G’day,
I’ve only just joined these forums having just bought a 2007 380 SX Series III after much research to replace my beloved and now very hail damaged/written-off BA Fairmont.

So far I’ve found the car a very agile ride and wanted to start work voiding the remaining factory warranty immediately.

I love attacking air boxes since they are always the cheapest mods for gain, and I usually suffer financial/marital issues with such things. So for anyone interested in doing this I thought I’d share my experience with modifying the 380 intake last night at 1a.m.: (warning: very long post...)

"We set forth one morning in the spring of 1873....." Nah not that bad , but nearly......

I started looking into the 380 air box which looked a bit inefficient (although already making very satisfying induction noises till it got warm) and came across the lower resonator mod on the RPW site which sounded good except for a couple of niggles:

1. Helmholtz resonators are typically used not just for sound reduction, but also for intake wave tuning , removal could negatively affect the timing of the pressure wave bounce back to the intake valves, reducing air pressure and performance

2. The end of the resonator is still right beside a rather hot transmission and engine bay sucking up hot air

These made me decide on the following approach:

• simply remove the resonator and store it in case I wanted to put it back

• manufacture a new intake duct from the entry hole of the resonator going to the a tow point hole in the bottom floor panel in front of the left wheel under the fog light

• Modify the angle of the factory snorkel outlet so that it points at the filter rather than the floor of the air box to avoid air collision with the new intake duct and focus air flow at the filter

• Retain the Factory filter based on the numerous Dyno reports and articles that have shown tiny or no gain over aftermarket K&N etc. (probably rather spend this money on a trans cooler)

• Construct a new variable Helmholtz resonator based on 1.25 times the volume of the existing factory one - WIP

The first part was, surprisingly, what took at least 75% of my time and effort. That resonator is a bastard to get out without dismantling half the car.
Thought I was home n’ hosed when I got all the bolts out, and then spent 45 mins trying to Chinese puzzle it out of the engine bay without breaking it (or the car), ounce of prevention might be easier in hindsight (just remove the plastic engine bay guard in front of the left wheel, it’s pretty quick and you’ll end up doing it anyway.:chainsaw:

By contrast, making and fitting the actual duct was a piece of cake. Here are the parts bought from Bunnings for anyone who’d like to repeat this:


1. Two 45 Degree 65 mm elbows
2. One 112 degree 65 mm elbow
3. One straight length of 65mm PVC pipe (about 1 foot long, but depends on exactly where you want it to finish). 65mm fits perfectly in the gap between the trans and the coolant bottle beside the radiator


I've got a bunch of pictures I took along the way , but don't have a web site I can put them up to , and haven't yet worked out how else to post them here? If people are interested I'll make the effort :stoopid: EDIT: managed to work it out so I've posted some pics:

Recipe
New duct:


Remove all dags etc. from plumbing parts
Remove the air box bolts X 2 and the hose clamp for the MAF sensor, remove the push nuts for the snorkel and lift the air box off the guiding pin and resonator. Pull it apart (careful with the MAF)
Remove the resonator – 3 bolts (won’t get into this, mentioned in these forums extensively)
http://img375.imageshack.us/img375/3138/ressie.jpg

The Infamous box

Heat one end of one 45 degree elbow till pliable and stretch over air box inlet for resonator
Deliberately and carefully burn fingers while moulding hot elbow to oval shaped outer duct
http://img375.imageshack.us/img375/8604/pipe2.jpg

Fit straight length of pipe to remaining round end of elbow and fit the 112 degree elbow to the other end
Fit off with hose clamps and a small amount of plumbers mate glue (I used very little glue and only on the air box join as it might be flammable, also waited overnight before starting)
http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/6856/pipepz.jpg


Da Pipe:

Angle duct from airbox down between the transmission and the coolant bottle and rotate the bottom 112 deg elbow to point at the front tow point hole in front of the wheel and under the fog lamp
Factory duct:

Use the other 45 Degree elbow and Cut one end of the elbow off at the line where it changes size to 65 mm, shove this on the end of factory inlet and rotate towards air box, tie off with hose clamp
http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/8719/factoryair.jpg

Put car back together (devote 3 minutes to scanning engine bay etc for left over nuts and spanners dying to fall into your spinning fans, belts and pulleys with hilarious consequences).

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/9131/airbox.jpg
Finished box with rear cover off

Crack tinny :beer:
Results (First Drive):

Sound:
With the car driven rather enthusiastically to work today I noticed a slightly deeper induction sound change at normal load. Also, I’ve noticed before the mod, that normally low rev induction noise is quite satisfying until things heat up, and then it reduces – now it remains for the duration of my 45 minute drive throughout the rev range. I also fancy (“imagine”?) there is a better induction warble at WOT in first and second between 3500-5500 RPM that wasn’t there before

Fuel Consumption:
I reset the average fuel counter before the same trip yesterday and drove the car with an almost pathologically frequent use of WOT for both trips (before and after intake mod) Today after the mod, despite the car being driven homicidally, average Fuel usage reduced from 14.8 L/100 to 13.8 in 45 minutes. Got briefly excited by this, then realised this is probably because the ECU simply hasn’t adjusted the mixtures yet,(hope this falls within the MAF and ECU ranges etc. and it richens up the mix before I burn valves etc.)

Temperature:
Both days before and after the mod just happened to be 15 Deg C outside for the same trip, and the car was driven with the same pathological hatred for all living things on both days. However I noticed that the temperature gauge was well below half today, whereas yesterday it hovered on halfway (wouldn’t have thought this would be so affected, will be interested to see if this pattern remains)

Performance (utterly subjective and unsubstantiated):
Hard to tell for sure, but it seems maybe a little more energetic in the low to middle rev range. I think if pressed (paid) I’d say it does seem a little more agile in throttle response from low to mid rpm

Issues:
- Transmission heat: As the duct runs right beside the Trans, it gets hot, and may even end up melting on a long trip, I’ve been monitoring this and it seems to be ok, but I will continue to check. Also likely to add heat to the air – side effect of additional transmission cooler would help here
- The intake of the new duct is not below the floor pan, and is behind the front spoiler, so no stones should be able to directly hit it, also quite a sharp rise to the air box, but not impossible to imagine a bouncing stone making its way to the air box and fragging my filter and MAF sensor
- Flooding occurs in my region at least once a year. With the two intakes, I’m hoping that the vacuum in the lower duct would not be strong enough to suck water up into the air box if the lower third of the car is immersed in water, but I’m not absolutely positive. I guess I could easily test this

Further work to follow:
Heat shield between air box and engine, and air box and transmission cooler
Flare intakes
Direct outlet of new duct at filter,
Stone mesh on lower intake
Purchase 65mm pipe cap to install in case of flooding
The variable resonator – if there is interest I will post this work also when complete

Cheers,
RG

Sorry to hear about your Falcon mate, but you bought the right car to replace it :). Rather interesting read...it seems you have done this with the standard 60mm intake duct? I wonder if there would be improvements again with the 90mm galant intake. I will admit it seems a bit excessive for such minimal gains but I Wouldn't mind trying this myself for curiosity sake...I don't think anybody on here has mentioned intake wave tuning, tbh I have never heard of it. I might get onto this when I get some money happening lol
Welcome to the club by the way!

Welcome to the club by the way!

Thanks Mate!

yeh I was a bit bummed about the BA Fairmont, it really was a one off car, as an NA 6cyl , it went even better than the BA XR6 turbo I had before it! However I am enjoying the agility of the 380 auto (I wanted a car that wasn't just fast in a straight line this time) I just wish it had a bit more guts at the top end, by the time it hits 3rd and around 80Kms it seems out of puff. As a side note , I'd really like to know once and for all if a trans cooler would improve the shift response , or just add longevity as indciated by many people here

I like the Galant intake mod and may still do it , but figured I'd start with a new lower pickup first, since it's practically free, and 60mm plus 65mm = 125 mm of total intake aperture (not considering cross flow)

about the resonator: seems like a lot of people have heard of and roughly understand the point of tuned intake runners, yet still either don't know or can't be bothered with the air piston effect of resonators on the intake pressure wave to and from the valves, and focus only on their noise reduction properties which are a side effect of this action.

I guess it's probably because it's such a bloody complicated exercise in fluid dynamics! That's why I'm building a variable Helmholtz, so I can just use trial and error instead of having to do the maths (lazy, but probably going to be quicker)

The whole exercise might seem not worth it, but I have seen calculations and examples where a tuned pressure wave arriving back at the valve just as it opens , can add 5-7 psi to the intake pressure :hmm:. Looking at all the various shapes, sizes and positions of the resonators Mitsubishi have put on the stock 380 intake path, makes me wonder if they were considering more than just sound reduction (especially the big resonator in question).

Unexpectedly , my biggest quandry at the moment is where to mount it!
The factory position seems to be favouring an indirect angle of attack (think of blowing across the top of a bottle and the noise it makes - thats the resonance) But I would've thought a position opposite the air filter would've been better for airflow direction.
I saw a good patent the other day using a speaker driver and inline mic as an active feedback resonator - might even look into this

As a follow up, now that I've driven the car for another 150 odd kms , a few things have settled:

1. The induction noise change is now clearly obvious. It now has that nice deep rapid "wob, wob wob" sound of a much larger engine throughout the entire range (I like this VERY much, at least it now SOUNDS the business if nothing else)

2. The fuel usage jumped around all over the place , went down to 13.8L/100, back up to 15 and now seems to have settled at about 14.4 all in two days - remember: I'm still regularly abusing the pedal) with a bit of luck this indicates that the ECU is doing it's job

3. Pipe hasn't melted:facejump:

4. I still couldn't put c**k on block and say performance is better, but I like to think so

I should point out that it is still running with the slightly dirty filter I bought it with, I just vacuumed all the grass seeds etc. out of it (previous owner certianly did some country driving), and the dealer filled the tank for me before I picked it up :shock: , so I don't know if it has premium or standard in it

Phew! , can see i'm going to get a rep as a long poster here :blah: :happy:

Cheers,

RG

Good stuff & welcome!

just a quick maths spotting - your 60+65 intakes aren't the equivalent of 125mm - that's the diameter.
The cross sectional area is actually the same as a single 88.5mm duct.
So considering turbulence from 2 intake paths, a single 90mm might be better. Is there any difference in air temperature or ram effect between your current setup and the 90mm Galant intake?

Cheers!
Graham.

Good stuff & welcome!

just a quick maths spotting - your 60+65 intakes aren't the equivalent of 125mm - that's the diameter.
The cross sectional area is actually the same as a single 88.5mm duct.
So considering turbulence from 2 intake paths, a single 90mm might be better. Is there any difference in air temperature or ram effect between your current setup and the 90mm Galant intake?

Cheers!
Graham.

Thanks!

Totally agree about the turbulence , that's what I was alluding to earlier with the crossflow reference. The additional 45 deg elbow I put on the 60mm factory snorkel outlet is now only about 3cm from the filter (great because its slamming air straight intothe filter reducing crossflow (and therefore turbulence) but bad because it's effectively using less of the filter and torturing one area) with the new duct. I've yet to add the second elbow mentioned in the first post to the new outlet, but once done there should be considerably less opportunity for cross flow between the two outlets

Not completely following you with the math. Totally see how the volumetric efficiency of two 65mm pipes would not literally equal the same flow of a single 125 mm pipe. But if you're using A = pi/4(Di) where Di = inner diameter, then I don't understand what you mean when you say the cross sectional area of these two pipes is equivalent to an 88.5 mm pipe? i.e.
one pipe at 65mm (25.6 inches) = 514 square inches of cross section, plus the cross section of another 25.6inch pipe = 1028 square inches
Single 88.5 mm pipe = 950.6 square inches
Single 90 mm (35.4inch assuming this is the inner D) = 983 square inches.

Don't get me wrong , I'll bet the flow rate of 2 X 65mm pipes could end up less efficient than a single 90mm after turbulence, and actual airflow is more complicated than cross sectional areas. I just don't get what you mean by the cross section being equal to a 88.5 mm pipe, are you thinking that 65mm is the outer diameter and taking off a few mm in the calculation for that maybe?

Point is two pipes of 65mm inner diameter have more cross sectional area for air to flow through than a single 90mm, if all other parameters are equal yeh?

Mind you , after all that, beating a 90mm isn't what I was trying to achieve.. I only chose 65 mm because this fits comfortably beteen the trans and the coolant bottle and would've stuck with this even if it had less flow than a 90mm because it's free :shifty:
Having said that , I'd still like to do the galant intake as well, when I can scrounge some cash

Cheers,
RG

There may be a 90 mm intake up for sale soon

but good stuff

I have not bothered with the lower resonator but I have the same econ as you when I boot it

going fast is fun

going fast round a bend is even better

Weclome to the club. Some good custom work done there!
I know KJ380 did something similiar, joining a flexible pipe from the bottom of the resonator to the foglight surround (as his model doesn't have foglights) and mounted it there.
As you said, you just about need to take half the car apart to get at that bloody thing... I tried but couldn't get all those plastic screws out.

