Why new injectors?
Discussion
Hedgehog, I hear what you are saying about your experience. Honesty in my opinion is absolutely paramount, this creates a level playing field where businesses can compete fairly.
I strongly suggest that you read the ASA rules not just the PH posting rules. I have some personal emails between myself and another 'commercial biased expert' who is to be found on these forums. The issue of honesty would be very clear to you if you had all of the information to hand. Sadly public forums (because of the posting rules that you quote) mean that the truth will never be found in these dark places. And I thought threadlock was for nutz n boltz.....lol
Ceejay
I strongly suggest that you read the ASA rules not just the PH posting rules. I have some personal emails between myself and another 'commercial biased expert' who is to be found on these forums. The issue of honesty would be very clear to you if you had all of the information to hand. Sadly public forums (because of the posting rules that you quote) mean that the truth will never be found in these dark places. And I thought threadlock was for nutz n boltz.....lol
Ceejay
Hi all,
well I was only really curious as to what was wrong with the injectors.
Mark,
Ive never spoken to you before so let me introduce myself, Im the guy who wrote the Megasquirt MSnS-Extra code with James Murrey. So I do have a bit of experience with EFI systems, etc. Anyhow, I agree with you about increasing pressure will alter voltage compensation for opening times, but lets face it, thats minute, maybe 0.05mS at 1V difference. And most injectors are tested at 43.5psi anyhow, so if TVR run at 36 then theres 6psi increase to be had free anyhow, but I dont actually like to increase fuel pressure, I would rather a new set fitted if they were going over 85% at high revs. My main concern was why they were being replaced, most last 100K before needing to be replaced, so I didnt know why the TVR ones were different.
Another thing I must say Im surprised at is the AFM, Id have thought there were gains to be had from removing it, I can do the tests myself, as I need to do some tests with AFM's . I'd like to be able to get megasquirt to use these as in some applications it is better than manifold pressure, e.g. 2 strokes.
Anyhow, enough of my drivel, Im off to the scrap yard to start taking some bits off and will see if I can get a set of injectors to play with,
Phil
well I was only really curious as to what was wrong with the injectors.
Mark,
Ive never spoken to you before so let me introduce myself, Im the guy who wrote the Megasquirt MSnS-Extra code with James Murrey. So I do have a bit of experience with EFI systems, etc. Anyhow, I agree with you about increasing pressure will alter voltage compensation for opening times, but lets face it, thats minute, maybe 0.05mS at 1V difference. And most injectors are tested at 43.5psi anyhow, so if TVR run at 36 then theres 6psi increase to be had free anyhow, but I dont actually like to increase fuel pressure, I would rather a new set fitted if they were going over 85% at high revs. My main concern was why they were being replaced, most last 100K before needing to be replaced, so I didnt know why the TVR ones were different.
Another thing I must say Im surprised at is the AFM, Id have thought there were gains to be had from removing it, I can do the tests myself, as I need to do some tests with AFM's . I'd like to be able to get megasquirt to use these as in some applications it is better than manifold pressure, e.g. 2 strokes.
Anyhow, enough of my drivel, Im off to the scrap yard to start taking some bits off and will see if I can get a set of injectors to play with,
Phil
GreenV8,
the maf sensor and MS isnt going to be too hard, I just need to do some tests, so if you want to help test it then shout out. Initially I will be datalogging the MAF output and running on MAP, then I will do the neccasary code mods to get it to run from maf. Sequential is in the pipe line for MSII as that will have CAN, so the world will be the limit for that, but sequential is low in the list as its hard to setup and theres very little gain in it, but people seem to like the idea. MS is going to take over the world that Im sure of
Phil
the maf sensor and MS isnt going to be too hard, I just need to do some tests, so if you want to help test it then shout out. Initially I will be datalogging the MAF output and running on MAP, then I will do the neccasary code mods to get it to run from maf. Sequential is in the pipe line for MSII as that will have CAN, so the world will be the limit for that, but sequential is low in the list as its hard to setup and theres very little gain in it, but people seem to like the idea. MS is going to take over the world that Im sure of
Phil
daxtojeiro said:
MS is going to take over the world that Im sure of
Phil
I'm not running MS but I really like the idea. The main things that put me off at the moment are the difficulty in working out which hardware/software combinations I need to get the features I want, and the lack of support for sequential injection. If it supported sequential injection now, I'd cancel my Emerald order tomorrow (it is currently three months into a three week lead time and counting...).
