When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
100%
Engine is slanted on the stand so the manifold is slightly out of place in the pic. This manifold actually lines up better to the heads and the Camaro intake than the smaller Camaro manifold does.
Just ordered. That saves so much time/fabrication. The height increase is likely unavoidable - even if I made an intake manifold from scratch I think it would have to end up about that much higher than the stock LFX IM.
Just ordered. That saves so much time/fabrication. The height increase is likely unavoidable - even if I made an intake manifold from scratch I think it would have to end up about that much higher than the stock LFX IM.
Yea I knew either way for me was going to result in cutting up my hood which I was not excited about after all the effort I put into it. I guess I will just get another hood and start over.
Wonder if a CCP hood has more than an inch of clearance over the camaro manifold????
Removed the HP pump, rails, and injectors from my spare motor to actually take a real look at the stuff that needs to be sealed.
The HP pump hole was easy. Made a cap from a spare chunk of 5/16" 7075 (way overkill but I had the scrap so why not) with the factory gasket underneath.
Looking at the injector ports, I think I've changed my mind on the way to go there. It looks like I can tap that hole to 1/8"NPT with the tap on a long extension without even taking the head off the block. Blow shavings out of the combustion chamber with compressed air (turn motor manually with valve cover off to verify valve position). Set screw/plug to close it up. McMaster 51205K176 looks good.
Originally Posted by griff
Yea I knew either way for me was going to result in cutting up my hood which I was not excited about after all the effort I put into it. I guess I will just get another hood and start over.
Wonder if a CCP hood has more than an inch of clearance over the camaro manifold????
Same here. When it comes time to do the actual conversion on the primary motor in the car, I'm planning to just remove the hood and work through the ECU/wiring/tuning side of things and if/when we get to a point where it's making all the magic on the dyno, then we'll know it's well worth the work to do a new hood.
Sorry for the lack of updates, work on the car has continued. Since covid hit we've been busier than ever at Goodwin Racing (a good problem to have) and that's meant that with the little spare time I have it often comes down to whether I want to use that time to build the car, or write about it... and I'm determined to finish this thing up and get back to the track, so it's been head down and getting after it for the past year.
There's a lot of updates to make, so to keep things digestible I'll break it up into smaller chunks and do those updates over a little time here.
First, the fuel system.
Thanks to LukeG and griff's tip above, I got my hands on the LFX CNG lower manifold, and then got to work on a fuel rail solution.
First mock-up of that manifold on the LFX, and in the picture I'm already starting to plan out rail placement:
With this new setup, I'll be running 6 x Injector Dynamics ID 1300x:
Had a little back and forth with the guys at ID to sort out the exact combination of top and bottom o-ring sizes plus a small spacer to get its placement in the manifold just right.
Due to the port placement, the rail has to be a few inches away from the injector, and at a different angle. This means the rail needs "fingers" that extend to the injector. The fingers need to be precision sized at both ends, bent at an angle, rigid, and also need to seal to the rail. This lead me down a whole spiral of researching the mechanics of o-rings and seals so I could design this to seal properly, and then figuring out how to make the necessary multi-piece design.
Some progress shots:
Pressure testing:
Polished and anodized:
And that's a finished set of one-off fuel rails test fit on the spare motor:
This can now be fed by a normal fuel supply system at normal fuel pressure. FPR will be mounted on the back of the motor near the rail and then split to both rails. And this will now be a return system with return line exiting the rails and going back to the tank.
I just need to make a couple lines and the fuel injector wiring sub harness and then this will be installed on the main engine in the car.
Oh, and the DI ports in the head were drilled/tapped and plugged:
Shame it won't be together and sorted before LRW (Lap Record Weather) is all over. Assuming it's sorted late spring, early summer, these are my predictions:
Shame it won't be together and sorted before LRW (Lap Record Weather) is all over. Assuming it's sorted late spring, early summer, these are my predictions:
Buttonwillow 13CW 1:38.xx
COTA 2:14.xx
LOL who gave this a neg cat??
I'm not making any lap time targets, but I like what you're thinking
Yeah 1.3" taller. I'll be making a cowl/bulge in the hood to clear it.
Sorry if you've answered elsewhere, but here's a bench-racing question:
You're going to lose horsepower by going from direct port injection to conventional manifold injection. The tradeoff is that you'll have more control over your ECU and you'll be able to make up the difference--and then some--with forced induction.
Give it up--what do you think injection will make you w/o forced induction, and are you even going to test those numbers or go straight to supercharger/turbocharger?
OEM powertrain engineer chiming in... Picking solely a DI or PI system isn't as simple as just a HP calculation (nor is the calculation even really possible to do without having GT-Power combustion modeling done).. Emissions / Maintenance / Packaging / Knock Prevention / HP&TQ are 5 things to consider off the bat from the designers aspect.. there are advantages to having both on the same engine, which is why you see both DI and PI on multiple Ford / Audi / Toyota engines. Shouldn't be much surprise that the most expensive option is the best performing overall...
