Is SEQUENTIAL INJECTION REALLY NEEDED?

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:18 pm

You know? a lot of expense and misinformation goes along with fuel injection and hot rodding.
Vendors want you to BELIEVE sequential injection is required for max performance, but is it really?
Can using batch syle injection save you money and work as well if not better than sequential?

rehab is for quitters
Bill

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:42 pm

Sequential injection is not needed for maximum performance.

It is needed for maximum drivability and economy though.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 4:11 pm

nice to see you back kane

I guess why I asked this quesion was because there must be a bottom line to find the most economical way to build a Mits engine swap and use a good turbo set up at a reasonable cost.
There is a lot of money that could go to something else in the car if we are all informed on a proper unit

jecr · Post by **jecr** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:32 pm

sequential is also better for emissions, but if your doing a swap I'm sure this is not that important.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:00 am

I think sequintail injection is a fake, and I beleive anti lag is a fake built in to drive up sales. I beleive anti lag is an adjustment for when the ECU turns to ' batch ' mode.
I also beleive that all all sequintial systems turn to batch injection at a given RPM, because IF the engine ran on sequential all the way up to max RPM it would be like running on a two barrel carburater. there is just not enough time for sequential to open injecter duty cycle open ( 90%) long enough at high speed RPM's
I beleive batch injection would be like running a 4 barrel carburater, opening the injecter twice for each crankshaft revolution. I also think sizing the fuel injecter would be much better and closer to correct if batch only system was used.
I would very much enjoy using a lap top system, but like DJ said, there is so much information, you can't use it all or understand what its telling you. the best readouts I have been able to get are from using a lab scope on the 02 senser and using ' cross counts' to adjust out the engine

I am not a gynecologist, but I will take a look

Eric · Post by **Eric** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:51 pm

Here is a good read: http://www.megasquirt.info/MS%20FAQ.htm#sequential

The megasquirt ecu's I've tuned do batch mode which is good/better than sequential for performance, but likely not as good for mileage and emissions.

As far as antilag, it is supposed to severely retard the timing as well as run a higher rate of fuel which causes the combustion period to happen partially outside of the engine, when the exhaust valves are closed, in order to spool the turbo without load on the engine. At least, that is my understand of it. This is one of the things I'm anxious to test out on my car when it's all built.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:45 am

I would like to try megasquirt just because I like to find out about how things work and like I said I want to try using a lap top. but hell, I am a guy that cant set his own alarm clock properly.
I am going to pick up a computer set up program about engine combinations from http://www.proracingsim.com/index.html
It's about $800. bucks, but it saves so much time on combination ideas.
It comes with cam library and runner lenth design, if what Eric says is true about turbo lag, it should be able to design out most if not all turbo lag.
If any one has a combination they wanna try I can plug in the numbers for them

Why hasnt anybody worked with a varible timing cam? or is there one out there?

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 10:30 am

just a poor choice of words on my part, yes I meant verable cam timing, like on the nissan VG series engine

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:32 pm

Some newer ECUs do have the ability to switch the vtech, ecotech... whatevertech features on. Not sure exactly how.

Not sure what you could do to setup a BMW without a throttlebody and its weird valve setup.

Robert Venable · Post by **Robert Venable** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 4:31 pm

DJpowerHaus wrote:Some newer ECUs do have the ability to switch the vtech, ecotech... whatevertech features on. Not sure exactly how.

Not sure what you could do to setup a BMW without a throttlebody and its weird valve setup.

Are you reffering to Valvetronic or Vano's??

I know of a company at www.metricmechanic.com that can change single acting(on/off) vano's(varrible valve timing) by limiting how much it can move (12.5 degrees is the factory setting, and they limit it to prevent the valves from hitting the pistons with higher duration cams).

As for valvetronic, this allows you to varry the valve lift on the intake side to varry engine RPMs. IMO, this would give you great intake voloecity at all RPM's due to only the minuminum amount of valve lift/opening being allowed for a certain throttle request.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:06 pm

