| Author | Message | ||
| Matt Karson (Squidracing)
Junior Member Username: Squidracing Post Number: 217 Registered: 3-2001 |
Martin....how funny...my 777 is down there as well. Ice maker needs to be fixed. | ||
| Martin (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 3117 Registered: 5-2001 |
Matt, love to but the next event is this weekend and my jet (Boing 777) is in Wichita for repairs. The damn ashtrays fall out of the seats on take off and landing.  | ||
| Matt Karson (Squidracing)
Junior Member Username: Squidracing Post Number: 216 Registered: 3-2001 |
Billy Bob, the Motec Technican worked the chip over the whole rpm range. Yes, it would not make sense if it were mapped for idle only. | ||
| billy bob (Fatbillybob)
Junior Member Username: Fatbillybob Post Number: 66 Registered: 8-2002 |
To Chris about the fuel regulator my understanding of thesystem is no you will not get more power by having higher fuel pressure. The ECU can sens this and shorten the duty cycle of the injectors. If you improve flow and therefore demand perhaps this may work but i am not sure you can do this with stock ECU's. In fact if you just increase fuel pressure and put bigger injectors you may have shor duty cycles or big globs of poorly atomized fuel rather than the fine mist you get from properly sized injectors for the given load. But I just am not sure. I think if you go this route you have to change the ECU map which is best achieved with a Motec or E-motive system but then you cause all knids of other compromises. Now what would be great to have is a piggyback ECU to turn up the fuel delivery etc. on demand with stuff like nitrous use etc. There are some guys who calim they can do this but....???? Big VOODOO. | ||
| billy bob (Fatbillybob)
Junior Member Username: Fatbillybob Post Number: 65 Registered: 8-2002 |
Well sounds like lots of big stories to me on this thread but someone educate me please. First, how do you rechip to 355 specs and change to an adjustable fuel regulator etc. You would have to put all this stuff in then use a programable prom in the ECU then test for a longtime to test out all conditions of use. You then make lots of compromises and then burn a prom chip. Does anyone think they can do that better than Ferrari? For the kind of money it would take to use a Bosch ECU why? Why not use a fully programable Motec? Motecs are way cheaper you only need one and you can dump a pile of Ferrari stuff you don't need and you can get rid of the retrictive twin hotwire intake setup. Second, even with the Motec rep sitting in the car he has perfectly optimized the car for idle. What about in motion, at speed, in traffic etc... Bosch Motronics claim an intricate 3-d mapping of fuel with spark blah blah blah... I do not see how guys can really do much without huge testing on a racetrack with there primative little systems like motecs and elctromotives. Yes these do work and all the big racers use them but they optimize for the track in question and have software to program the programable ECUs for the condtions at hand. None of use who drive our Ferrari to our dayjob and jack rabbit start at the stoplights do that. | ||
| Matt Karson (Squidracing)
Junior Member Username: Squidracing Post Number: 215 Registered: 3-2001 |
Justin, you seem to have done some interesting work to your 348. The main sources of your power increase are the head work you did (was not aware of that from your first post) as well as the ECU mapping. The lightweight flywheel is a nice touch, but that is an unsprung weight issue as opposed to a hp issue. My friend has a 355 which is configured to Grand Am specs. The reason I mention this, is that the engine management system he has is made by Motec. He had a Motec rep come out to the track and remap his ECU while sitting in his car with a laptop going. I'm trying to figure out if everything is synched correctly in your configuration. I'm a trader and not an engineer, but it seems that a lot of parameters were changed, and you may not be optimized. I only mention this because it is such a sensitive area to fine tune. My 355 Challenge Car has had its heads worked over as well. That is a good source of additional power. I do however have my cats in my car....doesnt seem to make the car less competitive. Martin, fly me down for your next event....I'll coach you and make you the fastest 348 out there! | ||
| Martin (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 3107 Registered: 5-2001 |
Guys, I believe that the car can have a drastic HP increase. Lets not forget that most of the HP gets lost due to emissions control devices. The CAT takes HP (I felt that in my pants, Matt ). The Challenge 348 I had has a great performance increase over my stock (w/o CATS) 348, which is the newer year. Can I measure it? No, not without the Dyno but then frankly I don't give much for HP anyway because that is so subjective. A MAC truck has more HP that all of our cars, so HP is nothing! Matt can probably outdrive me while he is driving a LADA (35HP) and I am in my Ferrari (300+HP). | ||
| Justin Randall Kenyon (Kenyon)
New member Username: Kenyon Post Number: 8 Registered: 10-2002 |
