camdriven pump cant suck fuel from a line from the tank, it needs to have a pump push the fuel to the CDFP/motor from the tank.

cool

yup. but i can tell you for sure that if the intank pump ever does need to be replaced (it probably will, but not for anybody's uses as of right now) a walboro 255lph inline will do the job, and will be a much easier install.

indeed this is true too

conclusion: i dont think the intank pump NEEDS to be replaced, but it doesn't hurt anything in doing so. a 255lph walboro inline can be had for about $150. that doesn't hit the wallet too bad and does indeed add more security, which is never a bad thing.

either way, i still dont think it needs it and won't be upgrading it. i would suggest it to the gt35r guys, if they ever arise.

Yes, thank you, exactly! At least you are seeing the point I'm tying to get accross. When people start pushing close to 500hp or more, no matter how cool the CDFP you have on the car is, the in-tank pump will not be able to provide the fuel required. I have a feeling that with motors being built and alot of the odds and ends getting panned out, we're going to start seeing some crazy numbers being put down, both on the track and on the dyno.

[mrlilguy157]

Yes, thank you, exactly! At least you are seeing the point I'm tying to get accross. When people start pushing close to 500hp or more, no matter how cool the CDFP you have on the car is, the in-tank pump will not be able to provide the fuel required. I have a feeling that with motors being built and alot of the odds and ends getting panned out, we're going to start seeing some crazy numbers being put down, both on the track and on the dyno.

agreed. i'm glad you and i could both contribute to the community, PG and CP-E for the fueling solution.

[redrocketz]

You can NOT compress a liquid you can only pressurize it. if your theory is correct about compressing liquids then why do so many people throw rods through the side of the block when water gets in the engine? it must be because I am an ill informed moron that doesn't know a damn thing about my profession.

And why don't you man up and buy the CDFP if you think it is going to make your fuel pump soo much better... I have looked at these pumps extensively and have look up how they work quite a bit. I have these cars at my disposal pretty much but until I don't have to use heat guns and knives to install a ghetto rigged intank pump just to possibly gain a few psi on the low end why waste my time.

And this is my personal opinion so take this as you may but I would NEVER start pushing shit loads more fuel into an untuned vehicle all it will do in the loong run is either kill your gas mileage or wash your engine...

[laloosh]

(peep)

[fourthmeal]

Its all about bottlenecks, you guys. The CDFP is certainly a bottleneck, and Laloosh uncorked that issue REAL quick. BRAVO!

Too many people trying to play "King of the Hill" here...lets just get to answers we can all use.

[AutoXRacer]

OK, I started reading the thread and then gave up on page 10...

From what I read, the PG pump upgrade is useless on a stock car with MS CAI...? When does this PG pump mod come in handy? When increasing boost 1, 2, 3 psi...(with full stock exhaust)?

For my personal application, I plan on Xede and thats pretty much it; maybe a new TMIC...along with my MS CAI. I would like to tune the Xede for maximum efficiency while maintaining reliability...so I guess 2-3 LBS of boost over stock...if thats safe. Will the fuel pump come in handy then? Or does it really come down to A/F ratios...?

I'm assuming laloosh didn't upgrade his fuel pump do to fuel leaning out... I'm assuming he did it just becuase...another upgrade?

[laloosh]

i didnt uncork shit, i just bought a part, i had zero invovlment in this or any pump.....lol just to make things clear

[laloosh]

i upgraded my pump because with only i/tbe my car was fuel cutting and fuel pressure was dropping, meaning the car couldnt get the fuel the ecu wanted.

[fourthmeal]

I didn't intend to say that you "uncorked" anything on your own, but your standback data shows the proof and that's what I'm saying. I like the results and look forward to seeing a true solution that other forum members can pursue.

I just wish I had the funds and ability to stay on the cutting edge of innovation like you guys are. Its just not happening at the moment, though. Maybe when I open my own shop as planned in a year.

[MS3-oholic]

Adding a second in-tank pump or even replacing the stock on with a higher flowing on will not make a difference in this car. As stated above, the in-tank pumps only purpose is to send fuel from the tank to the CDFP, which i does in sufficcient volume.

