a mate was tellin me that on his lancer forum they proved that on a dyno a mirage was gettin an extra 3-4 kw atw with the resonators on thus givin more volume for better responce.

probably wouldnt feel this to drive but it dose make sence. what do you think?????

are you talking about the little tube that runs (nowhere - dead end so to speak) off the intake plumbing between the airbox and throttle body?

i asked what these where for on a 5L V8 a while ago - its main use apparently, is just to help keep the noise down a little?
cant remember too well though.


if thats the part your talking about - i wouldnt have thought it make *that* much difference in power, might be pulling your leg a little on that one.... (if thats the same thing as what im talking about?)

They help with innitial response, its like an air reserve when you put your foot down

No, they dont.

They are sealed helmholtz (IIRC) resonators that are used to reduce intake noise.

No, they dont.

They are sealed helmholtz (IIRC) resonators that are used to reduce intake noise.

thats why some people on here remove them and cover the holes with spice jar lids :) you get a cool sound when you put the boot in.

Hmmm... I'm removing mine and replacing with welch plugs, gives you somewhere solid to mount water injection nozzles to.

Hmmm... I'm removing mine and replacing with welch plugs, gives you somewhere solid to mount water injection nozzles to.

Nice Thinking!!

Be good for your Blower!

So what i gather it will NOT affect performance?

So the only reson MMA put these reonators on is for noise? :nuts:

Throttle respose will not be affected?:confused:

Hot 4s did a write up on this a few years back, i'll check the issue when i get home. cant remeber what car they used, obviously a 4 banger, but they showed on the dyno that the intake resonators do make a difference. anyone who had removed them will tell you they change the sound and increase induction noise but appartently they also make a difference in power.

from memory they tried it a few different ways. no resonator, the standard one, a coke bottle and an oil bottle to see if the volume made a difference. if i recall the coke bottle won lol ...cheepest mod ever!!!

Hahahaha

You will end up with more torque if you leave them on... Trust me, I put my stock inlet pipe and resonators back on and it made a difference. Who would have thought that millions spent in engineering would make a difference :nuts:

Who would have thought that millions spent in engineering would make a difference :nuts:

hahaha good call!
:bowrofl:

yeah he also told my about the coke and oil bottel must have bin from the same sorce on his forum!

I remember seeing them on my old motorcross bikes.. in between the carby and the crank case. it was like a Air/fuel mix ready to be sucked in when you crack the throttle.


I could see that less volume in the inlet tract would mean the air flow sensor would be prone to getting larger pulses from the motor and cause a fluctuating reading to the ecu.
Meaning an unsteady supply of fuel though the injector pulses.

Am i out of play here?

A perfect example is my Land Cruiser. With the snorkle fitted, it gets a very anoying anoying sound like an exhaust leak though the intake to the filter at about 1200rpm labouring.

They can't help make power, they are simply for noise suppresion

On our cars they really do nothing, besides reduce induction noise. So pull them off if you like the sound, but you are kidding yourself if you think you're getting more power. I recall a member here actually did back-to-back dyno runs with and without the resonators, and the difference was only like 2 hp, which is about the margin of error between runs.

I've mucked around pulling them on and off, as I use to like the noise sometimes and then get sick of it other times. Once I got a loud exhaust I couldn't hear any intake noise difference anyway, though I left them off cos I can't be bothered putting them back.

Will have to start selling coke bottles on ebay. Someone might buy them for a performance mod. lol I wonder if Red Bull will do the job better.

Regards

Will have to start selling coke bottles on ebay. Someone might buy them for a performance mod. lol I wonder if Red Bull will do the job better.

Regards
I heard alcohol fueled cars are pretty fast... Jagerbomb plugs for my resonators now... Alcohol from the Jagermeister and the fact that red bull gives you wings will make my car go super fast bro

I remember seeing them on my old motorcross bikes.. in between the carby and the crank case. it was like a Air/fuel mix ready to be sucked in when you crack the throttle.

I could see that less volume in the inlet tract would mean the air flow sensor would be prone to getting larger pulses from the motor and cause a fluctuating reading to the ecu.
Meaning an unsteady supply of fuel though the injector pulses.

Am i out of play here?


Hi Trotty
You are on the money

The Magna’s vortex MAF is very sensitive to fluctuating intake pulses, especially the higher – flowing 24 Valve 3.5L, and there are a number of devices to make the air flow as smooth as possible

1. the wide, narrow intake snorkel to provide smooth laminar flow at the entry point
2. the small resonator on the intake to the air-box
3. the folded laminar air filter
4. the air-straightening mesh on the MAF
5. upper resonator between the MAF and the TB, and
6. lower ‘’ ‘’

On my TJ2 - 2 & 6 were removed at factory
Replacing 6 definitely improved the vibration at idle, but it is more noticeable if you electrically fix the synchronization problem in the 3rd Gen V6 with a correctly designed earthing kit

Also, for those who replace their muffler/exhaust with hi-flowing ones, this also has an effect on the MAF, so you can see how important smoothing devices are
If you have done this, don’t let the DROP in performance and the droning make you search for a “better” exhaust - get the air-fuel ratios fixed first

Cheers, Barry

Also, for those who replace their muffler/exhaust with hi-flowing ones, this also has an effect on the MAF, so you can see how important smoothing devices are
If you have done this, don’t let the DROP in performance and the droning make you search for a “better” exhaust - get the air-fuel ratios fixed first

Cheers, Barry

Care to elaborate?

Care to elaborate?


I think the book is called Cars for DUMBie's.... Even my missus could understand what barry said....

I think the book is called Cars for DUMBie's.... Even my missus could understand what barry said....

Tell me then... how a muffler affects an air flow sensor... because i dont understand what all you smart people are talking about.

It changes the flow characteristics of the engine, moving it further away from the ORIGINAL tune for the car.... causing leanouts, and or rich mixtures.

Yes the MAF just reads the air entered, but if it pulses, it will give irratic readings to the ECU, causing misfires?

Care to elaborate?


