why am i so fat?

[turbocamino1]

5.7 AlkyChip/3.5LS1MAF car.. chip made for a 6265jb ,93pump,@26Lbs ,,car ran great at10.7@125 with W/B # of 10.8 >>No P/Logger<< Always able to chip tune without issue. The issue> I bought a Bison 6766JB turbo and bolted it on with no other changes except -8 and-6 F/lines and a inline DW350 pump ,adjusted f/p back down to 43. First blast showed 26 Lbs boost ..and did feel lazy, .. a glance at WB showed 9.4 locked the whole pull,,..plugs look rich too,not terrible..felt like 400 Hp... Changed them out. How can this be with a 90Lb/mn verses 70Lb/mn turbo..why wasnt it very lean?. I cant verify WOT f/p as my gauge is junk and never reads even close othr than idle. I also did try a spare F/P reg i have and it showed same W/B # at WOT 9.4. I dont feel comfortable just pulling fuel without an logical reason for this?

 

[turbocamino1]

...worth mentioning,,,,i added 3 Lbs boost to see if W/B would come up some to use some of the 'extra' fuel..but no change..still low 9s?...also the PTC 9/5 is coupling as it had been. I have triple checked all scanmaster setting..all in range.

 

[turbocamino1]

NGK AFX wideband with a new NTK sensor...idle #s normal 13.2 cruise 14/16s as before..car runs fine. I have a MAP sensor ordered.

 

[turbocamino1]

... also,,, in no way is the engine tired...rings and heads have low miles and ran great prior...plugs all uniform and look good..just a bit rich.

 

[DSEROVY]

Ditch the junk fuel pressure gauge and verify base and wide open fuel pressure. Until then you're just guessing.

 

[Boost231]

agree. several things need to be checked. Why did you change turbos? that 6265 still had lots of room left.

 

[turbocamino1]

Ditch the junk fuel pressure gauge and verify base and wide open fuel pressure. Until then you're just guessing.

most i have tried are accurate at idle ,, electric ,digital in car.,but aren't so accurate high up around 70....if you know of one..am interested? thank for your reply

 

[turbocamino1]

agree. several things need to be checked. Why did you change turbos? that 6265 still had lots of room left.

i had it up to 29Lbs and car did 1320 @128... moreso after discussing the next step up for this engine with Bison it was his suggestion that the 62 was being overrun by the 65 and it may be done at 30Psi,,,also,, i have a 270" motor coming together....so i wasted to see what a 6766 could do prior ,on the small engine.

 

[turbocamino1]

agree. several things need to be checked. Why did you change turbos? that 6265 still had lots of room left.

also,,,suggestions on what else i can check, very appreciated...i have access to some things' i can swap and see' thanks

 

[DSEROVY]

I've used the Autometer electric fuel pressure gauge with good results. Think I had the Phantom 0-100 psi unit. Logging fuel and meth now with just senders and the PowerLogger.

 

[Jerryl]

Are you planning to push that $$$ 270 CID on a 5.7 and 3.5 MAF with a 67 without PL?

 

[DSEROVY]

Good point, Jerryl!

 

[turbocamino1]

Are you planning to push that $$$ 270 CID on a 5.7 and 3.5 MAF with a 67?

push?...700 whp is the target,but yes ,..chip stays...Bison had some choice thoughts on that too ; o

I've used the Autometer electric fuel pressure gauge with good results. Think I had the Phantom 0-100 psi unit. Logging fuel and meth now with just senders and the PowerLogger.

i do have an Autometer now..15yrs old though.
: /

 

[turbocamino1]

Are you planning to push that $$$ 270 CID on a 5.7 and 3.5 MAF with a 67 without PL?

i am old school it seems and for 15 years i have done well with basic WB /scanmaster tuning...i also realize the risks of 700hp buick engine and a PL would be wise.

 

[Jerryl]

i am old school it seems and for 15 years i have done well with basic WB /scanmaster tuning...i also realize the risks of 700hp buick engine and a PL would be wise.

Understand completely. 700 WHP requires some thought to make it live. It's no small feat and the margin of error is slim. Don't misunderstand though, because it can be done.

Hope you get it figured out soon.

 

[Mr.Spool]

How can this be with a 90Lb/mn verses 70Lb/mn turbo..why wasnt it very lean?.

because 26lbs is 26lbs and you went from a 10.7 afr to 9.4 afr if im reading your post right.also there is alot of fuel there at 9.4 and im sure you didnt buy that turbo to run low boost numbers time to let it eat more.if the afr is the same as you have been running what you are seeing is the drop in the spool time and no increase in airflow

 

[Mr.Spool]

so i wasted to see what a 6766 could do prior ,on the small engine.

it needs to make more boost to see a gain.that turbo will walk all over a 62 on the right tune and engine

 

[Mr.Spool]

the 62 was being overrun by the 65 and it may be done at 30Psi,,

comp wheel is done before the 65.if 30psi is all that it will make then its done

 

[turbocamino1]

comp wheel is done before the 65.if 30psi is all that it will make then its done

that is what i was referring to after speaking with Bison..

because 26lbs is 26lbs and you went from a 10.7 afr to 9.4 afr if im reading your post right.also there is alot of fuel there at 9.4 and im sure you didnt buy that turbo to run low boost numbers time to let it eat more.if the afr is the same as you have been running what you are seeing is the drop in the spool time and no increase in airflow

I did take it to 28 to see if i could 'use up' some of the excess fuel (9.4) and i did see 9.6 for a split second and it does have lag for sure...but then in third went down to 9.2 ..with the extra load of third gear i figured af would be much higher...,this is where i just assumed there is an issue and tried another f/p reg and WB sensor but got same results...but.. . you feel 26, is way out of range for the 6766 and 32-34 would wake thing up?

 

[No disintegrations]

I'm sure bison votes for more than 26 psi. Not sure how much timing you're running but don't forget to consider pulling out some.