14mm ve pump

I want to be full boost at or before 2800 RPM. I've yet to see a dyno graph where a VE makes power higher then 3000RPM. I like the idea of boost right off idle as well. I have no interest is spinning mine more then 3200 rpms
 
Dazed&Confused said:
I want to be full boost at or before 2800 RPM. I've yet to see a dyno graph where a VE makes power higher then 3000RPM. I like the idea of boost right off idle as well. I have no interest is spinning mine more then 3200 rpms
Click to expand...

It can be done with a stock 12mm . . .


447Dyno.jpg


Just say'in . . .




.
 
Last edited:
Yeah David I know it can be done with a 12MM. I know you and Brian have Knocked on 500hp's door with a 12MM pump.
 
I've dynoed 285 hp on my ve pumped 4bt on fuel only, and 430on water meth...... Which would be 440ish and 625ish out of a 6bt. Now mind you I was spraying ALOT of methanol...... I was thinking about going with a 14mm ve for this season. But decided to go p-pump instead.
 
Against my better judgement, I spent some time thinking about this topic;

14mm VE with a different dv/holder approach
7x0.012" or 7x0.013" Denso 158° nozzle
wide bowl piston ~ 17:1 compression
181/210° 106.5LSA 96°ICL
SBC valvetrain and 3/8" pushrods (possibly 1.8:1 cast rocker and girdle)
18° static timing before advance
63/68mm 0.70AR T3 - GT4202 1.15AR T6 (possibly a pair of S200's)

So often I see people waste money on flavor of the week parts and neglect the real areas that need addressed.
 
Why a 7 hole?

Also, Zach was saying for the VE, the new 188 would be a good cam.

Just wondering your reasoning.
 
SBC valvetrain and 3/8" pushrods (possibly 1.8:1 cast rocker and girdle)
Click to expand...

why would you go that far? little overkill for the intended RPM's no? why the different ration rocker?

Weston, can you give a "english-version" description of why you feel the DV's are holding the VE back? I neglected to really look in to them because of what all the interwebs told me, because like most VE guys, I think these pumps are mystery and what Brian says, goes :poke:

but in all seriousness... I think we would all like a better explanation, more than just a retorical question. even if its against your better judgement.

BTW your getting a call from me soon, I need injectors
 
oldestof11 said:
Why a 7 hole?.
Click to expand...

Just a wild guess on my part, but I believe it's for the 158* spray. I think I saw that those only come in a 7 hole style.

He mentioned using the widest possible spray to take advantage of available oxygen at low RPMs.
 
Smokem said:
Against my better judgement, I spent some time thinking about this topic;

14mm VE with a different dv/holder approach
7x0.012" or 7x0.013" Denso 158° nozzle
wide bowl piston ~ 17:1 compression
181/210° 106.5LSA 96°ICL
SBC valvetrain and 3/8" pushrods (possibly 1.8:1 cast rocker and girdle)
18° static timing before advance
63/68mm 0.70AR T3 - GT4202 1.15AR T6 (possibly a pair of S200's)

So often I see people waste money on flavor of the week parts and neglect the real areas that need addressed.
Click to expand...

I like that combo!
 
I like the turbo and injector/piston selection and reasons.

I don't know enough about the rest of it to appreciate it for what it is.
 
oldestof11 said:
Why a 7 hole?
Also, Zach was saying for the VE, the new 188 would be a good cam.

Just wondering your reasoning.
Click to expand...

They work! Weston can get into the real details about them, but I run a set of 7 holes from him in my p-pump truck and a set will be in the first gen very soon as well.
 
oldestof11 said:
Why a 7 hole?
Also, Zach was saying for the VE, the new 188 would be a good cam.
Just wondering your reasoning.
Click to expand...

7-hole will have better response earlier in the power band, as will the smaller lobe cam with a tighter installed centerline.
 
ahale2772 said:
why would you go that far? little overkill for the intended RPM's no? why the different ration rocker?
Click to expand...

Because the stock Cummins valvetrain sucks, and I would have access to the rockers.

ahale2772 said:
Weston, can you give a "english-version" description of why you feel the DV's are holding the VE back?
Click to expand...

It's the principle of injection rate. Same as you are seeing with any increase in plunger size. The larger diameter moves more fuel per given amount of stroke, to increase rate we want to move more fuel over less lift. I use 7mm delivery valves in P7100's, they decrease flow a bit and increase pressure that does add a bit of response. You guys are running a larger plunger and injector, yet not removing the restriction between the two.

I still feel one of the largest issues will be the interior passages, and the ability to use RPM while retaining a functioning advance piston. This I cannot disagree on with anyone.
 
Easy to see comparing the differnt VE models;

Light commercial 70mm³ 1250BAR 4400RPM
Med commercial 125mm³ 800BAR 3800RPM

Typically to handle increased pressure and higher operating speeds the component is smaller/lighter, such as the CR needle from 5.9L(4mm) to 6.7L(3.5mm).
 
It's a trend in every axial/radial piston pump that when the injected volume increases the pressure and max RPM decreases.
 
See, this is what we need.

Now, too much usable power low in the power band increases torque and the ability to break schit on command.

My next question is: Would a fast ramp, short duration cam for the plunger be able to broaden the power in higher rpm ranges?

My thinking come somewhat from steam engines. When moving slow, you can get a lot of power because of more fill time. Shorten this up and it moves faster but not as much power.

I am just thinking out loud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top