Hi Firestorm

TJ2 t/tronic auto tx

When I fitted a Lukey sports muffler, I expected there to be an improvement in performance and a healthy ‘growl’ as advertised by the makers

Instead, there was loud droning and a noticeable LOSS in acceleration
I fitted a K&N high–flow air filter but it was worse for accelerating than before, especially between off-idle and ~2500 rpm

I left the muffler on while I went ahead with improving the intake, but the exhaust sound did not get any better

This appeared to be partly due to un-burned exhaust gasses continuing to burn along the exhaust pipe and resonating under the cabin

One of the symptoms of the droning was large throttle openings ie accelerating up a hill as compared to say cruising

Anyway, long story short the Fuel rail tuning kit improved THE COMBUSTION and THE AIR-FUEL RATIOS, so that now the fuel charge was being used more for driving the pistons than escaping out the exhaust, and large throttle angles were now not so critical

After ~ 250 Km the droning reduced and I could now hear that growl coming through

Further advances came when I was looking into improving the rough idle and discovered that there was an imbalance between cylinders

Correct cylinder synch. mostly fixed that, and now it is a much better car to drive, when climbing hills, and even when idling at an indicated 650 rpm it will pull itself up a slight incline (A t/t Auto Tx remember)

Cheers, Barry

Anyway, long story short the Fuel rail tuning kit improved THE COMBUSTION and THE AIR-FUEL RATIOS, so that now the fuel charge was being used more for driving the pistons than escaping out the exhaust, and large throttle angles were now not so critical

Cheers, Barry
Call me a skeptic but do you have any dyno results or proof showing this at all? I haven't seen anything posted anywhere here on AMC...

Cheers for the reply Barry.









It changes the flow characteristics of the engine, moving it further away from the ORIGINAL tune for the car.... causing leanouts, and or rich mixtures.

Yes the MAF just reads the air entered, but if it pulses, it will give irratic readings to the ECU, causing misfires?

What the exhaust affects, is the amount of spent combustion gasses that remain in the combustion chamber over the next cycle - and how much enery the engine must waste to move these gases out of the cylinder. It does not change throttle position, and hence does not show the air flow meter that more air is being drawn into the engine, because more air isnt being drawn in (remember its NOT forced induction here).

The problem is that it does not affect the MAF in any way.. there is now less leftover post combustion gases in the chamber to mix with the incoming fresh inlet mixture, and so the overall chamber mixture will be richer. The MAF doesnt know this, and so will not lean out the fuelling.


How is a muffler going to create pulsing in the intake charge?

Call me a skeptic but do you have any dyno results or proof showing this at all? I haven't seen anything posted anywhere here on AMC...

I'm not complaining here.. but thats what i've been waiting to see too mate. Some consistent dyno runs with matching stoichiometric readings.

Posted by Firestorm

What the exhaust affects, is the amount of spent combustion gasses that remain in the combustion chamber over the next cycle - and how much enery the engine must waste to move these gases out of the cylinder. It does not change throttle position, and hence does not show the air flow meter that more air is being drawn into the engine, because more air isnt being drawn in (remember its NOT forced induction here).

The problem is that it does not affect the MAF in any way.. there is now less leftover post combustion gases in the chamber to mix with the incoming fresh inlet mixture, and so the overall chamber mixture will be richer. The MAF doesnt know this, and so will not lean out the fuelling.

How is a muffler going to create pulsing in the intake charge?

The standard tri-flow muffler is very good (in conjunction with the smoothing devices already mentioned) at keeping unwanted air pulses to a low level - but the VORTEX MAF is very sensitive to pulses ( remember this is how it works in the first place)!

You will find that even though they are at opposite ends of the breathing system, the hi-flow muffler will affect the MAF physically, and that will send the ECU unwanted signals

So, the message is 'restore the air-fuel ratios' before trying other mufflers

This can be by extra ECU management, or by fuel rail temp tuning


It does not change throttle position, and hence does not show the air flow meter that more air is being drawn into the engine, because more air isnt being drawn in (remember its NOT forced induction here).

Actually, it does - if you realise that you now need to press further on the pedal to attain the ground speed that you would have had - had you not reduced the performance by fitting the hi-flow muffler in the first place - Phew! - WAM

There is a lot to say for your comments in terms of conventional theory, but believe me, there a world of difference between the 3rd Gen V6 and engines like your 2.6L straight four

The 3G has the closed loop ECU control, where virtually any changes made are compensated for, by oscillating quickly between rich and lean, whereas yours has an EGO output that more simply monitors and adjusts feedback in small increments - and in a linear pattern!

Believe me - I know - I had a 2.6L before the TJ2 and used the exact same EGO monitor for both

Cheers, Barry

Actually, it does - if you realise that you now need to press further on the pedal to attain the ground speed that you would have had - had you not reduced the performance by fitting the hi-flow muffler in the first place - Phew! - WAM

[/COLOR]

So your claiming that you lost performance, when Mitsubishi gained 8kw by fitting a hi flow muffler?

Edit: Wait, are you talking about something above and beyond the muffler fitted to Sports / VR-X, etc? Or the Exec spec one?

Call me a skeptic but do you have any dyno results or proof showing this at all? I haven't seen anything posted anywhere here on AMC...

Hi type40

This question has come up before

Apart from the expense, dynos will not show up improvements like quick throttle response, an auto t/t gearbox that changes when it should, a clean exhaust that shows reduced EGR deposits...

and a dyno can't tell you how many owners have been surprised at just how much better their magna performs...

nor can a dyno show you the many testimonies from owners posted on AMC that have been purged over the 2 years that these kits have been in use

But I do have access to a very good portable butt dyno at a moments notice :D

Cheers, Barry

After ~ 250 Km the droning reduced and I could now hear that growl coming through


mufflers "bed-in" after about this time, it wasnt anything you did that changed the sound. My exhaust note on the old magna changed after about that time too, as did the exhaust i made for my current car, as does every other exhaust. The piping (especially stainless) goes through a similar process as can be witnessed through the colour change that occurs to stainless exhausts, it is after all a heat quenching process (heating/cooling/heating etc...) that is occuring which affects the grain structure of the steel.....The whole exhaust settles in after its been heated/cooled a few times....

