which is better, the star 2nd stage kit, or the hrc 2nd stage kit?...ie which is faster, which holds together better, etc...overall? pricewise? ...everything
-bryan

I hate to be rude, Before asking questions like this read the main page @ www.2gnt.com theres a turbo section with a comparison chart compiled buy Skrilla, very informative.
97' Talon ESi
Custom CIA
AF/X UDP
AF/X Solid front motor mount
Apex-i Exhaust
Accel Wires
Royal Purple 5w-30 Oil

"Our time is here, Our time is now, Team 2gnt."

Well, since the 'comparison' on Wyatt's site has been brought up again, in the interest of equal time, here's some
points to consider. The following points can be researched further in the archives of this forum and dsm.talk, as well as
explained on our website (turbosystem.com):

Powerful, correct exhaust manifold design (symmetrical vs. offset log).
Detailed fuel system development and resultant engine longevity.
Intercooler options (SMIC or FMIC); larger FMIC with HRC.
Wastegate durability, effectiveness, and open discharge dangers.
Turbocharger efficiency, response, and modern design.
Properly equipped fuel system vs. turbocharger size option (no larger turbos without safe fuel system!)
ALL performance records for 420A engine vehicles.
Fuel Mapper (equivalent to VC1 but easier to install and use) included at no extra cost.
Intercooler pipe fit and quality.
Detailed extensive instructions with drawings and photos.
Downpipe durability (no cracking due to absence of flex joint).
Completely researched/fully equipped turbo and fuel system upgrade options for higher power levels later.
Extensive experience with Diamond Star vehicles and resultant customer assistance with many aspects of car other
than turbosystem.
Access to daily available tech support from turbocharger and Diamond Star experts with decades of experience.

With even more support, development, records, and customer options to come!

Nothing against Skrilla, I just do not find the 'comparison' to be an objective statement based upon equal actual experience with both systems, nor is it composed from an unbiased expert's point of view.

LAST EDITED ON 22-Mar-01 AT 11:50 PM (PST)

Not to be on this again but what you stated is the exact reason why you should not be taken for face value. You too arent a "unbiased expert", Your a biased expert (as you should be). Being such you can manipulate features to favor your kit that may not be an advantage to everyone (much like a polititian pitching his plans). One example about newer turbo design: that reminded me of when chryler added sliding doors to the other side of their minivan and acted as if a great technical revolution had taken place. On the same token an 85 Porsche may be less technically advanced than a 2000 chevy but that doesn't mean the chevy is the better car. Just as your kit has proven itself so has the Garett turbo, which is evident by its use by nearly every competitive import car flying down the 1/4, DSMs included. Not that your turbo selection isn't better suited for our purpose but how much of that is a sizing/efficiency issue vs a reliability issue (one might think the Star turbo isn't reliable when hearing it from you). Not that what you say isn't true however you point out your kits features without pointing out the other sides features (surely even you can find one or two details better on the Star kit). I am unbiased and even I agree you have the best kit "overall" (but you could have made it alot better looking) but not because the designer is brave enough to say "My kit is better", Your suppose to say that.


Stan2gnt
Stan2va@aol.com
95 Talon ES-I-NOS but T soon!
http://members.nbci.com/FlyEsi/home.htm
You too can have a never updated site complete with old info and dated pics!

LAST EDITED ON 23-Mar-01 AT 08:40 AM (PST)

Well, shoot, I'll throw my .02 in as well.

I agree Bill has a vested interest in listing what he perceives to be advantages with his system over STAR's. Furthermore, I think it's a fair reply to make in light of Josiah's "biased" comparison. (I only call it biased b/c I know he's worked with Anthony's and is probably more familiar with his)

Next, on the sizing of turbo vs. the fuel system, I also think that's a very good and fair point. After reading Hoot's post about the walbo's effectiveness in tandem with 235 cc injectors at 10 lbs. of boost, I think it's pretty obvious that there may be leanness issues. That was of particular interest to me as I was running only with the walbro at the time. (that same week, I installed the HRC inline) So to say, that there aren't some "questionable" issues in regard to the STAR system at over 6-7 lbs. of boost would be innaccurrate.

We've already seen past instances of STAR owners at that level of boost detonating. I've yet to see an HRC owner who complied with all of the directions (no human error) blow their stuff.

IMO, the in-line fuel pump is the KEY INGREDIENT for boosting with stock injectors at over 7 lbs. of boost.

