not enough fuel (dynos inside)
03-22-04, 07:21 PM
#1
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 3,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not enough fuel (dynos inside)
So I went to dyno my car last weekend, and found a scary nasty surprise. I'm running super lean in the high rpm range. This is what seems to be at any boost level. It's a lack of fuel, but I don't know how/why it's happening. I'm gonna try to get a fitting and hose to go from the sx fuel pressure regulator to a gauge I have. Run it in the car so I can see what kind of pressure I'm getting (or losing) at higher rpms. Any other suggestions would be very welcome.
Car is tuned by Steve Kan, who tuned it pretty rich so I wouldn't blow another engine (10.5-10.8 a/f). So it surprised the hell out of me to see that starting at about 6k rpms I start to get leaner and leaner.
I couldn't see the screen from inside the car, so I had to rely on the waving of hands of my girlfriend and a shop employee if I got above 11.2 a/f. I coudln't even get to 7k rpms from the lean mixture
My applicable mods - Big streetport by Steve, BNR stage 2's (exchanged from the 3's cause of smoke and oil leakage) running non sequential, 550 primaries w <3k miles, 1600 secondaries w <10k miles, Keith's fuel rail, SX pressure regulator, Supra TT fuel pump, m2 intake, downpipe, midpipe, cat back. Think that's everything that matters.
Here's the 1st chart, running at my 'low boost' setting I use every day at .80 - .85 bar from Profec B Spec II (12.5 psi)
Car is tuned by Steve Kan, who tuned it pretty rich so I wouldn't blow another engine (10.5-10.8 a/f). So it surprised the hell out of me to see that starting at about 6k rpms I start to get leaner and leaner.
I couldn't see the screen from inside the car, so I had to rely on the waving of hands of my girlfriend and a shop employee if I got above 11.2 a/f. I coudln't even get to 7k rpms from the lean mixture
My applicable mods - Big streetport by Steve, BNR stage 2's (exchanged from the 3's cause of smoke and oil leakage) running non sequential, 550 primaries w <3k miles, 1600 secondaries w <10k miles, Keith's fuel rail, SX pressure regulator, Supra TT fuel pump, m2 intake, downpipe, midpipe, cat back. Think that's everything that matters.
Here's the 1st chart, running at my 'low boost' setting I use every day at .80 - .85 bar from Profec B Spec II (12.5 psi)
03-22-04, 07:46 PM
#4
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 3,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, the forum finally let me get 1 picture up...
Check out the dyno.. It got as high as 13!
If it'll let me get another picture up... This is the next run, with the same exact boost settings. HP is up 2, but torque is up 7.
But notice how there's less low end hp and torque, but its much smoother and has a higher peak. Why would 2 runs almost back to back be so different when no changes have been made to the car? Also notice this run near the end doesn't get quite as lean.
Oh, and the fuel filter is new, less than 6k miles on it.
And ECU is the Power FC
Check out the dyno.. It got as high as 13!
If it'll let me get another picture up... This is the next run, with the same exact boost settings. HP is up 2, but torque is up 7.
But notice how there's less low end hp and torque, but its much smoother and has a higher peak. Why would 2 runs almost back to back be so different when no changes have been made to the car? Also notice this run near the end doesn't get quite as lean.
Oh, and the fuel filter is new, less than 6k miles on it.
And ECU is the Power FC
Last edited by cavellm; 03-22-04 at 07:57 PM.
03-22-04, 07:56 PM
#6
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 3,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now here's where people can call me a stupidass. I wasn't thinking too much, and cranked the boost up to my normal 'high' setting. I turned it down a few % points to avoid any ignition breakup, as I'm still saving to get an AEM.
But this got up to 15.2 psi, and I only gained 10hp! The curves are somewhat similar, but hardly any difference.
You'll notice that as the a/f gets leaner, the hp stops climbing and turns flat.
One thing, I thought that hp and torque curves ALWAYS cross at 5325 rpms or something like that. Mine cross on here at 6500.
But this got up to 15.2 psi, and I only gained 10hp! The curves are somewhat similar, but hardly any difference.
