Ba, your work is the best! Now three questions.

1. How quick is your truck with all your mods?

2. Do you have a regular job (or do you just play with cars)?

3. Would you adopt me and let me rag your toys?

One extra question: what do you think about the 2# (extra boost) lower pulley? I have one on order but would like to hear your thoughts.


Jerry

 

Cool deal on the XXXL’s. I’ll definitely do a Desisto drive-by.

Just when I think I have the calculations close, more data comes in that clouds the theory. So are we saying that even at the HP peak you were fat on the fuel? For 2001, Ford is increasing the fender inlet hole AND going to a 90mm MAF? Maybe there is something to this inlet restriction. More power may be there but my point earlier still seems to be valid. Is 430 RWHP our limit without larger injectors or increase fuel pressures? BABolt seems to confirm this with his 4.6L Mustang. “My 4.6L 2 valve produces over 500 HP at the rear wheels….. I tried to use the 41 lbs. Lightning injectors and they would not support my fuel demands. I use 93 lbs. Injectors”. As you also say, “Good analysis has to start with a hypothesis and then testing.” Nothing beats real data.


------------------
Joel.......
99.5 White Lightning,
SVT # 0056

 

As I posted it was just a thought! "Why would you want two superchargers or twin turbos if the heads were a limiting factor or if high boost was keeping the valves open? "....obviously if the heads were a limiting factor they would be changed right?and installing different springs with higher seat pressure is no big deal as well something that could be done when the heads were off! A turbosystem on the L will be more efficient than a superchager..creating less heat which equals more power.

[This message has been edited by n20boy (edited 12-23-2000).]

 

You guys are giving me a chubby! Finally a post on something besides floor mats.
I think you guys are right on the injector size being the limiting factor, and perhaps the size and location of the air filter. I played around with bigger NOS jets and found that with the fuel side jet pretty much maxing out the fuel pressure and trying to give it a bigger shot of NOS I would go slower. Now this was just changing jets at the track (not the most scientific method) and found that the 100hp combination that NOS gave me was as quick as I could make it go. I believe that since I was running a dry kit and the injectors were picking up the fuel that they were running out of flow. I changed the fuel pumps to twin 190 lph hopeing to get more fuel but it didn't help. Now on the dyno it pulled around 360 rwhp no NOS and around 460 rwhp on the bottle. Now is it just a coincidence that both myself and Top Gun hit the wall at about the same point? or could it be that is all the stock injectors will make? or is it all the heads will flow? After talking to BABolt about the injectors on his Mustang. I have to beleive that the injectors are the problem. Now I could also fix this by converting to a wet kit but running the NOS/fuel mix through the rotors made me nervous plus the issues of puddling the fuel in the lower intake since the lower intake was designed as a dry intake. If I continue the run the bottle I would probably convert to a pro shot fogger type set up (8 fuel/NOS injectors mounted next to the factory injectors).
TOP GUN,
Are you still running the stock ignition? I have heard that converting to a MSD DIS4 and running two coil packs with plug wires has it's advantages on big boost/NOS set up. I'm sorry if this question seems kind of stupid since you are leaps and bounds ahead of us as far as researching these trucks. I was just curious.

Jerry,
I already asked Mike if he would consider adopting a 33 year old gear head.

This is just my opinions,
HIGH RISK

 

mr risk,
what jets did you find made the nos perform best? 55+47?

 

Hey Guys
I also have a filter story that you might find interesting. When I bought my Pro-M MAF I took one look at the filter that is provided with it and decided it had to go. K&N says in there catalog that, 1 sq.in. of there pleated filter material will flow about 6 cfm @ 1.5"h2o. So anyway I get a bigger clamp on style round filter that measures 7"dia x 9"long and the truck runs a little better ( not a huge difference,but better)
Then I decided to get tricky and I ordered an S&B coaxial type filter in roughly the same dimensions as the K&N that I was running. (this is the same type filter that Sal sells in his filter kits) I clamped it on the Pro-M and went for a ride and the truck fell on its face, I mean it lost a lot of power. So I go home and clamp on the K&N and the power is back.
So my hypothesis is this,the S&B filter has air entering in opposing directions and it causes turbulence that the Pro-M didn't like. The Pro-M is calibrated with a K&N and when I put that goofy filter on there,it couldn't read the air flow. Just thought I'd throw that on the fire.
I have now gone back to the stock MAF,seems that the latest generation of race chips are only programed for the stock piece and the chip burners are not really interested in dealing with the Pro-M.
Dale