Guys calm down, The 348 spider has a standard 320 bhp (European spec)from the factory. On upgrade, the engine heads have been 'Gas flowed', and valve seats polished and grounded and a lighted fly wheel. All done when cambelt was changed. The chip upgade was done by mapping a 355 ECU and programming it into 348 ECU with some parameters, using a adjustable fuel regulator to increase fuel. The air box has been removed from the engine and a 57i K&N foam filter system where installed and by passed directly to the vent door intakes to increase forced air flow. The NGK racing patinium plugs were recommneded by NGK with car mods I told them about due to increased fuel mixuture and upgraded fuel injectors. The 375 bhp is not at the wheels, which I never said was. The car is running on Shell Optimax which is 99%-100% octane (I am working as a engineer for petrolchemical business, Shell optimax is not a con, I have seen it being tested, you must use it all the time though) Reliability is not that much of issue for me. I do a full service on my cars every 3,000 miles. I have a 430 masertai pushing out 405 BHP AT THE WHEELS (Larger twin turbos with hybrid 360 dgrees thrust bearing, gas flowed the heads, grounded the valve seats, lighted flywheel, chip upgrade K&N 57i filter system, fuel regulator and running on shell Optimx fuel and NGK racing plugs platinium tip with larger fuel injectors and Aquamist intercoollers for cooling. The car is still OK with 120,000 miles on it. The car was modified with 50,000 miles on it. I use this car everyday. A engine is a engine and if serviced and looked after, their should be no problems, treat the car right (drive hard when warm, let cool down before switching off, things like that) I will down load some pictures of engine, regarding the graphs I have none. The ferrari was put on the rolling road and 375 bhp was the reading, NOT from the wheels. The car has definitley 350 bhp. I have raced 355's on trackays and they do pull better. The torque on the 355 is much better, I do not think really possible on 348. I feel the car is around the 350 BHP mark. I do not think the rolling road reading are that accurate, not the same as engine bench test. I can say the 355 engine is a better, with the 5 valves per cylinder and better injection system. | ||
| Justin Randall Kenyon (Kenyon)
New member Username: Kenyon Post Number: 7 Registered: 10-2002 |
Guys calm down, The 348 spider has a standard 320 bhp (European spec)from the factory. On upgrade, the engine heads have been 'Gas flowed', and valve seats polished and grounded and a lighted fly wheel. All done when cambelt was changed. The chip upgade was done by mapping a 355 ECU and programming it into 348 ECU with some parameters, using a adjustable fuel regulator to increase fuel. The air box has been removed from the engine and a 57i K&N foam filter system where installed and by passed directly to the vent door intakes to increase forced air flow. The NGK racing patinium plugs were recommneded by NGK with car mods I told them about due to increased fuel mixuture and upgraded fuel injectors. The 375 bhp is not at the wheels, which I never said was. The car is running on Shell Optimax which is 99%-100% octane (I am working as a engineer for petrolchemical business, Shell optimax is not con, I have seen it being tested, you must use it all the time though) Reliability is not that much of issue for me. I do a full service on my cars every 3,000 miles. I have a 430 masertai pushing out 405 BHP AT THE WHEELS (Larger twin turbos with hybrid 360 dgrees thrust bearing, gas flowed the heads, grounded the valve seats, lighted flywheel, chip upgrade K&N 57i filter system, fuel regulator and running on shell Optimx fuel and NGK racing plugs platinium tip with larger fuel injectors and Aquamist intercoollers for cooling. The car is still OK with 120,000 miles on it. The car was modified with 50,000 miles on it. I use this car everyday. A engine is a engine and if serviced and looked after, their should be no problems, treat the car right (drive hard when warm, let cool down before switching off, things like that) I will down load some pictures of engine, regarding the graphs I have none. The ferrari was put on the rolling road and 375 bhp was the reading, NOT from the wheels. The car has definitley 350 bhp. I have raced 355's on trackays and they do pull better. The torque on the 355 is much better, I do not think really possible on 348. I feel the car is around the 350 BHP mark. I do not think the rolling road reading are that accurate, not the same as engine bench test. I can say the 355 engine is a better, with the 5 valves per cylinder and better injection system. | ||
| Chris A. (Asianbond)
Junior Member Username: Asianbond Post Number: 84 Registered: 5-2002 |
My 348 Challenge is bone stock with the factory sport exhaust and upgraded chip, it's supposed to be pushing 320hp, true or not, it feels and sounds great, I don't want to change a thing about the car. Going from 300 to 375 without any internal work on a non-turbo car sounds quite optimistic, that's a 25% increase, hard to believe that Ferrari left so many horses on the table. | ||
