New motor build for the puller

And i took a truck that ran like this to one seen in the other vid, same track a few months apart...only difference was the pistons and injs. 2nd hook was pro stock, and still gained 15ft from the 2.6 sled setting before.$.02

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0k8DHvC3D0"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0k8DHvC3D0[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TearLsQqVFU&list=UUOLVNBBQmYpSsIuetdWimKQ&index=3&feature=plcp"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TearLsQqVFU&list=UUOLVNBBQmYpSsIuetdWimKQ&index=3&feature=plcp[/ame]
 
Last edited:
I cant tell much of a difference in either vid. That track looks pretty crappy. You snuffed in the first vid and spun out in the second one at a low RPM on a loose track. Did the swap net you any footage against the other trucks that you pull against?
 
ILLINOISRAM said:
I do have some pics put up on facebook if you want to see them. It is under Tim N Kelly Burton. What cam did you put in yours?
Click to expand...

I plan on runnin a 200/220 thats what ryan at Hamilton i needed for my set up. I tried to get a billet one but he said the thick core one would be fine, i guess we will see my pump is susposed to turn 5500 + its goin to be alot different from my old vp set up.
 
SledPuller21 said:
Instability seems to be induced by the unsteady flow separation at the edge of the bowl and squish region, although the turbulence generated by the piston bowl is relatively small.
Click to expand...

I still do not understand your comparison of how a CR with low pressure has anything to do with a mechanical system when using a 30° wider cone angle.

It is obvious you went from being within the bowl with the cone angle to out of the bowl from the first video to the second, clearly shown by the unburnt fuel(white) while spooling the charger. But in both videos it seems to be clearly overfueled, most likely a much larger factor than the piston type.

The late CR piston has been used very successfully in many applications whether 12v or 24v, in your instance you did not have such results, but is this to say everyone will see the same?
 
I want to run a s480 wide open for open diesel classes to. That is part of why I went with that cam. I wanted the 232/252 but Zach said if I dropped down to the 2.6 charger that it would come off the line hard and have trouble keeping it going. I'm sure it will run good
 
Smokem said:
I still do not understand your comparison of how a CR with low pressure has anything to do with a mechanical system when using a 30° wider cone angle.

It is obvious you went from being within the bowl with the cone angle to out of the bowl from the first video to the second, clearly shown by the unburnt fuel(white) while spooling the charger. But in both videos it seems to be clearly overfueled, most likely a much larger factor than the piston type.

The late CR piston has been used very successfully in many applications whether 12v or 24v, in your instance you did not have such results, but is this to say everyone will see the same?
Click to expand...

You dont understand how a low swirl bowl and a low injection pressure isnt optimal? Imo dont care what cone angle you run your not gonna get an optimal burn if that's the situation. Can it be done? Sure. Has it been done? Yes. With higher cylinder pressures, boost, and rpms its obviously going to help resolve the issue. But you cant show me or anyone hard facts or data to support you BS. Same **** that goes on in the performance world everyday..."well my cousins uncles friend has a 2.8 truck and he tried it and won the points, so its gatta work right?" And the 2nd vid the truck looks overfueled, are you high?
 
I hope so ill have a pretty good amount of cash in this thing this year. What size exhaust housing you goin to run this year? I ran a .90 with my vp and it always choked ive heard keep it and run and go up in size.
 
Injectorbearing said:
I cant tell much of a difference in either vid. That track looks pretty crappy. You snuffed in the first vid and spun out in the second one at a low RPM on a loose track. Did the swap net you any footage against the other trucks that you pull against?
Click to expand...

If you consider 4100 low rpm than yea. But than again you thought I stuck a plunger at mercer lmao.
 
Smokem said:
But in both videos it seems to be clearly overfueled, most likely a much larger factor than the piston type.
Click to expand...
Wrong again, I spent a day at EEP on the dyno going from 450-600cc's, and 30-36* with no better results only making the most power around 520cc, headed back home and tried another set of sticks before we said **** it and changed the pistons.
 
Hoodrat said:
I hope so ill have a pretty good amount of cash in this thing this year. What size exhaust housing you goin to run this year? I ran a .90 with my vp and it always choked ive heard keep it and run and go up in size.
Click to expand...

I hear that. Even making money conscious decisions it's still a bunch of money spent. I have the 3x3 sx turbo I ran last year and it has the 1.10 t4 housing. The s480 will have the 1.32 t6 housing. I would run the 1.10
 
SledPuller21 said:
You dont understand how a low swirl bowl and a low injection pressure isnt optimal? Imo dont care what cone angle you run your not gonna get an optimal burn if that's the situation.
Click to expand...

