SMARTY DEFUELING ON 07''s ISSUE.

[2007 5.9]

07 5.9,

So, where's the pull to 3800-4000rpm? OF COURSE you don't have defueling, your only going to stock redline. Pull to 3800.
...

So if by looking at my graph...what possible benefit would I have by running all the way to 4K??? You see my peak power at 25-2600, why on earth would continue to pull and draw it out???

If you dyno a gas engine that makes peak power at 4K and could turn 7K why would you run it out to 7K, those last 3K are just costing you time??????

So, how about this...get a hold of a graph of a STOCK truck and look at it. When you see it make peak power at 2700 and a smooth descent in power all the way to red line are you going to call the programmers for DC and ask for your money back because they wrote a program that doenst fully fuel to 3200????

If everyone is expecting a vehicle/software to hold FULL POWER until 4K, you are in a dream world. There is no engine mfg/software designer that would ever put peak power at REDLINE!! EVER!!! Every vehicle ever dynoed has its peak power at xxxx rpm and a slow descent in power till redline! Why is this so hard to understand????:bang

I get that some people think that a 4K tune should make power until 4K but what % of power SHOULD it make???? Hell even sledpullers graph shows power decline after 32-3300, even though Bully Dog claims full fuel till 4200, why isint someone ripping Bully Dog designers for not FULLY FUELING till 4200????

I think those who are asking a software developer to put peak power and redline at the exact same rpm should give a detailed explanation as to why.

 

[triton]

very well stated :clap: I think several graphs including mine show the " Smarty " fueling past 3K on it's way to 4K. That's what has always been in question.... whether it fueled out that far. Making power to there is a whole other story.

 

[JasonCzerak]

So if by looking at my graph...what possible benefit would I have by running all the way to 4K??? You see my peak power at 25-2600, why on earth would continue to pull and draw it out???

If you dyno a gas engine that makes peak power at 4K and could turn 7K why would you run it out to 7K, those last 3K are just costing you time??????

So, how about this...get a hold of a graph of a STOCK truck and look at it. When you see it make peak power at 2700 and a smooth descent in power all the way to red line are you going to call the programmers for DC and ask for your money back because they wrote a program that doenst fully fuel to 3200????

If everyone is expecting a vehicle/software to hold FULL POWER until 4K, you are in a dream world. There is no engine mfg/software designer that would ever put peak power at REDLINE!! EVER!!! Every vehicle ever dynoed has its peak power at xxxx rpm and a slow descent in power till redline! Why is this so hard to understand????:bang

I get that some people think that a 4K tune should make power until 4K but what % of power SHOULD it make???? Hell even sledpullers graph shows power decline after 32-3300, even though Bully Dog claims full fuel till 4200, why isint someone ripping Bully Dog designers for not FULLY FUELING till 4200????

I think those who are asking a software developer to put peak power and redline at the exact same rpm should give a detailed explanation as to why.

My point was never the power on the dyno. Re-read my last post there. My point was the "defueling". heck, my truck stops pulling at 3800-ish on the dyno (3600 street). however, supposedly I can turn 4000 (I can free reving). I don't care if it's useless at 4000, It would be nice to know why the fuel is turned off on a so called "4000 rpm" program.

It's obvious to assume that head/cam/exhuast can not flow good air over 3200. So what's a byproduct of bad flowing air and lots of fuel? lots of freaking heat. So. How did my stocker, PS62, HTT64 suddenly become as efficient as twins at 3600rpm?

Now, take this principle that is clamied with the TNT/R and re-engineer the head, cam and other hard parts to shift the power band up 1000rpm. What good are those hard parts if the software doesn't do what it's expected at the higher RPM. Last I checked, the injectors and pump are not limited (mechanically) at any RPM that's practical for the 5.9 block. They should fire as expected to about 7000rpm. However, the Software is holding it back.

How many folks have cams ground that are designed to flow at 4000rpm? that's the main hardpart here that's limited upper RPM power correct?

jlibert, Your and auto right? I can't help but wonder if that's the reason you can hit 4200. I should have an open enough freeway tomorrow to see where I can get the RPM's to in 5th and watch the EGT's and boost.