I ordered the soft ware this morning from motion tech, it is supposed to have a cam library.
I know turbo camshaft set ups have very critical about centerline, the second cam DJ was showing about 116 centerline which is a good turbo number but the other cam was (the first one) was not a turbo cam and had a centerline of only 98
If you consider the headers are very critical to valve over lap ( thats when headers really work) ,and from what Eric said about flame in the headders, the proper cam would go a long way to cure turbo lag
I guess what I am looking for is a design that is not a magic pill or a majic box, we are all expecting to put a engine combination together and make an ECU bring it all together with a majic prom. the truth always lies somewhere in between, the ECU has to match the combination as well as the combination has to match the box.
Dyno time is expensive and fun, but not nessicary. Everyone wants dyno slips, but the truth is at the track. Dyno's dont show ' human error' well guess what? every car has to be drivin by a human, so you have to have a driver to get real numbers. do your homework, build a good working combination and spend a day at the drags with your car making changes with every pass until you like the set up and you are tuned in

Eric · Post by **Eric** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:45 pm

Bill, the megasquirt is a LOT of work. Once I get mine setup right and running good I will have to find the time to do a writeup.

The biggest complication is the ignition. Here is a writeup on all that just to get you an idea of what's (partially) involved: http://www.diyautotune.com/tech_article ... _laser.htm

Robert Venable · Post by **Robert Venable** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 6:12 pm

Bill Hincher wrote:
I know turbo camshaft set ups have very critical about centerline, the second cam DJ was showing about 116 centerline which is a good turbo number but the other cam was (the first one) was not a turbo cam and had a centerline of only 98

When you say Centerline, are you referring to LSA, or Lobe Seperation angle?

Dyno time is expensive and fun, but not nessicary. Everyone wants dyno slips, but the truth is at the track. Dyno's dont show ' human error' well guess what? every car has to be drivin by a human, so you have to have a driver to get real numbers. do your homework, build a good working combination and spend a day at the drags with your car making changes with every pass until you like the set up and you are tuned in

Well, the truth is it depends on what you are looking for. Some people just want to say that they have a 700 (W/E) hp daily driver and it might never see the track. The others could not give a crap about what the car dyno's at, just as long as it runs in the 10s, or beats there buddy's car. A good example is the fact that the quickest cars in the world are not dyno'ed, there simply isn't a dyno capable to measuring the HP these cars put out.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 9:52 pm

LOBE CENTERS: The distance measured in degrees between the center line of the intake lobe and the center line of the exhaust lobe of the same cylinder.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Mon Nov 06, 2006 7:58 pm

well DJ I got my new engine program, lets put your numbers in it and see what it says, I know what the stock numbers are but I need to know the cam, turbo, ignition, injecter size and anything else you want to put in and simulate the engine you have

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:49 pm

Bill Hincher wrote:

Well DJ, I got my new engine program, lets put your numbers in it and see what it says, I know what the stock numbers are but I need to know the cam, turbo, ignition, injecter size and anything else you want to put in and simulate the engine you have

Um... okay.

Head: 47cc
Dish: -22cc
Valve Face Angle: 45 degrees

Bore: 3.425"
Stroke: 3.937"
Rod Length: 5.905"
Compression: 8.6:1"

Injectors: 950cc (4x)
Turbo: Holset HX35
A/R: .65
Exhaust: 3"

Weights:
Oil: 20W50 (hehe)
(Found these measurements online, but may not be perfect)
Scat Rods: ~640 grams
Wiseco Pistons: ~295 grams
4G64 crank: ~34.56 pounds
Flywheel: ~10.5 pounds
Clutch: ???
Wrist pins: ??
Rings: ??

Cam and Spring info: http://projectzerog.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=421

What do you need to know about the Ignition? Does that program have any libararies in it for a 4G63 head such as valves sizes, valve weights, etc. What about a library for the block and the journal widths and stuff?

Also, does anyone have any info on the weight of the Wiesco 4G64 pistons.. wristpins

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 11:02 am

DJ, I need a 'garret' number for the turbo.
an approximate turbo that garret would manufacture

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:59 pm

GT35R... but not ball bearing.. whatever that would be.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:10 am

OKay,

I found a Garret 25R but no 35 R on this display, I gotta have a closer cross referrence
I gotta have your intake runner lengths and the inside diameter of the intake runners and exhaust manifold
I also need to know the size of your throttle body.

I am getting ' up to speed' on this program and it looks like I can help you build the right set up at a pretty low cost with just some adjustments to what you have

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:15 pm

Maybe look for a turbo like a GT30. Or anything in the GT30## family.

The current throttlebody is 60mm. The current intake manifold is also stock, so measure whatever stock ones you have laying around for runner length.

The diameter of the radiused rectangular runner is equivalent to 55mm. This is calculated by getting the area of the port (3.527 sq in.) and calculating the diameter of a circle with this area.

