Local LT1 Stock Eliminator Car
12-13-2011, 08:48 PM
#61
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotcha! That looks like a neat event, but my car isn't suited for any of the classes that I saw. Mine is set up for NHRA Stock Eliminator and best suited for those types of events.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
12-13-2011, 09:49 PM
#62
You have a fast C car. If you can make the event, it is a lot of fun. It has become a must-do for me. The guys that show up for this event are a ton of fun to hang out with, before and after the race. In fact it is as much a social event as it is a race.
12-14-2011, 06:43 AM
#63
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you. I have been working on it and hope the things I am doing this off season helps even more. I did upgrade from the FAST Classic to the XFI 2.0 and feel it has a few more things to offer plus it is easier for me to manipulate.
There are a few things I am doing that aren't in the motor that should help. The biggest problem I have already is keeping it detuned enough to keep the horsepower hits away. I don't know why I am trying to make it faster. Lol!!!
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
There are a few things I am doing that aren't in the motor that should help. The biggest problem I have already is keeping it detuned enough to keep the horsepower hits away. I don't know why I am trying to make it faster. Lol!!!
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
12-14-2011, 07:16 AM
#64
Thank you. I have been working on it and hope the things I am doing this off season helps even more. I did upgrade from the FAST Classic to the XFI 2.0 and feel it has a few more things to offer plus it is easier for me to manipulate.
There are a few things I am doing that aren't in the motor that should help. The biggest problem I have already is keeping it detuned enough to keep the horsepower hits away. I don't know why I am trying to make it faster. Lol!!!
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
There are a few things I am doing that aren't in the motor that should help. The biggest problem I have already is keeping it detuned enough to keep the horsepower hits away. I don't know why I am trying to make it faster. Lol!!!
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
12-14-2011, 07:31 AM
#65
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not know all of the specific changes from the XFI to the XFI 2.0, but there are a few. FAST could better answer that question.
Mine was the XFI that I had purchased a couple of years ago and never put in the car until recently. I went ahead and upgraded it to the latest version (2.001 I think). We put the XFI 2.0 in our iron head LT1 Super Stocker and I like to have the systems the same when I am tuning. There is enough to think about without going back and forth. Don't get me started on the Big Stuff 3!
My FAST Classic didn't have the internal data logger. It used a stand alone and I hated it. The XFI 2.0 was much more stable on the connections, manipulations, new correction tables, and injector ICTs.
I will say that since I put the XFI 2.0 in it, I now have my car starting instantly and not coating the plugs as badly as before. We have to run the factory intake which is a bear on fouling number 7 and 8 on my car. Once I figure out how to switch it over to sequential then I think I will prevent a lot of that.
And switching over on a LT1 Stock Eliminator car to sequential isn't as easy as a setting on the FAST ECU. You have to run an Optispark by rule and figure out how to put in a cam sensor. Plus, it doesn't do any good just to switch it over. You need to put it on a dyno with O2 sensors in each header tube to really get the rich/lean cylinders identified.
I am working on all of that.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
Mine was the XFI that I had purchased a couple of years ago and never put in the car until recently. I went ahead and upgraded it to the latest version (2.001 I think). We put the XFI 2.0 in our iron head LT1 Super Stocker and I like to have the systems the same when I am tuning. There is enough to think about without going back and forth. Don't get me started on the Big Stuff 3!
My FAST Classic didn't have the internal data logger. It used a stand alone and I hated it. The XFI 2.0 was much more stable on the connections, manipulations, new correction tables, and injector ICTs.
I will say that since I put the XFI 2.0 in it, I now have my car starting instantly and not coating the plugs as badly as before. We have to run the factory intake which is a bear on fouling number 7 and 8 on my car. Once I figure out how to switch it over to sequential then I think I will prevent a lot of that.
And switching over on a LT1 Stock Eliminator car to sequential isn't as easy as a setting on the FAST ECU. You have to run an Optispark by rule and figure out how to put in a cam sensor. Plus, it doesn't do any good just to switch it over. You need to put it on a dyno with O2 sensors in each header tube to really get the rich/lean cylinders identified.
I am working on all of that.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
12-14-2011, 07:43 AM
#66
I do not know all of the specific changes from the XFI to the XFI 2.0, but there are a few. FAST could better answer that question.
Mine was the XFI that I had purchased a couple of years ago and never put in the car until recently. I went ahead and upgraded it to the latest version (2.001 I think). We put the XFI 2.0 in our iron head LT1 Super Stocker and I like to have the systems the same when I am tuning. There is enough to think about without going back and forth. Don't get me started on the Big Stuff 3!
