Mod updates
#227
It's a huge rush. I'm sure it'll take a few months of driving it before I drive it normally again. I've gotten so used to driving the Z71 that driving the TT is like driving a rocket ship.
It'll do it at pretty much any RPM and at any speed, so I don't think it's turbulence in the MAF. I've gotten it to do it at as slow as 10 MPH, and up to 80 MPH. It doesn't get any worse at higher speeds.
I swapped out the TPS and that wasn't it. MAF, O2 sensors? I don't know. I have a friend up here with an N/A. The MAF is easy enough to swap out. I'll see if he'll let me swap them.
Zlover...you got any ideas?
It'll do it at pretty much any RPM and at any speed, so I don't think it's turbulence in the MAF. I've gotten it to do it at as slow as 10 MPH, and up to 80 MPH. It doesn't get any worse at higher speeds.
I swapped out the TPS and that wasn't it. MAF, O2 sensors? I don't know. I have a friend up here with an N/A. The MAF is easy enough to swap out. I'll see if he'll let me swap them.
Zlover...you got any ideas?
Last edited by 91zxtt; 01-30-2007 at 09:28 PM.
#228
Originally Posted by 91zxtt
It's a huge rush. I'm sure it'll take a few months of driving it before I drive it normally again. I've gotten so used to driving the Z71 that driving the TT is like driving a rocket ship.
It'll do it at pretty much any RPM and at any speed, so I don't think it's turbulence in the MAF. I've gotten it to do it at as slow as 10 MPH, and up to 80 MPH. It doesn't get any worse at higher speeds.
I swapped out the TPS and that wasn't it. MAF, O2 sensors? I don't know. I have a friend up here with an N/A. The MAF is easy enough to swap out. I'll see if he'll let me swap them.
Bardabe...you got any ideas?
It'll do it at pretty much any RPM and at any speed, so I don't think it's turbulence in the MAF. I've gotten it to do it at as slow as 10 MPH, and up to 80 MPH. It doesn't get any worse at higher speeds.
I swapped out the TPS and that wasn't it. MAF, O2 sensors? I don't know. I have a friend up here with an N/A. The MAF is easy enough to swap out. I'll see if he'll let me swap them.
Bardabe...you got any ideas?
msglngth
#229
The CAS is what I replaced to fix the other problem. It did this same thing with the CAS I had before. It runs really well under load or hard acceleration. It doesn't like to be at or near coasting. There are two different problems that I thought were related....as it turns out, they aren't.
On a positive note....I took it to a smog shop last Friday to have them give me a read out. It runs clean...real clean. Before I began this project, hydrocarbons were over 300. The test last week showed them down around 60 ppm. I was an appt with a smog referee to give the final ok on Thursday.
On a positive note....I took it to a smog shop last Friday to have them give me a read out. It runs clean...real clean. Before I began this project, hydrocarbons were over 300. The test last week showed them down around 60 ppm. I was an appt with a smog referee to give the final ok on Thursday.
#230
Originally Posted by 91zxtt
It runs really well under load or hard acceleration. It doesn't like to be at or near coasting.
#231
Originally Posted by CanyonCarver
You might still try putting some tape on the side of your air filter that faces the front of the car. I wasn't insinuating that the MAF was the problem, but air turbulence in the MAF might be. Although you virtually have a new motor, have you tried cleaning the AAC valve and components? I had on-throttle / off-throttle lag and popping before I cleaned mine.
All of that stuff was cleaned within the last 1000 miles. I'll try the tape idea.
#232
Originally Posted by 91zxtt
All of that stuff was cleaned within the last 1000 miles. I'll try the tape idea.
#233
Well, it's been raining here all week, so I haven't driven since I won't drive it in the rain. I had to reschedule my appointment with the smog referee because of the weather. I have an appointment set for Tuesday. Wish me luck.
I was finally able to get around to installing the rear adjustable upper control arms today. It was quite a bit eaqsier than I expected. Also installed the rear strut bar, and bled the brakes with new synthetic fluid.
After I installed the rear strut bar, I moved on to bleeding the brakes. As I was jacking up the front end, I couldn't figure out why it was so hard to lift the car. I had the jack positioned beneath the passenger side frame rail just behind the wheek. I thought something was wrong, but when I looked to the back of the car, I noticed that the rear wheel was off the ground too. I can't believe the strut bar would make that much of a difference in the overall rigidity. I'm anxious to drive it again.
I was finally able to get around to installing the rear adjustable upper control arms today. It was quite a bit eaqsier than I expected. Also installed the rear strut bar, and bled the brakes with new synthetic fluid.
After I installed the rear strut bar, I moved on to bleeding the brakes. As I was jacking up the front end, I couldn't figure out why it was so hard to lift the car. I had the jack positioned beneath the passenger side frame rail just behind the wheek. I thought something was wrong, but when I looked to the back of the car, I noticed that the rear wheel was off the ground too. I can't believe the strut bar would make that much of a difference in the overall rigidity. I'm anxious to drive it again.
#235
Originally Posted by 91zxtt
Well, it's been raining here all week, so I haven't driven since I won't drive it in the rain. I had to reschedule my appointment with the smog referee because of the weather. I have an appointment set for Tuesday. Wish me luck.
I was finally able to get around to installing the rear adjustable upper control arms today. It was quite a bit eaqsier than I expected. Also installed the rear strut bar, and bled the brakes with new synthetic fluid.
After I installed the rear strut bar, I moved on to bleeding the brakes. As I was jacking up the front end, I couldn't figure out why it was so hard to lift the car. I had the jack positioned beneath the passenger side frame rail just behind the wheek. I thought something was wrong, but when I looked to the back of the car, I noticed that the rear wheel was off the ground too. I can't believe the strut bar would make that much of a difference in the overall rigidity. I'm anxious to drive it again.
I was finally able to get around to installing the rear adjustable upper control arms today. It was quite a bit eaqsier than I expected. Also installed the rear strut bar, and bled the brakes with new synthetic fluid.
After I installed the rear strut bar, I moved on to bleeding the brakes. As I was jacking up the front end, I couldn't figure out why it was so hard to lift the car. I had the jack positioned beneath the passenger side frame rail just behind the wheek. I thought something was wrong, but when I looked to the back of the car, I noticed that the rear wheel was off the ground too. I can't believe the strut bar would make that much of a difference in the overall rigidity. I'm anxious to drive it again.
#237
The problem I'm having feels like the car is running lean.
A thought....for those of you familiar with the DOOZ set up....could the problem I'm describing be caused by the 'dummy' maf having the screen removed and the working MAF still having the screen in place? It is my understanding that the ECU for the DOOLZ is re-programmed so that signal from the MAF is cut in half; which would allow it to meter twice the air. It also works off of the assumption that the air coming in through the dummy is the same amount as that comind in through the working MAF. If the screen is gone, then more air would come in through the dummy side...the non-metered side. This would cause a lean condition, right? This may be a stretch, but I think it makes sense.
Anyone else buying this?
A thought....for those of you familiar with the DOOZ set up....could the problem I'm describing be caused by the 'dummy' maf having the screen removed and the working MAF still having the screen in place? It is my understanding that the ECU for the DOOLZ is re-programmed so that signal from the MAF is cut in half; which would allow it to meter twice the air. It also works off of the assumption that the air coming in through the dummy is the same amount as that comind in through the working MAF. If the screen is gone, then more air would come in through the dummy side...the non-metered side. This would cause a lean condition, right? This may be a stretch, but I think it makes sense.
Anyone else buying this?
#238
Originally Posted by 91zxtt
The problem I'm having feels like the car is running lean.
