When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Oh really?? I've been using the drop down on mine with the low iat sensor and it seems fine. What kind of issues are they seeing??
I pulled the J1 connector and got the IAT sensor and sensor ground wires and confirmed 219kohm resistance the same at the HiAT sensor plug. This means the wiring up to the ECM are correct and not affecting the readings. so I tested with the GM IAT sensor and preset GM on Holley v1 and the temps read perfect. Laptop software would not let me custom tune the IAT table backwards so I said screw it.
I updated to V3 and did all the tests again and got weird results.
- v3 preset HiAT sensor netted 3*F temp when coolant was at 48*F.
- v3 custom IAT table netted the same 20*F temp as before on v1.
- v3 GM sensor GM preset read perfect 48*.
- v3 custom IAT and 28* temp offset showed 48*F
no matter what I do I can’t get the HiAT to read correctly and it reads worse with the preset table… a whole 45*F cooler which is nuts. Offsetting temp brings it up correctly but what does that do for the whole
sensor range? These are suppose to be more accurate and im not seeing that. Also when I plug the custom table with the HiAT values the chart looks way different than the charts on the V1 and on the motion website.
Sensors I’m testing
V3 custom table with HiAT values
GM sensors and the HIAT custom table with 28* offset in above pic
Hmm that's interesting how that table turned out. I think I had that same issue before with the weird looking table. So after you mentioned how Motion preferred everyone use the custom table so their IAT and CTS I went ahead and got their tables setup in mine they way they have it on the website. One other thing I noticed was that using the "dropdown" sensor calibrations was that the Holley didn't scale them to their advertised ranges -10-335 IAT and -10-290 CTS they just stay at the GM ranges which totally defeats the purpose of using them Coolant sensor scaled properly IAT scaled properly both sensors using the advertised ranges. Haven't tested yet but will in the morning
Hmm that's interesting how that table turned out. I think I had that same issue before with the weird looking table. So after you mentioned how Motion preferred everyone use the custom table so their IAT and CTS I went ahead and got their tables setup in mine they way they have it on the website. One other thing I noticed was that using the "dropdown" sensor calibrations was that the Holley didn't scale them to their advertised ranges -10-335 IAT and -10-290 CTS they just stay at the GM ranges which totally defeats the purpose of using them Coolant sensor scaled properly IAT scaled properly both sensors using the advertised ranges. Haven't tested yet but will in the morning
did you test a GM sensor? Wat was your MAT before the changes vs ECT vs the custom table? Are they trading similar or near ECT?
also how did you get the table to look like that? Yours looks like the low temp IAT but still couldn’t get mine to look like that under v3.
did you test a GM sensor? Wat was your MAT before the changes vs ECT vs the custom table? Are they trading similar or near ECT?
also how did you get the table to look like that? Yours looks like the low temp IAT but still couldn’t get mine to look like that under v3.
Well as I've just discovered that using the dropdown sensor calibration it was just the GM scaling the entire time so that's fun knowing it's been wrong the whole time I've been using them both! I do remember that the GM MAT sensor read higher and took longer to register any change in air temps. Yes I am using the Lo temp Rife IAT sensor. I had the same issue with the odd looking table like you're having and I'm pretty sure that's why I just used the dropdown. I'm not even sure what the fix was.
Well now that I've got the proper sensor calibration in the software I'll get it all tested to see what the difference is and compare a couple datalogs
Also after you get everything calibrated in those tables you'll shimmy over to system parameters icf and sensor scaling/warnings and scale those sensors in there. Then you'll need to go into Air temp enrichment and adjust that table for the scaling and basically all AE tables adjusted for the new scalings as well
Well as I've just discovered that using the dropdown sensor calibration it was just the GM scaling the entire time so that's fun knowing it's been wrong the whole time I've been using them both! I do remember that the GM MAT sensor read higher and took longer to register any change in air temps. Yes I am using the Lo temp Rife IAT sensor. I had the same issue with the odd looking table like you're having and I'm pretty sure that's why I just used the dropdown. I'm not even sure what the fix was.
