i am building a megajolt lite jr to run on a 2ltr pinto with many mods and twin 40 delortoes these carbs have both tps and four vacuum take offs that i can use
which is the better system tps or linking all four vacuums together and conecting this to the megajolt map sensor
thanks dave
tps or map
Moderators: JeffC, rdoherty, stieg, brentp
Opinions vary, but I believe
Opinions vary, but I believe using the MAP sensor is a more accurate measurement of engine load. Unless... you have wild cams, in which case TPS would be better for you.
Brent
Brent
-
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 9:27 pm
tps or map
hello brent i will be using a 285 kent cam so at what point does a cam become a wild one
is it the large overlap that causes the problems for a map sensor
ps the board looks great cant wait to use it
cheers dave
is it the large overlap that causes the problems for a map sensor
ps the board looks great cant wait to use it
cheers dave
Ok, MAP sensors have problems
Ok, MAP sensors have problems with both lumpy cams and intakes that flow alot of air. A set of individual throttle bodies will be pain for a MAP sensor. A stock vehicle that emits a healty amount of vaccume would work great. Not a 1500cc Honda motor with 288 duration cams and Weber DCOE 45's.
A TPS makes more sense to me, it wont take in effect of atomosphereic changes and what not, but that's why you have a programmible ignition right?
A TPS makes more sense to me, it wont take in effect of atomosphereic changes and what not, but that's why you have a programmible ignition right?
Honda 87 CRX - Motor puts out 65 hp, I'm shooting for 150
wild cams
How "wild" a cam is depends a great deal on the capacity and compression ratio of the engine.
From my Mini years, a cam that was mild in a 1400, placed in an 850 would result in an engine that idled roughly and wouldn't pull till it hit 4000rpm.
There was a point at which when matching a distributor, we'd go with purely manual advance and dump the vacuum, but it's going to depend on the cam. We had vacuum with a 266, non-vacuum with a 276/286.
Have a word with whoever supplied the cam as to which distributor they'd recommend for that overlap, and base the decision on MAP or TPS on that:-
This from the Aldon site
FORD OHC (PINTO) ALL BOSCH UNITS
104FPY
A non-vacuum distributor to suit engines fitted with side draught carburettors but retaining the standard camshaft.
104FPR1
A non-vacuum distributor to suit engines fitted with side draught carburettors and fitted with a modified camshaft such as piper 270, 285, Kent RL1, RL2, Burton 32, 33 or 40, 41 etc.
104FPR2
A distributor with vacuum advance to suit engines fitted with twin choke
down draught carburettors together with a modified camshaft.
Any help?
From my Mini years, a cam that was mild in a 1400, placed in an 850 would result in an engine that idled roughly and wouldn't pull till it hit 4000rpm.
There was a point at which when matching a distributor, we'd go with purely manual advance and dump the vacuum, but it's going to depend on the cam. We had vacuum with a 266, non-vacuum with a 276/286.
Have a word with whoever supplied the cam as to which distributor they'd recommend for that overlap, and base the decision on MAP or TPS on that:-
This from the Aldon site
FORD OHC (PINTO) ALL BOSCH UNITS
104FPY
A non-vacuum distributor to suit engines fitted with side draught carburettors but retaining the standard camshaft.
104FPR1
A non-vacuum distributor to suit engines fitted with side draught carburettors and fitted with a modified camshaft such as piper 270, 285, Kent RL1, RL2, Burton 32, 33 or 40, 41 etc.
104FPR2
A distributor with vacuum advance to suit engines fitted with twin choke
down draught carburettors together with a modified camshaft.
Any help?
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 6:54 pm
TPS or Map
On my 2l Pinto with twin Dellorto 45s installation, I have used tps. It works well and was simple to implement. I haven't come across anybody using MAP with Weber or Dellorto carbs. If there is it would be good to hear their comments.