Hi Trotty
You are on the money

The Magna’s vortex MAF is very sensitive to fluctuating intake pulses, especially the higher – flowing 24 Valve 3.5L, and there are a number of devices to make the air flow as smooth as possible
On my TJ2 - 2 & 6 were removed at factory
Replacing 6 definitely improved the vibration at idle, but it is more noticeable if you electrically fix the synchronization problem in the 3rd Gen V6 with a correctly designed earthing kit

Also, for those who replace their muffler/exhaust with hi-flowing ones, this also has an effect on the MAF, so you can see how important smoothing devices are
If you have done this, don’t let the DROP in performance and the droning make you search for a “better” exhaust - get the air-fuel ratios fixed first

Cheers, Barry

I should clarify IMO we are talking about different things, when comparing WOT dyno graphs and part-throttle performance (i.e most of what real-world driving is). As already mentioned, I saw a dyno comparison showing neglible difference in power across the revrange, with and without the resonators. However I agree the magna MAF would likely experience some degree of intake pulsing without the resonators.

Dynos can't show differences in part-throttle response/power/feel, only WOT power.

Personally I've never noticed any difference in driveability when switching the resonators on and off, but I wasn't paying close specific attention to this. I've never noticed any difference in idle quality either, but once again, not something I pay much attention to. My idle always seems "rough" anyway, since with a fairly loud exhaust it makes quite alot of "burble" at idle.

Unfortunantely I did every stage of my exhaust after having the fuel rail kit fitted, so I can't comment on how the kit interacts with aftermarket exhausts. But altering flow characterisitcs at the exhaust end certainly affects AFR. My recent dyno shows this, my AFR was in the low 13:1s at low/mid revs, and then gradually richens to 12:1 by the top of the revrange.

Now this is WAY leaner than a factory magna, I wouldn't be surprised if without the fuel-rail kit the AFR at the low end of the revrange would be even leaner, to a point of losing power/response.

The standard tri-flow muffler is very good (in conjunction with the smoothing devices already mentioned) at keeping unwanted air pulses to a low level - but the VORTEX MAF is very sensitive to pulses ( remember this is how it works in the first place)!

You will find that even though they are at opposite ends of the breathing system, the hi-flow muffler will affect the MAF physically, and that will send the ECU unwanted signals

So, the message is 'restore the air-fuel ratios' before trying other mufflers

This can be by extra ECU management, or by fuel rail temp tuning

Actually, it does - if you realise that you now need to press further on the pedal to attain the ground speed that you would have had - had you not reduced the performance by fitting the hi-flow muffler in the first place - Phew! - WAM

There is a lot to say for your comments in terms of conventional theory, but believe me, there a world of difference between the 3rd Gen V6 and engines like your 2.6L straight four

The 3G has the closed loop ECU control, where virtually any changes made are compensated for, by oscillating quickly between rich and lean, whereas yours has an EGO output that more simply monitors and adjusts feedback in small increments - and in a linear pattern!

Believe me - I know - I had a 2.6L before the TJ2 and used the exact same EGO monitor for both

Cheers, Barry

Barry, you're disagreeing with me.. yet not explaining your theory propperly. You still havent explained how a muffler causes pulses in the intake charge; all you've said is that 'it does'.

As for the throttle position, what happens when you're at WOT? At WOT you cant increase the throttle position any more to compensate.

If you restore the AFR's, and THEN put a muffler on.. you'll only need to retune again to suit the now changed conditions. :nuts:

I know theres a difference between the two engines. Are you trying to say i'm stuck in the stone age? :P lol

As for the closed loop readings, this should be disregarded.. because under WOT the o2 is run in open loop mode anyway. The astron does work in open/closed loo, and so does just about every other car running on narrow band o2 sensors. In closed loop mode, its a constant rich/lean/rich/lean... to keep the car as close to stoich as it can. You can see the voltages constantly going up and down.

Hi type40

This question has come up before

Apart from the expense, dynos will not show up improvements like quick throttle response, an auto t/t gearbox that changes when it should, a clean exhaust that shows reduced EGR deposits...

and a dyno can't tell you how many owners have been surprised at just how much better their magna performs...

nor can a dyno show you the many testimonies from owners posted on AMC that have been purged over the 2 years that these kits have been in use

But I do have access to a very good portable butt dyno at a moments notice :D

Cheers, Barry

Well could you at least do a few stopwatch runs or something?

mufflers "bed-in" after about this time, it wasnt anything you did that changed the sound. My exhaust note on the old magna changed after about that time too, as did the exhaust i made for my current car, as does every other exhaust. The piping (especially stainless) goes through a similar process as can be witnessed through the colour change that occurs to stainless exhausts, it is after all a heat quenching process (heating/cooling/heating etc...) that is occuring which affects the grain structure of the steel.....The whole exhaust settles in after its been heated/cooled a few times....

NO - the sound (droning) persisted for many weeks

The retailer of the muffler said to wait for the soot to "bed in"....still waiting

It was only after ~250Km and AFTER the fuel rail tuning kit was fitted that the tone improved

Co-incidentally, another mistake was made by a Matt who owned a Mazda on a different forum, who posted that I put too small bolts in my kits, when in fact it uses the original bolts

Well could you at least do a few stopwatch runs or something?
If engine flexibility is improved then an in gears acceleration response before and after could be done. As in 3rd, 4th and 5th 40 km/h to 80 km/h with and without these rings. So they should show an improvement if there is one.

If engine flexibility is improved then an in gears acceleration response before and after could be done. As in 3rd, 4th and 5th 40 km/h to 80 km/h with and without these rings. So they should show an improvement if there is one.

Exactly.