Wow!just come back online scince posting my last contribution,and its been interesting to see how the thread has developed!Its long been frustrating for me to see how many people have been talked into buying bigger injectors,when by my own cars output i know you dont need them,oh,and i dont have the more efficient heads either.Once again we have also had scientific type justifications to change,like the voltage drop,and once again it appears we are lucky enough to have had alternative information explaining the insignificance of such info.I only wish that Mark and his business associates would sell their products with more open honesty,discouraging people from buying things they dont need,and pointing them in the direction of what they do need.Or explaining the cost effective alternatives.But after the revelations of attempted price fixing by Mark,i doubt we'll ever get this,and thats such a shame that he abuses his long established reputation,as he is a very cleaver guy and you cant have too many,especially in tvr land.For me,i'll always shamelessly plug v8d and jools(trackday solutions),as this is where i know i'll be given the best advice about my car,and get great service too.Between them,they've given me a fabulous griff for a very fair price,and im really enjoying it
mongoose said:
stuff
I'm glad you're happy without the 'better' injectors and heads, but you don't have any grounds to cast doubt on claims that there are benefits to be had. There are credible reasons why they *might* give benefits, whether or not you personally have tried them or are prejudiced for or against them.
I'm a happy customer of ACT, V8D and MA. I've spoken to them at length and come away with the clear impression that they know what they're talking about and happy to help me make an informed decision rather than hard sell their products. Of course other people in the world also know what they're talking about, and people won't all agree all the time. Just because you trust somebody who disagrees with them, doesn't mean you should discount everything they say.
By the way if you posted accusations of price fixing about a business of mine on a public forum, I'd take serious issue with you.
GreenV8S said:
By the way if you posted accusations of price fixing about a business of mine on a public forum, I'd take serious issue with you.
I think Mongoose was refering to Joolz's post which mentioned a form of price fixing.
So I suggest you aim that dig at the correct target.
But I would also like this to get back on topic, simple because I'm looking for either an injector change or ASNU cleanup
>> Edited by David H on Thursday 21st July 14:08
Indeed it was me who mentioned the pricing policy.
In clarification, Mark asked me to say why I don't like him .. i answered and gave just one of many reasons *I* don't like him. If others have had what they consider fair work then that's great of course .. it's up to each person to decide where they'd like to spend their money. i always say that if you earn your money you've earned the right to spend it how you please I just choose to spend my money elsewhere.
But i consider price fixing to be way dirtier than making it public knowledge ... and i refuse to be a part of it.
i hope that clears that little bit up.
back to injectors ..
the interesting thing i notice from my conversations with both MA and my learned friend in-the-know is that they both come to the conclusion that fine misting injectors are the way to go, but for different reasons :
MA says it's the faster burn of the smaller droplets (though how small they are by the time they've collected on the back of the inlet valve i have no idea)
and my friend says it's down to the charge cooling effect as some of the droplets vapourise in the port.
Looking at it from the outside of the injector industry in, I'd find it much more believeable on the charge cooling issue than the burning droplet issue.
i can wholely believe that on a 17k rpm race engine running 2500psi pressures that injecting fine droplets into the chamber would create a situation where the small droplet size can be taken advantage of, but can't really see *at this moment in time* how that can benefit a RV8 turning at less than 1/3rd that rpm @ maximum power, especially as has been pointed out that the injector fires well up the port and a lot of the droplet size benefits would appear to be lost on the back of the valve.
Do we actually have any independant data on a RV8 running optimised fuelling on both the OE injectors and the uprated injectors to prove that it works?
Also surely if the droplet size does indeed create a faster burn, and hence faster pressure build up in the chamber, are these cars with uprated injectors using fully mapped ignition systems to take advantage of it? You can't alter the burn rate without altering the point at which you fire the mixture surely?
You could retard the whole timing curve on the clockwork dizzy, but that's not really taking full advantage of the injector change, though i can possibly see that there could be some improvement at certain parts of the rev range but maybe less power at other parts as the curve certainly couldn't be optimised for the full advantage to be taken. A best-compromise could overall be a faster car though.
Just how fine does the injector spray pattern have to be when fired upstream of the valve on a batch fired system? I can see the advantage with sequential injection, but not batch fired onto the back of the inlet valve and /or onto the port walls.
ideas?
In clarification, Mark asked me to say why I don't like him .. i answered and gave just one of many reasons *I* don't like him. If others have had what they consider fair work then that's great of course .. it's up to each person to decide where they'd like to spend their money. i always say that if you earn your money you've earned the right to spend it how you please
I just choose to spend my money elsewhere. But i consider price fixing to be way dirtier than making it public knowledge ... and i refuse to be a part of it.
i hope that clears that little bit up.
back to injectors ..
the interesting thing i notice from my conversations with both MA and my learned friend in-the-know is that they both come to the conclusion that fine misting injectors are the way to go, but for different reasons :
MA says it's the faster burn of the smaller droplets (though how small they are by the time they've collected on the back of the inlet valve i have no idea)
and my friend says it's down to the charge cooling effect as some of the droplets vapourise in the port.
