Kid at school just bought some kind of vw with a turbo and the way his friends put it "a huge intercoller". I asked him to run afterschool but he said it is running too rich and is probably only running 13. I know it has exhaust, and turbo but what is the possibility of it running 13. I might just have to install my turbo 350 with 2700 stall, and my 3.73 rear in the garage.

OK I did a little research and Stock the 1.8 liter Turbo GTI runs the 1/4 mile in a blistering 16.5 sec. and bursts up to 60mph in an exilerating 8.5 seconds. I'm pretty sure even with exhaust and turbo mods he isn't going to be in the 13's or even 14's (maybe really high 14's).
No i think this guy is probably you. So just go tell him you'll race and find out, but I'm pretty sure you got him.

Later, Garrett

the turbo GTI 5 spd runs the 1/4 in 15.1 according to motortrend. with a little turbo work they can get into the low 14's.

I will tell him to run whenever I see him but we just had some snow, and school got cancelled, but I should run him soon.

U will take him for sure, unless there has been major work to the engine. GTI's are not that fast even though they have a turbo. Race him and you are sure to win.

dude, how is that car running rich? its not carbed, and the injection is totally computer controlled unless the kid messed with something or has the wrong chip or something theres no way.

I think thats another case of a touch hole that has no idea what hes talking about trying to sound all technical....i hate that

a new fuel injected foreign car running rich!!...ROFLMAO

more than likely you'll win. he should run mid 14's unless he's dropped serious cash into that setup. i know guys with the same powerplant but in a heavier body (jetta 1.8t) who have done alot of mods and are still in the 15's. The GTI is lighter but no way that thing is in the 13's with common mods.

i think u should throw up the on this kid

it's still possible for him to be running rich (but i highly doubt that he knows how to tell). His O2 sensor could be bad or the MAF making it inject too much fuel and run rich. the computer will compensate and it won't be running very rich, but it is possible.

You guys are sure jumpy with the , non the less he is toast.

It is possible if the turbo and intercooler have been upgrade, maybe a 13.9999999 at best.

Running rich with a turbo is very easy to do. Especially if its not the stock turbo, which if he has a "huge intercooler", its probably not. My friends turbo talon runs really rich with his new fuel pump and turbo.

I dont care what you do to a turbo or any part of the engine for that matter, if your throttle position sensor, o2 sensor, and all the other junk is working correctly there should never be a rich or lean condition regardless of anything outside the engine like a turbo. The computer should sense a lean condition or a rich condition with the 02 sensor and immediately adjust the mixture.

Especially on newer OBDII cars....theres no way. or there would be a code for a bad sensor

If he has a bigger than stock turbo, than the stock fuel pump won't be able to pump enough fuel. Every PSI of boost needs a certain amount of fuel or you'll scorch a piston. Therefore it would be running lean. Not saying this is the case, but its possible.

.

exactly....if you have too big of a turbo your gonna run out of fuel....and youd have a lean condition.....not a rich one....

and there would still be a code set for it, and the motor wouldnt last very long. in any case the kid is full of sh*t and doesnt know what he was talking about

I dont agree. Most cars that come from the factory with a turbocharger have very very complex computers. Alot more complex than OBDII or anything that comes stock on a Chevy. Believe me, I know. The EEC-IV ('PE') on my SVO is a very complex ECU/FMU when compared to OBDII. When kept at the stock settings, factory turbocharged cars will run great. The turbo setup comes tuned for the best performance (while still being safe) from the factory. Consider the turbo a part of the engine. When people start modding the engine things can go wrong. Usually this happens because the car is not tuned right. Its very easy to encounter rich/lean conditions with a turbo. The ECU/FMU will change the ammount of fuel injected in relation to the boost. If you change the injectors or the turbo itself and dont tell the ECU/FMU whats going on then it can run bad. Or if you tweek the computer and dont know what you're doing you can ruin everything. The people who mod turbo setups correctly upgrade the computer along with any parts they put on to increase performance. People who dont know what they are doing will upgrade the physical parts but not the computer, or tune the computer wrong. Like most things automotive, to get the best results you need to do the full package and it needs to be done right.