NO - the sound (droning) persisted for many weeks

The retailer of the muffler said to wait for the soot to "bed in"....still waiting

It was only after ~250Km and AFTER the fuel rail tuning kit was fitted that the tone improved

Co-incidentally, another mistake was made by a Matt who owned a Mazda on a different forum, who posted that I put too small bolts in my kits, when in fact it uses the original bolts

maybe you should make yourself a bit clearer than..... whats this other matt got to do with anything.... thats like me saying that "coincidentally there was this other retard who had a miracle cure for cars and his fuel pyramid ioniser thingymagic-o....gee that went well for him didnt it." (peter brock for those playing at home)
i didn't make a mistake, i went off what you said, which is what you want people do to isnt it? no hard evidence anywhere yet.......

maybe you should make yourself a bit clearer than..... whats this other matt got to do with anything.... thats like me saying that "coincidentally there was this other retard who had a miracle cure for cars and his fuel pyramid ioniser thingymagic-o....gee that went well for him didnt it." (peter brock for those playing at home)
i didn't make a mistake, i went off what you said.
Hello everyone looking at this post! Dont be suckered in by false hopes and dreams... Always ask for substantiating evidence when sussing out products for your car. And have an inquiring mind! Before jumping into any sort of "performance" enhancing product weather it makes you car produce more power or makes it run smoother ask for testimony and proof through repeatable testing procedures that have validity. And last of all... If it sounds too good to be true it usually is! With kindest regards. Type40. :D

Ahh yes! The "Energy Polarizer" A small box filled with resin with 1 crystal and 2 antennae points that realigned and optimised the cars "molecules" to reduce squeeks and rattles, produce more engine power and optimise handling... All on 22 psi... :nuts:

wow, it does all those things? man with Brocky's Polarizer, A voltage Stabilizer, and barrys kits we could turn the average magna into a car worthy of competing against Back to the Futures Delorean...wonder what'd happen when you hit 88mph?

Hi type40

This question has come up before

Apart from the expense, dynos will not show up improvements like quick throttle response, an auto t/t gearbox that changes when it should, a clean exhaust that shows reduced EGR deposits...

and a dyno can't tell you how many owners have been surprised at just how much better their magna performs...

nor can a dyno show you the many testimonies from owners posted on AMC that have been purged over the 2 years that these kits have been in use

But I do have access to a very good portable butt dyno at a moments notice :D

Cheers, Barry

Dyno will show you your afrs at the tail pipe. Before and after install of the kit would be good.

At the end of the day dynos arent all that expensive. If there is a gain to be had Barry and people see it on paper it will put this topic to bed. I keep seeing the same questions come up over and over again. Also it will mean more sales for you if its a proven mod.

I do a product for diesel cars as TYPE 40 knows and the results were black and white you need the proof on paper to show people that it does really work hence more sales for me and more cash.... and i have dyno figures to prove it. In my case we are talking an extra 50 horsepower :) which you can see and feel but thats on another forum.

All the best
wrexed03

I do a product for diesel cars as TYPE 40 knows and the results were black and white you need the proof on paper to show people that it does really work hence more sales for me and more cash....

This is true.


and i have dyno figures to prove it.

Yes he does.


In my case we are talking an extra 50 horsepower :)

Unbelievable but also true!


which you can see and feel but thats on another forum.

I like tangible things... Its what really convinces me weather something is worthwhile or not... Not just hearsay.

Ahh yes! The "Energy Polarizer" A small box filled with resin with 1 crystal and 2 antennae points that realigned and optimised the cars "molecules" to reduce squeeks and rattles, produce more engine power and optimise handling... All on 22 psi... :nuts:
Dude, you forgot the all important "orgone energy" antenna sticker (with lightining bolt and PB signature) on the back window. Without the sticker the polariser was useless ...oh wait...it was useless anyway....lol

But back to the thread. I fitted Barry's fuel rail kit and earthing kits months after I did a complete front to back extractor exhaust system and immediately noticed less drone. By the end of two weeks after fitting the FR kit I had way less soot in the tailpipe. So it worked for me......

But back to the thread. I fitted Barry's fuel rail kit and earthing kits months after I did a complete front to back extractor exhaust system and immediately noticed less drone. By the end of two weeks after fitting the FR kit I had way less soot in the tailpipe. So it worked for me......


But you dont have proof.... All these sceptics are wanting proof!
Like barry said. you cant dyno initial respose and smoother running.

It might not do anything for WOT but like also said it's not where the foot is all the time.
it's the partial openings that count.

Next Barry will leave us like EZY and who will we have then? Turbo charade.. i'll read a toilet wall first.

And X_firsetorm_X if barry's name was GREDDY you would buy it without the proof on paper...:nuts:

Dude, you forgot the all important "orgone energy" antenna sticker (with lightining bolt and PB signature) on the back window. Without the sticker the polariser was useless ...oh wait...it was useless anyway....lol


But back to the thread. I fitted Barry's fuel rail kit and earthing kits months after I did a complete front to back extractor exhaust system and immediately noticed less drone. By the end of two weeks after fitting the FR kit I had way less soot in the tailpipe. So it worked for me......
I fitted the rail kit to my old car and all it did was introduce a flatspot... After driving for an hour you would park and switch off the engine. 5 mins later come back to start the thing and all you would have is one big flatspot. Push the accelerator to virtually the floor and have a big dose of non acceleration... Bloody dangerous. Drive for a min or so and it would be ok. I put it down to the fuel boiling in the rail due to the excessive heat transfer. But i don't have any proof of this.

But you dont have proof.... All these sceptics are wanting proof!
Like barry said. you cant dyno initial respose and smoother running.

It might not do anything for WOT but like also said it's not where the foot is all the time.
it's the partial openings that count.

Next Barry will leave us like EZY and who will we have then? Turbo charade.. i'll read a toilet wall first.

And X_firsetorm_X if barry's name was GREDDY you would buy it without the proof on paper...:nuts:
Toilet wall... that's where Turbo_Charade got the know how for this BMW SR20 conversion... and the G200T Charade... Toilet walls can be quite useful :shock: .

GReddy... nobody buys GReddy, you pay for the sticker on the side of your car, bro. The fact they are a multi-million dollar company with a worldwide consumer base and high quality go-fast-bits makes no difference to me :nuts:

brb high flowing my throttle body and installing a CAI.

It might not do anything for WOT but like also said it's not where the foot is all the time.


It's not?