You'll notice that as the a/f gets leaner, the hp stops climbing and turns flat.
One thing, I thought that hp and torque curves ALWAYS cross at 5325 rpms or something like that. Mine cross on here at 6500.
03-22-04, 08:09 PM
#7
Ee / Cpe
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Gaithersburg, MD / WVU
Posts: 2,843
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
they should cross at 5252, however sae correction will sometimes change the crossover point... Thats a pretty big change if you ask me though.
Your timing and fuel are where your problem is if you only gained 10 hp with 2 psi. Or the dynos correction is going all over the chart.
thats way too rich in the midrange though.
Your timing and fuel are where your problem is if you only gained 10 hp with 2 psi. Or the dynos correction is going all over the chart.
thats way too rich in the midrange though.
Trending Topics
03-22-04, 08:33 PM
#8
Lives on the Forum
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Lorenzo, California
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
SAE Correction doesn't change the crossover point, the crossover point is a mathmatical function. If you look at the dyno chart, the torque scale is different than the HP scale -- they do line up at 5250.
It looks almost like you're having a voltage issue to your fuel pump or your regulator isn't increasing pressure or something along those lines.
It looks almost like you're having a voltage issue to your fuel pump or your regulator isn't increasing pressure or something along those lines.
03-22-04, 08:39 PM
#9
Ee / Cpe
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Gaithersburg, MD / WVU
Posts: 2,843
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally posted by rynberg
SAE Correction doesn't change the crossover point, the crossover point is a mathmatical function. If you look at the dyno chart, the torque scale is different than the HP scale -- they do line up at 5250.
SAE Correction doesn't change the crossover point, the crossover point is a mathmatical function. If you look at the dyno chart, the torque scale is different than the HP scale -- they do line up at 5250.
But the correction (depending on the dyno) can throwoff the crossover point, because it will correct the horsepower and not the torque.
03-22-04, 09:24 PM
#11
The crossover point does not make sense to me. Regardless of the horsepower scale or torque scale the rpm should still be 5250. I would tend to believe that if the horsepower were corrected that the torque would most likely be corrected also, since horsepower and torque are directly related and can be derived from one another. (agree with rynberg)
At what rpm, as seen on your gauge did you max out? I know this doesn't answer whether or not you have a fuel issue, but I wouldn't have much confidence in that dyno. The following factors suggest the dyno is suspect: the crossover point is erroneous, the hp numbers aren't increasing as expected and the A/F ratios look odd. Please note you could still have a fuel problem.
At what rpm, as seen on your gauge did you max out? I know this doesn't answer whether or not you have a fuel issue, but I wouldn't have much confidence in that dyno. The following factors suggest the dyno is suspect: the crossover point is erroneous, the hp numbers aren't increasing as expected and the A/F ratios look odd. Please note you could still have a fuel problem.
03-22-04, 09:34 PM
#12
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 3,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They did have some issues in getting my RPMs right, after looking around my engine for 15 minutes I asked if I could help them find something. They couldn't find the spark plugs. Had them put the sensor on the ignitor and everything seemed to be good.
I never went past 7k rpms. Most of the runs let off around 6500 because that's when the a/f started to get pretty scary.
When I asked the shop owner (guy who was running the dyno) about the crossover point, he said, "well, they're different on different cars" Which didn't make sense to me from the other dynos I've seen on the forum.
The biggest thing I see as weird is the 2 totally different power curves running the same boost level. Nothing had changed, yet the rising of hp wasn't the same at all between the 1st and 2nd pictures I posted.
I never went past 7k rpms. Most of the runs let off around 6500 because that's when the a/f started to get pretty scary.
When I asked the shop owner (guy who was running the dyno) about the crossover point, he said, "well, they're different on different cars" Which didn't make sense to me from the other dynos I've seen on the forum.
The biggest thing I see as weird is the 2 totally different power curves running the same boost level. Nothing had changed, yet the rising of hp wasn't the same at all between the 1st and 2nd pictures I posted.
03-22-04, 10:05 PM
#13
2/4 wheel cornering fiend
Originally posted by cavellm
But notice how there's less low end hp and torque, but its much smoother and has a higher peak. Why would 2 runs almost back to back be so different when no changes have been made to the car? Also notice this run near the end doesn't get quite as lean.
