I just wopped on one of the APS induction kits (K&N down the wing where the resonator used to be). Impressive results high up... (John this really does make a difference!). And rather scary results low down

[img]
http://www.kuba.to/images/Scoobynet/APSvOEM.gif
[/img]

...and that's with a Tek2 so is already richened up!
When they said I didn't realise by 'less than optimal' they meant 'your engine may pop'

Presumably I have a good chance of blowing something up here Time for a Tek3 I think But those of you who actually know what they're talking about, is this going to be OK for a bit (manifold/up-pipe being fitted in a month & I was originally going to get a re-map then) or should I be hanging around for Merv at PE, 8 o'clock tomorrow morning I was wondering as it was mainly at off/low boost, knocking wouldn't be so much of a problem (Delta Dash is actually reporting advance at this point, which I didn't think a MY00 could do!)

Anyways, any ideas? Other than stick the old resonator etc. back in again ?

 

It might make a big difference because it is leaner up top?

I would get that remapped pretty soon. Check it is not showing up the knock signal and the knock retard is not excessive. Would be worth getting Merv to listen with det cans too when setting up and driving it carefully until then.

 

I'm just wondering, why does this "lean-ness" occur? If the changes are made upstream of the MAF sensor, shouldn't the MAF sensor be able to compensate for increased air flow (and command more fuel)?

 

Ta John.
Nothing coming up on the knock sensor, but I only have the OEM jobbie to rely on. Maybe time for a real one
It does look leaner up top, yup, but OK lean rather than nuts (as in any other car would, I imagine, call it rather over-fueled). But I suppose it would make a difference!

It runs lean rather than compensating 'cos it's running from the ecu map which can't cope with the mod. I think So the map needs to be adjusted to cope! Very soon, as well...

 

0.84V at 4000 RPM after compared with 0.89V before suggests to me it is TOO lean without water injection. 0.84 suggests about 5% CO or 13:1. If it doesn't det and runs this at the peak power point, then it could have added 20 BHP, but it too near to the edge for my liking.

Most think that the MAF sensor with some induction kits under-reads the amount of air because things are less turbulent.

Come in Mr WREXY... perhaps you will be looking to copy Nom's map.

 

I think that the long tubular nature of the APS kit may lead to some induction pulsing issues. I think the filter on a long tube idea is rather flawed, and would much rather have short tube with cold air feed.

Edited as now I realize this is lambda voltage!

Paul

[Edited by Pavlo - 7/14/2002 3:07:10 PM]

 

I CAN"T BELIEVE THIS. LAST MINUTE INFO BEFORE SURGERY YOU LITTLE RIPPER!

Exactly the same problem I had. Mine was a tad richer but I have the stock ECU whereas Nom has the Tek 2.

I'm with Beastie and we were about to remove the APS to see if it is the cause of my leaner running but we jumped on here first and to our surprise we found this thread.

Nom, thankyou very much. You have made my work easier. Not only do I know the Tek 2 would not solve my problem, you saved me some work, ie removing the thing and a copy of your map will definately help me. Top stuff!

Beastie and I can enjoy our super cold beers in the 38 degree heat instead and we'll just wait for the map instead.

Here's that thread I had started with my lean running

http://www.scoobynet.co.uk/bbs/threa...ThreadID=92839

And here's another.

http://www.scoobynet.co.uk/bbs/threa...hreadID=102042

 

Good to see that I've been some use

Now let's see if Merv can be more...

 

Agree!

Cheers,

Wrexy.

 

Nom,

This fits in exactly in to what Stephen Done had found out, and ... what I am seeing.

I still have to DeltaDash the bugger, but it would seem that with my new induction kit (Pipercross now on the shelves next to the other umpteen items) the MAF does underread - but not by much. However, I want to have my map redone before going on a track.

What I'm not seeing is the < 3.500 RPM leanness, but I am seeing 0.85 volts with a hot car... still not safe enough to my liking.

The car does pull better from about 5000 RPM, and the kit I am using seems to be MAF friendly (I'll probably eat my words shortly ), but it definately needs some richening here and there.

Wrexy, I am really curious of the outcome of you removing the APS. But I'm still not sure, as if I remember correctly, your MAF readings seemed to be OK, but the injector duty cycles seemed low.

Let us know anyway !

Theo

 

My 02 readings were identical to Nom's right through the rev range but 0.02 volts richer. This is because the stock ECU runs richer than the Tek 2. The pattern was also exactly the same as Nom's through the rev range. I don't want to remove the APS kit, cos 1, Beastie left and I won't have his help, 2 it's quite a bit of work and 3 it's too hot to work in this weather. 40 deg tomorrow and 42 on Tuesday. So I'm looking for the easy way if possible.

The easy way to find out is if Nom could provide us with his injector duty cycles to compare with mine.

Nom, please m8?

Cheers,

Wrexy.

[Edited by WREXY - 7/15/2002 12:19:30 AM]

 

Yeah, right.
Well, you're in luck - I brought my laptop in today. Give me a few minutes & I'll upload the log.

