528 rwhp 428 ft/lbs, 24 psi, pump gas and WI
02-10-12, 08:01 PM
#28
silver ghost
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Home of the Rolex 24
Posts: 3,061
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
Whats the theory of the IAT sensor before the injection? My nozzles are positioned similiar to yours but still have the FRAIT in the stock location. Dont you want the FRAIT to pic up the difference for tuning purposes?
02-10-12, 08:13 PM
#29
I put them in those locations so that water doesn't get on the sensor or affect the air temp reading from the sensor. I confirmed on the dyno yesterday that spraying pre turbo/before the ait sensor does affect the ait sensor readings, ait were higher, although not sure if its from the sensor getting wet or if it has something to do with the IC efficiency with WI going through it.
02-11-12, 07:19 AM
#30
silver ghost
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Home of the Rolex 24
Posts: 3,061
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
I put them in those locations so that water doesn't get on the sensor or affect the air temp reading from the sensor. I confirmed on the dyno yesterday that spraying pre turbo/before the ait sensor does affect the ait sensor readings, ait were higher, although not sure if its from the sensor getting wet or if it has something to do with the IC efficiency with WI going through it.
02-11-12, 10:39 AM
#31
Yes, but the car made more power with Pre Turbo WI, did you see my new thread with the pre turbo WI vs post IC WI dyno results? check it out here. https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.php?p=10973884
It's different spraying pre turbo because that's where all the heat is, so perhaps the water gets hotter from absorbing heat in the turbo so that water may not cool off as much in the fmic and make the ait sensor read higher when it gets wet. But regardless of the ait sensor readings, the pre turbo wi appears to make the turbo more efficient and more power is made. Maybe more power is also made from better atomization of the WI because it can further atomize when going through the turbo impeller blades, I think that is one theory.
It's different spraying pre turbo because that's where all the heat is, so perhaps the water gets hotter from absorbing heat in the turbo so that water may not cool off as much in the fmic and make the ait sensor read higher when it gets wet. But regardless of the ait sensor readings, the pre turbo wi appears to make the turbo more efficient and more power is made. Maybe more power is also made from better atomization of the WI because it can further atomize when going through the turbo impeller blades, I think that is one theory.
02-13-12, 11:18 PM
#32
rotary sensei
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The guys at Alky Inj said the test isn't really valid because :
"When you spray pre-compressor we up the jetting vs post compressor alone. Additionally, I didn't read this anywhere. In the end you'll want to do both to get the best result. Not just one or the other."
So you have to vary spray to get the best results. What your test showed was that spay amount was better pre turbo than post. If you would have had different jets you may have had a different result.
"When you spray pre-compressor we up the jetting vs post compressor alone. Additionally, I didn't read this anywhere. In the end you'll want to do both to get the best result. Not just one or the other."
So you have to vary spray to get the best results. What your test showed was that spay amount was better pre turbo than post. If you would have had different jets you may have had a different result.
02-13-12, 11:37 PM
#33
Are they saying basically that more water is getting to the engine with post IC WI so that extra water hurts power compared to pre turbo? I know a smaller water nozzle size/less water will make more power but I chose to run the large nozzle so that it is getting enough water and because it is the size they recommend for over 450 HP. Sure better results can be had with more testing, but still the test shows that more power is made with pre turbo with the same size nozzle vs post IC.
02-13-12, 11:56 PM
#34
rotary sensei
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are they saying basically that more water is getting to the engine with post IC WI so that extra water hurts power compared to pre turbo? I know a smaller water nozzle size/less water will make more power but I chose to run the large nozzle so that it is getting enough water and because it is the size they recommend for over 450 HP. Sure better results can be had with more testing, but still the test shows that more power is made with pre turbo with the same size nozzle vs post IC.
02-14-12, 12:02 AM
#35
Alky says you have to adjust spray to get the best results. Pre turbo versus post requires different nozzle sizing. The jetting size you used was fine for pre turbo but probably a bit too big for post turbo, if you would have used a smaller jet you would have had larger numbers.
