Problem with (Forge) dumpvalve and fuelconsumption
24 November 2002, 06:11 PM
#1
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I installed my Forge dumpvalve about a month ago. Works fine and no problems with the car, engine and DV. But the last weeks I've noticed that the car seems to be much more thirsty. Instead of 0.8-1.0l/10km it now has increased to 1.1-1.3l/10km. I've heard that some Imprezas can freak out when the airflow isn't the same anymore and therefor the fuelconsumption is increased. Solution is said to be a reset of the ECU (removing the battery for 30min) and then take the car out for a slow, normal and fast trip to give the ECU new values in the memory. Is this correct? I need all the help I can get since I can't afford to drive the car when it takes more than 1l/10km when I drive like normal (no quick starts, not often above 3000rpm in any gear for a long time, never over 120km/h).
Help me please!
PS: I searched the forum for other threads about this matter but I couldn't find any that explained and gave sollutions of how to do.
Help me please!
PS: I searched the forum for other threads about this matter but I couldn't find any that explained and gave sollutions of how to do.
24 November 2002, 07:08 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Home mostly
Posts: 1,120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Atmo dumpvalves are meant to make fuel consumption go up,i personally havent noticed a difference on mine but there has been LOADS of posts on here about atmo's and fuel consumption.
25 November 2002, 08:03 AM
#6
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feels like I'm **** out of luck then. According to my swedish Impreza-friends the MY00 can be tricky while the MY99 (and pre?) are more forgiving when you mount the car with a atom DV. Maybe time to try to sell the DV then... 
Trending Topics
25 November 2002, 09:05 AM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Prague
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have the same problem with Blitz DV. ECU think the air is in manifold but it is not right. Then mixture is rich.
(+ rear wrc wing - result 2-2,5 litres consumption higher)
(+ rear wrc wing - result 2-2,5 litres consumption higher)
25 November 2002, 01:09 PM
#9
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAM: Yeah that's an idea. But at the moment I consider a change back to the original DV than buying even more stuff. A bit low on cash at the moment...
By the way, what does a new ECU that supports an atmo DV cost?
By the way, what does a new ECU that supports an atmo DV cost?
25 November 2002, 02:49 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That'd be a MAP-based one, and I do think the Link will give best VFM ratio - it won't be cheap though.
I'd recommend a recirc BOV for you, and a snorkusectomy instead - it won't sound as much (as it did with your wussyass boost levels anyhoo
) as an atmo one.
/J
I'd recommend a recirc BOV for you, and a snorkusectomy instead - it won't sound as much (as it did with your wussyass boost levels anyhoo
) as an atmo one./J
26 November 2002, 06:40 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
/J you MAP snob 
I am a MAF snob and proud of it 
All I will say is temperature compensation, idle and starting quality All you will say is MAF failure and BOV overfuelling
[Edited by john banks - 11/26/2002 6:41:35 PM]
I am a MAF snob and proud of it All I will say is temperature compensation, idle and starting quality All you will say is MAF failure and BOV overfuelling [Edited by john banks - 11/26/2002 6:41:35 PM]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post