But notice how there's less low end hp and torque, but its much smoother and has a higher peak. Why would 2 runs almost back to back be so different when no changes have been made to the car? Also notice this run near the end doesn't get quite as lean.
03-22-04, 10:45 PM
#14
Originally posted by cavellm
They did have some issues in getting my RPMs right, after looking around my engine for 15 minutes I asked if I could help them find something. They couldn't find the spark plugs. Had them put the sensor on the ignitor and everything seemed to be good.
I never went past 7k rpms. Most of the runs let off around 6500 because that's when the a/f started to get pretty scary.
When I asked the shop owner (guy who was running the dyno) about the crossover point, he said, "well, they're different on different cars" Which didn't make sense to me from the other dynos I've seen on the forum.
The biggest thing I see as weird is the 2 totally different power curves running the same boost level. Nothing had changed, yet the rising of hp wasn't the same at all between the 1st and 2nd pictures I posted.
They did have some issues in getting my RPMs right, after looking around my engine for 15 minutes I asked if I could help them find something. They couldn't find the spark plugs. Had them put the sensor on the ignitor and everything seemed to be good.
I never went past 7k rpms. Most of the runs let off around 6500 because that's when the a/f started to get pretty scary.
When I asked the shop owner (guy who was running the dyno) about the crossover point, he said, "well, they're different on different cars" Which didn't make sense to me from the other dynos I've seen on the forum.
The biggest thing I see as weird is the 2 totally different power curves running the same boost level. Nothing had changed, yet the rising of hp wasn't the same at all between the 1st and 2nd pictures I posted.
Jason
03-23-04, 12:32 AM
#15
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 3,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After they messed around with it for a while, I had them put the signal on the black wire coming off of the ignitor on the drivers side of the engine bay.
That should give a good signal, right?
That should give a good signal, right?
03-23-04, 09:52 AM
#16
DFW Drunk by Proxy
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Valley Ranch, Tx
Posts: 2,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cavelle-
A few things I noticed:
1) The difference between runs 1 and 2 appear to be solely in the AFR. If you look, run #1 has a leaner AFR- closer to the stoich ratio of 12.8. For example- Run#1 at 4k RPM is about 11.5. Run #2 is about 11. Run #2 is richer which means you're losing power. That accounts for the little "hump" at 4500 RPM. In general, the "perfect" AFR is 12.8. Granted, rotary guys prefer to run a little rich to prevent detonation, but if you're running LESS than 12.8, you're just wasting fuel and losing power in exchange for detonation insurance.
2) A dyo measure the TQ a car produces and determines HP from the following formula: HP = TQ*RPM/5252. SAE correction or not, the HP and TQ curves WILL cross at 5252 RPM's. It's a mathematical FACT. However, you'll notice that your HP and TQ scales are different- that accounts for your curves crossing at a different RPM. If you punch all the numbers into excel and graph them on the same Y axis, they will cross at 5252 RPM.
3) It looks like they got the RPM sensor correctly placed: you said you let off abouy 6500 or 7k RPM's, which matches the #2 dyno graph pretty closely. Run #1 ran up to about 7500 rpm; I would bet you ran run #1 a little longer than the others then became concerned after seeing the AFR for all the subsiquent runs. Correct?
4) I would not be concerned about a slight variation (the 7TQ and 2HP you mentioned) between the different graphs. There are litterally a million factors that can change your "measurements" ever so slightly. My dyno varied by about 5 HP and 3TQ on back to back identical runs.
5) Your "high power" run #3 being lower than you wanted is a result of 2 things:
1) you not staying the gas long enough.
2) The AFR going rich on you
From ~4k to 5.5k, you're running so rich it's off the scale. That's LOST POWER. Additionally, your TQ peak looks to be about 6k, yet you got out of the throttle at ~6700 RPM- before your HP peaked. Granted, you were starting to run ~12.5 AFR which scared you- so I understand why you stopped. I won't pretend to speak for rotary motors since they're inherently different than pistons, but I do know one thing: the perfect AFR is 12.8:1 for all gasoline motors. Anything less than 12.8 and you're losing power. IMHO, your car has a LOT more power in it with the proper tune.
