ratter

Brett from Shockworks was not interested in doing a group buy, I asked him a little while back.

how many $$$$ do you want to spend to gain a little top end?

bigger turbo will help top end, but your gas system as it is, is close to maxed out and will require more done to it to get more flow

some one has accidentally put the incorrect amount in, common issues with performance shops and ZF rebuilds

So no factors affect 1/4 mph?

Have no difference between the 2 but the Jag one has the model 6HP26 on it

we currently have a rebuild happening on a ZF from a 7 series jag v8 and it's a 26

yep all are 6hp26's

the ZF in my Super Pursuit is a 6 speed, not sure on the I6 without checking my data

there are manufacturer pids and OBD2 pids in the system, priority is given to manufacturer pids with data reporting so obd2 can be delayed

If its reading a generic OBD2 pid, the number maybe correct if it's reading MAP, but the reading may be slow compared to what is actually happening at the time

torque? are you talking the torque app?

NA ZF's have 5 clutches in E clutch, BF turbo has 6 and FG turbo has 7 Supercharged 5.0 has a 4 pinion gear and the others have 3 pinion

would have been ideal to get runs done under the same conditions, if the car has the stock tune or tuned but in closed loop boost control, the boost control will pull the boost back to where it is commanded, but which also varies by rpm and mct, so not unusual to see different boost levels on a stock car when doing multiple runs

Organic is best if you want a nice drive and longer life, ceramic is harsher, wears out quicker but holds better

That's pretty much it, the ford ecu does not have an absolute psi reading to give out

Mal Wood touched on flywheels in another post, did you get a new one and what brand of clutch?

Boost works but it is not in the usual form that people expect to see

Not saying this at all, but knew coming from KPM it would get disputed from some, which again is why I recommended a third party to test it. If I was to test a system, I may not have any control over the initial fuel temp, if a car has been started the fuel will be above ambient temp

The questions of the testing are the reason I posted in the intercooler thread that any testing should be done by an independent third party, people asked for KPM's testing data, possibly thinking it did not exist and now want to question it, not just on this forum but others as well

many cars are now using pump speed controllers but it adds to the cost when buying the controller and a rpm module

every tuner is different, I'm sure you are aware of this with what you have seen, pity Ford Australia did not include a rail temp sensor on our cars to keep things more consistent. But injector flow is only one aspect of fuel getting hotter, but agree it will be hard to record unless you had an engine dyno and complete control of coolant and air temps to keep things consistent in order to do the testing

get him to call Mainline,

How fuel temp can affect your tune accuracy, a copy and paste not written by me "In last month’s TechnoRant, I discussed the difference between injector volume flow, and mass flow, and described how mass flow is dependent on fuel density. I also hinted at the fact that fuel density is dependent on temperature. This month, I will detail that dependence, describe how it affects your tune, and give you a tool to compensate for it. Let’s start with what really matters, which is how it affects your tune. Have you noticed that even a well-tuned engine runs leaner when the fuel is hot? There’s a reason for that… The reason is that the density of the fuel changes with temperature, which changes the injector mass flow rate. Predictably, your air fuel ratio changes because your fuel injector is now effectively smaller. (Remember, air fuel ratio is mass based.) This change in density can be predicted with a parameter called the “Coefficient of Thermal Expansion” (CTE) which is a description of how much the fuel expands with temperature. It sounds complicated, but like many things related to performance, most of us already have an intuitive feel for it. For instance, we all know that our pistons expand when they get hot, which is why we specify a cold clearance. And we all know that the fluid in the radiator expands when it gets hot, which is why we need an overflow tank. It should come as no surprise then that our fuel also expands when it gets hot, and in fact it expands at a greater rate than either water or aluminum. So let’s consider how this expansion changes the fuel density. Let’s start by filling a cylinder to the very top with ethanol. Ignoring evaporation, if we heat the ethanol, it will expand and overflow just like the fluid in our radiator. The cylinder contains the same volume of ethanol, but because a portion has spilled out, the mass of ethanol in the cylinder has changed. Referring to last month’s TechnoRant, we know that density is defined as mass divided by volume. As we divide our unchanged cylinder volume into a lesser mass, we get a lesser density, which we already know will reduce our injector mass flow rate. The situation is the same on a running engine. The fuel injector delivers a specific volume of fuel to the cylinder, but as the temperature of that fuel changes, so does the mass, and so does our mass based air fuel ratio. The hotter the fuel gets, the smaller the fuel mass delivered to the cylinder, and the leaner the air fuel ratio becomes. Let’s move beyond generalizations, and be more specific. Gasoline, ethanol, methanol, toluene, etc all have a similar CTE value of approximately .001 per degree Celsius. This means that for every change in temperature of 1 degree C, our volume will change by a factor of .001, which you math geeks will recognize as 1/10 of one percent per degree Celsius. Let’s apply this to a sample 1000 cc/min injector, and calculate the mass flow rate at a few different temperatures. We start by looking up the density of ethanol, and we find that the density of .789 is stated at a temperature of 20 degrees C. Multiplying our 1000cc/min by ethanol’s specific gravity of .789, we get a mass flow rate of 789 grams per minute at a fuel temperature of 20 degrees C. Now let’s consider what happens after a half hour of driving in stop and go traffic when the fuel temperature climbs to 70C, using the following formula: (((Reference Temp – New Temp) * CTE) + 1) * Reference Density = New Density Using the values from our example: (((20 – 70) * .0011) + 1) * 0.789 = 0.746 As a result of the density changing from 0.789, to 0.746, our injector mass flow rate has now gone from 789 g/min (13.2 g/sec, or 104.4 lbs/hr) to 746 g/min (12.4 g/sec, or 98.7 lbs/hr) Putting that to numbers that we can more easily relate to, our air fuel ratio of 11.5 to 1 has just become 12.2 to 1 and would need a trim of approximately 6% to bring it back in line. Not the end of the world as long as our tune is conservative, but potentially ugly if we are cutting it close. And I think most would agree that a 6% trim is unnecessary if we can compensate for it in the tune right? While half of you are nodding your heads in agreement, and planning to perform the calculations to account for this density change, the rest of you are shaking your heads violently, thinking “There is NFW I am going to struggle with a bunch of math just to fix a 6% trim!”

do either of you believe there is a benefit in cooler fuel, forget about which type of system it comes from