I fitted the rail kit to my old car and all it did was introduce a flatspot... After driving for an hour you would park and switch off the engine. 5 mins later come back to start the thing and all you would have is one big flatspot. Push the accelerator to virtually the floor and have a big dose of non acceleration... Bloody dangerous. Drive for a min or so and it would be ok. I put it down to the fuel boiling in the rail due to the excessive heat transfer. But i don't have any proof of this.

Well, that's certainly not the experience of 60+ owners and users of the kit

There has to be some explanation

Were there any issues with the car previously?

Can you post a list of any/all other mods - I would be happy to do what I can to explain it

What type was your old car anyway?

Cheers, Barry

Were there any issues with the car previously?

Can you post a list of any/all other mods - I would be happy to do what I can to explain it

What type was your old car anyway?

Cheers, Barry
I had a 3.0 TF manual with about 250,000 on board when i fitted them. It had a Redback cat back system with custom engine pipes and a K&N panel filter. It was a very strong engine that had run a 15.08 over the quarter and had never given me a moments trouble.

I got them off wrexed03 just to see if they made a difference. Unfortunately this was about 18 months ago and i cant remember the exact timeline of things. Perhaps i am assuming that the rings did introduce the flatspot but it did occur very soon after i fitted them up. As i said not sure exactly when but it was close to the fitment.

But im wondering out of the 60 kits you have sold how many have been very happy with them and who hasn't been so happy? I certainly didnt notice a reduction in exhaust drone (although this was never and issue with my car) or improved throttle response.

I just like tangible things. People seem to be saying that they "feel" a difference but how much of this is just the placebo effect and wanting to feel something?

I like the fact that there are people who are tinkering with Magnas to improve the car but i really do think that some sort of proof is required. Not just someone saying i can feel a difference. Because i know i didnt.

Convert me Barry!

I had a 3.0 TF manual with about 250,000 on board when i fitted them. It had a Redback cat back system with custom engine pipes and a K&N panel filter. It was a very strong engine that had run a 15.08 over the quarter and had never given me a moments trouble.

I got them off wrexed03 just to see if they made a difference. Unfortunately this was about 18 months ago and i cant remember the exact timeline of things. Perhaps i am assuming that the rings did introduce the flatspot but it did occur very soon after i fitted them up. As i said not sure exactly when but it was close to the fitment.

But im wondering out of the 60 kits you have sold how many have been very happy with them and who hasn't been so happy? I certainly didnt notice a reduction in exhaust drone (although this was never and issue with my car) or improved throttle response.

I just like tangible things. People seem to be saying that they "feel" a difference but how much of this is just the placebo effect and wanting to feel something?

I like the fact that there are people who are tinkering with Magnas to improve the car but i really do think that some sort of proof is required. Not just someone saying i can feel a difference. Because i know i didnt.

Convert me Barry!


You'll be waiting for a long long LONG time me thinks...............................:doubt:

Dyno will show you your afrs at the tail pipe. Before and after install of the kit would be good.

At the end of the day dynos arent all that expensive. If there is a gain to be had Barry and people see it on paper it will put this topic to bed. I keep seeing the same questions come up over and over again. Also it will mean more sales for you if its a proven mod.

I do a product for diesel cars as TYPE 40 knows and the results were black and white you need the proof on paper to show people that it does really work hence more sales for me and more cash.... and i have dyno figures to prove it. In my case we are talking an extra 50 horsepower :) which you can see and feel but thats on another forum.

All the best
wrexed03

What forum???

I wont post it here cause im not a sponsor so its probably against the rules. Plus its off topic.


Regards

I had a 3.0 TF manual with about 250,000 on board when i fitted them. It had a Redback cat back system with custom engine pipes and a K&N panel filter. It was a very strong engine that had run a 15.08 over the quarter and had never given me a moments trouble.

I got them off wrexed03 just to see if they made a difference. Unfortunately this was about 18 months ago and i cant remember the exact timeline of things. Perhaps i am assuming that the rings did introduce the flatspot but it did occur very soon after i fitted them up. As i said not sure exactly when but it was close to the fitment.

When I designed the Fuel Rail Tuning Kit – I made sure that there was enough headroom to rule out the possibility of heat soak – both in temp range and stability - and I don’t know of any other AMC’ers with this problem

With your modified 2nd Gen you possibly had issues with fuel pressure, or fuel lines that were experiencing increased heat transfer
Insulating and/or cooling the fuel lines could have ruled this one in/out

These kits are meant for near standard n/a cars, and if the initial enquiry expressed concerns about extensive mods already fitted, I would generally err on the side of caution and recommend that they NOT get the kit, and to wait until buying their next Magna

But im wondering out of the 60 kits you have sold how many have been very happy with them and who hasn't been so happy? I certainly didnt notice a reduction in exhaust drone (although this was never and issue with my car) or improved throttle response

Not all owners post their results, but the ones that do are often those who say … I was skeptical at first…but decided, after reading up on the kits that I would give them a go – and I am now very happy that I did…etc

I just like tangible things. People seem to be saying that they "feel" a difference but how much of this is just the placebo effect and wanting to feel something?

The 3rd Gens are the ones with the most issues - TB's requiring cleaning, rough running and rough idle, hesitation on auto tx changes, EGR issues, lack of good throttle response, etc so it's often 3.5L 3rd Gens w/EGR that show the most improvement after fitting the kits

I like the fact that there are people who are tinkering with Magnas to improve the car but i really do think that some sort of proof is required. Not just someone saying i can feel a difference. Because i know i didnt.

As stated previously - A dyno would not show the improvement that the kits achieve ie much improved throttle response, auto Tx changes, cleaner exhaust, better idle and off-idle

Convert me Barry!

Well, the preceding should achieve it !

Cheers, Barry

With your modified 2nd Gen you possibly had issues with fuel pressure, or fuel lines that were experiencing increased heat transfer
Insulating and/or cooling the fuel lines could have ruled this one in/out
y

a TF is a 3rd gen barry!!....:bowrofl: :nuts: :redface: oh dear! :redface:

As stated previously - A dyno would not show the improvement that the kits achieve ie much improved throttle response, auto Tx changes, cleaner exhaust, better idle and off-idle

So why call them performance mods if you're not measuring an increase in engine performance?