Sounds to me like the kid upgraded the injectors and the intercooler but didnt touch the ECU/FMU. Car is out of tune.

I think that explains it, which kind of makes me miss the simplicity of a non computerized engine.

the same thing can happen with any car.

CrazyHawaiian, you obcviously dont understand much about the way electronic engine management systems work. The fuel map in an engine control unit is set by programmed parameters. depending on information the engine obtains from the various sensors (which can change depending on the engine) and OBDII is not a system in and of itself, its a standard and there are many different systems which must all comply with the standard if they are being imported into the US as a new car.

regardless of whether a car is turbocharged or not, some of the information used to determine optimal fuel and spark maps is obtained from the manifold absolute pressure sensor. Which senses the pressure inside the intake manifold.....if theres boost that is the sensor that is used to relay the information to the computer and thereby adjust the fuel and spark maps....the only time you can get a lean/rich condition is if you have a malfunctioning sensor, or you have changed something (like a much bigger turbo) that the control system does not have a fuel or spark map to compensate for it.

dude, every control system is complex when compared to systems of the past....but i assure you that the level of complexity of an engine management system in a car is fairly simple in comparison to most electronic control systems. and OBDII is a standard not a system like I said before. All new cars have very complex systems compared to what was out a few years ago. Ive studied alot of this stuff because im a computer information systems major (graduate in may with a bachelor of science in business administration) and i have a background in electrical engineering. Dont go assuming that your ecu is "more complex than anything that comes on a chevy" because it isnt. Hardware wise, and software wise i bet youd be very surprised to find out just how similar it is. thats an ignornat and uneducated comment. In the scope of electronic control systems most things related to cars are really not very complex at all.

Oh ya by the way......on most OBDII compliant chevy's....you can virtually change everything on the engine, and the computer will read the changes and adjust everything automatically and compensate for the new variables.

for example...

take a 6.0L vortec truck engine, install a stroker rotating assembly from lunati, z06 corvette ls6 heads, cam, and valvetrain, keep the truck intake and throttle body. and oversize pistons as well.

the result is a 434ci stroker ls6 engine with an iron block....you retain all factory computer equipment and sensors....the necessary adjustments for fuel and spark will be made automatically.....this setup should be good for over 500hp.

and thats the same computer thats in every truck GM makes with a 6.0L vortec engine.

If you dont know anything about electronic controls and instrumentation then dont make claims about it

oh ya, what SVO exactly are you talking about and what year is it?

Geez, are you serious? You're just joking right? IMPOSSIBLE to go rich or lean? Sir, Please put down the crack pipe and step away from the keyboard. If you have actually tuned a computer controlled car you'd find that they can indeed run out of fuel or go rich depending on if there are mods on the car or something might get dirty or countless other possibilities. Certainly we all want to believe in the infalliability of the engineers who designed the newer cars but to think that they never go rich or lean? That's just silly. If this kid upgraded his fuel pump and intercooler with the stock garbage turbo that's almost as small as a T-25 then he can indeed be running rich. If he turns up the boost he could be running lean. I don't know what sort of crazy super ultra computer you use but they are NOT infalliable, you can try to convince yourself that they are but then you'd be wrong. You should study up on the intricacies of OBD-II a bit and you'd find out that it's not an "intelligent" machine in the way in which you try to say it is.

Kevin, To a degree you have some validity.

A Boost friendly ECU will infact change the
fuel requirements based on vacume or boost.

However, since the ECU has no ability to change
fuel pressure and must rely on increasing the
injector pulse (which is limited) or decreasing
(which is also limited) the range of fuel compensation is not very high. SO if your running
LOTS of boost, then you'll never get it to run just on an ECM.. You will never get the entire
RPM range out of the injector pulse, at one set
fuel pressure. thats life.

And even if your running minimal boost, you'll have to match you rail pressure to your base
calibrations.

The O2 sensor + tps do infact have a large impact
on the way the car runs. But if you ignorantly
assume a stock ECM is gonna calibrate whatever
you through at it based on: unburnt fuel, throttle
position, and manifold pressure; then you need
to hit the books again.

If you tuned ECM's you'd have a better understanding of how they work, for real.