The part about the sizing is also fair b/c the Garret turbo is bigger. It's bigger, and requires more fuel in-turn. With no inline fuel pump with a turbo bigger than HRC's, you would think it would use MORE fuel, not less. But it does...

These may all be biased opinions or whatever, but you boost your STAR systems at your own risk with a single walbro + 235cc injectors.

Other points Bill made: (and who wins on each point in my own "biased eyes". :-)

"Powerful, correct exhaust manifold design (symmetrical vs. offset log)."

Makes sense to me....I thkn if you read "MAximum Boost," this statement is talked about at length and supported.

Advanage: HRC. I like the Stainless steel design as well.

"Detailed fuel system development and resultant engine longevity."

Agreed.
(see above comments)

Advantage: HRC. A big one.

"Intercooler options (SMIC or FMIC); larger FMIC with HRC."

This is true. Percsonally, I like the STAR FMIC. Aesthetically, I think it really nice. However, the 4g63 guys are NOT fans of this intercooler. They don't like the efficiency of it, nor the endtank design. The HRC sidemount is a extremely popular as is the Apex'i Front mount. HRC's does cost more.

Advantage: HRC. By a small amount b/c of cost.

"Wastegate durability, effectiveness, and open discharge dangers."

I'm not much for a loud wastegate, but this issue is pretty much of a wash for me. I'm indifferent.

Advantage: None.

"Turbocharger efficiency, response, and modern design."

I've heard great things about Garret turbos. Those babies are really nice and I'm sure much of Bill's statement here is embedded in opinion and bias. However, the S-16g has a broad powerband. I would venture to say broader than the T03/04 (non Ball-bearing model), although not quite the high end. We know it spools quicker.

Advantage: None.


"Properly equipped fuel system vs. turbocharger size option (no larger turbos without safe fuel system!)"

Agreed.
(Sea above comments)

Advantage: HRC. landslide.

"ALL performance records for 420A engine vehicles."

True!!

Advantage: HRC.

"Fuel Mapper (equivalent to VC1 but easier to install and use) included at no extra cost."

Wyatt has absorbed some of the VC1 costs through his work. WE need to give a shout out to his efforts bringing this device in the STAR system. After reading the VC-1's instructions however, it is more diffcult to install. It requires a power and a ground to install where HRC's does not.

The HRC fuel mapper is easy to install IF you know a key fact. You gotta wrap that thing a bunch of times around the Map Sensor wires to get the all-important voltage clamping interference connections. I know myself and Joe A.(Blkout) had all osrts of problems getting this to work properly. Once it is working though, all is well.

Advantage: None.


"Intercooler pipe fit and quality."

The HRC pipes are veyr nice. They fit like a glove without a problem. We've heard on the board before about fitament problems regarding the STAR pipes. I don't know how prevalent this problem is, or how individual these pipes are made. HRC has their own demons contending with auto cars that have ABS brakes. (basically, the sidemount intercooler pipes won't fit) Front mount does... I've also heard though that it's not an easy job getting the HRC front mount pipes to wrok easily. At least reported by Guy. So fitament problems go both ways for sure.

The STAR system has beautiful Chromey pipes should you get them to fit. Very nice indeed. HRC's are powdercoats. Keeps them cool.

Advantage: STAR...when they fit.


"Detailed extensive instructions with drawings and photos."

This isn't even a close one. Read both sets of instructions and you'll see what I mean. STAR gives you a table of contents while HRC gives you a book.

Advantage: HRC. Not close.


"Downpipe durability (no cracking due to absence of flex joint)."

HRC gives you a converter pipes, though. Not exactly awe inspiring. The pipe clamp is prone to leaking when the clamp doesn't evenly clamp all the way around the sotck DP. STAR's does have a problem without a flex.

Advantage: STAR. Only b/c I'd rather add a flex with STAR's than try and weld a stainless steel converter to stock aluminized junk.


"Completely researched/fully equipped turbo and fuel system upgrade options for higher power levels later."

Again Agreed. After Stage 2 with STAR, you're out on an island.

Advantage: HRC.


"Extensive experience with Diamond Star vehicles and resultant customer assistance with many aspects of car other
than turbosystem."

If you've ever spoken with Bill Hahn on the phone, you're glad someone out there knows so much about your car other than satan.

Advantage: HRC.


Access to daily available tech support from turbocharger and Diamond Star experts with decades of experience.

Let me restate the phrase I have often coined. "Where is STAR?"
OR the same question that's been posted here a million times...
"Where is the STAR website?" (year right)
Thank you for having an address, Bill.

