When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I just use a check valve with 25psi cracking pressure to prevent vacuum from causing meth to flow through my nozzles.
In addition to stretching my dollars this year on the project (I spent this years budget last year), my understanding changed when I realized fogging into the LSJ intake anywhere but the ports could be a problem if you consider I am bringing in a ton of [non-symmetrical] airflow through the bypass port. I imagine a condition where air/meth mixture is heterogeneous because of the large amount of fresh air pushed through the bypass port by the turbocharger. Port injection is the best solution for my very specific application.
The logic bringing it back before the TB is to help blow methanol through the bypass port. Just before the TB is also the recommended wet fogger nozzle location for NOSSS; I assume this is to ensure homogeneity of the methanol air mixture.
In addition to stretching my dollars this year on the project (I spent this years budget last year), my understanding changed when I realized fogging into the LSJ intake anywhere but the ports could be a problem if you consider I am bringing in a ton of [non-symmetrical] airflow through the bypass port. I imagine a condition where air/meth mixture is heterogeneous because of the large amount of fresh air pushed through the bypass port by the turbocharger. Port injection is the best solution for my very specific application.
The logic bringing it back before the TB is to help blow methanol through the bypass port. Just before the TB is also the recommended wet fogger nozzle location for NOSSS; I assume this is to ensure homogeneity of the methanol air mixture.
I understand your logic there. I was just addressing your "I decided to spray the meth before the throttle body to avoid needing a solenoid due to low pressure (vacuum)" issue that you stated. Not saying one way or another was the better choice just that a check valve with sufficient cracking pressure is another way to address the issue of unwanted flow when the nozzle is mounted in a vacuum location.
I understand your logic there. I was just addressing your "I decided to spray the meth before the throttle body to avoid needing a solenoid due to low pressure (vacuum)" issue that you stated. Not saying one way or another was the better choice just that a check valve with sufficient cracking pressure is another way to address the issue of unwanted flow when the nozzle is mounted in a vacuum location.
Thanks for feedback, just laying it out in case my logic was off. For reference, which check valve are you using? I see snow performance has a 20 psi "high flow" valve, what are you using for 25 psi?
25 psi was pulled from memory. You are right and mine is probably 20 psi. I used two different DevilsOwn check valves previously but they both failed on me with cracked housings so I'll have to double check but I am pretty sure I bought the Snow Performance check valve you are talking about this last time around but haven't used it yet.
25 psi was pulled from memory. You are right and mine is probably 20 psi. I used two different DevilsOwn check valves previously but they both failed on me with cracked housings so I'll have to double check but I am pretty sure I bought the Snow Performance check valve you are talking about this last time around but haven't used it yet.
Blasted, another bad mark for Devilsown, I knew something was up with this company when I found they were selling me gallon jugs of city water.
Blasted, another bad mark for Devilsown, I knew something was up with this company when I found they were selling me gallon jugs of city water.
I still have their pump and nozzles. They appear to be fine so far. However I was less than impressed with their check valves continually failing for me and them not doing anything to make it right. I know I have back luck but two valves cracking in less than a year for each? I'd be stupid to buy another one.
Son of a Biscuit, couldn't burp the IC, running like's it choking, and blowing white smoke. Pulled the SC and identified this last night:
I reused the laminova o-rings, but applied plenty of silicone grease o-ring lube. The sealing surface on the cores aren't bad, light corrosion if anything.
I pressurized it on the bench after pulling it and confirmed that air coming from inside the intake, but couldn't see where exactly but it was pretty loud. Maybe an o-ring pinched or rolled when I assembled it idk. I followed the ZZP instructions also, which showed how to clock the cores and deal with the washer stack ups.
When I serviced the intake I used the 'hose clamp' method to remove the Laminova cores as recommended by multiple interweb sources. The used intake manifold came with the ZZP dual pass plate, so someone went in there beat up the core o-ring surface on 3 cores, so likely a leak came from there. One core o-ring sealing surfaces was very deformed, crushed ~0.030" I bent it out with a picked and filed off the over shoot, then used anaerobic sealer and pressure tested to 20 psi on the bench the next day.
