Project: Smogie...RacinNdrummins IDI build
#1906
07-08-2014, 12:00 AM
I went with the M112 only for the fact that the thought kicked into my head when NMB2 said he was upgrading his cobra SC and would be selling his stocker. He had mentioned that I just buy his SC one day, and from then on its been pretty much a sealed deal. I actually have the HX35 I was planning to use done, but I figured the SC would add that much more of a wow factor, so I decided to go that route.... I have screwed around on Comp-D a lot, and a couple of cummins guys got some wacky SC setups going on, ridiculous in my opinion, and in typical fashion, I want to upset the status quo...
I am going to custom build the bypass valve just because I know I can do it cheaper than buying a $500 wastegate. The BP will bleed all airflow back to the entrance of the SC until the 475 starts outflowing the SC in which it will supply air through both the SC and the BP valve. The idea is to keep the SC at peak efficiency, and when it starts dropping efficiency by increasing pressure ratio, build boost as quick as possible with the 75/83/90 (hence the small turbine side) to take over and basically free spin the SC.... I mapped it out and it shouldn't require more than 25-30hp to drive the SC at peak HP fully bypassed....
I will adjust the drive pressure of the turbo depending on boost pressure and where I want it to come on at.... The stage 2 cam has a decent amount of overlap, and I want to have as close to a 1:1 BP/DP ratio as possible.
I will dyno tune everything out by adjusting the BP valve and WG to achieve the best avg HP.
Im just going to keep my single stage A2A IC setup, and run W/M on top of it, I think that should get the job done.... But who knows, its already asking a bunch.
As far as the bottom end goes, I don't know.... Id say its at least as strong as the PSD bottom, and maybe IDI will come through and give us a little leeway for a change.... My crystal ball isn't big enough to read without glasses at this point.....
I am going to custom build the bypass valve just because I know I can do it cheaper than buying a $500 wastegate. The BP will bleed all airflow back to the entrance of the SC until the 475 starts outflowing the SC in which it will supply air through both the SC and the BP valve. The idea is to keep the SC at peak efficiency, and when it starts dropping efficiency by increasing pressure ratio, build boost as quick as possible with the 75/83/90 (hence the small turbine side) to take over and basically free spin the SC.... I mapped it out and it shouldn't require more than 25-30hp to drive the SC at peak HP fully bypassed....
I will adjust the drive pressure of the turbo depending on boost pressure and where I want it to come on at.... The stage 2 cam has a decent amount of overlap, and I want to have as close to a 1:1 BP/DP ratio as possible.
I will dyno tune everything out by adjusting the BP valve and WG to achieve the best avg HP.
Im just going to keep my single stage A2A IC setup, and run W/M on top of it, I think that should get the job done.... But who knows, its already asking a bunch.
As far as the bottom end goes, I don't know.... Id say its at least as strong as the PSD bottom, and maybe IDI will come through and give us a little leeway for a change.... My crystal ball isn't big enough to read without glasses at this point.....
#1907
07-08-2014, 10:34 AM
I went with the M112 only for the fact that the thought kicked into my head when NMB2 said he was upgrading his cobra SC and would be selling his stocker. He had mentioned that I just buy his SC one day, and from then on its been pretty much a sealed deal. I actually have the HX35 I was planning to use done, but I figured the SC would add that much more of a wow factor, so I decided to go that route.... I have screwed around on Comp-D a lot, and a couple of cummins guys got some wacky SC setups going on, ridiculous in my opinion, and in typical fashion, I want to upset the status quo...
I am going to custom build the bypass valve just because I know I can do it cheaper than buying a $500 wastegate. The BP will bleed all airflow back to the entrance of the SC until the 475 starts outflowing the SC in which it will supply air through both the SC and the BP valve. The idea is to keep the SC at peak efficiency, and when it starts dropping efficiency by increasing pressure ratio, build boost as quick as possible with the 75/83/90 (hence the small turbine side) to take over and basically free spin the SC.... I mapped it out and it shouldn't require more than 25-30hp to drive the SC at peak HP fully bypassed....
I will adjust the drive pressure of the turbo depending on boost pressure and where I want it to come on at.... The stage 2 cam has a decent amount of overlap, and I want to have as close to a 1:1 BP/DP ratio as possible.
I will dyno tune everything out by adjusting the BP valve and WG to achieve the best avg HP.
Im just going to keep my single stage A2A IC setup, and run W/M on top of it, I think that should get the job done.... But who knows, its already asking a bunch.
