yfz450guy

how does one go about checking for a boost leak?

HOHN

You may, in fact have a boost leak. The telltale sign is the HIGHER egt. If it was just winter fuel (or lower fuel quality in general), you should see LOWER egt.

Boost leaks can be hard to track. The first thing to do is check the obvious-- boost gauge lines, loose bolts on air horn or clamps, etc.

I had a boost leak once that turned out to be a crack in the clear tubing that supplied the boost guage.

Most boost leaks, even small ones, will leak more than just 3 or 4 psi, though.

I remember Piers had posted once (on TDR) a good procedure for finding boost leaks. It was something about using some PVC to cap off the intake tract on both ends, tap a fitting into one of the PVC ends, and pressurize the system with 20psi of regulated air. Then use a brush and some soapy water.

A common leak location is the intercooler boot on the passenger side-- check that, too.



H

RowJ

I used a Windex spray bottle filled with soapy water....just keep spraying till you see bubbles.

RJ

j-dubya

so how does the VA compare to the EZ on the top end? when i was searching on here, somebody wrote about the VA drifting off around 2300. any comments?

jeremy

HOHN

I can't say. I have to wonder if the perception of the VA dropping off is due to the fact that it's a little better on bottom.

For example, the ECM has such a huge fat bottom end that it makes the top end feel a little disappointing because it can't sustain the awesome pull. You run out of RPM!

To a lesser extent, the VA may feel like it does the same. I personally haven't noticed any fall-off with the VA, ECM, or EZ. It just APPEARS that way relative to the bottom end torque.

I can say that the VA feels smoother than the EZ, but maybe not as strong? I can't say because I had much smaller injectors with my EZ. I do prefer the VA, even it turns out to be less powerful than the EZ. It's quieter, smoother, and seems much more refined.

But.... if that Catcher isn't still tempting me! Bob's evil genius in sending me one to test has me hooked like a crack addict. It's SOO tempting to basically say "dang the torpedoes" and just plunge into the Catcher, annihilate my clutch, and get on with life.

I have to confess that I expected the VA to be a little stronger. The ECM has me spoiled! I'd like to test a "regular" instead of the "special".

JH

j-dubya

the VA appeals to me more simply because of the type of driving im subject to, as well as the fact that im mostly driving around town. and the fact that my buggy is so quick off the line like a drag car, im always wanting to have anything i drive more like the buggy. yes, thats what i suspected on the comment on the VA's top - the bottom is stronger than the others and your maybe expecting more out of the top...

jeremy

TORQUE

Hohn, I would suspect if Bob would have sent you the regular CATCHER(with timing) previously instead of special(without timing), you would have kept it. I have tested my older Van Aaken box, stacked with my regular CATCHER, and it is even more awesome on bottom end , and even more smoke (but still controllable).

We don't have bio-diesel here, just winter fuel now, I suspect THIS may be where your issue is. I have no real noticeable boost drop yet(maybe 1psi) with #1 winter diesel(34-35psi max). You MAY have slight boost leak, which would show up more under max boost conditions. These can be very hard to locate even with soap/water solution, as running even high engine speed, boost will not be very high. Tighten all intercooler boots until tight(align clamp properly), then tighten some more.

GSP

Hmm Good Reading, Im trying to decide which box to get for towing a 5th wheel. About a year ago I was thinking a EZ when I first got my truck. This Van Akin sounds better though. The mad ecm sounds like its power band would be all or nothing, Kinda like 2 speeds ,Idle and On...( just guessing)...I drove a peterbuilt with a big cummins motor that you could not control the speed or power band ,it was either idleing or on all the way.

What do you guys mean when you stack 2 boxes? Are you plugging in to boxes together? Can you do that? How do you plug them in? Hows that work ? Wouldnt one interfear with the other?

Rick

RowJ

GSP
I plug the TST PM3 into the MAP Sensor. Than the EZ goes into the PM3. Finally the Engine Block plug goes into the EZ...instead of the PM3. Kind of a three way "loop". Finally, the EZ data port hook up - goes where it always did.

They don't fight each other....just contribute different benefits at different times.
-EZ contributes timing and fueling at 0 boost.
-PM3 kicks in additional fueling, as usual, based on how much boost your pulling and the power setting you use...all the way up to 3000 rpm.

In one sense, the PM3 takes over where the EZ stops. No one has ever reported ill effects from stacking...just don't stack two boxes that both add timing! IMO, it's the best of both worlds.

RJ

HOHN

I agree with RJ and that's why I'm pursuing a similar stack with a VA and TST. I've got the VA now and it's similar to the Catcher in feel, only to a much smaller degree. It's hard to describe.

The more I drive my VA, the more I prefer it to the EZ I had. Timing seems to be more to the engine's liking, and it makes the engine feel very solid.

The thing I like most about the VA is that EVERY INCH of pedal travel makes a difference. I can tell (and see on my guages) a difference between 90%, 95%, and WOT pedal positions.

IMO, the PERFECT setup would be the ECM's power with the VA's linearity.

Because the VA is so linear (the EZ was less so), I can see this resulting in a NICE stack with a TST box or similar. Since a TST basically just amplifies what's already there, I think I'm really going to like the setup.