 

[mulisha]

triton im surprised at you saying that crap about me cmon man, i never never said i exspect 11 flat. so your just making shiat up there.and as far as hp, im around 700, maybe a little over, maybe a little under.all im saying again is 300ft before the traps, im being defueled.i dont know why anymore.but ill take 11.8's and being shut down early anytime.

 

[2007 5.9]

My point was never the power on the dyno. Re-read my last post there. My point was the "defueling". heck, my truck stops pulling at 3800-ish on the dyno (3600 street). however, supposedly I can turn 4000 (I can free reving). I don't care if it's useless at 4000, It would be nice to know why the fuel is turned off on a so called "4000 rpm" program. .

Because there is NO NEED!!!! Do you want to fuel to 4K to just say that you can??? Or do you have a actual reason for wanting 4K????

Any RPM past peak HP is COSTING YOU TIME at the track and putting UN-NEEDED stress on parts.

So if Marco said that this was a TNT/R that fuels to 3600 on the street and 3800 on the dyno and 4000 in free rev, would you be happy then???

I guess I need to stop posting on this subject....:bang

I have been tearing my hair out all day wondering why someone wants to fuel to a certain RPM even though its costing them time and wear and tear on parts when there is no performance gain from it.

Please all of you...dont take anything I type as a personal attack on you. I am just REALLY trying hard to understand the logic of WANTING something that has no benefit.

 

[2007 5.9]

triton im surprised at you saying that crap about me cmon man, i never never said i exspect 11 flat. so your just making shiat up there.and as far as hp, im around 700, maybe a little over, maybe a little under.all im saying again is 300ft before the traps, im being defueled.i dont know why anymore.but ill take 11.8's and being shut down early anytime.

Without everyone getting all angry at eachother...

What is your RPM at your 1000ft mark???

How does that RPM correspond to your graph with regards to peak HP???

Is the RPM at the 1000ft mark before or after you peak HP???

If its before then I would say that you have a de-fueling problem, but if its after peak HP then your truck is simply on the backside of your usable HP.

If its after your peak HP then going to 3.73 gears would help alot, or going to a taller tire. Basically if your after peak HP then you either need to find a way to bring your 1000ft RPM's down or make more power later.

 

[JasonCzerak]

Because there is NO NEED!!!! Do you want to fuel to 4K to just say that you can??? Or do you have a actual reason for wanting 4K????

Any RPM past peak HP is COSTING YOU TIME at the track and putting UN-NEEDED stress on parts.

So if Marco said that this was a TNT/R that fuels to 3600 on the street and 3800 on the dyno and 4000 in free rev, would you be happy then???

I guess I need to stop posting on this subject....:bang

I have been tearing my hair out all day wondering why someone wants to fuel to a certain RPM even though its costing them time and wear and tear on parts when there is no performance gain from it.

Please all of you...dont take anything I type as a personal attack on you. I am just REALLY trying hard to understand the logic of WANTING something that has no benefit.

I suppose I'd have to port the head like crazy and cam it (something I'll do when the gasket goes again, or I have time/money laying around) to really have leverage to what i'm about to say...... But with a manual, RPM's seem to spool the charger from under 10psi better then just being in gear and loading it down. It seems to be that if I can shift into 3000rpm I'd re-lite the charger faster then if I shift into 2000rpm. Motor turning faster, there more the air pump is moving more air then at the lower RPM. If you've never driven a big single manual, you wouldn't understand.

Since when does high rpm break parts? Peter at SBC will say this over and over and over... and over again, Clutches love rpm. Heck, look at my avatar, there's torque at 1800rpm for ya, 6th gear, BOOM.

i believe higher RPM will save on parts. Now, this is assuming the rest of the motor is tuned for that with hard parts.

What RPM does the rails runs? or any fast 12v for that matter. 5? 6k? I'm sure they do, and do it very well.


Edit here:

don't get me wrong, I 100% agree with you. you pull past the power band to much, it's pointless.

 

[mulisha]

hey 2007 im gonna find out that info you said to look at tomorrow.but you will agree right that if i can keep from getting defueled or keep my rpm's a couple hundred lower i will gain in the quarter, since im hitting a wall just before the traps.

 

[2007 5.9]

hey 2007 im gonna find out that info you said to look at tomorrow.but you will agree right that if i can keep from getting defueled or keep my rpm's a couple hundred lower i will gain in the quarter, since im hitting a wall just before the traps.