Advantage: HRC.

So that makes it 9 to 2 using the criteria that Bill set out. I think it's a fair set of turbosystem aspects to comment on as well.

Jason
98' Eagle Talon ESi-T
Mitsu Super 16g Turbo(HRC)


http://springfielddsm.homestead.com/JasonsPics.html

>>>>The part about the sizing is also fair b/c the Garret turbo is bigger. It's bigger, and requires more fuel in-turn. With no inline fuel pump with a turbo bigger than HRC's, you would think it would use MORE fuel, not less. But it does...



this is something that has seriously gone through my mind numerous times. just because a turbo has a higher CFM measurement, why does it seem to be the concensus that it will require more fuel. Our stock ECU reads certain inputs different inputs and adjusts injector pulsewidths based on these. But the main ones that it corrects for is Manifold pressure based on the map sensor, and Intake air temperature. Now, with us being turbocharged and only using a 1 bar map sensor, this makes it harder to make my point, based on the fact that our ECU's aren't adjusting for boost.

But, i'll get into it anyway. If you are reading your boost gauge, and if it is reading 10lbs. , then there is 10 PSI of positive pressure inside that manifold, pushing on the back of the valves. Whether or not it is coming from a T3/T4, a S-16g, A 20g, or even an enormous T-78....it is still 10 lbs. of boost. Now, where the need for more fuel would come into need is with the air temp inside the manifold. My guess is though...with these both being very efficient turbocharges, and both using very efficient intercoolers, that this difference is minimal. Now, say you were using a T-25, that would be making hotter pressure, than i could see this statement to be true.

But the way i see it, and based on my rememberance of chemistry from high school...pressure, volume and temperature are all related in the world of gases. Pressure is 10 PSI for both, volume is the same for both since manifolds would still be identical(unless you have port work done, then i would see the need for more fuel), and as long as the temperature of the intake charge is the same, then there is still the same amount of molecules of oxygen that will be flowing into your motor.

I don't know if i am at all correct for this knowledge or not, but i would love to hear everyone's thoughts. I don't feel that the star kit needs anymore fuel per pound of boost than the HRC kit does. I do agree that the walbro pump probably isn't enough at higher levels, due to the fact that it is designed more for flow than pressure.

I also agree with a lot about what HRC claims. Some i don't. I used to think that the HK$ standard BOV that comes with the star kit is so great, till i put an HKS race valve on, and i see now how it was seriously too small. The gobbling noise mine always made was the same noise that my friends turbo miata makes....compressor surge. It spools after shifting now a lot better. So, even though HRC uses a 2G plastic one, it is probably better.

As for the Intercooler pipes...my star pipes fit like shit...then again..i think i have the 1st or second production kit made, so i can't expect them to fit all that well.

downpipe...add a friekin flex section, and i think the star is beating HRC by miles!!! A clamp to hold a downpipe together???? i don't know...doesn't seem like a great design to me. I can't wait to see the 3" one they are working on. Now i know that it is gonna be real nice.

Instructions...HRC is definitely better, but then again...i don't seem to think installing a star kit is all that difficult to do either...it is pretty straightforward.

Intercooler...i like the APEX-i that they offer, but for 10 lbs. of boost, is it really worth the price? Star at least comes with a FMIC for a hell of a lot less, and it should be efficient for 10lbs. with no problem.

Wastegate???? I dunno about this one....i kinda like the external...others don't. It's all what you want i guess...i like ripping through a tunnel with my wastegate open and scaring the bejesus out of everyone...

manifold...i would say HRC on this one...but the star is a solid piece and with some porting it works even better...i just wish it was symetric...

ohh well..enough of my rambling...this is all just my opinion ...and just that...thanks for listening...


jason
95 GS Turbo

dont forget contingentcy sponcer at NIRA events..hehe!

Well since my name has been brought up several times, I'm being called out. So here's my couple of cents:

I'd like to say that the arguments so far are nothing more than subjective.