A few things I noticed:
1) The difference between runs 1 and 2 appear to be solely in the AFR. If you look, run #1 has a leaner AFR- closer to the stoich ratio of 12.8. For example- Run#1 at 4k RPM is about 11.5. Run #2 is about 11. Run #2 is richer which means you're losing power. That accounts for the little "hump" at 4500 RPM. In general, the "perfect" AFR is 12.8. Granted, rotary guys prefer to run a little rich to prevent detonation, but if you're running LESS than 12.8, you're just wasting fuel and losing power in exchange for detonation insurance.
2) A dyo measure the TQ a car produces and determines HP from the following formula: HP = TQ*RPM/5252. SAE correction or not, the HP and TQ curves WILL cross at 5252 RPM's. It's a mathematical FACT. However, you'll notice that your HP and TQ scales are different- that accounts for your curves crossing at a different RPM. If you punch all the numbers into excel and graph them on the same Y axis, they will cross at 5252 RPM.
3) It looks like they got the RPM sensor correctly placed: you said you let off abouy 6500 or 7k RPM's, which matches the #2 dyno graph pretty closely. Run #1 ran up to about 7500 rpm; I would bet you ran run #1 a little longer than the others then became concerned after seeing the AFR for all the subsiquent runs. Correct?
4) I would not be concerned about a slight variation (the 7TQ and 2HP you mentioned) between the different graphs. There are litterally a million factors that can change your "measurements" ever so slightly. My dyno varied by about 5 HP and 3TQ on back to back identical runs.
5) Your "high power" run #3 being lower than you wanted is a result of 2 things:
1) you not staying the gas long enough.
2) The AFR going rich on you
From ~4k to 5.5k, you're running so rich it's off the scale. That's LOST POWER. Additionally, your TQ peak looks to be about 6k, yet you got out of the throttle at ~6700 RPM- before your HP peaked. Granted, you were starting to run ~12.5 AFR which scared you- so I understand why you stopped. I won't pretend to speak for rotary motors since they're inherently different than pistons, but I do know one thing: the perfect AFR is 12.8:1 for all gasoline motors. Anything less than 12.8 and you're losing power. IMHO, your car has a LOT more power in it with the proper tune.
03-23-04, 10:16 AM
#18
Lives on the Forum
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Lorenzo, California
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by Umrswimr
I won't pretend to speak for rotary motors since they're inherently different than pistons, but I do know one thing: the perfect AFR is 12.8:1 for all gasoline motors. Anything less than 12.8 and you're losing power. IMHO, your car has a LOT more power in it with the proper tune.
I won't pretend to speak for rotary motors since they're inherently different than pistons, but I do know one thing: the perfect AFR is 12.8:1 for all gasoline motors. Anything less than 12.8 and you're losing power. IMHO, your car has a LOT more power in it with the proper tune.
Turbo'd rotaries need to be tuned to 11:1 to 11.5:1 to provide a reasonable level of safety.
03-23-04, 10:40 AM
#19
DFW Drunk by Proxy
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Valley Ranch, Tx
Posts: 2,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rynberg
If you ran an FD at 12.8 under boost, the motor would last about 10 minutes....
Turbo'd rotaries need to be tuned to 11:1 to 11.5:1 to provide a reasonable level of safety.
If you ran an FD at 12.8 under boost, the motor would last about 10 minutes....
Turbo'd rotaries need to be tuned to 11:1 to 11.5:1 to provide a reasonable level of safety.
but if you're running LESS than 12.8, you're just wasting fuel and losing power in exchange for detonation insurance
03-23-04, 10:53 AM
#20
DFW Drunk by Proxy
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Valley Ranch, Tx
Posts: 2,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One more thing-
I don't know that he's running out of fuel, though. If you look at the AFR's for the low and high boost settings, you'll see that they're identical. If he were fuel limited, the AFR would increase dramatically at the high boost setting at high RPM's compared to the low boost setting.
