any way of using tps instead of map

[Josh_b]

i use a dual weber setup so the map sensor is not really usable. could i soemhow wire a throttle position sensor into where the MAP is?

[Luca Lagonigro]

I don't think its doable with the stock MJLJ code. MAP is used to presume engine load, TPS has nothing to do with it.

You can use MJLJ as RPM only, same as a pure centrifugal dizzy, or connect all the vac ports of your webbers togheter at a sourge tank (fuel filter or something that size) before the MAP sensor, a check valve usually helps as well... unless you have a big cam it should work.

[brentp]

Actually, if it's acceptable to use TPS to represent engine load, it should be possible, with some minor circuit modification.

the TPS would replace the map sensor as the input to the processor. You would use the software and programming the same way- 0 on the "MAP" would represent closed throttle; 255 would represent wide open throttle.

[Scott Deane]

I am also interested in a TPS instead of vacuum - very short runners and a bit of a cam. I'm thinking of an R/C network that would integrate a rising or falling TPS signal to mimic the vacuum change during throttle changes. I'm wondering if it would really be worth it, however. By not using vacuum input do we lose some driveability - hesitation with throttle increase or perhaps slower throttle response without timing changes with throttle increase?

Sorry for a stupid question but its been a long time since I had a centrifugal-only disti.

[Paratime]

Cars with failed vacuum advance (mechanical advance working only) usually exhibit no change in performance. The vacuum advance only improves economy and idle quality, and used correctly, will make the engine run slightly cooler at cruise.