Engine Question (Again!)

General FTO discussion only

Moderator: Moderators

Engine Question (Again!)

Postby rsg » Sun Jan 09, 2005 11:51 pm

Hi People.

Hope you all had a good Christmas & New Year. Anyway, I've got another enquiry regarding my 93BHP GR engine.

I've heard of people advancing and retarding timing and different altitudes for performance reason and since I am about 2km above sea level, is there no need to retard/advance the timing for my car to perform correctly because someone mentioned this to me and I thought I might look into it? Just something that crossed my mind.

After clearing the ECU, also turns out there are no error codes so now I'm looking in other places. I may have finally found a decent mechanic that is going to have a look at the car this week if all goes well with my time schedule!

Anyone know about this timing story?

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby rsg » Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:14 pm

Is there really no one that can help me with this?

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby kevinod » Wed Jan 12, 2005 12:24 am

I'm afraid I can't help you on that myself... do the guys who said they've done it say whether it made much difference?

Kev.
Steel Silver manual GR (95 C)
User avatar
kevinod
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 3336
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: Cork

Postby rsg » Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:36 am

Apparently it does make quite a significant difference, but then again who knows? I suppose I'll have to find out for myself from a mech.

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Engine Question (Again!)

Postby Myfeckin FTO » Wed Jan 12, 2005 11:45 am

rsg wrote:I've heard of people advancing and retarding timing and different altitudes for performance reason and since I am about 2km above sea level, is there no need to retard/advance the timing for my car to perform correctly because someone mentioned this to me and I thought I might look into it? Just something that crossed my mind...Anyone know about this timing story?raf


Raf - The FTO ECU can adapt to different fuel types and air ratios so I doubt that you'll see any significant increases here.

Is it possible that the cambelt is out a tooth or 10.
AFAIK the ECU would adjust dramatically for this in order to avoid damaging the engine - you may be driving around on a "safe mode".

I get the feeling you need to see a Mitsubishi main dealer as with this kind of power loss you would think any of the "mechanics" you have been to would be able to diagnose the problem.
Image
User avatar
Myfeckin FTO
Forever Ticking Over
Forever Ticking Over
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Clare/Limerick

Postby rsg » Wed Jan 12, 2005 3:03 pm

I think you're right, but I've only been to one mech. Anyway, I'll have a look around and see if I can find a mitsu dealer that can help me.

thanks

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Engine Question (Again!)

Postby CJ » Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:51 pm

Myfeckin FTO wrote:Is it possible that the cambelt is out a tooth or 10.
AFAIK the ECU would adjust dramatically for this in order to avoid damaging the engine - you may be driving around on a "safe mode"


Agreed on this point, the last cambelt change might have been a duffer, definetly get it checked out. If you havn't dome so already, hook it up to a MUT-II or output the diagnostic codes yourself.

As regards altitude, theres definetly going to be less oxygen available so you should invest in a cold air induction system. Related links:

http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/67678/

http://www.pagewise.com/how-turbochargers-work-auto.htm

http://www.cartalk.com/content/columns/ ... er/05.html

CJ
User avatar
CJ
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9083
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 4:44 pm
Location: Dublin 15

Postby rsg » Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:06 am

Thanks for the info and links CJ. I've done a self-diagnostic on the car and there are no errors.

Also, even before the cambelt change, the car was slow. Maybe timing was off both times? Who knows.

Already got another air filter, just want piping and maybe something along the lines of this.

http://www.ftoaustralia.com/modules.php ... FTO&page=4

6kw proven for an auto FTO, sounds decent for just changing the pipe. Also maybe look into that device for covering the air filter. Only thing is they have the piping only for mivec engines for now. Just a bit pricy.

Though I was thinking, since my chip now replaced my air flow meter, I could just remove it? Yes/No/Maybe? The car runs better with the chip thats for sure and the airflow meter must restrict airflow a little bit I'm sure.

One more question, what are your guys views on these Samco hoses for the fto? Worth looking into?

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Engine Question (Again!)

Postby soc » Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:51 pm

rsg wrote:Hi People.

Hope you all had a good Christmas & New Year. Anyway, I've got another enquiry regarding my 93BHP GR engine.

raf



Man there has got to be something wrong with your car or the dyno you ran it on - 93bhp from a GR is just too low to be right. Even at the wheels the GR should be putting out around 130bhp (allowing for approx 20% transmission loss)....
soc
Forever Ticking Over
Forever Ticking Over
 
Posts: 2465
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 1:05 pm


Return to General FTO Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron