STAGE I SLOWER????!!!!!

[Ptturbine]

3BarBoost.....Well said! BTW nice time...Is that with the stock tires?

Also, considering the boost levels we ALL are using a 3 bar map sensor SHOULDN'T be required.....I'm not saying it won't function, however the pcm will need alternate calibration to work...Maybe once we get a constant 25+psi that will be the next step.
PTTURBINE
Toronto.

[3BarBoost]

quote:Originally posted by Ptturbine

3BarBoost.....Well said! BTW nice time...Is that with the stock tires?

Also, considering the boost levels we ALL are using a 3 bar map sensor SHOULDN'T be required.....I'm not saying it won't function, however the pcm will need alternate calibration to work...Maybe once we get a constant 25+psi that will be the next step.
PTTURBINE
Toronto.

Stock tires. PVO PT is faster yet ->http://www.ptcruiserlinks.com/forum/..._ID=3184#21923

Stage 2 is getting 3 Bar MAP if I remember right. Either that or 2.5 bar. Few more months and it'll be out.

[Ptturbine]

O.K. Sounds good... For now I guess I have to be happy with the 13.48! Not bad for an auto....Thanks 3Bar.

[hyracer]

Ptturbine,
What is the "alternate side-gears" you are speaking of?
Also how did you jump from running 14.50's to mid 13.48's? That's an incredible leap in performance! My "Quarter Junior" drag-race software shows you making between 285-300 HP to run that quick.
Deen

[Mel K]

Are you suggesting that we could just put in the larger injectors by themselves and expect better performance than a full Stage I kit or some improvement over the stock injectors?

[spidy134]

Im not sure if just larger injectors will do it alone we are both running boost controlers with our Pt's it was just something we found at the track to work better.
[:I]

[GLH_TC 16V]

quote:Originally posted by Mel K

Are you suggesting that we could just put in the larger injectors by themselves and expect better performance than a full Stage I kit or some improvement over the stock injectors?

Larger injectors by themselves will slow you down. The larger injectors will richen your fuel mixture causing combustion camber temperatures to drop resulting in decreased performance. You need to increase the amount of air into the engine as well (increase the boost) to take advantage of the extra fuel which results in more horsepower and torque.

[Ptturbine]

Hyracer, the alternate gears are from a non-turbo car. I was shifting into overdrive with automatic. This was a result of the BFG drags being almost 2" shorter than the RSA's. That was the only size I could get that day....To remedy the problem, I had to effectively change the final drive ratio...(like have 4.56 gears in the rear end.) This will net you a higher MPH and LESS torque available at the drive tires.
Ptturbine

[Dalite]

quote:Originally posted by 3BarBoost

Welcome to the land of on-board diagnostics (OBD). The Mopar stuff isn't as picky, despite what you might think....

Yes; OnBoard Diagnostics - managing engine operation with EPA compliance the #1 concern.

How can the Mopar PCM be any less picky and still be OBD Based? [:I]

Sounds like a paradox to me... Personally, as long as the PCM properly manages the engine, I could care less how "picky" it is. I am glad that the Stage I firmware is optimized for the stock engine. At this point, with a relative new engine setup, and relatively new firmware routines; it is good to have a standard platform available to eek out common results for future firmware updates. The more widely varied the operating platform is, the less consistent the reactions will be, and the less likely we will have future firmware updates to address common issues.

With that said, I still want to be able to log data and be able to fill in the gaps of my understanding of how it is working; and I must admit the gaps are rather large at this point. [:I]

Anyway, some other information about the DaimlerChrysler-specific PCM, and how it has been noticed by others; specifically SAE. This will let others read and decide for them selves.

SAE has a paper issued by their Vehicle EE SYstems Diagnostic Standards Committee. titled "Serial Data Communication Interface"; Document number J2610 - Issued April 2002. It addresses the need to fully define the Serial Data Communications Interface (SCI) used in the reprogramming of emmission-related powertrain control units (PCM), specifically in DaimlerChrysler vehicles.

A brief of this paper can be found here:

http://www.sae.org/servlets/productD...D=J2610_200204

This paper was issued at the same time (April 2002) that SAE superceeded their February 1998 document(J1962), which is now titled: "Diagnostic Connector Equivalent to ISO/DIS 15031-3: December 14, 2001". This document relates to the standardization of the OBD diagnostic port in terms of electrical and functional requirements.

A brief of this paper can be found here:

http://www.sae.org/servlets/productD...D=J1962_200204

Both of these documents are s precursor to the SAE J2534 (Recommended Practice for Pass-Thru Vehicle Programming - J2534 Date Published: February 2002) standard for Pass-Thru Programming, using a Windows-Base API (Application Programming Interface). The EPA has mandated that all 2004 model cars must support the J2534 standard.

A brief of this paper can be found here:

http://www.sae.org/servlets/productD...D=J2534_200202

An excellent article explaining this standard - the whats and whys can be found here:

http://www.etools.org/files/public/All_about_J2534.htm

In a nutshell, J2534 requires that all 2004 model vehicles have a diagnostic connector, communications protocol and programming procedure (communications protocol, initilization sequence, etc.), that will allow for the aftermarket to produce code scanners and programming equipment that is available to the consumer, independent garages, as well as the dealership. EPA is forcing the car manufacturers to release software that updates the firmware on their cars. This software must run on WIndows and use the J2534 API to talk to the car. It must be availalble to anyone, and must be sold for a 'reasonable price'; which they estimate to be "a few hundred dollars".

For a better understanding of just what changed between the 2.4L NA engine and the 2.4L Turbocharged engine, SAE offers a paper: 2003-01-0410 : Turbocharging the Chrysler 2.4l Engine

A brief of this paper can be found here:

http://www.sae.org/servlets/productD...D=2003-01-0410

Somewhere within the text of thes

[macster]

D


Well said. You sir, are my hero!

macster