The future ITB manifold will have the same 55mm ports but with 4x 50mm throttlebodies.

Not sure about the exhaust. Probably whatever stock exhaust ports are.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 1:03 pm

where to start?

well I guess at the heart of the problem will be how much air can this engine can pump.
The first thing ( I think) to adress the injection system is to know how much CFM the engine is capable of pumping.
There are two particular speeds to look at, peak torque, where highest volumetric efficiantcy occurs and maximum RPM when the maxamum air capacity occurs.
The engine DJ built ( with the 2.4L crank and oversized pistons) built max torque at 4500 RPM

so if I use the formula rpm x displacement /3456 =CFM it should tell me the engines air capacity @ max torque

4500 rpm x 145.2 cu in =653400 Cubic ' inches' per minute
divied by 3456 ( how many cubic inches per foot) =189 CFM @ max torque

Max RPM shoud be around 7000 RPM so using the same formuala

7000rmp X 145.2 Cu in = 1016400 divided by 3456 = 294 CFM

so if we take these two numbers and adjust them for bends in the induction system and valve interference, the real volumetric efficeincy will be about 85 to 90% of these numbers

90% effeciency CFM @ 4500rmp = 170 CFM
90%effeciency CFM @ 7000rpm = 264 CFM

now lets kick in the turbo

we know atmoshereic pressure is @ 14.7 then we add the desired boost, lets say 10 lbs so absolute pressure will be 24.7
now we gotta convert this number to a pressure ratio number
pressure ratio = absolute pressure divided by atmospheric pressure or 24.7/ 14.7 = 1.68 pressure ratio meaning 68% more air is being pushed into the induction system now I can get an acurate number on actual CFM

air flow rate= pressure ratio x basic cfm

1.68x 170 CFM @ 4500 rpms = 285 CFM @ 290 max torque

1.68 x 264 cfm@7000 rpms =443 CFM @310 max HP

now we gotta match that number to a fuel injecter to maintain a 12.5 air fuel ratio

come back next week boz and gurlz
when ' uncle dick' brings his camera

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:34 am

no Matt, no blow ups, just the opposite 14.7 to 1 is the stoichiometric ratio designed to delivery less oxides into the air

12.5 to 1 air fuel ratio is the desired rating ratio to deliver power

it takes .56 lbs of fuel to support 1 hp per hour, more on that later

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:00 pm

well Matt, you bring up an excellent point, why would any one advise 12.5 as opposed to 14.7 ? 12.5 was standard on all engines before emmission controls, 14.7 was never used before 1969

all equations can be written backwards as well as forward.

lets look at DJ's engine again, I gave it a total HP rating of 310 @ 1.68 pressure ratio, or 10 lbs boost . did you know his engine would only put out 185 hp without the 68% pressure ratio?

first you gotta have goals and then plan to achieve them

DJ wants 500 HP that would be a 62% increase in power, how much extra boost would that be?
.62 x 14.7 atmosheric pressure = 9.1 psi + the original 10= 19.1 total boost to achieve 500 HP
well the standard rule of thumb with a boosted engine is that it takes .55 brake specific fuel consumption of fuel ,per hp, per hour to support the engines needs Now if DJ expects to make 500 hp he needs to multiply 500 expected HP by .55 pounds per hour divided by number of injecters

500 hp x .55 = 275 lbs per hour required , divided by 4 injecters= 68.75 lbs per hour per cylinder

68.78 pounds per hour converted back to cc's is 68.75 lbs per hour x 10.5 equaling 721.8 cc injecters, add 10 % for adjustments and you should be in the ball park @ 800 cc injecters .

right now with the setup DJ has, he should be running 310 hp x .55bsfc = 170 lbs per hour required divided by 4 injecters = 42.625 lbs per hour per cylinder x 10.5 convertion for cc's equals 447. cc's add 10% = 500cc
This is all worked out for DJ's engine @ 2.4 L and now then I can explain duty cycle, after my nap

I dont sleep at the holiday express inn anymore Matt, at my age I just sleep around

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:24 am

we are using the same numbers but the wrong termanolgy Matt

when you say 12.1 to 1 you are saying 12.1 parts fuel to 1 part air thats backwards its 12.1 parts air to one part fuel.

in other words, the lower the number the richer the mixture IE 12.1 is richer then 14.7 which brings up a good point. does that mean if you burn one gallon of fuel you burn 12 gallons of air?