Looking at it from the outside of the injector industry in, I'd find it much more believeable on the charge cooling issue than the burning droplet issue.
i can wholely believe that on a 17k rpm race engine running 2500psi pressures that injecting fine droplets into the chamber would create a situation where the small droplet size can be taken advantage of, but can't really see *at this moment in time* how that can benefit a RV8 turning at less than 1/3rd that rpm @ maximum power, especially as has been pointed out that the injector fires well up the port and a lot of the droplet size benefits would appear to be lost on the back of the valve.
Do we actually have any independant data on a RV8 running optimised fuelling on both the OE injectors and the uprated injectors to prove that it works?
Also surely if the droplet size does indeed create a faster burn, and hence faster pressure build up in the chamber, are these cars with uprated injectors using fully mapped ignition systems to take advantage of it? You can't alter the burn rate without altering the point at which you fire the mixture surely?
You could retard the whole timing curve on the clockwork dizzy, but that's not really taking full advantage of the injector change, though i can possibly see that there could be some improvement at certain parts of the rev range but maybe less power at other parts as the curve certainly couldn't be optimised for the full advantage to be taken. A best-compromise could overall be a faster car though.
Just how fine does the injector spray pattern have to be when fired upstream of the valve on a batch fired system? I can see the advantage with sequential injection, but not batch fired onto the back of the inlet valve and /or onto the port walls.
ideas?
mongoose said:
Lots of stuff
I’ve kept out of most contentious issues for while now after the last round of silly games, but I feel that post, whilst based on one mans experience and opinion with a bit of hearsay thrown in, is a little unfair and possibly malicious.
I have had direct dealings and have passed my hard earned to all parties in this, yes ALL of them. As far as I’m concerned and in my actual experience they are all good guys that love the marques and do the best for the customer, whilst trying to run a business and pay the mortgage. Some may not become your best friend, but what I want is professional advice and services for which I am more than happy to pay.
My little Tiv has probably one of the highest outputs and speed of response of any NA road going 4ltr TVR out there, it goes around the twisties quiet well too That is thanks to ALL the parties involved in teh theread + V8D
. Which leads me to try and redress the point about selling you things you don’t want or need, given the tune of my motor this is pertinent. I do not have any fancy plenum, bogo standard here, as the advice was for my installation the cost out weighed the benefits. I have standard injectors, as the advice was the current costs would outweigh the benefits. However if money was no object then there are benefits still to be had with these items. I continue to monitor the injector route as if they become available at better prices I will dabble, subject to not getting a Cerb this year that is.
Harry
Harry, there is no doubt that in the land of PH you are the best reporter of heresay, most posts start with 'don't quote me on this but I heard it somewhere' lol.
By the way (as a reminder) you never did call me re that other matter you chose to get involved in without knowing any of the facts. Sadly I missed you at LM but you'll have the chance to explain at the Monster Meet.
Ceejay
By the way (as a reminder) you never did call me re that other matter you chose to get involved in without knowing any of the facts. Sadly I missed you at LM but you'll have the chance to explain at the Monster Meet.
Ceejay
Seems like there are some alternative theories about why the injectors might give a benefit, the 'faster burn' and 'evaporative cooling' theories both seem credible to me. A back-to-back test would show whether there is any benefit, but I can't see any realistic way to prove or disprove whether it's caused by either/both of these effects. From memory, Mark/Austec (I forget which) did a back to back test and found a small torque increase, 9lb-ft rings a bell. It would be interesting to see the results of an independant back-to-back test to see if we could confirm these gains on a different engine.
Hi all,
well I never meant for this thread to get like this.
I may need to pick those peoples brains as yet.
Anyhow, the injectors look like Bosch items to me, which is better than the 4.6 RangeRover ones Ive tested in the past, the 3.0 and 3.5 had Bosch ones too. The number on the 5L engine I have is : 1830ga on one side and 0769 on the other. I cant find any info on them on the net so I will do a flow test on all 8 very soon,
Phil
well I never meant for this thread to get like this.
I may need to pick those peoples brains as yet.
Anyhow, the injectors look like Bosch items to me, which is better than the 4.6 RangeRover ones Ive tested in the past, the 3.0 and 3.5 had Bosch ones too. The number on the 5L engine I have is : 1830ga on one side and 0769 on the other. I cant find any info on them on the net so I will do a flow test on all 8 very soon,
Phil
daxtojeiro said:
Hi all,
well I never meant for this thread to get like this.
I may need to pick those peoples brains as yet.