02-22-12, 01:28 PM
#37
AEM large nozzle, 550 cc/min nozzle, with the new pump. " The flow rates listed are at 150 psi of line pressure. If you have the newest pump you can expect up to a 25% increase in flow due to the higher outlet pressure."
I was using the Aeromotive Stealth 340 lph pump, but I recently installed bosch 2200 injectors and put in a walbro 400 lph pump because I was hoping to be able to turn up the boost a little more and make more power so I figured I should try the walbro 400lph just in case I would need more from the pump.
I was using the Aeromotive Stealth 340 lph pump, but I recently installed bosch 2200 injectors and put in a walbro 400 lph pump because I was hoping to be able to turn up the boost a little more and make more power so I figured I should try the walbro 400lph just in case I would need more from the pump.
02-22-12, 05:49 PM
#39
What I am saying is, comparing HP on different dynos is near impossible and pretty much useless. Even on the same brand dyno, different shops will use different correction factors. The drag strip tells the true story and Tom seems to have it figured out.
02-22-12, 08:43 PM
#41
Keep in mind dyno plays a big factor. Not discrediting you but I think you mentioned your trap speeds in another thread and they didnt add up to 535rwhp. Tom seems to be one of the few who likes to use a "heart breaker" dyno and then go out and run faster than expected at the trap. Power under the curve along with traction/60 feet also alter trap speed as well. A car that is hooking well with have a slightly lower trap speed then a car that is spinning slightly out of the hole, too much spin will lower traps as well.
What I am saying is, comparing HP on different dynos is near impossible and pretty much useless. Even on the same brand dyno, different shops will use different correction factors. The drag strip tells the true story and Tom seems to have it figured out.
What I am saying is, comparing HP on different dynos is near impossible and pretty much useless. Even on the same brand dyno, different shops will use different correction factors. The drag strip tells the true story and Tom seems to have it figured out.
well i just went out and pulled my two jets. I changed them and forgot haha. Its on 566cc's at 250 psi pump pressure
Last edited by silverfdturbo6port; 02-22-12 at 08:58 PM.
02-22-12, 09:13 PM
#42
You can switch the correction factor at the dyno, sae, std or uncorrected. I have my dyno files and dynojet software to see the differences. Was yours on a dynojet?
Your turbo is probably better than mine. The person I bought it off of said it was a garret turbo but nowhere does it say that on the turbo and all the other parts are no name parts..
Your turbo is probably better than mine. The person I bought it off of said it was a garret turbo but nowhere does it say that on the turbo and all the other parts are no name parts..
02-22-12, 10:25 PM
#43
You can switch the correction factor at the dyno, sae, std or uncorrected. I have my dyno files and dynojet software to see the differences. Was yours on a dynojet?
Your turbo is probably better than mine. The person I bought it off of said it was a garret turbo but nowhere does it say that on the turbo and all the other parts are no name parts..
Your turbo is probably better than mine. The person I bought it off of said it was a garret turbo but nowhere does it say that on the turbo and all the other parts are no name parts..
whats your timing at max torque? mines at 10-11* currently on 20 with a conservative tune at a flat 11.0 afr on 93 pump and water
oh and im selling my turbo to upgrade
Last edited by silverfdturbo6port; 02-22-12 at 10:40 PM.
02-22-12, 10:51 PM
#44
Mine made 528 SAE / 536 STD. More recent new best in Jan. was 532 SAE/ 545 STD, just looked at the dyno files.
Timing around peak torque at 6k rpms logs at 6-7, more conservative, knock readings peak at about 20-30. afr 11.5-11.9, 11.0 with water = you lose power.
Timing around peak torque at 6k rpms logs at 6-7, more conservative, knock readings peak at about 20-30. afr 11.5-11.9, 11.0 with water = you lose power.
02-22-12, 10:59 PM
#45
yea ive always tuned conservative and only ran my car three times at the track. I wanna tune the car in and attend a ifo event this year in my town. i wanna put my afrs a bit leaner. yea id have timing at about the same for your boost level as well. but i make peak tq at 4700 with my long runner manifold and peak hp at 7800.
what clutch are you using? everything else with our cars are pretty identical
02-22-12, 11:10 PM
#46
Where is your dyno sheet, I'd like to see.