The problem is the CDFPs ability to pressurize the fluel high enough at the volume being demanded by the motor. I worked in a pneumatic and hydraulic repair shop for 4 years and the priciple behind the CDFP is the same as an air or hydraulic pump.

Example: A hydraulic pump may have a max operating pressure of 10,000 psi, but that does'nt mean that it can flow its max volume of fluid at that pressure. The pump can flow 5 gallons a minute at 2,000 psi but will only flow 1 gallon a minute at 10,000 psi.

An air pump can flow 10 CFM at 100 psi, but only 2 CFM at 300 psi.

This is proven by datalogs provided by various members. As the volume demand increases, the pump cannot pressurize the volume to max pressure quickly enough and pressure starts to drop, which is the problem. The pump is still flowing the volume of fuel being damanded by the engine, but not at the correct pressure, so the throttle plate closes decreasing power.

The new internals for the CDFP simply increases the volume the pump is able flow at max pressure. Since datalogs with the CDFP installed shows max pressure holding steady all the way to redline, the in-tank pump, is as of right now, adequate. Once you are heavily modded and the pressure begins to drop or other fueling issues arrive with the upgraded CDFP installed, then maybe an in-tank pump would be the next step.

Hope this makes sense and didn't bore you.

[zoom^3]

great explanation.^^

[redrocketz]

From what I read, the PG pump upgrade is useless on a stock car with MS CAI...? When does this PG pump mod come in handy? When increasing boost 1, 2, 3 psi...(with full stock exhaust)?



there is no proof it is useless on a stock car. certain people believe it would be useless because a standback doing a data log on an ms3 with an intake shows no fuel pressure loss. however, it also shows no fuel pressure increase while load, boost and RPM increase and offers no insight as to what will happen if the car does have more available fuel pressure from a pump like this, even in closer to stock form. mrlilguy's car is closer to stock form than laloosh's is IMHO, and showed improvements which he has oft talked about.

[laloosh]

I dont know why people think they need to be heavily modified to buy this pump. I have two mods. I/TBE, running stock boost in cold temps the car would cut out.

[ATE BALLER]

Same here, and now it doesn't, even with higher boost. I didn't get fuel cut on my lunch break today with the E-01 set to 19psi either btw. If an in-tank fuel pump does nothing, then why is this happening? If anyone knowswhy it would, or could, please tell me. I want to know if it could be a bad thing, however I doubt it because it feels great to drive in the cold now, like it should. Otherwise, I'm going to stay inclined to believe that upgrading the in-tank fuel pump is a useful thing to do.

[driver311]

Same here, and now it doesn't, even with higher boost. I didn't get fuel cut on my lunch break today with the E-01 set to 19psi either btw. If an in-tank fuel pump does nothing, then why is this happening? If anyone knowswhy it would, or could, please tell me. I want to know if it could be a bad thing, however I doubt it because it feels great to drive in the cold now, like it should. Otherwise, I'm going to stay inclined to believe that upgrading the in-tank fuel pump is a useful thing to do.

Everything that everyone has stated above sounds logical. So explain why this guys problems were fixed with an intank pump? Dont need any data logging to tell you that its not fuel cutting anymore.

[ATE BALLER]

And guess what... I just did it again on the way home, though I brought it back down to 18 psi for the turbo's sake, but still. I usually would be getting a fuel cut pushing any more than right around 15psi at these temperatures, especially without the ATP bce on there. Logically speaking, I should be. I don't know why I'm not, but I'm not. All I did is a common thing people do when they need more fuel. Dropped in a Walbro, drilled some holes in the bucket (it doesn't seem like it can hold enough to keep up with with too much of a continueous load at the Walbro's rates), and added 4 baffels in the tank. All together, it took a week of casual work. I've done it before, so I figured "what the hell". It can't hurt anything AFAIK. I'm glad I did, and I'm happy with the results thus far. I think you guys have a little bit more research to do before you go calling me a liar.

