John Van Valkenburgh <jvan@nando.net> writes:
>I can see why they would use the Weber throttle body. I'm assuming that
>they use an intake manifold that runs into a single intake. Perhaps a
>little easier to control. I wonder though if this reduces the maximum
>possible air intake?
Probably, but unless you're also fooling with your cam profile and the flow
is *severely* restricted it doesn't affect performance as much as you might
think. If you're worried about it, you'd do well to ditch the carb body
altogether and jam a huge nothing-but-a-butterfly-valve piece in the plumbing.
>I could buy one, but most of the fun is designing my own and putting some
>of my engineering skills to the test!
Fascinating. You and I would apply our skills in completely different
directions, John. You'd concentrate on the electronic controls, while I'd
work on a properly tuned manifold (can't decide if the siamesed ports would
be an asset or a liability).
>Lets see, I could put a modem on the engine management controller's RS-232
>port, and then I could be here at work and call it from my PC and log on
>to my MGB...
Even better I'd like to see "John's MGB Home Page" featuring real-time
telemetry. Let Web-browsing fools observe your car in action and monkey
with your air/fuel ratio and spark advance! Don't forget to tie in a GPS
system so we can locate you right away and render assistance when (not if)
you break down. :)
>Maybe it should run UNIX? Or since the MG is supposed to
>be an older "classic" I could run my MG under VM.
Makes no difference, as long as the computer has Lucas electrics.
>Hey Ray! Ya suppose we could get a grant for this???
Not as laughable as it may sound. I'll bet somebody would fund it.
--
Jay Tilton
jtilton@vt.edu
|