[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

FIC +30 and LPE di pump with a low side should handle 700whp on pump E. At least that is what Brett told me. I wouldn't buy LPE injectors because the FIC can be had for a bit less if you know where to look.

I am considering grabbing a set of the FIC +30 being they will allow me to lower rail pressure some and run more E. Not sure if I can get back to full pump E but it should be close. It will probably be one of those deals where I can run full pump E in the warmer months and have to drop back when it cools down because Supercharged cars make 1.5- 2psi more boost when it's 40-50 degrees vs 75+. Can always swap pulleys to keep boost the same throughout the season as well.

LPE injectors are +52% which is a big jump in output over the FIC at +30%, no? Based on the datalogs from my last dyno time, I believe I can run full E85 at my current 900+ WHP level. IPW was only 5.1 on E50, and only 2175 psi commanded rail pressure. Plenty of wiggle room on both fronts IMO.

[wnta1ss]

Originally Posted by Crush365

Thanks for the input. I have a Banks data monster. Wasn't logging my runs, but saw the IAT at around 121-130 at the line. This was around 50-60 degrees over ambient. (Sat in staging lanes for a while)

That much margin above ambient at the starting line sounds like your device is showing MAT instead of IAT.

[KingLT1]

Originally Posted by Joshinator99

LPE injectors are +52% which is a big jump in output over the FIC at +30%, no? Based on the datalogs from my last dyno time, I believe I can run full E85 at my current 900+ WHP level. IPW was only 5.1 on E50, and only 2175 psi commanded rail pressure. Plenty of wiggle room on both fronts IMO.

The 700whp statement was based on a stock engine with stock cam. With a 38 or 42% fuel lobe I would think 800-850 on full E at LT4 pressure with the +30's. My brother is running them on his Z06 and has enough fuel for E60 @ 16psi of boost on his H/C 2650 setup. If he went to the +60 then I think he could run whatever E that the pump offers which is normally E78 around here.

For my setup I think they would be fine and I can also get the FIC for less then half of the LPE +52% but that doesn't do you any good if they won't meet your fuel needs. I believe the +60's were still less then the LPE's but I don't see them available right now.

Couple things to note. Your injector MS will go up .5 every 10% you move up in Ethanol content.

The LPE injectors will start to misfire if you crank the rail pressure up as they are designed around LT1 fuel pressure and don't like much over 2400psi if I remember correctly. The FIC's can handle up to 3200psi without misfire.

The LPE DI pump is also designed around LT1 fuel pressure but it seems to be stable up to 2900psi. Word is the LT4 pump has been tested to 34 or 3600psi and produced more fuel headroom. However the LT4 pump will only handle a 38% lobe where the gen 2 LPE will work with a 42% lobe. Everything seems to be rated around a specific pressure and not how they perform at max sustainable pressure.

Wish I had the time to test all this stuff on my own because a lot of the data out there is as clear as mud. From what data I have seen I believe the LPE gen 2 pump with 42% fuel lobe, FIC +60's @ LT4 pressure, and a good low side should handle 1000whp on full pump E.

[cjperformance]

Testing my understanding...

For starting with a new speed density tune from STOCK values (they were NOT adjusted in the VVE tables by the canned tune), in order to start with a rich tune... I'm thinking I need to add something like 60% fuel in the higher PR/RPM cells to account for a best/worst boost of 8 psi at higher PR/RPM (down and right on the table)... but only like 12% to 15% in the lower PR/RPM range, and interpolated between the low and high PR/RPM due to the linear boost rate of the procharger?

In other words, the canned tune nerfs the MAP and VVE in favor of a MAF only, so the VVE tables are still basically stock n/a values.

Procharger has linear boost from 0 at low rpm to 7-8.5-ish psi at high rpm.

I'll have a baro breakout and 3 bar MAP by the time I do this, so I'll have good PR. So map should read 14.65 + 8.5 psi = 23.15 psi at full boost (or kpa/bar equivalent). Increase in air = proportional increase in fuel right? So 23.15 / 14.65 = 1.58 or 58% increase in air at the top end... highest PR and highest RPM.... so highest expected PR + RPM should be + 60% or so fuel... and that would scale down to something like +12% safety margin or as you travel either down the table (lower PR) and/or to the left on the table (lower RPM)?

If anyone has a good VVE table for a similar application, that would be great to see to validate what I might need to do.

