Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Building a 2270 motor with LH-Jet, A discussion thread....
boxsterfan
post Jan 30 2014, 11:33 AM
Post #1


914's are kewl
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,776
Joined: 6-June 03
From: San Ramon, CA
Member No.: 791
Region Association: Northern California



First off, I am not anywhere near an expert in engine building, cam selection (how duration and lift affect the motor at idle and driving), injector flow rates, etc, etc, etc... So now that I have that out of the way, I still want to figure out the bits and parts that ***may*** make it possible to run a 2270 motor with LH-Jet. The primary reasons I am looking at this setup are because:
  • L-Jet likely is not a good setup for this based upon my reading (issues with cam, idle troubles, hesitation, full power, etc...).
  • I don't want to run carbs.
  • I don't believe I want to tackle MegaSquirt (leaving the door open though).
  • It sounds like fun/dare to be different.
1. The first question that comes to mind is will it be LH-Jet 1.0 vs LH-Jet 2.0?
From my research, LH-Jet 1.0 was pretty rare and used in the early 80's but then a switch to LH-Jet 2.0 occured. The primary difference between the two was that LH-Jet 2.0 utilized a Throttle Position Sensor (TPS) whereas LH-Jet 1.0 did not.

2. If LH-Jet 2.0 variant is the desired setup, which sub-variant would be used?
There appears to be a couple sub-variants within LH-Jet 2.0 primarily consisting of LH-Jet 2.2 and LH-Jet 2.4. It appears one of the primary differences between the two is that the LH-Jet 2.4 utilizes a "trigger flywheel" and the LH-Jet 2.2 does not. What exactly a "trigger flywheel" is I am not sure....I am guess that this is a notch or mark on the flywheel that is monitored by a sensor with the data fed back to the ECU.

3. What would the "build" sheet look like for such a setup?

Of course, this list can get complicated, but the desired build here is a street car with spirited driving. I would want excellent low-end torque, around 140-150HP on the motor and good pull all the way through the RPM range up to XXXX RPM (not sure where redline would be). Note also, the car will remain as a narrow body with 4-lug wheels.
  • 2270 motor with which CAM?
  • What plenum could work here?
  • What intake runners would work here?
  • Which fuel injectors could work here?
  • Need to upgrade fuel pump?
  • ECU - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from 80's
  • FI Wiring Harness - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from 80's and will require customization
  • Need any relay boards?
  • Hot-wire MAF Sensor - need to pull from Volvo/Saab LH-Jet system
  • IAC - Electronic Idle Controller - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from 80's
  • O2 Sensor - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from the 80's - where to mount?
  • CHTS - Utilize the existing CHTS (TS2) input into the ECU as a substitute for the coolant temp sensor (just have to figure out the proper resistance)
  • Cold Start Valve - probably not needed here in the Bay, but what could be done here? Or does existing on the Type IV motor work here?
Of course, if you have already done this setup, it would be great to here from you, how the car drives, pain points, etc, etc....
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies(1 - 19)
Mark Henry
post Jan 30 2014, 11:45 AM
Post #2


that's what I do!
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 20,065
Joined: 27-December 02
From: Port Hope, Ontario
Member No.: 26
Region Association: Canada



No clue and you are trail blazing here, looks like a volvo or 928 FI system.

One of the best places to ask/rescerch in a aircooled app
http://www.shoptalkforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=34970


Good luck
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dave_Darling
post Jan 30 2014, 12:57 PM
Post #3


914 Idiot
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 14,991
Joined: 9-January 03
From: Silicon Valley / Kailua-Kona
Member No.: 121
Region Association: Northern California



Your best bet is to find a four-cylinder car that had about a 2.3L displacement and made about 150 HP that ran LH-jet. Then just use all the parts from it that you can.

My guess is you'll have to actually use something from a larger displacement motor than 2270cc, because I don't think there were a lot of 2.3L motors back when LH-jet was popular that made as much as 150 HP... Especially four-bangers.

Cam, heads, intake, and exhaust all have to work together.

I'm thinking you may be able to use the stock 2.0 manifold and such, but you'll have to make mods to fit the parts from the donor car--like injectors.

A header of some kind is probably the best idea for exhaust. Ideally, use a Tangerine piece. But any header setup will have a collector that will (eventually) get gases from all four exhaust ports, so that's a good place to put your O2 sensor.