To say without any specific testing that "you are going to lose horsepower by moving from DI to conventional PI" is a pretty loaded statement. We've done testing to show at lower RPM, PI has benefits, but there's an RPM switchover point where DI proves beneficial. This isn't an all encompassing statement though, there are always exceptions and the number of variables you can change in a combustion chamber design are seemingly infinite. With ever tightening government regulations, emissions and fuel economy benefits are one of the bigger reason automotive OEM's are making the shift to more expensive DI or hybrid PI/DI setups.
In Ryan's case, he is in a race environment, doesn't care about emissions or fuel economy, etc... if you are power limited by your fuel system (DI upgrade options are hard to find vs PI), moving to an easily upgradable PI system is an easy choice for the enthusiast. Any small difference between DI and PI will be tossed in the weeds with the addition of having proper fueling with PI.
Picking solely a DI or PI system isn't as simple as just a HP calculation (nor is the calculation even really possible to do without having GT-Power combustion modeling done).. Emissions / Maintenance / Packaging / Knock Prevention / HP&TQ are 5 things to consider off the bat from the designers aspect.. there are advantages to having both on the same engine, which is why you see both DI and PI on multiple Ford / Audi / Toyota engines. Shouldn't be much surprise that the most expensive option is the best performing overall...
To say without any specific testing that "you are going to lose horsepower by moving from DI to conventional PI" is a pretty loaded statement. We've done testing to show at lower RPM, PI has benefits, but there's an RPM switchover point where DI proves beneficial. This isn't an all encompassing statement though, there are always exceptions and the number of variables you can change in a combustion chamber design are seemingly infinite. With ever tightening government regulations, emissions and fuel economy benefits are one of the bigger reason automotive OEM's are making the shift to more expensive DI or hybrid PI/DI setups.
In Ryan's case, he is in a race environment, doesn't care about emissions or fuel economy, etc... if you are power limited by your fuel system (DI upgrade options are hard to find vs PI), moving to an easily upgradable PI system is an easy choice for the enthusiast. Any small difference between DI and PI will be tossed in the weeds with the addition of having proper fueling with PI
These kind of posts are why I have to keep coming back here. Thanks for the new little knowledge gem.
These kind of posts are why I have to keep coming back here. Thanks for the new little knowledge gem.
No worries! I also love this forum from the perspective of "someone always knows more than me". Between work and the pile of engineers that post up in here pretty often, I'm learning all the time. I don't mean to clutter Ryan's thread, but as long as the topic was breached I'll just finish my thoughts based on my fuel system experiences thus far.
PI Benefits:
Generally better A/F mixing at low/med loads as the mixture has more time to tumble past the valves and into the chamber.
Air/chamber tumble/swirl past intake valves is a big science problem of its own as it relates to volumetric efficiency of the engine. The more chamber swirl action, the less volumetrically efficient your engine generally is (yay pumping losses), but the better mixed your A/F is (from high chamber swirl), the more efficient your combustion process usually is. Finding the balance between air swirl (VE) and combustion efficiency is one of many iterative processes in combustion chamber design.
Cooling Affect (Pre-Combustion Chamber)
Increasing air density before the intake valve closes rams as much air as possible into the cylinder. More air = more fuel = more powaaaa!
DI Benefits:
Generally better for high loads (fast rpm) as you are injecting fuel exactly where you want it to be, which is a two-fold benefit
Cooling affect is in the cylinder which drops the peak cylinder temps, which helps out all the components in the chamber like valve seats / valves / etc. It may even allow you to run higher locally located piston ring sealing grooves for reduced emissions
May allow you to run higher CR / more timing / or just be less knock prone overall at those high loads (more powaaaaaa!)
Due to the nature of DI, you aren't wetting any of the intake port with fuel before it enters the combustion chamber. From an efficiency standpoint, DI > PI > Carb as you are further focusing where you want your fuel
The other way of saying this is, with PI any small bit of residual fuel on intake port walls/valves is wasted from a fuel economy standpoint and without proper control of residual fuel into the combustion chamber emissions are negatively affected.
Misc Drawbacks:
Without an A/F mixture running past your intake valves, DI has the disadvantage of being known for valve coking where PCV oil mist eventually gunks up your intake valves, requiring maintenance intervals for cleaning. PI essentially washes the valves with every pulse of fuel.
DI is much more expensive due to the higher system operating pressure and more precise fuel control needed
Summary:
Having both DI and PI is the bee's knees as you can optimize fueling efficiency, maintenance woes, and cooling for all load cases, but packaging it all can be challenging depending on application. It also is expensive to do both systems. Sometimes it is even hard to justify DI over PI to begin with in some circumstances where costs matter, but our government eventually force our arm with emissions regulations (example: economy cars slowly shifting to DI).
