MR Turco

iTrader: (16)

Anyone have advice on torquing it down? I made it pretty tight but am not sure what might be too much. 40ft/lbs maybe?

some pics:



Drilled and tapped:

laramie_05MR

iTrader: (20)

i would say more like 20 ft/lbs. but I'm not for certain. If I was at work I'd look it up in Alldata. I'll ask my buddy with a T/A. Coming from working on Mercedes 54nM is a lot of torque for a sensor.

cij911

iTrader: (14)

So what are people seeing for true IATs?

mrfred

iTrader: (50)

During daily driving, MAT = IAT. In WOT 3rd gear pulls, MAT will rise up 10-20 deg higher than IAT, depending on the intercooler used.

tephra

iTrader: (6)

really?

my MAT is a lot higher that IAT and only comes down when doing a pull.

Maybe I am getting some heatsoak into the sensor.

ie highway driving my IAT is 22 degC but my MAT is between 37 and 50 degC depending on throttle/load.

mrfred

iTrader: (50)

Yeah, even on the stock IC, my MAT reading would almost exactly match the IAT reading as long as the car was moving along, except perhaps in really hot weather (35C+ day time temps).

Could be due to sensor placement. Mine is in the UICP. Yours is in the IM.

tephra

iTrader: (6)

well that's a bit worrying - its not a true representation of the temp then...

mrfred

iTrader: (50)

Yours may be a better representation. The IM carries away heat from the head and the t-body gets heated by the engine coolant.

MR Turco

iTrader: (16)

I just got this working tonight. I did put a thermal barrier gasket but i will report back when i have some more info.

tephra

iTrader: (6)

lol - great minds huh?

Which Thermal B did you go for? Agency Power, Magnus or Hondata, or another??

I was thinking of doing that as well... pretty cheap (cost wise)

MR Turco

iTrader: (16)

I got the hondata but i know someone with the magnus and bot seem fine. I really bought it becuase it is reusable where the stock one isn't. I have to say the IM is definitely a big pain to take off mainly due to the support bracket.

l2r99gst

iTrader: (2)

My observations go along with mrfred, but I as well have my sensor in the UICP.

I would think that the temp in the UICP would be a better representation of true temps because if the IM is heat soaked, it will create a boundary layer of air that is artificially higher in temperature than the rest of the air in the volume of the IM. For example, if you graphed the temp of air right at the interface of the IM metal to the center of the IM, it would start higer, then curve down to the actual temp.

So, what tephra is seeing may be the misrepresentation of the true intake temps due to the sensor reading this heatsoaked layer. That's just my opinion.

tephra

iTrader: (6)

well basically:

UICP: more accurate measurement of post IC airtemp, less prone to HS as UICP is thin and will change temp easier

IM: more accurate measurement of actual temps (ie TB coolant) however much more prone to HS as IM is thick+touching head

if Mikes test of the temp reducer gasket works then I think that would be a go-er.

Mike can you also test blocking off the TB coolant? (Maybe in the US you guys need this, but here in Australia temps RARELY go below 10degC

MR Turco

iTrader: (16)

Yeah i can test that. At the moment the outside temps are in the <20F so it might not be until it warms up a bit more.

Evoryder

iTrader: (55)

updates on other roms.