A thought....for those of you familiar with the DOOZ set up....could the problem I'm describing be caused by the 'dummy' maf having the screen removed and the working MAF still having the screen in place? It is my understanding that the ECU for the DOOLZ is re-programmed so that signal from the MAF is cut in half; which would allow it to meter twice the air. It also works off of the assumption that the air coming in through the dummy is the same amount as that comind in through the working MAF. If the screen is gone, then more air would come in through the dummy side...the non-metered side. This would cause a lean condition, right? This may be a stretch, but I think it makes sense.
Anyone else buying this?
A thought....for those of you familiar with the DOOZ set up....could the problem I'm describing be caused by the 'dummy' maf having the screen removed and the working MAF still having the screen in place? It is my understanding that the ECU for the DOOLZ is re-programmed so that signal from the MAF is cut in half; which would allow it to meter twice the air. It also works off of the assumption that the air coming in through the dummy is the same amount as that comind in through the working MAF. If the screen is gone, then more air would come in through the dummy side...the non-metered side. This would cause a lean condition, right? This may be a stretch, but I think it makes sense.
Anyone else buying this?
or you can always try switching MAF's and see if that little screen is making a diference. (if it is you should run rich / stoich)
#240
Originally Posted by 91zxtt
The problem I'm having feels like the car is running lean.
A thought....for those of you familiar with the DOOZ set up....could the problem I'm describing be caused by the 'dummy' maf having the screen removed and the working MAF still having the screen in place? It is my understanding that the ECU for the DOOLZ is re-programmed so that signal from the MAF is cut in half; which would allow it to meter twice the air. It also works off of the assumption that the air coming in through the dummy is the same amount as that comind in through the working MAF. If the screen is gone, then more air would come in through the dummy side...the non-metered side. This would cause a lean condition, right? This may be a stretch, but I think it makes sense.
Anyone else buying this?
A thought....for those of you familiar with the DOOZ set up....could the problem I'm describing be caused by the 'dummy' maf having the screen removed and the working MAF still having the screen in place? It is my understanding that the ECU for the DOOLZ is re-programmed so that signal from the MAF is cut in half; which would allow it to meter twice the air. It also works off of the assumption that the air coming in through the dummy is the same amount as that comind in through the working MAF. If the screen is gone, then more air would come in through the dummy side...the non-metered side. This would cause a lean condition, right? This may be a stretch, but I think it makes sense.
Anyone else buying this?
Last edited by Boosted Z; 02-12-2007 at 06:44 PM.
#241
Bard- I think you're mistaken on how the DOOLZ works. There is only 1 MAF signal. There is only 1 plug. There's aren't 2 signals to average. It only meters 1 side. The 2nd MAF is a dummy; i.e. there is nothing that plugs into it.
Everything I have read in regards to the Z1/ASH ecu is to set the timing at 15 degrees BTDC. Never more than that. Advancing the timing beyond 15 increases the likelihood of detonation. I'm not willing to risk that.
Ray-that's an interesting idea. I have difficult time buying a 'gimic'; which is what the tornado is, but if it works than it may be worth a shot. Where did you install it? What's weird is that it doesn't seem to matter what speed I'm traveling at. Was your's as bad at 80 MPH as it is at 10 MPH, cause mine doesn't seem to care how fast I'm going. It tends to be the worst when I'm running it between 7 and 10 lbs of vacuum.
CC-thanks....you're a big help.
Everything I have read in regards to the Z1/ASH ecu is to set the timing at 15 degrees BTDC. Never more than that. Advancing the timing beyond 15 increases the likelihood of detonation. I'm not willing to risk that.
Ray-that's an interesting idea. I have difficult time buying a 'gimic'; which is what the tornado is, but if it works than it may be worth a shot. Where did you install it? What's weird is that it doesn't seem to matter what speed I'm traveling at. Was your's as bad at 80 MPH as it is at 10 MPH, cause mine doesn't seem to care how fast I'm going. It tends to be the worst when I'm running it between 7 and 10 lbs of vacuum.
