Not a problem, I had a good read and got a good idea from it. Anyways, since your return is still running to the top of the tank, all you need to do is create a siphon from that. If you look at post #6 in this thread, you could easily make something like that as long as your return...

So there is a way to actually make the system work so that you regain the ability to transfer fuel. Of course, having read the majority of this post (nearly twice over), the use of a transfer pump is the key. Oddly enough I have taken this setup and modified it a bit [on paper] and managed to...

Unfortunately you can't do this due to it not having a sandwhich cooler on it, you have to run something there otherwise your oil temps will creep and or you'll just pump oil everywhere...

The diamter is a 2" out, generally you're larger sized turbos (T3/T4 type) will run the 2.5" out with a 4" in.

So I'll be using a 1G Blacktop CAS, I should be able to tap off the wire that would normally go to the CPS? Or would it be best just to tap the wire from the CAS (wire that goes to the CAS connector)?

Quick question, how much current goes to the sensor ground at pin 92 on the ECU? Trying to determine the wire gauge for that signal, but unlike the +12V signal and battery return it shouldn't be high current (as their diagram states). Am I correct on this?

I have been just making sure and confirming it's correct. "Measure twice, cut once." I'm also on a "trust but verify" basis as well, trust me I take what everyone has said (in this thread and others) with careful consideration.

Ah so exactly how is it sourced on the coil pack on the '90 model as this may be the basis for what I need to do to mine to get it to work properly. Although I'm thinking I can still tap off the CAS sensor and use that signal for the tacho input (to ECU).

Leaving it disconnected wouldn't be a problem but I'm still curious as how the stock transistor and the ECU are tied together at C58 (tacho pin). The wiring diagram says they are tied together and this thread in post #3 says that pin 4 is the output signal for the tach. Although here it says...

Well the reason the tach signal is connected to ground, sensor ground, is because my tach signal will be lost in the changing of my setup. I have removed the PTU all together as each coil has its own "PTU" imbedded within it. The only other way I can do this is what was previously stated by Beau...

Thanks Dex.So I want to tie the other 3 sensors' 4 other signals (Gnd, Sensor Gnd, Cyl Head Gnd, +12V) to the 1st as my convoluted cable wrap is too thin and I'm keeping the amount of pins on the ignition harness to engine harness down to a mere 9 pins (rather than 20). With that being said...

So I've got all the equipment and things needed to create this harness but my current problem is I don't know where to mount these? With that being said I can't determine how to position each of the connections to best fit the positions of the coils themselves... any ideas?

So I figured rather than try and re-route the triangular connector back to the ECU I can just just wire everything up through one connector (but not the PTU). This is what I've found...Connector 1 Connector 2Figured I'd remove the old connector and replace it with one of these or something...

From what Polar said, yes. The only thing I think you would run a problem into is that from what he said...Alright so I wonder if this seems logical:Pins 1 and 8 leave the PTU and go to the coil pack triangular connector, with that being said, would I be able to (as shown in the above...

Here's the "finished" product, the only thing I have a question about is the dashed line (Switched +12V Constant)... where is this constant actually coming from? I know it's from the battery but where from the battery? Is it being split (i.e. PTU pin 6 and connection at coil packs) between the...

But even with those would I still have to run some type of external amplifier? Such as MSD or Dynateck?

Here's the thing about the tach input, I'm switching my CAS/CPS sensors to the 1G black top CAS, so that I may, in the future, either advance or retard timing with adjustable gears. As you know the stock sensor won't fit under there unless I run stock cam gears. But that's a different topic...

So what's the difference between what you just said and COP setups? I'm not knocking it but how come everyone goes for COP setups when they can just change the P/T and up the output of the stock coils rather than change out a whole system and pay $$$? I dunno, just seems logical to go the cheap...

Now all of that actually made sense, as for the TTL logic I know that 0-5V is a typical TTL signal and all it's doing is telling the PT to "open and close" causing the secondary coil to charge to ground (correct me if I'm wrong). But which would you say would be cheaper? I may have to do more...

Would this work? Not that 'd rather go the smart coil route... but another option none the less.

Here are some schematics I've come up with that would be the build for the individual coils. One of the pictures, with the smudges, is the setup that would run the "dumb" coils and power transistor, the other two are the wiring harness and over all schematic for the "smart" coils.The one...

The second transistor was also a thought. But as for running them in series or parallel the actual power going to them WON'T be one coil to another, it'll be each individual coil receiving their own power. In a way think of it being one coil in it's own individual circuit is what I was saying...

Wouldn't pin A be ECU Triggers PTU pin 7 for 1/4 and then pin 2 for 2/3? Other than that it makes a lot of sense. The ground to head won't actually be part of the harness will it? At least that's what I'm seeing, most likely I could wire that in the bundle but just have a whire divert off to the...

Interesting, didn't know that about the Miata.Although I have read in our forums that the P/T can go bad from time to time and I could see it being an issue for when I decide to rock 4 separate coils. But in all honesty, as the P/T is only a "switch" I would think that it would be okay to...