Oh yeah, Redrocketz, don't worry. I will be picking up a CDFP first thing in January. Not sure whose yet, but I'm sure there'll be alot of data out by then. That's when I get my bonus, and that'll give me time to run my fuel lines and find a good spot to put my surge tank that won't be in the way of what's to come. You missed the point of the comment you were refering to, though. My point was that since YOU are the one calling BS on me, the burden is on YOU to prove me wrong. You have the equipment to actually test what is going on, I don't. So that's in your court now. If you will actually do this testing, I will GIVE you guys the stock pump to use. Just show what the flow rates are for the stock pump vs. whatever you have on hand that is comparible to the Walbro, then run the lines of each one seperately to a benched CDFP, and test it's values for rate, volume, and pressure. Probably would take less than an hour. That's all I'm suggesting, cause I'm gonna stand by this thing until I hit fuel cut during one of the usual conditions.

[chriscecc914]

I see it like this: Mostly everyone is running a stock motor.

Point 1: The CDFP is a bottleneck for the in-tank fuel pump.
Point 2: Only Replace the in-tank and you still have a bottleneck.
Point 3: Only Replace the CDFP and you can run as much power as the stock internals can handle.
Point 4: Replace both pumps and waste your money because you wont need that much fuel unless your running a significant amount of power which will cause the stock internals to go.

I only find that replacing the intank would be useful if you plan on going forged motor, big turbo, big horsepower. Although, thank you ate baller for testing this out for us for future research.

[Haltech]

Everything that everyone has stated above sounds logical. So explain why this guys problems were fixed with an intank pump? Dont need any data logging to tell you that its not fuel cutting anymore.

What makes you think he even had a problem. Based on his attitude, i think the guy has " other issues " and went the wrong direction with a solution like so many others do on various cars. There's ALWAYS a handful on every forum.

[Haltech]

I see it like this: Mostly everyone is running a stock motor.

Point 1: The CDFP is a bottleneck for the in-tank fuel pump.
Point 2: Only Replace the in-tank and you still have a bottleneck.
Point 3: Only Replace the CDFP and you can run as much power as the stock internals can handle.
Point 4: Replace both pumps and waste your money because you wont need that much fuel unless your running a significant amount of power which will cause the stock internals to go.

I only find that replacing the intank would be useful if you plan on going forged motor, big turbo, big horsepower. Although, thank you ate baller for testing this out for us for future research.

Im taking the stock shortblock as far as its going to go in 2008. I have money set aside for the " Haltech DISI Disaster Fund " so stay tuned.

[driver311]

What makes you think he even had a problem. Based on his attitude, i think the guy has " other issues " and went the wrong direction with a solution like so many others do on various cars. There's ALWAYS a handful on every forum.

I thought he said he was having fuel cut PROBLEMS, and when he installed the pump they went away. Did I read wrong? Im not defending the guy in any way but if it worked it worked!!!!!Someone just prove him wrong if your so sure. I dont know shit, so Im not gonna go either way. LOL

[mrlilguy157]

I thought he said he was having fuel cut PROBLEMS, and when he installed the pump they went away. Did I read wrong? Im not defending the guy in any way but if it worked it worked!!!!!Someone just prove him wrong if your so sure. I dont know shit, so Im not gonna go either way. LOL

the upgraded pumps were originally made to remove fuel cut.

[udontknowjack]

What makes you think he even had a problem. Based on his attitude, i think the guy has " other issues " and went the wrong direction with a solution like so many others do on various cars. There's ALWAYS a handful on every forum.

now we have another guy calling laloosh a liar or he dont know what hes doing....(blarf)

[bacarl]

^^Haltech's not even talking about laloosh. Back on topic perhaps?

There's a great deal of knowledge floating around here, and I think everyone is basically saying the same thing. People just want to say it a little differently: Fourthmeal was spot-on with his "King of the Hill" comment.

As an aside, how does this pump affect daily driving fuel economy -- any effects during normal driving? I wouldn't expect there to be, since fuel will be metered as normal?

[laloosh]

my gas mileage has not changed at all. Its like driving with the stock pump....untill u floor it

[boost_me]

niiiiiiiiiiiiiiice !!

[ZooMIN3]

whew... that was about a goo 45 minutes of reading!! I'll be looking to do a couple of these mods myself soon!

Again, great info Laloosh, I appreciate you getting this done!

-J

[Haltech]

now we have another guy calling laloosh a liar or he dont know what hes doing....(blarf)

(scratch)

I guess people cant follow threads and quotes.

