was wondering if i'd get away with 2D for a while, like if its drivable enough then i can make a new manifold later after the cars all legal
just wondering...
3D would give better performance, but is a car drivable enough in 2D mode (ford EDIS etc)
isnt that limp home - 10 BTDC.
itll run if thats what youre asking .
Edis limp home is fixed.
Other 2D systems have rev based advance but no load based advance.
The Dunnell system I had on the Zetec was absolutely fine and that was 2D.
Edis in limp home mode would be a bit flat I reckon.
Seen a few megajolt maps that are just 2d, waste of money i reckon. If you put same advance level for all load cells for same rpm, then it's 2D.
I used a 2D map for a while, until I got my MAP sensor (originally) and then my TPS (now) working correctly.
It worked very well - certainly better than running the old and knackered mechanical dizzy I had before.
So, don't discount the 2D map as it can work very satisfactorily - but the 3D map is better.
cool, i was just wondering, coz to go 3D i'll need to make a new inlet manifold
was wondering if i'd get away with 2D for a while, like if its drivable enough then i can make a new manifold later after the cars all legal
quote:
Originally posted by blakep82
cool, i was just wondering, coz to go 3D i'll need to make a new inlet manifold
was wondering if i'd get away with 2D for a while, like if its drivable enough then i can make a new manifold later after the cars all legal
quote:
Originally posted by blakep82
cool, i was just wondering, coz to go 3D i'll need to make a new inlet manifold
was wondering if i'd get away with 2D for a while, like if its drivable enough then i can make a new manifold later after the cars all legal
lol, got carbs from a zzr1100 without TPS. made my manifold without the engine being in the car, got the engine in today, the angle's all wrong, now i could fit the zzr1100 carbs in with individual filters for now, but i've also got a zx9r carbs with TPS, which will fit the manifold, but the pipercross filter i've got for it won't fit because of some chassis tubes being in the way
the grp 4 escort i rattle on about on has a 2d system and has no problems xe on 45's mbe system pulls well from low revs and drives wello
quote:
Originally posted by blakep82
cool, i was just wondering, coz to go 3D i'll need to make a new inlet manifold
was wondering if i'd get away with 2D for a while, like if its drivable enough then i can make a new manifold later after the cars all legal
2D maps can work very well. My ST ECU is 2D as standard. It'll be interesting to see how much extra oomph I get just switching to a 3D map....
Hi
Many of the club level racing championships DO NOT allow 3d mapping. For instance the 750 kits. The cars are perfectly drivable at the lower speeds.
Cant really comment about fuel economy though as they are all on twin 40's.
Although 2d mapping is reliant on preprogramed advance settings they can be set to suit the rpm and do not have to be the same figure through out the
rpm they should be set min every 500rpm.
Without a doubt though the 3D will be a lot better.
Cheers Matt
quote:
Originally posted by stevebubs
Could you not tap some vacuum take-offs and use a MAP sensor on the existing manifold?
3d will not give any more power (thats from paul dunnell) but will give bettre economy.
Having had a dunnell 2d ignition and a megajolt on 3D I would say the dunnell went better, but thats down to the better map which I tried to copy as
abase for megajolt, but not well enough and the fuel economy on a 300mile journey was about the smae.
I suspect the 3D can give much better economy, when carefully set up.
However when the car is replace (written off big time) it will be fitted with Dunnell EFI, all preprogrammed as I am that impressed by it (got it sh,
still as expensive as a new MS setup though)
Clive
Running my MJ on 2D, no probs at all. Better than my brand new dizzy i replaced.