Well now that I've got the proper sensor calibration in the software I'll get it all tested to see what the difference is and compare a couple datalogs
Also after you get everything calibrated in those tables you'll shimmy over to system parameters icf and sensor scaling/warnings and scale those sensors in there. Then you'll need to go into Air temp enrichment and adjust that table for the scaling and basically all AE tables adjusted for the new scalings as well
Let us know what changes you see. Are you seeing the same MAT temp with the custom table as you are for ECT now with the changes? Mine wasn't and I needed to use a 28*F offset. I realize your using the RIFE ECT sensor so that could be off too but what are the temp differences now? Apparently this is an issue with others as well as I found a thread on holley with similar issues. Nobody every posts the solution tho. https://forums.holley.com/forum/holl...-now-reads-off
Let us know what changes you see. Are you seeing the same MAT temp with the custom table as you are for ECT now with the changes? Mine wasn't and I needed to use a 28*F offset. I realize your using the RIFE ECT sensor so that could be off too but what are the temp differences now? Apparently this is an issue with others as well as I found a thread on holley with similar issues. Nobody every posts the solution tho. https://forums.holley.com/forum/holl...-now-reads-off
Okay so I just went down to the car and sent the tune with the custom tables for the MAT and CTS sensors it did get fairly cold last night and rained most of the night as well so with key on engine off the MAT was 53* which was bang on with actual air temps and my CTS was 47* which makes sense it would be a touch colder due to iron block keeping those temps down overnight. I let the car warm right up and the MAT was staying close to ambient temps instead of climbing and I also noticed that my autometer coolant gauge is matching what the laptop is saying now. Before using that custom table there was an easy 15-20* difference between Holley and coolant gauge. So as of now I'm gonna take this as a win and everything is calibrated the way it should be
I spoke with Dalton again he said they are going to do some internal testing on the car they have which runs an Holley HP. He runs a terminator in his personal car with the RIFE sensor and he says it works correctly. At this point we both think this is a software issue vs a sensor issue. I'm leaving it at custom MAT table but with a 28* coolant offset until I hear back from Motion or Holley. I did send an email to Holley tech support to see what they think as well... I assume I'll hear back in like 2 weeks.
I spoke with Dalton again he said they are going to do some internal testing on the car they have which runs an Holley HP. He runs a terminator in his personal car with the RIFE sensor and he says it works correctly. At this point we both think this is a software issue vs a sensor issue. I'm leaving it at custom MAT table but with a 28* coolant offset until I hear back from Motion or Holley. I did send an email to Holley tech support to see what they think as well... I assume I'll hear back in like 2 weeks.
Yea it kinda sounds like it's a software issue. Myself using those custom tables with the Dominator everything seems to be right where it needs to be
I spoke with Holley yesterday, they said sensor probably or the data for the table is causing the temp to be off. I did some tests by pulling the connector on the IAT sensor and using resistors in place of the sensors and put together a chart of random points. I tested the resistance of each to get an exact number and plugged them in which the handheld spit out a temp number. I got some good data but what I'm seeing is that the sensor/holley is accurate at really anything above 100*F, once it gets below it starts to read low pretty quickly. The holley tech wasn't even aware of the lo/Hi RIFE preset dropdowns and couldn't comment if they are setup correctly or not. He said just run the GM sensor and be done with it. I used a heat gun to heat up the RIFE sensor after and verify the temps and the sensor moves pretty quick compared to what I'm used to with the GM sensors. Now Idk what to do. I doubt I'll ever be below 100*F even with spraying a small amount of meth so do I just leave it? Oh I did change the offset back to Zero but I am still running the Custom MAT table per Motions specs.
I'm actually kinda interested in using the RIFE but focusing on a particular range say 100-300*F and breaking the cells out maybe it will offer more resolution that its focusing on a smaller temp range.