The answer is no, because you are only using one part of the air content, the oxygen content which is only 20% of one unit of air, the rest is mostly Nitrogen, so for every one component of combustable fuel you have to gather 5 times as much air, so to achieve 12.5 to 1 you need to gather 62.50 gallons of air to 1 part fuel

can you imagine the tank you would need to carry that much fuel if your numbers were correct?

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:45 pm

AFR is calculated by MASS not volume as is the case for most calculations in chemistry. So no, 1 gallon of fuel to 12 gallons of air is NOT correct. It is measured as 1 grams of fuel for 12 grams of air. And since we know air is much less dense than fuel.. the volumes vary greatly.

Also, when they say Air.. they mean Air.. not oxygen, otherwise it would be an Oxygen/Fuel ratio.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:52 pm

what does the nitrogen do?

.55 is a rounded figure because after finding a fuel value, I added a ten percent adjustment, so we are both at about the same number

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:59 pm

Mostly, the nitrogen just passes on through. Depending on the conditions of the combustion (mainly tempature) it can bond with other things making different NOX gasses.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 11:08 pm

WHAT ARE YOU DOING UP SO LATE

how are ya ?

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 11:15 pm

Good. I'm just leaving work. Need to do some late night wrenching to make my first event tomorrow.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 10:44 am

EASYYYYYYYYYYY killer...............one of us could get hurt !

the work is not done, I had to order a seperate cam library to optimise the cam design, I should have it by Friday.

Please be kind enough to enlighten us with your figures Matt, what numbers apply to your engine?

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 3:34 pm

No, i didnt mean dyno numbers, i was asking what CFM's you ran what injecter sizes have you tried, and where did you place your torque curve and HP curve numbers when you built your systems.

Also, I was wondering what your air speed was @ your throttle body? i want to change my throttle body but I havent found the right speed yet.
what are the usable numbers you came up with for a starting point?
Lets all compare our stuff and learn from each other

I am no Gynocolicist, but I will take a look!

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 4:52 pm

thanks matt, i will run your numbers

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 9:13 pm

well Matt lets look at some over all numbers first

you ran 12.7 @ 118 mph at the drags with this set up, well if you divide the wieght by the ET divided by the constant of 5.825 and cubed by 3 you then know the HP. I looked up your wieghts on the net and I knocked off 400 lbs because you said you had it stripped down, so I figured about 2500 lbs.

2500 lbs divided by 12.7 / 5.825 cubed comes out to 241 HP which is very do able.

Now you run 16 lbs of boost which is added to atmosheric pressure of 14.7 = 30.7 total boost and then divide that by 14.7=2.0 pressure ratio

now your air flow rate at max torque @ 4500
at 145 Cu in x 4500 rpm x .5 ( two revolutions) x .85 efficiantcy
divided by 1728 equals 160.5 CFM @ 175 max torque

and the same calculation @ 7000 rpm equals 249 CFM @ 150 HP

now kick in the turbo

air flow rate = pressure ratio x basic engine CFM

2.0 P.R. x 160.5 CFM = 321CFM @ 4500 RPM
2.0 P.R. x 249.CFM = 498 CFM @ 7000 RPM
This baby can BREATHE!
as for injecter sizing your @ about 240 to 250 HP so if you multiply that by .55 and then divide that by the numbers of injecters

250. x .55 = 137.5 pounds per hour of fuel divided by 4 injecters equals 34.375 converted to cc's is 34.375 x 10.5 =360. CC add ten percent and they should be about 490 cc to 400 cc

If you run that bacwards according to your set up , you have injecters rated at 780 cc, if you multiplied that by 4 injecters you have 3120 cc's which works out to 297 lbs per hour which when divided by .55 equals a whooping 540 HP !

well 540 HP @ 2500 lbs your car should have a 4.75 wieght to power ratio with an ET of 9.6 @ 141 MPH

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm? maybe I should try 11.0 to :D1 !

