99 intake manifold setup questions
#1
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: oahu
Posts: 1,787
Total Cats: 6
99 intake manifold setup questions
99 head and manifold going on a 94 block in a 90 chassis running ms.
I am thinking the best source for ms and boost meter signal is off the outlet for egr adapted down. I was going to source my vac for the diverter rite after the tb (one of the ones off the neck into the intake mani). I am going to leave the vics disconnected and plug the rest of the ports (vics will be set up after I get the initial bugs out). Does this plan sound like an adequate one or is there a better source for any of these?
I am also swapping my grounding plate over from my 94 head so I have less things to solder.
Any input is greatly appreciated!
Pic of im:
I am thinking the best source for ms and boost meter signal is off the outlet for egr adapted down. I was going to source my vac for the diverter rite after the tb (one of the ones off the neck into the intake mani). I am going to leave the vics disconnected and plug the rest of the ports (vics will be set up after I get the initial bugs out). Does this plan sound like an adequate one or is there a better source for any of these?
I am also swapping my grounding plate over from my 94 head so I have less things to solder.
Any input is greatly appreciated!
Pic of im:
#2
fixed: Use 1 for Megasquirt MAP sensor and boost gauge. Use 2 for bov/diverter or w/e else.
Seemed that was the best way to go from my own searching, and also what FM recommends for the 99-00 IM. I'm using mine this way and it's working just fine.
I think the reasoning is, at the back of the manifold, 1 is going to get some turbulence, etc.
Last edited by aaronc7; 03-31-2011 at 12:39 PM.
#3
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: oahu
Posts: 1,787
Total Cats: 6
I was thinking two would have turbulence also seeing how it is going through the tb and changing direction at that point. The one that I have capped is rite in the middle of the manifold so I was thinking (like my 94 mani) it would be cleaner air.
#4
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,100
2 is the worst place for a map line. You want the MAP line on the back of the manifold, not on the front.
Also be careful about what nipple you use - some of them don't actually protrude into the plenum.
Also be careful about what nipple you use - some of them don't actually protrude into the plenum.
#5
idk, its working fine for me- heres my reference:
http://flyinmiata.com/support/instru...all_turbos.pdf
page 38, 39. in that file they use 1.) as a MAP line and 2.) as bov line
http://flyinmiata.com/support/instru...all_turbos.pdf
page 38, 39. in that file they use 1.) as a MAP line and 2.) as bov line
#6
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: oahu
Posts: 1,787
Total Cats: 6
idk, its working fine for me- heres my reference:
http://flyinmiata.com/support/instru...all_turbos.pdf
page 38, 39. in that file they use 1.) as a MAP line and 2.) as bov line
http://flyinmiata.com/support/instru...all_turbos.pdf
page 38, 39. in that file they use 1.) as a MAP line and 2.) as bov line
#7
"For the MAP sensor, it’s very important to get the cleanest signal possible. Only sealed items with very little fluctuation (e.g, boost gauge, MSD timing box, etc) should share the line with the MAP sensor. Also, it is preferable to have it come into the manifold in the middle. If this is not possible, the front of the manifold is the next best thing. ‘99 - ‘05 cars have a nipple in between two of the runners that looks ideal for sourcing a signal, however, this nipple does not go through to the manifold. Don’t use this to source the signal for anything."
#8
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: oahu
Posts: 1,787
Total Cats: 6
*Edit: Just got off the phone with FM and they said that I should be taking the signal off the back of the manifold and that the labeling on pg 39 was a misprint...I don't know about the blurb djp posted though. Maybe somebody was high, but I asked about that also and they stated the nipple off the neck that transitions from tb to plenum would not be optimal source for the ecu/boost meter.
Last edited by astroboy; 03-31-2011 at 10:41 AM.
#11
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: oahu
Posts: 1,787
Total Cats: 6
I am assuming he was referring to this:
*Edit: Just got off the phone with FM and they said that I should be taking the signal off the back of the manifold and that the labeling on pg 39 was a misprint...I don't know about the blurb djp posted though. Maybe somebody was high, but I asked about that also and they stated the nipple off the neck that transitions from tb to plenum would not be optimal source for the ecu/boost meter.
#12
see astroboy's last post/edit... basically they said that pg 39 was wrong for the 99 IM, and that the rear is actually better (like they show in the pics for the other years). But it still doesn't match the text prior to all the pics (which you quoted). It's starting to seem like the rear would be the way to go since it's that way for all other years, but I guess we won't know for sure unless someone tests it out.
#17
You know what's funny.. FM updated their PDF hahahhah. It now has the rear port as the MAP line and one off the TB as bov line. I edited my previous post with pic so theres no confusion for later
I just changed the source for mine, I'll see if I can tell a difference or not.
I just changed the source for mine, I'll see if I can tell a difference or not.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post