I spoke with Holley yesterday, they said sensor probably or the data for the table is causing the temp to be off. I did some tests by pulling the connector on the IAT sensor and using resistors in place of the sensors and put together a chart of random points. I tested the resistance of each to get an exact number and plugged them in which the handheld spit out a temp number. I got some good data but what I'm seeing is that the sensor/holley is accurate at really anything above 100*F, once it gets below it starts to read low pretty quickly. The holley tech wasn't even aware of the lo/Hi RIFE preset dropdowns and couldn't comment if they are setup correctly or not. He said just run the GM sensor and be done with it. I used a heat gun to heat up the RIFE sensor after and verify the temps and the sensor moves pretty quick compared to what I'm used to with the GM sensors. Now Idk what to do. I doubt I'll ever be below 100*F even with spraying a small amount of meth so do I just leave it? Oh I did change the offset back to Zero but I am still running the Custom MAT table per Motions specs.
I'm actually kinda interested in using the RIFE but focusing on a particular range say 100-300*F and breaking the cells out maybe it will offer more resolution that its focusing on a smaller temp range.
I've already confirmed that the drop down presets for those sensors don't do anything and just stay at the GM/Holley configuration in the global file. You'll need to use the custom tables and then go into your fuel icf and adjust everything to match those sensors. I probs would've even worry about much below the 100* mark as you're still kinda warming everything up
I’ve started plumbing the water meth system. I’m looking at two locations.
in the top of the short k&N which is 3” deep. Thinking of running 2gph with 300psi pump and wiper fluid mostly for lowering IATs. My concern here is that the pattern could soak the filter media and when I let out of boost the wiper fluid will come out of the BOV and get everywhere. See pic
in the 90 right before the TB. The issue here is that it will soak the IAT sensor. see black dot in pic
I know the turbo inlet will allow the most cooling and right before the TB will offer more detonation protection. Not that it really be an issue on 93. Not a ton of room and these are really the only spots.
I’ve started plumbing the water meth system. I’m looking at two locations.
in the top of the short k&N which is 3” deep. Thinking of running 2gph with 300psi pump and wiper fluid mostly for lowering IATs. My concern here is that the pattern could soak the filter media and when I let out of boost the wiper fluid will come out of the BOV and get everywhere. See pic
in the 90 right before the TB. The issue here is that it will soak the IAT sensor. see black dot in pic
I know the turbo inlet will allow the most cooling and right before the TB will offer more detonation protection. Not that it really be an issue on 93. Not a ton of room and these are really the only spots.
I think in the 90 before the TB is the only option there's not a whole lot of piping and before the BOV would just create a mess
I’ve started plumbing the water meth system. I’m looking at two locations.
in the top of the short k&N which is 3” deep. Thinking of running 2gph with 300psi pump and wiper fluid mostly for lowering IATs. My concern here is that the pattern could soak the filter media and when I let out of boost the wiper fluid will come out of the BOV and get everywhere. See pic
in the 90 right before the TB. The issue here is that it will soak the IAT sensor. see black dot in pic
I know the turbo inlet will allow the most cooling and right before the TB will offer more detonation protection. Not that it really be an issue on 93. Not a ton of room and these are really the only spots.
What about putting the nozzle in the end of the filter as mentioned and put a fuzzy wrist band around the BOV that will catch the mist and keep it from spraying everywhere?
Remember back in the day guys would put the fuzzy wrist bands around the valve cover breathers to keep the mist from getting everywhere?
With the temps under hood, it would evaporate and dry almost instantly.
What about putting the nozzle in the end of the filter as mentioned and put a fuzzy wrist band around the BOV that will catch the mist and keep it from spraying everywhere?
Remember back in the day guys would put the fuzzy wrist bands around the valve cover breathers to keep the mist from getting everywhere?
With the temps under hood, it would evaporate and dry almost instantly.
I've done that with a green foam filter media to help with BOV noise when I was running a supercharger. It's an option I guess... just don't know if spraying that soon is worth it. I've also read a small nozzle like 1GPH is needed pre turbo and you can't spray alot, the smallest I have is a 2GPH. I wired it up last night and put fluid in the tank and now the tank is leaking by a mounting tab... not idea why but the tank is the original so maybe it just decided to crack dunno. I had to order a new tank which are expensive for what they are.