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:26 am

well, back to injections, lets talk duty cycle, the all important majic number
the first thing we gotta figure out is the time of engine revolution @ peak HP and how much time we have for maximum injecter duration. Now we all know that all ECU's use ' batch' mode above 3000 RPM. For those just joining in, batch mode means that the injecter fires twice for every four strokes of the engine and sequeintial only opens once. Why is that true? because the intake valve would not be open long enough to recieve enough fuel with sequential injection above these RPM's.
so when you want to find out how to maximize your duty cycle ( that means how long the injecter can remain open) you should be testing above 3000 RPM's so lets start with max torque @ 4500 rpm's
you have to have a counter or oscilliscope to measure this number but you can use a Fluke meter with min/ max or duty cycle selectors ( thay cost about $150. bucks) the min/ max will capture the duty cycle data because it happens so fast you cant really use an osiliscope.

if I divide a minute ( 60 sec) by 4500 RPM's I find 13.3 Milliseconds
thats our available time to work with ( also known as 100% value)
So you take your buddy out, strap him in the drivers seat, hand him the hand held meter and take his ass on a joy ride, shouting at each other 4500 RPM WOT! and he shouts back ' 62%!' ( spilled my beer ) use a counter and capture the data for duty cylce , lets say we got a duty cycle number while moving the car @ full throttle@ 4500 RM and that number was 62% duty cycle. well 62% of the time of 13.3 milliseconds is 8.2 milliseconds .Subtract 8.2 from 13.3 and you find you have 5.1 Milli seconds to work with or , your only using 62 % of your available time . well, you know? the injecter has to close too, I mean, its never just switched ' ON' between cycles, so you have to allow 10% of an injecters time to be 'off', that would mean you have another 28% to work with
now lets look at max power @ max RPM
60 seconds divided by 7000 RPM's = .008 or 8 milliseconds is the time availabe to the injecter to be open. now @ 90% duty cycle that would work out to be 7.2 Milliseconds that the injecter would be open to deliver enough fuel to fill tha cylinder, you just dont have any options available
the only adjustable options under these conditions are increase injecter size, increase numbers of injecters , increase fuel pressure or use auxilary injecters , and work with camshafts to produce more power
the Majic of the ' prom' in the ECU is slowly sliding down the drain

the INTERNET is MORE than just PORN!

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Fri Nov 17, 2006 12:25 pm

This is how a balance 02 senser looks on an osciliscope when its balanced, it looks kinda like a soft ball bouncing up and down at a some times lazy and some time hectic pace.
Notice the scale on the left, it measures in milli volts ( less then one volt)
and the scale at the bottom measures in milli seconds.
If the soft ball is above the the 4.5 milli volt scale its measuring a rich condition, if it is in the lower end it is measuring a lean condition, remember, this is constantly in motion, up and down. As the soft ball moves leftt to right it is measuring ' cross counts', you can count how many times the soft ball crosses the 4.5v line per minute and use that number to evaluate how well the engine is running, the more cross counts the more fuel.
this is a diagnostic tool for input to the ECU, it measures any ' left over ' Oxygen in the exhaust, if there is too much Oxygen the 02 senser tell the ECU to richen, it there is not enough Oxygen present, the 02 senser tells the ECU to lean, this happens every time the soft ball bounces from the top to the bottom of the screen @ 14.7 stechohiometeric value

So when you change an injecter to a larger size, this 02 senser is null and void, it no longer tells the computer anything except it is sensing no oxygen in the exhaust, this means the computer is never in closed loop, it only runs in open loop, or a back up stratigy.
My point is, the OEM 02 senser is a diagnostic tool for working with your injecter set up, but no value to the ECU if you resize your injecters

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Fri Nov 17, 2006 3:20 pm

Hi matt,
read up on that same page http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/resources/rich.php
I am glad to see my posts are helping you, if you have any more questions feel free to ask

Bill

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Fri Nov 17, 2006 3:57 pm

yeah, you do, your a dick and you know it

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Fri Nov 17, 2006 4:04 pm

Bill Hincher wrote:

yeah, you do, your a dick and you know it

That seems to be Matt's reputation on lots of sites when someone is posting information that's not 100% factual. I've seen some of the holes in the above information as well. I'm not going to hold it against you though. I'll just sit back and watch it all play out. In the end I think everyone will learn a little bit more than they already knew.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:53 pm

well, lets discuss it, where are the holes in the numbers and why, I would be glad to listen but you never talk about cars, you only mock others that would like to talk about performance. I havent seen you guys do anything but blow up motors on a dyno and try to determine horspower by how many transmissions you tear up.
You give me numbers , then tell me they were the wrong numbers for speed and ET and that I dont calculate right, then you tell me you only made one pass at the drags and you couldnt even get that right

Please, lets talk cars, what do you find wrong with what I said?

