Fueling & Injection Fuel Pumps | Injectors | Rails | Regulators | Tanks

Are your injectors REALLY maxed out???

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-12-2006, 08:46 AM
  #21  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
 
LostCauseZ06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ogden, Utah
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

i am currently running my 408 with right around 500 RWHP and no leaning out whatsoever on the top end... ill stick with my 28.8's for now.... btw, 28.8 is at 47-48 PSI.. LS1's run more pressure and make the injectors roughly 32 lbers
Old 05-21-2008, 06:55 PM
  #22  
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (9)
 
BadLtBlu99TA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Columbus , Ohio
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default injectors

so since i have a 402cid engine , Fast 33lb injectors should be enought for me correct ? i though so .
Old 05-22-2008, 08:25 PM
  #23  
9 Second Club
 
stevieturbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norn Iron
Posts: 13,616
Received 180 Likes on 155 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Brains
Actually, 20ms @ 6000 RPM isn't physically maxed out for the injector, it's 50% ... think about it -- it's the max open time for that HALF of the engine revolution. The PCM obviously knows it can hang the injector open longer, because it DOES -- and the motor doesn't starve for fuel where it otherwise "theoretically" should. In order for the injector to go mechanically static (ie. open 100% of the time) your duty cycle would need to be 200%, or have a 40ms pulse width at 6000 RPM. As duty cycle increases, you spray more and more fuel on the back of a closed intake valve. Is it optimal? Heck no, but it works.
I havent done the calcs, but I do not believe you are right.

When using 1 injector per cylinder, my ECU wont even allow me to enter numbers on the map higher than 20ms at 6000rpm, and dropping lower as the rpms rise, and naturally time to inject fuel decreases.

I am not currently firing my injectors sequentially. Some ecu's may falsely report higher duty cycles for some strange reason. Ive seen a few do it, but it is false.

I would say the only way to know for sure, is to stick a scope onto the injector output. Id be confident that at 20ms at 6000rpm, it would be flatlined open all the time.
Old 01-16-2014, 08:24 PM
  #24  
TECH Fanatic
 
dannyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: olympia, wash
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 66 Likes on 47 Posts

Default

Old thread I came across. Interesting points made.
Anyone think these guy's are out to lunch?
Old 02-13-2014, 05:08 PM
  #25  
Teching In
 
musthaveLSx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 31
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by Colonel
Chris, I agree with everything you said there. Don't misunderstand me, I'm NOT advocating running things on the ragged edge of safety. I just want people to have an accurate and realistic understanding of what these fuel systems can do and the danger (or relative lack of danger) involved in running the injectors beyond what some people think they are capable of. In a nutshell, it bothers me that there is a somewhat common belief that stock injectors, even the 28.8 lbers, will safely support operation in the 420-430 range and no more. That is just false and that's my point. I've become a bit frustrated that oftentimes people think their injectors are totally maxed out due to some calculation or PW monitoring when in fact, their injectors will support more.

Now running a power adder, sure, overkill on the fuel system is JUST RIGHT! I've always been an advocate of that. But running NA, you're not going to be running a nice 13:1 fuel/air at 450 RWHP and then all of a sudden an injector stops flowing and you melt a piston. It just doesn't happen...well, anything is possible, but you get my point.

Regarding fuel pressure. Sometimes people *think* their injectors are maxed out because their duty cycle is maxed. Well, if the fuel pressure is 45 psi, you have to increase the duty cycle to maintain the fuel/air ratio. If you bring the psi back to 55+, where it should be, you can bring the duty cycle back down. Were the injectors maxed? Maybe so. Was it the fault of the injectors? No, the fuel pressure was low. How many people running serious power have a pillar mounted FP gage? Not many...but everyone running a PA should have one and it's a really good idea for anyone.