[laloosh]

more "HARD" data for every1 lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3Rlua6r_40

[numbnuts22715]

that thing fucking flies.

so the pg pump doesnt need any sort of ems to control it, correct?
You said everything on your standback is zeroed out, doesnt that mean that it's not really controlling anything, except for boost, with how it is now?
If this has been said before, I apologize. I'm actually going to go back through and look for it as I wait for a response.

[laloosh]

that thing fucking flies.

so the pg pump doesnt need any sort of ems to control it, correct?
You said everything on your standback is zeroed out, doesnt that mean that it's not really controlling anything, except for boost, with how it is now?
If this has been said before, I apologize. I'm actually going to go back through and look for it as I wait for a response.

the ems on my car is nothing mroe than a boost controller

[numbnuts22715]

of course you beat me.
how do you reply so fast?!?

anyway, i just wanna say congrats on everything you've accomplished with your car... running 12's on your shitty(for dry traction) winter tires. Good job.

[laloosh]

thx all.

[Falconx84]

that last video..... I don't think I've seen a speedo climb that fast

[numbnuts22715]

that last video..... I don't think I've seen a speedo climb that fast


it wasnt even climbing, it was just jumping like a motherfucker.
this thing needs better traction.

[laloosh]

it wasnt even climbing, it was just jumping like a motherfucker.
this thing needs better traction.

i think hes talkign about my 30-125 and 30-135 video, not the 10 mph one lol

[Falconx84]

I missed the 10 mph one.....

dammit loosh.... now I have to figure another mod into my budget ;)

[6262MS3]

That vid is awesome! My favorite is how you revved past 6000 and the car didn't fall on it's face, is that a result of the cdfp? It might just fix my biggest gripe with this motor.

[ZooMIN3]

wow 140...crazy fast!

at least it looked like 140!

[Fritch]

hey laloosh, have you driven the car with the Standback bypass plug in? Just curious how, if any, the car will react differently.

[laloosh]

i havnt driven with the plug in, but ive driven on the 15 psi map and everythign was fine. My standback is not tuned, it is doing nothing but adjusting boost.

[Captain KRM P5]

we sent out two more pumps today, can't wait to see other's results

[mrlilguy157]

that thing fucking flies.

so the pg pump doesnt need any sort of ems to control it, correct?
You said everything on your standback is zeroed out, doesnt that mean that it's not really controlling anything, except for boost, with how it is now?
If this has been said before, I apologize. I'm actually going to go back through and look for it as I wait for a response.


hey laloosh, have you driven the car with the Standback bypass plug in? Just curious how, if any, the car will react differently.

i run the PG pump with no EMS whatsoever. my only mods are listed in my sig.

no symptoms, backfiring, richness, boggyness, nothing. just more power ;) (silly)

[fourthmeal]

I wonder if the BCK could be removed now, mrlilguy. What do you think?

[mrlilguy157]

I wonder if the BCK could be removed now, mrlilguy. What do you think?

Possibly, but I wouldn't think so. The function of the BCK is to limit the pressure seen at the MAP sensor on the intake manifold. Although there is more fuel available for the car and more boost can be run safely, I don't think the ECU/PCM parameters actually change the initial clip at 18psi or whatever.

I'm leaving mine on, there is no reason to remove it. I won't be using a CPE standback whatsoever. I'm going with the AEM wideband/truboost electronic boost 'gauge' type controller for a custom panel that is in my car. Using also a turbo timer. Later a short ram intake will come as well as a test pipe, intercooler, and water/meth.

ill be at 350whp no problem, if not more.

[redrocketz]

I doubt you can hit 350whp on a Speed3 without some sort of tuning software especially with the Meth.

If you are using any type of REAL tuning equipment the BCD is more harm than good. I have witnessed this first hand MULTIPLE times.

[laloosh]

i bet you im not to far from 350whp and im not using any type of tuning software...just a boost controller. i/tbe/exhaust manifold/ic/18psi/map clap/fuel pump 350 shouldnt be hard to get...esp if you throw meth on top

[silverspeed03]

When did you get a Manifold?
Is it the one from PG?
Last question, What IC are you using?