Gas analyser readings will show the change in AFR's.

you cant dyno initial respose and smoother running.


But what causes this to happen? A change in AFR's (as Barry said himself). The earth kit will change injector pulse, and the rail kit will lean the incoming fuel. So there must be a change happening.

So why call them performance mods if you're not measuring an increase in engine performance?

Gas analyser readings will show the change in AFR's.

There were some early posts where members described the flat spot

i.e. take the standard filter off, put the hi-flow air filter on.....FLAT SPOT and poor acceleration :rant:

take the hi-flow filter off, put the standard air filter on.....NO FLAT SPOT and good acceleration :bowdown:

take the standard filter off, put the hi-flow air filter on.....FLAT SPOT and poor acceleration :rant: to ad nauseam if necessary

Now fit the Fuel Rail Tuning Kit with Hi-flow air filter.....NO FLAT SPOT and a responsive throttle that you never had before

Now that's a good performance mod !

Its like beating a drum, in a soundproof room... it aint gettin through.

I'm sure barry has explained this a thousand times, and getting sick of it.

Why dont you do a search on barry's mods and read them start to finish....

There were some early posts where members described the flat spot

i.e. take the standard filter off, put the hi-flow air filter on.....FLAT SPOT and poor acceleration :rant:

take the hi-flow filter off, put the standard air filter on.....NO FLAT SPOT and good acceleration :bowdown:

take the standard filter off, put the hi-flow air filter on.....FLAT SPOT and poor acceleration :rant: to ad nauseam if necessary

Now fit the Fuel Rail Tuning Kit with Hi-flow air filter.....NO FLAT SPOT and a responsive throttle that you never had before[/COLOR]

Now that's a good performance mod !

So in essence, it will make the car accellerate quicker in a straight line, correct? If so, do some stopwatch runs... is it really that hard? If there was a flat spot.. it would definately show up on a dyno chart...

Trotty, none of your posts in this thread have been informative or constructive so far mate.

So in essence, it will make the car accellerate quicker in a straight line, correct? If so, do some stopwatch runs...


And if he did do some stopwatch runs, you would all be sooking about how it isn't accurate and cant be used to justify the kit.

If you like the kit, fine. If you don't like it, **** off and stop badgering the poor guy for being one of the only people out there trying to work with the magna community.

And after reading threads like this, you all wonder why no company's bother to make anything for the magna's and then sook when everything has to be custom made. You cant win.

So in essence, it will make the car accellerate quicker in a straight line, correct? If so, do some stopwatch runs... is it really that hard? If there was a flat spot.. it would definately show up on a dyno chart...

Trotty, none of your posts in this thread have been informative or constructive so far mate.
Exactly... even if you take it to the drag strip and get some 60ft times and run with that. Improved throttle response should see a decrease in 60ft time...


And if he did do some stopwatch runs, you would all be sooking about how it isn't accurate and cant be used to justify the kit.

If you like the kit, fine. If you don't like it, **** off and stop badgering the poor guy for being one of the only people out there trying to work with the magna community.

And after reading threads like this, you all wonder why no company's bother to make anything for the magna's and then sook when everything has to be custom made. You cant win.
As above, a timeslip from local drag strip will suffice... Accurate and reputable. Same dif with people saying their car runs a 15 second quarter, such claim isn't valid without proof of said run... ie; your timeslip.

Companies don't make kits for magnas because they are a family FWD sedan with little to no mainstream performance application.

And if he did do some stopwatch runs, you would all be sooking about how it isn't accurate and cant be used to justify the kit.

If you like the kit, fine. If you don't like it, **** off and stop badgering the poor guy for being one of the only people out there trying to work with the magna community.

And after reading threads like this, you all wonder why no company's bother to make anything for the magna's and then sook when everything has to be custom made. You cant win.

Why wouldnt they be accurate? You take 3-4 runs without the kit.. and 3-4 runs with the kit. Then average it. If it reduces the flatspot, the times will be be noticeably different.

At the end of the day, if it doesnt increase accelleration times.. i dont really care i'm not going to have a whinge over it, at least there'll be some physical data on the kit. But you need to consider whether its able to be called a performance mod if it doesnt reduce accelleration time.

It changes the flow characteristics of the engine, moving it further away from the ORIGINAL tune for the car.... causing leanouts, and or rich mixtures.

Yes the MAF just reads the air entered, but if it pulses, it will give irratic readings to the ECU, causing misfires?


What so you cant read....????
EDIT whats the point of saying it when barry has already explained it, but you wont accept his testing as proof.

What so you cant read....????
Cut the sarcasm..

I didn't find that post informative because its not completely correct. That, and you questioned yourself in the last paragraph. :confused:

Cut the sarcasm..

I didn't find that post informative because its not completely correct. That, and you questioned yourself in the last paragraph. :confused:


Sorry for the Questionmark at the end of the sentence.... As said before, you change something anywhere on a line it will affect the enire lines performance. I really CBF goin into depth over this, it was a thread over intake resonators not mufflers... and fuel rail kits. One that youre either not happy with or head huting.... :nuts:

As for being sarcastic, iGNORE:D

Sorry for the Questionmark at the end of the sentence.... As said before, you change something anywhere on a line it will affect the enire lines performance. I really CBF goin into depth over this, it was a thread over intake resonators not mufflers... and fuel rail kits. One that youre either not happy with or head huting.... :nuts:

As for being sarcastic, iGNORE:D

Yeah no dramas buddy, its funny as hell how far off topic this has gone lol .

Yeah no dramas buddy, its funny as hell how far off topic this has gone lol .



:thumbsup:

I will just post up my 2 cents again...




On my TL VR i noticed that it lacks the lower intake resonator that my TF had previously. It isnt even blanked off as it is a completely new piece of rubber tubing. It definitely has more intake resonance... But i can live with that!

I will just post up my 2 cents again...