I've done that with a green foam filter media to help with BOV noise when I was running a supercharger. It's an option I guess... just don't know if spraying that soon is worth it. I've also read a small nozzle like 1GPH is needed pre turbo and you can't spray alot, the smallest I have is a 2GPH. I wired it up last night and put fluid in the tank and now the tank is leaking by a mounting tab... not idea why but the tank is the original so maybe it just decided to crack dunno. I had to order a new tank which are expensive for what they are.
Not sure where you heard you can’t spray much volume pre turbo, but that’s total nonsense. If you run an intercooler, then you limit the amount sprayed pre turbo so it doesn’t condense in the IC and puddle. Otherwise, there is zero reason to run AUX inj anywhere else. Spraying pre-turbo is the only way to up the eff. of the turbo itself. No other location gives you that. So if you don’t run an intercooler, no other location makes sense. You can spray 200gph++ pre turbo no problem, there is no “limit”.
Personally, I’d ditch the blow off valve completely. Its not needed. Turbo “surge” doesn’t hurt the turbo one bit. At least not enough to effect our applications. Maybe if you ran a semi 1 million miles the BOV would help the turbo live a bit longer. I had 180k original miles on my grand national… much smaller turbo spinning much faster than the units we work with these days. No BOV from the factory… But I know a lot of people like them for the sound. Wrapping it would be fine IMO.
You can run any poly tank and it will be compatible with methanol. Mower fuel tanks etc. I prefer the agricultural ones with 4-5” lids. Makes it easy to clean and add fluid. Def don’t need the BS alky tanks they sell with the controllers. Way overpriced.
Not sure where you heard you can’t spray much volume pre turbo, but that’s total nonsense. If you run an intercooler, then you limit the amount sprayed pre turbo so it doesn’t condense in the IC and puddle. Otherwise, there is zero reason to run AUX inj anywhere else. Spraying pre-turbo is the only way to up the eff. of the turbo itself. No other location gives you that. So if you don’t run an intercooler, no other location makes sense. You can spray 200gph++ pre turbo no problem, there is no “limit”.
Personally, I’d ditch the blow off valve completely. Its not needed. Turbo “surge” doesn’t hurt the turbo one bit. At least not enough to effect our applications. Maybe if you ran a semi 1 million miles the BOV would help the turbo live a bit longer. I had 180k original miles on my grand national… much smaller turbo spinning much faster than the units we work with these days. No BOV from the factory… But I know a lot of people like them for the sound. Wrapping it would be fine IMO.
You can run any poly tank and it will be compatible with methanol. Mower fuel tanks etc. I prefer the agricultural ones with 4-5” lids. Makes it easy to clean and add fluid. Def don’t need the BS alky tanks they sell with the controllers. Way overpriced.
But do those farmer tanks have a cool billet lid that says Alky Controls?
Worth it.
I've already confirmed that the drop down presets for those sensors don't do anything and just stay at the GM/Holley configuration in the global file. You'll need to use the custom tables and then go into your fuel icf and adjust everything to match those sensors. I probs would've even worry about much below the 100* mark as you're still kinda warming everything up
I just got a call from Motion today. They said they were doing internal testing on the RIFE sensor on the holley HP and found similar issues that I'm seeing. They are recalibrating the curve and doing further testing on the HP but also a TermX on a customer car. I should know probably by the end of the week. Likely this has caused them to redo the calibration table data so we could be seeing new data moving forward.
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Slideshow: From wobbling harmonic balancers to failed EBCMs, these are the issues that define long-term C5 ownership and what repairs typically involve.
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Slideshow: A modern Camaro transformed into a retro icon, this limited-run "Bandit" build blends nostalgia with brute force in a way few revivals manage.
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Slideshow: Cadillac didn't just crash the high-performance luxury vehicle party, it showed up loud, supercharged, and occasionally a little unhinged...
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Slideshow: A one-off sports car that looks like a vintage Italian exotic-but hides a C6 Corvette underneath-just sold for the price of a new mid-engine Corvette.