There may be a 90 mm intake up for sale soon



DO let me know....
Cheers!

There is one on fleabay at the mo'
DO let me know....
Cheers!

i might have the 90mm intake for sale will post up info in the for sale section if i sell it....

Weclome to the club. Some good custom work done there!
I know KJ380 did something similiar, joining a flexible pipe from the bottom of the resonator to the foglight surround (as his model doesn't have foglights) and mounted it there.
As you said, you just about need to take half the car apart to get at that bloody thing... I tried but couldn't get all those plastic screws out.

Grub,

I know I've said this before, but getting the lower plastic panel off so you can then undo two of the three resonator mounting bolts is not as hard as it seems (you can get the third mounting bolt off from the top via the engine bay). Those pesky little scrivets come out fairly easily if you treat them not as screws but as little plastic rivets. Just stick a small screwdriver blade between the head of the scrivet (the 'screw' bit) and the surround, and lever the screw out a bit. Then grab it with needle nosed pliers and pull it out. You'll find that some of them will be loose enough to pull out with your fingers.
Then, once you've got the plastic panel off, one of the two resonator mounting bolts is dead easy to get at but the other one is a little more difficult because it's a fair way 'up'. You just need a long extender bar for your socket wrench, or a breaker bar to crack the bolt loose.
Then, once you've got the three bolts out, the resonator just drops out from underneath (don't try to pull it out through the engine bay like one poster here tried, that's a real PITA!). Once you've got the resonator out it's dead easy to cut the end off with a hacksaw, the plastic is quite soft. Then make whatever other modifucations you like (such as a tube to the driving light hole like I have done) and bolt the resonator back in again.

Grub,
Then, once you've got the three bolts out, the resonator just drops out from underneath (don't try to pull it out through the engine bay like one poster here tried, that's a real PITA!). Once you've got the resonator out it's dead easy to cut the end off with a hacksaw, the plastic is quite soft. Then make whatever other modifucations you like (such as a tube to the driving light hole like I have done) and bolt the resonator back in again.

Couldn't agree more, I first made the mistake of trying to remove this from the engine bay, thinking I would save time over removing all the scrivets - wrong!
Ended up removing them all anyway, and taking it out the bottom (in fact if anybody succeeds in getting this thing out intact from the engine bay, without removing half the car , there should probably be some sort of prize...)

BTW, since doing this mod I seem to get a patchy miss-fire (maybe?) when first starting the car and "idling" out of the driveweay in reverse, feels like I'm touching the brake on and off, but I'm not. I'm pretty sure this never happened before the intake. Anyone else get rough idling or anything after increasing airflow?

Could be just the ECU adjusting

Could be just the ECU adjusting

meh.... maybe, it's done about 300Kms since the mod, any idea how long it normally takes?

As long as it wants

it is always in a constant state of change

Just a quick update for anyone still interested:

Installed a Vaccum Gauge for testing, which has never shown more than 1.5 inches of Mercury pressure drop under any load at a point on the intake just before the throttle body.
This isn't all that bad, but still worth improving on. Figured the big restrictors left are, the MAF Screens, The convoluted intake pipe, and the 60mm upper factory snorkel and very possibly, even the air filter

So... I installed the 90mm TMR snorkel :woot:. Surprisingly, I seemed to get slightly LESS throttle response and performance etc. than before.:tired:
I think this is because:
a. I had already gained so much from the lower intake I installed by comparison
b. When I installed the 90mm snorkel , I removed the directional ducting I had added inside the airbox that I had put on the 60mm snorkel outlet, which was pounding the air straight into the face of the MAF intake.

Last night I pulled the airbox apart again for what seems like the 40th time and hot glued some 90mm duct to direct the snorkel outlet and the lower outlet right at the filter again.
Then I bored out all the surrounding square holes in the outer MAF screen (not game to
mess with the inner one as these buggers are sensitive) to a larger , round diameter (without actually breaking the walls)
Ran again this morning, half expecting to see a CEL from friggin with the MAF with the following results:

-Fuel consumption has dropped by 2 litres per 100 again, indicating a yet to be corrected leaning of the mixture (which would most likely be explained by more air entering the intake than before which the ECU hasn't adjusted yet)
- My vacuum gauge now doesn't go past one inch of mercury under highest load (about 13.5 inches of water from memory) which is pretty reasonable considering the restrictive inner MAF screen, Factory Air filter and convoluted intake pipe stilll remaining

Next up is the installation of the water cooled PCV condenser I've been working on to cool and refine the PCV gas being vented into the intake and a smooth water cooled pipe between the Throttle body and MAF

Very interested to see if the pcv cooler has any gains :) What does it involve exactly?

Very interested to see if the pcv cooler has any gains :) What does it involve exactly?

Basically just a glorified oil catch system, i.e. can full of glass balls to condense oils and hydrocarbons from the PCV system . (You know , the thing that pumps nice hot crankcase blow by gas into your intake that you've been painstakingly trying to cool and add air density/flow to:doh:). The difference with mine, is that it has a copper cooling coil going around the outside , which pipes cool water from a small airconditioner radiator around the alluminium gas canister (There is also a fan driven peltier semiconductor helping cool the radiator).
The whole idea being to dramatically reduce the temperature of the PCV gas making its way through the canister, and sitting at idle, and causing oil and contaminants to condense on the glass balls (marbles) which can be emptied out rather than polluting my intake.

EDIT: will post a picture of it when I get home for clarity

I removed the directional ducting I had added inside the airbox that I had put on the 60mm snorkel outlet, which was pounding the air straight into the face of the MAF intake.
Not sure of this description; do you mean an extension into the airbox aimed at where the MAF is behind the air filter?
If so, surely any velocity/ram effect would be negated by the dense filter?

So it seems that drilling out the outer MAF screen, with the lower reasonator removed and the 90MM intake could be a good solution. Do you remember what drill size you used for the MAF screeen?

Sounds good!....but a photo is a must lol

This makes good reading
Cant wait for the next chapter woohoo

Not sure of this description; do you mean an extension into the airbox aimed at where the MAF is behind the air filter?
If so, surely any velocity/ram effect would be negated by the dense filter?