------------------
Black 00'
13.21 @ 105.24 so far
full weight, stock tires

 

One more thing to consider that I failed to think of before: As the boost pressure goes up the fuel pressure must increase to maintain the same flow. My previous calculations did not account for this. So let's try it again. Back to the equation:
ENGINE HP = [Injector (@ 43.5psi)]*[# Cyl]*[Inj Duty Cycle]/BSFC.
In stock condition with 8psi boost from the Eaton, our effective injector is not 41lb/hr, but:
Stock Effective Injector = 41*[(43.5-8)/43.5]^.5 = 37lb/hr.
So the maximum stock Engine HP capability (based on my previous assumptions) is:
Engine HP = (37*8*.8/.5) = 473 HP, or the
RWHP [(473-45)*(1-.11)] = 381 RWHP. (Coincidentally the maximum HP BABolt saw was 386 RWHP .)

Now IF in Chet’s case we have 16psi of boost that is requiring 75hp to turn the two blowers, and we are only increasing the fuel pressure (FP) to 60(+)psi, we would yield:
Effective Injector = 41*[(60-16)/43.5]*^.5 = 41.2lb/hr
Engine HP = (41.2*8*.8/.5) = 527 HP
RWHP = [(527-75)*(1-.11)] = 402 RWHP

If Chet’s FP was set 72psi you would get 463 RWHP.

I’m all confused now (so don’t worry about the dumb look on your own face ). It looks like we didn’t get anywhere! This point is true: if you continue to use the 41lb/hr injectors the fuel pressure must be increased to compensate for the higher boost levels. BABolt stated that you were rich and still couldn’t get any more HP, which certainly points to an air intake problem. But if you were developing boost I can’t see how airflow is your problem other than possibly a loss in blower efficiency (more HP required to make the same boost level). Clearly there is free horsepower to be had if you have a freer flowing intake because the pressure ratio across the blower is less, thus requiring less HP. Man, my head is starting to hurt. Thanks for letting me ramble again.

HAVE A GREAT HOLIDAY!!!!!!

------------------
Joel.......
99.5 White Lightning,
SVT # 0056



[This message has been edited by JoeLightning (edited 12-24-2000).]

 

The knowledge I get from this group keeps amazing me day in and day out. I think I'm going to have to work for Chet so I know EXACTLY what you all are talking about. How about it Chet? Want to hire a 19 yr old college student??
Good luck on breaking through that wall.

-Marcus

------------------
Black 2001 ordered and impatiently waiting.
<A HREF="Http://www.SVTperformance.com" TARGET=_blank> </A>

 

The ignition question is a great one? I was recently asking anyone and everyone if there is a mod to improve it! I really want to leave the ignition stock as long as I can and give it a little extra OOMPH if possible??? If their is an ignition GENIOUS out ther please help. Just for kicks over the holidays I am going to remove the aircleaner and change the blower belt to turn only the Paxton to see if anything changes. Once everyone gets back from the holidays I will increase the Paxton to 16psig by itself and dyno it to see the difference. We might as well play until the new cylinder heads arrive. Also, I purchased a new 2001 L does anyone want to purchase a virtually new cherry L with low miles!!! Just think only 5000 "GRANDMA" driven miles with only 4999 of them on the dyno. The ad will read "driven only on the weekends" never seen the rain! Keep the ideas coming and I will keep changing the parts, Thanks again for the thoughts,Chet

 

