Getting everything together to install a 2056 into my '72 and swap out the steady, reliable 1.7L I've been running. The 2056 is '73 but came with '74 ECU/MPS combo. The part numbers are 049 on the MPS and 044 on the ECU. Sometimes I'm not sure if I read that ECU/MPS compatibility table on Anders D-Jet site correctly. Is the 049/044 a winning combination?

Also, I've read here that a 2056 really should run with an adjustable MPS. A couple of months ago I converted my 1.7L MPS to adjustable with the Tangerine kit. Any thoughts on whether I could effectively run my MPS (007) just by adjusting it appropriately, or are there other compatibility issues? Or do I need to make that '74 MPS adjustable?

Thanks for the help.

Hey Rob, I'm no DJet expert but I think there are som issues here.

An 049 MPS is a 1.7L MPS. It cannot be recalibrated to the needs of a 2056 engine.

The 044 ECU is the 1974 2.0L ECU and that should work for the 2056.

You need an 043 MPS that is recalibrated for a wider pulse width range than the standard calibration, not the 007 MPS (is that a 1.7L MPS also?) The 1.7L MPS does not have the adjustability range of the 2.0L MPS's because it lacks an internal spacer.

Almost all MPS are adjustable, a few of the earliest MPS for early D-Jet VWs and Benz's are not, but they are not in the 914 dialogue.

Hi Jeff -- thanks for the reply. Now I see where the 049 is listed as a 1.7L MPS on that site. Yeah, I'm not reading that table correctly.

So I have a 007 and a 049 MPS, neither of which are really compatible with that ECU or 2.0L, right? I should be looking for a 043 MPS.

As long as:
You have a stock grind cam with your 2056 the 044 ECU is fine.
The 049 can be adjusted to run with the 2056 no problem as it can be reset to the 043 specs.
The 007 can be adjusted too to run with the 2056 IIRC

If you have a nonstock cam like a Raby 9550 or a Web73 only the 049 can be adjusted to run with the 2056 because it doesn't have the inner cast stop ring in the cover which limits the amount of travel/adjustability for WOT

Make sure you have the correct 012 CHT!

Hi Geoff -- good info, thanks. Cam is stock. Sounds like I may be able to experiment with either the 007 or go ahead and make the 049 adjustable. I'll make sure I have the right CHT.

Thanks guys.

You must be adding the 2.0L spacer to these 1.7L MPS's Geoff? I have not had success in recalibrating the 1.7L MPS's due to their shortened calibration range. I have found even the 2.0L to be at their limit when recalibrating them for a 2056.

The Anders site is not specific on the MPS housings.

I am looking for the same answer as the OP.

So........do you need the 2.0 liter MPS housing to match a 2056.

Will the 1.7 housing work with a 2056 ?

Yes, I add the inner spacer to 049's if going to 2.0l specs but the difference between a 049 and a 043 is mostly at WOT.

For a 2056 a stock set 043 works but should be checked with a O2 wideband.

So Geoff, would you say my best bet is to either:

1. Source a 043 and make it adjustable

or

2. Make the 049 adjustable with a spacer? I'm not familiar with this spacer. I've used the Tangerine MPS repair/adjustment kit. Do you know if that is part of that (maybe it is but can't remember)?

Thanks for da' help.

I have some spacers but you have to take apart the MPS to install it and recalibrate it with a Waveteck to 043 specs.
All MPS's can be made adjustable if you don't epoxy the WOT stop in and for that I use teflon tape to hold the WOT stop in place when it's screwed in. The adjustment for the AFR is inside via the hole once you take out the WOT stop.

Hi Geoff - I've installed the Tangerine diaphragm and adjustment setup on my 007 MPS. I could do that on the 049. I don't have a wavetek but do have an AFR. A little googling and I found out the spacers were part of the original 2.0 MPS to increase the travel distance.

Maybe I'll try the different MPS's I have, see how they run, and then decide if I need to source a 043....

Geoff,

Do you have a picture of this spacer? Thanks

I'd love to buy a spacer...
or if these are all old stock, I wonder if we can have a few made?

Rob, thanks for starting this thread.

I also have a 2056 with D-Jet, but the cam is more suited for carbs. I didn't build this engine, but it's the one I have, and I know some things need to be adjusted to make it more driveable. It wouldn't surprise me if my MPS needs adjustment or reconditioning.

