stock tune afrs okay with 3 port boost solenoid?
Aug 29, 2010, 08:40 PM
#16
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: cali
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tuning
You're right Phil, no boost pill on the car so wastegate duty cycle is at 100 all the way down the table and I know it's not hitting 21psi in stock form. I got the 3 port so the car would hold 21psi all the way to redline without tapering like the stock bcs usually does. Will the stock fuel pump be okay or will I need to upgrade to the walbro?
I picked up a used mines 2.75" downpipe and Hks Racing Cat so I'll be using this setup with the stock midpipe and exhaust.
I picked up a used mines 2.75" downpipe and Hks Racing Cat so I'll be using this setup with the stock midpipe and exhaust.
Aug 30, 2010, 08:12 AM
#19
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: cali
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tuning
you're probably right, I haven't run any logs on this car yet so I'm not sure where it's hitting. If I can get the car to run 21psi with all stock parts and hold it to redline, then I prefer that over any other setup. Do you think running a pill would be better for my car since it would use the stock boost lines?
Aug 30, 2010, 03:52 PM
#20
you're probably right, I haven't run any logs on this car yet so I'm not sure where it's hitting. If I can get the car to run 21psi with all stock parts and hold it to redline, then I prefer that over any other setup. Do you think running a pill would be better for my car since it would use the stock boost lines?
3-port > 2-port, even w/ the pill!
A pill will easily net u your level of boost, tho...
In my opinion, being as though I like to tinker w/ my tune, the GM 3-port was one of the BEST mods Ive done! It allows u to tune the car w/ "direct boost control" , achieves slightly better spool/response, and it holds beter than a 2-port w/ pill.
I can easily hold 22 psi @ 7000k, w/ my stocker. I DONT cause thats out of the efficiency range of the turbo, but just saying, the GM 3-port is tha shizzle!
I was also seeing 25-26psi by 3500, starting @ 25-2700rpm, and can get it to spool a bit sooner if I start sooner, but surges the turbo...
my .02
Aug 31, 2010, 12:11 AM
#21
3-port > 2-port, even w/ the pill!
A pill will easily net u your level of boost, tho...
In my opinion, being as though I like to tinker w/ my tune, the GM 3-port was one of the BEST mods Ive done! It allows u to tune the car w/ "direct boost control" , achieves slightly better spool/response, and it holds beter than a 2-port w/ pill.
I can easily hold 22 psi @ 7000k, w/ my stocker. I DONT cause thats out of the efficiency range of the turbo, but just saying, the GM 3-port is tha shizzle!
I was also seeing 25-26psi by 3500, starting @ 25-2700rpm, and can get it to spool a bit sooner if I start sooner, but surges the turbo...
my .02
A pill will easily net u your level of boost, tho...
In my opinion, being as though I like to tinker w/ my tune, the GM 3-port was one of the BEST mods Ive done! It allows u to tune the car w/ "direct boost control" , achieves slightly better spool/response, and it holds beter than a 2-port w/ pill.
I can easily hold 22 psi @ 7000k, w/ my stocker. I DONT cause thats out of the efficiency range of the turbo, but just saying, the GM 3-port is tha shizzle!
I was also seeing 25-26psi by 3500, starting @ 25-2700rpm, and can get it to spool a bit sooner if I start sooner, but surges the turbo...
my .02
For one it requires less WGDC for hit target boost and just turning up the boost doesn't do crap unless you fix the timing and fuel maps.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
joah1660
Water / Methanol Injection / Nitrous Oxide
17
Sep 19, 2007 01:19 AM
