CIS airflow meter limits HP? (Martin Pajak) /sorry it's long.....

[JShadzi at aol.com]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Johnny, I don't mean to mudsling, I don't think I am, just asking you to back
up some of your hypotheses.  I have tried for years to get CIS to support big
HP levels, I used to be the first person who wanted it to work.  Lets face
is, CIS is archane and outdated, its limited, the advent of electronic
control allows fuel and igniton control that CIS could only dream about.

If you would like to go ahead and research the possiblilities, and find a
working solution with CIS, then I'm all ears and will be nothing but
complimentary.  I am well aware of the VW tuners, its not relevant here, we
are talking 250+hp from forced induction, I'm aware of Techtonics, I used to
manage at New Dimensions, I helped develop the ND turbo systems, I have
maintained Audi Sport Trans Am cars, I have developed an EFI system myself,
please don't discount my experience, you don't know who I am or my
experiences.  Do feel free to question  my assertions, that is fair enough.

Being a tech is fine, doesn't mean you can re-engineer a CIS system to double
its output.  I am only questioning your assertions, not who you are, my
assertions are substantiated by lack of successful implementations, I don't
need to prove anything, as far as you've proved with empirical evidence, I'm
right (not counting your opinion).

Anyway, I still assert that the airflow meter is a restriction, and limiting
in hp applicatins above 250hp, yes, I've tried it, I gave up on CIS, nuff
said from this end.

Javad

In a message dated 5/8/2002 8:33:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, J123fs writes:


> With regard to the original question if a Airflow meter is the "ultimate
> restriction" for HP in the system I still stick to my guns stating that it
> is not the roadblock to HP in the Type 44 system, and if you want to take
> the discussion off the list into some hard science, lets do that, not sling
> verbal mud.
> And as I stated I have seen plenty of CIS based systems that make big HP,
> both in Magazines and in some race cars, doing just that, (making big HP)
> not just from one limited experience. I also have twenty years worth of
> Bosch service manuals/info laying around for various fuel systems, and it
> seems they ALL roughly have the same operating parameters; Kinda ironically
> funny, huh? Without regards to motor size, or HP nonetheless...go
> figure...Hummm...
> Better sources of TRULY RELIABLE (if my info will not do) info may be
> better found off list with some engine builders like Tectonics, or Drake
> (VW) and some of the Porsche race teams that abound out there.
> I do think, as I have worked on many different CIS systems (VW, Porsche,
> MB, Volvo, maybe some BMW, to name specifics, that give me some basis for
> my info) that there is dramatic variances in the size of some of the
> components, but they are more or less similar, and they all go back in
> lineage to some of the original Bosch/Porsche Fuel injection systems that
> made Big HP in the low teens (x100) in the early turbo Porsche's of yore.
> My almost twenty years of working with CIS and other fine systems does lead
> me to believe (unlike you) that you could in fact mix and match some
> existing Bosch FI components to get a system with much higher potential HP
> figures than stock.
> I'm sorry if you do not feel that way, but in reality can you honestly tell
> me as a fact that CIS Porsche systems are not engineered to handle more HP?
> Are you on the Bosch payroll as an engineer?
> And do you think that the Bosch engineers did not design in a degree of
> tunably for their systems?
> Can you state as a fact that a MB CIS air flow plate from a 450 SL will not
> work with an AUDI CIS system for a 2.1 motor?
> Or one from a 3.0 flat six?
> I think they could.
> And, I admit it is just my opinion, based on the facts I have at hand, and
> in memory.
> As far as how much flow can go through the actual orifice of the CIS meter
> plate, I would suspect that maybe you could go and consult a physics
> reference book regarding fluid dynamics to yield the proper equations.
> If you truly would like me to go pull my college textbooks from the attic
> to prove my point on flow, I could (I worked my way through college as a
> mechanic), although with great hesitation, as in my experience with some of
> this list's raves and flame wars I'm inclined to not even bother regarding
> issues that really do not matter, in the big scheme of things.
> And now I regret even replying to this to begin with, as this seems to have
> degraded from what could have been a cool technical discussion to one with
> accusatory tones in the writing.
> If I have unwillingly contributed (I think I may have!) to this I apologize
> now, but I feel sometimes you do have to speak up.
> See ya
> Johnny
>
>
>