Bill

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:48 pm

you know matt? if you look in the dictonary you will find your picture under the word ' conundrum '.

The numbers are to get you into the ball park so you quit breaking your stuff and have some fun and enjoy what you do. Then you can get dyno'd any way you want, on the machine, at the drags, on the circle tracks, its all about options

The whole idea of this discussion was about how the venders are selling you guys stuff that worthless, trying to save a buck and apply your mind instead.

I would like to understand how you use the wide band 02, I have no experience with them, if you or DJ would be kind enough, would you help me understand what thier advantages are

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:26 pm

naaaaaaaaw Matt that information is all just a copy of this page
http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/resources/news3.php

I was wondering how YOU personally used the information from your wide band

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 10:38 am

What do you suggest for a decent Lap top? do you down load your information on a computer after a full test ? or do you use a lap top on site and adjust after every pass?
do you work with injecter sizing and turbo adjustments while testing? or do you try and adjust it all out with the ECU?

Thanks
Bill

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 7:01 pm

I am suprised at your numbers, I figure you are not showing your real number for competitive purposes, but your charts show a 51% duty cylce and your air fuel ratio shows 11.1 , that explains why you had to turn the fuel pressure up, because you dont have enough time your injecter is open, it seems like you are using way too large of an injector, but then again , I know you spoke of using a real rich mixture to cool the turbo heat. I would have thought you would have retarded the cam timing to enrich the exhaust, but all to thier own.
The numbers I used to calculate your horse power from ET and OR MPH was from Moroso, its as old as the hills
http://www.amazon.com/Moroso-89650-Powe ... B000CON4SO
they cost $ 8. bucks
With those numbers I could tell you were at 249 HP, I didnt know you tested all day, I would have thought you would use an average number after all the runs you made instead of focusing on just one run that really didnt show you what you thought was right.

If you multiply you 249hp times your fuel pounds per hour ( lets use your number of .60) you equal 149.4 lbs per hour to achieve your goal divided by 4 injecters equals 35.37 lbs per hour per injecter. converting that number over to cubic centimeters would require I multiply by 10.5 equals 392 cc per hour add 10% would make the injecter size lets say a 450 cc injecter @ 90% duty cycle.
Now , you say, my 780 cc injecters do more work with half the time, yeah, thats true, but more fuel would be ' atomized' from the fuel spray WHILE THE INTAKE VALVE MOVES THROUGH ITS FULL DURATION, which is important because of the working relationship to valve overlap and exhaust hedder tuning

where I live we are at 600 ft above sea level, I use an altimeter to adjust out my air density, I am also a pilot, so I usually call the air port and ask for the weather information needed for air density from ATIS which is free to the public because its your tax dollars, How do you get your numbers?

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 10:33 pm

yeah , I thought your TPS was an average @ 5500 rpm, I see it now, your V-ref is higher @ 6000. its a good V-ref though, far below the adaptive strategy levels I have seen from the OEM stuff, It usually starts @ 4.7v and drives up to 5.25v when the sensers start to get old.

But ya know? if I use my head and figure out this stuff on paper, I bet I can beat parting with $ 2000.bucks for this unit. I can measure all this stuff on your graphs with a hand held voltage meter and I can get the timing curves worked out with some old fashion changes. Your wide band doesnt show anything but full rich all the time, so I know that aint much help.

I can see where you need the sequential stuff because you injectors are so large, that way you can lean out when you are below 3000 RMPs before your batch kicks in, but a properly tuned set up with batch injection is just as nice.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 10:00 am

here is the bottom line matt
You gotta understand what the numbers ( data) stands for, data logging is nice for timing purposes but most people don't really understand what its saying or how to tune it.
You are just paying for convenience of the program telling you what to do, the information can be collected with simple tools and if you know what the numbers should be , you can ajdust your engine to proper tune.
The ECU's you are buying are just on off switches, they are not as sophisticated as the OEM ECU. The OEM ECU will do the exact same job as your ' purple box' if you know how to tune, the ECU is just run in open loop constantly, that is the same condition all stock engines run in before the 02 senser is heated enough to go to closed loop. when any ECU is in open loop, its maps are an average of running conditions required by the engine, when the engine is in closed loop, the narrow band 02 senser constanly maintains a stecohiometric ( 14.7) balance, Thats when it is using its full capabilitys.
I have demonstrated to you that there is not enough time to truly make an adjustment to your duty cycle to increase horse power at peak rpm. However, I have explained the increases available in injector sizing, by understanding how much air is available, how much fuel is required at that CFM and I believe I can expand on that with cam profiles and induction/ exhaust changes with definate power gain at less cost.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:05 pm

nooooooo, I would never try to write software or understand the complexity of the ECU, I never graduated from High school

I am saying the stock ECU is a dumb instrument, it performs an expected function after it receives acceptable input, once you know what the required inputs are, you can predict the exact outputs that will take place.

