VR6Joni

Cheers for that, unfortunately I already forked out for a new one, just I needed the car the day after I stripped it down and couldn't get a hub on a Sunday.

My recirc valve is passing air on idle, which would screw idling up. It also sounds like a dump valve anyway. :) Therefore I would say tread very carefully with any kind of dump valve!

I would love to confidently say yes, but I'm afraid that I just don't really know. Going by the V1's I've seen it quite possibly is the later version, but then again it was the really early V1's that had straight blades at which point the V9 may not have even been on the market. Anyone else clued up on Vortechs?

Anyone know the hub diameter where it slots into the wheel bearing (tolerances would be good too). I don't have a new bearing yet and I can't decide whether its just the bearing that's knackered or the hub as well. I would change it straight away on the rado but this is just for my 500 quid golf run around, hence the question.

On the early V1's the compressor wheel blades were straight so could run clockwise or anti clockwise, later they changed to curved one directional compressor wheels which were more efficient for obvious reasons. Might be something completely different for the V9's though! Also seem to recall gear cut changing at some point too.

http://www.knfilters.com/filter_facts.htm#WORD Seems to imply that you'd need a 10 micron or finer filter... so not convinced they'll really do a better job than any other 'performance' filter... Well spotted, I was looking at the efficiencies page which is rather confusing! I was only thinking of using these filters because of the ease they can be cleaned, and you would expect them to be much more durable. If they come back with

That may prove tricky as I can't make head nor tails of the info on the K&N website.

Just posted a message on their website asking what filtration level they go down to in microns. We use 25 micron stainless filters at work and they do flow very freely, just need to find out what a standard cotton filters filter down to now.

Anyone come across these before, opinions please? For example: http://www.motorsportworld.co.uk/frame-detail.asp?PAGE=/performance-air-filter.htm edit: Link didn't work as I expected, click on the Powertec filters link.

Using a 4" housing tricks the ECU into thinking there is less air going into the engine and therefore it automatically reduces the injector PW accordingly, which if you use 440cc injectors, puts the fuelling reasonably close to where it should be. I tried it on my OBD2 setup. Stock chip with 4" housing and Bosch greens (@ 3 bar) held 14.7 AFR with ~12% lambda trimming. It drove very well actually, but I certainly wouldn't recommend it as a long term solution! Stealth's Turbo conversion still uses the stock 3" MAF by the way. I believe you can tell the ECU not to throw it's toys out if it sees 5V from the MAF signal when it's not expecting to see it. Should have really phrased that better! Instead of reducing the air flow over the MAF to reduce maximum output, (I.e. making the CSA of air flow over the MAF larger) why not simply reduce the signal from it by a similar ratio. The MAF is 12V powered and will give an output close to this level, the ECU will only read signals up to 5V so you have masses of room to play with. This in my mind has to be significantly cheaper than using a 4" MAF and will give exactly the same result. And much less effort required with pipe work reducers etc.

Tap into the ABS sensor signal, if you know the gearbox pulses per wheel rev and the ABS sensor ring pulses per wheel rev it should be simple as long as they factor into a whole number. If anyone knows this info and wants a relevant circuit diagram, just ask. PS. Probs should move this to another thread!

Possibly, where does the filter actually end up with that setup then? I can't picture where it will end up. All the silicone, MAF and filter are below the inner wing flange, behind the OSF bumper and above the splash guard. The bellmouth on the alloy bend mates with the suction inlet of the V9. V difficult to see unless you're underneath - if you're in Royston anytime you're welcome to have a butchers - she lives over the pit most of the time. I may well take you up on that offer, it may well save me lots of time trying different set up's. I'll drop you a pm some time in the not too distant future to see when your free.

Seems to. It joins onto another valve (with an electrical sensor) underneath the air intake hose. From there another small hose then leads along the wing towards the charcoal canister. Cheers, The broken pipe is only the fuel tank breather, which is vented to the inlet manifold under certain engine conditions. Not really essential but makes the car very slightly more environmentally friendly (I think). Be careful if you glue it as a small vacuum leak could cause idling issues.

