Mis-Matched? No longer.

So with a common rail injection system 900hp equals bent rods, but with the proper application of fuel from a p-pump, 1200hp on stock 24V rods is ok. I'm just adding a few late entries into my diesel notes.:poke:
 
RonA said:
So with a common rail injection system 900hp equals bent rods, but with the proper application of fuel from a p-pump, 1200hp on stock 24V rods is ok. I'm just adding a few late entries into my diesel notes.:poke:
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the high pressure fuel injection of the CR has a hydraulic effect in the higher hp applications. I've seen rods get mashed in the VP an P pump trucks when N2o or meth has been introduced.
 
The combination of being able to set accurate timing for every RPM window and the multiple injection events at 26000psi equates to more cylinder pressure then a mechanical pump injecting fuel at less pressure and fixed timing setup for the peak HP range at higher rpms.
 
LAmiller said:
The combination of being able to set accurate timing for every RPM window and the multiple injection events at 26000psi equates to more cylinder pressure then a mechanical pump injecting fuel at less pressure and fixed timing setup for the peak HP range at higher rpms.
Click to expand...

So it's a bigger strain on the motor even though it's making less peak power? Who'd a thought?
 
Hey Ron, I here Drake is opening back up for business. Maybe you could get some free dyno tuning sections.:poke: LOL
 
RonA said:
Power under the curve is overrated.
Click to expand...

Got that with a torque line too? Either way you skin this cat, you're making 300whp more at 2300 than I am, the torque number is obviously higher. So your point is very, 900 bends rods in a CR and 1200 doesn't with a pee-pump.

I most certainly can turn up the low end fuel and make more power at 2300. In fact I've turned things down to the point where it's rather difficult to break the tires loose on a 40-50mph roll in 1:1 locked. So I'm sure it was much higher at one point. The goal was to keep it drive able, smoke-free-ish and not looking at the right side mirror and let the RPM's take care of the power. That was accomplished as my graph shows.

Maybe timing was the ultimate reason for this bending? I do have the motorsport nozzles with the 03/04 spray pattern. I'd imagine the tighter pattern

But how does one explain a stock MLS gasket with 625's being stronger then rods?
 
JasonCzerak said:
Got that with a torque line too? Either way you skin this cat, you're making 300whp more at 2300 than I am, the torque number is obviously higher. So your point is very, 900 bends rods in a CR and 1200 doesn't with a pee-pump.

I most certainly can turn up the low end fuel and make more power at 2300. In fact I've turned things down to the point where it's rather difficult to break the tires loose on a 40-50mph roll in 1:1 locked. So I'm sure it was much higher at one point. The goal was to keep it drive able, smoke-free-ish and not looking at the right side mirror and let the RPM's take care of the power. That was accomplished as my graph shows.

Maybe timing was the ultimate reason for this bending? I do have the motorsport nozzles with the 03/04 spray pattern. I'd imagine the tighter pattern

But how does one explain a stock MLS gasket with 625's being stronger then rods?
Click to expand...

You are on the right track Jason. Pure dumb luck was all that kept mine from breaking something. That graph was from a super flow dyno with me starting the run at 20psi(about 10psi on the primary) pulling against the dyno's load at a constant 80mph. Not fair to compare graphs against a dyno jet. Sorry to hear you had to build it again.

RonA
 
RonA said:
You are on the right track Jason. Pure dumb luck was all that kept mine from breaking something. That graph was from a super flow dyno with me starting the run at 20psi(about 10psi on the primary) pulling against the dyno's load at a constant 80mph. Not fair to compare graphs against a dyno jet. Sorry to hear you had to build it again.

RonA
Click to expand...

This was a load dyno, without the load box hooked up. It made street boost starting at 30psi. I have my doubts that it would of made much more power with a load cell hookedup due to how flat and smooth the torque line is.

My primary vs secondary boost is 1:1 up till about 80psi.
 
JasonCzerak said:
Argh. You twisted my arm. Carrillo's it is.
Click to expand...



BDP has the best pricing on Carrillo's plus much more.

Jason smart $$$ move. Now you will be able to have a usefull powerband instead of short butt cheeks tight 1100 rpm bursts. That's going to be a fun setup even if it's pink.

Chris
 
So. With good rods, should I keep the z-gap rings or use the OEM ones?

I'm not sure, but could the cylinder scuffing come from the bent rods or just the rings?
 
JasonCzerak said:
So. With good rods, should I keep the z-gap rings or use the OEM ones?

I'm not sure, but could the cylinder scuffing come from the bent rods or just the rings?
Click to expand...

I know a ton of people have used Total Seal Gapless second rings with little to no problems. They machine your stock second ring and have a insert that goes in it. Under 100 bucks to do if you send them out.
 
scat said:
I know a ton of people have used Total Seal Gapless second rings with little to no problems. They machine your stock second ring and have a insert that goes in it. Under 100 bucks to do if you send them out.
Click to expand...

I have z-gaps already. They apparently were not damaged (nor the pistons). But the cylinder walls had scuffing and I've head that the scuffing was primarily the cause of running a gapless ring. But in this case, was it the case?

hmmmm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top