034 EFI

[ScottyCBoy at aol.com]

Actually most of wires in the MAC 11 stuff is the ignition system and boost control!

The only wires off the top of my head that pertain to strcitly fuel are the frequency valve, oxygen sensor, control pressure regulator heater, carbon canister valve, airflow meter dump valve and maybe a temp sensor or two.

Scott

In a message dated Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:03:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Ken Keith" <auditude at neta.com> writes:

> On 4 Dec 2001, at 23:22, Orin Eman wrote:
> > >
> > > On 5 Dec 2001, at 0:14, JShadzi at aol.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > quoting me:
> > > >  4ksq flywheel, and not the 200tq one I am planning using, right?
> > > >  Unless I had the 4kq/NF/NG timing pins put in the 200tq.  So far
> > > >  the machine shops I've talked to don't even want to deal with the
> > > >  existing timing pins, I can imagine their reponse to some custom
> > > >  work.>>
> > > >
> > > > NO, the NG/Nf do not use pins, its all from the hall sender.
> > >
> > > Very cool.  I think it's coming back to me now. I remember thinking
> > > the MC system was strange with the flywheel timing, back when I
> > > drove a Coupe GT!
> >
> > Now no doubt Javad is going to say that using the distributor fired
> > ignition works fine - and it does, but it isn't optimal.  You have to
> > set the timing such a little retarded such that the jitter in the
> > ignition signal doesn't cause knock.  Ah, but the knock sensor catches
> > that you say.  Yes, but in general, when the knock sensor kicks in,
> > you lose - they use large amounts of retard and slowly advance back
> > to the programmed timing.
>
> I'm still thinking about which way I want to go.  I was reading a recent
> post by Javad that mentions the MC ignition is technically more optimal
> than an NF/NG based setup, because it is expecting boost.
>
> Within reason, my 4ksq turbo project is supposed to be about the most
> optimum stuff, as opposed to the compromises that unmodified cars
> have.  So, if the MAC11 ignition side of things is the most optimal setup
> available currently (is that a pun? I guess not because voltage is the
> significant metric for ignitions), then I'd be leaning in that direction.  I
> may be in over my head tho'.
>
> Would swapping in just the ignition side of an MAC11 be _more_
> difficult than swapping in the whole system (fuel too)?  Does going
> through the wiring harness and deleting the unnecessary stuff cause
> more work than if I were to leave it included and put it all in?  I'm trying
> to get an idea of how much work it really is, since I was prepared to
> swap in everything.  Comparing an ignition-side only MAC11 swap with
> a total MAC11 swap, as opposed to comparing to an NF/NG ignition-
> side only swap.
>
> Here's a question.  Where does the overboost protection go when you
> switch to 034 EFI and for example and NF/NG ignition?  Isn't that the
> MAC11 that watches for overboost?  I think this is retained in my TAP
> box, but I'm not sure anymore.  I realize I can check this by slightly
> pressurizing the ECU line to that the PT gets a 1.8+ signal, but not over
> 2.0, right, since that's the physical limit of the sensor?
>
> > With the timing map on my 5k set to just
> > avoid knock, it pulls strongly to redline.  With the the stock timing
> > tables and the knock sensor handling things, it has that running into
> > molasses feeling around 4800 RPM.
>
> When you say the timing map on your 5k is set to just avoid know, do
> you mean there is custom code in there, a la QLCC?  Or are you
> referring to rotating the distributor in the head?  Well, the terms "map"
> and "tables" would indicate we're talking about chip mods, right?
>
> Has anyone here had any experience with the J&S Safeguard?  If it
> does what it says, it seems like a great product.  Instead of retarding
> the timing for all cylinders by a great deal when it sense actual knock, it
> retards each cylinders ignition timing only as much as is need to
> prevent knock, and supposedly does this based on pre-ignition sound
> as opposed to knock.  I may have these two terms reversed.  Here's a
> link to some info from J&S:
>
> http://www.safeguard.20m.com/preignition.html
>
> > > So, I'll continue with the plans for using the 200tq flywheel, except
> > > the concern for the pins presence is greatly dimished.  I can get it
> > > turned now.  (that takes care one of them, I still need a 5kcstq
> > > resurfaced, keeping those pins)  I already have the clutch (and no
> > > 200tq), and I want the 240mm disc and lighter flywheel.
> >
> > BTW, the PIN that matters is on the engine side of the flywheel.
> > Those on the clutch side are for VW diagnostic tools that are capable
>
> Thanks Orin.  I was reading the past posts in the archives about
> flywheels, and although this was mentioned your statement clears it up
> very well.  So the two skinny (and long on the 200tq version) pins on the
> front either of my flywheels ( 5kcstq is the other one) don't matter at all
> (practically).  This would apply to the 4ksq flywheel too.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ken