SethU

Spent the past few hours dissecting everything. Averaging between the S480 & S488 compressor maps, assuming you're in there somewhere.

Some of the temps maxed the sensor and some were still climbing when the run was over. Again, they're "climbing" because the sensor hasn't reached the temperature that the charge air is at yet. Anyway, I broke down and timed the temp curves to identify a likely final temperature range.

Not knowing peak pressure numbers, I just tossed a few values in to see their effect.

I calc'd out for 32, 40, & 45º intercooler water.

I was hoping to write up some big fancy thing, with a big, dropping the knowledge "ah-hah" ending. And I just can't.

My final conclusion. Your analysis was pretty much right on the money and some of the intuition I shared earlier did not hold water.

Both the S480 and S488 have a HUGE 72+% area and you're not likely to be too far outside of it for any appreciable amount of time at any of the higher boost levels you're running. You were right on, IMO, in your use of the 72% figure.

Even if we stretch things a little beyond likely assumed values on the hot end of things, and assume the post cooler temp data is correct (which it isn't, the air is still hotter than indicated), it doesn't change the outcome enough to provoke any doubt about what's going on. Or more acurately, what's NOT going on.

If we say the output of the compressor is 32 psig, at 65% eff, that gives an outlet temp of 456º based on 110º inlet temp. This higher pre-IC temperature should make the numbers look better than they likely are, and still, assuming 40º IC water and a post-IC MAT of 188º... still only equates to be 64.5% IC eff. And that's trying to make the numbers look better.

give or take 2, 55% is the number that came up when using more likely assumptions.

gtistile

the highest boost log I posted was 26psi verified by a go-pro the guage in the car. It was JUST beyond the sensors peak 👍

54inches

iTrader: (4)

You are too nice. F this vendor and their attitude.

This!

Agreed!

Yep.

Good luck bud!

dburt86

iTrader: (2)

Great work on the data collection and sorry for all ur troubles. The vendors involved really need to step up to sort this out.

gtistile

Thanks man. Still grasping that something decent can come of this. We'll see.

350SS

iTrader: (38)

x2

curious to hear where you're going to go with this now.

think someone else mentioned this before but seems like you could keep 90% of your setup and run a cheap a2w setup over towards the driver's side kinda like this but moved over:



at least you could throw it together quick and have fun this summer

rkupon1

iTrader: (3)

Maybe try out that SHEARER unit as it looks close to working with what you have already. Probably the cheapest out. Lol, his unit will get a free n thorough testing with comparison results. Someone else mentioned it and if it has a proven track record, id say go for it!

SLOW SEDAN

iTrader: (13)

I agree I cant think of a reason not to utilize something you paid for. Learning is a great help in unforeseen events however I have turned off learning in the idle and lower RPM range with bigger cams and throttle bodies as the learning can jump around and mess things up a bit from what the engine actually wants. But in the upper end of the map why not leave it on?

We noticed the fuel pressure after one pass with the boost raised and corrected it, nobody is relying on the correction to mask a problem. But if you don't have correction enabled and do have a problem what does your setup do?

Where exactly did you get anyone here is relying on it 100%? Most runs on these cars closed loop correction is <5%. Oil pressure, fuel pressure, IAT, IDC, A/F, correction %, timing, etc is all reviewed after every pass. Even on the street most every hit is logged and reviewed hence the amount of data in this thread. When we cranked the boost up we knew we would be close to the limit of the fuel pump and as the pump pressure dropped off Holley ramped up the injectors. Not sure why you think that's a bad thing? Have you seen what Holley does with a failing wideband? Its not as bad as you make it out to be.

We also spent a fraction of $3500. My Holley setup with harness, wideband, injectors, and ECM was $1500. So far we have found the HP ECM just fine and haven't needed to step up to the Dominator. But I do get your point as I've tuned old squirt and vems boxes that are cheaper and work fine for the intended purpose.

