Originally posted by RTStabler51:
IMO, its stewpid because why put all that work into a dry diret port kit? I'd much rather have both fuel & air going in at the same time and not worrying as much about the injectors and such.

2. and I never said the a returnless car would never be able to run a direct port kit. Mustangs do it so whyy wouldn't a CSVT? I would think though, it would be easier and more feasible to add another fuel system to the returnless car for it though.


1. That makes NO sense at all.
Why? Exactly why I stated. It evenly distributes the nitrous to every cylinder. The amount of work involved would be considerably less then rigging up even a single point wet system on a returnless car and more reliable to boot.

If anything running a wet system with a single TB entry is stupid. It's not distibuting the mixture evenly and it's running fuel through a manifold Never intended for liquid flow!

With that in mind a single entry dry kit is a much better idea because it's just distributing a gas (as in form not fuel) unevenly to the cylinders. Not running and puddling a liquid in a manifold not designed for it.

2. It's More feasible to add "a-whole-nother fuel system" to the car verses simple PCM programming???
Adding a completely seperate fuel system and you would make a ton of work, bugs to fix and headaches for yourself. Also so many more components and areas to get a failure point in.

Heck using the VCN-2000 kit in a direct port setup and you would only need a small amount of fine A/F tuning. This setup would also be completely controllable from the cockpit! Infinitely superior to any other setup!

Cockpit controllable shot, several different shot modes, self programmable rpm points, every cylinder getting an equal dose of juice, make sure to have plenty of extra injector pulse width! (I.E. 24lbers on a 3L ), and it doesn't hurt if you have a self programmable chip with 4 settings plus a baseline one.

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