turbolx

Let me preface this with a few points. I do not sell fuel injectors, nor do I really care where you bought yours. This report is just the result of a bunch of engineering tests that I recently ran. You can duplicate all of this yourself if you're familiar with SAE J1832 and have a test bench with controls capable of delivering the proper test conditions. The report is just meant to raise the bar for awareness in the performance industry. And finally, no I will not give you my characterization data from any of the injectors tested in this report unless you want to hire me as an engineering consultant. If you're mad because you don't like it, please remember this is just data, math, and science. I just report what I see.

Calibrated Success Fuel Injector Article #2

kyoytey1693

iTrader: (7)

Wow! That was an awesome read. I wish I had half of your knowledge and experience.

oange ss

iTrader: (50)

Very good read ! I have a question concerning the injector data in the CS dvd. The data in the dvd shows minimum pulse width for SD 80lb injectors as 1.1 ms, however factory data from Siemens VDO (now Continental) shows a minimum pulse width of 1.7 ms. Why the difference ? Thanx for all the info you've posted

turbolx

That 1.7ms minimum pulsewidth from Conti represents the point at which they think the injector becomes "consistent enough" for reliable use in an emissions compliant, OEM application. Remember that +/-5% guideline I mentioned? It's part of the SAE spec. The injector manufacturer just doesn't want to hear complaints about performance when somebody tries to use the part "outside of the envelope", which includes very short pulses that are very difficult to control consistently. This is also the reason why the car makers don't just slap big injectors on everything. They want the injector to be operating in that linear region as much as possible, especially at idle and cruise where AFR control and emissions are critical.

Since we would be walking the fine line of tickling this pulsewidth at idle on many engines, we move that point down knowing that we may get slightly less consistent behavior but it at least gives us the option to deliver less fuel and not be so rich.

oange ss

iTrader: (50)

Makes sense, thank you !

onfire

iTrader: (17)

What's your opinion of the method to dynamically batch balance the 212lb/hr Bosch injectors used by Injector Dynamics vs a typical "bench matching" of the same 212lb/hr Bosch injector by others?

turbolx

Generally speaking, dynamic matching should give better results than grouping injectors based upon volume flowed from a 20-30second continuous flow test. We do not run injectors continuously in the car, therefore we should attempt to group them based on how they would actually perform as installed. Grouping them based on total mass delivered at 1.5ms, 2ms, 2.5ms, and 4ms should all give better results in the car than those that were grouped based on continuous flow. It's all in how you do the test since even the ASNU bench can give this kind of data if you take the time to use it properly.

onfire

iTrader: (17)

Thanks. I agree and saw the results on a set of ID2000's I tuned in a car that was north of 1100rwhp. The 212lb/hr injectors were more linear than the 120's used earlier...you could even hear the drop in lope since they were closer injector to injector. Having the peaks and valleys in flow below 2ms for all 8 injectors makes a big difference. I was skeptical, but it made me a believer.

TransAmcoupe98

iTrader: (10)

Which "brand" of aftermarket injectors typically are the most consistent? THerefore making the tune more efficient/accurate throughout the band? I had no idea drilled were this inconsistent.

DSteck

iTrader: (4)

Injector Dynamics

TransAmcoupe98

iTrader: (10)

Do they deal with high impedance injectors? What injectors would be ideal for HC build on a 346?

TransAmcoupe98

iTrader: (10)

Jesus those are expensive. What about a blue collar brand like FAST? Are they fairly consistent?

DSteck

iTrader: (4)

For your application, just run LS7 or LS9 injectors. Even LS2 would cover you. Anything ID sells would be overkill for a NA 346.

crainholio

iTrader: (2)

Another great paper, thanks for sharing your expertise.

turbolx

Can't be bothered to read? Do you like watching TV more? OK...

http://youtu.be/JZmV10pFsCM

This is just a small part of an upcoming video. It will be part of a smaller injector-specific video as well as a longer video version of my basic EFI class. Don't even ask about release dates yet. I'm just getting started.

TransAmcoupe98

iTrader: (10)

Nice!

eb02z06

iTrader: (18)

No offense-but was this test "sponsered by" Injector Dynamics?

BLOWNBLUEZ06

iTrader: (17)

So the injectors are all made by Bosch and modified by separate companies by machining the ends off using different machines, but in a clean fashion. Now not only is ID performing dynamic testing, but it seems as though FIC is dynamically testing them as well. The data is different due to the different test results on different machines I guess. So now what's the big deal about ID again? Before ID existed there was lots of chatter about injector data being proper, but in the end, I don't know one person that ended up complaining about the way their car performed on the street or track that ended up being an injector issue. Yes there are still people with driveability issues, even with the "proper data" and these great performing injectors. So what now? Good marketing? absolutely!

turbolx

As I said in the original post, "I don't sell injectors." I don't have a dog in this fight, I'm just reporting the information that I found through accepted industry standards of testing. (SAE J1832) If it was sponsored, I still haven't seen a check, so I better check with my accountant again.

Will you feel better if I call out the manufacturer of the BAD units I tested as well? I'm not looking to specifically stir up poop and drama here. I'm just presenting findings based on valid testing. I made the call to give props to the one company that I found to be producing a product that really worked in lab conditions because I think GOOD efforts should be acknowledged and rewarded. Openly dressing down a company selling products that don't meet my standard isn't really going to help the discussion here.

My main thrust in a LOT of my calibration training (Books, Video, Live Classes) has been to try and eliminate as many variables as possible during the testing and calibration process. The more we know about actual fuel delivery, the more precise we can be when it comes time to control air/fuel ratios under all conditions. Any errors in the fuel delivery side (injector characterization, pressure control, fuel composition) get carried over into the calibrations changes that are made to both airflow estimates (VE, MAF) and general AFR control. The closer we get to reality and precision, the better we can expect the car to run under all conditions, just like they do from the factory.

Do you think that GM just guesses at injector data and covers it up with whatever they find necessary later to get "good driveability" and pass federal emissions requirements? Why would anyone NOT want to follow a similar approach to what they're doing at the OEM?

eb02z06

iTrader: (18)

So I guess all the cars tuned without data don't get good driveability and don't pass emissions?

Funny I took a set of 120lb low impedance injectors, plugged them, and got a car to get good fuel economy and pass emissions on a roller with no cats.

Nobody is going to get me to pay $1000 for modified set of $500 dollar injectors and tell me there "better".

There's lots of "sheep" out there-I'm just not one of them.