Please do..I think you'll find that at your 1000ft mark you are well past your peak hp.

Yes I do think that if you can get your trap RPM down closer to your peak RPM you will infact run better times, or at least you wont hit the proverbial wall you now have.

 

[2007 5.9]

Edit here:

don't get me wrong, I 100% agree with you. you pull past the power band to much, it's pointless.

:thankyou2:

Just wanted to make sure what we talking on the same page.

I agree with your shifting at higher rpm would put you closer into your power band for spooling. But how many guys drive around running down the road shifting all the time at 4K???

As far as the track goes I think the extra time you spend waiting for 4K to happen before you switch gears hurts you more than the early shifting and subsequent slower spool.

 

[2007 5.9]

here's the dyno graph you had to have.

Looking at your graph you posted in the beginning...with a trap speed of 114mph, you are WAY past your peak MPH of 95. You need to bring your rpm's down at the traps or make more power above 95mph.

Here is my graph from last year at the Nor Cal Rally....

Here is yours...

You can clearly see that my peak power happens at roughly 105mph, which is 10mph higher than yours.

So I think that you may not have a de-fueling issue per say, but you are just out of gear at 1000ft.

Do I think that there might still be a lack of power on the 06.5+ trucks...maybe, but I dont see a de-fueling issue with yours, just a lack of gear.

I am running 3.73's and 33" tires, I'd be willing to bet that if you change gears, you will move your peak HP higher in the MPH category and have subsequent quicker ET's.

 

[JasonCzerak]

:thankyou2:

Just wanted to make sure what we talking on the same page.

I agree with your shifting at higher rpm would put you closer into your power band for spooling. But how many guys drive around running down the road shifting all the time at 4K???

As far as the track goes I think the extra time you spend waiting for 4K to happen before you switch gears hurts you more than the early shifting and subsequent slower spool.

Again, the assumption here is if you have the hardware to support 4000rpm. However, chicken and the egg. If you don't have software either, no one's going to build the hardware. Software is cheaper then hardware to engineer. There is no way to test the hardware with out the software cost effectively. it's up the software vendors to honestly have the software figured out before the hardware folks can do their magic.

And I touch 3000rpm more often then one would think. I cruise at 2500rpm in traffic a lot. I normally finally shift into 6th if I know i'm going to be going faster then 65 for a while. I've had to adopt driving style as I go up in charger size..

 

[jlibert]

jlibert, Your and auto right? I can't help but wonder if that's the reason you can hit 4200. I should have an open enough freeway tomorrow to see where I can get the RPM's to in 5th and watch the EGT's and boost.

04.5, nv5600.

Here's a vid of me grabbing 3rd low instead of 5th low by mistake. 4200 the whole way down the track. If you listen closely you can hear it bouncing off the limiter. YouTube - ceres pull Extreme Diesel Class


Here's 3500 rpm down the track
YouTube - ceres pull street mod

 

[mulisha]

thats my old dyno sheet even.my newer one is in here also.

 

[SledPuller21]

LoL!

I saw your graph. I'd take Les' graph any day of the week. I bed he'd spank your ass on the track too.

On the pulling track? Doubt it, I prolly spank your ass too...$.02

 

[lmills]

look at my avatar, there's torque at 1800rpm for ya, 6th gear, BOOM.

i believe higher RPM will save on parts. Now, this is assuming the rest of the motor is tuned for that with hard parts.

I can honestly say I did that for a 2nd time last weekend. :doh:

 

[jlibert]

On the pulling track? Doubt it, I prolly spank your ass too...$.02

Not with 650/1000.

"Prolly" not. lol.

wned:

 

[mulisha]

if you can top 11.8's congrat's....:Cheer:

 

[jlibert]

if you can top 11.8's congrat's....:Cheer:

Not with a dual disk in a 6 speed. Maybe 13.8 if I'm lucky!

 

[2007 5.9]

thats my old dyno sheet even.my newer one is in here also.

Old or new...doesnt matter. You make peak power BEFORE 100mph, so for evey second you spend pask your peak is costing you precious time on the track.

Bottom line....you need to either make MORE power above 95mph or bring your trap rpms down.