The relay board in an L-jet 914 is mostly there to hold the voltage regulator and to attach the main wiring harness to the FI wiring harness and engine wiring harness. The actual FI relays are elsewhere, generally hanging off the battery tray. You can follow that model pretty easily if you choose.

Use the fuel pump from your donor car, or double-check the required volume and pressure for the donor car's pump. And get a pump that meets or exceeds those. (The stock 914 pump might be that pump, or you might need to get something like a Walbro pump.)

Sounds like an interesting project, that's for sure!

User ejm (Ed, who works for Racer Chris) put a CIS setup on his 1.8 turbo; I think some of the challenges in that would be similar to the ones you will be facing. So he may have some good input on that.

--DD
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ClayPerrine
post Jan 30 2014, 01:50 PM
Post #4


Life's been good to me so far.....
***************

Group: Admin
Posts: 15,515
Joined: 11-September 03
From: Hurst, TX.
Member No.: 1,143
Region Association: NineFourteenerVille



Use LH-Jet 2.2 so you don't have to get involved with trying to duplicate the notches/pins in the flywheel.

Use the 2.0 L intake runners, plenum and throttle body. Better yet would be a 912-E throttle body. If you use the 2.0L throttle body, you have to make mounts for the TPS. The 912-E throttle body will have a better mount.

Use everything you can from the LH-Jet system.

Mount the O2 sensor where all 4 pipes come together. It might be better to use a heated O2 sensor, just wire the heater circuit to the same power source as the ECU.


User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
r_towle
post Jan 30 2014, 02:27 PM
Post #5


Custom Member
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 24,588
Joined: 9-January 03
From: Taxachusetts
Member No.: 124
Region Association: North East States



QUOTE(Dave_Darling @ Jan 30 2014, 01:57 PM) *

Your best bet is to find a four-cylinder car that had about a 2.3L displacement and made about 150 HP that ran LH-jet. Then just use all the parts from it that you can.


--DD

Agreed on that.

The big difference between L-jet and LH-jet is the O2 sensor with a feedback loop for constant monitoring of the mixture.

Look at the 924/944 motors, I cannot remember the sizes, but those systems may work, and have support in the aftermarket.

The other one is VW (rabiit/golf/jetta etc) which has a large aftermarket support community.

Rich
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
boxsterfan
post Jan 30 2014, 02:32 PM
Post #6


914's are kewl
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,776
Joined: 6-June 03
From: San Ramon, CA
Member No.: 791
Region Association: Northern California



QUOTE(ClayPerrine @ Jan 30 2014, 11:50 AM) *

Use LH-Jet 2.2 so you don't have to get involved with trying to duplicate the notches/pins in the flywheel.

Use the 2.0 L intake runners, plenum and throttle body. Better yet would be a 912-E throttle body. If you use the 2.0L throttle body, you have to make mounts for the TPS. The 912-E throttle body will have a better mount.

Use everything you can from the LH-Jet system.

Mount the O2 sensor where all 4 pipes come together. It might be better to use a heated O2 sensor, just wire the heater circuit to the same power source as the ECU.


Clay, thanks for the feedback (as you also put info in another thread that got me thinking about this whole concept/project).

How about my distributor and electronic ignition? Do I get to use what I have or do I need to grab those parts also?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
boxsterfan
post Jan 30 2014, 02:35 PM
Post #7


914's are kewl
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,776
Joined: 6-June 03
From: San Ramon, CA
Member No.: 791
Region Association: Northern California



QUOTE(r_towle @ Jan 30 2014, 12:27 PM) *

QUOTE(Dave_Darling @ Jan 30 2014, 01:57 PM) *

Your best bet is to find a four-cylinder car that had about a 2.3L displacement and made about 150 HP that ran LH-jet. Then just use all the parts from it that you can.


--DD

Agreed on that.

The big difference between L-jet and LH-jet is the O2 sensor with a feedback loop for constant monitoring of the mixture.

Look at the 924/944 motors, I cannot remember the sizes, but those systems may work, and have support in the aftermarket.

The other one is VW (rabiit/golf/jetta etc) which has a large aftermarket support community.

Rich


The O2 sensor is a difference but also the air flow meter is a "hot wire" unit vs. the barn-door L-Jet AFM's.