| Matt Karson (Squidracing)
Junior Member Username: Squidracing Post Number: 214 Registered: 3-2001 |
Frank and Dave, I'm with you. Frank, the Spyder exhaust, from what I know of it, is what they called their 'free flow exhaust'. I had the same exhaust on my '93 Series Speciale, as well as my '94 Challenge Car. A Tubi, or even a cat by-pass won't even give an extra 12hp. Dave, I can't imagine that Justin meant at the wheels. If that is the claim, then using a 20% loss of hp from the block to the wheels...that would have the motor putting out 450hp at the block. Either way, it's silly to say that an essentially stock 348 kicks out 375hp. Why do people think that if they bolt on this, or add that, that it will result in the preposturous claims that the manufacturers come up with. We already know that most of the 'upgrade chips' are pieces of crap. All we need to do is look at the very hard work Chris, Tim and Roland have done on their F40's. That's real work, with measured results, no guesses there. Finally....why do people think making hp gains is EASY? To get 375 hp out of a 348 motor, I would think you would have to measure its life expectancy in track hours, not years. And while I'm on my soapbox.....I think it's foolish when people try to sound serious when using the 'seat of pants' method to calculate hp. Like any of us would have any idea of what they were talking about. | ||
| Dave Penhale (Dapper)
Member Username: Dapper Post Number: 337 Registered: 4-2002 |
Justin, 375 @ the wheels? Sounds pretty unbelievable from a 348 with stock motor (internals), like to see the graphs | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Intermediate Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 1478 Registered: 9-2001 |
Justin, 375hp is a little hard to believe without going into the engine. The 348 Spiders had around 312hp from the factory according to most test i have read. So you would be getting a 63hp increase from an exhaust and chips ! Please post the dyno graphs for us all to see. | ||
| Matt Karson (Squidracing)
Junior Member Username: Squidracing Post Number: 213 Registered: 3-2001 |
375 HP out of a 348 with the updates you mentioned?? Is that done on a dyno? | ||
| Chris Richardson (Boozy)
Junior Member Username: Boozy Post Number: 228 Registered: 11-2001 |
Justin: I have never heard of replacing the fuel regulator as a performance upgrade. Where can you purchase one and how much does it cost? What does it take to replace it? How much difference does it make? | ||
| Justin Randall Kenyon (Kenyon)
New member Username: Kenyon Post Number: 6 Registered: 10-2002 |
I have taken the cats off my 1994 348 spider. I have kept them incase I sell the car. The exhaust is 316 stainless , polished inside (like Dairy pipework), have cat replacement pipes on my car. The car sounds like a F1 engine. Horsepower has increased, no problems with idling, or power delivery its runs better now then with the cats on. I will never go back to cats. It took me 45 mins to take the cats off and install the replacement pipes. Any of the ferrari specialist companies do cat replacement pipes. I had some made up using highly polished 316 stainless steel pipe. I ordered a set of Tubis and copied them and return them. So easy to make. I believe QV London to cat replacement pipe for �200.00. I have had the cats removed from the car, straight through exahust with a small single box at the rear. The ECU has been chipped, K&N air filter, upgraded fuel regulator and racing platinium KNG plugs. I have had it on the rolling road pushing out 375 BHP at 8000 RPM (10 BHP off a 355). The only thing with the cats removed the emissions are higher. I am going to get the car lowered this winter. Putting on Tarox racing disc. | ||
| Martin (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 3093 Registered: 5-2001 |
Tubi won't cure your CAT problem. I have put test pipes on my car. They come from Eric here on this board. This is his e-mail address: [email protected] He has done an outstanding job on the pipes. If the 91 CATS and the 94 CATS are the same you can order direct from him. Much much less than new CATS. Performance increase for sure. Revs up better than before, cooler and sounds a little better. Barely noticable in the car but outside. I can highly recommend doing it! | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Member Username: Ross Post Number: 507 Registered: 3-2002 |
sounds like its time for a tubi.....get hold of manu, he seems to have the low down on some of these questions and is always itching to fit you a tubi at a decent price..... | ||
| Craig Williams (Craigw)
New member Username: Craigw Post Number: 24 Registered: 4-2002 |
Having been told over the weekend that my catalytic converter is "On the way out" I have been given two options. 1. Replace both cats, approx �1400 ukp + labour 2. Install Cat bypass pipes, apparently more power, sounds better etc etc. Not sure of exact costs but radically cheaper. Anybody here have any experience of cat bypass pipes & likely performance gains/any problems? The car is a 1994 GTS and has a stainless steel sports exhaust and k&n airfilter. Thanks guys. |