My cars development
Discussion
Alex, you've tried intake manifold Edelbrock Pro Flo xt?
It is less expensive and produces the same horses.
your cam which duration at .050 ex / asp? i have installed comp cam 231/237 (spring ecc)
I'm making the same changes on my own.
I too have had the same problems with the tanks and pump 2 (my run without switch simultaneously).
please if is possible, I think it would be better to post a wiring diagram? with many solution?
thanks
It is less expensive and produces the same horses.
your cam which duration at .050 ex / asp? i have installed comp cam 231/237 (spring ecc)
I'm making the same changes on my own.
I too have had the same problems with the tanks and pump 2 (my run without switch simultaneously).
please if is possible, I think it would be better to post a wiring diagram? with many solution?
thanks
I'm just working on the fuel system now,I am connecting both tanks together to balance them with the an6 at the bottom of each tank. The an6 tank pick ups will then be connected together and T connector to lift pump via an in-line filter,pump to swirl pot, swirl pot to variable speed high pressure pump,high pressure pump to fuel rails via two in-line filters. Swirl pot overflow to T back to both tanks via an6 tank return, fuel regulator return also via this.
It seems a similar solution to what is being used and my question would be, does the single lift pump suffer from running dry when the fuel gets say 1/4 full under hard cornering with the fuel moving away from either fuel tank pick up (simple solution may be fill tank when 1/4 full)
would I be better off running two smaller lift pumps like the standard carters set up beside each fuel tank feeding into the swirl pot so either one will still be feeding the swirl pot under the same conditions or does this not happen at all and I'm worrying about nothing.
Still waiting for fuel pumps and inter-coolers from States, problem with Fuelab lift pump from factory and liquid inter-coolers made it to UK customs and disappeared for now.
Picture of progress so far,drivers side exhaust manifold is off at the moment waiting for the fuel pumps, engine,gearbox and dry sump breather system has been fabricated and fitted. Still lots to make but hopefully engine will run this year and I can get back to the meccano job of the rest of the car
Regards Tim
UltimaCH said:
Alex, where are you fitting your twin pump surge tank? On the bulkhead downside somewhere?
The surge is mounted horizontally above the drivers side fuel tank with the pick ups on the pumps pointing towards the back of the car. 845ste said:
your cam which duration at .050 ex / asp? i have installed comp cam 231/237 (spring ecc)
I think it would be better to post a wiring diagram? with many solution?
My cam = 237 / 252 @ .050, .612 / .618 lift, 112 lobe sepI think it would be better to post a wiring diagram? with many solution?
chuntington101 said:
I think the MSD will be MUCH better in the mid range than the above! There have been loads of tests carried out and unless you are revving over 7k these short runner setups really don't add anything other than weight!
Yep - exactly my reason for choosing that manifold. It's cheap, around $1200 AUD, and also has runner lengths long enough that you don't lose bottom end / mid range, which is important to me on a road car. xrtim said:
does the single lift pump suffer from running dry when the fuel gets say 1/4 full under hard cornering with the fuel moving away from either fuel tank pick up (simple solution may be fill tank when 1/4 full)
would I be better off running two smaller lift pumps like the standard carters set up beside each fuel tank feeding into the swirl pot so either one will still be feeding the swirl pot under the same conditions or does this not happen at all and I'm worrying about nothing.
Looking good Tim!would I be better off running two smaller lift pumps like the standard carters set up beside each fuel tank feeding into the swirl pot so either one will still be feeding the swirl pot under the same conditions or does this not happen at all and I'm worrying about nothing.
Personally, I've opted for (2) lift pumps that out-flow my (2) high pressure pumps. This way, my surge tank will always be 100% full all the time.
Also, all my pumps are wired separately, so should one lift or high pressure pump fail, the system will continue to function albeit at a reduced power capacity.
Edited by AlexCim on Sunday 6th March 21:09
turbos are HX35 12cm twin scroll, picture is a bit deceptive as exhausts are past the end of the chassis not sure if I will go for offset single outlet or twin standard position outlets as I need room for charge cooler radiator and rear passengers side is looking like the only option hence single outlet,would love to do the 918 style but charge coolers are going along length of each rocker cover (when and if they turn up from customs) to keep turbo to inlet manifold distance short so rear outlet it is for exhaust.
has anyone using a single lift pump drawing from two tanks to feed a swirl pot had problems as the more I think about it two smaller lift pumps sound like the way to go, it would be nice if I could hear first hand while I have a chance to change my plans.
Thanks for the interest
Tim
has anyone using a single lift pump drawing from two tanks to feed a swirl pot had problems as the more I think about it two smaller lift pumps sound like the way to go, it would be nice if I could hear first hand while I have a chance to change my plans.
Thanks for the interest
Tim
My weedy n/a LS7 (575hp) has a single lift pump from the passenger side tank feeding a swirl pot and then the A1000 H/p pump with no issues. Tanks linked and return to the same tank as pump is in.
No issues other than temperature of fuel so I will be fitting an on demand fuel pump regulator asap.
