The Lotus Cars Community banner
1 - 20 of 129 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Darth,

You do realize that the OEM ECU is from EFi Italia? The aftermarket EFi is from their US division. Not sure I understand why your excluding EFi US and ability to tune without costly reflashes? There are some differences, but conceptually the same -- toss in DRS latest firmware/software for EFI 1.2 Lotus and you now have a potent and very adjustable package. Of course tuning is not for the faint at heart -- I'm slowly getting to understand it more but have a long way to go. But when I get there it will be rewarding -- at least that is my hope (I should know within a couple of weeks).

Phil,

Wow on those air-charge-temps!!! Even without an IC, it would appear this SC will stay strong and keep the power delivery going without drop off during track sessions. Big plus over the M62 which most know heat soaks and gets very inefficient very quickly on track and one's 220 or 240 HP soon drops to about 200.

Would this SC be able to bring a highly modified motor to 500 hp? With an IC of course. Not that I want to build a Frank challenger, but toying with the idea.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Darth,

Still not sure why you're out? I'm not out from a possible reflash from Charlie, I'm keeping all my options open, but I like to tinker with my car and it will be a constant changing/evolving work (as money permits). Trust me, I used to believe that I get a car, set it up and that's it....but that reality was no reality, it was my fantasy world as I keep tinkering :)

Seriously, can you run a winter tune, a summer tune, a fall tune, a spring tune, a 91 octane tune, a 96 octane tune, a 100 octane tune, a 112 leaded octane tune? I'm sure you can, but how many reflashes would that be and what if you just wanna switch on the fly?

Charlie's current solution (which he may open up in the future) is a better alternative if you plan to "stabilize" your car and not change it much. But I don't plan to do that.

Charlie $600 dyno tune? Not sure I follow you. My original dyno tune was around $500 from FF (lets not go there). But the ultimate dyno for me will be on the track, nothing emulates a track like actually being on a track. :) I need to gather some more knowledge over the next couple a weeks and drop my car off in SoCal and I hope to be free of dyno's after that point and armed with ability to do this myself.

Phil,

Well, 500 hp from it? What's the realistic max before it becomes inefficient?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Charlie,

Oh I see, your talking initial startup cost, yes, it is more. But if one tinkers/changes their car over time, long term cost will be less if one does tuning themselves. Once I've got a good baseline set, I'll use track days, my data logging, and my laptop as my "dyno".

Darth,

Sorta my point though, if I hit a track that doesn't have race gas or has run out, then I simply switch or stay on the 91 oct map. If it has 100, then I switch to 96 pending how much 100 I put in, then later in the day when I'm confident I'm running 98% 100, I switch to 100 oct. Or if it's a really hot day at the track I may switch to an alternate map for safety.

Only when tuned wrong would a decat smell like a 68 buick ;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Thanks for update Phil. Are you stopping at 300 whp because of chassis or something else?

Bring it out to CA so you can run on some tracks with me :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
But Phil, it's sunny and 80 degrees here in SF/Bay Area and it's gonna be 90 when I go to SoCal tomorrow ... ugh!! Yeah, it's November, I know. Besides, I don't think the Kansas locals will like seeing CA plates in their state ;) Oh, and we have many road courses to choose from - I can think of 6 right now (Willow Spring, Fontana, ButtonWillow, Infineon, Laguna Seca, Thunderhill), sure there are more.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Yeah Phil's pretty anal, and I mean that in a good way. I would expect/demand top notch workmanship -- and he has the tools/equipment to do it.

Still think you should get out to CA Phil and do a couple of track events to validate the track worthiness of the kit (even without an IC).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Don't think anyone said "this is the best kit"? Think the meat of the thread is low charge temps without an IC at affordable prices.

This SC design was given big props from other sources that are not Lotus specific. I believe the design of the SC is it's key on efficiency and great track potential with minimal heat issues.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
skottoman,

I'd like to see more CARB numbers also, but I don't think that will happen due to how hard it is to find a CARB approved dyno and meet the very strict requirements. It takes considerable amount of effort for CARB and any changes to the kit would require another CARB run. So a CARB kit would cost at least 2X or 3X times as much in order to recover getting a CARB number.

Not saying it can't be done, cause it can, it's just cost to do so makes the kit virtually unsellable.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Since everyone is talking about fuel delivery. Could I see some numbers (pressure vs. rpm vs. boost)? I plan to install a fuel pressure gauge and hook it up to my IQ3 for monitoring.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
I'm not seeing any numbers? Graph of fuel pressure during a dyno run would be nice -- is this all just speculation? What charts?

46.7 lbs for a fuel pump -- uuuuuh, that can't be right??

It tells me Lotus are stupid $60K+ S car and Lotus want to save $5 on a less capable fuel pump??? A pint of beer right?