Hi Joel
I see that you reposted my Lightning HP numbers. Here is the background on how I got there. Chassis & driveline mods are 3.73 gears and lowering. These were the first changes that I made. Also added the carbon fiber driveshaft but never dyno tested it.The changes to my engine consist of a Pro-M meter and K&N filter, chip, oval throttle body and long tube headers with Borla mufflers. There are no other changes, in fact I have never even pulled the stock spark plugs to check if the gap is correct let alone replace them with NGK's. All of the items that I have made with the exception of the milled SVT adapter have never been installed on my truck. They have been waiting for the new short block. The initial dyno test for my Lightning was a low of 310 to 318 ( I did three pulls stock, the second was 316 and the third was the 310 figure)rear wheel horse power and that was on 8/10/99. As I added the four components that I just cited I tested eachof them individually and together with the components that I had available at the time. So yes I know what each component is worth and as I stated before in other posts there is a synergy with the combination. I think that I have a pretty fair increase, 68 horse power with a minimum of add-ons. In regards to the Mustang the fuel lines are 1/2 inch on the delievery side.
Jerry
Thanks for the compliment my Lightning is not quick. The best that I have done is 13.30 at 106 MPH on the F1's, it was 8/18/00 at Milan Dragway and I had a 2.02 sixty foot. I can make a lot of excuses and say that the mile per hour is indicative of 12 second times but I have not done it yet. Much like the shoemaker that makes shoes I have yet to use many of the items that I have made. I am sure that you now have second thoughts about adoption, anyways I was hoping that some rich widow would wisk me away. Oh yea, I do the 9 to 5 thing too. Lower pulley change, give it a shot.


------------------
BABolt
SVT#290




[This message has been edited by BABolt (edited 12-25-2000).]

 

Thanks Chet for not getting cheesed at my stupid question. My understanding is that you can run two MSD DIS4's with the coil on plug ignition or a single MSD DIS4 with two coil packs. I am regergitating this info from a conversation with Lideo from Alternative Auto. Now I still feel that bigger injectors would help with the mondo boost you are pumping. I am also curious if blowing out the spark is an issue. Now I hope you don't take this the wrong way. I am not sure. Basically we are doing the same thing by inducting extra oxygen to the combustion chamber. Either by multi-blower or NOS. Here in Michigan track time has come to a screetching halt and I see that you are still hard at it. I hope to keep in touch with me through BABolt or Email me at HIGHRISK22@peoplepc.com. We are both some what of the extremists but you have alot better resources then myself. Please keep us posted.

Thanks,
HIGH RISK

 

38Topgun
This is an outside long long shot at your problem, but after looking at the fuel rails on my truck, they look to be about the same size as any ford that has 19lb injectors. Large fuel injectors and small fuel rails dont work very well. A 41lb injector isn't big but it aint small either.
If the fuel rail being used is to small for the set of injectors being used it will cause a shock wave effect or pulsing in the rail that can get out of control and really effect the flow rate of the injectors.
You and Highrisk both might be at that threshold. Like I said it was an outside shot.
Dale


------------------
Black 00'
13.21 @ 105.24 so far
full weight, stock tires

 

Good Morning and Merry Christmas
You can run the MSD but not with the EEC. You have to go the DFI route like I did. The stock fuel rails become a problem when you try to support about 600 HP. Steeda now offers extruded aluminum fuel rails (greater flow) for the mod motors I will post a photo in a few days.

------------------
BABolt
SVT#290




[This message has been edited by BABolt (edited 12-25-2000).]

 

I think its the 4 cats that can't flow what your putting out.

 

Sorry BABolt, I've seen several different guys at the corral board using the MSD DIS4 and they don't seem to mention having DFI. Just figured with two coil packs the ECC could use the MSD as a spark intensifier. I called MSD and a single DIS4 will not support 8 coils. I didn't ask them if you had to go to a DFI or not. (I talked to them this fall before we had this conversation) You were with me when Lideo mentioned that I would need two DIS4's to fire 8 coils but we were talking about the DFI any how. So I'm not sure if the ECC will support it or not. It just seemed like it would from what I've gathered at the corral site. I was just curious with all the elaborate mods Chet has done if spark blow out is becomeing an issue.

HIGH RISK