My FAST Classic didn't have the internal data logger. It used a stand alone and I hated it. The XFI 2.0 was much more stable on the connections, manipulations, new correction tables, and injector ICTs.
I will say that since I put the XFI 2.0 in it, I now have my car starting instantly and not coating the plugs as badly as before. We have to run the factory intake which is a bear on fouling number 7 and 8 on my car. Once I figure out how to switch it over to sequential then I think I will prevent a lot of that.
And switching over on a LT1 Stock Eliminator car to sequential isn't as easy as a setting on the FAST ECU. You have to run an Optispark by rule and figure out how to put in a cam sensor. Plus, it doesn't do any good just to switch it over. You need to put it on a dyno with O2 sensors in each header tube to really get the rich/lean cylinders identified.
I am working on all of that.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
Mine was the XFI that I had purchased a couple of years ago and never put in the car until recently. I went ahead and upgraded it to the latest version (2.001 I think). We put the XFI 2.0 in our iron head LT1 Super Stocker and I like to have the systems the same when I am tuning. There is enough to think about without going back and forth. Don't get me started on the Big Stuff 3!
My FAST Classic didn't have the internal data logger. It used a stand alone and I hated it. The XFI 2.0 was much more stable on the connections, manipulations, new correction tables, and injector ICTs.
I will say that since I put the XFI 2.0 in it, I now have my car starting instantly and not coating the plugs as badly as before. We have to run the factory intake which is a bear on fouling number 7 and 8 on my car. Once I figure out how to switch it over to sequential then I think I will prevent a lot of that.
And switching over on a LT1 Stock Eliminator car to sequential isn't as easy as a setting on the FAST ECU. You have to run an Optispark by rule and figure out how to put in a cam sensor. Plus, it doesn't do any good just to switch it over. You need to put it on a dyno with O2 sensors in each header tube to really get the rich/lean cylinders identified.
I am working on all of that.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
12-14-2011, 07:59 AM
#67
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No I haven't messed with the injector firing angle. It is my understanding that is generally to help the idle of the car. It may help in other places, but with the big cams we run in Super Stocker and crazy lobes in the Stocker I am not sure we could tell what helped.
The batch fire will be just as fast as the sequential for most people. The sequential allows the tuner to really get in and refine the tune depending where you are in the event of the run. At certain RPMs the sequential part really loses any advantage.
You have to know what each cylinder needs and I don't know how to do that anywhere else but on a dyno with 8 O2 sensors. Just getting them even on the air/fuel ratios isn't always the target. You have to consider the design of the intake along with a consideration of cylinder pressures.
Equal power per cylinder is the goal, IMHO.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
The batch fire will be just as fast as the sequential for most people. The sequential allows the tuner to really get in and refine the tune depending where you are in the event of the run. At certain RPMs the sequential part really loses any advantage.
You have to know what each cylinder needs and I don't know how to do that anywhere else but on a dyno with 8 O2 sensors. Just getting them even on the air/fuel ratios isn't always the target. You have to consider the design of the intake along with a consideration of cylinder pressures.
Equal power per cylinder is the goal, IMHO.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
12-14-2011, 08:14 AM
#68
No I haven't messed with the injector firing angle. It is my understanding that is generally to help the idle of the car. It may help in other places, but with the big cams we run in Super Stocker and crazy lobes in the Stocker I am not sure we could tell what helped.
The batch fire will be just as fast as the sequential for most people. The sequential allows the tuner to really get in and refine the tune depending where you are in the event of the run. At certain RPMs the sequential part really loses any advantage.
You have to know what each cylinder needs and I don't know how to do that anywhere else but on a dyno with 8 O2 sensors. Just getting them even on the air/fuel ratios isn't always the target. You have to consider the design of the intake along with a consideration of cylinder pressures.
Equal power per cylinder is the goal, IMHO.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
The batch fire will be just as fast as the sequential for most people. The sequential allows the tuner to really get in and refine the tune depending where you are in the event of the run. At certain RPMs the sequential part really loses any advantage.
You have to know what each cylinder needs and I don't know how to do that anywhere else but on a dyno with 8 O2 sensors. Just getting them even on the air/fuel ratios isn't always the target. You have to consider the design of the intake along with a consideration of cylinder pressures.
Equal power per cylinder is the goal, IMHO.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
12-14-2011, 08:48 AM
#69
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry about cutting up your quote, but you have brought up something that I thought about in the beginning and then was led to believe I was on the wrong path. I wondered about an injector firing on a closed intake valve and "puddling" like you suggest especially with batch fire.