It's all about personal taste. BOTH turbo manifolds could be made better. The star manifold isn't symmetrical but it doesn't crack or cause excessive heat in one particular area in the exhaust, but the Star is made of a stronger material so it can better combat the heat. Realistically this doesn't mean a Damn thing. If the HRC SS manifold is properly treated to take the heat and last then it's nothing to worry about. Some of you have also brought up the fuel "problem". The Star Kit was designed to run on 10lbs nothing more. It could be made "safer" but if it ain't broke so don't fix it. Our engines run rich enough to lean 6% stock w/o ANY detonation so the Star Kit provides ample fuel. The turbos are also subjective but as Stan said just about everyone who is pressurized who runs down the track uses a Garret design. Now as much as I know some of you HRC users will hate me saying this, the T3/T4(especially E) is more efficient. Turbo efficiency is based on CFM's and the Hybrid in the Star Kit is the more efficient turbo and capable of more power. All I have to say about this is who cares! My comparison was based on my experiences driving and physically INSTALLING BOTH kits. Albiet the HRC directions are flawless but I had no serious problems. The T3/T4 E trim that's available as an upgrade is dirt cheap through Wyatt. The Mitsubishi HI turbos also have a design flaw as compared to the "more efficient" Garret that has been reposted for us by Stan. It doesn't matter so far it has never happens. So this is only theory, but one that could happen. The Star also comes with thicker diameter piping and works on ANY 2GNT. The HRC doesn't and even requires welding when upgrading. The Star is equiped w/a FM intercooler at no extra cost. We also mentioned performance records. That means little since the Star Kit is available cheaper and with people who don't often go to the track. So I'd like to bring this in. Wyatt has recently installed a Stage1 Star that ran FIVE PSI and covered the quarter in 14.5s and ZERO INTERCOOLING. I haven't seen an HRC do that and it doesn't matter, but that's DAMN impressive and besides the point. The point is BOTH KITS are good and have their strong points and weak points. Both provide sportscar power at 10 psi and flow sufficient fuel, so purchasing a kit is just like buying a Car. Do your research and decide which one is right for you. If anyone has COMPLETELY read my review they would know that I wasn't "biased". I listed poor qualities and good qualities with each kit. The comparison not only helped people to decide to purchase Star Kits, it helped people get Hahn Kits as well. Check Wyatt's Guest book on his Website. I've also received email thanx for help and understanding. We are all good friends here, at least I'd like to think, so lets not make anything more than this, about the kits. This is obviously a questions that will be asked for a while(which kit is better) so lets make sure to properly educate. As I've written before I actually prefer MHI Turbos so I don't think my comparison was biased towards star. I mearly think the Star Kit is better capable of performance. All one needs are injectors, SAFC, boost and internals an could EASILY put 300HP to the wheels! Kinda exciting. With some more timing control 400HP is possible. Then again HRC has support but so does Star(Wyatt). HRC has also proven themselves with a 600HP VIPER STOMPING Neon.

Anyway - BILL - I'm slightly dissapointed in your actions. When YOU ASKED ME to email you with my comparison, you were given a chance to PERSONALLY dispute my "comparison"(as you like to refer to it).

You never did and that became your loss by your own decision not to respond.

I am a VERY cooperative person and you decided to ignore you opportunity. I would have changed it.

"Nothing against Skrilla, I just do not find the 'comparison' to be an objective statement based upon equal actual experience with both systems, nor is it composed from an unbiased expert's point of view."

Bill we are both intelligent people. Magazines spend their days writing about car performance to their subjective views even though almost NONE of them are engineers, have taken a driver's course or anything of the sort. Opinions are considered truth so long as it never succumbs to degradation and lies (freedom of speech) . So opinions are almost never based on unbiased expert's point of view and nor do they have to be.

With that said I find your statement to be a carless. I am always free to open discussion, especially when it was I lending you the helping hand. Still I have no hard feelings and continue to admire you work and are especially excited to to Len's 750HP+ Neon wup some A$$. Drop mail sometime.

Seeya...

Skrilla
'97 Base Talon NA
"Technology: The Only Replacement for Displacement"
"Peace and Turbo Grease"

LAST EDITED ON 23-Mar-01 AT 02:55 PM (PST)

I just want to say that I hope you (or anyone else for that matter) didn't construe anything I had written as "calling you out", Skrilla. I'd also liek to consider you as a friend as most everyone on this board. Just wanted to say that. It's more important to me that we all get along rather than what you or I think which turbo is "better."

Also, I didn't know you had installed both kits. That certainly does put you in a position to be less biased.