The 12V constant would in theory be in series, but you can't daisy chain as the properties of inductive coils in series or parallel will have effects on the current and voltage drop across them. But in the mindset of putting them in "series" as they get their own feed from the main 12V (from...

I think you may have misunderstood what I meant... the four inductors won't actually be in "parallel." What I meant by this is that they all would receive their own 12V and ECU trigger (yes the ECU is the trigger - the ground is only there to actually create the charge on the secondary winding)...

Now I'm kinda confused, does anyone know how the two coils within the coil pack are separated during the dissipation of energy? The new coils are separated into individual coils allowing each plug to have it's own "coil" but they, the dumb coils, require a +12V constant, trigger and ground. I...

Have you checked the gauge cluster itself?

It would seem that no one here has ever used the high output inductive coils made by AEM. Is there a reason why? The only problem I could see from these would be trying to get the original signal from ECU to all 4 coils as they are individually connected meaning you'd need 4. But with that being...

Hmm, fair enough, I'll have to look into that.

I think I may have to run this setup too... awesome thread!You guys have any thoughts on the B&M oil cooler kit that comes from STM?STM Oil Cooler Kit 90-99 DSM

JEGS Performance Products 10566 JEGS Fuel Pump Harness and Relay KitWould you say this would be acceptable to re-wiring my stock and adding the in-line fuel pump?

Had been looking at this one for a while but didn't know if anyone had problems with it fitting correctly - guess I got my answer. I'm sure, with the space you have, that a 40R should fit just fine.

If you're going to replace bearings and such you might as well, at least, do a normal stock rebuild to at least ensure your internal are fresh and not excessively worn. It'd be one of those "safety" precautions to do so, all-in-all best of luck to what ever power you do manage to reach.Sent...

In all honesty, after the research I've done, you'd be better off getting something else unless you can deal with idle and such but maybe this thread can help you out on some fuel explanations and such but hope this helps you out on your injector sizing...

Shearer has stopped making custom orders according to this thread: http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/bolt-tech/421797-twin-scroll-t3-manifold.html although it is a thread on T3 fabrications, most likely this goes to all.

That makes sense, so how much cutting did you do to get yours to fit? I take you're running something similar to a 4088R?

Right now, until I build my other engine I've got a FP3065 that is doing just fine - thanks for the offer though!So, basically just rock a twin w/g and call it a day? or save the money and use only one w/g? I mean 200rpm isn't a whole lot so it really wouldn't hurt. I mean if spool up is...

How much cutting would you say I'd have to cut? Or what if I were to run a GT3794R, would I have the same problem?

I read through some older threads and my own recent thread about making up to 800awhp. For the most power, but street capabilities, the GT4088R seems to be my sweet spot for power, torque, and awesome power-band. The only problem I'm running into is fitting capabilities as I've also read this...

Very well put information, my plan was to run a 2.3L setup but with the change in the type of engine I wanted to run (originally a 2.0L) I figured I'd change my whole angle of what I wanted. With all this information I do believe that I'll be able to make some adequate decisions - and save...

If I stick with the BlueMax injectors, be it 1350cc or whatever, I shouldn't have any problems when tuning up to the goal (800whp). I guess as long as I don't exceed 850 then I'm good to go. I guess if I ever decide to hit that 800+ goal I'll switch over to race gas but until then what would...

Oh wasn't actually thinking of rocking the mechanical setup as I did the math, only part of it, and it wasn't my "strong suit." My question was: if I were to run a fuel pump setup, such as the one you said, on smaller injectors would it hurt the smaller injectors, my apologies for not wording...

What would the possibility of problems occuring be if I ran more fuel on smaller injectors, with the assumption of upgrading said injectors to "match" fuel flow from the pump(s)?

Is this run in conjunction with an in-tank fuel pump, or is it a separate entity in itself? Along with that, would it be "forgiving" in the sense that if I were setup to run X-turbo, with Y-injectors, and Z-fuel lines it wouldn't be bias to a certain setup (i.e. something capable of 2000hp)...

With this being said, I'm understanding that E85 has a higher fuel consumption than pump gas due to its volumetric displacement? Or rather, it will fill the area of each cylinder more so than that of the E85 fuel, right?

Well I don't have to do it all at once, I figured if I space it out it won't be "as bad" as doing it all at once ya know?

But before then I'd be perfectly fine on 93, Q16 is a bit expensive but I guess by the time I make it a complete track car Q19 will be no problem. But how far would I get on 93 (hp wise)?

I'm going to try and keep it on pump gas (93 octane). I was thinking of two Walbro 255lph using the Full Blown dual hanger. But what about the rest of the setup? -8AN too much for return on the 800+ setup? Does it hurt the injectors for the 550hp opposed to the injectors on the 800hp setup or do...

After reading up on a few old threads, I understand that our stock fuel rails can handle a bit which is one less thing I'll need to purchase. I've also read that -6 AN send and return lines are perfect (or unless I read wrong) for 650whp, which is also fine. But the problem/confusion that I'm...