I wanted longer runners to keep the torque curve down lower in the rpm
range, mostly to try and keep it in the same range as the standard camshaft
grind.
Plus with the single throttle body, I don't have to deal with individual
throttle position matching. :-) Well...I guess a function of 'what's
readily available' and $$$ had a bit to do with it also. :-)
Paul Tegler
ptegler@cablespeed.com
www.teglerizer.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Carruthers" <spitlist@mintylamb.co.uk>
To: <ptegler@cablespeed.com>
Cc: <SPIT6CGT6@yahoogroups.com>; <spitfires@autox.team.net>;
<triumph-gt6-enthusiast@yahoogroups.com>; <triumphs@autox.team.net>; "CARS
nass@yahoogroups." <nass@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 7:34 AM
Subject: Re: Fuel injecting a Spit6
> Very interesting Paul. Any reason why you didn't take the Triumph PI
> throttle body route?
>
>
>
>
> ptegler@cablespeed.com wrote:
>> well work is progressing VERY nicely I must say.....
>> http://www.teglerizer.com/fi/megasquirt/ms_gt6_manifold.html
>>
>> Paul Tegler
>> ptegler@cablespeed.com
>> www.teglerizer.com
=== This list supported in part by The Vintage Triumph Register
=== http://www.vtr.org
|