DuAl FeDe fewyl RaILS 4 da WIn?
08-07-2008, 06:12 AM
#121
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,047
Total Cats: 12
Ok, within the limits of the test, there's very little difference. Not everything was as calibrated as it could be, but... I seemed to see more a change in the pattern Than an actual shortage - that meant sometimes single feed was better, sometimes dual. Didn't seem to matter if it was returnless or not.
More details when I get a chance to sort it all. A good, dual feed rail, and some HIGH flow injectors would have been nice. Unfortunately, it seems the biggest injectors I could try on the stock NA rail was ~240.
More later. Pics, and videos (if someone can tell me how to use youtube) to follow.
More details when I get a chance to sort it all. A good, dual feed rail, and some HIGH flow injectors would have been nice. Unfortunately, it seems the biggest injectors I could try on the stock NA rail was ~240.
More later. Pics, and videos (if someone can tell me how to use youtube) to follow.
Reply
0
0
08-07-2008, 09:26 AM
#122
Elite Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Point Pleasant, NJ
Posts: 2,957
Total Cats: 2
Do you still need a stock 99 rail? I have one. If it was winter I would be willing to send you my vishnu dual 99 rail(maybe). A friend just bought one and may be talked into sending it to you for testing.
I also have 6 430cc injectors you can use. low z though.
oh, and i have 4 195500-2010 460's sitting around but one seems to be stuck closed.
I also have 6 430cc injectors you can use. low z though.
oh, and i have 4 195500-2010 460's sitting around but one seems to be stuck closed.
Reply
0
0
08-07-2008, 01:27 PM
#124
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,047
Total Cats: 12
Hmmm, yeah - that would be awesome! I might repeat the test a bit later. With a bit more time (I know it sounds funny since I spent months "on" it) I could flow test each injector first to make sure they are matched. Anyway, I have the entire set up now so it's really just a matter of bolting it all together, hitting "go" on the computer and writing down the results.
Here's how I ran things. I didn't really need to, being MS-II, I can just tell the injectors to run, and give them whatever settings I want... However, it's buggy like everything MS-II.
I pulled a few jumpers so I wouldn't run things on my car during the test.
After various configurations, this one seemed to work. The only real upgrade was putting a funnel next to the hose so I'd stop leaving it out, turning on my fuel pump, and soaking my entire bench with gasoline. I did this at least 6 times.
Once I had the hose supported on a roll of blue shop towels, and the entire roll became saturated with fuel. It's probably sitting in my driveway now with a huge pile of other rags I was too afraid to have in the garage evaporating.
And now: Sweet elixir of the horsepower gods:
There it is, the results of a particularly uneven run. You can easily real to 1/4 of a CC accuracy, in general ~1%.
Of course stumbling out of my house this morning I left my notes/data at home (but remembered my dorm fridge for cold monster at work!), but I can reiterate what I (tried to) say last night - there did seem to be fixed patterns in the injectors, and the dual/single feed didn't seem to remove them, only redistribute them. The spread generally was small (the biggest difference was ~3%, typical 1.5%), but I'm very interested to repeat the experiment with bigger injectors, closer to the limit of what the rail can run.
Notes:
I did most of the testing with "injector output test mode" which I set things for 85% duty cycle, either 10ms period or 10 ms open time, depending when I did it. This simulates 6,000 or 5100 respectively. The trouble with this mode is that all four injectors fire at the same time.
To better simulate the real way the motor works, I used the jimstim (with req-fuel turned way up so I could hit ~81% duty cycle at 7,000 rpm redline) and ran the motor at various speeds (unfortunately this was mostly with the FM rail and Alberto's 60 lb/hr injectors), but if anything it evens out what you get from the rail. The test would run the injectors different amounts, hoping to see if there was a resonance to be aware of. I think the damper would be a good thing to test if I do this again.
Also, there's a small chance I'll pull my rail soon (since I can't idle for **** these days, cyl one seems to not even be attached to the car though I get spark) then I'll have everything I "need" except a dual feed rail. But my 550's should do the job.
Lastly: Paul - I have access to a sonic cleaner, so I don't know if it would help - it's more of a jewelry cleaner, but I could try it. :-)
Here's how I ran things. I didn't really need to, being MS-II, I can just tell the injectors to run, and give them whatever settings I want... However, it's buggy like everything MS-II.