Excellent numbers BTW, you are really being the Guinea pig for everyone with a MS3. I think everyone here really appreciates what your doing. Keep up the good work.

[laloosh]

i dont have any off those mods. All the car has is i/tbe/pg fuel pump/ems at 18psi untuned. Stock ic, stock manifold, stock fuel and timing stock turbo...umm stock everything that would make more power.

[clos561]

you should get ur computer tuned before your motor pops laloosh...

[mrlilguy157]

you should get ur computer tuned before your motor pops laloosh...

if a/f is good (which it is), and the ecu isn't pulling a crazy amount of ignition timing then there is no reason the motor would pop. people have been running 18psi for quite awhile now...

[mrlilguy157]

I doubt you can hit 350whp on a Speed3 without some sort of tuning software especially with the Meth.

nah.... 30whp gains are seen with the proper nozzle on water/meth, no tune refined, been there seen that in person. i am sure that with a proper tune for the application even more power would result though.




If you are using any type of REAL tuning equipment the BCD is more harm than good. I have witnessed this first hand MULTIPLE times.

i agree.

[redrocketz]

I'm just going from a personal view on it I don't think with all of that stuff I would recommend running the meth long term without a tune because you want to throw timing in to get the best gains from Meth.

[laloosh]

you should get ur computer tuned before your motor pops laloosh...

my motor is going to pop with i/tbe/18psi? I dunno about that one...especially after the fuel pump where the maf tells the ecu how much fuel it wants

[mrlilguy157]

you want to throw timing in to get the best gains from Meth.

indeed. but with decreased temperatures you'll see less timing pulled initially.

[ATE BALLER]

IIRC, the speed 6 guys have seen the timing advance while meth was being injected. The ECU was doing it on it's own, I believe. I think someone even posted a log of it over on the other forum. This from back before the xede even came out I think, but I still don't think anyone's played around with tuning for it yet. I know the evos love it as is, but you can essentially double it's gains with proper tuning on them. These cars, who knows?

[meha11]

i run the PG pump with no EMS whatsoever. my only mods are listed in my sig.

no symptoms, backfiring, richness, boggyness, nothing. just more power ;) (silly)

Congrats for the pump sucess.
Im interested in how much power you picked up with just the pump, is there any chance of you timing a 60-100 run in 4th or 6th gear then it can be compared to my times below so all can see your real life gains, i just did this to monitor my own gains and eliminate the human factor but it could compare with someone elses car too. (1/4 tank of gas with 2 poeple in car is what i did).

If you think on and have time to do so please post your time.


Cheers.

[cornflaykes]

This is for laloosh and millerguy.

Is there any way to monitor knock with the standback? Or retard the ignition timing? I am not familiar with the standback but a big fan of ebc's/mdc's with atp bck.

And congrats on the 12.9 pass, looks like your time and money is paying off now.




-Benji-

[laloosh]

you can retard or advance timing witht he standback, you can't monitor knock or a/f ratios with it.

[cornflaykes]

Thanks

[mrlilguy157]

Congrats for the pump sucess.
Im interested in how much power you picked up with just the pump, is there any chance of you timing a 60-100 run in 4th or 6th gear then it can be compared to my times below so all can see your real life gains, i just did this to monitor my own gains and eliminate the human factor but it could compare with someone elses car too. (1/4 tank of gas with 2 poeple in car is what i did).

If you think on and have time to do so please post your time.


Cheers.

i'll see what i can do. i'm at school in oklahoma and don't have a video camera up here, but i'll ask around and maybe i can get something done this weekend.



This is for laloosh and millerguy.

Is there any way to monitor knock with the standback? Or retard the ignition timing? I am not familiar with the standback but a big fan of ebc's/mdc's with atp bck.

And congrats on the 12.9 pass, looks like your time and money is paying off now.



Although I don't have a standback, I do know you can retard or advance ignition timing with the standback. I don't think you can look at knock (I think its completely stupid to release a product that is supposed to be a tuning solution yet it can't monitor knock, thats a huge necessity in tuning vehicles), and i guess A/F cannot be monitored either.

Josh Adams told me otherwise though.