Since this doesn't happen, I don't beleive it's the fuel DELIVERY, but rather the fuel TUNE.
I don't know that he's running out of fuel, though. If you look at the AFR's for the low and high boost settings, you'll see that they're identical. If he were fuel limited, the AFR would increase dramatically at the high boost setting at high RPM's compared to the low boost setting.
Since this doesn't happen, I don't beleive it's the fuel DELIVERY, but rather the fuel TUNE.
03-23-04, 11:03 AM
#21
Lives on the Forum
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Lorenzo, California
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by Umrswimr
One more thing-
I don't know that he's running out of fuel, though. If you look at the AFR's for the low and high boost settings, you'll see that they're identical. If he were fuel limited, the AFR would increase dramatically at the high boost setting at high RPM's compared to the low boost setting.
Since this doesn't happen, I don't beleive it's the fuel DELIVERY, but rather the fuel TUNE.
One more thing-
I don't know that he's running out of fuel, though. If you look at the AFR's for the low and high boost settings, you'll see that they're identical. If he were fuel limited, the AFR would increase dramatically at the high boost setting at high RPM's compared to the low boost setting.
Since this doesn't happen, I don't beleive it's the fuel DELIVERY, but rather the fuel TUNE.
03-23-04, 11:30 AM
#22
DFW Drunk by Proxy
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Valley Ranch, Tx
Posts: 2,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rynberg
But that's exactly why it looks like a fuel pressure or voltage problem. I am ruling out the tuning because Steve Kan is the man and would not have tuned the car that way.
But that's exactly why it looks like a fuel pressure or voltage problem. I am ruling out the tuning because Steve Kan is the man and would not have tuned the car that way.
But looking at the graphs, it doesn't makes sense that it would be fuel pressure.
If it were fuel pressure, the AFR's would NOT be identical on different boost settings. For example, if you the fuel pressure was inadequate (or if the injectors were at 100% DC) at high boost, the AFR would climb rapidly compared to the low bost setting. It doesn't. He's fuel limited, but it's NOT the delivery.
03-23-04, 11:40 AM
#23
Rotary Freak
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: fort worth, tx, usa
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Honestly, the car was tuned to around 10.5-10.8 across the board. As you can see that as the rpm goes up, the a/f ratio goes higher, that indicates a major fuel pressure drop because either the fuel pump isn't keeping up with the fuel pressure or there maybe a leak causing it not to keep up at higher injector duty cycle. If the car was tuned at a certain fuel pressure and a/f ratio, higher boost will yeild higher duty cycle on the injectors. The only varabile that could change the a/f ratio is the fuel pressure. I know that cavell was messing with his fuel system for about 2-3 weeks when it wasn't working properly a few months ago. Something could have changed in the fuel delivery system (no O-ring on the fuel pump to the pipe), faulty fuel pump?( i think he swapped it from the old one?), broken or losen fuel lines etc....
It's hard to say what was causing it w/o looking at it and see the actual fuel pressure that is going into the fuel system.
It's hard to say what was causing it w/o looking at it and see the actual fuel pressure that is going into the fuel system.
Originally posted by Umrswimr
I know Steve is a good tuner. I know Steve. I've met him a dozen times. I've been to his shop and met all the Gotham guys. I've gotten drunk with Ihor, Steve, and Rich. They run a good shop.
But looking at the graphs, it doesn't makes sense that it would be fuel pressure.
If it were fuel pressure, the AFR's would NOT be identical on different boost settings. For example, if you the fuel pressure was inadequate (or if the injectors were at 100% DC) at high boost, the AFR would climb rapidly compared to the low bost setting. It doesn't. He's fuel limited, but it's NOT the delivery.
I know Steve is a good tuner. I know Steve. I've met him a dozen times. I've been to his shop and met all the Gotham guys. I've gotten drunk with Ihor, Steve, and Rich. They run a good shop.
But looking at the graphs, it doesn't makes sense that it would be fuel pressure.
If it were fuel pressure, the AFR's would NOT be identical on different boost settings. For example, if you the fuel pressure was inadequate (or if the injectors were at 100% DC) at high boost, the AFR would climb rapidly compared to the low bost setting. It doesn't. He's fuel limited, but it's NOT the delivery.
