dual feed 12v injectors?

6.7STRAWSIE

BALLS DEEP
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
83
im looking to buy a new set of dual feed injectors, ive been having issues with my harts 5x25 cracking the bodies (four different sets) and im getting tired of messing with them. they make really good power when they stay together. can someone point me in the right direction to buy a set that makes comparable power and are also reliable. thanks.
 
Scheid does triple feeds that are more reliable. International bodies. That's what I swapped to
 
The real question is what does the triple feed benefit? I've flowed the Stanadyne holder next to the P-style holder, and I can ensure you the benefit is not the triple feeds.
 
The real question is what does the triple feed benefit? I've flowed the Stanadyne holder next to the P-style holder, and I can ensure you the benefit is not the triple feeds.

Oh ye god of the injection world, I bow before you, awaiting to hear the REAL benefits :poke: :hehe:
 
It does not matter how many feed passages there are, the valve(pintle) and orifice size will still determine flow.

No religious figures needed, I simply try to put some proof behind what is/has been done.
 
Last edited:
Bout the same advantage of "storing" air in the head....

I asked the question simply because I was told there is more power to be made by storing more fuel at the injector, and when it opens, it has more "reserve" waiting to be injected.
 
I look at this from a different standpoint. I would be curious to cc the volume of a holder and compare the results of different feed passage modifications. My concern is simple, when you increase the volume of the holder, you increase the amount of time it takes to prime and actuate the assembly, this in turn will retard injection timing.
 
I was told there is more power to be made by storing more fuel at the injector, and when it opens, it has more "reserve" waiting to be injected.

This would make far more sense if there was constant pressure present rather than a pulse of fuel from the IP.
 
This would make far more sense if there was constant pressure present rather than a pulse of fuel from the IP.

Awesome !! I'm gonna dual feed my CR !!!!! And put a giant rail and lines on it !!!

:rockwoot:
 
I look at this from a different standpoint. I would be curious to cc the volume of a holder and compare the results of different feed passage modifications. My concern is simple, when you increase the volume of the holder, you increase the amount of time it takes to prime and actuate the assembly, this in turn will retard injection timing.

Fuel is incompressible though so any additional volume shouldn't make a difference on how fast the internal pressure rises.
 
Fuel is incompressible though so any additional volume shouldn't make a difference on how fast the internal pressure rises.

The quantity of fuel required to prime the system is altered, this causes a delay. It can be calculated, the real proof would be measuring it.
 
The quantity of fuel required to prime the system is altered, this causes a delay. It can be calculated, the real proof would be measuring it.

Once it is primed(ie after the first injection firing), wouldn't it be irrelevant?
 
Having equipment problems Ron? LOL

I think where the confusion may set in here is that, while a medium may be considered incompressible, it is certainly not "inpressurizable". Larger volume increases the length of time to hit an equivalent pressure, all others remaining constant.

Also, this is not accounting for entrained compressibles, such as air. But hey, that's what an air dog is for......right?? :D
 
Last edited:
all i can do right now is smile and enjoy the reading. this should be good!!! "i was told this...i was told that...but i have no real dyno numbers...they just said it worked" :hehe: this has been an ongoing question in my mind and im just not really sure what i think about this yet.....continue on gentlemen! ima set back and read on this one!
 
Top