Notices
Series I Aftermarket Performance Modifications Discussion of power adding modifications

Brillo & RG NA Interceptor Testing

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old 05-25-2006, 03:24 PM
  #51  
Go Texas Longhorns!
Thread Starter
 
brillo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,818
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Not sure about your question Dave. There is alot of overlap between the maps. Its kinda like the points on the emanage software where you have 10% load at 9000rpm, it doesn't make sense (or matter) what value you put there b/c you'll never be there in real life.
Old 05-25-2006, 06:00 PM
  #52  
Registered
iTrader: (1)
 
r0tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
what does the ignition timing look like?
Old 05-25-2006, 06:55 PM
  #53  
Bigus Rotus
iTrader: (3)
 
Nemesis8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Missouri
Posts: 8,573
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Is that the t_rpm map?
Old 09-01-2006, 12:59 AM
  #54  
Registered
 
gr8rx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can someone please address my question though.. Or maybe your not sure like I am.. Why would there be a hg value on the Load map for a wide open throttle situation when that is handled on the RPMwot map?

Any ideas?[/QUOTE]


I believe its for the matrix mode, or for overrun. when in matrix mode it has to have a value there or it jumps to the next available value. Cause matrix mode doesn't use rpmwot map.
Old 09-01-2006, 03:23 AM
  #55  
Boosted Kiwi
iTrader: (2)
 
Brettus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Y-cat-o NZ
Posts: 20,537
Received 1,500 Likes on 847 Posts
Brillo - you were going to try for increased fuel mileage , did you ever get anywhere with that ?
Old 09-01-2006, 09:20 AM
  #56  
Go Texas Longhorns!
Thread Starter
 
brillo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,818
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I haven't finished testing b/c I was called out of town and I need to fine tune a few things. Its been so hot here and with the recall I've taken the computer off of the car for the moment. I plan on getting back into tuning more this month.
Old 02-12-2007, 07:28 PM
  #57  
Registered User
 
juanjux's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So, what happened with this brillo, do you have a dyno or something? how much hp did you get with Interceptor-X? I see 220 rwhp on your vbgarage, if that's from the I-X it's very good if your car was in the 175-190 rwhp range most ownser see here!!!
Old 02-12-2007, 08:07 PM
  #58  
Go Texas Longhorns!
Thread Starter
 
brillo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,818
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
220whp was a flywheel estimate based upon my real dyno. I have been rather busy as of late and haven't been able to focus on the tuning as I only have one car (my 8). I think some better mileage is possible while cruising, but its tough to get a decent idle without it running super rich.

I'm likley going to get a beater soon and start focusing on turbo charging the car, so If anyone is interested in my NA interceptor, PM me or see my thead in the FS section
Old 01-01-2008, 06:46 PM
  #59  
Registered
 
Soravia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: KY, TN border
Posts: 213
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Sorry for Necro but how did the mod go? I'm assuming that the car should have modded Cat and muffler by now.
Any better gas mileage? Any decent power increase (torque) from 3,000 to 4,500 RPM range?

Thanks
Old 01-01-2008, 09:51 PM
  #60  
Registered
 
rotarygod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 9,134
Likes: 0
Received 24 Likes on 23 Posts
The Interceptor has long since been sold. The car was running a stock flash as far as I know although he may be using an RB flash. He'll chime in on the details. For n/a use the gains from an Interceptor just couldn't justify the money it costs. Forced induction is a different story altogether. For na performance the best option out there is the RB flash but don't expert huge gains.
Old 01-01-2008, 10:19 PM
  #61  
Registered
 
Soravia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: KY, TN border
Posts: 213
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Can it be used to get better gas mileage by totally disregarding the emission stuff and optimizing for 93 octane?
How much of a better mileage can I expect with Interceptor-X and straight pipe exhaust? Can I lean the AFR more than normal if the intake air and coolant temps are down?

Last edited by Soravia; 01-01-2008 at 10:22 PM.
Old 01-02-2008, 01:24 AM
  #62  
Registered
 
rotarygod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 9,134
Likes: 0
Received 24 Likes on 23 Posts
If you wanted to optomize for mileage reasons, you'd want to use 87 octane. Isn't the whole point to keep costs down? The engine would run fine on 87. You need to think about it a different way though. You definitely can do this. However, how much money are you saving per tank? How many tanks would it take to equal the cost of the Int-X? Keep in mind this is the break even point. Until then, you are negative financially on your investment and would have come out ahead by just using more expensive gas.
Old 01-02-2008, 02:12 AM
  #63  
Banned
iTrader: (3)
 
MazdaManiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Under my car
Posts: 16,386
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes on 21 Posts
You will use more fuel than you could possibly save in tuning the mid and upper ranges to 15:1 or so just by idling at a stop light.
The Int-X will not give you a stable idle at mixtures leaner than 13:1.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Shankapotamus3
Series I Trouble Shooting
28
03-14-2021 03:53 PM
Carbon8
RX-8's For Sale/Wanted
42
02-27-2020 08:39 AM
mdl0209
Series I Trouble Shooting
14
05-23-2019 05:46 PM



You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: Brillo & RG NA Interceptor Testing



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:26 AM.