Spec stage 3+
I thought I was gonna make more power because after this 528hp I got a full 4" exhaust and a 1.32 A/R divided turbine housing, but it made about the same max power 532hp, but a quicker spool and better power/torque curves, the power stays up until redline, tune was about the same.
Spec stage 3+
I thought I was gonna make more power because after this 528hp I got a full 4" exhaust and a 1.32 A/R divided turbine housing, but it made about the same max power 532hp, but a quicker spool and better power/torque curves, the power stays up until redline, tune was about the same.
02-22-12, 11:15 PM
#47
i will have to take a pic with my phone as i dont have a scanner. I will send you a pm on about a hour. or pm me your cell # and i can send it to you
Where is your dyno sheet, I'd like to see.
Spec stage 3+
I thought I was gonna make more power because after this 528hp I got a full 4" exhaust and a 1.32 A/R divided turbine housing, but it made about the same max power 532hp, but a quicker spool and better power/torque curves, the power stays up until redline, tune was about the same.
Spec stage 3+
I thought I was gonna make more power because after this 528hp I got a full 4" exhaust and a 1.32 A/R divided turbine housing, but it made about the same max power 532hp, but a quicker spool and better power/torque curves, the power stays up until redline, tune was about the same.
02-23-12, 08:05 AM
#48
Racing Rotary Since 1983
iTrader: (6)
silverfd and tom,
you may have posted this info but pls do again...
what was your IDC at peak hp?
what injectors?
what base fuel pressure?
what AFR at peak hp?
how much water at peak hp?
hc
you may have posted this info but pls do again...
what was your IDC at peak hp?
what injectors?
what base fuel pressure?
what AFR at peak hp?
how much water at peak hp?
hc
02-23-12, 08:33 AM
#49
Howard, most of that info is in the first post of this thread, info for the first time I made 528. base fuel pressure was 44,
"At 528 HP my Torque was 403, 6878 rpm, AFR was 11.8 (11.2-11.8 afr across the powerband), leading timing logged at 9 (7 in the map) split 12, knock 4, PIM 26231, 1.59 bar on pfc, inj. duty 80.4 , AirT 23C. "
When I made 532 hp (4" exhaust and 1.32 A/R divided turbine housing and bosch 2200 injectors) I forgot to hit the button to record in datalogit. But here is a dynosheet to show the comparison (this was also with a bad leaking uim gasket)
"At 528 HP my Torque was 403, 6878 rpm, AFR was 11.8 (11.2-11.8 afr across the powerband), leading timing logged at 9 (7 in the map) split 12, knock 4, PIM 26231, 1.59 bar on pfc, inj. duty 80.4 , AirT 23C. "
When I made 532 hp (4" exhaust and 1.32 A/R divided turbine housing and bosch 2200 injectors) I forgot to hit the button to record in datalogit. But here is a dynosheet to show the comparison (this was also with a bad leaking uim gasket)
02-23-12, 09:24 AM
#50
when i dyno'd i was using power fc over a year and a half ago so i will try my best to remember but as of now im on aem and less boost.
20-21 psi
what was your IDC at peak hp? 84%
what injectors?2x 850/ 2x1680
what base fuel pressure? 42
what AFR at peak hp? 10.6-11.0 really dont recall
how much water at peak hp? do2 and a d07= 660cc
and as for timing at 20psi im around 10* at peak tq and i add a few degrees to redline so about 12-13* at peak hp .12* split
20-21 psi
what was your IDC at peak hp? 84%
what injectors?2x 850/ 2x1680
what base fuel pressure? 42
what AFR at peak hp? 10.6-11.0 really dont recall
how much water at peak hp? do2 and a d07= 660cc
and as for timing at 20psi im around 10* at peak tq and i add a few degrees to redline so about 12-13* at peak hp .12* split