As far as the bottom end goes, I don't know.... Id say its at least as strong as the PSD bottom, and maybe IDI will come through and give us a little leeway for a change.... My crystal ball isn't big enough to read without glasses at this point.....
I am going to custom build the bypass valve just because I know I can do it cheaper than buying a $500 wastegate. The BP will bleed all airflow back to the entrance of the SC until the 475 starts outflowing the SC in which it will supply air through both the SC and the BP valve. The idea is to keep the SC at peak efficiency, and when it starts dropping efficiency by increasing pressure ratio, build boost as quick as possible with the 75/83/90 (hence the small turbine side) to take over and basically free spin the SC.... I mapped it out and it shouldn't require more than 25-30hp to drive the SC at peak HP fully bypassed....
I will adjust the drive pressure of the turbo depending on boost pressure and where I want it to come on at.... The stage 2 cam has a decent amount of overlap, and I want to have as close to a 1:1 BP/DP ratio as possible.
I will dyno tune everything out by adjusting the BP valve and WG to achieve the best avg HP.
Im just going to keep my single stage A2A IC setup, and run W/M on top of it, I think that should get the job done.... But who knows, its already asking a bunch.
As far as the bottom end goes, I don't know.... Id say its at least as strong as the PSD bottom, and maybe IDI will come through and give us a little leeway for a change.... My crystal ball isn't big enough to read without glasses at this point.....
#1908
07-11-2014, 11:17 PM
Yeah Kevin, I think im probably crazy for putting this much into this platform, but there are two things that drive me... Number one, Im too damn stubborn, and I wont accept No/failure until its inevitable... Whether its me being stupid or not is yet to be determined, we will find out either way... Number two, every single time I hear some other diesel guy, or some kid in his early 20's driving dad's 2006 cummins around claiming 650hp and laughing at an IDI that he could never build, even at 300hp, it adds to my will to make this damn engine do something great and repeatable... Its like the "Planet of Evil" in "The Fifth Element" movie... Every time you shoot some garbage at me, I just grow stronger, and Im not the type you want getting stronger, because one day I will defeat you or your notion... You would be better off just ignoring me...
#1910
07-24-2014, 05:04 PM
Any updates on the injection pump research and development?
I was just curious what ask is accessible to modify like a p7100 pump. I know it apples to oranges, but some of the mods they do to their pump could translate over to ours?
They lock the timing to the Cummins, I think 24°, dual fuel leads, the db2 I think only had one way, bigger delivery valves, think you have done this, more lift with their timing fuel events, has something to do with the cam.
Stock p pump was at about 130 cc I think, which is close to your 120 db4.
Just wondering if you got any tricks coming
I was just curious what ask is accessible to modify like a p7100 pump. I know it apples to oranges, but some of the mods they do to their pump could translate over to ours?
They lock the timing to the Cummins, I think 24°, dual fuel leads, the db2 I think only had one way, bigger delivery valves, think you have done this, more lift with their timing fuel events, has something to do with the cam.
Stock p pump was at about 130 cc I think, which is close to your 120 db4.
Just wondering if you got any tricks coming
#1911
07-25-2014, 01:34 PM
Any updates on the injection pump research and development?
I was just curious what ask is accessible to modify like a p7100 pump. I know it apples to oranges, but some of the mods they do to their pump could translate over to ours?
They lock the timing to the Cummins, I think 24°, dual fuel leads, the db2 I think only had one way, bigger delivery valves, think you have done this, more lift with their timing fuel events, has something to do with the cam.
Stock p pump was at about 130 cc I think, which is close to your 120 db4.
Just wondering if you got any tricks coming
I was just curious what ask is accessible to modify like a p7100 pump. I know it apples to oranges, but some of the mods they do to their pump could translate over to ours?
They lock the timing to the Cummins, I think 24°, dual fuel leads, the db2 I think only had one way, bigger delivery valves, think you have done this, more lift with their timing fuel events, has something to do with the cam.
Stock p pump was at about 130 cc I think, which is close to your 120 db4.
