Injector Scaling 28lb. to 60lb
Injector Scaling 28lb. to 60lb I am unfamiliar with how to scale the injectors on an LS1 PCM, the older LT1 were real easy, this looks greek to me.
I have the stock 28lb/hr injectors and I need to scale them to 69.3lb/hr (60lb Mototron at 43.5 psi, rated at 58 psi fuel pressure)
I have the stock 28lb/hr injectors and I need to scale them to 69.3lb/hr (60lb Mototron at 43.5 psi, rated at 58 psi fuel pressure)
TECH Addict
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by ChiTownHustler
I am unfamiliar with how to scale the injectors on an LS1 PCM, the older LT1 were real easy, this looks greek to me.
I have the stock 28lb/hr injectors and I need to scale them to 69.3lb/hr (60lb Mototron at 43.5 psi, rated at 58 psi fuel pressure)
I have the stock 28lb/hr injectors and I need to scale them to 69.3lb/hr (60lb Mototron at 43.5 psi, rated at 58 psi fuel pressure)
This follows your IFR table:
KPA 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
8.73, 8.78, 8.83, 8.90, 8.95, 9.00, 9.04,
KPA 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
9.09, 9.16, 9.19, 9.26, 9.31, 9.36, 9.41,
KPA 70 75 80
9.45, 9.53, 9.55,
Originally Posted by Bink
Here you go. These are vacuum referenced so -> 0 kPa is WOT and 80 kPa is equal to 20 kPa absolute referenced.
This follows your IFR table:
KPA 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
8.73, 8.78, 8.83, 8.90, 8.95, 9.00, 9.04,
KPA 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
9.09, 9.16, 9.19, 9.26, 9.31, 9.36, 9.41,
KPA 70 75 80
9.45, 9.53, 9.55,
This follows your IFR table:
KPA 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
8.73, 8.78, 8.83, 8.90, 8.95, 9.00, 9.04,
KPA 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
9.09, 9.16, 9.19, 9.26, 9.31, 9.36, 9.41,
KPA 70 75 80
9.45, 9.53, 9.55,
injector flow rate is in g/sec i think and 80 kpa is the vacuum the manifold sees in relation to standard atmospheric pressure of 101.3 kPa. so 80 in the table should be 20 on the map sensor ( i think i actually have a post asking about this )
Originally Posted by WS6FirebirdTA00
injector flow rate is in g/sec i think and 80 kpa is the vacuum the manifold sees in relation to standard atmospheric pressure of 101.3 kPa. so 80 in the table should be 20 on the map sensor ( i think i actually have a post asking about this )
im pretty sure that what i was talking about is right, if 0 kpa is the vacuum then that means your at standard atm pressure of 101.3, if you pull an 80 kpa vacuum then
-80+101.3=21.3 MAP
in other words with no vacuum the manifold sees what you see outside of the car, plain old air at about 100 kpa, as you go up, subtract off of that and you get the map reading. so (atmospheric pressure)-(IFR vacuum)=MAP reading
so lets say in the table at 40 kpa vacuum
100-40=60 kpa MAP
did that help or no? lol
-80+101.3=21.3 MAP
in other words with no vacuum the manifold sees what you see outside of the car, plain old air at about 100 kpa, as you go up, subtract off of that and you get the map reading. so (atmospheric pressure)-(IFR vacuum)=MAP reading
so lets say in the table at 40 kpa vacuum
100-40=60 kpa MAP
did that help or no? lol
i got the same numbers he got, you can get it mroe consistent if you check the pressure at the given kpa, if you do that i can plug it in my excel file for you and give you the numbers
Trending Topics
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo TECH Addict
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by white2001s10
Could someone post up the stock rates for an LS1 (the gms/s vs KPA) ?
I only have a truck file on this computer right now.
thanks.
I only have a truck file on this computer right now.
thanks.
kPa 100 95 90 85 80 75 70
g/sec 8.73 8.78 8.83 8.90 8.95 9.00 9.04
*
65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30
9.09 9.16 9.19 9.26 9.31 9.36 9.41 9.45
*
25 20
9.53 9.55
Last edited by Bink; Mar 21, 2005 at 04:08 PM.
Originally Posted by Bink
*
kPa 100 95 90 85 80 75 70
g/sec 3.33 3.35 3.38 3.39 3.41 3.44 3.45
*
65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30
3.48 3.49 3.52 3.53 3.55 3.57 3.59 3.61
*
25 20
3.63 3.65
kPa 100 95 90 85 80 75 70
g/sec 3.33 3.35 3.38 3.39 3.41 3.44 3.45
*
65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30
3.48 3.49 3.52 3.53 3.55 3.57 3.59 3.61
*
25 20
3.63 3.65
I know that std atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi and that is equal to 101.4 kpa, some earlier in the thread said 0 kpa was WOT (no vacuum), is this correct.
