6063 is plenty for this especially with the welding ease!

 

6063 is what I am leaning towards because it has better resistance to cracking from what I have readup. Like I said, I will double check with my engineers tomarrow and order up the material for the flanges so that I can get the first CNC process done on Friday and hopefully finish them by next week.

then I will start working on the throttle body frame, butterflies, and plate rod.

Now I just got to source some cable throttle body parts for it which means I have to find a throttle body that has the same TPS voltage signal as the Z so I can take its guts.

 

0-3 v floating I think dont quote me!... Q45 tps sensor should work, use the guts of it, thats my only guess!

 

I have to make the decision soon if I am going to use drive-by-wire or cable. That will be the deciding factor.

 

If you get the DBW to work the CC will stay intact and tuning will be easy via a Utec or SAFC. Both of those systems are simple to operate! Im not even sure if timing would need to be tuned, but aftermarket cams would definately help this build! This would be an ideal mod on a destroke high rev app!

say 3.3L with a 10K redline, high comp pistons, cams, and a very fun powerband and maybe a direct port nitrous!

 

I am still battling with the use of a MAP sensor to tune this thing NA.

 

I'm thinking that if I can get these to work correctly with the MAP sensor I would be able to get 20-30 WHP with nothing else added to the engine just based on the increase in air volume and the tuning of the UTEC.

Not to mention that throttle response will be much improved.

Do you think that the DBW motor will be able to handle controlling all 6 plates? I wonder what type of motor it is and if there would be a way of retro fitting a different motor?

 

Call Top Secret... sounds funny but I bet they would help!

the DBW only has to handle one plate, all 6 plates have to be connected together somehow and then using the guts of a stock TB connect the DBW!

 

That will still not solve my problem. TS uses a full cable setup with a standalone which I know I could do like butter.

Many seem to want to use the stock ECU and a piggyback which is a problem based on the fact that the ECU reads MAF. As long as I can get the UTEC to control it NA with a MAP sensor it will be doable I think and as long as the stock DBW motor can handle it.

 

Using the throttle cable like TS would be badass, but the useability of the product significantly drops! No one want to but a fcon or Aem to run NA unless they are crazy rich or a shop car!

Utec and Stock ECU with DBW seems the harder solution but the most logical and probable for any kind of street car!

 

i dug a little deeper and here's the maf solution
http://www.srvperformance.com/pages-...f226851a75e5b0


it has 3 modes and one of them is full SPD DENSITY with a 3bar map and Air temp! not to mention its tunable for fuel and air so you really wouldnt even need a piggy back unless you wanted to change timing then It recommend a timing controller!

it is universal and could be hardwired into a setup at a fraction of the cost of utec! $394

 

It says that it controls via boost. Will that cause a problem with an NA engine since it will never pressurize?

 

I bet it could be setup to config based on vacum.
Ill look into it a little more!

 

I would appreciate that.

Also, should the MAP sensor read vaccuum from before or after the throttle plate for the?

 

I have a few other issues that I would like to think about regarding a DBW setup that way I know if I have everything under control so I don't make it and find out the only way to do it is cable.

The issue of high idle has come to mind a few times and I have been pondering how to take car of it. Lets say that I can control it with a MAP sensor via the UTEC and all issues there do get worked out. I am not fully aware of how the stock ECU controls the idle. If the stock ECU has a set % open that it stays at to maintain idle I think I could take car of it but then I am back at square one.

Lets say that the stock ECU holds the throttle at 10% open (I may be completely wrong on my thinking) in order to maintain idle with the stock TB. With ITB's and the drastically improved air flow and volume, I would think that the idle would shoot up to somewhere in between 1000-1500 rpms if not more. I could make the DBW setup rotatable somewhat like a cam gear (for cars such as honda's that are adjustable) and rotate the DBW setup a few degrees backwards (so that 0 degrees is actually open somewhat with the car off). This would mean that when the car turns on and the TB goes to idle position it would still think it is at 10% open but the actual would be like 5%.

That would be solved and a easy solve for the idle....but...

Now you just eliminated the amount that the throttle body can be open at WOT. As far as I know, the stock configiration will not open up 100%. I forget the exact % but lets say that it is 80%, by correcting the idle via my proposed method, I would only allow 75% at WOT. Granted it would still be and increase in throttle response and some gains in power over stock it would somewhat defeat the purpose all together.

Based on the above statement, unless I can somehow get the stock ECU to correct high idle correctly and allow the ITB's to open 100% I think a cable setup will be the route of choice.

I could take the TPS sensor out of the stock throttle body and retrofit it to the ITB's so that I can still give a TPS signal to the stock ECU and then use the UTEC as a standalone via speed density mode if I can somehow verify that it is capable of doing so. This would also incorporate the use of MAF replicators.

 

idle is not a problem the idle should be set at the TB by a set screw on the set of tbs! the ecu goes from there, there is a specific amount of opening and the set screw will only allow it to close so much so as long as the ecu thinks its going all the way down the mechanical side of the ECU will know the car is idleing

 

I know that is how it works for mechanical TB's but is it the same for the DBW setup that is on our car? I never really looked at it to be honest.

 

Quamen, on a previous post somebody posted a link to the Maximum forums on how to use the OEM TPS with the stock ECU and but converted the machanism to cable. Might wanna look into that.

You're still not 100% sure on what you'll be doing with the cable/TPS?

 

Zexy:

I think I have decided on a cable setup. Now the main problem I have is if the UTEC can control it with a MAP sensor.

I think it would be easy as can be to make a nice 90mm single TB for the FI guys using a cable setup that would be tunable via the UTEC. I may look into making something like that for fun also. Down the road though.

 

Any updates?