S2 RS Turbo 4x4 Cosworth Conversion - Fuel Computer Issues
#1
S2 RS Turbo 4x4 Cosworth Conversion - Fuel Computer Issues
Hi Guys,
Just wondering if anyone is able to offer any information or assistance.
I am just completing the finishing touches to a 4x4 Cosworth conversion that I started 15+ years ago. I have fitted the RS Turbo fuel computer to the dash but would like some advice on calibrating it with the correct sensors... As it is currently reading a fuel consumption of 3 MPG, I expected the Cossie to be juicy but I feel this is a little out...
Does anyone have any experience with making one of these computers work on a Cossie set up?
I have the standard fuel sender inside the tank, the speed sensor fitted to the gearbox side of the cable drive and have fitted a fuel flow sensor to the main inlet to the rail. Its the final sensor I feel the problem me exist at. Would this normally be fitted inline to one of the MFI injectors on a RST? Possibly making mine read 4 times the amount of fuel use?
If so, does anybody know of the electronic values expected this sensor is supposed to give, I wonder if I'm able to place some kind or resistor within the wiring to achieve 1 quarter the current given value?
It would be nice to know what others have done or how you might have overcome this problem. I guess I'm also going to get the measurement for the flow going back to the tank with my current configuration?
Any advice is greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Mike J.
Just wondering if anyone is able to offer any information or assistance.
I am just completing the finishing touches to a 4x4 Cosworth conversion that I started 15+ years ago. I have fitted the RS Turbo fuel computer to the dash but would like some advice on calibrating it with the correct sensors... As it is currently reading a fuel consumption of 3 MPG, I expected the Cossie to be juicy but I feel this is a little out...
Does anyone have any experience with making one of these computers work on a Cossie set up?
I have the standard fuel sender inside the tank, the speed sensor fitted to the gearbox side of the cable drive and have fitted a fuel flow sensor to the main inlet to the rail. Its the final sensor I feel the problem me exist at. Would this normally be fitted inline to one of the MFI injectors on a RST? Possibly making mine read 4 times the amount of fuel use?
If so, does anybody know of the electronic values expected this sensor is supposed to give, I wonder if I'm able to place some kind or resistor within the wiring to achieve 1 quarter the current given value?
It would be nice to know what others have done or how you might have overcome this problem. I guess I'm also going to get the measurement for the flow going back to the tank with my current configuration?
Any advice is greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Mike J.
#2
Have you go both earth connections attached at the back of the fuel computer.
I cannot remember if you have both connected for MFI and 1 for EFI or the other way round.
Also, it may not be compatible with the Cosworth engine management sensors?
I cannot remember if you have both connected for MFI and 1 for EFI or the other way round.
Also, it may not be compatible with the Cosworth engine management sensors?
#3
Thank for your reply, I will have to check on the earth situation, I had an original RST loom and plugged that in to use. So I would have though how it was meant to be set up when standard. Am I right in thinking that using the second earth makes the computer measure fuel flow from just the sender and speed sensors? Ignoring the fuel flow sensor?
The Cosworth engine management is not linked to the little loom at all, only the in-line fuel flow sensor, speed sensor, fuel sender (in the tank) and the main power are connected to it. Although I have seen some threads where they have used an output from an ECU to measure the fuel flow through the injectors.. I too am not sure if that would work.
Would be nice if I could get it working or at least reading more than 3 MPG
Cheers for your help!
The Cosworth engine management is not linked to the little loom at all, only the in-line fuel flow sensor, speed sensor, fuel sender (in the tank) and the main power are connected to it. Although I have seen some threads where they have used an output from an ECU to measure the fuel flow through the injectors.. I too am not sure if that would work.
Would be nice if I could get it working or at least reading more than 3 MPG
Cheers for your help!
The following users liked this post:
boost monster (17-07-2020)
The following 2 users liked this post by gcfcos:
dan le moignan (23-07-2020),
MikeJamieson (17-07-2020)
The following users liked this post:
MikeJamieson (18-07-2020)
The following users liked this post:
MikeJamieson (23-07-2020)
#11
This one is a Sierra floor pan... although this was the first shell of 2 that I have converted. I built the second (shell only) to help fund this one... The second was completely fabricated and looked like it had been driven out the forecourt like it. If I was going to build another, I'd definitely fabricate the conversion instead of using a floor pan!
#13
This one is a Sierra floor pan... although this was the first shell of 2 that I have converted. I built the second (shell only) to help fund this one... The second was completely fabricated and looked like it had been driven out the forecourt like it. If I was going to build another, I'd definitely fabricate the conversion instead of using a floor pan!
#14
I fabricated the heater box from Aluminium then had it powder coated black. I made it when the engine was out and was sat in the engine bay with the bonnet closed fitting all the pieces together...TIG'd it up then polished all the welds off before having it painted.
#15
Thank you! Yeah its pretty good, theres just things I would change if I did it again. Don't get me wrong, its lovely and I paid attention to all the little details, but when I fabricated the whole thing there wasn't any visible welds, I done it to look factory. Obviously chopping a Sierra floor pan up and pasting it in, requires a lot of tinkering, bit here and a bit there, patches and buggering about. The second one I built just looked like it had been made that way by Ford. I guess it's just my opinion...
The following users liked this post:
MikeJamieson (30-07-2020)
The following users liked this post:
MikeJamieson (19-08-2020)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post