Author |
Message |
Speedfreaks101
| Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 12:10 pm: |
|
I have been looking at old topics about IAT sensor location and I have yet to find an answer to my question. When installing some type of heat barrier why do some of you relocate the IAT sensor below the barrier? IAT= Intake air temperature so why would you not want the ECM to be able to recognize the correct air temp. Also why would this be so different from a stock setup? Thanks, Bart |
Buellin_ri
| Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 12:26 pm: |
|
I don't know why you wouldn't want the ECM to know the correct intake temp. I would put it where it belongs. |
Odie
| Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 12:54 pm: |
|
I want to say I read that someone in Europe had gotten better esults with it BELOW the barrier in the heat......... |
Odie
| Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 12:54 pm: |
|
I want to say I read that someone in Europe had gotten better results with it BELOW the barrier in the heat......... |
Pupu
| Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 01:06 pm: |
|
i did something like that on a car and it ran worse, i thought that it needed the air temp in order to adjust the A/F ratio, and if you fool it, you might run rich or lean, but i am by no means an expert, but if it thought the air was hotter than it really was, i would think it would run a little lean, therefor giving you more power. |
Blazinc5
| Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 05:43 am: |
|
hot air is not as dence as cold air,,, so hot air = less oxygen able to get into the engine in the same hole at the same flow rate... I am quite sure that if your sensor is getting the hotter air, it says it need less fuel in the mix to keep the air/fuel ratio correct. Putting that sensor in the heat would cause a lean condition.. Bad ju-ju ya'll Devin |
Sparky
| Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 04:28 pm: |
|
I think it would be beneficial to mount the IAT sensor in a material that would transmit less heat energy than the rubber grommet that is currently used. The idea here is that ambient hot air spewing off the heads HAS to be heating the bottom of the airbox and the grommet that holds the IAT. It follows that the hot grommet COULD be heating the lead wires of the IAT, thus influencing its calibration the wrong way. Anybody know what kind of material might transmit less heat than the rubber grommet? And don't say asbestos. Sparky |
M1combat
| Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 05:07 pm: |
|
But that's the system the ECM was designed around. It's already taken into effect. |
Isham
| Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 07:28 pm: |
|
Toilette paper card board doesn't transmit much heat. Ditch the rubber and put card board around it. Yeah! |
Buellin_ri
| Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 07:35 pm: |
|
Don't mess with it..... |
Trenchtractor
| Posted on Tuesday, February 28, 2006 - 02:28 am: |
|
That set-up was used with the hillbilly motors FAST intake system. On the dyno they had better performance with the IAT sensor under the heat matt. Bear in mind they were using a different intake design, so it's possible the difference in IAT sensor reading was compensating the A/F curve to suit their intake design better. A type of remapping?? |
Voltage_vector
| Posted on Tuesday, February 28, 2006 - 09:14 am: |
|
Bad Ju-ju... |
|