Any new info on that built APS engine and fuel system?
10-31-2007, 12:28 PM
#1
Any new info on that built APS engine and fuel system? Peter this is directed at you. Is there any new numbers for that forged up 346 you were playing with? I thought you might be trying a few diffenent cams and was curious to see what effect they would have. I have the same gt7 but might go with bigger gt11. I am planning a bigger motor though than the 346. Pretty sure going with 408 but 427 is still in my mind too.Also you never said if the 346 had fast 78 or 90 intake. Pretty sure it was a fast intake on it? Also is the general opinion still that 427 would be too big for the current turbos? I don't really want to upgrade the turbos now or in the future. But just wondering what the actual symptoms would be if they are in fact too small for a 427. Would you just not be able to get much boost? What exactly happens when your turbos are too small?
Also no hard prices still on the fuel system upgrades including the rail additon? Torn between your setup and custom setup. I would like to see a few other cars on the boards that are running your setup and see what numbers they can get. I need to support 850rwhp off spray and 1000rwhp on spray. Your setup says it can do that but would like to see some actual cars running it.
Also no hard prices still on the fuel system upgrades including the rail additon? Torn between your setup and custom setup. I would like to see a few other cars on the boards that are running your setup and see what numbers they can get. I need to support 850rwhp off spray and 1000rwhp on spray. Your setup says it can do that but would like to see some actual cars running it.
10-31-2007, 11:17 PM
#2
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also is the general opinion still that 427 would be too big for the current turbos? I don't really want to upgrade the turbos now or in the future. But just wondering what the actual symptoms would be if they are in fact too small for a 427. Would you just not be able to get much boost? What exactly happens when your turbos are too small?
Also no hard prices still on the fuel system upgrades including the rail additon? Torn between your setup and custom setup. I would like to see a few other cars on the boards that are running your setup and see what numbers they can get. I need to support 850rwhp off spray and 1000rwhp on spray. Your setup says it can do that but would like to see some actual cars running it.
Please see the links below to the fuel system options,
Twin fuel pump system,
http://www.airpowersystems.com/fbody...sgmf-fss01.htm
Twin fuel pumps system parts list,
http://www.airpowersystems.com/guide...-fss01/bom.htm
Second stage of the twin fuel pump system
http://www.airpowersystems.com/fbody...sgmf-fss02.htm,
I will post up prices for you tomorrow,
Many thanks,
Peter
11-01-2007, 10:26 AM
#3
Thanks for the quick reply.
You should try out the textralia twin disc or triple disc. They are in australia like you guys. The tex twin with their standard discs is rated to think 1200ft pounds and the triple think for 1500rwtq.
I have the twin in my car and its pretty driveable after break in.They also have started playing with some carbon,kevlar street discs for the clutch they sent me some to try out. One guy LOBOOST think he has your aps twins on his gto found that the street discs on the twin wasn't enough so think he is using triple with street discs now. I will try to email him and see how that is working out. He said the street discs with the twin was very very streetable.
I have that lingenfelter gt7 cam current to use if I want. I don't want much of a cam. Want very smooth idle ,no surging or other problems of a big cam.
They make a gt11 think you were talking about it.
Not sure if can go with a 370 and still forged crank. I have seen lots of 402 and 408 combos in the boosted list and one guy on the board here has your aps on his 402 /408.
He seemed very happy .That EPP car I think?
No huge rush on the fuel system. Car won't be running now till spring earliest. And as said would like to see it working in a few more cars. You have it in your test car I think but not sure if you have the entire fuel setup or just the twin part not the rail part??
Also not sure like the twin internal idea if one fails might be problems. I may still go for custom tank, one big external easier to get to if need be, although would do a hatch hole in my car anyway,gm should have put a hatch access plate in there factory.
It looks still that a 346,370 or 402/408 would all do my 850 rwhp goal. Less boost should be needed with the bigger engines which would be fine and maybe the turbos would only put out lower on the bigger engine anyway. Again likely fine.It might be worth some trade off to have a bit more torque off boost and faster spool up with the bigger engine.
Likely be some more combos to look at over the winter. You did sell 50 some kits already.
You should try out the textralia twin disc or triple disc. They are in australia like you guys. The tex twin with their standard discs is rated to think 1200ft pounds and the triple think for 1500rwtq.
I have the twin in my car and its pretty driveable after break in.They also have started playing with some carbon,kevlar street discs for the clutch they sent me some to try out. One guy LOBOOST think he has your aps twins on his gto found that the street discs on the twin wasn't enough so think he is using triple with street discs now. I will try to email him and see how that is working out. He said the street discs with the twin was very very streetable.
