Any reason why they are different? Or were they just playing with it? (Assuming the SL stands for Shelby Lancer) Do the Shelby Lancers idle or cold start better than the others?
Printable View
Any reason why they are different? Or were they just playing with it? (Assuming the SL stands for Shelby Lancer) Do the Shelby Lancers idle or cold start better than the others?
The 0078 is an ATX 2.2 T2 cal. I assume the timing is different to help de-tune the engine for ATX duarabillity...
I dunno, it looked like it had more timing than the others. The AdvanceFromMapPartThrottle is what's sticking out in my memory, it had a lot more timing in low vacuum/low boost area. Cold Advance was another that looked like a lot more, and something about the advance from Baro or something. I'll have to check it again tonight when I'm at my computer to name it exactly.
Oh yeah, you're right. It does have more timing in vac at part throttle. WOT timing is the same, though. Not really sure why they would be different in that way.
more drag on the motor from the Auto likes more timing in vacuum and when cold. just my thoughts anyway.
Or maybe less load on the engine due to it being an auto, when you step on it the engine can rev up due to the slippage, whereas on a stick-shift it would be lugging kinda?