Just wondering if you got any tricks coming
As far as comparison to the P7100, the DB pump couldn't be further away from it in terms of injection pumps. The DB pump is inlet metered, so the amount of fuel going to the plungers is metered before hand. The P-pump is metered with an adjustable helix and spill port that controls the Effective stroke of the pump. The P7100 can get huge amounts of fuel because it has 12mm of bore (.472") and 12mm of stroke (might be 11mm). The only thing holding back the volume in a P-pump in stock for is the rack limit which is easily modified for insane volumes of fuel. 500-600cc I believe is what a stock 12mm pump will do with Rack-Adjustment. Its also not limited by RPM because it has a plunger for every cylinder, meaning it has a ton of time to refill. The DB pump as 2 (or 4) plungers that share a common port and reciprocate 8 times as many times as a P-pump plunger. Not only is lift limited by a leaf spring, but if you don't run a leaf spring, the rollers can bind and lock the pump up. The largest bore a DB2 pump runs in an 8cyl head is the .33 plunger chevy marine head/rotor, otherwise you run a 4 plunger .31 head which is what I run, and is by far the most producing DB head/rotor you can get. That isn't where the limitation is of the pump though. The biggest limitation to power is the amount of fuel volume the DB pump puts out in the upper RPM's. The reason for this is that the fill ports that are under lower charge pressure (20-120psi depending on RPM) register on the OD of the rotor and ID of the head. They are only filling the chamber when the ports cross over each other. The faster you spin the rotor, the less time there is to fill the chamber. To counteract that, the pressure rises, but its still not enough to stop the nose diving the higher in RPM you get. The DB4 and chevy Marine DB2 head's have wider charge slots for more filling duration which is why you can generally get 20-30 more CC's out of those on the top end than a regular .31 DB2 head. What I do with my large CC pumps is add charge ports to the rotor so that even though the duration is the same, the volume during that duration is increased. The one drawback to that is that the more area you add to charge porting, the more leakdown you get, so you have to have a balance between the plunger volume and charge porting area. For example, I had some issues when I first came out with the 110 pump, I was adding as much charge porting as my DB4 pumps have, and while it was magical for a flat fuel curve, I found out that after the fuel would get hot, it would push past the charge porting and cause the volume to drop off and the pump to have a hot start issue. The solution to this was to cut back on charge port area. This fixed the volume/hot start issue, but I had to bump up low end fueling slightly, so the fuel curve isn't as flat as it once was but peak fueling is the same. How I figured out the plunger volume to charge porting ratio was that the big bore, while having the same head/rotor as a 110, just a larger bore, it didn't have the issues with the charge porting the 110 did. Now what really limits the DB pump in terms of performance besides the issues above, is peak injection pressure is limited by the port/rotor leakdown as well. A DB4 pump with stock porting is supposed to handle something like 12,000psi of injection pressure. I would say my own DB4 is significantly less, possibly sub 10kpsi, because my rotor has 4 times the port/rotor area of a stock one. This limits the amount of pop-pressure and nozzle area you can run because you have less room between adequate atomization and peak injection pressure. I ran into this on my last setup with my 2500psi pop injectors and it lead to my low peak boost numbers through the 093 hot side with the 366 turbo. I might have only been effectively pushing 120-130 net cc's or so because there was so much leakdown with the higher injection pressures. That being said, at low volume, my IDI was the cleanest burning IDI ive ever seen... The guys at my pump shop couldn't believe how clean it was, even revving it, and it was responsive, I was just missing a whole bunch of fuel off the top. So one thing I have figured out with these pumps, if you want fuel volume, especially upper end volume, you have to run hose nozzles for injectors... I am planning on modifying my stroked G-codes for a .062" nozzle and 1900 pop pressure. My truck will probably be more smokey than I want, but I want to use every drop of fuel the pump will let me have, and the extra duration will help spool my big turbo sooner. Really, its just a matter of these pumps never being meant to do these sorts of volumes, they can physically handle it, but the conditions for it to happen is very tricky and takes a lot of R&D and engineering.
#1912
07-25-2014, 01:59 PM
The test bed for my DB pump stuff most recently has been the Big Bore pump im working on. Unfortunately, the Plungers developed too much wear, so I have to make new plungers an have it re-honed. I noticed the wear when I had the parts at the EDM shop for more porting, but I figured Id run them anyway. I chalked the wear up to a coarse hone job, the P/B clearance was right at .0002", which was fine, and had no issues holding pressure until the wear happened. That said, I didn't get to test my large porting and metering valve gallery enlargement, so right now things are still in the same spot. On my personal DB4, I am taking back to the shop to try and get a few more top end CC's a well as add some modified leaf springs, lock out the timing so I can delete the HPCA, and calibrate it at 20psi inlet pressure. If this can get me close to 180cc at 2800rpm, 500whp shouldn't be out of the question with the airflow capability I am adding to this engine. But the real issue is if it will hold together mechanically.