So you're saying the 2.5" on a stock fuel pump with 550's is guaranteed to run out of fuel? The very same Kit FF sell ;) I might just agree with you there.

So if I get this right, I can just drop in a Walbro 255 and good to go? No adapters?

Thanks phil, I'm not see any hard data on FP, would also be interested in the HOT wire Fuel pump FP numbers too (see if there is any difference). BTW, I did go back to running the stock battery and put my Braile aside for now.

What can I say, I'm a data guy, like to see real charts and numbers :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Ok, I'm not actually seeing any charts showing fuel pressure readings? Am I missing something? I understand the calculations, but I like to see real world. I'm not a strong believer of using AFR alone as indicator of fuel delivery issues.

But I agree on the surge tank -- does anyone make a viable solution for the slosh problems with these cars? It's really annoying (and slower) to have to run these cars with a full tank every session -- especially at 6lbs per gallon.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Still wanna see the FP values, sorry I'm anal that way. Of course I'm currently no where near those wHP values, on 2.5" 550 I was at 255 wHP (91 oct), so I would imagine 3.0" (8.9 psi peaked on a cold night) + 550 + RLS I'm around 230 wHP on 91 oct.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Phil,

On a side note, do the lower comp pistons you used weigh less?

Rob

P.S. For you folks fearing engine life issues, do bare in mind that a NEW (not rebuilt) short block and cylinder head with valves comes it under $2000 -- which is less than the SC. Just an FYI.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
I paid $1313 for my short block (NEW from 1st Toyota Parts). New head complete was $600 - $1913 (there was no tax and shipping to my door is about $137) -- I didn't need to get a new one, but was interested in cost. I believe upgraded head from Monkey is $1100??

Phil, less weight, tis good! :)

Not sure what the concern is about tuning, the kit WILL need a tune, just no way around it. EFI makes the process a little easier (since Phil can simply Email to EFI users), but this could be a great opportunity for Charlie to work out something on stock ECU also.

Rob
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Just to toss this out, I was running a V8 DOHC FORD 4.6 on a 190 pump putting out about 331 wHP and never had any fuel pressure issues even under race conditions. Stock fuel rails with bigger injectors. It was a returnless FI system. Fuel cell obviously but still, I think a 160 should be plenty for a 1.8 litre even with lots of boost.

But I plan to install a FP gauge also and data log it, just to see.

Also agree with dstevens on the RC 550's -- I ran my own injector tests on them post motor expire, they all worked as expected, but the spray pattern seemed to coarse compared to the stock 440's. I'd like to see a working alternative to the RC 550s -- especially since the connectors don't really fit the 2ZZ. I also suspect the RC 550s might be responsible for the idle hunt I have (tuned most of it out but still a little hunt left).

Rob.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
EFI is a breeze to unhook and go back to complete stock with OBD -- unplug it and plug bypass in -- that simple.

I plan to upgrade the unit with the Data Logging capabilities which will provide some additional learning capabilities. The new firmware will also have some additional goodies.

My car is back from Kris's tuning help, 100X better than before.

Rob.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
That doesn't seem right to me on the CD numbers. For one the frontal area of the Lotus is considerably smaller. How is it being measured?

170 mph is attainable at 255 wHP (trust me - with EFI and stock 6 speed) - take the rear wing off. But to hit 200 mph, I agree, you'll need considerably more wHP - Viper ACR stock will do about 202 mph on 600 HP. If Lotus CD is indeed that bad, then you'll need more than 600 HP as weight starts to get irrelevant at those speeds.

Personally I think anyone doing 170 mph in a Lotus without a full roll cage is crazy - me included ;).

Torque doesn't help top speed, HP does. Anyone that has done 180+ on a motorcycle and popped their head up over the front fairing will understand the sheer forces involved -- pretty friggin amazing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Can't really debate much said, just don't know enough about the physics involved. But still doesn't seem like that is a good measure of drag -- physical reality of the size and shape of a Mustang GT front windshield is no where near as "slippery" as that of my S.

Does CD include the downforce greated with the air flowing up thru the nose into radiators? Can't believe that produces more drag than air hitting a perpendicular flat radiator in a Mustang GT. The Mustang GT also has NO undertray, plenty of odd drag inducing shapes for the air to find it's way around.

So what specifically is causing such a high CD?

Where's Adrian Newey when ya need him ;)

xtn - yes you are correct (and no that didn't cause engine failure - that was 6 mo. prior to my car seeing a track).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Sorry, I did diverge some there on the CD. Oops.

I'm happy as a pig in **** right now, working on a new MAP for my EFI as we speak -- but I did get Kris to help get me a good base.

Uno Dos VANOS ... lame humor, working on this stuff makes me all giddy :)
 
1 - 20 of 129 Posts
Top