Pic of inside a early cover showing the cast in stop ring. The spacer looks like the paper gasket in the pic except its thicker of course. I don't have one handy for a pic.

My motives were 100% selfish but you're welcome! If you need to recondition or make your MPS adjustable, the kit from Tangerine is great and comes with very good instructions. I also have a bunch of pictures I took of the process I can share.


Yeah, thanks Geoff. Not that you are looking to be the "MPS spacer vendor" or anything but if you have extra looks like there are a couple of us that would be interested.

Going through this process and doing some research it appears my 0 280 100 007 isn't a 914 original part and may be designed for Type III. Someone may have used that out of convenience during a rebuild years ago. The MPS that came with my 2056 IS meant for a 1.7. So maybe I swap MPS's and see if I can tune the 007 to work with the 2056 and/or start sourcing for a 043.

This has been very helpful, Geoff (and Jeff). Thanks.

Geoff,

Other then being cast this way, some MPS units don't have the cast stop. Is there any reason for not machining off this part? It would seem that the screw still cannot go any further then its max setting. Does this logic make sense?

I have a spacer in my spare parts collection. Thickness is .023".
I didn't realize they were only found in 049 units and that they went between the part load plate and the diaphragm to increase the distance to the part load plate.

It shouldn't be too hard for me to make a pattern for my laser shop to use.
I'll have them made in stainless so no need for plating.

I'm struggling to visualize this...
but I want one for my MPS spares
I just changed out a housing to avoid the stop-casting, and may need this spacer also?

haven't road tested yet with the innovate

Chris, that would be great! Just to be clear though -- I think they're only found in 043 units if I'm reading the posts accurately. Is that correct?

Ok...
I realize what it is now
I will open my mps again tonight and make certain
I remember seeing this.. but not sure if it was the MPS I'm trying to use or another

so between the part load plate and diaphram???

Chris is the Man for this MPS spacer ring, you already have the CAD work done from the diaphragms, just need editing. All those 1.7L MPS can then become 2.0L MPS!

Here is about the only photo I have on this computer of the ring FWIW.

That's what Geoff and Jeff indicated above.
I wrote 049 because I was looking a disassembled one on my desk which already contained the spacer.
But the evidence suggests it had been apart once.

The stock cam should really help. My 2056 was put together with a Raby clone cam and it took a lot of tuning. Can be done though. If you have a sealed MPS, I would suggest trading for one that has already been molested. It is really hard to get back exactly to where the factory set them, and someone with a 1.7 might really want a good one. Just my 2 cents. Good luck!

There also was a rumor that the springs are different. Not sure if that is true or not.

I have two 1.7 cores so this thread has been very imformative.

Springs are differnet between the early and late ones as there is a long or short nose MPS

There are 2 ways to increase fuel flow, everything up to know is dealing with longer pulse width for injector opening.
Another way is to increase fuel pressure. Remember that flow changes not linearly with pressure, but with the square root of pressure change.
Thus if you want 5% more flow,you need 1.05 squared pressure change, or about 11%.
Of course this increases flow over the whole load range by the same amount.
Not sure just how much more a stock pump can put out, bout the pressure regulator can easily be adjusted. You'll need to tap in a fuel pressure gage to know what's going on but that's easier that modifying a MPS.
Barefoot

3 ways, you could use injectors with a higher flow rate. You will have the same problem as increasing pressure, increase flow over whole load range.

Next question that follows if I am allowed:.......still on topic...


Is it known if the spring differnce alters drivability across all three settings for a 2056?

Anyone?

Yes quite correct. I was looking at ways not requiring part replacement.
I don't know if the mods to the MPS only permit a longer max pulse width, or do so over the the entire manifold pressure range.
If only increasing max pulsewidth this mod will lean out low & midrange A/F which is not what you're after as it will only provide longer pulses at WOT.

I haven't noticed that the spring rate does anything. Drivability in my experience was related to the diaphragm as the OEM ones were the best so Chris's replacement fixes that problem. Adjusting the MPS with a Raby cam means finding the sweet spot for the cam which usually means a slightly richer idle and faster idle (1050-1100). Other than that once Everything is set up right the 2056 w/raby cam drives like a raped ape.

Thanks Geoff.

Pic of the 2.0L spacer ring

Took me a long time to get the mix rich enough. After that things fell into place. Haven't had the fast idle. But with what I was thinking a normal mixture setting the head temps were plain scary. Especially #3.

