Ecotec le5 Turbo 2.4 Build (Page 21/28) 4thfiero FEB 27, 01:03 AM I talked to Alpha fab again, he said they switched to the MAP/MAF system bcc as he put it "its easier to tune (in theory) but if you have base knowledge speed density is easy to tune as well, just more time consuming" So 2 different processes to get to the same result. My car is back with my mechanic. He's gonna tune the cold start this weekend and everything should be good to go after that 4thfiero FEB 27, 01:14 AM Also...stupid question but, is my climate control panel supposed to glow when my lights are on? So i can see the settings in the dark??? jediperk FEB 27, 08:28 AM Y'up... http://www.blacktopupgrades...ac-lighting-upgrade/ 4thfiero FEB 27, 09:52 AM i KNEW IT.....awesome, good to know. It's been so long that ive had my car ive forgotten basic things lol Will FEB 28, 10:11 PM quote Originally posted by wftb: My information is kind of dated I will admit . But it usually is an either/or thing anyways : you have a MAF or a MAP but not both . Like Dobey said, pretty much everything GM has built since the early '90's has had both MAF and MAP quote Originally posted by dobey: That's fine. You'll need a 2 bar MAP if you're running about 16-32 PSI of boost. If you run less than 16, then 1 bar is fine, and about 30-46 PSI you'll need 3 bar. You're a bar off... N/A engines use 1 bar, up to 15 psi boost is 2 bar, up to 30 psi boost is 3 bar. Some diesel apps even use a FIVE bar sensor, but it has a different lower reading as diesels never make any vacuum. quote Originally posted by dobey: But that doesn't change the fact that you should have the MAF as well, and the cold start/idle tables should be pretty much the same as stock. Cold idle isn't making any boost, so it doesn't matter how many bar your MAP can handle. My thoughts as well. The stock system uses both. There's no reason to delete the MAF. Alpha screwed up, even if they delivered to you exactly what they intended to. quote Originally posted by 4thfiero: So i talked to Alpha fab, when i bought the kit, the tune and design was based only off a 2 bar map. So my kit did come with everything it needed. There new version of the same kit comes with both the map and maf. So thats what happened there. I talked to my mechanic, i asked him if we added a maf if that would make the engine run better. He says he would have to re-tune everything but it wouldnt make it run better, the engine is running perfectly except for the cold start which he's fixing this weekend. Once he throws his o2 wideband kit into the car he will have that fixed, he says if i want i can add a MAF later and re-tune the car but i would get the same results as what im getting now for performance and gauge numbers. So we will see what happens after this weekend. I think Alpha owes you for your extra tuning time. There's just no excuse for deleting necessary components AND screwing up something they shouldn't have been messing with in the first place. It's also pretty unacceptable to deliver a car that won't start in the cold. 4thfiero MAR 01, 12:07 AM I never got charged the full tuning time anyways. Alpha fab admitted they didnt put two and two together and realize that I live in WINNIPEG...they mainly build these engines for racing in the desert or places it doesnt snow. Cold start was not really something they concerned themselves with. So the extra time it took to tune for that stuff, i never got charged for. All's good. Hybrid tuning is much more difficult to tune and time consuming, unless u upgrade the stock MAF it's only accurate to a certain point, i called around, there arnt a lot of shops that do it, and those who said they'd be willing are gonna charge an arm and a leg. They either go full MAF or Speed density. My shop would have done either but my kit came with MAP. So they went Speed Density. After doing some more research, most track cars use SD over MAF, some guys perfer MAF over SD...but 90% of the ppl went for SD. So im cool with that. the tune they gave is really good. A good MAP tune should act like MAF. I should be able to take my car out into any weather condition, drive in the mountains and be perfectly fine. the O2 will detect any changes and adjust. And IF something weird happenes? I just data log, send in my log to my tuner, he makes the adjustment...problem solved. 4thfiero MAR 02, 12:41 PM Update: Cold Start is fixed! Also got my car weighed...battery is still in the back, i will change that later and re-do. But for now here's where i am at. Without me in the car: lf: 636 rf: 593 lr: 761 rr: 733 front: 45.13% rear: 54.87% total: 2723 With me in the car: lf: 696 rf: 620 lr: 820 rr: 777 front: 45.18% rear: 54.82% total: 2913 not bad? jediperk MAR 02, 02:24 PM Did you have the spare tire and jack up front when it was weighed? Also I would look at just replacing your stock battery with a 5lb lithium ion battery and save the hassle of relocating. 480 CCA is more than enough for an ecotec... http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0...coliid=IW1XMHW2X7SS4 dobey MAR 02, 02:54 PM quote Originally posted by jediperk: Did you have the spare tire and jack up front when it was weighed? Also I would look at just replacing your stock battery with a 5lb lithium ion battery and save the hassle of relocating. 480 CCA is more than enough for an ecotec... I'd avoid Li-Ion batteries for such use. The weight savings is nice, but they are more sensitive to heat and overcharging. AGM batteries are still pretty heavy, but would be a better choice than Li-Ion. You can also get a smaller Braille or similar race battery and it should be fine though. But then again, saving weight at the battery probably isn't a great plan for balancing the weight, especially in this car. Moving the battery up front, or going with an lightweight battery will make the left/right balance more uneven than it is now, and moving it up front isn't going to really get you closer to a 50/50 front/rear balance, at least in this car. It might bring it up to 45.20% in the front, with 4thfiero sitting in the driver seat. To get to 50/50 (without just increasing weight where it's lower, with ballast), he'd need to take about 150lbs from the rear and move it up front. Or lose almost 300 lbs from the rear. But short of removing lots of metal and making a custom cradle and/or rear section, I'm not sure there's a good way to do that. jediperk MAR 02, 03:03 PM One of those brail batteries would lose a fair amount of weight too. 50/50 weight is not what you want anyways. He has the weight distribution about as ideal as it gets already. Remember, when you hit the brakes the weight transfers forward and when you hit the gas its already where you need it.