I was told by a very good tuner that it was inconsequential to non existent. And that there was much more to be found in other places. He was definitely right about the latter, but the jury is still out on the former. He may be right about both if I am not seeing a significant problem when in batch fire mode. I feel that sequential would cut the potential problem of "puddling" by 75% on its own.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 LT1 Firebird
12-22-2011, 03:13 AM
#70
older thread but i got a kick out of some of the responses. I have a working opti 1x cam sync in 3 cars right now, DFI in my car and XFI in the others. The gains from sequential fueling are negligible over batch, like you know the benefit is in the individual cylinder trims. Granted you run the head much cooler in a stocker, but in a street engine the fuel will "vaporize" on the intake valve.
12-22-2011, 06:13 AM
#71
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
older thread but i got a kick out of some of the responses. I have a working opti 1x cam sync in 3 cars right now, DFI in my car and XFI in the others. The gains from sequential fueling are negligible over batch, like you know the benefit is in the individual cylinder trims. Granted you run the head much cooler in a stocker, but in a street engine the fuel will "vaporize" on the intake valve.
If you did, what was the typical spread on the rich to lean cylinders and which ones were they if you are running a stock intake? Thanks!
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 Firebird LT1
12-22-2011, 04:01 PM
#72
Nothing other than a temp gun on the header tubes and looking at the plugs, which wasn't helpful with coated headers. I've always run in batch, the latest version of DFI firmware can adjust individual cylinder fueling in batch or sequential with N2O as well. I have a Stealth Ram intake on it now and have not had the car running long enough to tune it. Also I run E85 which has quite a bit more flexible tuning window.
12-22-2011, 09:21 PM
#73
Curious if you put any of your engines on the dyno or in the car with individual O2 sensors on each cylinder. I cannot see sequential making any difference to speak of without doing that part of the tuning.
If you did, what was the typical spread on the rich to lean cylinders and which ones were they if you are running a stock intake? Thanks!
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 Firebird LT1
If you did, what was the typical spread on the rich to lean cylinders and which ones were they if you are running a stock intake? Thanks!
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 Firebird LT1
12-22-2011, 09:40 PM
#74
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How far did you go with the sequential tuning? Sorry if I keep beating the same drum with this line of questioning, but did you use O2 sensors on each header tube and make pulls on a dyno? If so, what were the rich/lean cylinders and the spread? Stock intake?
The reason I am asking these questions is that I have run into only one other person that actually did all these things.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 Firebird LT1
The reason I am asking these questions is that I have run into only one other person that actually did all these things.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 Firebird LT1
12-23-2011, 07:10 PM
#75
My testing was all low tech. I ran the VIC for about four years. All of my testing was back-to-back runs. I could get all eight plugs to look nice, but didn't see any noticable gains. This was quite a few years ago when my LT1 Stocker was still a D/SA car! So, yes it was with a stock intake. I even made some pretty drastic changes and didn't see much good or bad. I am pretty sure I know what was going on, but that's another story!
As you are doing your testing by a way more scientific route, I am interrested to hear what you find. I know that Bernie C. did some of this stuff with his car. I don't think that he saw much of a gain. Woodro used to run the VIC too. He may have something more positive to say.
Daren
12-23-2011, 08:18 PM
#76
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have spoken to Bernie at length and have a decent idea of what he did or was trying to do. I feel that the dyno or some way to record the individual cylinders during a run is the only way to get full utilization out of the sequential tuning. If you don't know exactly what each cylinder is doing before and after the adjustments then I don't see how to get any realistic improvements from sequential tuning. Bernie claimed to pick up .15 from his efforts.
I am fairly convinced that there is something there due to some of the things that I found by accident with our tuning on our iron head LT1 Super Stocker. One of the biggest hurdles is getting a "clean engine" run. What I mean by that is cleaning out the excess fuel from the engine throughout the various events and loading from staged to the finish line. These events vary from the use of a 2 step, transbrake, and foot braking. Some events are hidden behind a curtain that you cannot monitor, but have to take your best guesses then see how it plays out in the incrementals.
Some of the more amazing improvements have been discovered when we altered the way the car started and moved in the staging lanes. You wouldn't think that matters, but you can really do a number on the plugs that will take nearly to the 1/8 mile to get cleared up. Just count up the number of times you start and stop the engine from the trailer to pre-staging. I think you would be surprised at the number.
Basically, the more efficiently the engine can run on the fuel the more quickly it will accelerate.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 Firebird LT1
I am fairly convinced that there is something there due to some of the things that I found by accident with our tuning on our iron head LT1 Super Stocker. One of the biggest hurdles is getting a "clean engine" run. What I mean by that is cleaning out the excess fuel from the engine throughout the various events and loading from staged to the finish line. These events vary from the use of a 2 step, transbrake, and foot braking. Some events are hidden behind a curtain that you cannot monitor, but have to take your best guesses then see how it plays out in the incrementals.