I put the 049 that came with my 2056 into my 1.7L (while it's still in the car). Ran like a champ even though the temperature was like 15 degrees. The A/F ratios looked a little rich, and I don't know if that was because of the air temp or because I may have the fuel pressure a pound or two high. For the last year I've been trying to overcome a slightly lean condition probably as a result of that 007 that came with the car. Nice to actually have the right part in there, even if it's only for a few weeks.

I'm anxious to get that 2056 in the car. Geoff, do you happen to have any MPS calibration values for the 2056 like in this table: MPS Calibration. Or is it going to be fairly close to stock 2.0L except at WOT? With a spacer maybe I can get that 007 to where it will work with the 2056.

I need to see if I can get my hands on an Inductance meter.

A 007 will work only if you have a late cover as the cast in ring will keep you from getting it rich enough. Close to a stock 2.0L? Not with a Raby cam as it's much more like a 037 setting.

Pic of many 2.0L spacer rings

Click to view attachment

Chris - are you selling these now? So a x049 MPS can be set to x043 specs with this, right? I have a leaky x049 I wouldn't mind tearing apart.

I've been fiddling with MPS settings the last couple of nights trying to get a rebuilt 043 set correctly. I use Anders' adjustment method he describes, but I can never seem to get all settings (15 in, 4 in, 0 in) correct...

I will be within a few days.

Anders published values are known to be lean.

Really? My experience so far on adjusting two of these (admittedly, I'm a bit of a newbie at this) is that I have no problem adjusting to 0 in, I can get kind of close to the 4 in setting, and not close at all on the 0 in.

For example, for the x043 I think he publishes:

15 in: .71 H
4 in: 1.18 H
0 in: 1.39 H

I get more like:

15 in: .71 H
4 in: 1.16 H
0 in: 1.30 H and no more, no matter what I do (e.g., full stop fully removed)

Any idea what I'm doing wrong?

And then, after all that, I seem to normally run rich. I think that's more because most of my driving is trips of 20 minutes or less, and the car may not be fully warm and more under the influence of CHT (and CHT spacer I have) than the MPS.

We're those values adjusted for your local evation from sea level? If you are very rich, can you MPS hold vacuum?

Jeff - I did not adjust for sea level, but I'm only at about 500 feet, so I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that at that level the difference would be minor.

One of these MPS's holds a vacuum nicely, the other not so much anymore. I've also noticed that if I loosen up the outer screw too much trying to reach those part load (4 in) values I lose my ability to hold a vacuum.

These gonna be available on your web site Chris?

I haven't got much to add, Bleyseng and Bowlsby know more about how to adjust MPS's than I do now! Only thing I'd say is that my LCR data should be used to just get an MPS initially set up, especially with modified engines. The gold standard should be to adjust the MPS while running the car on a dyno with a shop-quality gas analyzer measuring the AFM. Bowlsby and Bleyseng can comment, but my take is to do the main mixture adjustment under part-load at 2 or 3 engine speed settings (e.g. 2000 rpm and 3000 rpm) and set it to 13.7:1, and to do the full-load adjustment to 12:1. I do mine on the road with my less-than-shop-quality AFM and I've gotten good results.

Great info, thanks for the education

This has been a great thread for my 2056 D-jet build.

The only thing I can add is that I have the 037 ECU which puts me back into the CHT sensor -017 availability issue. McMark sent me a while back a digital version with a separate ground that I am going to try out soon.

With the cam choice, and according to Jake and the Type IV store, the 9550 is no longer available but the replacement is made to work more with ethanol blends, so this is what I will go with.

I will also need the two rings that Chris is now making for the two 037 cores that I have.

Great to see you post Brad, your site has maintained a lot of interest in these systems, and at least for me...for ten years a great running FI system considering how old it is.

Thanks also to Jeff and Geoff and Chris Foley who I'm sure hasn't made a fortune on making these parts.

Thanks again to the OP for the thread.

They will, but probably not for a few weeks. My laptop that I use for website work just crapped out.

Brad, I've relied on the information you've compiled more times than I care to count. Chris' products are awesome and he provides great support for them.

Tonight I managed to get my other x043 to hold a vacuum again. I managed to get the 0 in setting at 1.34, but that's about as high it will go. I think I'm getting the hang of this D-Jet stuff. Maybe there are career opportunities out there for me as a D-Jet engineer

Great info...following this thread closely as I plan to get a spare MPS ready to go this winter, using one of Foley's rebuild kits.