 |
|
  |
 |
01-21-2005, 12:51 PM
|
#16
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hagerstown, MD
My Ride: 88 sundance
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
$188 is unheard of. List is $176.00. If u really want one i have a brand new one on the shelf, i'll sell for $155 shipped
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-21-2005, 01:31 PM
|
#17
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Whitmore Lake, Michigan
My Ride: Titan & '89 C/S AGS
Engine: 2.5L T1
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 13.873
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by xrattiracer
actually the charge temp sensor does very little. it is mostly just an early warning device that pulls timing if the charge temp exceeds a certain value. use a good intercooler and it will never even get used.
|
  |
In addition to the fuel trim mentioned, on the T2, there is also a table that controls boost based on charge temp. Of course, all it does in stock form is to reduce boost above a certain charge temp. In modified cals, it could be used for other things...
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-21-2005, 07:05 PM
|
#18
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Jacksonville, Fl
My Ride: '88 Shelby Z TII
Engine: 2.2 TII
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 14.284
|
Mentioning the 3D maps and all on the SBECII's, I thought that the SBECS also had 3D maps, but that they weren't of any real use to us? I'm no expert on the matter, just trying to learn.
One last thing...what about the 3.0?? Some of us still beleive there is power to be had in those engines from some tuning with the computer...not to mention a lot of people HATE the speed and rpm limiters. There wouldn't be that large of a market(just being honest), but there are people that are interested...
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-21-2005, 08:03 PM
|
#19
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Dearborn, Michigan
My Ride: 87 Daytona Shelby Z
Engine: 2.5L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 12.130
|
The 90-91 SBEC's are 2D except for the T-III's which have 3D. I don't know about the TBI and V6 SBEC's though.
The V6 motors have been brought to our attention and I'll be looking into them after AZ. I'm going to finish the turbo cals that I still want to develop before really getting into the V6 stuff, but will most likely be able to do speed/RPM limiter shut off jobs rather soon.
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Reaper1
Mentioning the 3D maps and all on the SBECII's, I thought that the SBECS also had 3D maps, but that they weren't of any real use to us? I'm no expert on the matter, just trying to learn.
One last thing...what about the 3.0?? Some of us still beleive there is power to be had in those engines from some tuning with the computer...not to mention a lot of people HATE the speed and rpm limiters. There wouldn't be that large of a market(just being honest), but there are people that are interested...
|
  |
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-21-2005, 09:20 PM
|
#20
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Abbotsford, BC, Canada
My Ride: 1989 Turbo Caravan
Engine: 2.5L 8V Sohc
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 13.400
|
You are the man Paul, can't wait to have my computer,
Why are the TIII maps 3D, because of the extra flow of the 16v head?
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-21-2005, 09:32 PM
|
#21
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PA
My Ride: 88 Shadow
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
Yeah just forget about the super 60 ECU, it sucks. A super 60 doesn't read the O2 sensor at all, and you will run way rich all the time. It's mostly a race-only ECU.
Also, you have a 2.5L, all super 60 ECU's will be for 2.2's.
Go with a cal from TU once paul gets them done. In the mean time save your money to upgrade the turbo, MAP sensor, and fuel injectors. The super 60 is really the only good part about the kit, everything else sucks. The cams were prone to wearing down really fast, I think somewhere between 5000-15000 miles. The intercooler flows better but does not cool as well, and the ECU plain sucks.
I have a TU calibration, and I must say I could not be more pleased. The idle is better than stock, starts fine, runs great, and the fuel curves are dead on. I'm at 1500 EGT's at full boost. I'm anxious to see how it turned out as I had the ECU re-tuned for some more modifications I made but I not worried in the least about it not running good I just want to feel the power difference!!!
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-21-2005, 09:35 PM
|
#22
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PA
My Ride: 88 Shadow
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jdawg
$188 is unheard of. List is $176.00. If u really want one i have a brand new one on the shelf, i'll sell for $155 shipped
|
  |
Shipping is gonna be more than you think, he's in Sweden!
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-21-2005, 11:10 PM
|
#23
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Dearborn, Michigan
My Ride: 87 Daytona Shelby Z
Engine: 2.5L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 12.130
|
Thanks Simon!