There are definitely 4-cylinder NA Volvo's running around 150-160 HP (B230FT motor for example).
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
r_towle
post Jan 30 2014, 03:01 PM
Post #8


Custom Member
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 24,588
Joined: 9-January 03
From: Taxachusetts
Member No.: 124
Region Association: North East States



QUOTE(boxsterfan @ Jan 30 2014, 03:35 PM) *

QUOTE(r_towle @ Jan 30 2014, 12:27 PM) *

QUOTE(Dave_Darling @ Jan 30 2014, 01:57 PM) *

Your best bet is to find a four-cylinder car that had about a 2.3L displacement and made about 150 HP that ran LH-jet. Then just use all the parts from it that you can.


--DD

Agreed on that.

The big difference between L-jet and LH-jet is the O2 sensor with a feedback loop for constant monitoring of the mixture.

Look at the 924/944 motors, I cannot remember the sizes, but those systems may work, and have support in the aftermarket.

The other one is VW (rabiit/golf/jetta etc) which has a large aftermarket support community.

Rich


The O2 sensor is a difference but also the air flow meter is a "hot wire" unit vs. the barn-door L-Jet AFM's.

There are definitely 4-cylinder NA Volvo's running around 150-160 HP (B230FT motor for example).


Possibly, but early LH-jet was just another barn door item..
I believe the 924 and 944 are barn door AFM units.

In reality, they are measuring air volume, not air pressure...

If you find a motor that is the same size with the same output, you will be much farther ahead.
Just look for an ECU that someone understands how to flash....the really early stuff cannot be flashed, but the mid 80,s on up can be modified...sometimes.

Volvo (in my experience) would honestly require you to speak swedish if you want to tune it...there is some support in the US, but the real decent knowledge is overseas.

I would look at BMW, VW/audi, or Porsche, they all seem to have tuners out there.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ClayPerrine
post Jan 30 2014, 03:35 PM
Post #9


Life's been good to me so far.....
***************

Group: Admin
Posts: 15,515
Joined: 11-September 03
From: Hurst, TX.
Member No.: 1,143
Region Association: NineFourteenerVille



The 924 is CIS (Had one). The 944 is motronic with a Vane air meter. If you found a replacement for the vane air meter that was a hot wire MAF (they sell them for the Motronic 3.2 911 engines), then it would work with the big 4 in a 914. But the motronic fuel and ignition map would be all wrong for a Type-IV.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2mAn
post Jan 30 2014, 04:53 PM
Post #10


trying to see how long I can go without a 914
**

Group: Members
Posts: 487
Joined: 14-November 13
From: Westchester (Los Angeles)
Member No.: 16,644
Region Association: Southern California



E30 M3 & MB 2.3-16 are both in the realm of what you are looking for (displacement & powerwise), though I'd recommend getting a motronic setup from a M42 powered 318 and doing the MAF conversion avaliable through Miller. Its a tunable setup through a laptop. just my .02

you could also get an EFI setup from a naturally aspirated subaru motor, at least that will come from a flat motor vs an inline.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
edwin
post Jan 30 2014, 05:09 PM
Post #11


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 20-May 09
From: Australia
Member No.: 10,384
Region Association: Australia and New Zealand



Why bother trying to adapt something that has been setup for a completely different engine rather than use and aftermarket ecu which gives heaps of flexibility.
I just removed the lh2.2 setup from my '90 Saab 900 because it had its limitations on the engine it had been setup for. Can't think what it will be like getting it going on another engine. I went haltech and haven't looked back
Lh2.2 in the forms I've seen has been batch fired and dissy ignition which isn't that special. Lh2.4 can do coil packs and I think 2 injectors but you'll need the crank trigger
Saab 9000's came in 2.3L with lh2.4
Cheers
Edwin
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
boxsterfan
post Jan 30 2014, 05:46 PM
Post #12


914's are kewl
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,776
Joined: 6-June 03
From: San Ramon, CA
Member No.: 791
Region Association: Northern California



According to my productive day at "work", the LH2.2 ECU's are programmable as are the LH 2.4's. The LH 2.2 setup is seeming pretty straight forward, but I am certainly not aware of all the math that has to take place to make the motor run well.



User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
colingreene
post Jan 30 2014, 10:47 PM
Post #13


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 729
Joined: 17-October 13
From: Southern California
Member No.: 16,526
Region Association: Southern California



Honestly Id probably tackle doing a mega squirt and go from there.
its a pretty well covered topic with lots of support and you have the benefit of having others to help you trouble shoot it.
Plus its more modern than a band aide solution.
Id still use a pair of carbs as air bodies though.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
boxsterfan
post Jan 30 2014, 11:36 PM
Post #14


914's are kewl
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,776
Joined: 6-June 03
From: San Ramon, CA
Member No.: 791
Region Association: Northern California



QUOTE(colingreene @ Jan 30 2014, 08:47 PM) *

Honestly Id probably tackle doing a mega squirt and go from there.
its a pretty well covered topic with lots of support and you have the benefit of having others to help you trouble shoot it.
Plus its more modern than a band aide solution.
Id still use a pair of carbs as air bodies though.



