Who eliminated there IAC valve
04-14-2007, 12:05 AM
#21
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2002
Location: OBAMA IS HITLER
Posts: 22,209
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
10 Posts
Is the word dumber a word??
This forum gets DUMBER AND DUMBER when we have to start discussing removing specific sensors that GM put on these cars 20 years ago.
As CFI said, if you are too fking retarded to figure out how this sht works close the damn hood and take it in to a professional. CFI didn't exactly state it that way but I am. You shade tree mechanics that don't know what the fk you are doing shouldn't come to an online forum asking these total buttfk questions.
And anyone that wants Kobblevette's advice needs to have their nuts kicked up into their throat. He hasn't a clue on how these cars work properly.
I have a car that I beat the **** out of and all I've done to it was cam, intake, exhaust, heads, chip, transmission shift kit-valves, rearend, pulleys, rockers and ignition. My car runs just fine with all the stock crap hooked up. QUIT ASKING THESE ******** WHAT THEY DID TO THEIR CARS TO MAKE THEM RUN LIKE SHT.
P.S. I've done all the mechanical work except program the chip. If push would come to shove I could probably program a chip better than 80% of the people selling chips on this forum, maybe 90.
This forum gets DUMBER AND DUMBER when we have to start discussing removing specific sensors that GM put on these cars 20 years ago.
As CFI said, if you are too fking retarded to figure out how this sht works close the damn hood and take it in to a professional. CFI didn't exactly state it that way but I am. You shade tree mechanics that don't know what the fk you are doing shouldn't come to an online forum asking these total buttfk questions.
And anyone that wants Kobblevette's advice needs to have their nuts kicked up into their throat. He hasn't a clue on how these cars work properly.
I have a car that I beat the **** out of and all I've done to it was cam, intake, exhaust, heads, chip, transmission shift kit-valves, rearend, pulleys, rockers and ignition. My car runs just fine with all the stock crap hooked up. QUIT ASKING THESE ******** WHAT THEY DID TO THEIR CARS TO MAKE THEM RUN LIKE SHT.
P.S. I've done all the mechanical work except program the chip. If push would come to shove I could probably program a chip better than 80% of the people selling chips on this forum, maybe 90.
that's what happens when the kids take over. especially the ones that still live at home for far too long 
by the way i'm totally on board with your choice of words. its about time someone tells it like it is. i can't stand PC and pussyfootin' around when it comes to idiocy.
Last edited by Red Tornado; 04-14-2007 at 12:08 AM.
04-14-2007, 12:11 AM
#22
Safety Car
Member Since: Dec 2004
Location: Poop land
Posts: 4,088
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd totally use that for more mod money, which I'm doing now...****cough***383***cough***
04-14-2007, 12:11 AM
#23
Maybe C4 Tech should make crapvette a mod so he can tell you how to make a L98 pull 50 lb ft less torque and 20 hp less and still maintain somewhat of crappy idle.
04-14-2007, 12:15 AM
#24
It's actually stupid to take a L98, throw a Mini on it and pull 10 less HP and 50 less lb ft of torque than a LTR intake can do with ALL emission hooked up.
yup, i said so.
04-14-2007, 12:27 AM
#26
04-14-2007, 12:29 AM
#27
Le Mans Master
remove stuff
I only have one thing to say.........
GM is not a company that likes losing money.
If they thought it was not necessary, they woudn't spend the time and money to invent a part, test it, make it work, then make it cheaper, and install it in the first place. If they can save a couple pennies per car per part, let alone dollars, they would be totally profitable.
Removing parts can't be so good, since, for instance, they tried removing the MAF for two years, and they have been on every efficient model except trucks since 92
GM is not a company that likes losing money.
If they thought it was not necessary, they woudn't spend the time and money to invent a part, test it, make it work, then make it cheaper, and install it in the first place. If they can save a couple pennies per car per part, let alone dollars, they would be totally profitable.
Removing parts can't be so good, since, for instance, they tried removing the MAF for two years, and they have been on every efficient model except trucks since 92
04-14-2007, 12:32 AM
#29
Safety Car
Member Since: Dec 2004
Location: Poop land
Posts: 4,088
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And when something goes with a LTR intake, its bad enough to take it all apart and even worse putting the SOB back together. For example, a fuel injector swap would take me 15 minutes on a Miniram vs. 2 hours or more on a LTR intake. Its much smarter, timewise, to have a Miniram over a LTR intake. To make a LTR intake worthwhile, you have to invest quite a bit of time and money to make sure it flows enough air to support the intended/expected hp. Hell, I may as well run at least 12s @ 115 mph if I can only get a TPiS ZZ9 cam, a 4000 stall converter, ported 113 heads or equivalent. Tuning it to run right also shouldn't be an issue. If I can launch it right and get a magical 1.6xx 60', I'd probably be running very similar ETs and trapping about the same mph.