So it seems that drilling out the outer MAF screen, with the lower reasonator removed and the 90MM intake could be a good solution. Do you remember what drill size you used for the MAF screeen?

Sorry.. no, I just tested with a bit that just fitted through , then went one size above that. Will look when I get home and If I can identify it (chewed plastic remains) will post
With regards to your other question: yes it's an extension into the airbox, as in the original 60mm solution (see the pics in the first post of this thread), and yes.... the more I test this Ryco paper filter , the more I feel that it is restrictive. Going to remove on the weekend and see what improvement I get in pressure measurements.
I am actually considering the slightly risky move of a MAF bypass hose, with a good regulator, but I want to wait until I have some diagnostic software, so I can see the effects on the Mix and Advance

Edit: Knotched, I've just checked and it was a 5mm bit, should mention that I had to spend a bit of time carefully cleaning off the dags with a sharp scalpel blade to avoid any plastic (actually more like carbon fibre/Graphite or whatever the hell the MAF body is made of, quite hard) entering the intake , also be very careful of the exposed thermistor when doing this (looks like a resistor in the outer MAF chamber)

This makes good reading
Cant wait for the next chapter woohoo

Well wait no more! , here is the next installment :woot: :

" Hot snot we are back in business"

Certainly got the ECU's attention again.
Exactly the same pattern as when I installed the lower intake pipe,: Fuel usage plummeted suddenly by 2 litres/100 (12.4), over 25Km trip, then at next startup Fuel usage skyrocketed by 3 Litres /100 (15.6) for the next 25 Km trip , as the ECU went : "Allo allo , wots all this then....?" and richened the mix, and now has slowly begun adjusting back to the typical insane levels of about 14.6L/100 that my solid gold right foot encourages.

Performance is great again, can highly recommend this mod (putting directional piping inside the airbox and drilling out the MAF screen, that is).

As to the Earlier requests for photos:

The PCV condenser (Weapon of Mass Condensation):

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/7130/iphonepics028n.jpg

The Modified airbox with directional pipes ("In yo Face MAF!):

http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/8382/iphonepics011.jpg

The "Oh so sexy " stir fried Vacuum and temperature pods for measuring the pressure changes and throttle body temperature (not essentially relevant, but goes well with most curries and wok dishes:happy: ) :

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/4858/iphonepics046.jpg

Could the increase in econ be from possible running in Closed loop as the engine warms up

just a thought???

Jeez, Gold, you ARE serious about this. That condenser looks a weapon.

Do you think the deflectors in the airbox are really required? The fact you have pressurised the airbox to a higher level must do the trick, particularly with the filter in place?

Why don't you invest in an Exede/UnichipQ?
Then you'll have full control over the AFRs instead of chasing your tail everytime the ECU readjusts and you secondguess it.

Could the increase in econ be from possible running in Closed loop as the engine warms up

just a thought???

Although I reckon this car gives impressive performance in closed loop, nothing has changed here at all. If I was getting better econ from the closed loop , then I would have been getting this all along. In any case I'm pretty sure from hearing the sudden idle change and monitoring the engine temp, that mine is out of closed loop within 5 minutes of starting
EDIT: Sorry, brain freeze.... the idle change I was thinking of would be due to the choke condition ceasing, not the closed loop ending, and happens after only a minute or so


Jeez, Gold, you ARE serious about this. That condenser looks a weapon.

Do you think the deflectors in the airbox are really required? The fact you have pressurised the airbox to a higher level must do the trick, particularly with the filter in place?

Why don't you invest in an Exede/UnichipQ?
Then you'll have full control over the AFRs instead of chasing your tail everytime the ECU readjusts and you secondguess it.

OOh yeah! I likes shiny metal things (my precioussssss....). To be honest, I simply can't afford an off the shelf interceptor, but I have a fair bit of experience programming microcontrollers, and am working slowly towards building my own managment system. Before I can do that though I have to settle on a decent but cheap ODB2 scanner, to make it easier to see if the ECU believes the lies I tell it about the Altitude, Temp and Airflow.

I also need to get a decent picture of the engines behaviour (for example, I know from all you chip huggers that the mix is very rich, and improvements have been gained from leaning the mixture by up to 12.5 -13.1 , but at what load? ideally this figure would be mapped to slightly different ratios across the load range ,and I'm sure it is)

Driving again today reinforced my opinion, that the airbox deflectors are an improvement, way better than the other day , when I fitted the 90 mm without them, I'm loving this car!
Interestingly , the economy has started to improve much further than usual. after the spike to 15+ as the ECU adjusted the mix, it's continued to very slowly fall down to 13.6 which I've never seen it do by this stage of the adjustment (it normally never goes below 14.6). I think this might be because , the re-bored MAF screen is letting more air through, and of course the ECU doesn't know about it, since the air is passing outside the AirFlow sensor chamber (still hitting the thermistor, so helping reduce the temp reading tho'). Therefore it's not compensating for this small amount of extra air in the mixture, so I get a nice subtle leaning effect

Can't believe it! Even though I'm still maintaining a "spirited" driving style the econ hasn't gone past 13.6L/100. That's a consistent 1L difference from the 14.6 I've always had up to now. I really wouldn't have thought that boring the MAF screen would let that much extra air through, but I can't think of any other explanation. I don't see the ECU being unable to adjust (richen) for the directional airflow I've added, unless by some fluke I've hit an upper limit. Anybody else have a theory?

interesting work mate. what exactly do you mean by boring out the MAF screen? does the 380 have the hot wire MAF type which has two wire screens around the MAF? (i have a Magna which uses the other MAF type)

if so, from my understanding those wire screens are there to ensure laminar air flow over the MAF sensor so it can accurately detect how much air is going through it. if you've changed one of them, you might get more air turbulence over the sensor, causing an inaccurate airflow reading, which could have the effect of leaning out your mixtures. just an idea :) excellent craftsmanship skills you have though :)

edit: just did a google search and it comes up with a lot of interesting pages about screen removal on MAFs. here's one: http://www.gmtips.com/3rd-degree/dox/tips/maf/maf-screen.htm

The 380's is completely plastic,screen and all, and cheap as chips too! About $90 from the wreckers and only about $160 new.I removed the entire outer screen from one about a year ago but got abit of hunting at idle and a CEL when I drove it hard,did seem to go well though.Makes me wonder if those flow deflectors Gold has made might have helped that issue?I reckon Gold should steadily remove more and more material until he starts having issues like mine, then go buy another and replicate to pre-problem spec.