I hope with the above summary, you can start at least understanding how complex this all is and how impossible it is to expect Ryan to have any sort of accurate before and after calculation done. At the end of the day, ambient temperatures during his dyno session will play a much bigger factor on his power output than fuel injection type used.
OEM powertrain engineer chiming in... Picking solely a DI or PI system isn't as simple as just a HP calculation (nor is the calculation even really possible to do without having GT-Power combustion modeling done).. Emissions / Maintenance / Packaging / Knock Prevention / HP&TQ are 5 things to consider off the bat from the designers aspect.. there are advantages to having both on the same engine, which is why you see both DI and PI on multiple Ford / Audi / Toyota engines. Shouldn't be much surprise that the most expensive option is the best performing overall...
To say without any specific testing that "you are going to lose horsepower by moving from DI to conventional PI" is a pretty loaded statement. We've done testing to show at lower RPM, PI has benefits, but there's an RPM switchover point where DI proves beneficial. This isn't an all encompassing statement though, there are always exceptions and the number of variables you can change in a combustion chamber design are seemingly infinite. With ever tightening government regulations, emissions and fuel economy benefits are one of the bigger reason automotive OEM's are making the shift to more expensive DI or hybrid PI/DI setups.
In Ryan's case, he is in a race environment, doesn't care about emissions or fuel economy, etc... if you are power limited by your fuel system (DI upgrade options are hard to find vs PI), moving to an easily upgradable PI system is an easy choice for the enthusiast. Any small difference between DI and PI will be tossed in the weeds with the addition of having proper fueling with PI.
Luvs me all the extra knowledge, and saw your other post after this one. Want to extrapolate on a couple more things?
--I've read OEM ECU's do some really exotic things with their mapping, such as leaning the Hell out of the engine on tip in and then dumping lots of fuel after. If I remember right, part of what Ryan was trying to get around were ECU-based limitations, and maybe some of these quirks.
--To make things easier for my brain, I liken PI to DI like the jump from carbs to TBI. Are you saying in your other post that other car groups are taking direct injection cars and then adding port injection via piggyback? I think some of the MSPNP units can run additional injectors for Miatas, like PI + TBI. Care to expand?
--To make things easier for my brain, I liken PI to DI like the jump from carbs to TBI. Are you saying in your other post that other car groups are taking direct injection cars and then adding port injection via piggyback? I think some of the MSPNP units can run additional injectors for Miatas, like PI + TBI. Care to expand?
As Padlock mentioned, PI to DI is more like carb to PI. Saying PI-DI is like carb-TBI isn't giving DI enough credit. I've added quite a few PI systems to BMW's N54/N55 DI engines. There isn't a lot of aftermarket support for larger injectors, but then again you don't really control DI with injector size, but with fuel pressure. So once the HPFP has reached it's limit, and you want more fuel, PI is the way to go. They simply T off the low pressure fuel line going to the HPFP, or the really crazy guys run a new dedicated line from an auxiliary fuel pump. The guys who have 4 fuel pumps (3 in tank+HPFP) in their system make me want to shoot myself. I've installed a few Split Second controllers, not sure if it's the latest tech, but that's the popular one around here. Kind of like a MS but simplified to kick on with a boost sensor, and otherwise only uses RPM and the PW.
The shop I work for is building a 335 enduro car, and I'm hoping I can convince the higher-ups to do exactly what Ryan is doing, delete DI and install PI with an aftermarket ECU. It's currently the way to go to avoid oil build up and gain more end-user control.
As Padlock mentioned, PI to DI is more like carb to PI. Saying PI-DI is like carb-TBI isn't giving DI enough credit. I've added quite a few PI systems to BMW's N54/N55 DI engines. There isn't a lot of aftermarket support for larger injectors, but then again you don't really control DI with injector size, but with fuel pressure. So once the HPFP has reached it's limit, and you want more fuel, PI is the way to go. They simply T off the low pressure fuel line going to the HPFP, or the really crazy guys run a new dedicated line from an auxiliary fuel pump. The guys who have 4 fuel pumps (3 in tank+HPFP) in their system make me want to shoot myself. I've installed a few Split Second controllers, not sure if it's the latest tech, but that's the popular one around here. Kind of like a MS but simplified to kick on with a boost sensor, and otherwise only uses RPM and the PW.
The shop I work for is building a 335 enduro car, and I'm hoping I can convince the higher-ups to do exactly what Ryan is doing, delete DI and install PI with an aftermarket ECU. It's currently the way to go to avoid oil build up and gain more end-user control.
Would an extra injector in the intake manifold work, or is that too easy? DI + PI, cleans the valves, adds the HSPRS. I look for simple solutions because sometimes just remembering to tighten bolts is too much for my brain...
After filling up my gas tank today, I'm wondering if we'll all be racing Teslas in 10 years...
01-23-2021, 11:00 AM
1