I'm leaving that (MegaSquirt) on the table, but I do want to take a serious look at the LH-Jet 2.2 setup. The ECU can be programmed. Enthusiasts have various fuel maps out there. The parts should be cheap, a plethora of them and many available at your local PnP.

Probably the two biggest pains so far are working on the wiring harness and getting an O2 sensor installed at the exhaust (not sure where I would even do this on a SS Heat Exchange setup with Triad exhaust. Probably just pick one side of the exhaust to monitor....cylinders 3 & 4 exhaust).
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sportlicherFahrer
post Jan 31 2014, 02:51 AM
Post #15


Nothing to see here.
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,088
Joined: 18-April 05
From: Tacoma, WA
Member No.: 3,945
Region Association: Pacific Northwest



On the muffler itself you should be able to get a good O2 reading from the pipe that goes up to the split from the bottom can. all 4 cylinders have to feed through that one spot. Think I saw a muffler at Dave's that had a bung there...
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jcd914
post Jan 31 2014, 02:52 AM
Post #16


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,081
Joined: 7-February 08
From: Sacramento, CA
Member No.: 8,684
Region Association: Northern California



On mine the O2 sensor is in the Triad muffler, rather than messing with either of the SSIs.

Jim
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
AndyB
post Jan 31 2014, 08:17 AM
Post #17


The Governor is watching me
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,115
Joined: 10-April 10
From: Philadelphia New York
Member No.: 11,595
Region Association: North East States



QUOTE(boxsterfan @ Jan 30 2014, 12:33 PM) *

First off, I am not anywhere near an expert in engine building, cam selection (how duration and lift affect the motor at idle and driving), injector flow rates, etc, etc, etc... So now that I have that out of the way, I still want to figure out the bits and parts that ***may*** make it possible to run a 2270 motor with LH-Jet. The primary reasons I am looking at this setup are because:
  • L-Jet likely is not a good setup for this based upon my reading (issues with cam, idle troubles, hesitation, full power, etc...).
  • I don't want to run carbs.
  • I don't believe I want to tackle MegaSquirt (leaving the door open though).
  • It sounds like fun/dare to be different.
1. The first question that comes to mind is will it be LH-Jet 1.0 vs LH-Jet 2.0?
From my research, LH-Jet 1.0 was pretty rare and used in the early 80's but then a switch to LH-Jet 2.0 occured. The primary difference between the two was that LH-Jet 2.0 utilized a Throttle Position Sensor (TPS) whereas LH-Jet 1.0 did not.

2. If LH-Jet 2.0 variant is the desired setup, which sub-variant would be used?
There appears to be a couple sub-variants within LH-Jet 2.0 primarily consisting of LH-Jet 2.2 and LH-Jet 2.4. It appears one of the primary differences between the two is that the LH-Jet 2.4 utilizes a "trigger flywheel" and the LH-Jet 2.2 does not. What exactly a "trigger flywheel" is I am not sure....I am guess that this is a notch or mark on the flywheel that is monitored by a sensor with the data fed back to the ECU.

3. What would the "build" sheet look like for such a setup?

Of course, this list can get complicated, but the desired build here is a street car with spirited driving. I would want excellent low-end torque, around 140-150HP on the motor and good pull all the way through the RPM range up to XXXX RPM (not sure where redline would be). Note also, the car will remain as a narrow body with 4-lug wheels.
  • 2270 motor with which CAM?
  • What plenum could work here?
  • What intake runners would work here?
  • Which fuel injectors could work here?
  • Need to upgrade fuel pump?
  • ECU - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from 80's
  • FI Wiring Harness - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from 80's and will require customization
  • Need any relay boards?
  • Hot-wire MAF Sensor - need to pull from Volvo/Saab LH-Jet system
  • IAC - Electronic Idle Controller - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from 80's
  • O2 Sensor - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from the 80's - where to mount?
  • CHTS - Utilize the existing CHTS (TS2) input into the ECU as a substitute for the coolant temp sensor (just have to figure out the proper resistance)
  • Cold Start Valve - probably not needed here in the Bay, but what could be done here? Or does existing on the Type IV motor work here?
Of course, if you have already done this setup, it would be great to here from you, how the car drives, pain points, etc, etc....