C-ya

Wow no need to get all defensive. I just dont agree with what you are telling these guys. I am by no means an 'expert' on electronic engine management systems. If I were, I would probably work in that field. No, instead I gather information from reading online and watching friends tune their F/I cars. I have seen what works and what does not. I do (believe it or not) have personal experience with editing parameters in a variety of different ECM's/FMU's for F/I setups across alot of different platforms (Ford, Nissan, Toyota, Aftermarket). No I'm not an expert. But yes I have done it. And yes I do know 'something' about it.

You said:

'The fuel map in an engine control unit is set by programmed parameters. depending on information the engine obtains from the various sensors (which can change depending on the engine)'

This is true for a N/A setup, but not entirely true for a F/I setup. The ECM uses the information gathered from the various sensors to provide the correct A/F ratio (we agree on that). For a N/A engine setup, the parameters for the fual map are static. They do not change.

However, when you have a forced induction setup, the pressure inside the engine changes relative to the boost level. At bar 1 (14.5 psi) you have now doubled the pressure inside the engine. This means that the fuel map parameters will NEED to change as the pressure inside the engine increases. If they stayed the same they would not provide enough fuel as the boost level increases. Imagine suddenly doubling the ammount of air passing through the engine but the ammount of fuel stays the same. Can you see where this is going? The ECM has to be able to calculate the A/F ratio curve based on the boost level, and after calculating that, it needs to update the parameters in real time in order to provide enough fuel to compensate for the air and maintain a correct A/F ratio. This is why I say the ECM's for F/I cars are more complex than those for N/A cars. The ECM's for N/A cars do not need to calculate much. Parameters are static. This is why my Vortech supercharger came with an external ECM. It needs more calculation than the stock ECM can provide.

Your Version:

'The fuel map in an engine control unit is set by programmed parameters. depending on information the engine obtains from the various sensors (which can change depending on the engine)'

My Version (For F/I cars):

'The fuel map in a F/I engine control unit is set to calculate the correct A/F parameters in relation to the boost level. This calculation depends on information the FMU obtains from the various sensors.

My SVO is an 85. Look it up on the net. SVO Mustang came with a 2.3ltr EFI engine @ 8:1 CR and a Garret T3 turbo @ 10 psi. It originally came with the 'PJ' computer which is really good (and matched for 30# injectors). But I upgraded the injectors to 35# and along with that I upgraded to the 'PE' computer which came on the 86 SVO (Stock with #35 injectors). This way I did not need to tune anything. Basically upgrade the 85 to 86 specs. But when I take the car further (almost double the cfm), I will need to bust out the EEC-IV tuner and change alot of the parameters.

Good deal on the 434ci stroker ls6 engine with an iron block, but what would you do if you installed a supercharger? Would the 'complex' stock ECM be able to handle that? This whole disagreement is because you're stuck on N/A tech and we're all talking F/I.

Next time try not to be so rude. I had no problem with you before (maybe didnt agree, but whatever) but now I think you are a punk. Its ok to disagree, but you dont have to insult people.

Turbos are just too sophisticated and complicated for me, which is why I like Superchargers so much - much less associated hardware.

N/A is even better

Sometimes NA isn't enough.

some of you people are retarded.....obviously what i said is not gonna be truth in all cases.....in most cases without any extenuating circumstances what i said is completely true. as long as the modifications in question are within reason. Obviously its not impossible to run rich or lean....but if you read my entire post you would notice that i included the stipulation if all the sensors are working properly and the ecm posesses the proper fuel and spark maps.

so maybe you people should learn how to read before you open your mouths...a little common sense would help, because i dont think i should have to write a 300 page doctoral dissertation everytime i try to answer something......therefore its not I that needs to hit the books, its you that needs to read the entire post before you make an assanine comment about it.

and yes the stock ecm would handle a supercharger...in fact they sell the kit direct from ligenfelter.....the ecm requires reprogramming, but the stock system remains intact.

also, fuel and spark maps for an N/A engine are not static. They are adjusted the same way in a turbo car as they are in an N/A car.....just the maps are obviously different.

hawaiin if you are trying to say that the ecm in your 1985 svo is even near as complex as a modern OBDII compliant system your a fool.

i dont care if you think im a punk or not, this is the internet. I know what im talking about, if i didnt i wouldn t have said anything.

and like i said before, of course people are going to point out details i didnt mention before......but i think they should have been considered obvious because you shouldnt have to recite the engineering report on every topic you speak about....people should use some degree of common sense and understand what your talking about without having every single detail laid out for you

by the way, we were talking about the idiot in the VW claiming his car would be faster if it wasnt running rich......this is way off topic anyways

LOL, yeah, but aren't all the threads off-topic.