03-23-04, 12:16 PM
#24
DFW Drunk by Proxy
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Valley Ranch, Tx
Posts: 2,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by pluto
Honestly, the car was tuned to around 10.5-10.8 across the board. As you can see that as the rpm goes up, the a/f ratio goes higher, that indicates a major fuel pressure drop because either the fuel pump isn't keeping up with the fuel pressure or there maybe a leak causing it not to keep up at higher injector duty cycle. If the car was tuned at a certain fuel pressure and a/f ratio, higher boost will yeild higher duty cycle on the injectors. The only varabile that could change the a/f ratio is the fuel pressure. I know that cavell was messing with his fuel system for about 2-3 weeks when it wasn't working properly a few months ago. Something could have changed in the fuel delivery system (no O-ring on the fuel pump to the pipe), faulty fuel pump?( i think he swapped it from the old one?), broken or losen fuel lines etc....
It's hard to say what was causing it w/o looking at it and see the actual fuel pressure that is going into the fuel system.
Honestly, the car was tuned to around 10.5-10.8 across the board. As you can see that as the rpm goes up, the a/f ratio goes higher, that indicates a major fuel pressure drop because either the fuel pump isn't keeping up with the fuel pressure or there maybe a leak causing it not to keep up at higher injector duty cycle. If the car was tuned at a certain fuel pressure and a/f ratio, higher boost will yeild higher duty cycle on the injectors. The only varabile that could change the a/f ratio is the fuel pressure. I know that cavell was messing with his fuel system for about 2-3 weeks when it wasn't working properly a few months ago. Something could have changed in the fuel delivery system (no O-ring on the fuel pump to the pipe), faulty fuel pump?( i think he swapped it from the old one?), broken or losen fuel lines etc....
It's hard to say what was causing it w/o looking at it and see the actual fuel pressure that is going into the fuel system.
Not trying to start a flame war- I honestly just don't understand...
If the fuel pressure were the limiting factor, then the AFR's should not be the same for both low and high boost, correct?
For example, look at the graph below. Supposing it requires X lbs fuel/min per RPM to maintain a certain AFR. Higher boost would require more fuel because there's more air. The graph below would show the Fuel required per RPM for the two settings, we'll call them "low" and "high".
Now, if fuel pressure (or injector duty cycle) were the limiting factor, you would only be able to deliver a finite amount of fuel at RPM- let's say that maximum amount 2500X lbs/min. So for the low boost setting, you would have plenty of fuel because you notice the blue line never exceeds the maximum rated fuel delivery of 2500. For the high boost setting, though, the maximum fuel delivery rate is exceeded above 7000 RPM. At this point, the fuel system would be unable to add more fuel and the AFR would QUICKLY go lean. The fuel system is clipping.
My point: the only way for the AFR's to be IDENTICAL would be if neither system were exceeding the maximum fuel rate. If they BOTH exceeded the maximum rate, the "high" boost setting would have an increased AFR occuring at a lower RPM than the low setting. (for example- if the maximum fuel delivery was 2000X lbs/min. The "high" boost setting would spike at 5500 RPM's while the "low" setting would be fine until 8K RPM)
Does this make sense? Again- not trying to start a flame war here... Just a discussion for my own clarification.
Last edited by Umrswimr; 03-23-04 at 12:20 PM.
03-23-04, 12:27 PM
#25
DFW Drunk by Proxy
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Valley Ranch, Tx
Posts: 2,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once more clarification:
I knew the modifications and configurations of cars can change and in NO WAY am I implying that Steve did a bad tune when Cavelle took delivery of the car. Steve's reputation preceeds him here.
I just feel that Cavelle's car would benefit from a new tune to revise the alterations that might have been made to his car since the last time. That's all...
I knew the modifications and configurations of cars can change and in NO WAY am I implying that Steve did a bad tune when Cavelle took delivery of the car. Steve's reputation preceeds him here.
I just feel that Cavelle's car would benefit from a new tune to revise the alterations that might have been made to his car since the last time. That's all...
