Is there a trend here?

Walkinshaw · 27-07-2005, 11:56 PM

Injectors, ECU pulse width, or pump? Whats running out??

EFFalcon · 28-07-2005, 04:00 PM

could it be efficiency? or lack there of.
ie. need for headwork to help the map sensor get a feel for whats going on.

neb · 28-07-2005, 04:09 PM

anyone would think they are the same cams :P I think John might have a good point there... seeing as the dev5 kits get up to around 170rwkw on a stock ecu and fuel pump.. maybe headwork does sort out the map sensor a bit

AUII_Forte · 28-07-2005, 05:00 PM

My car has head work and it still doesn't particularly like my 1004@110.

I might get a 1521a and throw it in without a chip just to see what happens.

Walkinshaw · 28-07-2005, 05:56 PM

did you run the 1004/110 with a stock head? Did porting the head clean the running up?

Im of the opinion that a 1521a actualy idles almost identicaly to a 1004/110

AUII_Forte · 28-07-2005, 06:53 PM

No the cam went in after the head was done. When it was auto, the idle wasn't great, but bearable. Now with the 5spd it idles smoothly at about 900rpm, but refuses to idle when its cold because the ISC is disconnected.

stockstandard · 28-07-2005, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walkinshaw

Im of the opinion that a 1521a actualy idles almost identicaly to a 1004/110

Without a chip I would be surprised if the 1521a is as good as the 1004-110

galapogos01 · 28-07-2005, 07:39 PM

what cams are those two dynos?

im getting a miss with my car in the midrange at the moment.. ing EFI!

neb · 28-07-2005, 08:16 PM

AUII_Forte: What are your air/fuel ratios like... do they also lean out up top or are they alright?

galapogos01: top one is walkinshaw 1521a, bottom one is mine dev5.. both with stock heads. my cam hasn't been dialled in yet either..

AUII_Forte · 28-07-2005, 09:01 PM

I haven't seen my A/F ratios. I haven't got the printout from the dyno :(

It's going back on the dyno next week because I've fixed a few things up from the last time it was run, so hopefully I'll get a printout this time.

I think I'll get a 1521a anyway, throw it in and see what happens. If it's that bad I'll put the 1004 back in till I get a chip.

neb · 28-07-2005, 09:39 PM

cool well you're making really good power with the 1004-110 will be interesting to see what it does with a 1521a... should go pretty hard as long as the ecu doesnt go out of wack too much

AUII_Forte · 28-07-2005, 10:02 PM

I really think the headwork is helping a lot power wise. I would have loved to have dynoed it without the headwork.

I'm thinking bigger valves are on the cards after the bigger cam.

Damo · 28-07-2005, 10:08 PM

I don't get the trend... You both make similiar power ?

Also how come Nebs` dyno sheet is at heaps more KMH ?

stockstandard · 28-07-2005, 10:09 PM

think the trend is running lean at the top end

KMH depends on what gear the car was run in.

AUII_Forte · 28-07-2005, 10:11 PM

I'd say walki's was done in 2nd (auto) and neb's in 3rd (manual).

Damo · 28-07-2005, 10:15 PM

does the choice of gear that it's run in, give a true relection of power ? like can you compare auto in 2nd to manual in 3rd ?

sorry for the n00b questions.. :P

stockstandard · 28-07-2005, 10:15 PM

those kph are about right for 1st gear in an auto aren't they

:

stockstandard · 28-07-2005, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damo

does the choice of gear that it's run in, give a true relection of power ? like can you compare auto in 2nd to manual in 3rd ?

sorry for the n00b questions.. :P

nup, exactly the same (assuming the dyno operator doesnt stuff up). On the Day dans was run, Grants was run in 2nd and 3rd and the graphs were exactly the same (just different kph)

Gunns · 28-07-2005, 10:16 PM

4th in a manual and 3rd in a auto! gives a 1 to 1 drive

Gunns · 28-07-2005, 10:19 PM

Any of you running a 300kpa fuel reg? might be worth a try. The 250kpa might not have enough up high.

AUII_Forte · 28-07-2005, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gunns

4th in a manual and 3rd in a auto! gives a 1 to 1 drive

True, but I'm pretty sure the speed limiter comes in and ruins all the fun.

Gunns · 28-07-2005, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AUII_Forte

True, but I'm pretty sure the speed limiter comes in and ruins all the fun.

Very ture. Just saying in a perfect world.

neb · 29-07-2005, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gunns

Any of you running a 300kpa fuel reg? might be worth a try. The 250kpa might not have enough up high.

i'm using an xr6 fuel pressure reg... and also ed xr6 ecu..but stock fuel pump, maybe it might be worth changing my fuel pump

Walkinshaw · 29-07-2005, 12:25 PM

I'm running an ajustable fuel reg, hence the 2nd pull had a whole lot more fuel in it (AFR curve droped).

Im leaning towards a shot fuel pump that just cant keep the flow up when the revs pull past 3000rpm.

EFFalcon · 29-07-2005, 12:56 PM

walkinshaws would be in 2nd.
neb's looks like its in 4th.

neb · 29-07-2005, 01:00 PM

yep mine was done in 4th gear

Walkinshaw · 29-07-2005, 01:40 PM

I had a cop ECU in the car, so the run could have been done in 3rd, but yes it was run in 2nd gear.

4.9 EF Futura · 29-07-2005, 02:04 PM

Crikey dan, shouldnt the AFs be starting around 14 and finishing up around 12?!? Seems like she's all back to front.

Fuel pump is possible - thats an awful lot of power... but mine is able to keep up with forced induction and 12:1 rising rate so maybe your is just tired? It *should* be capable of that power delivery if in good nick.

My money is on pulse width. You're tuning with reg only?

Walkinshaw · 29-07-2005, 03:42 PM

Yeah mate stock ecu + adjust reg.

I think the whole "the ECU is haveing a fit due to the big cam + MAP sensor" has just throwen all the fuel tables out, as when on cruise the ECU is pulling fuel out to maintain 14.7:1 so it factors this in over time to the WOT load tables hence leaning it out mabey. I should bite the bullit and get an EMS 8860

4.9 EF Futura · 29-07-2005, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walkinshaw

Yeah mate stock ecu + adjust reg.

I think the whole "the ECU is haveing a fit due to the big cam + MAP sensor" has just throwen all the fuel tables out, as when on cruise the ECU is pulling fuel out to maintain 14.7:1 so it factors this in over time to the WOT load tables hence leaning it out mabey.

Sound theory. Quite an impressive amount of fuel it is pulling if this is the case.

Do you reset the ECU regularly? Might be a good bandaid fix...

Aftermarket ECU obviously the ideal solution. Do you have an opinion on unichips/interceptor style units? Seems like people get OK results with em.

Lol, convert to MAF?