[laloosh]

a/f and knock cant be monitored...hence the reason why i dont think the standback is as big of a deal as every1 makes it out to be...maybe im just spoiled by having friends who own kpro

[driver311]

ill wait for something cheaper

[Haltech]

indeed. but with decreased temperatures you'll see less timing pulled initially.

Actually, as the temps decrease, the computer will add timing. This is why more people blow their cars up in winter/spring than in summer and fall. Ive seen Mustangs and Lightnings advance timing more than 8 degrees in weather under 60F. 12 Degrees at 40F. Thats a lot of fricken timing and it doesnt matter what your computer chip was programmed at, the ECU is going to add it anyways. This is the downside of chips compared to a piggybacks.

[Aricjm15]

The factory ECU will not add timing with the addition of meth. There is no sensor after the point of where you should be adding meth for the ecu to see the change.
We dyno tested a Ms6 with meth and it showed almost no gain without tuning.

[Aricjm15]

This is the downside of chips compared to a piggybacks.

All of the current engine management systems for these cars are at the mercy of the stock ecu when it comes to both timing and fuel. If the factory ecu decides to add timing when it is cold it will do so and neither the Xede or Standback can do anything about it.
Neither unit has the ability to change timing or fuel based on outside temperature.

You can tune each unit to pull or add timing at a specific boost and Rpm, but only as a percentage of what the factory ecu is putting in.

Mazda tends to add more fuel in their tunes when it gets cold then timing. Adding more timing when the air is colder/denser is not normally something someone who cares for their motor would do.

[Craighjr]

ill wait for something cheaper

A cheaper tuning solution? Standback is the cheapest?

[cornflaykes]

a/f and knock cant be monitored...hence the reason why i dont think the standback is as big of a deal as every1 makes it out to be...maybe im just spoiled by having friends who own kpro

I agree and K-Pro is the poop!!! K-pro can do it all.

I am going to stick with EBC, BCK, and purchase the turbo xs knock lite..
I just need to figure out if the timing gets advanced when the more fuel is added at higher boost levels.

[Haltech]

The factory ECU will not add timing with the addition of meth. There is no sensor after the point of where you should be adding meth for the ecu to see the change.
We dyno tested a Ms6 with meth and it showed almost no gain without tuning.

So youre telling me that a MS6 had no gains from running meth with cooler air charges? I find that an interesting discovery.

[Haltech]

All of the current engine management systems for these cars are at the mercy of the stock ecu when it comes to both timing and fuel. If the factory ecu decides to add timing when it is cold it will do so and neither the Xede or Standback can do anything about it.
Neither unit has the ability to change timing or fuel based on outside temperature.

You can tune each unit to pull or add timing at a specific boost and Rpm, but only as a percentage of what the factory ecu is putting in.

Mazda tends to add more fuel in their tunes when it gets cold then timing. Adding more timing when the air is colder/denser is not normally something someone who cares for their motor would do.

My experiences with piggybacks are a little different. Generally, you tap the lines and intercept them. The Xede and Standback should be able to control any advanced timing and overide it based on the parameters set in the unit. Have you recorded any datalogs that shows either piggy unit being ignored and the Mazda ECU adding timing anyways? This is actually quite scary if true (boom05)

[Haltech]

I agree and K-Pro is the poop!!! K-pro can do it all.

I am going to stick with EBC, BCK, and purchase the turbo xs knock lite..
I just need to figure out if the timing gets advanced when the more fuel is added at higher boost levels.

Why not purchase the Auto Ingenuitysoftware at RPM (http://www.therpmstore.com/product_info.php?cPath=122&products_id=146) to monitor the motor to see whats actually happening.

[Aricjm15]

It shows almost not gains because "chemical cooling" does not cool the air that much, it is just a means to prevent detonation and is not meant to be anything more. You can read more on Snow performance's website.

Both the Xede and Standback, or any interceptor system for that matter modify signals to the factory ecu to get the result they want. The factory computer then decides how it wants to run the car based off of those signals. This is why the factory computer can still trigger a fuel cut/ignition cut with either system. Like I said before both systems can only change fuel or timing based off of the factory cumputer's output.

The standback and xede change the crank trigger output to get the timing change. This is pre ECU so if the decides to add timing it will.