Possibly, where does the filter actually end up with that setup then? I can't picture where it will end up.

Looks more like the fuel tank ventilation system to me, if so it will make bugger all difference. Does the blocked pipe got to the charcoal canister below the airbox?

I have managed to get it all between the bumper and inner arch using a bit of ducting, however I'm still not happy with this setup. I'm afraid I haven't got pictures, but the setup is as follows: Charger -> 90deg silicon bend(with recirc hole cut into it) -> Flexi ducting (300-400mm) with 180 deg bend in -> MAF - Narrow Filter (one of the bits I'm not happy about). Also this requires removal of the bumper to clean the filter, the other bit I'm not happy with :mad2: . I also cut slots into the bumper insert to allow more cool air to this area. This does work and is just about good enough to minimise turbulence and recirc surges to an acceptable level, however I have noticed on the odd occasion loss of power straight after a gear change which I can only assume being due to recirc air screwing MAF reading up. I'm hoping to change this before it goes back on the road in march, I'll be sure to post my findings.

I'd say your plan is definitely coming together now, larger injectors and remap are the way forward. One thing to note, you will probably still require some method of reducing the MAF output as it is likely to clip (its output becoming higher than the voltage the ECU can deal with) at the air flows you will be achieving. I found the the potentiometer mod worked a treat for curing this problem! Why 4" MAF's were ever used I don't know :cuckoo:

Couldn't agree more :clap: And another one, immigrant commits a crime = extradition!

With the C30-84 with an 80mm pulley I think its safe to say that reducing compression ratio should come fairly high up on your priorities list. At a guess I'd say you will be looking at a potential 11psi. Which also means charge cooling would also be highly recommended. You may well get away with aquamist at that boost level, but obviously some sort of heat exchanger system would be more effective and less to worry about (I.e. tank level.) The list will continue to grow, trust me! Oh and I'm sure the dub power spacer will be fine as they are just sheet steel cut the same as the head gasket.

That's a bit shocking, I was imagining a lot more scope for playing with boost levels. The smallest pulley is only 70mm, so not much room on either the 84 or 94! Do you have the 84 or 94? C-30 or SP-30 model type? What bhp/torque are you pushing out with the 80mm? I'm running an SP-30-94 with a 85mm pulley and my belt self destructed :cuckoo: It was running close to 12psi, so what ever power that would give with conservative timing. I'm now remaking the bracket as it just isn't right, I couldn't get the tensioner to run true as well the belt interfering.

Don't get the 90mm pulley, it will not fit! 85mm is border line, ended up being a real pain in the arse for me I.e. belt scrubbing against it's self. 80mm will probably be safe.

If you remove the MAF, I think the ECU will run in limp mode, limp mode can be remapped but I very much doubt the engine will ever run as smooth again and its just asking for other running issues (i.e cold startup etc). Although this could explain the larger injectors being required, as its possible in limp mode that the ECU will run in batch mode instead of sequential which will reduce the maximum output of the standard injector. I hope you've got a good reason for this as I recon it's likely to cause you a string of problems. I might be wrong, these findings are just from personal experience and what I've read, would be interesting if anyone could confirm this, or even confirm I'm wrong.

Think I'm safe in saying the standard injectors will be more than adequate for any NA application. What are your reasons for doing this and what are you trying to achieve?

I've just witnessed this on my mates golf, low and behold he reported symptoms of low on power, bad mileage and it failed it's MOT on emissions. It does go onto a very rich map as the lambda reading was topping out and CO was about 7-8%. Plugged the VAGCOM in and it threw up a cam position sensor fault. So in keeping with this thread, It's definitely worth while at very least mirroring your correct WOT map1 into map2! So it appears that MAP2 is simply a limp mode map. There may well be other reasons to cause the ECU to run in limp mode but it looks like cam position sensor is now confirmed as one of them!

Looks good, but I'm now going the charge cooler route for ease of routing. Also that one is for 24V. Doesn't look like they do one for 12V engines with equalised runners :(