[cjperformance]

Okay, so after posting the above, I also found this... So maybe just a flat 15% and then slow and steady building of the table...

https://www.hpacademy.com/forum/gene...er-intallation

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

The 700whp statement was based on a stock engine with stock cam. With a 38 or 42% fuel lobe I would think 800-850 on full E at LT4 pressure with the +30's. My brother is running them on his Z06 and has enough fuel for E60 @ 16psi of boost on his H/C 2650 setup. If he went to the +60 then I think he could run whatever E that the pump offers which is normally E78 around here.

For my setup I think they would be fine and I can also get the FIC for less then half of the LPE +52% but that doesn't do you any good if they won't meet your fuel needs. I believe the +60's were still less then the LPE's but I don't see them available right now.

Couple things to note. Your injector MS will go up .5 every 10% you move up in Ethanol content.

The LPE injectors will start to misfire if you crank the rail pressure up as they are designed around LT1 fuel pressure and don't like much over 2400psi if I remember correctly. The FIC's can handle up to 3200psi without misfire.

The LPE DI pump is also designed around LT1 fuel pressure but it seems to be stable up to 2900psi. Word is the LT4 pump has been tested to 34 or 3600psi and produced more fuel headroom. However the LT4 pump will only handle a 38% lobe where the gen 2 LPE will work with a 42% lobe. Everything seems to be rated around a specific pressure and not how they perform at max sustainable pressure.

Wish I had the time to test all this stuff on my own because a lot of the data out there is as clear as mud. From what data I have seen I believe the LPE gen 2 pump with 42% fuel lobe, FIC +60's @ LT4 pressure, and a good low side should handle 1000whp on full pump E.

Great info as always!

[ZO6Ted]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

The 700whp statement was based on a stock engine with stock cam. With a 38 or 42% fuel lobe I would think 800-850 on full E at LT4 pressure with the +30's. My brother is running them on his Z06 and has enough fuel for E60 @ 16psi of boost on his H/C 2650 setup. If he went to the +60 then I think he could run whatever E that the pump offers which is normally E78 around here.

For my setup I think they would be fine and I can also get the FIC for less then half of the LPE +52% but that doesn't do you any good if they won't meet your fuel needs. I believe the +60's were still less then the LPE's but I don't see them available right now.

Couple things to note. Your injector MS will go up .5 every 10% you move up in Ethanol content.

The LPE injectors will start to misfire if you crank the rail pressure up as they are designed around LT1 fuel pressure and don't like much over 2400psi if I remember correctly. The FIC's can handle up to 3200psi without misfire.

The LPE DI pump is also designed around LT1 fuel pressure but it seems to be stable up to 2900psi. Word is the LT4 pump has been tested to 34 or 3600psi and produced more fuel headroom. However the LT4 pump will only handle a 38% lobe where the gen 2 LPE will work with a 42% lobe. Everything seems to be rated around a specific pressure and not how they perform at max sustainable pressure.

Wish I had the time to test all this stuff on my own because a lot of the data out there is as clear as mud. From what data I have seen I believe the LPE gen 2 pump with 42% fuel lobe, FIC +60's @ LT4 pressure, and a good low side should handle 1000whp on full pump E.

Wow King if this is the case it pretty much answers the 1k fueling question in my thread. Also, you are referring to blowers most likely so does this mean I could probably be good with this setup with twins?

CR is not taking orders so I may not get to do port as I had planned. I really value your opinion brother it's obvious who knows what here and you certainly are one.

[KingLT1]

Should definitely be doable with twins...you remove all parasitic pumping losses that come with belt driven superchargers. And I suspect that up around the 1k whp region a supercharger probably eats up a 100+ whp just to turn the thing.

[Trochoidal]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

Should definitely be doable with twins...you remove all parasitic pumping losses that come with belt driven superchargers. And I suspect that up around the 1k whp region a supercharger probably eats up a 100+ whp just to turn the thing.

No doubt about that loss especially as boost increases to get to the 1k whp. Even with the crank driven set-up we run on a different platform, the parasitic loss doesn’t decrease that much.

Not a blower many run on our platform use, but this gives a general idea of the loss.

https://www.dragzine.com/news/lose-p...-loss-testing/

[ZO6Ted]

Thank you gentlemen!

[cjperformance]

Fixing the Procharger Tune... just an update for folks who may be DIYers and are interested in knowing more detail.

Got wideband installed this last weekend.

Watched 9,000,000 videos, and read 10,000 forum posts. Turned off the stuff, did the things, and tweaked the junk.

All in all... AFR was off by about 5-8% across the board from the Procharger tune.

Long story short, I tuned the MAF Freq table. It is MAF only tune from Procharger. It looks pretty well dialed in on fuel right now after that according to the wideband. Within 1% for most of the range.