I have that lingenfelter gt7 cam current to use if I want. I don't want much of a cam. Want very smooth idle ,no surging or other problems of a big cam.
They make a gt11 think you were talking about it.
Not sure if can go with a 370 and still forged crank. I have seen lots of 402 and 408 combos in the boosted list and one guy on the board here has your aps on his 402 /408.
He seemed very happy .That EPP car I think?
No huge rush on the fuel system. Car won't be running now till spring earliest. And as said would like to see it working in a few more cars. You have it in your test car I think but not sure if you have the entire fuel setup or just the twin part not the rail part??
Also not sure like the twin internal idea if one fails might be problems. I may still go for custom tank, one big external easier to get to if need be, although would do a hatch hole in my car anyway,gm should have put a hatch access plate in there factory.
It looks still that a 346,370 or 402/408 would all do my 850 rwhp goal. Less boost should be needed with the bigger engines which would be fine and maybe the turbos would only put out lower on the bigger engine anyway. Again likely fine.It might be worth some trade off to have a bit more torque off boost and faster spool up with the bigger engine.
Likely be some more combos to look at over the winter. You did sell 50 some kits already.
11-01-2007, 12:11 PM
#5
12 Second Club
iTrader: (33)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: winter springs, fl
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so i correct in assuming that the 2nd stage rail kit is designed for aps twin pump kit owners and to relocate the fpr closer to the motor(if the first condition is true)?
11-01-2007, 12:12 PM
#6
gt 7 specs
LS1-GT7 208 / 230 .554" / .546" 1.7 ratio 121
gt 11 specs..
Lingenfelter LS1-GT11 Camshaft 350-383-427 LS1, LS2, LS6 215/231 .631/.644 w 1.7 rocker 118.0 CL
How do you guys think this would be in a 402/408? Is the gt7 way too small?
Will the gt11 still sound pretty smooth. Want pretty stealthy type of cam.
LS1-GT7 208 / 230 .554" / .546" 1.7 ratio 121
gt 11 specs..
Lingenfelter LS1-GT11 Camshaft 350-383-427 LS1, LS2, LS6 215/231 .631/.644 w 1.7 rocker 118.0 CL
How do you guys think this would be in a 402/408? Is the gt7 way too small?
Will the gt11 still sound pretty smooth. Want pretty stealthy type of cam.
11-01-2007, 02:55 PM
#7
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Milliken, Colorado
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our tech guys have been playing with the F body engine a little though we had big troubles working out a clucth that would not slip with high engine torque. As of now we are at 795 rwhp which equates to around 875 rwhp on a dyno jey dyno. I feel that this is about the power limit of the F body twin turbo system without going to larger turbos.
Trending Topics
11-01-2007, 03:39 PM
#8
Thanks for the quick reply.
You should try out the textralia twin disc or triple disc. They are in australia like you guys. The tex twin with their standard discs is rated to think 1200ft pounds and the triple think for 1500rwtq.
I have the twin in my car and its pretty driveable after break in.They also have started playing with some carbon,kevlar street discs for the clutch they sent me some to try out. One guy LOBOOST think he has your aps twins on his gto found that the street discs on the twin wasn't enough so think he is using triple with street discs now. I will try to email him and see how that is working out. He said the street discs with the twin was very very streetable.
I have that lingenfelter gt7 cam current to use if I want. I don't want much of a cam. Want very smooth idle ,no surging or other problems of a big cam.
They make a gt11 think you were talking about it.
Not sure if can go with a 370 and still forged crank. I have seen lots of 402 and 408 combos in the boosted list and one guy on the board here has your aps on his 402 /408.
He seemed very happy .That EPP car I think?
No huge rush on the fuel system. Car won't be running now till spring earliest. And as said would like to see it working in a few more cars. You have it in your test car I think but not sure if you have the entire fuel setup or just the twin part not the rail part??
Also not sure like the twin internal idea if one fails might be problems. I may still go for custom tank, one big external easier to get to if need be, although would do a hatch hole in my car anyway,gm should have put a hatch access plate in there factory.
It looks still that a 346,370 or 402/408 would all do my 850 rwhp goal. Less boost should be needed with the bigger engines which would be fine and maybe the turbos would only put out lower on the bigger engine anyway. Again likely fine.It might be worth some trade off to have a bit more torque off boost and faster spool up with the bigger engine.
Likely be some more combos to look at over the winter. You did sell 50 some kits already.
You should try out the textralia twin disc or triple disc. They are in australia like you guys. The tex twin with their standard discs is rated to think 1200ft pounds and the triple think for 1500rwtq.