The stock ECU can be tuned back to, from the engine, with more performance benifits resulting from engine modifications instead of relying on an ECU to gain horsepower by adjusting the duty cycle and timing controls
Your supposed to have some fun and learn about engines, not throw money at it, lighten up........

Chief of the ' slap-a-ho' indian tribe
bill

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:35 pm

well, I keep telling you I feel the money can be best spent on mechanical advantages while using a stock ECU.

Then I hope tp replace a transmission every other weeks to get my dyno numbers, finally give up because i wont spend the time to do it right and then sell the whole damn car for $4500. bucks because I cant get the this junk to work

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 3:27 am

well, I found out one thing, you were absolutely right about turbo lag , Smog. If I had to say anything the after market ECU's data stream is a nice to work with instead of trying to re invent the wheel

In modeling to engine horse power I can find a lot of gain using different configuration with the turbo, but turbo lag is very close behind those gains

The cam library hasnt been much help, the cam DJ has selected is about the best one I have modeled and its funny, the induction doesnt seem to change no matter what length I use from 6 " to 14 ", the taper angle is pretty severe and I know they are trying to gain velocity, but with the right turbo, that huge mass of manifold is not needed.
Most of the significant gains are in the exhaust to the turbo, a good set of hedders and exhaust make a huge difference

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:20 pm

God damn it Matt.. grow up.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 10:22 am

DJ's 475 hp Honda Killer

there is a lot to be said for an engine simulater, mostly I have been working with understanding the relatioship between induction waves and exhaust wave patterns, but I thought I would share with you what I beleive to be a workable fuel table.
strating out as sequential
@ 1000 RPM 11HP requires 17.56.cc fuel @ 60. msec
@2000 RPM 54HP requires 85.7 cc fuel @ 30. msec
@ 3000 RPM 121 HP requires 192.5 cc fuel @ 20. msec
The ECU converts to batch at this point
@ 4000 RPM 260 HP requires 412.9 cc fuel @ 15. msec x 2 = 30. msec
@5000 RPM 383 HP requires 608.25 cc fuel @ 12.msec x 2= 24.msec
@ 6000 RPM 440 hp requires 689.00 cc fuel @ 10. msec x2 = 20. msec
@ 7000 RPM 473 HP requires 751.18 cc fuel @ 8.5 msec x2 = 17. msec
@ 8000 RMP 475 HP requires 754.35 cc fuel @ 7.5 msec x2 = 15. msec

well lets try to convert this to duty cycle. I will have to work backwards because I know @ 8000 RPM the duty cycle will be maximuim @ 90% ( x 2)
7.5msec divided by 90% duty cycle multiplied by 2 ( revolutions) = 13.5 msec to inject 754.35 cc fuel @ 12.5 A/F ratio ( this can be adjusted to your needs). when you consider these injectors are rated with cc's per MINUTE, this is quite an accomplishment.
now your boosting to 16 lbs, I am guessing the stock boost was around 7 lbs so you are inducting 100% more boost then original. Your original 7 lbs boost is surpassed @ 3500 RPM and conitues to climb until it reaches 5500 rpm @ 16 lbs boost and that is how I would use the pressure to engage an extra set of injecters.
You can use any ECU you want to and you still have to feed the engine, after you exceed the stock HP / Turbo numbers, you are on your own to feed the 16 lbs boost@ 475 HP . To use one injector and ask it to use this wide of a range, is at best a comprimise. There is plenty of room in the intake manifold for a second injecter placed up stream matched for max power with minimuam cost.
The ECU grounds the injector, power is applied on the other side of the injector, using the same wire from the ECU conected to the second injector does no work until connected to power, if a relay were placed between the second injector and the power source, using a pressure sensor in the intake manifold @ 7 lbs , it could connect power to the second set of injectors @ 7 lbs boost and beyond making a workable fuel system ( just like a 4 barrel carb)
more time has to be done with developement for injector timing and sizing, but this is an option, entertain the thought and make some suggestions