Although I may disagree with some of your opinions as to each system, particularly your opinion of both kits' fuel reliability, I still consider you as a very cool person and a friend. :-)

p.s. You know you and I have had friendly little discussions on these silly things before. I think we both enjoyed them before as well, you big "biased" car-nut!! LOL ;-)

Jason
98' Eagle Talon ESi-T
Mitsu Super 16g Turbo(HRC)


http://springfielddsm.homestead.com/JasonsPics.html

Yes I agree the fuel system is the MAJOR difference in why hahns kit is better overall BUT you can get an inline pump, adjustable reg without overspending the HRC kit if you shop wisely. Also Stars stage I IS NOT RECOMMENDED BY STAR to run anymore than 5lbs of boost. Stage II is not recommended by star to run anymore than 7lbs of boost so if you detonate a star kit at 8-10lbs of boost its not Stars fault. Look I'm not here to cause division either but price is not being fairly weighed in these comparisons especially when one can regularly be had for much less than MSRP. Like I said there's no reason why you cant change something about either kit if you dont like it.


Stan2gnt
Stan2va@aol.com
95 Talon ES-I-NOS but T soon!
http://members.nbci.com/FlyEsi/home.htm
You too can have a never updated site complete with old info and dated pics!

It's cool to be able to disagree without some kind of dissention.

I've always, particularly, enjoyed reading your posts as well as Stan2GNT. My post happened to be more "Biased" toward HRC, but it's all good, I still consider them a tresured "reward" for their following of 420a's and Domestic Car stomping.

I always know when yourself or Stan2GNT posts, reply or comment it's something to look forward to:) I remember just about all my major disagreements with members, which I completely enjoy. I feel it as a time to learn from debate, struggle and a bit of arguing to discover new information for me to write down or put in my lil', personal database of info. Such a debate, which was my very first on the Ol' Board, was on the argument of engine superiority. It was a "Which was better" statement in which was Turbocharged VS. All Motor. I got into it with Stan in which a couple times he ended up Moching me:)(LOL! now that I think of it, Stan if you remember you kept using "NEVER" that's some funny stuff). It was very good and I learned some new things. Jason, we had the argument about the AMG VS Anthony's Star Stage 2 at 7PSI.

Anyway this board is a priceless resource in which I have learned all my information from about the 420a. As a Matter of fact when I joined there were only 4 pressurized cars. 2 HRC and 2 Star.

Skrilla
'97 Base Talon NA
"Technology: The Only Replacement for Displacement"
"Peace and Turbo Grease"

LAST EDITED ON 27-Mar-01 AT 01:39 PM (PST)

Skrilla,

You've been cool to me overall, but the 'comparison' issue has been simmering with me for a while. I guess if my livelihood would not be potentially affected, and we were just arguing about opinions, I could be a bit looser. But with as much effort as my company has spent in the 420A arena, I am a bit raw about the whole thing.

HRC,

I've always appreciated all your input and your continued success with your pressurized 420a vehicles. I can understand what its like to maintain your business. I will admit after some of your points I was a bit "quick" to replying and so maybe a little hot. So kindly I've asked Wyatt to remove my turbo comparison for a future rewrite, which will include your most up to date products and news and more accurate information, I have found to be incorrect.

Thank you, again, for your help and our future endeavors.


Skrilla
'97 Base Talon NA
"Technology: The Only Replacement for Displacement"
"Peace and Turbo Grease"

You know, you can't find this kind of discussion (i.e. highly opinionated either way) without name calling and finger pointing on just about any other board... I'm SOOO glad to be a part of this board... This thread is such a good example. If this was a Honduh board people's feelings would be hurt and then I would be reduced to go and rag on some damn Rustangs... Oh well... I can still rag on the Rustangs, right?... j/k...

Don

'99 GS Sports Edition
Star Stage 2, CFDF Clutch
Greddy Manual Boost Controller
Greddy BOV and EVO Exhaust
Greddy TT and shift knob
AF/X Underdrive Pulley
AEM Big Brake Kit
B&M Edge Short Shifter
Eibach Sportlines with Tokiko Blues