I have the twin in my car and its pretty driveable after break in.They also have started playing with some carbon,kevlar street discs for the clutch they sent me some to try out. One guy LOBOOST think he has your aps twins on his gto found that the street discs on the twin wasn't enough so think he is using triple with street discs now. I will try to email him and see how that is working out. He said the street discs with the twin was very very streetable.
I have that lingenfelter gt7 cam current to use if I want. I don't want much of a cam. Want very smooth idle ,no surging or other problems of a big cam.
They make a gt11 think you were talking about it.
Not sure if can go with a 370 and still forged crank. I have seen lots of 402 and 408 combos in the boosted list and one guy on the board here has your aps on his 402 /408.
He seemed very happy .That EPP car I think?
No huge rush on the fuel system. Car won't be running now till spring earliest. And as said would like to see it working in a few more cars. You have it in your test car I think but not sure if you have the entire fuel setup or just the twin part not the rail part??
Also not sure like the twin internal idea if one fails might be problems. I may still go for custom tank, one big external easier to get to if need be, although would do a hatch hole in my car anyway,gm should have put a hatch access plate in there factory.
It looks still that a 346,370 or 402/408 would all do my 850 rwhp goal. Less boost should be needed with the bigger engines which would be fine and maybe the turbos would only put out lower on the bigger engine anyway. Again likely fine.It might be worth some trade off to have a bit more torque off boost and faster spool up with the bigger engine.
Likely be some more combos to look at over the winter. You did sell 50 some kits already.
Jeff
11-01-2007, 08:51 PM
#9
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the quick reply.
You should try out the textralia twin disc or triple disc. They are in australia like you guys. The tex twin with their standard discs is rated to think 1200ft pounds and the triple think for 1500rwtq.
I have the twin in my car and its pretty driveable after break in.They also have started playing with some carbon,kevlar street discs for the clutch they sent me some to try out. One guy LOBOOST think he has your aps twins on his gto found that the street discs on the twin wasn't enough so think he is using triple with street discs now. I will try to email him and see how that is working out. He said the street discs with the twin was very very streetable.
You should try out the textralia twin disc or triple disc. They are in australia like you guys. The tex twin with their standard discs is rated to think 1200ft pounds and the triple think for 1500rwtq.
I have the twin in my car and its pretty driveable after break in.They also have started playing with some carbon,kevlar street discs for the clutch they sent me some to try out. One guy LOBOOST think he has your aps twins on his gto found that the street discs on the twin wasn't enough so think he is using triple with street discs now. I will try to email him and see how that is working out. He said the street discs with the twin was very very streetable.
It looks still that a 346,370 or 402/408 would all do my 850 rwhp goal. Less boost should be needed with the bigger engines which would be fine and maybe the turbos would only put out lower on the bigger engine anyway. Again likely fine.It might be worth some trade off to have a bit more torque off boost and faster spool up with the bigger engine.
Good luck with your twin turbo project.
Peter
11-01-2007, 09:22 PM
#10
TECH Regular
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets say I had two engines, a 370 and a 402. With the twins max out I could hit 18psi on the 370 and 14psi on the 402. What would be the difference. In either combo the turbos were maxed out and the the 370 would be limited by the pressure ratio and the 402 would be limited by the flow volume, in theory. Its to late for me to do the math so I won't but if the answer lies in the math then I'll figure it out in th morning. I'll need to find Mitsu 20g compressor map first.
11-02-2007, 11:18 AM
#11
Teching In
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just thought I would chime in hear a bit.
I'm the guy with the EPP 403 twin turbo Firehawk. I'm sure Peter is right that the bore / stroke ratio is not ideal for twin turbos...I have heard that...I also believe it has something to do with the rings and the bore/stroke ratio. However, what you do get with the 403 over the 370 is 30 lb/ft of torque down low in non-boosted conditions...And even though I try and get into the boost as much as possible, I still would imaginge that greater than 95% of my time is spent driving in non-boosted conditions. That is also why I kept my compression ratio at nearly 11:1 and went with methanol and a conservative tune. For a street car the high compression 403 versus the 370 in non-boosted situations will typically provide greater power below 3,000 rpm and that extra 30lb ft down low...Which is a lot....I'm a big fan of cubic inches. However the main reason I did the 403 was that I already had it....If I started from scratch I'm not sure what direction I would go in. Although, more than likely I would go with more than 370 cubic inches...I just feel that with the weight of the F-body that you need atleast 400 cubic inches for non-boosted driving...IMHO...Maybe step into a 427 for a better bore / stroke ratio. The important part is you really need to understand how you are going to drive the car and set it up to get the most out of your driving style.