interesting work mate. what exactly do you mean by boring out the MAF screen? does the 380 have the hot wire MAF type which has two wire screens around the MAF? (i have a Magna which uses the other MAF type)

if so, from my understanding those wire screens are there to ensure laminar air flow over the MAF sensor so it can accurately detect how much air is going through it. if you've changed one of them, you might get more air turbulence over the sensor, causing an inaccurate airflow reading, which could have the effect of leaning out your mixtures. just an idea :) excellent craftsmanship skills you have though :)

edit: just did a google search and it comes up with a lot of interesting pages about screen removal on MAFs. here's one: http://www.gmtips.com/3rd-degree/dox/tips/maf/maf-screen.htm

I've read that it's a hot-wire MAF , although it doesn't really look like one (single screen + inner sanctum for the sensor?), and apparently (.. from Wikipedia, whom I trust implicitly :hmm:.....) Mitsubishi use Karman-Vortex MAF sensors on just about everything else these days.
Witewalz should know though as he's actually removed the inner screen, which to answer you're question, no... I haven't touched. This would very likely mess with the readings too much regardless of which type of MAF it is. Also in defence of the Hot wire MAF status.. the workshop manual (which otherwise seems to be pretty mum on the topic) says it's a 5-volt , voltage range based sensor, whereas Karman-Vortex are normally frequency based, so very likely hot-wire
I bored out the square holes to 5mm round in the OUTER screen which is a separate chamber to the airflow sensor itself and houses the IAT sensor instead, this lets a heapa air bypass the sensor from what I can tell so far.


The 380's is completely plastic,screen and all, and cheap as chips too! About $90 from the wreckers and only about $160 new.I removed the entire outer screen from one about a year ago but got abit of hunting at idle and a CEL when I drove it hard,did seem to go well though.Makes me wonder if those flow deflectors Gold has made might have helped that issue?I reckon Gold should steadily remove more and more material until he starts having issues like mine, then go buy another and replicate to pre-problem spec.

<Snort!> hah!,sure mate!lol If I was going to waste money I'd rather put it towards my new Exhaust :woot:. Wreckers want $120!!:eek2:
Interesting that you say you removed the entire outer screen though , as on mine this is one piece with the MAF body (i.e. I would have to actually cut the screen out, and .... nooo... I'm not going to do it!) whereas the inner screen that leads to the MAF sensor does just look like it pops-off , you aren't talking about the inner screen you removed are you?

Gold, you are in uncharted territory so you are just going to have to explore the limits.

I believe that you are correct re the bypass airflow - it's leaned out the mixture. I wouldn't go any further until you know exactly what the AFR is doing; otherwise you are going to court disaster - or at the least cause the ECU to keep retarding the advance to stop pinging.

I'd go the exhaust route (straight thru) and you'll find the top end of the engine will come alive ;)

Nah, I cut the outer screen, hot knife followed by a die grinder.Yeah $120 is too much,I paid $90, but hardly a waste of money.Comparable in price to a K&N filter but could deliver far better results when explored properly, ie not how I did it!

Gold, you are in uncharted territory so you are just going to have to explore the limits.

I believe that you are correct re the bypass airflow - it's leaned out the mixture. I wouldn't go any further until you know exactly what the AFR is doing; otherwise you are going to court disaster - or at the least cause the ECU to keep retarding the advance to stop pinging.

I'd go the exhaust route (straight thru) and you'll find the top end of the engine will come alive ;)

Yaaar! Me hearties! Set sail for torque land and we'll ravish their valve seats and lay waste to their conrods!... or maybe just end up in Limp home mode.....

Yeh, I'm desperate to get my hands on an exhaust, all this air has to come out somewhere.........


Nah, I cut the outer screen, hot knife followed by a die grinder.Yeah $120 is too much,I paid $90, but hardly a waste of money.Comparable in price to a K&N filter but could deliver far better results when explored properly, ie not how I did it!


yeh, it makes sense why you would get rough idle and CEL's then: with the outer screen completely gone, the mass of air would follow the path of least resistance and would scarcley bother flowing through the restrictive inner sensor chamber at all, would certainly bugger up the normal range of outputs, did you know whether your CEL was an out of range error? (i.e. airflow too low for too long) If the ECU sees a Crankshaft revolution greater than 150 rpm combined with a measured airflow of less than 283kg/h then it'll throw a CEL after 4 seconds (the temp sensor lower error threshold is -38Deg C, which is pretty unlikely even with the increased airflow, even if you were visiting Antarctica at the time)

If this is the case it's probably a good thing I didn't get too aggressive with the bit size I bored this out with, probably got a bit lucky with just the right amount of airflow. Of course if the MAF is now seeing less air it'll most likely advance the timing slightly more than usual at the same actual load, so I guess I better stick to high octane fuel for now.
I wont be playing with this anymore until I can get an ODB2 scanner to see what the actual AFR is , and what the ECU thinks is happening with air volumes. Then I'll either put a MAF bypass hose in with a regulator, or use something like silicon chips Digital Fuel Adjuster circuit to intercept the signal

Couldn't tell you the error code unfortunately as the cable/software package I bought to log all this was refusing to play ball.After alot of goes by the supplier to get it working I lost interest and sold it.

Couldn't tell you the error code unfortunately as the cable/software package I bought to log all this was refusing to play ball.After alot of goes by the supplier to get it working I lost interest and sold it.

Hmmm...mind sharing the name of the cable/software so I don't buy the same thing? I'm thinking of either getting one of the ELM based connectors and software or a scanguage unit, can't decide yet. I was about to buy an actual AFR gauge when I realised that I should be able to get this from the scanner yeh?
I've asked this before actually but didn't get much response: would really like to know what ODB2 scanner setups people have tried and if they can recommend them?

Hmmm...mind sharing the name of the cable/software so I don't buy the same thing? I'm thinking of either getting one of the ELM based connectors and software or a scanguage unit, can't decide yet. I was about to buy an actual AFR gauge when I realised that I should be able to get this from the scanner yeh?
I've asked this before actually but didn't get much response: would really like to know what ODB2 scanner setups people have tried and if they can recommend them?

http://www.limitless.co.nz/evoscan/ .I had the open port 2.0 cable from memory,cable was fine but the software didn't seem to like CANbus. Downloaded a trial from Palmer performance which seemed to work as it showed a steady idle RPM and plenty of PIDs.Wanted to use this package along with an INNOVATE AFR gauge/sensor to fine tune the XEDE I had not yet fitted along with that modded MAF and some gutted manifolds I was making.I was told I would still need an AUX wideband sensor ,the reason I have long since forgot!