i own the HRC kit and yea i am biasd.plus you will get MONEY if you race and win with the kit.the kit that is better- its HRC i had 4k and wanted to buy a turbo kit .i knew of both systems i looked through both sights a year ago.i looked at stars sight oh thats right they dont have one --sorry.wyatts i mean .oh quick question if you read this wy--how did you find this kit?if not for you no one would even know it exhists.for looks yea it looks really cool to have a FMIC.but really ..... big deal.if something fucks up then what ?does star have any kind of warrenty on there parts ..not wys warrnty but stars?every MAJOR company/shop agree hands down that HRC is better.call one -call extreme motorspors-howell automotive -busher raceing .ask experts not some dumb ass like me .your going to invest thousands on a kit that if you fuck up you have to pay thousands to repair being engine tranny or what have you.they will both give you similar time slips in stage 2 trim. power/what looks good or whats the cooler turbo to have on the car shouldnt be the issue.they both work well for what you get.you have to think beyond this you need long term reliability.you need details .what if wy goes on vacation the same day your car goes nuts --and it will.remember your turbo chargeing a non-turbo car .it might not be an issue if the car can handel it ,but how is the car going to react?i can near garuntee you no matter what kit you buy ,youll run into problems somewhere along the line.be prepared my friend .im alway prepared when it comes to raceing .being doing it or tuneing my car for it .dude in short if you have to buy a turbo kit buy it from a real company .hrc has reputation /reliability/and longevity.if WY says im done with cars and walks away 2 years down the road then what? wy i hope you never do that!!!!! but these are things that he has to think of .

LAST EDITED ON 28-Mar-01 AT 11:35 AM (PST)

Well, I can't say much since I also bring in a "biased opinion" into this discussion.
I can say, that with a couple small changes like, a flex section in downpipe, and the blow down tube piped to the downpipe, the STAR kit makes an awesome appearance in performance. I have seen it and driven in a fiew :)
I think both kits work very well. On both sides there are examples of engine failures, and I have quite a fiew people running 10psi+ on an unchanged STAR fuel system. If the fuel demands weren't there I am pretty sure thier engines would be long gone by now. One good pull running 10psi with not enough fuel would make short order of any motor.
I am no "turbo Pro" and I try and not play it off like I am, but as I have been told the t3/t4 turbo is the better turbo. I believe even the Turbo DSM guys convert over to a t3/t4 turbo system with an external wastagate, right?

As far as Warranty issues, all parts are warranteed for 6 months, thats about all your going to get from any manufacturer. I try and make sure EVERYONE who buys from me is content with their order.
For the first group buy I put on I ate the cost of the FCD's "Splitsec's VC1's" until I could get them made in-house. I'll agree though, HRC's FCD only taps one wire, and makes for an easier install. The STAR FCD needs, power, ground, and to tap the MAP sensor wire. But the isntall is FAR from difficult and I think you have less of a chance for inconsistancy's with the STAR's FCD.

I plan on being in the 12's this season, if I ever get my new turbo :)
I think this season will be great for us 2gnt'ers. We are going to be formadable contenders in the DSM race, on our way to finally acheaving status with what is known to be fast and cool looking cars. Thats what its all about!

Wyatt
http://www.turbogs.com
98 Eclipse GS Star Stage 5,000 Turbo kit

It was an advertisement, end of story. We see them about 500 times every day. Good thread though. I learned a lot of good sheit. I will probably by some 370 injectors now because of this thread. Good Job Jason. Very articulate writer. Just fixed my car today and i kicked the sheit out of a 2g 4g63 for the first time in my life and boy it fealt great to think what the guy thought after he say my 'RS' sticker on the back (stock rims too) later all

"Fast Cars and Fast Girls"

Sleeperz (in SoCal)
"No One is Safe"

LAST EDITED ON 25-Apr-01 AT 05:44 PM (PST)

QUOTE
------
For the first group buy I put on I ate the cost of the FCD's "Splitsec's VC1's" until I could get them made in-house. I'll agree though, HRC's FCD only taps one wire, and makes for an easier install. The STAR FCD needs, power, ground, and to tap the MAP sensor wire. But the isntall is FAR from difficult and I think you have less of a chance for inconsistancy's with the STAR's FCD.
----------
END QUOTE

What FCD, and why did I never get one??????????? I have a HRC Kit by the way... oh and an "early" 95 Fuel System....

Is this the device that stops the car from "hit-a-brick-wall-effect" (fuel-cut?) when I my car is in 5th gear at about 3000rpm cruising, and I suddenly give it full-throttle?

Please say it is... this is the MOST annoying thing ever (apart from being undoubtedly bad for my car!)

Guy
RS_Guy



I might actually be *driving* my car soon!
Its only been 6 LONG months...

Damn the waiting..... It Sucks!

Yeeks, you brought this painful thread back to the surface!

I will email you directly about the Fuel Mapper (for other's info, a 95 car does not require one). Let's let this thread move back into the archives........

will do

HONDA'S SUCK!!!!!

DSM ECLIPSE RULE!!!!!!!!!

YA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



:-)


Ball Bearing Star Stage II
"Power is nothing without control"