Tim
I'm the guy with the EPP 403 twin turbo Firehawk. I'm sure Peter is right that the bore / stroke ratio is not ideal for twin turbos...I have heard that...I also believe it has something to do with the rings and the bore/stroke ratio. However, what you do get with the 403 over the 370 is 30 lb/ft of torque down low in non-boosted conditions...And even though I try and get into the boost as much as possible, I still would imaginge that greater than 95% of my time is spent driving in non-boosted conditions. That is also why I kept my compression ratio at nearly 11:1 and went with methanol and a conservative tune. For a street car the high compression 403 versus the 370 in non-boosted situations will typically provide greater power below 3,000 rpm and that extra 30lb ft down low...Which is a lot....I'm a big fan of cubic inches. However the main reason I did the 403 was that I already had it....If I started from scratch I'm not sure what direction I would go in. Although, more than likely I would go with more than 370 cubic inches...I just feel that with the weight of the F-body that you need atleast 400 cubic inches for non-boosted driving...IMHO...Maybe step into a 427 for a better bore / stroke ratio. The important part is you really need to understand how you are going to drive the car and set it up to get the most out of your driving style.
Tim
11-02-2007, 01:54 PM
#12
11 Second Club
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: ne philly
Posts: 2,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
subscribing
im a little dissapointed in hearing how you are now feeling about the 402-408ci engines. in the first thread when the system was under developement you were all for bigger cube motors and are now back tracking. i went with a 402 and i feel that if im not gonna be pushing the limits of this kit, it should work out just fine.
im a little dissapointed in hearing how you are now feeling about the 402-408ci engines. in the first thread when the system was under developement you were all for bigger cube motors and are now back tracking. i went with a 402 and i feel that if im not gonna be pushing the limits of this kit, it should work out just fine.
11-02-2007, 02:27 PM
#13
Teching In
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't believe Peter is backtracking as I talked to him quite a bit about my 403 build at EPP. He was very supportive that the kit would work very well on a 403 and so far the kit is awesome on my ride....I'm 758lbft at 3,800 rpms on 9lbs of boost on a Mustang dyno. The motor is a total torque monster. I don't want to speak for Peter...What I do belive is that the dynamics of a 370 cube motor with its bore/stroke ratio is better suited too turbocharging than the bore/stroke ratio associated with a 403 stroker and if you are trying to build the ideal turbo motor that a optimum bore/stroke ratio is important. Notwithstanding, the APS TT Kit produces amazing power on my 403 and I am very happy with it at this point. Again, I think you need to really think about how you will drive the car and what you want to accomplish with the car before making a shortblock decision.
Tim
Tim
11-02-2007, 02:40 PM
#14
11 Second Club
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: ne philly
Posts: 2,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the decision has been made for months...even before i purchased the kit...ive had it since last december..lol. i know that it will make power on my motor. again, i wont be testing the limits of the motor or the kit so i should be fine. i was just referancing the first "$5495 APS kit" thread where several people had asked Peter if this kit would work on a 400+ci motor and at that time, he was all for it. now maybe since than something changed, i dunno, it just makes me feel a little uneasy thats all. whatever the case, whats done it done and i cant go back and do another bottom end...ill live with my results.
incidently...i followed your build and was quite releaved when your numbers came up...hence another reason why im not stressing too much about the whole bore/stroke ratio thing. you seem to be very happy with your numbers and very understandbly so cause they are awsome!! thanx for your insight.
sorry for the slight thread jack...carry on...
incidently...i followed your build and was quite releaved when your numbers came up...hence another reason why im not stressing too much about the whole bore/stroke ratio thing. you seem to be very happy with your numbers and very understandbly so cause they are awsome!! thanx for your insight.
sorry for the slight thread jack...carry on...
11-02-2007, 04:39 PM
#15
I would not stress much about it either. Look at the boosted lists there are many many 402/408 cars doing great running super fast and putting out big numbers. As said bigger motor should spool the turbo up quicker and give you better torque off boost and let you run less total boost I would think also.
I am still proceeding with a 402/408 leaning to the 408. I would go 427 but think the turbos might be a bit too small for that and the 427 is going to cost quite a bit extra and you have to say enough is enough sooner or later. Money is not limitess for me on this project. Have other projects.
I am still proceeding with a 402/408 leaning to the 408. I would go 427 but think the turbos might be a bit too small for that and the 427 is going to cost quite a bit extra and you have to say enough is enough sooner or later. Money is not limitess for me on this project. Have other projects.
11-06-2007, 09:06 PM
#16
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.airpowersystems.com/fbody...sgmf-fss02.htm
Thanks,
Peter