The Xede changes the signal from the mass airflow to control fuel. This is done pre ecu. If the ecu decides to dump or pull 100% of the fuel it will.
The Standback changes the throttle position sensor signal to control fuel. Same as the Xede if the ecu wants to pull or add fuel it will.

Both systems have trouble tuning at partial throttle because the factory ecu is set to run at 14.7:1. Trying to have either system lean out at partial throttle the ecu will learn around it back to the 14.7 up to a point then will throw a lean code and dump fuel like crazy.

[Haltech]

It shows almost not gains because "chemical cooling" does not cool the air that much, it is just a means to prevent detonation and is not meant to be anything more. You can read more on Snow performance's website.

Both the Xede and Standback, or any interceptor system for that matter modify signals to the factory ecu to get the result they want. The factory computer then decides how it wants to run the car based off of those signals. This is why the factory computer can still trigger a fuel cut/ignition cut with either system. Like I said before both systems can only change fuel or timing based off of the factory cumputer's output.

The standback and xede change the crank trigger output to get the timing change. This is pre ECU so if the decides to add timing it will.

The Xede changes the signal from the mass airflow to control fuel. This is done pre ecu. If the ecu decides to dump or pull 100% of the fuel it will.
The Standback changes the throttle position sensor signal to control fuel. Same as the Xede if the ecu wants to pull or add fuel it will.

Both systems have trouble tuning at partial throttle because the factory ecu is set to run at 14.7:1. Trying to have either system lean out at partial throttle the ecu will learn around it back to the 14.7 up to a point then will throw a lean code and dump fuel like crazy.

Well im quite aware how Methanol works since ive been using it for years on my other vehicles, generally getting between 25-32 hp pre-tune and 55-74 hp after the tune. I just find it odd that the car is showing no gains at all from its use pre-tune.

Looks like neither piggyback is a solution to actually tuning these cars... esp when going larger turbo and needing to dial the tune in,.

[Captain KRM P5]

Well im quite aware how Methanol works since ive been using it for years on my other vehicles, generally getting between 25-32 hp pre-tune and 55-74 hp after the tune. I just find it odd that the car is showing no gains at all from its use pre-tune.

Looks like neither piggyback is a solution to actually tuning these cars... esp when going larger turbo and needing to dial the tune in,.

really the best tuning solution would be a standalone, bar none. then you have absolute control without external interference. you will not pass emissions and you will have to devise your own maps. for every give there is a take.

either piggyback will suffice for most people on these cars i think. once you max out the MAF sensor (5v) you'll need to do something else.

[mrlilguy157]

once you max out the MAF sensor (5v) you'll need to do something else.

couldn't you just get a bigger MAF housing and a sensor calibrated for it?

[Captain KRM P5]

thats plausible, yes

[Craighjr]

thats plausible, yes

Hey Ken I spoke to you the other day about the back ordered Cobb intakes and fuel pumps. Just to clarify if I send my pump to you it is only 349 (or 399) to get it upgraded right. I know I asked about the cheapest pump and you said 750 or something. I also think I would like to buy that Cobb intake but could you measure one thing on it for me beforehand? I would like to know the actual size of the maf housing before I spent more money on intakes that are gunna give me lean codes.

[driver311]

A cheaper tuning solution? Standback is the cheapest?

Its not cheaper than the safc neo i plan on putting on it. I dont see any reason why it wont work. Time will tell. (shady)

[fourthmeal]

Hey Ken I spoke to you the other day about the back ordered Cobb intakes and fuel pumps. Just to clarify if I send my pump to you it is only 349 (or 399) to get it upgraded right. I know I asked about the cheapest pump and you said 750 or something. I also think I would like to buy that Cobb intake but could you measure one thing on it for me beforehand? I would like to know the actual size of the maf housing before I spent more money on intakes that are gunna give me lean codes.

I think you can pose the question on the Cobb Forum for what the MAF housing size is, but if I remember it is exactly as stock.

[Craighjr]

Its not cheaper than the safc neo i plan on putting on it. I dont see any reason why it wont work. Time will tell. (shady)

Ok pay 350-370 for 16 points of fuel adjustment and no timing control.


I think you can pose the question on the Cobb Forum for what the MAF housing size is, but if I remember it is exactly as stock.