CC-thanks....you're a big help.
#242
Originally Posted by 91zxtt
Bard- I think you're mistaken on how the DOOLZ works. There is only 1 MAF signal. There is only 1 plug. There's aren't 2 signals to average. It only meters 1 side. The 2nd MAF is a dummy; i.e. there is nothing that plugs into it.
Everything I have read in regards to the Z1/ASH ecu is to set the timing at 15 degrees BTDC. Never more than that. Advancing the timing beyond 15 increases the likelihood of detonation. I'm not willing to risk that.
Everything I have read in regards to the Z1/ASH ecu is to set the timing at 15 degrees BTDC. Never more than that. Advancing the timing beyond 15 increases the likelihood of detonation. I'm not willing to risk that.
#243
Well f*ck....took it to the smog referee today. Failed emmissions and visual. CO was within range, but just barely on both the idle and 2500 RPM test.
Comparing it to the test from two years ago it looks like this.
gross polluter = 270
AT Idle CO2 O2 Hydrocarbons (max = 120ppm) CO% (max = 1%)
2004 10.4% 6.1% 497 .55%
2007 13.6% 1.2% 228 .87%
AT 2500 max = 140 ppm max = 1%
2004 11.1% 5.5% 16 0%
2007 13.7% 1% 135 .97%
I can't begin to guess what might be causing this. Everything's new.
Does anyone know how the car with the DOOLZ intake would act if the ecu was not programmed for it? It would run really lean, right? Isn't high CO and high hydrocarbons indicators of a lean condition?
He failed me on the visual for not having the AIV's or the precats. I'm guessing I'm going to have put the stockers back on....what a bitch. I'm f*ckin pissed.
Comparing it to the test from two years ago it looks like this.
gross polluter = 270
AT Idle CO2 O2 Hydrocarbons (max = 120ppm) CO% (max = 1%)
2004 10.4% 6.1% 497 .55%
2007 13.6% 1.2% 228 .87%
AT 2500 max = 140 ppm max = 1%
2004 11.1% 5.5% 16 0%
2007 13.7% 1% 135 .97%
I can't begin to guess what might be causing this. Everything's new.
Does anyone know how the car with the DOOLZ intake would act if the ecu was not programmed for it? It would run really lean, right? Isn't high CO and high hydrocarbons indicators of a lean condition?
He failed me on the visual for not having the AIV's or the precats. I'm guessing I'm going to have put the stockers back on....what a bitch. I'm f*ckin pissed.
Last edited by 91zxtt; 02-14-2007 at 11:35 AM.
#244
Originally Posted by 91zxtt
Well f*ck....took it to the smog referee today. Failed emmissions and visual. CO was within range, but just barely on both the idle and 2500 RPM test.
Comparing it to the test from two years ago it looks like this.
gross polluter = 270
AT Idle CO2 O2 Hydrocarbons (max = 120ppm) CO% (max = 1%)
2004 10.4% 6.1% 497 .55%
2007 13.6% 1.2% 228 .87%
AT 2500 max = 140 ppm max = 1%
2004 11.1% 5.5% 16 0%
2007 13.7% 1% 135 .97%
I can't begin to guess what might be causing this. Everything's new.
Does anyone know how the car with the DOOLZ intake would act if the ecu was not programmed for it? It would run really lean, right? Isn't high CO and high hydrocarbons indicators of a lean condition?
He failed me on the visual for not having the AIV's or the precats. I'm guessing I'm going to have put the stockers back on....what a bitch. I'm f*ckin pissed.
Comparing it to the test from two years ago it looks like this.
gross polluter = 270
AT Idle CO2 O2 Hydrocarbons (max = 120ppm) CO% (max = 1%)
2004 10.4% 6.1% 497 .55%
2007 13.6% 1.2% 228 .87%
AT 2500 max = 140 ppm max = 1%
2004 11.1% 5.5% 16 0%
2007 13.7% 1% 135 .97%
I can't begin to guess what might be causing this. Everything's new.