Goldy,

I'm guessing that there would be no point in us piggy back boys drilling out the outer MAF screen like you have done, as our piggy backs are already tuned to optimise the AFRs, and either or both ECUs would simply try to readjust anyway?

KJ.

Goldy,

I'm guessing that there would be no point in us piggy back boys drilling out the outer MAF screen like you have done, as our piggy backs are already tuned to optimise the AFRs, and either or both ECUs would simply try to readjust anyway?

KJ.

The only gain you would get is the typical better airflow-> bigger bang. The factory ECU will only adjust in closed loop (when cold or low revs), at higher loads it'll ignore this airflow, since the 02 sensor which tells it about this extra air will be ignored. I don't know what pattern the exede has been programmed to so can't tell you there.However I expect it would only be a mapping system (there wouldn't be a lot of point bypassing the low load factory closed loop system , as it's inherently designed to try for stoichiometric ratios which are technically the most efficient anyway) in which case you would simply tell the exede to slightly increase the MAF sensor output (by DECREASING the voltage..... go figure!) to the ECU to compensate for slightly more air flowing than the sensor is seeing.

I'm pretty sure the exede would be telling the ECU that the airflow is slightly less than it is right now on your system to make it richen the mixtures across most map points, so if you bored the (outer) MAF screen, you would just need to tell the exede to trim this lie back a little, as you would be effectively lying to the ECU by two different means at once.

BTW , I certainly wouldn't do this (mess with the screen), if you guys don't have the means to adjust the Exede to factor in the extra airflow (either by yourselves or via a tuner) or you will further lean the mixtures beyond what both the Exede AND the Factory ECU are trying to acheive (since neither will know about it, at high load), this will probably mess with your ignition timing at the very least.

Also since some of the threads I've read from you guys discussing the ratios the exede was being tuned for mentioned that you couldn't get past 13:1 without issue. Therfore , if you have already tuned the exede to get as close to this as possible, then you lean the mixture further (in an uncontrolled manner, I might add )by boring the MAF screen , you will very likely see these issues return :learn::blah::blah::learn: lol

Hmmm...mind sharing the name of the cable/software so I don't buy the same thing? I'm thinking of either getting one of the ELM based connectors and software or a scanguage unit, can't decide yet. I was about to buy an actual AFR gauge when I realised that I should be able to get this from the scanner yeh?
I've asked this before actually but didn't get much response: would really like to know what ODB2 scanner setups people have tried and if they can recommend them?

i think you said that you've programmed microcontrollers before? if so i definitely recommend the ELM chipset. i've got one called 'ElmScan 5' that hooks up to a notebook. it works well with the supplied software

if you're a programmer, the best thing about it is that the ELM chipset communication protocol is readily available on the internet, and easy to use. to communicate to the ELM chip you just need to send ASCII commands through the serial port. it's pretty easy to write your own software to read/graph the OBD-II sensors via the chip - i did it for fun about a year ago (i'm a software engineer)

unfortunately i think you'll discover that the O2 sensor in the 380 is a narrow band sensor. i'm not 100% sure, however, as far as i know 99% of manufacturers don't use a wide band sensor from factory as they are much more expensive than narrow band. besides, narrow band is all that's needed as 99% of cars only use the O2 to make sure they're running at 14.7:1 in closed loop.

therefore, the front O2 sensor readings won't tell you enough information to accurately determine AFRs as narrow band O2 sensor response is very non-linear. trust me, i've tried :(

good work so far, however if you want more performance beyond this point i think most traditional approaches such as an exhaust and cams then piggyback will be the way to go. if you just want to tune the engine, the other things you've mentioned are a possibility but a) you'll need to invest in a proper wideband O2 sensor and wack it into your tailpipe to tune properly and b) you won't see much gain if any

i think you said that you've programmed microcontrollers before? if so i definitely recommend the ELM chipset. i've got one called 'ElmScan 5' that hooks up to a notebook. it works well with the supplied software

if you're a programmer, the best thing about it is that the ELM chipset communication protocol is readily available on the internet, and easy to use. to communicate to the ELM chip you just need to send ASCII commands through the serial port. it's pretty easy to write your own software to read/graph the OBD-II sensors via the chip - i did it for fun about a year ago (i'm a software engineer)

unfortunately i think you'll discover that the O2 sensor in the 380 is a narrow band sensor. i'm not 100% sure, however, as far as i know 99% of manufacturers don't use a wide band sensor from factory as they are much more expensive than narrow band. besides, narrow band is all that's needed as 99% of cars only use the O2 to make sure they're running at 14.7:1 in closed loop.

therefore, the front O2 sensor readings won't tell you enough information to accurately determine AFRs as narrow band O2 sensor response is very non-linear. trust me, i've tried :(

good work so far, however if you want more performance beyond this point i think most traditional approaches such as an exhaust and cams then piggyback will be the way to go. if you just want to tune the engine, the other things you've mentioned are a possibility but a) you'll need to invest in a proper wideband O2 sensor and wack it into your tailpipe to tune properly and b) you won't see much gain if any

mmm .. yeh, I was afraid this might be the case. I was hoping with the big range of richness that the 380 is factory tuned for they might have wide band sensors. But I guess they would just not bother, since they aren't really going to be checking them during open loop anyway, and , as you say , for stoichiometric , Narrow band would make more sense. This could be an issue for me, as I dont really have any mechanic friends, so I'll have to either buy a sensor (and a circuit to run it) or pay someone to test and tune with me. Maybe I'll just lean it out till I get a CEL then back off, LOL!
Yep.. ELMscan 5 is the one I''ve been thinking about.. which species did you get? and how informative was the free software that it came with i.e did it read the 02 sensors etc. I just want something to read the sensors to start with, I will only start playing with the actual programming much later, I usually program in PicBasic Pro, which won't help here. I used to be pretty good with ANSI C, and VB a long time ago, but will have to refresh to talk to the ELM I suspect.
So I'm still in debate whether to get something like the Scanguage 2 which is only about $50 dearer than a laptop based system like ELM and negates the need for the LT entirely... not as visual or flexible of course tho'

i got one of these: http://www.motorscan.com.au/catalog/ though i think you can get cheaper versions of the ELM chip off ebay. the free software was pretty good, it could read immediate error codes (check engine lights) and also all the common sensor values including air flow rate, intake air temp, O2 sensors 1 and 2 (and 3 and 4 if the 380 has them) coolant temperature etc. the only problem is the refresh rate - the maximum speed is about 5 times/second which is usually fine but probably not fast enough if you're going to try to tune with this information.

good luck and i hope you get the results you're looking for :)

Hi lith, nice looking unit that ELMSCAN 5 . Have you used it on a 380 and can you use an AUX wideband oxy sensor with it?