I pulled a few jumpers so I wouldn't run things on my car during the test.
After various configurations, this one seemed to work. The only real upgrade was putting a funnel next to the hose so I'd stop leaving it out, turning on my fuel pump, and soaking my entire bench with gasoline. I did this at least 6 times.
Once I had the hose supported on a roll of blue shop towels, and the entire roll became saturated with fuel. It's probably sitting in my driveway now with a huge pile of other rags I was too afraid to have in the garage evaporating.
And now: Sweet elixir of the horsepower gods:
There it is, the results of a particularly uneven run. You can easily real to 1/4 of a CC accuracy, in general ~1%.
Of course stumbling out of my house this morning I left my notes/data at home (but remembered my dorm fridge for cold monster at work!), but I can reiterate what I (tried to) say last night - there did seem to be fixed patterns in the injectors, and the dual/single feed didn't seem to remove them, only redistribute them. The spread generally was small (the biggest difference was ~3%, typical 1.5%), but I'm very interested to repeat the experiment with bigger injectors, closer to the limit of what the rail can run.
Notes:
I did most of the testing with "injector output test mode" which I set things for 85% duty cycle, either 10ms period or 10 ms open time, depending when I did it. This simulates 6,000 or 5100 respectively. The trouble with this mode is that all four injectors fire at the same time.
To better simulate the real way the motor works, I used the jimstim (with req-fuel turned way up so I could hit ~81% duty cycle at 7,000 rpm redline) and ran the motor at various speeds (unfortunately this was mostly with the FM rail and Alberto's 60 lb/hr injectors), but if anything it evens out what you get from the rail. The test would run the injectors different amounts, hoping to see if there was a resonance to be aware of. I think the damper would be a good thing to test if I do this again.
Also, there's a small chance I'll pull my rail soon (since I can't idle for **** these days, cyl one seems to not even be attached to the car though I get spark) then I'll have everything I "need" except a dual feed rail. But my 550's should do the job.
Lastly: Paul - I have access to a sonic cleaner, so I don't know if it would help - it's more of a jewelry cleaner, but I could try it. :-)
Reply
0
0
08-07-2008, 01:31 PM
#125
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,047
Total Cats: 12
I should have just bought one of those rails when they were on sale and sold it after the price went up. I'd have broken even. :-)
Reply
0
0
. Anywho, when you know you'll be able to use it pm your address and I'll send it over.
08-07-2008, 01:55 PM
#127
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,047
Total Cats: 12
By popular demand:
My "Single Feed" test rig:
I was thinking of playing with damping by how far I put the clamp from the hose barb, but on the NA rail with the regulator I don't think it matters.
Also, just cause I like this pic:
MAN I sure felt sciency doing that. I think the guy who came up with the trademark "Techron" was probably doing this at the time.
My "Single Feed" test rig:
I was thinking of playing with damping by how far I put the clamp from the hose barb, but on the NA rail with the regulator I don't think it matters.
Also, just cause I like this pic:
MAN I sure felt sciency doing that. I think the guy who came up with the trademark "Techron" was probably doing this at the time.
Reply
0
0
That's pretty good. I see this could go in many directions.
08-07-2008, 07:26 PM
#139
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,047
Total Cats: 12
<embed id="VideoPlayback" style="width:400px;height:326px" allowFullScreen="true" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-8828968667715232007&hl=en&fs=true" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"> </embed>
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...15232007&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...15232007&hl=en
Reply
0
0
08-07-2008, 07:45 PM
#140
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,047
Total Cats: 12
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...94501591&hl=en
This one shows the MS-II acting up - I ran the "same" test twice, got much more fuel the second time, obviously there were many more pulses. Certainly better off than I would be without it, but nowhere near as reliable as my turning the RPM **** by hand on the jimstim.
Could you use an MS-II for figuring out open times and flow rates for an injector? Probably, but it would take a lot of averaging from many runs.
This one shows the MS-II acting up - I ran the "same" test twice, got much more fuel the second time, obviously there were many more pulses. Certainly better off than I would be without it, but nowhere near as reliable as my turning the RPM **** by hand on the jimstim.
Could you use an MS-II for figuring out open times and flow rates for an injector? Probably, but it would take a lot of averaging from many runs.
Reply
0
0