04-14-2007, 12:35 AM
#30
And when something goes with a LTR intake, its bad enough to take it all apart and even worse putting the SOB back together. For example, a fuel injector swap would take me 15 minutes on a Miniram vs. 2 hours or more on a LTR intake. Its much smarter, timewise, to have a Miniram over a LTR intake. To make a LTR intake worthwhile, you have to invest quite a bit of time and money to make sure it flows enough air to support the intended/expected hp. Hell, I may as well run at least 12s @ 115 mph if I can only get a TPiS ZZ9 cam, a 4000 stall converter, ported 113 heads or equivalent. Tuning it to run right also shouldn't be an issue. If I can launch it right and get a magical 1.6xx 60', I'd probably be running very similar ETs and trapping about the same mph.
You couldn't tune my moped to run proper.
If I still owned my 89 vette, which was closer to stock than the 90 I currently have, I'd run you for titles and take yours to the scrap yard and have it crushed when I won. You know almost nothing about these cars. You do know where to put the key in to start it so you know a little.
04-14-2007, 12:35 AM
#31
Safety Car
Member Since: Dec 2004
Location: Poop land
Posts: 4,088
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was actually only $100 more to build a 383 than a 350 with similar parts, technically mine is a 376, because I retained a 4.000" bore. Just machine work around certain areas. That was about it.
04-14-2007, 12:39 AM
#32
I don't care if you build a 406, I'd race you with my 350 set up properly.
04-14-2007, 12:40 AM
#33
Safety Car
Member Since: Dec 2004
Location: Poop land
Posts: 4,088
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You couldn't tune my moped to run proper.
If I still owned my 89 vette, which was closer to stock than the 90 I currently have, I'd run you for titles and take yours to the scrap yard and have it crushed when I won. You know almost nothing about these cars. You do know where to put the key in to start it so you know a little.
If I still owned my 89 vette, which was closer to stock than the 90 I currently have, I'd run you for titles and take yours to the scrap yard and have it crushed when I won. You know almost nothing about these cars. You do know where to put the key in to start it so you know a little.
04-14-2007, 12:42 AM
#34
Safety Car
Member Since: Dec 2004
Location: Poop land
Posts: 4,088
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-14-2007, 12:43 AM
#35
Against you, yeah I'd run you for titles, trust me you are that dense, you don't have a clue. I've been beating on Chevy cars long before your papa's sperm decided to leave the sheets on the bed.
04-14-2007, 12:43 AM
#36
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2002
Location: San Diego , CA Double Yellow DirtBags 1985..Z51..6-speed
Posts: 24,337
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
16 Posts
Every single fuel injected vehicle on the face of the earth built since about 1985 (except Kopbet's) has sensor(s) to meter the air mass into the motor, whether directly or indirectly.
What sort of fuel mileage do you get kop? That's a pretty good indicator whether or not your car is running like ***.
What sort of fuel mileage do you get kop? That's a pretty good indicator whether or not your car is running like ***.
04-14-2007, 12:45 AM
#37
Safety Car
Member Since: Dec 2004
Location: Poop land
Posts: 4,088
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every single fuel injected vehicle on the face of the earth built since about 1985 (except Kopbet's) has sensor(s) to meter the air mass into the motor, whether directly or indirectly.
What sort of fuel mileage do you get kop? That's a pretty good indicator whether or not your car is running like ***.
What sort of fuel mileage do you get kop? That's a pretty good indicator whether or not your car is running like ***.
04-14-2007, 12:46 AM
#39
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2002
Location: San Diego , CA Double Yellow DirtBags 1985..Z51..6-speed
Posts: 24,337
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
16 Posts
Ahh, my bad, I forgot you tuned it in the I-4 onramp, sorry for disputing your 3-5%.
I have had it at WOT many times and nothing gave yet!!!
04-14-2007, 12:52 AM
#40
Safety Car
Member Since: Dec 2004
Location: Poop land
Posts: 4,088
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, like you have a clue. You're the kind of guy who thinks he can get a standard/traditional 350 SBC and make 600 naturally aspirated and port a stock valved 113 aluminum head to flow 300 cfm @ 28" of water. Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? Of course man, its human nature to act bigger online when you probably wouldn't say it face to face, in a group.