Also why do you change the injector constant with manifold vacuum?? I mean wouldn't you wanna keep the injector constant static and then just scale the VE and MAF table??
the injecors are really done on a change in pressure basis from what i understand. so at 80 kpa vacuum, thats about 11 psi vacuum, so the rail pressure of 58 plus that vacuum is 69 psi (delta) so that is why the injectors will flow more fuel at 80 kpa vacuum. you want to get this table accurate and then leave it alone
Originally Posted by ChiTownHustler
Also why do you change the injector constant with manifold vacuum?? I mean wouldn't you wanna keep the injector constant static and then just scale the VE and MAF table??
The IFR table for my truck is set constant, as is most of what I've worked on, so yes it will work either way you want to do it.
If it's scaled by MAP from the factory, then it's just less work to keep it that way.
I was just trying to figure out the percent increase that was done to that posted table. I figure that the injector size increased by 147.5% over the stock 28 lb.
It looks like he (Bink) roughly added about 162%
Is this what was done here?
TECH Addict
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Sorry, I copied the last post wrong - I edited it and it is now correct for absolute referenced values. 100 kPa being atmospheric/WOT = 8.73 g/sec.
If you do the math 100 kPa should be 8.78 g/sec -> But, there is a .05 buffer subtracted which will result in .05 g/sec More fuel for safety.
If you do the math 100 kPa should be 8.78 g/sec -> But, there is a .05 buffer subtracted which will result in .05 g/sec More fuel for safety.
Originally Posted by Bink
Sorry, I copied the last post wrong - I edited it and it is now correct for absolute referenced values. 100 kPa being atmospheric/WOT = 8.73 g/sec.
If you do the math 100 kPa should be 8.78 g/sec -> But, there is a .05 buffer subtracted which will result in .05 g/sec More fuel for safety.
If you do the math 100 kPa should be 8.78 g/sec -> But, there is a .05 buffer subtracted which will result in .05 g/sec More fuel for safety.
I multiply 3.33 * 1.475 and get 4.91
4.91 + 3.33 = 8.24
Did you use a different % gain? or a different formula?
TECH Addict
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
F1=60 lb/hr
F2 = New Flow Rate lb/hr
P1=43.51 psi
P2=58.02 psi
F2 = F1 * Square Root (P1 / P2)
F2 = 60.00 lb/hr * square root (58.02/43.51) = 69.29 lb/hr
Remember, the PCM values are in grams/second.
1.000 lb/hr = 0.1260 g/sec
69.29 * 0 .1260 = 8.731 g/sec
Hope this helps some.
F2 = New Flow Rate lb/hr
P1=43.51 psi
P2=58.02 psi
F2 = F1 * Square Root (P1 / P2)
F2 = 60.00 lb/hr * square root (58.02/43.51) = 69.29 lb/hr
Remember, the PCM values are in grams/second.
1.000 lb/hr = 0.1260 g/sec
69.29 * 0 .1260 = 8.731 g/sec
Hope this helps some.
tonight i went out and logged for my IFR changes for the actuall pressure and was quite impressed with the numbers i got, much more consistent and the VE table seems to flow better now. plus rich idle is eliminated
Originally Posted by white2001s10
Could you please post the math you used?
I multiply 3.33 * 1.475 and get 4.91
4.91 + 3.33 = 8.24
Did you use a different % gain? or a different formula?
I multiply 3.33 * 1.475 and get 4.91
4.91 + 3.33 = 8.24
Did you use a different % gain? or a different formula?
Bink, whatever you used did the same calculation that I did above. you just started with a different base number in the beginning.
You started with 3.33 as the base flow rate with 28lb injectors, and I started with 3.528 as the base flow rate of the same 28 lb injector.
It looks like your formula uses a calculation to convert to gms/sec, and the number I used comes straight from the factory calibration in the IFR table.
As far as I'm concerned, I'd just multiply the IFR table by 147 in Edit and start from there.
Your value of 8.73 is about 6% more flow than my number of 8.24
*Keep in mind that this is the lowest flow rate as seen at WOT, and the difference in values between the two calculation methods will increase as you get closer to the MAP reading for idle.
This could be causing your idle fueling to be a little more off than you think.