As far as comparison to the P7100, the DB pump couldn't be further away from it in terms of injection pumps. The DB pump is inlet metered, so the amount of fuel going to the plungers is metered before hand. The P-pump is metered with an adjustable helix and spill port that controls the Effective stroke of the pump. The P7100 can get huge amounts of fuel because it has 12mm of bore (.472") and 12mm of stroke (might be 11mm). The only thing holding back the volume in a P-pump in stock for is the rack limit which is easily modified for insane volumes of fuel. 500-600cc I believe is what a stock 12mm pump will do with Rack-Adjustment. Its also not limited by RPM because it has a plunger for every cylinder, meaning it has a ton of time to refill. The DB pump as 2 (or 4) plungers that share a common port and reciprocate 8 times as many times as a P-pump plunger. Not only is lift limited by a leaf spring, but if you don't run a leaf spring, the rollers can bind and lock the pump up. The largest bore a DB2 pump runs in an 8cyl head is the .33 plunger chevy marine head/rotor, otherwise you run a 4 plunger .31 head which is what I run, and is by far the most producing DB head/rotor you can get. That isn't where the limitation is of the pump though. The biggest limitation to power is the amount of fuel volume the DB pump puts out in the upper RPM's. The reason for this is that the fill ports that are under lower charge pressure (20-120psi depending on RPM) register on the OD of the rotor and ID of the head. They are only filling the chamber when the ports cross over each other. The faster you spin the rotor, the less time there is to fill the chamber. To counteract that, the pressure rises, but its still not enough to stop the nose diving the higher in RPM you get. The DB4 and chevy Marine DB2 head's have wider charge slots for more filling duration which is why you can generally get 20-30 more CC's out of those on the top end than a regular .31 DB2 head. What I do with my large CC pumps is add charge ports to the rotor so that even though the duration is the same, the volume during that duration is increased. The one drawback to that is that the more area you add to charge porting, the more leakdown you get, so you have to have a balance between the plunger volume and charge porting area. For example, I had some issues when I first came out with the 110 pump, I was adding as much charge porting as my DB4 pumps have, and while it was magical for a flat fuel curve, I found out that after the fuel would get hot, it would push past the charge porting and cause the volume to drop off and the pump to have a hot start issue. The solution to this was to cut back on charge port area. This fixed the volume/hot start issue, but I had to bump up low end fueling slightly, so the fuel curve isn't as flat as it once was but peak fueling is the same. How I figured out the plunger volume to charge porting ratio was that the big bore, while having the same head/rotor as a 110, just a larger bore, it didn't have the issues with the charge porting the 110 did. Now what really limits the DB pump in terms of performance besides the issues above, is peak injection pressure is limited by the port/rotor leakdown as well. A DB4 pump with stock porting is supposed to handle something like 12,000psi of injection pressure. I would say my own DB4 is significantly less, possibly sub 10kpsi, because my rotor has 4 times the port/rotor area of a stock one. This limits the amount of pop-pressure and nozzle area you can run because you have less room between adequate atomization and peak injection pressure. I ran into this on my last setup with my 2500psi pop injectors and it lead to my low peak boost numbers through the 093 hot side with the 366 turbo. I might have only been effectively pushing 120-130 net cc's or so because there was so much leakdown with the higher injection pressures. That being said, at low volume, my IDI was the cleanest burning IDI ive ever seen... The guys at my pump shop couldn't believe how clean it was, even revving it, and it was responsive, I was just missing a whole bunch of fuel off the top. So one thing I have figured out with these pumps, if you want fuel volume, especially upper end volume, you have to run hose nozzles for injectors... I am planning on modifying my stroked G-codes for a .062" nozzle and 1900 pop pressure. My truck will probably be more smokey than I want, but I want to use every drop of fuel the pump will let me have, and the extra duration will help spool my big turbo sooner. Really, its just a matter of these pumps never being meant to do these sorts of volumes, they can physically handle it, but the conditions for it to happen is very tricky and takes a lot of R&D and engineering.