While I'm sure it helped out with that combo, Chrysler eventually moved everything up to 3D, I think the T-III was just the test bed, I'm speculating though. The TC Maserati was a 16V that used a 2D cal, it was based off the 89 T-II SMEC calibration even though it was a 90 MY vehicle.
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by turbovanman
You are the man Paul, can't wait to have my computer,
Why are the TIII maps 3D, because of the extra flow of the 16v head?
|
  |
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-21-2005, 11:22 PM
|
#24
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Dearborn, Michigan
My Ride: 87 Daytona Shelby Z
Engine: 2.5L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 12.130
|
Yeah, to rewire a 92 vehicle to use a S-60 ECU would be like putting hubcap spinners on a Bentley! Besides, like moparzrule said, it doesn't run a 2.5L well at all. The only upside would be that you could get the SMEC 3 BAR cals from me or any other vendor to run your car instead of waiting for the SBEC-II cals, you'd be in for some wiring and your body module would be out of commission. I have talked to someone who had a car or van running on 2 computers, I can't remember what combo of computers he had, but one ran the BCM, and the other ran the motor.
Hey Matt, I've seen a few posts where you've given me good feedback like below...Appreciate it man!
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by moparzrule
Yeah just forget about the super 60 ECU, it sucks. A super 60 doesn't read the O2 sensor at all, and you will run way rich all the time. It's mostly a race-only ECU.
Also, you have a 2.5L, all super 60 ECU's will be for 2.2's.
Go with a cal from TU once paul gets them done. In the mean time save your money to upgrade the turbo, MAP sensor, and fuel injectors. The super 60 is really the only good part about the kit, everything else sucks. The cams were prone to wearing down really fast, I think somewhere between 5000-15000 miles. The intercooler flows better but does not cool as well, and the ECU plain sucks.
I have a TU calibration, and I must say I could not be more pleased. The idle is better than stock, starts fine, runs great, and the fuel curves are dead on. I'm at 1500 EGT's at full boost. I'm anxious to see how it turned out as I had the ECU re-tuned for some more modifications I made but I not worried in the least about it not running good I just want to feel the power difference!!!
|
  |
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-22-2005, 08:50 AM
|
#26
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PA
My Ride: 88 Shadow
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bladerunner
I think he was referring the shipping cost to me, and I'm in Houston. I dunno though, he may have been referring the cost to someone else.
|
  |
Oh, I thought he was talking to the original thread starter, my bad!
Paul- Hey it's no problem! I just love to see someone good at there job, and when I see it I talk it up!
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-22-2005, 04:47 PM
|
#27
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Vienna, Austria (EUROPE)
My Ride: '92 Daytona Iroc
Engine: 2.2
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
do it like me, wait till paul has finished SBEC-II 3bar cals and then grab one
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-24-2005, 12:54 AM
|
#28
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sweden
My Ride: -92 Daytona IROC
Engine: 2,5 turbo I
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
How about the -92 computer is there a chargeair tempsensor ?
Do i need moore fuel when intercooling ?
I´ve read that inercooling is a must for boost raise.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-24-2005, 09:40 PM
|
#29
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Dearborn, Michigan
My Ride: 87 Daytona Shelby Z
Engine: 2.5L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 12.130
|
I'm not sure if the 92 T1's had IAT or not, but the 90-91 didn't and my guess would be no. I'll have to look into that when I get going on those cals.
You will need more fuel when intercooling, but most stock ECU's have enough to cover 14 PSI. I've run 14 PSI non intercooled with no extra fuel and had no problems, my friend did the same with an intercooler and had no problems, the factory cals have quite a bit of safty fuel in them, in fact some MP cals actually take a little fuel out at WOT.
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ERACE
How about the -92 computer is there a chargeair tempsensor ?
Do i need moore fuel when intercooling ?
I´ve read that inercooling is a must for boost raise.
|
  |
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-25-2005, 12:20 PM
|
#30
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Vienna, Austria (EUROPE)
My Ride: '92 Daytona Iroc
Engine: 2.2
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
the '92 T1 doesn't have a chargeair temp. sensor.
but i'd like to know how to add the wires to make a chargeair temp sensor work in a '92 (custom calibration)
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
 |
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Quick Nav |
|
» Quick Tech |
|
» Market Place |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|