Originally posted by Ray:
all of those statements are true.. when based on a car such as yours.

Can those be applied as equally to a stock 2.5? the car WILL suffer drivability issues.. it WILL suffer performance issues.. it WILL be a pain to drive.


Absent-mindedly yanking them out based solely on flutter, etc (that you pointed out) will net 99.9% of the users on CEG nothing.. and will make them lose something, as well.

Blanket statements (that are true) may sound really good, but I wanted to include information that would be relevant to those particular users as well, not just information that would be accurate for those in your state of tune.




Are you sure you are not new around here???

I've had my IMRC removed for many years now. Long before I had a 3L engine. EVERYTHING I POSTED APPLIES TO BOTH THE 2.5L AND 3L ENGINE!

All those statements are true period. Regardless of engine size.

The 2.5L does suffer a more noticeable low rpm (below 2500 rpm) power drop then the 3L. No shock there & nothing I have not said a million times before. However the majority of this loss is gained back by proper tuning. (again something I've said & proved ad nauseam over the last 5 years)

Also you will find every post I do about this I advise people not to remove them. I do this because the tuning required to remove them is a requirement and most, if not all, places can not tune for it properly. (Yes some can shut it off but never can tune for it - a BIG difference!) I can guarantee you that none of them datalog to see if they are even making changes and that is just worthless tuning. Period.


My real issue was that your reasoning was completely backwards.
The IMRC is only removed for performance reasons. (many of which I posted) There is no other reason to remove it.
It is only kept for drivability reasons. (PITA to tune, requires custom tuning, etc)
That is the opposite of what you stated.

2000 SVT #674 13.47 @ 102 - All Motor! It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.