 

OK, I've put them here - the run was in 3rd as I'd have run out of road in any other gear (well, I did anyway ) but there's enough there to be getting on with.

 

Cheers Nom.

I will look at it now. I too have done a run identical to yours in third, which is perfect for comparison

Regards,

Wrexy.

 

This has been covered a few times before - after the 1st few we sold we realsied these caused lean running and always mentioned this to potential purchasers.

Most went on cars with Link or Unichip already fitted so a simple remap was all that was needed.

Scott bought an HKS fuel adjuster and this sorted him out.

In one of the original posts I think APS put up a graph showing exactly why it caused the lean running.....

You WILL need to get the fuelling sorted.

 

I think they need to re-word their 'warning' a tad - Obviously it's going to lean it out, but 'some' was my thought rather than 'totally' . 'Less than optimal results', they say; hmm, yes...

 

And any geniuses out there - why is there 'positive knock correction' when at the very lean spot(!) um, area, especially when I thought that the MY00 couldn't actually do this... Or is it plain & simple just going nuts?

 

Tom - I'll have a word with David at APS and see what he says on this.

APS always maintain that the APS HFA should only be fitted in conjunction with a Unichip or other ECU remap.

Funnily enough when trying out another manufacturers so called cold air kit a few weeks back I experienced the same problems although that particular item increased inlet temperatures also which doesnt help!

It is very interesting to be involved so please keep me informed with how it goes. APS and JW Racing are keen to see exactly what people are doing to their cars, and if we can help in any way we will.

Speak to you soon Tom!

Jamie

www.j-w-racing.com

 

Yes the AE800-802 do advance typically up to 1 degree in (in)appropriate circumstances

 

Here are my logs,




And here are Nom's,



Since Nom got to 4700rpm I chopped mine so compare up to 4700.
What do the techies think?

Cheers,

Wrexy.

 

What I'm trying to do is to compare both cars from 3900 to 4700rpm with the APS kit.

Cheers,

Wrexy.

 

Other than questioning the 'appropriate' use of advance , it's advancing 2 degrees rather than the 'maximum' of one... and seeming that it's advancing (which it's never done before) I presume that it isn't currently in the progress of destroying the engine? (still getting it remapped ASAP, Merv away for a long weekend at the moment though ) From my understanding of engine goings-one, it should be retarding rather than advancing there if there's a fueling problem. However, my knowledge is somewhat, err, somewhat.

 

Wrexy - can't see the images
Is it just me or does anyone else have problems accessing the 'turbosport' site from some connections? I just get one of those friendly little red crosses in the browser or the ever-helpful 'internal server error 500' if I try & access directly...
Could you mail'em to me?

 

From my limited understanding the APS kit would reduce intake temps therefore getting either no knock correction, like my car, or advance like Nom's. My run was done in thirty degree heat and there was no knock correction. The APS may cause the engine to run leaner than normal but not fully lean which is probably still OK but not to be left like this for too long. I have run my car like this for two years and had no idea I was running this lean untill I got Delta Dash a couple of months ago. The engine has lasted. Not saying it's safe though.

Cheers,

Wrexy.

[Edited by WREXY - 7/15/2002 12:29:15 PM]

 

Nom,

I can see them. What about anyone else?

 

I can see them, and yes the APS HFA does reduce inlet temps significantly.

Whereas standard induction kits increase temps by staggering amounts. + 15 degrees c on average compared to the standard airbox in some cases!!!

 

Nom,

I have e mailed the pics to you.



Cheers Jamie! I thought they did reduce intake temps.

Wrexy.

 

Thanks for the pics!
I'm pleased to here that you've had the thing on for 2 years with no problems Wish I had an inlet-temperature thingy so I could check on that. Difficult to see where I can cram another dial on... Where is the inlet temperature measured from anyway?

 

I measured the inlet temp through my Tectom monitor which plugs into the select monitor port under the dash.

 

The non STi my99/00 JECS doesn't read inlet temperature - the STi imports do I think, but I believe this is pre-turbo temperature, making it 'not ideal'....and I've no idea how it uses the information Best temperature reading is post intercooler - this is ultimately the charge temp. that gets to the cylinder.

The JECS mainly uses the MAF sensor input against load to make fuelling decisions - your APS means the MAF is reading artifically low, so the ECU provides less fuel.

Equally, timing is probably being advanced because the ECU thinks you got high load but low airflow - it's not detecting knock, so it advances the timing.

As mentioned above, I'd monitor this very closely until sorted - can the factory knock sensor pick up knock at low revs even?

It would be interesting to understand exactly why this is happening, and the best way of fixing it. While I guess (think I read on another post!) that the MAF can be rescaled, it's probably better to identify the source issue with airflow past the MAF (it can't be air-temp related, as removing the resonator gives a similar inlet temp) and correct that.

Is the air too smooth, too disrupted, too slow or too fast?! Anyone tried removing the MAF mesh to see what effect it has?

Richard