Some of the more amazing improvements have been discovered when we altered the way the car started and moved in the staging lanes. You wouldn't think that matters, but you can really do a number on the plugs that will take nearly to the 1/8 mile to get cleared up. Just count up the number of times you start and stop the engine from the trailer to pre-staging. I think you would be surprised at the number.
Basically, the more efficiently the engine can run on the fuel the more quickly it will accelerate.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 Firebird LT1
12-23-2011, 09:42 PM
#77
I have spoken to Bernie at length and have a decent idea of what he did or was trying to do. I feel that the dyno or some way to record the individual cylinders during a run is the only way to get full utilization out of the sequential tuning. If you don't know exactly what each cylinder is doing before and after the adjustments then I don't see how to get any realistic improvements from sequential tuning. Bernie claimed to pick up .15 from his efforts.
I am fairly convinced that there is something there due to some of the things that I found by accident with our tuning on our iron head LT1 Super Stocker. One of the biggest hurdles is getting a "clean engine" run. What I mean by that is cleaning out the excess fuel from the engine throughout the various events and loading from staged to the finish line. These events vary from the use of a 2 step, transbrake, and foot braking. Some events are hidden behind a curtain that you cannot monitor, but have to take your best guesses then see how it plays out in the incrementals.
Some of the more amazing improvements have been discovered when we altered the way the car started and moved in the staging lanes. You wouldn't think that matters, but you can really do a number on the plugs that will take nearly to the 1/8 mile to get cleared up. Just count up the number of times you start and stop the engine from the trailer to pre-staging. I think you would be surprised at the number.
Basically, the more efficiently the engine can run on the fuel the more quickly it will accelerate.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 Firebird LT1
I am fairly convinced that there is something there due to some of the things that I found by accident with our tuning on our iron head LT1 Super Stocker. One of the biggest hurdles is getting a "clean engine" run. What I mean by that is cleaning out the excess fuel from the engine throughout the various events and loading from staged to the finish line. These events vary from the use of a 2 step, transbrake, and foot braking. Some events are hidden behind a curtain that you cannot monitor, but have to take your best guesses then see how it plays out in the incrementals.
Some of the more amazing improvements have been discovered when we altered the way the car started and moved in the staging lanes. You wouldn't think that matters, but you can really do a number on the plugs that will take nearly to the 1/8 mile to get cleared up. Just count up the number of times you start and stop the engine from the trailer to pre-staging. I think you would be surprised at the number.
Basically, the more efficiently the engine can run on the fuel the more quickly it will accelerate.
Kyle Ratcliff
4121 C/SA
1998 Firebird LT1
01-22-2012, 08:04 PM
#80
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, I finally took it to the dyno and much to my surprise I actually got the MSD version of the Optispark to act as my cam sensor. The darn thing worked! I almost did a back flip in the dyno room. Glad I didn't try because it would have snapped my neck.
These are the things that I found. First, sequential does make a difference on the LT1 stock eliminator motors and it is a material difference. It picked up my HP a few, but that wasn't what was so significant. A lot of that was due to the fact that my tune in batch fire was pretty good in the first place. What it did was to spread the HP peak over almost 500 RPM and smoothed out the power curves significantly. This should show up more on the track in positive results than it does on the dyno. But there was no question that it helped.
The third thing that I found out was that it is a myth that sequential basically reverts to batch fire above 5,000 RPM. That is not correct. It functions much higher than that.
The last thing that I found out was it is darn near impossible to get good info on how to modify the reluctor wheel to work properly and signal properly. If you cannot figure a good way to get a cam sensor to work then you could take a couple of boxes of injectors, have them flow tested and stagger them to get a rough form of sequential.
These are the things that I found. First, sequential does make a difference on the LT1 stock eliminator motors and it is a material difference. It picked up my HP a few, but that wasn't what was so significant. A lot of that was due to the fact that my tune in batch fire was pretty good in the first place. What it did was to spread the HP peak over almost 500 RPM and smoothed out the power curves significantly. This should show up more on the track in positive results than it does on the dyno. But there was no question that it helped.
The third thing that I found out was that it is a myth that sequential basically reverts to batch fire above 5,000 RPM. That is not correct. It functions much higher than that.
The last thing that I found out was it is darn near impossible to get good info on how to modify the reluctor wheel to work properly and signal properly. If you cannot figure a good way to get a cam sensor to work then you could take a couple of boxes of injectors, have them flow tested and stagger them to get a rough form of sequential.