Does anyone know how the car with the DOOLZ intake would act if the ecu was not programmed for it? It would run really lean, right? Isn't high CO and high hydrocarbons indicators of a lean condition?
He failed me on the visual for not having the AIV's or the precats. I'm guessing I'm going to have put the stockers back on....what a bitch. I'm f*ckin pissed.
#245
I e-mailed Greg down at Specialty Z. He said that they've only had 1 (now 2) people fail the visual inspection with the mid pipes and the down pipes. He said to take it somewhere else. I may have made a mistake by taking it to a smog referee; when all I needed to do was take it to a shop that is certififed to pass gross polluters. I'm not sure if the inspection is any different, but it's worth a shot.
He also said that I should adjust the timing back to 10 degreed BTDC. This will bring the hydrocarbons way down. Makes sense. I told him that this makes me feel that I'm just masking the problem. He responded by saying that my readouts are pretty typical for a Z32 TT with the downpipes and hi-flow cats. He said that most people with the hi-flow cats need to back the timing down to 10 degrees in order to pass smog.
Would've been nice to know that before today.
He also said that he has never seen a car pass smog with Random Technologies Cats. They always need to reinstall the OEM cats to pass. Interesting to know.
He also said that I should adjust the timing back to 10 degreed BTDC. This will bring the hydrocarbons way down. Makes sense. I told him that this makes me feel that I'm just masking the problem. He responded by saying that my readouts are pretty typical for a Z32 TT with the downpipes and hi-flow cats. He said that most people with the hi-flow cats need to back the timing down to 10 degrees in order to pass smog.
Would've been nice to know that before today.
He also said that he has never seen a car pass smog with Random Technologies Cats. They always need to reinstall the OEM cats to pass. Interesting to know.
#246
Originally Posted by 91zxtt
Ray-that's an interesting idea. I have difficult time buying a 'gimic'; which is what the tornado is, but if it works than it may be worth a shot. Where did you install it? What's weird is that it doesn't seem to matter what speed I'm traveling at. Was your's as bad at 80 MPH as it is at 10 MPH, cause mine doesn't seem to care how fast I'm going. It tends to be the worst when I'm running it between 7 and 10 lbs of vacuum.
Last edited by Boosted Z; 02-17-2007 at 03:32 PM.
#247
I installed a screen to replace the one missing on the dummy maf....problem fixed. I can't believe that something as insignificant as a screen would have this large of an impact. Installing the screen has also solved the problem of the engine wanting to die when I would coast to a stop. The problems I was experiencing was due to a lean condition. Installing the screen seemed to have fattened it up just enough.
Fattening it up a but will improve the emissions readings, but I'm sure this won't get it to pass smog. Retarding the timing to 10 degrees and putting a few gallons of 87 octane in prior to the test should do the trick though.
Fattening it up a but will improve the emissions readings, but I'm sure this won't get it to pass smog. Retarding the timing to 10 degrees and putting a few gallons of 87 octane in prior to the test should do the trick though.
#250
Originally Posted by 91zxtt
I installed a screen to replace the one missing on the dummy maf....problem fixed. I can't believe that something as insignificant as a screen would have this large of an impact. Installing the screen has also solved the problem of the engine wanting to die when I would coast to a stop. The problems I was experiencing was due to a lean condition. Installing the screen seemed to have fattened it up just enough.
Fattening it up a but will improve the emissions readings, but I'm sure this won't get it to pass smog. Retarding the timing to 10 degrees and putting a few gallons of 87 octane in prior to the test should do the trick though.
Fattening it up a but will improve the emissions readings, but I'm sure this won't get it to pass smog. Retarding the timing to 10 degrees and putting a few gallons of 87 octane in prior to the test should do the trick though.