I can post some log files and/or tune files if anyone wants that stuff.

I didn't find the magical 100 HP unicorn though.

I did find an issue with Power Enrichment that I haven't addressed yet. I'm getting around .85 EQ Ratio Commanded for around 3,000 to 5,800 RPM at WOT and then EQ Ratio Commanded goes up to 1.0 at around 5800 RPM up to redline.

Have some associated Knock Retard at WOT due to this... so tomorrow going to tweak the Enable Torque table with a lower values for 4800 RPM and up. I think this is a (not so) simple math error, that I would imagine should have been accounted for in the tune I was provided by Procharger. The amount of enrichment seems about right. For the most part at WOT, it was commanding around .85 lamda, and after my tune job... pretty much doing what was commanded.

I can't feel any seat-of-the-pants power from my AFR changes yet, at least not the 100 horses I'm short on. So I'll probably look at timing next.

Still feels squishy in the mid-rpm range... Torque tables and all that "seem fine", by which I mean there does not appear to be any cases where spark or throttle is being affected by torque calculations. Driver seems to be in control for the most part for Predicted Axle Torque source too, which I think is what matters?

Very interested in seeing some "good" tunes so I know what kind of ball park values I'm looking for.

There were lots of tweaks in timing between Procharger and stock. Still deciphering what's good and what's not. Not just the base tables, but modifiers for humidity and other such things. Still working through learning all of that.

Procharger also modified the SOI and CAM timing too. It looks like the PC tune altered cam timing in the low and mid range to remove cam retard. This is mostly at the part throttle and low rpm, probably for gas milage. So I dont think that's the cause of the part throttle slushiness now, but could be.

Last, my boost gauge is telling me I'm seeing slightly less boost than I think I should be seeing. On one pull I was only seeing 4.4 PSI, and on another I was seeing 6.6. I was thinking it should be much higher than that, over 7 PSI... It was high 80's today, with moderate humidity... Could be that the boost gauge just doesn't read quickly enough to catch "peak"... Prob know more once I get my 3 bar MAP delivered and installed.

Hope someone finds this useful. I'll keep posting as I make more changes this week

[KingLT1]

You have to adjust the throttle pedal percent and enable torque percent to get the ECU into PE mode sooner. .85 is a bit too lean imo. Sounds like your heading the right direction. GL!

[toohighpsi]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

Should definitely be doable with twins...you remove all parasitic pumping losses that come with belt driven superchargers. And I suspect that up around the 1k whp region a supercharger probably eats up a 100+ whp just to turn the thing.

That's not entirely true, you'll have to do a bit more math than simply say the SC uses 100HP (though the belt) and the turbo is free (cause the drive is hidden).

Many may know this already, but if not:

Any compressor with the same mass flow, same pressure ratio, and same compressor efficiency (adiabatic x mechanical efficiency) requires the same amount of power to drive it.

To compare a SC system to a turbo system, the engine must be included - specifically the PV diagram of each setup. Why? - because the Turbocharged engine will have a negative pumping loop (the turbo's belt) and the Supercharged engine will have a positive pumping loop (counteracts the "actual" required power of the supercharger)

So without jumping into a ton of detail and collecting enough data to calculate the actual fuel requirements between both you'll find that actual parasitic difference between SC and TC engine will be 0 to 50% of the power required to run the SC (depending on the optimization of the engine for the boosting device).

So if the switch to turbo is made from a SC that required 100 HP, you might end up with an extra 50HP worth of fuel, but its probably more like 30HP worth of fuel.

Hope this helps!

[wnta1ss]

Originally Posted by cjperformance

Last, my boost gauge is telling me I'm seeing slightly less boost than I think I should be seeing. On one pull I was only seeing 4.4 PSI, and on another I was seeing 6.6. I was thinking it should be much higher than that, over 7 PSI... It was high 80's today, with moderate humidity... Could be that the boost gauge just doesn't read quickly enough to catch "peak"... Prob know more once I get my 3 bar MAP delivered and installed.

Is your boost gauge OBD? With the stock MAP sensor you cannot get proper manifold pressure readings for your supercharger, and with the BARO coming from the MAF you will have a bogus barometer reading too. Therefore 'boost' readings from these sources are bogus.

As part of your spark work, take a look at this: Engine>Spark>Retard>Static Retard>vs Cylinder (that is a button) table. This table causes false KR and some professional tuners do not fix it. IMO this table should be all zeroes.

Has the TCM been unlocked?