I agree, it's just not worth the trade off to me when there is no performance improvement. Now this seems to be a topic of great debate on the various boards. I'm one of the first to have played with the adjustment having done so back in '98 and I've done it numerous times at different states of modifications. The reason for the difference of opinions might be because some were adjusted really conservatively at the factory while others more agressively. But on mine in moving it to as agressive a position as it will allow did nothing but make it suck more fuel in typical driving and my cross country trip gave me a good chance to confirm it under a mostly cruise control state where only small controlled throttle inputs are the norm. My around town mileage also suffered because I drive pretty conservatively most of the time on the street. I'd average ~17-19 mpg before adjusting it and with it set agressively my around town mileage went down to ~13-15 because every little throttle input had the boost coming on. My ETs never improved with it set agressively, and in fact my quickest is still with it set at the factory position. I'm not a casual racer either, my data is important so I only compare apples to apples and not apples to oranges which is a real problem with a number of the comparisons you see by people on the boards. What I mean is that if you don't have consistent and optimized data to start with to compare a change to then you can't equate your data afterwards and this is something you see in comparisons on the boards all the time. Then there's that ass dyno thing... that's really accurate.

The place where this adjustment might have the most benefit is for part throttle response. The autoX guys might find it useful, or might not.

RC