I am running L-Jet with a 2.2 I don't know where you have been reading but I have no issues with my fuel system or the car. It was a 75 1.8l
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
0396
post Jan 31 2014, 10:50 AM
Post #18


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,046
Joined: 13-October 03
From: L.A. Calif
Member No.: 1,245
Region Association: Southern California



Interesting read. .subscribed
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
boxsterfan
post Jan 31 2014, 11:56 AM
Post #19


914's are kewl
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,776
Joined: 6-June 03
From: San Ramon, CA
Member No.: 791
Region Association: Northern California



QUOTE(Scarlet75 @ Jan 31 2014, 06:17 AM) *

QUOTE(boxsterfan @ Jan 30 2014, 12:33 PM) *

First off, I am not anywhere near an expert in engine building, cam selection (how duration and lift affect the motor at idle and driving), injector flow rates, etc, etc, etc... So now that I have that out of the way, I still want to figure out the bits and parts that ***may*** make it possible to run a 2270 motor with LH-Jet. The primary reasons I am looking at this setup are because:
  • L-Jet likely is not a good setup for this based upon my reading (issues with cam, idle troubles, hesitation, full power, etc...).
  • I don't want to run carbs.
  • I don't believe I want to tackle MegaSquirt (leaving the door open though).
  • It sounds like fun/dare to be different.
1. The first question that comes to mind is will it be LH-Jet 1.0 vs LH-Jet 2.0?
From my research, LH-Jet 1.0 was pretty rare and used in the early 80's but then a switch to LH-Jet 2.0 occured. The primary difference between the two was that LH-Jet 2.0 utilized a Throttle Position Sensor (TPS) whereas LH-Jet 1.0 did not.

2. If LH-Jet 2.0 variant is the desired setup, which sub-variant would be used?
There appears to be a couple sub-variants within LH-Jet 2.0 primarily consisting of LH-Jet 2.2 and LH-Jet 2.4. It appears one of the primary differences between the two is that the LH-Jet 2.4 utilizes a "trigger flywheel" and the LH-Jet 2.2 does not. What exactly a "trigger flywheel" is I am not sure....I am guess that this is a notch or mark on the flywheel that is monitored by a sensor with the data fed back to the ECU.

3. What would the "build" sheet look like for such a setup?

Of course, this list can get complicated, but the desired build here is a street car with spirited driving. I would want excellent low-end torque, around 140-150HP on the motor and good pull all the way through the RPM range up to XXXX RPM (not sure where redline would be). Note also, the car will remain as a narrow body with 4-lug wheels.
  • 2270 motor with which CAM?
  • What plenum could work here?
  • What intake runners would work here?
  • Which fuel injectors could work here?
  • Need to upgrade fuel pump?
  • ECU - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from 80's
  • FI Wiring Harness - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from 80's and will require customization
  • Need any relay boards?
  • Hot-wire MAF Sensor - need to pull from Volvo/Saab LH-Jet system
  • IAC - Electronic Idle Controller - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from 80's
  • O2 Sensor - need to pull from Volvo/Saab from the 80's - where to mount?
  • CHTS - Utilize the existing CHTS (TS2) input into the ECU as a substitute for the coolant temp sensor (just have to figure out the proper resistance)
  • Cold Start Valve - probably not needed here in the Bay, but what could be done here? Or does existing on the Type IV motor work here?
Of course, if you have already done this setup, it would be great to here from you, how the car drives, pain points, etc, etc....



I am running L-Jet with a 2.2 I don't know where you have been reading but I have no issues with my fuel system or the car. It was a 75 1.8l


Can you describe the characteristics of your car (HP, Torque, intake, exhaust,etc...) and it runs throughout the RPM range? Street or track? Idles well? Anything you would change?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rand
post Jan 31 2014, 12:41 PM
Post #20


Cross Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 7,409
Joined: 8-February 05
From: OR
Member No.: 3,573
Region Association: None



I can't help but wonder about the Megasquirt (or even Microsquirt) thing. You are looking at doing something that hasn't been done much, vs what has - and has been proven. It sounds like you think MS is complicated and you are afraid of it, when it seems to me it is simple and proven?

But I love it that you are looking at something new. Always love to see that. Look forward to hearing what you end up with.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 8th June 2024 - 07:47 AM