Hi lith, nice looking unit that ELMSCAN 5 . Have you used it on a 380 and can you use an AUX wideband oxy sensor with it?

i haven't used it on a 380, though if the 380 is OBD-II compliant it should work ok with it. i should also add the ELM scanner allows you to clear check engine lights - definitely a useful feature.

i don't think you can use a wideband O2 sensor with it. OBD-2 scanners are used to diagnose engine problems - they aren't really a tuning tool :)

i haven't used it on a 380, though if the 380 is OBD-II compliant it should work ok with it. i should also add the ELM scanner allows you to clear check engine lights - definitely a useful feature.

i don't think you can use a wideband O2 sensor with it. OBD-2 scanners are used to diagnose engine problems - they aren't really a tuning tool :)

I haven't seen any of these units that can have an aux sensor fitted, they only read whatever the ECU sees
Lith: did you get the elmscan 5 compact or one of the earlier ones? There's a lot of hooha at the mo' about the latest Elmscan 5 compact using a clone of the elm chip rather than an actual elm327, not sure how much it really matters, but I think I might look into the ODBPro range instead. Really want to get the Digital Fuel adjuster and an ODBPro together in the car (although it sounds more and more like I'm going to have to invest in a AFR gauge and WB sensor as well)

i haven't used it on a 380, though if the 380 is OBD-II compliant it should work ok with it. i should also add the ELM scanner allows you to clear check engine lights - definitely a useful feature.

i don't think you can use a wideband O2 sensor with it. OBD-2 scanners are used to diagnose engine problems - they aren't really a tuning tool :)

Yeah unforntunatley thats what I was told when I bought my last cable/software package.But it didn't! Hey Gold have you had a look at this site?http://www.palmerperformance.com/ like I said in my previous post about the EVOSCAN issues, I tried the trial and It works with plenty of PIDs plus you can datalog engine and a wideband too! http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/ have some nice stuff to like the LC1 wideband contoller which has two outputs , handy for supplying info to a ECU and a gauge or data logger at the same time.

Well I just ordered the Digital Fuel Adjuster Kit from Jaycar, and we'll see how it goes. I think this should be a good solution for the 380 owing to it's rich factory tune.
on a leaner vehicle I think it would be less effective due to retarded ignition timing when the MAF singal increases. Since I need to decrease the MAF output anyway to lean the mix, I will also beneft from the ECU's natural tendency to advance the timing as it leans the mix. Putting my faith in the factory knock sensor here..... and hoping that the MAP isn't used for a double check on the MAF! :eeek:

Yeah unforntunatley thats what I was told when I bought my last cable/software package.But it didn't! Hey Gold have you had a look at this site?http://www.palmerperformance.com/ like I said in my previous post about the EVOSCAN issues, I tried the trial and It works with plenty of PIDs plus you can datalog engine and a wideband too! http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/ (http:///) have some nice stuff to like the LC1 wideband contoller which has two outputs , handy for supplying info to a ECU and a gauge or data logger at the same time.

Yeh I have actually , I like the DashCommand tool for the iPhone, but just haven't been able to find a "competativley priced" wireless ODB2 dongle package to go with it, and the OT2 package is a good one too . The EGO sensors are way out of my league

Edit:
Back on the intake mod, I almost outsmarted myself last night when I re-routed the PCV breather hose to stop the PCV system scavenging my precious intake air (Mine! Mine!!) I attached a nice little breather filter to the end of a re-inforced hose and ran it to the side of the front grill, carefully heat shielding the hose past the engine and radiator, reasoning that I would pick up cool, but still filtered air from here.

http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/4904/2010102128am.jpg

Only today when I had to drive to work in the rain did I realise it would also pick up plenty of water when it rains and dump it straight into my crankcase!! :doh:
Fine for the intake where the combustion process will certainly vaporise any water droplets that get in there (typically with positive effects) , not so sure the same applies to my oiled (I assume) crankcase (where this is dumped directly via the head), and don't really want to find out. Luckily I left enough slack in the hose to pull it forward behind the front guard where it should only get minimal vapour and spray (had to go to the car park and remove the front grill etc in my lunch break).

Otherwise no ill effect other than that I noticed my throttle body temperature increased more than usual on the drive today , and realised I'd blocked proabably the only front air flow void leading to the ECU side of the bay with my new installation. Man!... all the sh*tty little things you don't think of when messing with an engine!!- now remedied anyway

Throttle body temp probs?

Take off the plastic engine cover and get yourself a thermobloc spacer for the intake manifold from RPW.
After a trip of a few hours I can put my hand on the intake plenum.
Try doing that with yours now.

http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69711&highlight=phenolic

Throttle body temp probs?

Take off the plastic engine cover and get yourself a thermobloc spacer for the intake manifold from RPW.
After a trip of a few hours I can put my hand on the intake plenum.
Try doing that with yours now.

http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69711&highlight=phenolic

Yeh ... look I read quite a bit about this, becasue I was interested in getting the Thermobloc gasket c/o the RPW blurbs, but two things have held me back.

1. I can always put my hand on the plenum after a drive, without it being too hot, just as it is now. Sometimes even after an hour in traffic, the plenum doesn't feel more than very warm. I find this really perplexing given that I drive it hard in stop start traffic and often stop to get fuel, supplies etc. when heat really soaks in (with no airflow) then go again, but it rarely gets uncomfortably hot, and never so I couldn't keep my hand on it
2. I'm still trying to get a good picture of just how much heat soak is really happening, especially given some of the innacuracies posted by RPW with respect to the heated throttle body etc.
65 deg C is the hottest temp I've yet to see on the throttle body or under the bonnet (under any circumstances) which doesn't last long before it's back to hovering around 55, and I'm not sure that is significant for an engine bay. So for the moment I'm devoting my finances to the tuning, intake and exhaust. I still have my eye on the phenolics, but I have more investigative work to perform before I go for them

That spacer to me does not make sense. Heat is still being transferred by the bolts holding the plenum down!

