Alfa Romeo Forums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
982 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Well, I was positive I was going to convert to
Webers, then I go and find this place is Australia
that sells EFI conversion kits.

They sell all kinds a cool kits, the one Im thinking
of trying is the F10 wich is fuel-only and does
not require special ignition or a crank sensor.

Has anyone used this system? I would think the
conversion would be pretty straight foward for
Spica cars, as they have the manifold with injectors
that could possibly be converted to electronic injectors, with a custom fuel rail.
The throttle linkage is very large, and should be able to
mount the TPS sensor to it. The Spica cars also
have a high pressure pump with return line.
Should be no problem adding the MAP, and airflow
sensors and the O2 sensor.

Check out the pics of the cars they have converted.
Especially the Maserati(note the overflow bottle,
look familiar?)

Here's the link:http://www.hitman.hm/haltech.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,837 Posts
That I am aware of, Haltech is a good system. I know a few people who have tried it and liked it, so if you can find it for a price you are comfortable with, go for it!

To comfirm, the SPICA pump is more than enough for EFI, as we are using one for our Turbo Spider running an Electromotive.

The only trick with the MAP sensor is where you put it. If you start with one of the Bosch manifolds (like ours), its pretty easy.

If you go with port throttle similar to SPICA or Webers, you need a ballence tube that goes into each throttle. Probably, if you buy a kit, it will have a provision to do this very easily. Also, the kit will easily put a TPS on the system...

What were you thinking of? With some machining, you can convert the SPICA intake to EFI. There was a guy at the convetion in SoCal that had it, and it looked really nice.

Eric
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Haltech

I recently picked up a set of individual throttle bodies, some coils and a haltech. I have not installed it yet but I will keep you informed of the progress.

1987 Milano Engine
 

·
1966-2013
Joined
·
13,741 Posts
As stated by turbolarespider, you'll need a vacuum balance chamber for those if you want to use MAP sensing with any degree of accuracy.

A tubular rig 1 1/4" x 11 1/2" (capped at both ends obviously) will support all the vac pipes from the ITB's + MAP sensor + fuel pressure regulator with no problem and pull around 11.5-12.6 inches of mercury at 1000 rpm idle speed. ('normal' vacuum for most engines is around 15 inches of mercury, so you won't be losing much)

It'll also lay right in between the TB's and the water manifold on the older spica and carb manifolds like it was made for it. (look for the black pipe running sideways behind the air filters and fuel rail in the attached)
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,040 Posts
I went to Autronic another Australia company for mine. Programmable fuel injection rocks get one that will give you error codes when something is wrong if you can.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
MAP balance tube volume?

Tifosi,

I'm curious about the dimensions you've stated for the MAP/vacuum balance tube. How important is the volume? Is bigger better? I've heard several people with individual throttle bodies state that they needed small restrictors in the lines (.035") to dampen the vacuum signals... which led me to believe that a small volume in the balance chamber might be better, or give a faster, more accurate signal.

I'm half-way through my Spica-to-EFI conversion, and am about to fabricate a balance tube. I was thinking of using some 3/4" OD tubing... maybe 8 or 10 inches long, which will fit out of sight below the Spica manifold. Should I use a larger volume tube?

Thanks,
George
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,837 Posts
Tifosi,

I'm curious about the dimensions you've stated for the MAP/vacuum balance tube. How important is the volume? Is bigger better? I've heard several people with individual throttle bodies state that they needed small restrictors in the lines (.035") to dampen the vacuum signals... which led me to believe that a small volume in the balance chamber might be better, or give a faster, more accurate signal.

I'm half-way through my Spica-to-EFI conversion, and am about to fabricate a balance tube. I was thinking of using some 3/4" OD tubing... maybe 8 or 10 inches long, which will fit out of sight below the Spica manifold. Should I use a larger volume tube?

Thanks,
George
Here's what I would say- if you use a big chamber (and I can't really tell you what is big), use big ports- that way the tube will act like a ballance bar between all of the 4 ports. Smaller- use smaller tubes, to dampen out the flow. If you make the chamber big enough, it will just act like a volume of air that goes between the ports and never really evacuates, which is ok.

I don't think that is really needed- you should be able to make a small chamber that' just a little larger than the fuel rail, with small ports, and see a good enough signal between the cylinders.

Eric
 

·
1966-2013
Joined
·
13,741 Posts
The premise is that it reduces the pulsations associated with intake harmonics.

You can go smaller certainly, but the larger ones 'cushion' the pulses as the come into the vac chamber so readings at the MAP sensor are more steady which is very important if you actually want to be able to tune with MAP. (what you've got in mind will likely work, though if you get really unsteady MAP reading, bigger may be a neccesity)

Even with that chamber in mine, I oraficed the fuel pressure regulator and MAP sensor taps (.029" IIRC) which reduced the pulsations even more, at least as indicated by realtime MAP readings.

After a bit of recent tweaking, idle MAP values on mine are a slow hover between 11.9 and 12.2. Never higher, never lower unless the airbypass for warmup is active.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Vacuum restrictors

Murray,
Thanks for the pics of your setup. It's similar to what I'm thinking of for plumbing, except I'll mount all this out of sight under the throttle bodies. The vacuum tube will form part of the fuel-rail hold-down bracket and the TPS bracket, all of which bolts to the bottom of the Spica throttle bodies using existing threaded holes. I'll post pics after I weld it all up.

Tifosi,
Did you use a single .029" restrictor in the single MAP line and one in the FPR line, or one restrictor in each throttle-body line? I'm not sure if it matters either way... just curious, since your setup has proven to work.

George
 

·
1966-2013
Joined
·
13,741 Posts
I soldered shut the nipples for the MAP and regulator at the vac chamber, then drilled them out to the given size. Lines from the ITB's are wide open to the vac chamber to allow for slightly better cross balance between cylinders. (old individual carb trick to help steady idle from motorcycle days)


Point of note:

If you build the chamber so it fits under the TB's, make sure you get the MAP sensor nipple on the top side of the chamber and that the MAP sensor proper has it's nipple pointing down.

Otherwise there's the chance the line and/or sensor will sump oil or other moisture into the MAP sensor gizmonics and screw up the way it works.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
my typing is terrable

correct email is [email protected]

My map sensor just pluged into one of the factory plugs on the plenum chamber, of course being a v6 i dont have the manifold/pulsing issues accosiated with the 4. The F10 was easy to install and use the hardest part was making the wiring loom tidy. Its been 4 years (good lord) and its still working fine. Will be interesting when i start to modify the engine.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top