On my TL VR i noticed that it lacks the lower intake resonator that my TF had previously. It isnt even blanked off as it is a completely new piece of rubber tubing. It definitely has more intake resonance... But i can live with that!
No you can't live with that... Buy more kits lol

Yeah no dramas buddy, its funny as hell how far off topic this has gone lol .

:thumbsup:Best 2 posts in this thread over the past 4-5 pages :D
Well done to you two blokes for ensuring this thread didn't get out of hand and have to be closed. :thumbsup:

I will just post up my 2 cents again...




On my TL VR i noticed that it lacks the lower intake resonator that my TF had previously. It isnt even blanked off as it is a completely new piece of rubber tubing. It definitely has more intake resonance... But i can live with that!

It was the same on my TJ2

I just bought another one from the wrecker's for $7 and cut a hole for it into the intake

I think it was more a cost-cutting measure, along with the battery cover

http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showpost.php?p=827607&postcount=19

MMAL probably didn't notice the extra resonance because it was running rough and idling badly :bowrofl:

:thumbsup: Barry

It was the same on my TJ2

I just bought another one from the wrecker's for $7 and cut a hole for it into the intake

I think it was more a cost-cutting measure, along with the battery cover

Probably... Have you priced one of those ducts? I cant remember exactly what they are worth but you wont get much if any change out of $100!


http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showpost.php?p=827607&postcount=19

MMAL probably didn't notice the extra resonance because it was running rough and idling badly :bowrofl:

:thumbsup: Barry


lol lol lol

My recent dyno shows this, my AFR was in the low 13:1s at low/mid revs, and then gradually richens to 12:1 by the top of the revrange.

Now this is WAY leaner than a factory magna, I wouldn't be surprised if without the fuel-rail kit the AFR at the low end of the revrange would be even leaner, to a point of losing power/response.

I'd actually disagree. By heating the fuel rail up (what Barry's fuel spacers do), you would actually be leaning the air/fuel ratio out. The most likely reason your air/fuel ratio richens up in the top end is because there is less time for heat transfer due to the higher flow rate of fuel in the high rpm range.

In effect the fuel spacers "lean" the air/fuel mixture out in the lower rpm band. Since Magnas run rich in the first place, this isn't such a bad thing.

Having said that, if you where to alter you're air/fuel ratios via some sort of aftermarket ECU/interceptor I would take the fuel spacers off. Since aftermarket management can properly optimise the air/fuel ratio throughout the rev range there would no longer be a need for the spacers, but even at a guess I'd say the factory plastic spacers would provide a better tuning base as the fuel rail temps would be more stables and allow finer adjustment (instead of compensating for the varying temp in fuel throughout the rev range).

far out WHAT HAVE I STARTED!!!!!!!!! man have i got a headache!!!!!!!

I'd actually disagree. By heating the fuel rail up (what Barry's fuel spacers do), you would actually be leaning the air/fuel ratio out.

The most likely reason your air/fuel ratio richens up in the top end is because there is less time for heat transfer due to the higher flow rate of fuel in the high rpm range.



Well my understanding is the "flat-spot"/hesitation associated with K&Ns is actually caused by underfuelling, or lean out. AFAIK Barry's kit attempts to do rectify this by improving atomisation via heating, thus "enrichening" combustion. How this actuallyaffects measured exhaust AFR I'm not so sure, perhaps you are right in that regard. I will try to clarify this.

I suspect AFR richening at the top end is more to do with ECU mapping than heat transfer to the fuel. Reason being I don't think there's enough fuel flow to evacuate the fuel rails for this to instantly take effect, when you stomp on the gas and rev it out.

Generally it's considered desirable to have a richer AFR towards the top of the revrange for safety, at least for OEM tunes.

far out WHAT HAVE I STARTED!!!!!!!!! man have i got a headache!!!!!!!

So have we answered your question? :bowrofl:

You've created a MONSTER!!!! :shock:

I will just post up my 2 cents again...




On my TL VR i noticed that it lacks the lower intake resonator that my TF had previously. It isnt even blanked off as it is a completely new piece of rubber tubing. It definitely has more intake resonance... But i can live with that!

Dave pop around i have a couple of spare coke bottles sitting here im sure we can make them fit.

Regards

So have we answered your question? :bowrofl:

You've created a MONSTER!!!! :shock:


Just had to laugh....lol

Just had to laugh....lol

I was referring to myself as being the monster... :P :badgrin:

Trotty, firestorm... quit it.

(party pooper) :neutral:


*Ban* :doh:


I think intake resonators are just that... they stop resonance within the inlet piping. If they were there for any other reason, wouldnt mitsubishi make the plenum chamber volume larger instead? Or am i totally off track here?

As far as i can tell they quieten down the induction. Nothing more nothing less. I had one missing due to a botched gas installation. I had a cap on the replacement pipe you could hear a drone not via the exhaust but through the induction. I went to mitsu for the factory item for my paj cost apx 40 dollars or so but the only difference it made was eliminate the drone and thats about it. Coke bottles may work better..... :badgrin:

So have we answered your question? :bowrofl:

You've created a MONSTER!!!! :shock:


yeah got the point dosnt make an ounce of dif except the sweet induction noise it reduces!!!

god you guys r funny :bowrofl: :bowrofl:

Well my understanding is the "flat-spot"/hesitation associated with K&Ns is actually caused by underfuelling, or lean out. AFAIK Barry's kit attempts to do rectify this by improving atomisation via heating, thus "enrichening" combustion.

But what is "enrichening" of the fuel?

When you heat a liquid up (like any substance really) it will expand, this forces the molecules further apart. So for any given volume of liquid the equivalent "hot" volume would contain less molecules then the "cold" equal volume. This means that the hotter the fuel the less potential energy it holds. Since the injectors open for the same amount of time regardless of fuel temp, the same volume of fuel is being injected each pulse. Therefore you are reducing the energy potential of that fuel and leaning out the air fuel ratio.

When I did my 3.5 conversion I had a unichip installed and before the tune, the factory air/fuel ratios where very rich throughout the rev range, but especially uptop. And this is with a K&N and catback exhaust already fitted. I suspect the the Karmen Vortex air flow meter Magnas use has something to to do with the flat spot some people experience when fitting exhausts and filters.




