009's all done @110% Duty Cycle? (T+ tuning)
- Thread starter BEATAV8
- Start date
BEATAV8
The Engine Whisperer
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
I spent some time looking for fuel line issues yesterday and couldn't find anything obvious. Rubber parts of the lines looked good up front and didn't see anything amiss in back when I installed the new 340 last weekend.
The fuel pressure gauge is taped to the windshield now, ready to go. Will try to run it tonight and see if FP is what it's supposed to be (expecting steady ~74 PSI at WOT. 50PSI static+24lbs boost).
IF I do find a fuel pressure issue my first suspect is the adjustable regulator. It's not a real expensive one. It looks like a stock type bosch unit with the top cut off and a billet alluminum cap screwed on. Got it from ANS. Anybody have problems with those?
Also suspect of the stock pump wiring. The car has a casper's hot wire kit with redundant ground. But... there is still factory wiring at the fuel header unit from the pump header to the hotwire plug-in. Not aware of a wiring kit which upgrades that wiring too.
I'm not too worried about emissions if I do have to go to 50's. The car annihilated the IM240 with the 009's and a 3 inch cat converter bolted up (kept fresh..used only as needed).
thanks for your help dudes
The fuel pressure gauge is taped to the windshield now, ready to go. Will try to run it tonight and see if FP is what it's supposed to be (expecting steady ~74 PSI at WOT. 50PSI static+24lbs boost).
IF I do find a fuel pressure issue my first suspect is the adjustable regulator. It's not a real expensive one. It looks like a stock type bosch unit with the top cut off and a billet alluminum cap screwed on. Got it from ANS. Anybody have problems with those?
Also suspect of the stock pump wiring. The car has a casper's hot wire kit with redundant ground. But... there is still factory wiring at the fuel header unit from the pump header to the hotwire plug-in. Not aware of a wiring kit which upgrades that wiring too.
I'm not too worried about emissions if I do have to go to 50's. The car annihilated the IM240 with the 009's and a 3 inch cat converter bolted up (kept fresh..used only as needed).
thanks for your help dudes
BEATAV8
The Engine Whisperer
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
Yeah what's up with that?
I met this older GN dude a few weeks ago at cruise night. He had an "old school" GN which was built maybe 10 years ago with all the hot stuff from the day, none of the parts were new or recent. He said he was running 22 PSI on 93 pumpgas and I went
. To top it off he had no idea what the ignition timing was or even what knock retard was. My direct scan laptop freaked him out a little. He said "whatya need that for?"I have to assume he probably never ever gets on it (super low mileage and very clean car).
Yes he does. His car is one of those "gone over EVRYTHING" and if theres a gain to be had, Bruce has found it. Running hard w/o detonation is simply knowing how the flame travels, what causes detonation and taking measures in engineering to prevent it. I believe he even posted his "combo" many times. Remove all burrs, radiius all sharp edges, keep a little tooth in the heads/intake/chamber. Stuff like that will get you further than bolt ons. Its just that bolt ons are easier.
I routinely run 21-22psi with 19* of timing. If the car is set up, you wont hurt it. I run my car admittedly a little fat, but thats safer than lean. I did hurt it though when I didnt notice boost crept to 26#. ONly showed 6* KR on scanmaster...I'm sure SM missed a lot...which is why I dont recommend tuning by it, anyway, temp was creeping up fast and got bubbles in the overflow. Got my new motor on the way so I didnt bother doing the HG's. Any month now......Originally posted by MJRWOOD
Yeah what's up with that?
I met this older GN dude a few weeks ago at cruise night. He had an "old school" GN which was built maybe 10 years ago with all the hot stuff from the day, none of the parts were new or recent. He said he was running 22 PSI on 93 pumpgas and I went
I have to assume he probably never ever gets on it (super low mileage and very clean car).
Originally posted by Tom87GN
It sounds like my car runs the same as MJRWOOD's ride does. I believe everybody when they say that with 40's and a 307 I should be going faster. Now I just have to find out why.
INTERCOOLER, my chip is from Joe Lubrant, 26 degrees. My fuel filter only has about 3 tank fulls of gas / race gas through it. My sock is a newer non-collapsable style that came with the 307.
Should MJRWOOD and I be looking for kinked fuel lines????
WHAT? Why are you running so much timing? In my research and reading throughout this board, it seems today's culture leans more towards running less timing and more boost. Years ago I ran the Conley Mag-4, which had 24 degrees of timing in it, and it was basically a grenade on 93 octane. Anything less than C16 would be bye-bye head gaskets. Per someone else's claims, I too went 12.60's with stock injector and stock fuel pump, but would not recommend anyone attempting it these days, due to having so many affordable upgrade options.
Anyway, there's been alot of good input on this thread. I too have gone 11.9's @ 112 w/ stock turbo and 36# injectors, Walbro 340, with my O2 still hanging in around 790-820. It's readily achievable.
My comment about the 40's is this: I had the old style "red-stripe" 40's many years ago, and they sucked! At the time, they were one of the few options to upgrade with, but as mentioned above, they had bad street manners, were hard to tune, were fat down low and lean up high. One major drawback was they shot a big straight stream of fuel, as opposed to a nice conical pattern. If you are still using this old style 40# injector, I would do the same thing I did - drop them in the trash! 36# injectors are very easy to find used, (I paid $175), and they have great street manners. They will support at least an 11.70 as long as the rest of the fuel system is properly enhanced.
I forgot,,, what was the question...?
malibuick231
Member
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2002
I am wiyh reds hot air i was running 009s in my car and went 118 mph with 105% duty cycle and 12.9 a/f so i dont think your out of fuel this was at 27 psi fuel press was at 76psi at wot.