Cleaning the cores with sand papers on the mini-lathe:
Don't use sealant. just some light dielectric grease or something to lube the orings
I put a small amount of anaerobic gasket maker on the damaged portions directly, all o-rings are covered in silicone grease. That anaerobic gasket maker is used on some o-rings in marine applications (jet pump cone).
Looks like I might need a smaller SC pulley. If the 2.0 LSJ stock puts out 12 psi, that is about a P/R of 1.82 where my system is showing P/R of 1.65. Consider I am running a 2.4 engine that has 20% larger displacement so probably expected with a M62 swapped onto a 2.4, will need to research this unless you know.
Referencing the log below: - Turbocharger made 15.3 psi (SC inlet side) with a P/R of 2.07 - Supercharger added 10 psi (Intake valve side) with a P/R of 1.65 - Total boost is 25.3 psi - All boost pressures measured by 0-5V transducers that I doubled checked calibrations with regulated shop air after installation on the vehicle
Why do you think you need a smaller pulley? Boost not coming on as fast as you want it to? I ran a bigger pulley than you, also on a 2.4 so im sure my PR was much lower. The blower only made 5-6psi on my setup.
Why do you think you need a smaller pulley? Boost not coming on as fast as you want it to? I ran a bigger pulley than you, also on a 2.4 so im sure my PR was much lower. The blower only made 5-6psi on my setup.
The car made peak torque at about 4,600 RPM at 25 psi on the turbocharger only, so I am in the early stages of trying to understand why it doesn't feel like 420 ft-lbs of torque at this same speed point and same boost level in front of the intake valve with the twincharger system (I doubt I have grown use to 400+ ftlb in this car, I should be more scared). Was kinda thinking I need to push the SC harder low/mid range with a smaller pulley; maybe it is feasible to do this if I am successful in developing an effective SC-bypass controller. I am not planning on swapping the SC pulley anytime soon until I better understand the current setup. I haven't turned up the turbo past 15 psi, because my max boost TC-only at the intake valve was 25 psi, so that is where I stopped for now. I am also planning on going to the lingenfelter cars & coffee June 1st so I am trying not to break it in the short-term.
The goal I have in mind with this current setup (5557 turbo) is to achieve or exceed the turbo-only output of this car, ultimately I still want the 600 bhp but I am planning on upgrading the turbo to achieve this.
The amount of noises this car makes is amazing, SC whine is not as noticeable, but the Tial BOV is getting a workout everywhere. Like messing with people who have their windows open stopping at a light or something, I just WOT it for a second and WHOOOOSH-flutterrrrr about 5x louder than before. I am also going to add a side exit 3" dump exhaust (behind passenger front tire), I have a spare fender to cut a hole in, this way I can swap back to the single 2.5" for the street.
The car made peak torque at about 4,600 RPM at 25 psi on the turbocharger only, so I am in the early stages of trying to understand why it doesn't feel like 420 ft-lbs of torque at this same speed point and same boost level in front of the intake valve with the twincharger system (I doubt I have grown use to 400+ ftlb in this car, I should be more scared).
at the same boost level id believe the engine should be making the same torque, and id bet its close except for one factor- your now driving a supercharger. the blower takes power to turn so your likely not putting the same power to the tires now.
In my limited experience with this setup, youre going to flow less air at the same boost pressure because the boost is being compounded. That is likely why the car feels "slow."
Below is the 25 psi dyno pull at nearly the same point under WOT with the turbo-only setup, same gear 4th:
- Higher cylinder air mass turbo only 1.52g vs. 1.06g
- Dyno pull has more timing but hotter IAT, not sure about this yet
- For the twincharger tune, I have only reduced fuel by 10-20% in high MAF table only and removed 5 deg at 1.28-1.36g cyl airmass so don't think it's that
- I also HPT compare the dyno tune and the current tune, the spark tables are the same except for that -5 deg
*look at that instrumented fuel pressure, with the new fuel system it looks nice and smooth matching the boost, right now I am running 3 air pressure sensors so I had to ditch FP analog signal for now.
The turbo is providing the majority of your airflow but you reduced its flow by only running the same boost pressure as before. A bigger pulley on the blower would allow you to run more flow from the turbo at the same boost pressure and youll still have good spool up.
04-24-2019, 02:08 PM
