>What for?
After replacing the intake, building a cold air box for said intake,
and a high-flow exhaust from manifold back, I seem to be running a bit
lean...
>It's likely that springing for an aftermarket ECU is in your future.
I figured as much, but thought I would ask...
Original question below:
>> Does anyone have a reasonable fix, aside from purchasing the FM-ECU ?
'97 STO, "Chouki"
// Change TEJAS to TX to reply via eMail //
chuckk - 28 Oct 2004 23:02 GMT
In your case, I'd be thinking about the placement of the air flow sensor. It
may be that it's not reading quite what you need. The timing retard is
usually only needed if you add forced air (turbo/supercharger)
I'd also replace the fuel filter if you haven't already done so. Another
thing to do is to see if the fuel pressure drops below normal at higher
throttle settings.
>>What for?
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> // Change TEJAS to TX to reply via eMail //
Leon van Dommelen - 29 Oct 2004 00:59 GMT
>>What for?
>
>After replacing the intake, building a cold air box for said intake,
>and a high-flow exhaust from manifold back, I seem to be running a bit
>lean...
Why do you say so? You should be putting only a small percentage more
air through the system as usual.
Apparently, the JR uses a resistor in the air temperature circuit to
trick the ECU in adding more fuel. You could try the same with a much
smaller resistor. I do not remember what the resistance of the JR kit
one is, (if I ever knew,) but you could try the power forum on
miataforum.com.
Following chuck's advice in insuring the proper operation of the
OEM system first seems like a good idea, though. You hate to
have to take out the resistor later again after you replace the
fuel filter or fuel pump, say.
Leon
>>It's likely that springing for an aftermarket ECU is in your future.
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
>// Change TEJAS to TX to reply via eMail //

Signature
Leon van Dommelen :) Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
rammm@dommelen.net http://www.dommelen.net/miata
EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)
L Bader - 29 Oct 2004 03:01 GMT
Chuck -
Thanks for the lead. The car has ~43K miles on it. Having owned it
for only 6 months, I've not changed the fuel filter.
Leon -
My reasoning for the "running lean" assessment is due to the blueing
verse s bronzing of the RB 4-1 stainless header.
I agree that changing the filter is a first option over adding a
resistor of unknown size...
- L
>>>What for?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>>
>>// Change TEJAS to TX to reply via eMail //
'97 STO, "Chouki"
// Change TEJAS to TX to reply via eMail //
chuckk - 03 Nov 2004 04:30 GMT
I don't know if that's a good indication these days. The feds insist that
the engine run leaner than they did in the old days when we used pipe
discoloration to judge rich/lean.
> Chuck -
>
[quoted text clipped - 48 lines]
>
> // Change TEJAS to TX to reply via eMail //
L Bader - 05 Nov 2004 02:19 GMT
Chuck -
I've talked with a few other gear-heads and have come to the same
conclusion. -- Based upon the lack of CEL and the relatively
unchanged fuel consumption post exhaust upgrade, I am guessing things
are OK...
Thanks to those that chimed in...
- L
>I don't know if that's a good indication these days. The feds insist that
>the engine run leaner than they did in the old days when we used pipe
[quoted text clipped - 57 lines]
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004
'97 STO, "Chouki"
// Change TEJAS to TX to reply via eMail //