|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Depends on the power of your nissan and the number of cylinders. A 400 HP 4cyl needs bigger injectors than a 400 HP 6 cyl.
the 4 cyl has 100 HP per cylinder while the 6 cylinder has about 65 HP per cylinder and requires less fuel per/cyl.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by warmonger:
Depends on the power of your nissan and the number of cylinders. A 400 HP 4cyl needs bigger injectors than a 400 HP 6 cyl.
the 4 cyl has 100 HP per cylinder while the 6 cylinder has about 65 HP per cylinder and requires less fuel per/cyl.
I am still always surprised more folks don't catch that point...
The other great point you made about the Duratec being significantly more efficient then the "old school" rule of thumb ratings for brake consumption is also good information for everyone else to realize.
Also that RC fuel injector sizing model is just that. A "theoretical" model based on very general numbers from very average efficiency engines.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Is that a nice way of saying: "I'm really surprised that you caught that." ??? 
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by warmonger:
Is that a nice way of saying:
"I'm really surprised that you caught that."
Actually no...
...however if you feel it's a slam I'll take that as well...   
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
I don't think its a slam, but I thought it was funny to point at that it could be taken that way....it's a hobby of mine to see double meanings in what other people say and then respond to the worse or more embarrassing meaning. Depends on the situation I guess. So no points for your slam list this week.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Old Numbers (2.5L)
271FWHP / 210FWTQ
New Numbers
298FWHP @ 7000 / 245FWTQ @ 5700
Also it is hard to "directly" compare the graphs because the old one was done with no rpm signal.
You can tell the 2.5L and it's split port manifolds made better TQ & HP in the low and mid-range (per displacement)
It also "appears" that now it does not hold the torque as well but it's hard do more than speculate since the torque data is missing on the old dyno beyond "roughly" 6300rpm.
I wonder how the boost level compared between the runs as well???
More boost now???
I pondered this graph and I think it looks really good for what it is!
I mean the 3L manifolds on a naturally aspirated car suck IMHO for a MTX that is geared the way ours is. However, with a centrifugal type blower where the boost sucks in the low end and just starts to build in the midrange where the manifold is really tuned at and then finally starts pushing some good airflow at high rpm where the manifold is not so good, it works out well.
He will have better low-end traction, then the blower will more than make up for his top-end deficiencies with the manifold.
I suspect that if he raised the boost even more it will be a little more low-end but an even better torque curve to redline....more flat which will throw you well over 300 at 700 rpm!
Good job Jason. I would suspect that you need to make sure you have an intercooler, raise the boost some more and do the standard intake and exhaust mods to boost volume flow rate at the same pressure. Probably looking at a good 325+ HP at the wheels when you are all done.
YEP! I just calculated it and if you just hold your 245 ft-lbs of torque up to 7000 rpm you will have 326 wHP!
With an intercooler and injectors and maf you will achieve that without even raising the boost, intercooler being the key I'd say. Of course your midrange torque will go up but shooting for 245 ft-lbs@7000RPM should be feasible with the intercooler OR more boost and good exhaust flow.
PS: Which year of motor and intake system is it, and what cams are you using?
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 829
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 829 |
I have a 2001 Returnless motor with a return fuel system... Go figure. I am using the SVT Cams. Full Oval port 3.0L UIM and LIM.
SVT Parts For Sale!PM Me.
2006 M6 Cyclone Gray GTO
1995 Mazda Protege Commuter Special
93 FXDWG Dyna Wide Glide
I'm A TROLL Now!~
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Originally posted by Rev. Po-Jay:
I have a 2001 Returnless motor with a return fuel system... Go figure. I am using the SVT Cams. Full Oval port 3.0L UIM and LIM.
Jason,
I'm doing some comparison of the oval port heads and I have a few questions.
1.) What boost do you see at 3000 rpm on your engine? Specifically, I would like to know what the boost pressure is in 1K rpm increments from 3000-7000 so I can use that in the comparison.
2.) Did you do any head work to the 3L oval port heads?
3.) What did you do with the secondaries from the stock computer? Did you turn them off or what? In your graph you have a very small customary spike at 3650 rpm where the secondaries are supposed to be. Is that residual from the stock timing curve?
4.) What boost pressure do you have at 36-3700 rpm?
5.) What exhaust manifolds, type of exhaust and diameter of piping?
6.) Where is the intake air filter located, engine bay or fender?
Sorry for the barage of questions, I'm finally on leave and can afford to sit down and do some data correlation between your engine and mine.
I'm comparing torque, boost and power at various rpm. Its a good comparison because we both had 91 octane fuel from the same area and used the same dyno.
Our engines have different head designs but essentially the same chamber size and valve size. i.e. similar chamber and ~equal compression of 10:1.
Same type of fuel system and same type of cams along with the same size throttlebody at that time too.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 829
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 829 |
Originally posted by warmonger:
...
1.) What boost do you see at 3000 rpm on your engine? Specifically, I would like to know what the boost pressure is in 1K rpm increments from 3000-7000 so I can use that in the comparison.
I will have to do some data logging for you, which is no big deal as I would like to know this myself... I am only seeing 6PSI @ 7K RPM's.
2.) Did you do any head work to the 3L oval port heads?
Not a single bit
3.) What did you do with the secondaries from the stock computer? Did you turn them off or what? In your graph you have a very small customary spike at 3650 rpm where the secondaries are supposed to be. Is that residual from the stock timing curve?
The IMRC is still plugged in and in place... We have "ghetto-rigged" the actuator to a spring to fool the computer into thinking there is real resistance. I am using the E0 EEC so I think there is a residual effect on the timing curve.
4.) What boost pressure do you have at 36-3700 rpm?
I seem to build about 3PSI at 3K and it starts climbing at about 4200RPM's, IIRC.
5.) What exhaust manifolds, type of exhaust and diameter of piping?
Stock exhaust manifolds with a little mild porting. I, of course am fully gutted of cats.
6.) Where is the intake air filter located, engine bay or fender?
I have the fancy fandangled Keith Custom Fender Mount Air Intake. It sits just above the left Foggie.
Sorry for the barage of questions, I'm finally on leave and can afford to sit down and do some data correlation between your engine and mine.
I'm comparing torque, boost and power at various rpm. Its a good comparison because we both had 91 octane fuel from the same area and used the same dyno.
Our engines have different head designs but essentially the same chamber size and valve size. i.e. similar chamber and ~equal compression of 10:1.
Same type of fuel system and same type of cams along with the same size throttlebody at that time too.
I am interested to see what you come up with. No apology needed for the questions, as I am happy to supply the answers. I know that my setup is not ideal, yet, but it will be soon!
SVT Parts For Sale!PM Me.
2006 M6 Cyclone Gray GTO
1995 Mazda Protege Commuter Special
93 FXDWG Dyna Wide Glide
I'm A TROLL Now!~
|
|
|
|
|