Yeah I should. I sort of thought it would be a trade secret thing and Figured If Ken had one he could check it for curosity.

[mrlilguy157]

thats plausible, yes


Cool. I hate to always compare to the VAG world, but when going BT it was always a must t step up from the 1.8t MAF housing and sensor to the VR6 maf, or even the S4 maf - they're an inch bigger in diameter.

[Haltech]

Cool. I hate to always compare to the VAG world, but when going BT it was always a must t step up from the 1.8t MAF housing and sensor to the VR6 maf, or even the S4 maf - they're an inch bigger in diameter.

Jonathon, the diameter isnt the big problem when pegging the meter.. Its the values associated with the sensor itself. You can still mod the sensors calibrations without having to actually increase the size of the meter. Problem is, you need to find someone who can do it. SCt does it on Fords, dont know about the import crowd.

[mrlilguy157]

Jonathon, the diameter isnt the big problem when pegging the meter.. Its the values associated with the sensor itself. You can still mod the sensors calibrations without having to actually increase the size of the meter. Problem is, you need to find someone who can do it. SCt does it on Fords, dont know about the import crowd.

ive already contacted them and they 'aren't doing it for that application at this time'

i was under the impression that a bigger housing calibrated with a different sensor would allow more peak flow of air at the peak voltage.

ie: 60cc of air would read 4.5v on the stock sensor, but on a bigger housing new sensor calibration it would read at 2.5v, and 100cc at 4.5v

those numbers were made up

[driver311]

Ok pay 350-370 for 16 points of fuel adjustment and no timing control.



Yeah I should. I sort of thought it would be a trade secret thing and Figured If Ken had one he could check it for curosity.


$250 fuel control, $60 boost control, $30 mapclamp
So Im $340 into it and the only thing the standback does on top of it is timing. So for $650 more dollars I get timing control and can see the sensors. No afr logging and knock logging. Ill pass. Who says Ill even need timing changed??????

[Captain KRM P5]

Hey Ken I spoke to you the other day about the back ordered Cobb intakes and fuel pumps. Just to clarify if I send my pump to you it is only 349 (or 399) to get it upgraded right. I know I asked about the cheapest pump and you said 750 or something. I also think I would like to buy that Cobb intake but could you measure one thing on it for me beforehand? I would like to know the actual size of the maf housing before I spent more money on intakes that are gunna give me lean codes.

if you send me your pump, yes it is 350. i believe the MAF inlet is 2.5 inches inside diameter.

[laloosh]

(bump)Timing...you dont need to adjust it unless your running a big turbo, and in that case you want to retard it. Advancing timing on the stock turbo is askign for problems once u start pushing some serious power, retarding it is not needed. Hence timing changes being rather useless on this. Driver has the right idea....i wish i was a lil smarter before i spent my money

[Captain KRM P5]

well lets not get exicted. there is no hard proof that the AFC NEO or any SAFC will work with these cars. i believe it will, but before we start preaching the virtues of it lets see some results! i had planned on doing one here but have been too busy to make it happen.

[driver311]

Keep us posted Ken, we appreciate your input. If I get around to it first Ill let you guys know my findings.

[Haltech]

ive already contacted them and they 'aren't doing it for that application at this time'

i was under the impression that a bigger housing calibrated with a different sensor would allow more peak flow of air at the peak voltage.

ie: 60cc of air would read 4.5v on the stock sensor, but on a bigger housing new sensor calibration it would read at 2.5v, and 100cc at 4.5v

those numbers were made up

No, the meters size doesnt need to be increased to change the calibration. Ford changed the Maf from 80mm to 90mm in 2001. They used the same meter in the cobra. When we began pegging the meter at 600hp, SCT came out with recalibrated 90mm meters that support 825hp before pegging. Solved alot of headaches. You can tune around meter pegging but the solution isnt pretty.

[nypest]

you should be if you get a quality boost controller that holds boost steady. BTW im on the stock intercooler, why do poeple think i have all these god damn mods. Power mods are i/tbe with a cat/18psi/fuel pump. Thats it for power, no intercooler, no meth, no exhaust manifold, no tune


Do you have a BCD?

[laloosh]

the ems im using has a voltage map clamp