SLOW SEDAN

iTrader: (13)

Considering the OP did everything they asked and they haven't come into the thread to refute the results tells me they agree the data presented is a solid representation of the products capability.

onfire

iTrader: (17)

Stevie is talking about failsafes as the primary safety valve. You still use the closed loop protections but more as a fine tune (less than 10% trim). Typical failsafes that I use are 1. If the fuel pressure falls below 40psi , limit the rpm to 2500. If the AIT exceeds 160F , limit rpm to 2500. Same with oil pressure, etc. The car will nose over and hopefully protect parts,etc.

Seems like a nobrainer for the manufacturer to give you a 2000 hp ic to try for free. Very bad PR if they do not.

SLOW SEDAN

iTrader: (13)

lol If we used AIT 160F to limit the car we could never make a pass!!

gtistile

Before we realized how high the post-cooler temps were, we were pulling timing at 160. Car was a monster in the first 1/2, then fell flat on its face. Never in a million years did I think I was pulling timing at the 1/8th and ultimately going through the traps with less than 1/2 my original timing at 200* IAT lol

Car would only back half 23mph if we pull timing. Our only option has been to dial back the timing to a safer over all level, and just not pull it out until...well... HOT.

rkupon1

iTrader: (3)

Im gunna make it a point to revive this thread often to keep it up in the forum so EVERYONE knows, until these guys step in to help out in any way possible at this point. Theres no doubt uneducated turbo guys like myself just ASSUMED this was the cats meow based on how it looks and who is selling it. A learning lesson i didnt have to actually pay for...

Next up, we need to get tons of info on one of the set ups that "WORKS GREAT" on another car, and let SETHU compile the data n figure out how, why, and whats so different. That could be interesting i think...

Atomic

iTrader: (37)

So I had a thought....having never messed with the 417 intercooler personally, is it symmetric on the water line? Meaning can you flip it over, and rotate it 180 degrees so its upside down with the water ports on the same side as before?

Yea I know it shouldn't make a difference, but worth a shot maybe since you've come this far.

oscs

iTrader: (19)

Yes sir. After the idle and low rpm bugs are worked out that correction factor gets turned to 0%

stevieturbo

Exactly, you just need to browse the forums, there are dozens of people relying very heavily on Holley's closed loop alone.

I have failsafes on relative fuel pressure ( far easier/better than actual fuel pressure as FP relative to MAP should be a pretty static number. and AFR in terms of fueling safeties. If either exceed designated margins for more than 1sec then it forces restricted rpm. There is obviously closed loop in there too but generally it's doing very little. If it ever started to need to make large corrections, something has went badly wrong and IMO the engine should not be raced until it is resolved.
This should make it nigh on impossible for engine health to be put at risk from a fueling issue. You could add others too, but the above 2 are fairly comprehensive and simple.

As for the hot air temps....if preIC temps are indeed in the 400degF range, which is a lot...sounds like an ideal candidate for some water injection pre IC ? or perhaps even a little pre-turbo ?

oscs

iTrader: (19)

Maybe so and we are in aggreance with safeties being tier 1 but turning it down to 10% correction factor makes zero sense in the upper KPA ranges. Your doing nothing more than limiting the amount of correction the ECU can preform in the event of a failure. Yes **** happens like sensors failing that your relying on to trigger safety's and tier 1 safety's not working properly. For some odd reason my dominator quit activating the secondary fuel pump one day. We spent DAYS trying to figure it out. We ended up slapping on a Hobbs and making it work. So again I just don't see the point. One could argue the opposite but it is almost never the case (In my experiences anyways) at any rate I really don't want to jam up this well executed thread with nonsense. Sorry OP.

stevieturbo

But then you need to ask....why on earth should it ever be making those corrections ? 10% isnt huge 15%....still a lot...but giving it say 30..40..50 etc etc No way ( other than perhaps if it's first usage at lower loads and you're trying to let it "self tune" albeit with close supervision )

If it's full on racing and you are happy to blow the engine...then by all means take all measures to complete every pass even if it results in damage further down the line

That **** gets expensive though. I'd rather be alerted of the problem and prevented from doing harm

oscs

iTrader: (19)

Agreed on the first part of your statement. That's why you check the logs after each run like I said in the earlier post. You have to stay on top of it.

stevieturbo

I agree, logging is vital.

But not all races last just a few seconds. Sometimes waiting to view the logs...can simply be too late.