Wow you really get pissy when people dont agree with you. Calm down man. I was just trying to say that he might be running rich because his A/F settings on his ECM might be out of whack. A common mistake non-tuner type people make with turbo setups is to upgrade the injectors and not adjust the ECM accordingly. This might be a reason hes claiming to run rich. Just like your theory on bad sensors (and I do agree to some length), I have my own theory. Dont take it so personally. I've seen it happen alot so I'm just trying to give some insight.

I have no idea if the computer in my SVO is better than OBDII computers. What I do know is they are a PITA to tune. And compared to what I've seen on a ScanMaster ... yes the Ford stuff was more complex to tune. It was an assumption. An assumption based on the fact that, generally speaking, ECM's for F/I cars are more complex than ECM's for N/A cars. If you were correct, and stock ECM's could infact account for boosted applications, there would be no market for aftermarket ECM's/FMU's. Everyone would have a turbo setup that worked perfectly. What a great world that would be. Maybe you should do a little more research. Compare this to your almighty OBDII. http://www.fuelairspark.com/

I think anthesis summed it up pretty well. You have lost any respect you might have had from me. Take your own advice.

thats fine with me....because once again, your contradicting yourself and not understanding what i actually wrote. OBDII is a STANDARD not a computer. anyways, it doesnt make any difference....i know what i mean, and i never had any respect for you in the first place, no loss there

that's actually the VR6. The VR6 is a quick little car n/a but with a turbo on it, capable of low 13s. The VR6 has a slant 6, not a turbo 4 though. The turbo 4 is piss slow and would probably catch fire with any kinda extreme duty lol

Road and Track's last reported time for a 1.8T GTI 5-speed manual (it is also available with a five-speed manumatic) was 15.2 sec. in the 1/4 mi., and it clicked off a 7.6 second 0-60 time. The 2003 VR6 (actually a narrow-angle V-6, not a slant six,) reaches 60 in 6.3 sec, now that it has the previously Euro-only 201hp VR6 and six-speed. I was unable to find 1/4 mi. times for it. The 1.8T is considered the better handler, however, due to it's better weight distribution. In any case, you're looking at a low-15 second car, if the kid can drive. With some turbo work, the 1.8 could easily surpass the VR6's numbers.

I raced him monday, and pulled away the whole race.This is how it went. Lined at 310 and 40. spun bad off the line because my posi went out a month ago. Still was ahead though and kept pulling away until I shutdown at 80. He drove by and said his clutch is going out and that it was good race. I just laughed at that. If I had my turbo 350 and stall converter and stall converter, and my 3.73 rear with posi installed it would have been even more embarassing.

hmmmm

I find your race hard to beleive. I would have to call you guys mag racers (as in magazine). Referring to mags is not the best way to find times. Go check out a VW enthusiast web page and see what guys are running there. The mags gave my car a 15.7 and I pulled off a 15.4. Anyway I know plenty of guys who pull mid 13's with their 1.8t's. And why does everyone on this board always have a comment at the end that states " they got out and said they're clutch was slipping..." Thats BS. You guys just HATE imports and I understand completely. 90% are ricers. But when I witness races I don't here an excuse coming out of someones mouth after every loss. If he was chipped, IC'd, and had a turbo upgrade he should have plastered your ***. Maybe he lied and was bone stock. What year was it again? I hope there is no bad blood with me now I just call on your race if he had everything you said he had.

why do you call bs. Maybe it doesnt have what all his friends hyped it up to be,but I still beat him. He said that the car is now tuned because it had a lean problem not a rich like he said. I also talked to the guy who he bought it from and that guy said the car would run low 14.

alrighty!