As far as comparison to the P7100, the DB pump couldn't be further away from it in terms of injection pumps. The DB pump is inlet metered, so the amount of fuel going to the plungers is metered before hand. The P-pump is metered with an adjustable helix and spill port that controls the Effective stroke of the pump. The P7100 can get huge amounts of fuel because it has 12mm of bore (.472") and 12mm of stroke (might be 11mm). The only thing holding back the volume in a P-pump in stock for is the rack limit which is easily modified for insane volumes of fuel. 500-600cc I believe is what a stock 12mm pump will do with Rack-Adjustment. Its also not limited by RPM because it has a plunger for every cylinder, meaning it has a ton of time to refill. The DB pump as 2 (or 4) plungers that share a common port and reciprocate 8 times as many times as a P-pump plunger. Not only is lift limited by a leaf spring, but if you don't run a leaf spring, the rollers can bind and lock the pump up. The largest bore a DB2 pump runs in an 8cyl head is the .33 plunger chevy marine head/rotor, otherwise you run a 4 plunger .31 head which is what I run, and is by far the most producing DB head/rotor you can get. That isn't where the limitation is of the pump though. The biggest limitation to power is the amount of fuel volume the DB pump puts out in the upper RPM's. The reason for this is that the fill ports that are under lower charge pressure (20-120psi depending on RPM) register on the OD of the rotor and ID of the head. They are only filling the chamber when the ports cross over each other. The faster you spin the rotor, the less time there is to fill the chamber. To counteract that, the pressure rises, but its still not enough to stop the nose diving the higher in RPM you get. The DB4 and chevy Marine DB2 head's have wider charge slots for more filling duration which is why you can generally get 20-30 more CC's out of those on the top end than a regular .31 DB2 head. What I do with my large CC pumps is add charge ports to the rotor so that even though the duration is the same, the volume during that duration is increased. The one drawback to that is that the more area you add to charge porting, the more leakdown you get, so you have to have a balance between the plunger volume and charge porting area. For example, I had some issues when I first came out with the 110 pump, I was adding as much charge porting as my DB4 pumps have, and while it was magical for a flat fuel curve, I found out that after the fuel would get hot, it would push past the charge porting and cause the volume to drop off and the pump to have a hot start issue. The solution to this was to cut back on charge port area. This fixed the volume/hot start issue, but I had to bump up low end fueling slightly, so the fuel curve isn't as flat as it once was but peak fueling is the same. How I figured out the plunger volume to charge porting ratio was that the big bore, while having the same head/rotor as a 110, just a larger bore, it didn't have the issues with the charge porting the 110 did. Now what really limits the DB pump in terms of performance besides the issues above, is peak injection pressure is limited by the port/rotor leakdown as well. A DB4 pump with stock porting is supposed to handle something like 12,000psi of injection pressure. I would say my own DB4 is significantly less, possibly sub 10kpsi, because my rotor has 4 times the port/rotor area of a stock one. This limits the amount of pop-pressure and nozzle area you can run because you have less room between adequate atomization and peak injection pressure. I ran into this on my last setup with my 2500psi pop injectors and it lead to my low peak boost numbers through the 093 hot side with the 366 turbo. I might have only been effectively pushing 120-130 net cc's or so because there was so much leakdown with the higher injection pressures. That being said, at low volume, my IDI was the cleanest burning IDI ive ever seen... The guys at my pump shop couldn't believe how clean it was, even revving it, and it was responsive, I was just missing a whole bunch of fuel off the top. So one thing I have figured out with these pumps, if you want fuel volume, especially upper end volume, you have to run hose nozzles for injectors... I am planning on modifying my stroked G-codes for a .062" nozzle and 1900 pop pressure. My truck will probably be more smokey than I want, but I want to use every drop of fuel the pump will let me have, and the extra duration will help spool my big turbo sooner. Really, its just a matter of these pumps never being meant to do these sorts of volumes, they can physically handle it, but the conditions for it to happen is very tricky and takes a lot of R&D and engineering.
Cheers
#1913
07-25-2014, 11:09 PM
Posting Guru
#1914
07-30-2014, 12:33 PM
Ok so Ive been thinking of changing my plans again.
Id like to consolidate some of the upgrades to make it easier on myself with the limited time I have to put into my own truck.
I have two options I can follow:
A) I can continue with the DB4, S471 blowing into the M112 for a compound/Sequential setup and basically use all my fuel I can get and see what my truck does this way.
Or...
B) Skip the Above and just install the P-Pump and run with a 471 and see what this IDI can really take.
Obviously I would save the DB4 and supercharger for another IDI project (Im thinking an IDI powered DD Bronco)
Right now from the feedback im getting, people really wanna see the P-Pump go on, so I am leaning that direction, but I wanna get some opinions from the people who have read the thread.
Id like to consolidate some of the upgrades to make it easier on myself with the limited time I have to put into my own truck.
I have two options I can follow:
A) I can continue with the DB4, S471 blowing into the M112 for a compound/Sequential setup and basically use all my fuel I can get and see what my truck does this way.
Or...
B) Skip the Above and just install the P-Pump and run with a 471 and see what this IDI can really take.
Obviously I would save the DB4 and supercharger for another IDI project (Im thinking an IDI powered DD Bronco)
Right now from the feedback im getting, people really wanna see the P-Pump go on, so I am leaning that direction, but I wanna get some opinions from the people who have read the thread.
#1920
07-30-2014, 09:11 PM