A larger bowl increases swirl, should be obvious seeing that the forged Ross and Arias pistons are wide bowl and often flat bottom. Port shape and seat angle effect swirl, which can greatly alter the results of the large bowl piston. Bowersock's motor fell prey to this, and a poor valve job played a large role which was addressed.
 
SledPuller21 said:
Instability seems to be induced by the unsteady flow separation at the edge of the bowl and squish region.
Click to expand...

This is simply saying that instability is located from the edge of the bowl across the crown, how would increasing this surface area with a narrower bowl be beneficial?
 
SledPuller21 said:
This is a good little read, this is just the conclusion at the end of the study, pages upon pages can be read through.

"The case studies have shown that the intake turbulence generation and decay can be predicted in good agreement with experiments. Turbulence generated during the intake stroke decays towards TDC during compression.
This study has also shown that significant turbulence is likely to be generated by a carefully designed piston-bowl. Instability seems to be induced by the unsteady flow separation at the edge of the bowl and squish region, although the turbulence generated by the piston bowl is relatively small. The predictions confined that the turbulence intensity increase roughly linear with piston speed.
Because of the general decay of turbulence after the intake stroke, shown in experiments and confined by the present calculations, turbulence generated at the onset of combustion is not greatly affected by the intake turbulence. This may provide some justification for setting up approximate initial conditions at the intake stroke, i.e. without modeling a complicated valve assembly, and still reproduce the main dynamics of the combustion process."
$.02
Click to expand...

what page of gale banks "swirl" beliefs did you get this out of? sounds like what ive read about his personal statements on diesel applications....must i remind you gale cannot win without *nx*. i understand what you typed but do you? if you can convince me swirl is for the mixing of fuel and air on the compression stroke...i'll listen like i said before. what you just typed is about turbulence...not swirl....its two different things. i hate to tell ya but there isnt a whole lot of "swirl" goin on on the compression stroke. with boost pressure and fuel compressing as the piston raises, the "swirl" thats created from the port is slowed and stopped abruptly. swirl is created for low rpm efficiency situations. all swirl is used for is to mix/scavenge new clean air on your overlapped intake/exhaust event to rid the cylinder of spent gasses. but thats just my $.02.....while you are worrying about swirl.....i'll find a few cfm! :hehe::hehe:
 
Smokem said:
This is simply saying that instability is located from the edge of the bowl across the crown, how would increasing this surface area with a narrower bowl be beneficial?
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges on a re-entrant and non-rentrant piston. I can see where a 03-04 piston could be mahe to work.
 
Last edited:
lenahan05 said:
what page of gale banks "swirl" beliefs did you get this out of? sounds like what ive read about his personal statements on diesel applications....must i remind you gale cannot win without *nx*. i understand what you typed but do you? if you can convince me swirl is for the mixing of fuel and air on the compression stroke...i'll listen like i said before. what you just typed is about turbulence...not swirl....its two different things. i hate to tell ya but there isnt a whole lot of "swirl" goin on on the compression stroke. with boost pressure and fuel compressing as the piston raises, the "swirl" thats created from the port is slowed and stopped abruptly. swirl is created for low rpm efficiency situations. all swirl is used for is to mix/scavenge new clean air on your overlapped intake/exhaust event to rid the cylinder of spent gasses. but thats just my $.02.....while you are worrying about swirl.....i'll find a few cfm! :hehe::hehe:
Click to expand...

Thermo- and fluid-dynamic processes in diesel engines: selected papers from ... - James H. Whitelaw, Francisco Payri, José-Maria Desantes - Google Books

Now are you and weston arguing? He is saying swirl and you dont agree. I'm worried about turbulence and a more effecient combustion process...I think everyone could gain from alittle diesel combustion theory 101.
 
Smokem said:
Bowersock's motor fell prey to this, and a poor valve job played a large role which was addressed.
Click to expand...
Which part of that study didnt you understand? Where intake turbulence has basically decayed by the time of the compression stroke i.e. your relying on your piston for turbulence...And riddle me this, why in a common-rail can these pistons be run, stock head,motor and so forth, and run just how they were intended. But in a P-pump application your trying to say a poor valve job is to blame??? Wouldnt a stock head work? Or wait, maybe its the injection pressure. Nah, couldnt be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top