Unfortunately, it will be quite a while before I can afford the TST. I'm pretty much broke for the foreseeable future. We're moving next summer and will have to buy appliances (washer, dryer, etc), so BOMB funds are slim for the 8 mos or so.


Stock clutch still going strong, now with M4s and a VA!

Marco

Hohn,
I'm working for you on a software with a different, more linear throttle .
It's a bear but I'll get it straigthend out.

Marco

storx

your wrong about that.... b20 winterized fuel is nothing more then a mixture of the above.......

20% Biodiesel
4% kerosine
76% #2 Diesel


if you look onto biodiesel forums the ending cetane level is 4 points higher on winterized b20 and 7 points higher on normal b20..... so the results would put out higher btu's......i run 100% biodiesel and my idle preturbo temps are 320 degrees... and when i run petro #2 my preturbo temp fluctuate between 280-300 degrees.......... on the dyno i was 80 hp higher with a mix of biodiesel and petro as before earlier the same day i ran dyno with just a 1/4 tank of petro #2 ......... try to run B100 int he truck... with my twins i notice my idle is smoother and less clattery... my turbo response is quicken a little not much but noticable.. and the smoke level is less since im running stage 5 injectors as before with #2 petro on a normal take off the smoke it pretty thick tell the turbos get spooled up......

HOHN

I dunno who is wrong about what (since you didn't say).

But since when does cetane or octane rating have ANYTHING to do with Energy content in BTUs (heating value)???

Methanol has an octane rating of 100 (Using r+m/2 method) compared to regular pump gasoline, yet has almost HALF the energy content in BTU/gal (Gasoline is 124,800 BTU, methanol is 64,250).

Cetane rating refers to a fuel's tendency to auto-ignite. It has NOTHING AT ALL to do with higher heating value (or energy content in BTU/gallon).



Anyway, I'm curious of the fuel is the reason I see less boost, or if it's simply the VA being so much milder than than a Catcher. I suspect the latter, but haven't ruled out the former.

H

RowJ

Storx - I'm not sure there is a direct correlation between Higher Cetane #'s and more BTU's.
Cetane is a measure of combustability...
BTU is a measure of heat output....


Justin - Never even seen at VA. Are there high, med & low settings...like the EZ?
Got stuck doing some business before entering my thread...you got in ahead of me on the Cetane/BTU question.
I hate it when work interfers with important stuff!

RJ

HOHN

Not to my knowledge. It's pretty much just two settings: installed or not

With this VA there's no need for settings anyway. All the EZ's settings do is adjust how much pedal compression there is: on #1 it takes more pedal to give the same amount of fuel as on #3. At the same time, the EZ's settings adjust the proportion of "pedal fueling" (how much you get regardless of boost) to "boost" fueling" (how much fuel you get once you have boost, and how much boost it takes for that fueling).

I dunno where VA drew the line on boost fueling vs pedal fueling, but it's a VERY good balance. There's enough pedal fueling to where you can get good response, but not so much to where smoke is uncontrollable. Smoke is easily controlled.

I don't think I'd mind having ALL the fuel available just with the pedal. It would be like a fictional EZ setting #4, with 100% fuel at zero psi.

I have NO idea how Marco goes about giving the Catcher its incredible response, but I suspect it has a LOT to do with timing, and not so much with fuel. Heck, an EZ can be set to fuel 66%@ no boost, and have 100% at only 3psi, and it's nothing near the Catcher in bottom end response. The smoke is the proof. You can get an EZ to smoke just fine, and while a catcher will smoke a LOT if you push it that far, you can accelerate much faster smokelessly than the EZ can.

IOW, at a constant rate of brisk acceleration, the Catcher is actually CLEANER than the EZ If it was just a function of fueling, than the catcher should smoke a lot given the same circumstances, shouldn't it? Yet we know this doesn't happen.


I suspect that part of the key to the Catcher's success is that it is better positioned to manipulate critical engine parameters for performance. A plug in box can only do so much. In some ways, it has to "play the hand it's dealt". A plug in (non wire tap) box cannot exceed the maximum fueling built into the ECM; on the other hand, a replacement ECM should be able to raise the fueling limit theoretically as high as any wire-tap fueling box.

Moreover, when combined with a wire-tap box, thing get interesting. Suppose the stock ECM has a maximum of X rate of fueling (at 2700 rpm). The Catcher ECM raises this limit to a higher value, Say X+3.

Now you go and add a fueling box. All fueling boxes multiply the ECM's fueling value. So say you get a Blue Chip box that goes up to 63% fueling. This is 63% OF THE ECM'S FUEL. So if the box added a constant 63% to the fueling (which most don't), your fueling would exactly follow the stock ECMs curve.

If you combine that SAME fueling box with a modded ECM, now you are getting 63% of X+3, not just 63% of X!! Morever, your fueling box (if it added a constant 63% more fuel) will follow the modded ECM's more aggressive, performance fueling curve.


What I wouldn't do to be able to manipulate timing and fueling on the fly via Laptop computer!! You could tune the engine to PERFECTLY match any combination of injectors and turbo(s)!

Sorry so long.