How this actuallyaffects measured exhaust AFR I'm not so sure, perhaps you are right in that regard. I will try to clarify this.

I suspect AFR richening at the top end is more to do with ECU mapping than heat transfer to the fuel. Reason being I don't think there's enough fuel flow to evacuate the fuel rails for this to instantly take effect, when you stomp on the gas and rev it out.

Generally it's considered desirable to have a richer AFR towards the top of the revrange for safety, at least for OEM tunes.

I agree what I meant to say is that at higher rpm the fuel rail spacers have less of an effect on the fuel temp then at lower rpm.
:)

When you heat a liquid up (like any substance really) it will expand, this forces the molecules further apart. So for any given volume of liquid the equivalent "hot" volume would contain less molecules then the "cold" equal volume. This means that the hotter the fuel the less potential energy it holds. Since the injectors open for the same amount of time regardless of fuel temp, the same volume of fuel is being injected each pulse. Therefore you are reducing the energy potential of that fuel and leaning out the air fuel ratio.

I suspect the the Karmen Vortex air flow meter Magnas use has something to to do with the flat spot some people experience when fitting exhausts and filters.


i agree with this. As i doubt a different filter could lean out the mixture enough to cause power loss (which would probably be internally harmful) and it's more likely to be a excessively rich spot. Which would be noticable to the driver.

From what i've seen and felt you won't notice much difference between an AFR of 17:1 and 14.7

yeah got the point dosnt make an ounce of dif except the sweet induction noise it reduces!!!

god you guys r funny :bowrofl: :bowrofl:

The point is more, theres no loss to removing them... but there is potential power gains to be had, although probably not much at all.

From what i've seen and felt you won't notice much difference between an AFR of 17:1 and 14.7

I assume you are talking about lean cruise, in which case you are correct, it's possible to safely have AFRS of higher than 14.7 for lean cruise with the right tuning.

I assume you are talking about lean cruise, in which case you are correct, it's possible to safely have AFRS of higher than 14.7 for lean cruise with the right tuning.

no at WOT as well

I assume you are talking about lean cruise, in which case you are correct, it's possible to safely have AFRS of higher than 14.7 for lean cruise with the right tuning.

Chrysler used lean burn on cruise for years (since the 70's i think) and from memory their ratios were around the 18:1 mark. Honda now are using their own lean burn system too with ratios of 21-22:1 from memory.

no at WOT as well

No thats just dangerous i believe lol. Unless other engine conditions are changed to suit, but i doubt it can be safely achieved. You'll end up burning out valves.

No thats just dangerous i believe lol. Unless other engine conditions are changed to suit, but i doubt it can be safely achieved. You'll end up burning out valves.

i know my tune was out and ****ed big story yet it was running that lean and now it's fixed. There was no real difference between the lean mix in terms of power to stoich. Just burnt too hot...

No damage that im aware of................................................ .........

i know my tune was out and ****ed big story yet it was running that lean and now it's fixed. There was no real difference between the lean mix in terms of power to stoich. Just burnt too hot...

No damage that im aware of................................................ .........

Haha bugger.. afaik, the hottest exhaust temps occur at around the 15:1 AFR mark, going higher sees the temps start to slowly decline, and going lower sees a faster decline. So even running the car at stoich (14.7:1) under WOT for long periods (i mean WOT for 20mins+ on a continual basis) of time can burn out your valves quite easily, which is the reason alot of tuners will go for a 12.5ish ratio (or 13.5ish in a hi-po NA). Not to mention it can cause detonation if your timing is not set to suit.

Haha bugger.. afaik, the hottest exhaust temps occur at around the 15:1 AFR mark, going higher sees the temps start to slowly decline, and going lower sees a faster decline. So even running the car at stoich (14.7:1) under WOT for long periods (i mean WOT for 20mins+ on a continual basis) of time can burn out your valves quite easily, which is the reason alot of tuners will go for a 12.5ish ratio (or 13.5ish in a hi-po NA). Not to mention it can cause detonation if your timing is not set to suit.

is exhaust temp linear with combustion? i thought combustion temps continued to increase as AFR leans out. Thus the melting of internals with leaner ratios.

Also i'd say id have some healthy carbon deposites on my valves to burn off anywaylol

:) May I

If you get too lean, combustion starts to decrease as there is not enough fuel to burn. Like it has been said, past about 15:1 it gets cooler, and power really drops off quickly. This is why with old cars and cold mornings they hesitate because they are lean. They are running past 15:1 and drop power.

High RPM and high load at anywhere past 13:1 is really starting to push the limits of material melting points, and is past them in some cases, causing catasrophic failure.

I remember the day me and a mate were out on a back road doing fishies and the motor just seemed to be making so so much power. Turns out it had a failed fuel pump, was running a close to stoich air fuel ratio and we melted a piston a few doughys later.

Makes a good story, and I sand blasted the piston and made a paperweight out of it.

is exhaust temp linear with combustion? i thought combustion temps continued to increase as AFR leans out. Thus the melting of internals with leaner ratios.

Also i'd say id have some healthy carbon deposites on my valves to burn off anywaylol

At stoich (14.7:1) the mixture burns most completely with no excess fuel or air remaining. Leaner than this, the fuel will still burn but once its burnt there is still excess heat.

Let me explain it like this:
We have 10 parts of fuel and 10 parts of air (for the sake of explanation) which i'll use to resemble a stoich ratio.

Air: ||||||||||
Fuel:||||||||||

Say we go leaner than this;

Air: ||||||||||
Fuel:||||||||
The 8 parts of fuel will still burn, but there are still 2 parts of air remaining which have no fuel to burn, and so the remaining oxygen absorbs some heat instead. The same goes for the other direction (rich AFR), except its not the oxygen thats absorbing the heat, its the excess fuel instead that absorbs heat.

Sorry about the long/lame explanation.

Jason's pretty much on the money there too! :) LOL @ the piston... thats a pretty cool souveneir! Can i ask what model falcodore it was? :P lol EA or VN?