Since we're on the subject, who has had an NA LS1 engine failure due to an injector failing due to being run at a high duty cycle (injectors can fail for other reasons)? I'm sure it's happened before but in my years, I've NEVER heard of it. Not even with all of the 470-520 RWHP large CI engines running around with stock injectors. Why? Because when people notice their O2 readings are lean, they upgrade their injectors and pump. The ones who've not reached the point of leaning the mixture back excessively (even if their injectors are doing all they can) seem to run like this indefinitely and without problem.
I work for a company that manufactures fuel injectors. We flow them static all the time for time periods longer than a drag run. If they have have fuel flowing through them, they are fine. They do not overheat or have any problems. I can not speak for the driver circuit in the ECU however. We do use driver boards that are intended to exactly duplicate the production ECU for obvious reasons. I am very new to LS1 and FI in hot rods, but I have tested these things for years. I like to read this forum quite a bit, and I hear of reference to failures, but have not read any examples of actual failures from people who think this was the problem.
Old 02-13-2014, 05:17 PM
  #26  
9 Second Club
 
stevieturbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norn Iron
Posts: 13,616
Received 180 Likes on 155 Posts

Default

The issue can be that on some injectors, above 80% or thereabouts whilst it will still flow fuel, actual fuel flow may not be as linear per duty as it had been at say 2% to 80%

So all cylinders may not be getting equal amounts of fuel and you would not be aware of it.

That said, Ive run injectors on plenty of cars to 95% and left them at that and never experienced any problems.
Old 02-13-2014, 05:30 PM
  #27  
Teching In
 
musthaveLSx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 31
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by stevieturbo
I havent done the calcs, but I do not believe you are right.

When using 1 injector per cylinder, my ECU wont even allow me to enter numbers on the map higher than 20ms at 6000rpm, and dropping lower as the rpms rise, and naturally time to inject fuel decreases.

I am not currently firing my injectors sequentially. Some ecu's may falsely report higher duty cycles for some strange reason. Ive seen a few do it, but it is false.

I would say the only way to know for sure, is to stick a scope onto the injector output. Id be confident that at 20ms at 6000rpm, it would be flatlined open all the time.
Let's do the math:
6000 rpm
sequential injection - 1 pulse per engine cycle - 4 stroke cycle
You have 2 crank revolutions per cycle, so...
3000 engine cycles per minute / 60 seconds per minute = 50 cycles per second
That gives 1 engine cycle equal to 20 msec. (1 sec / 50 cycles)
The period or repetition rate is 20 msec.
Your total available injection time at 6000 RPM is 20 msec.
If you are commanding a 20 msec pulse width, you are at 100% duty cycle.
Old 02-13-2014, 05:51 PM
  #28  
Teching In
 
musthaveLSx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 31
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by stevieturbo
The issue can be that on some injectors, above 80% or thereabouts whilst it will still flow fuel, actual fuel flow may not be as linear per duty as it had been at say 2% to 80%

So all cylinders may not be getting equal amounts of fuel and you would not be aware of it.

That said, Ive run injectors on plenty of cars to 95% and left them at that and never experienced any problems.
I could actually do an experiment on a 28.8 and see what the results are. You make a very good point. I could do a detailed flow curve and get back to you. When dealing with a solenoid, I believe there is a 10% to 90% linearity general rule of thumb so to speak. An actual test would tell how it performs. I am very busy now, but I could try to do it at some point.
Old 02-18-2014, 08:36 PM
  #29  
TECH Senior Member
 
joecar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: So.Cal.
Posts: 6,077
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts

Default

The problem with running more that 70% DC is that the injectors now start spraying against open intake valves... it appears that stock GM calibrations time the injectors to spray against closed intake valves for various reasons (promote evaporation of sprayed fuel, promote cooling of the intake valves).
Old 02-19-2014, 02:39 AM
  #30  
9 Second Club
 
stevieturbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norn Iron
Posts: 13,616
Received 180 Likes on 155 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by joecar
The problem with running more that 70% DC is that the injectors now start spraying against open intake valves... it appears that stock GM calibrations time the injectors to spray against closed intake valves for various reasons (promote evaporation of sprayed fuel, promote cooling of the intake valves).
That may happen anyway at some stage, so not a big deal. And it always happens on batch fire injection cars on some cylinders.

But generally with sequential you time "end of injection" as your target. Whether that's against open or closed valve will come down to testing, some people have different views.



Quick Reply: Are your injectors REALLY maxed out???



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:42 PM.