The high pressure pump does heat up the fuel, especially when returning to the swirl pot and sitting in traffic (no issue when at speed).
Paul
No issues other than temperature of fuel so I will be fitting an on demand fuel pump regulator asap.
The high pressure pump does heat up the fuel, especially when returning to the swirl pot and sitting in traffic (no issue when at speed).
Paul
The build in the picture above looks great!
Speaking from experience here, I think the balance pipe needs to be bigger than a -6, and importantly, the two tanks need to be linked at the top to allow air to travel between the two tanks too, ensuring that the lowest point of that 'breather' is the point at which is meets both tanks. We had issues with this at first but overcame them with a bigger link pipe.
Speaking from experience here, I think the balance pipe needs to be bigger than a -6, and importantly, the two tanks need to be linked at the top to allow air to travel between the two tanks too, ensuring that the lowest point of that 'breather' is the point at which is meets both tanks. We had issues with this at first but overcame them with a bigger link pipe.
macgtech said:
The build in the picture above looks great!
Speaking from experience here, I think the balance pipe needs to be bigger than a -6, and importantly, the two tanks need to be linked at the top to allow air to travel between the two tanks too, ensuring that the lowest point of that 'breather' is the point at which is meets both tanks. We had issues with this at first but overcame them with a bigger link pipe.
Jonny, does that mean you have two balance pipes with a large diameter in the lower part of the tanks for petrol balance and a smaller diameter at the top for air balance?Speaking from experience here, I think the balance pipe needs to be bigger than a -6, and importantly, the two tanks need to be linked at the top to allow air to travel between the two tanks too, ensuring that the lowest point of that 'breather' is the point at which is meets both tanks. We had issues with this at first but overcame them with a bigger link pipe.
UltimaCH said:
Jonny, does that mean you have two balance pipes with a large diameter in the lower part of the tanks for petrol balance and a smaller diameter at the top for air balance?
HiA singe tank in the new build!
When we ran a twin tank arrangement, which wasn't for long, you are correct. Still didn't balance very quickly or efficiently though - you couldn't fill one tank and have it self level quickly.
macgtech said:
The build in the picture above looks great!
Speaking from experience here, I think the balance pipe needs to be bigger than a -6, and importantly, the two tanks need to be linked at the top to allow air to travel between the two tanks too, ensuring that the lowest point of that 'breather' is the point at which is meets both tanks. We had issues with this at first but overcame them with a bigger link pipe.
Many thanks for the informationSpeaking from experience here, I think the balance pipe needs to be bigger than a -6, and importantly, the two tanks need to be linked at the top to allow air to travel between the two tanks too, ensuring that the lowest point of that 'breather' is the point at which is meets both tanks. We had issues with this at first but overcame them with a bigger link pipe.
That's convinced me to keep the tanks separate, looks like I will be doing something similar to the factory
Regards Tim
macgtech said:
The build in the picture above looks great!
Speaking from experience here, I think the balance pipe needs to be bigger than a -6, and importantly, the two tanks need to be linked at the top to allow air to travel between the two tanks too, ensuring that the lowest point of that 'breather' is the point at which is meets both tanks. We had issues with this at first but overcame them with a bigger link pipe.
I have no more nipples on the tank to use Speaking from experience here, I think the balance pipe needs to be bigger than a -6, and importantly, the two tanks need to be linked at the top to allow air to travel between the two tanks too, ensuring that the lowest point of that 'breather' is the point at which is meets both tanks. We had issues with this at first but overcame them with a bigger link pipe.
The top ones (currently capped off as per factory fuel set up) I am using as returns from the surge, one bottom one is a feed, and one bottom one is for the balance pipe.
Hey Alex, have you ever had your car on a dyno? I am in Sydney looking to buy an Ultima GTR with the 700hp American Speed engine and I was sent a dyno chart from the owner with it making a max of 366kw @ 5725rpm and dropping off to about 340kw @ 7005rpm. To me this seems quite low for a 700hp @ flywheel rated engine.
CL GTR said:
Hey Alex, have you ever had your car on a dyno? I am in Sydney looking to buy an Ultima GTR with the 700hp American Speed engine and I was sent a dyno chart from the owner with it making a max of 366kw @ 5725rpm and dropping off to about 340kw @ 7005rpm. To me this seems quite low for a 700hp @ flywheel rated engine.
The one from TAS?My standard engine made like 340 rwkw as far as I can remember. Which is about right if you think standard engine is 505hp, plus the long tube headers, so maybe ~550hp. 550hp into kw = 410kw, take away 15-20% driveline loss and it's around 330rwkw +/-.
Can't see how a car with 700 fly wheel hp could possibly be making 366rwkw. 366 * 1.25 / 0.75 = 610hp at the flywheel.
PS - When I spoke to Gail when originally before buying my engine, he said "Modifications to 700 hp include, hand ported cylinder heads, custom camshaft, HD pushrods, PAC high lift valve springs, FAST fuel injection manifold and injectors, custom made 102mm drive wire throttle body, carbon fiber fuel rail covers."
Gassing Station | Ultima | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff