LESS fuel pressure

[Charles Napier]

Dave Zug wrote:
> 
> George M. Dailey wrote:
> >
> 
> ...
> > When the FAQ is completed, line one should be:
> > Q- Can I raise my fuel pressure to inscrease my WOT power?
> > A- No. If you have a stock automobile, and its is working properly,
> > increasing fuel pressure (with no other changes) will not increase power.
> >
> 
>         Speaking as the originator of this "subject" (this time around, anyway) I'd like to
> say, First, i'm learning alot from the responces even though some contradict slightly. and
> some even would keep me from asking similar questions, if i were sensitive to the "novice"
> thrashing. i'm not refering to this message specifically.
> 
>  Second, I HAVE gotten a DEFINITE performance increse at WOT by providing LESS fuel. "feels"
> like 35 hp or more. (as they cringe at the word FEEL)
> 
> .. not in fuel pressure, but in fuel (pulse width). i could leave you guessing, but thats
> not productive... its on a turbo car that is made FAT up high on purpose to keep from
> tearing up the transaxle (the weak link).
> 
> and third, i already have the means by which to increase airflow, and advance.. (at NO
> cost), i just wanted advice on modifying an existing part on the thing to get more fuel with
> pressure, rather than with taxing the injectors duty cycle, which at this point i have NOT
> calculated the max cycle so no, i dont know if its close to being taxed (wet type).
> 
> Hence the bones of my quest: release the power thats ALREADY in there (no fair buying
> stuff), learn something, share information within limits.
> 
> DO carmakers reduce performace for the reason of increasing mileage, or do they do it more
> to give the warranty a better chance of making it?  With my model, it was to protect the
> warranty, which has expired, along with the book value (28k to 4k in 6 years) and 3 sets of
> ZR's in 3 years.
> 
> So in summary, this is a good list, thank you, and the FAQ is a great idea, speaking as a
> person who wouldnt have bothered you all with silly novice questions, and as a person who
> takes the time to read the 42 messages a day and would eventually appreciate not seeing the
> silly ones over and over again.
> 
> the gasoline FAQ was the neetest thing i've read yet, the porting article too. almost want
> to keep the list a secret, huh?
> 
> happy holidays. :-)

I am sure that this directed to me, and I apologize. If anyone on here
is the novice it is me.

Charlie