For $250 odd, invest in an AEM UEGO wideband o2 sensor and gauge kit. For tuning purposes, this has saved me HEAPS of money long-term. mine is used for tuning and is also read by the ECU to alter fuel on it's own. Anyway, yeah if your going to get into tuning...get a wideband....well worth the $

;1271008']That spacer to me does not make sense. Heat is still being transferred by the bolts holding the plenum down!

For $250 odd, invest in an AEM UEGO wideband o2 sensor and gauge kit. For tuning purposes, this has saved me HEAPS of money long-term. mine is used for tuning and is also read by the ECU to alter fuel on it's own. Anyway, yeah if your going to get into tuning...get a wideband....well worth the $

This might help! Old school V8 with quadrajet carbie,without phenolic spacer runs like crap when its hot and won't restart.With spacer,no probs!

Well I just ordered the Digital Fuel Adjuster Kit from Jaycar, and we'll see how it goes. I think this should be a good solution for the 380 owing to it's rich factory tune.
on a leaner vehicle I think it would be less effective due to retarded ignition timing when the MAF singal increases. Since I need to decrease the MAF output anyway to lean the mix, I will also beneft from the ECU's natural tendency to advance the timing as it leans the mix. Putting my faith in the factory knock sensor here..... and hoping that the MAP isn't used for a double check on the MAF! :eeek:

Just an update: Got the successor to the Silicon chip Digital Fuel Adjuster kit , now called the "Voltage Interceptor for Cars" kit , which is the same but newer, with double the load points , twice the oscillator speed and a more compact and efficient design.
Built and tested over the weekend (almost let the smoke out by using a crossover DB25 cable instead of a straight thru, made a nasty smell come from the hand controller - note to self: "When constructing electronic circuits , keep the number of bourbons consumed throughout to less than six") and all working ok now. Now waiting for OBD2 scanner to arrive to start connection to the MAF and adjustment.

Just an update: Got the successor to the Silicon chip Digital Fuel Adjuster kit , now called the "Voltage Interceptor for Cars" kit , which is the same but newer, with double the load points , twice the oscillator speed and a more compact and efficient design.
Built and tested over the weekend (almost let the smoke out by using a crossover DB25 cable instead of a straight thru, made a nasty smell come from the hand controller - note to self: "When constructing electronic circuits , keep the number of bourbons consumed throughout to less than six") and all working ok now. Now waiting for OBD2 scanner to arrive to start connection to the MAF and adjustment.

OBD2 scanner arrived, installed and even working. Have started monitoring and logging Intake Temp, Mass air flow and Advance to understande the ECU's logic patterns and parameters. Once I've got these Mapped, a few trips with my USB multimeter should be able to map OBD2 data to voltage fluctuations to build an adjusted Map for the MAF input from the piggyback

How has this adventure ended up?

How has this adventure ended up?


Pretty good actually,

I've had the voltage adjuster (interceptor) running for a few months now with an Innovate AFR guage to tune it by and all seems to be going well (first gauge/sensor died after a month, but Kade speed and Marine replaced it even though the sensor has no warranty (highly recommend those guys).

Fuel use has dropped by 1.5 L/100Km which I'm really happy about.
Performance gain/loss is difficult to measure as the only real way I can measure is with airflow meter readings (either directly or converted to KW and Torque by the OBD scanner), and this is the very parameter I am altering to adjust the fuel mix so I can't depend on this anymore (I limit the airflow reading to about 174g/s at WOT, used to go up to 200g/s).

I also had to add some "baseline" voltage to the Interceptor unit as no matter how I wired it (or built it - tried two) it would always drop about 50mV or so off the actual voltage from the MAF.

Next step is to fit a resistance circuit to the IAT and Coolant temp sensor to allow massaging the timing a little and then to a Dyno for a professional torque tune and a better measure of performance.
At the moment I've just tuned it to keep AFR's above 10:1 up from 9:1 using repetative runs and logging, to stay on the safe side in case the guage is not accurate.
if you're going to try any of this ,I recommend everything you buy is capable of logging. Realtime reading is useless as the changes and readings happen way too fast

Cheers,
RG

Haha going to be honest, i was just going to pick your mind and see if your investigations would lead to anything that i could potentially appropriate, but i'm certain that if i tried to change the AFR i'd blow something up...

What would you say would be the total time/cost factor to get to what you've achieved? Shaving 1.5L/100km is a lovely figure

Haha going to be honest, i was just going to pick your mind and see if your investigations would lead to anything that i could potentially appropriate, but i'm certain that if i tried to change the AFR i'd blow something up...

What would you say would be the total time/cost factor to get to what you've achieved? Shaving 1.5L/100km is a lovely figure


Cost factor is pretty fair, the voltage interceptor unit only costs about $150 (but you have to build and solder it together yourself) and the AFR sensor and gauge were $200. Add another $30 for a bung welded into the exhaust and $30 for good waterproof plugs and cable to create a loom and I guess you're gonna spend something around $400. The OBD scanner is very handy also and I paid about $30 for the scanner $15 for the software and about $100 for a tft screen to display realtime data on.
As far as time goes ,forget it! I can't even guestimate the weeks of research put in alone before I even purchased a thing, let alone building ,testing ,troubleshooting, re-building, re-testing etc. .
If you leverage lessons learned from people like myself you will save a lot of time,(unfortunately when I was doing this, I coudn't find anyone doing this, especially for the 380) but it will still take you quite a few weekends.
Gotta remember it's a cautious process, if you rush it and go too lean when tuning at WOT, might be a LOT more expensive than anticipated
I went down this path instead of just paying a grand or so for an exede and tune for a couple of reasons:
1 .I like to do sh*t myself, and I plan to keep on expanding this engine managment system with further circuits, this was just a part of quite a few mods I've done /am doing
2. I have lot of experience with electronics and programming (not strictly neccessary though)
3.I couldn't stand how stupidly rich these things run, it's just offensive to my sense of efficiency and performance
I guess what I'm saying is, if you're just going to do it to save money over the exede professionally fitted and tuned, I wouldn't do it. If you factor in the hours and cost together the exede would be better value , unless you have heaps of time, a love of improving engines yourself, or someone is asking ridiculous amount (possible) you just can't afford
Cheers,
RG