Intercooler
New Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
My two closest TR buddies run 009's and XP pumps. One is about at limit going 11.36@117 and the other has some more left going 11.76@116. I think they could both go a 11.20's with some more base FP dialed in. FFT
malibuick231
Member
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2002
you are right intercooler because i went a 11.27 1.59 60 ft 009 are good to low 11s two of my friends have been 11.30 on them
BEATAV8
The Engine Whisperer
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
Regardless of ET my car is out of fuel at ~ 100MPH and up. Last night made a run in the country with fuel pressure gauge on the windshield. At full boost the fuel pressure maintained 72-75 PSI throughout the whole run. As usual, she was popping at the top of third gear and Direct Scan showed third gear O2's in the 750's with lean pops dropping to the 600's.
That's enough screwing around for me. I'm going to at least 50's, maybe 55's and new inj drivers. Till then I'll dial the boost down until I can maintain flat 800+ O2's throughout a run.
That's enough screwing around for me. I'm going to at least 50's, maybe 55's and new inj drivers. Till then I'll dial the boost down until I can maintain flat 800+ O2's throughout a run.
Intercooler
New Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
Please report back when it doesn't fix your problem. I would like to hear what actually fixes it.
Intercooler
New Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
Start at the back and work your way to the front until you find the problem. If the 55's fixes it keep me posted.
Can run 24 all day long.
Like I said, the 1/4 doesn't thrill me.
No secrets, just hard work.
Being a skeptic, can keep some folk, stuck. It's one way of saying my mind is made up and don't confuse me with facts.
So far I yet to see anyone recalibrate their MAF, and I have. I run Open Loop, all the time, and the cal is button on.
There's more to tuning then changing a chip, and the fuel pressure.
BEATAV8
The Engine Whisperer
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
Doesn't "good" fuel pressure under load indicate that there is no problem with the fuel system? I've already checked condition the lines and installed a fresh new 340 pump and new filter. There's nothing wrong there.
The 009's may typically be capable of the required fuel delivery, however there may be an issue with one or more of my injectors. ie. weak coils, contamination, etc.
Another possibility is that I may be moving enough air in the top of 3rd to run low 11's, but just haven't executed a good pass yet (I know I haven't made a good pass yet!). MAF readings on T+ base setting are well exceeding 400g/sec. For what MAF readings are worth, that's a lot of flow.
my GN has gone 6.90-7.00 in the 1/8 mile on 009's...many many times...1/8 mph was 98-101 mph...with lazy 60'..1.60..and yes is was lean scanmaster was showing 710-730 @ 27 psi..T63e with a red armstrong106 chip...with a red 93 chip..and 20 psi on pumpgas.i got 28 mpg..driving the car to bristol...ya its heavy too 3700#....i'd say its NOT the 009's joe
joeIntercooler
New Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
Take them out and send them to Chuck Leeper for testing before putting out a bunch of wasted IMO cash.
Bruce, unless you are running a giant duration cam or pulling a bunch of timing at WOT, I do not see how you can run 24+ lbs of boost on 93 octane....or maybe you can, but not making any power?
the only way I know how to evaluate a tune is 1/4 mile performance or perhaps a dyno....I could care less about fuel economy...do you have any numbers that would demonstrate power being made with your car on pump gas?
or maybe you don't want to share? If you are making good power under those circumstances, there would be a market for such info.....
FYI, many of us run in open loop, ignore the 02, and some don't need a MAF, courtesy of Steve Y. I imagine a WB 02 would make tuning real simple (in conjunction with an egt...)
the only way I know how to evaluate a tune is 1/4 mile performance or perhaps a dyno....I could care less about fuel economy...do you have any numbers that would demonstrate power being made with your car on pump gas?
or maybe you don't want to share? If you are making good power under those circumstances, there would be a market for such info.....
FYI, many of us run in open loop, ignore the 02, and some don't need a MAF, courtesy of Steve Y. I imagine a WB 02 would make tuning real simple (in conjunction with an egt...)
I had 009's...
I was at 140+ % and would lift to save head gaskets at around 900 -1100 ft....and coast through to 11.60's 70's and 80's at 100- 105 mph.......
The o2 would nose dive.......and be rich on the bottom.....
I know a guy that went a 10.91.......but it was hurt for months after that.........
I changed to 55's at the time and went 11.20-30's @ 120 with no other changes.......in fact it only took one pass to see that it was rich at that point on a 11.7 @114 pass and one change and 11.25...@ 119 on the next pass....
Now......72's.....
I was at 140+ % and would lift to save head gaskets at around 900 -1100 ft....and coast through to 11.60's 70's and 80's at 100- 105 mph.......
The o2 would nose dive.......and be rich on the bottom.....
I know a guy that went a 10.91.......but it was hurt for months after that.........
I changed to 55's at the time and went 11.20-30's @ 120 with no other changes.......in fact it only took one pass to see that it was rich at that point on a 11.7 @114 pass and one change and 11.25...@ 119 on the next pass....
Now......72's.....
Sorry to take so long to think things out better,
but,
In part the reason I can run the 24 PSI so easily is because the injectors as able to function as they were designed to. they can turn on and off, and operate with in the parameters that the engineers designed them too.
Believe it or not, these design teams that GM and others spend millions of dollars on each year just may have some clues about how the stuff they design actually works. If it takes them 30#er's to make 240 HP, then using the simpliest of logic would indicate if you want 480 HP you would start with something like 60s. Then if you really want to get picky build an ecm bench run direct scan and see what's going on. Then after you have some firm data, actually run it on a car. Then when your to the stage of seeing what actually happens you can desing all sorts of theories about the hows and where fors.
Maybe that better explains it.
Similar threads