Anyhow, the injectors look like Bosch items to me, which is better than the 4.6 RangeRover ones Ive tested in the past, the 3.0 and 3.5 had Bosch ones too. The number on the 5L engine I have is : 1830ga on one side and 0769 on the other. I cant find any info on them on the net so I will do a flow test on all 8 very soon,
Phil
Hi
what's your gut reaction on the charge cooling / droplet size debate Dax? have you seen any data that could give us a clue at all?
thanks, Joo
trackcar said:
What is the engine spec of your car Harry?
Full V8D rebuild,
10:1 (ish) compression,
218 cam verniered in,
full dynamic balance,
lightend/balanced flywheel,
full cc balance,
later (28cc) Stage 111 heads,
fully ported manifold,
45mm ali trumpet base,
Precat manifolds smaller bore primaries
Bended Y piece smaller bore secondaries
Standard JP the remainder of exhaust
Fully mapped 3D ignition
Smooth bore intake, unique routing
. A lot of the time was spent getting the right intake route length and shape, yes a lot of it on the RR. Quiet a bit was done by myself playing and monitoring the output of the AFM under load, good fun. Intake temps are still the biggest killer IMHO.
All said and done it has really been a mule and a lot has been learnt p[articularly on the intake lengths, short and direct is not as good as you think it might be
. The 3D ignition has really made the biggest difference to response and spread of torque, without it (it can be reversed) it still feels like a lumbering V8
. Glad to say none of the above is hearsay
. Harry
HarryW said:
trackcar said:
What is the engine spec of your car Harry?
Full V8D rebuild,
10:1 (ish) compression,
218 cam verniered in,
full dynamic balance,
lightend/balanced flywheel,
full cc balance,
later (28cc) Stage 111 heads,
fully ported manifold,
45mm ali trumpet base,
Precat manifolds smaller bore primaries
Bended Y piece smaller bore secondaries
Standard JP the remainder of exhaust
Fully mapped 3D ignition
Smooth bore intake, unique routing
A lot of the time was spent getting the right intake route length and shape, yes a lot of it on the RR. Quiet a bit was done by myself playing and monitoring the output of the AFM under load, good fun. Intake temps are still the biggest killer IMHO.
All said and done it has really been a mule and a lot has been learnt p[articularly on the intake lengths, short and direct is not as good as you think it might be
The 3D ignition has really made the biggest difference to response and spread of torque, without it (it can be reversed) it still feels like a lumbering V8
Glad to say none of the above is hearsay
Harry
First hand cherry popped then Harry! Much easier to digest and for once an interesting read. Maybe you should try it more often and keep to the stuff you do know about.
Ceejay
>> Edited by ceejay on Thursday 21st July 18:10
Great to see the use of mapped ignition .. i still don't understand why more people don't use it ...
that spec oughta do it
I hope we're in the same group at the monster meet .. would love to see how fast my car is (std tired engine but well developed through the twisties) is against your engine-biased mods..
that spec oughta do it
I hope we're in the same group at the monster meet .. would love to see how fast my car is (std tired engine but well developed through the twisties) is against your engine-biased mods..
trackcar said:
Hi all,
well I never meant for this thread to get like this.
I may need to pick those peoples brains as yet.
Anyhow, the injectors look like Bosch items to me, which is better than the 4.6 RangeRover ones Ive tested in the past, the 3.0 and 3.5 had Bosch ones too. The number on the 5L engine I have is : 1830ga on one side and 0769 on the other. I cant find any info on them on the net so I will do a flow test on all 8 very soon,
Phil
Hi
what's your gut reaction on the charge cooling / droplet size debate Dax? have you seen any data that could give us a clue at all?
thanks, Joo
well there were a few people doing this in the turbo world to help cool the air a bit, indeed, as a general rule anything lower than 12AFR starts to reduce power, but they would run at 11-11.5 to help cool the air, but that was to stop detonation, not for power. I would think its like so many things, they work in theory and are correct, but in practice there will be no noticable gain in power. So many things can add 1 bhp at 6000rpm , its having the correct air fuel ratio thats where power comes from, if you let more air in then you have to give it more fuel, if you cant maintain the correct ration then power will be lost, spray patterns, etc, will give you the extra 1BHP.
I want to see if there are any gains to be had from removing the air flow meter, Ive measured it and the air intake on the plenum is 65mm, the air flow meter is as slim as 55mm, so thats quite a large restriction in my mind, but without testing this I cant be sure. Also mappable spark HAS to be the way to gain more power, I was gobsmacked when I pushed the bonnet off the TVR ( its been in an accident) and there sat a distributor and one coil!!! This was supposed to be a high perfomance engine I thought, so with out the MAF and with mapped spark and maintaining the correct AFR Im hoping to have some power gains out of the engine for very very little money. If the injectors arnt up to the job then I need to address this, but thats what I was trying to find out,
Phil
Gassing Station | Griffith | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff