• Welcome to The Truck Stop! We see you haven't REGISTERED yet.

    Your truck knowledge is missing!
    • Registration is FREE , all we need is your birthday and email. (We don't share ANY data with ANYONE)
    • We have tons of knowledge here for your diesel truck!
    • Post your own topics and reply to existing threads to help others out!
    • NO ADS! The site is fully functional and ad free!
    CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!

    Problems registering? Click here to contact us!

    Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!

Going mechanical with a Moose Omega Marine IP

ed
[QUOTE="n8in8or, post: 559460, member: 15176"Oh I didn’t realize it was as bad in the plains. I thought it mainly rained.....oh wait, wrong country.[/QUOTE]

Nice 'My Fair Lady' reference, Nate! In 'Artford, 'Ereford and 'Ampton, 'urricanes 'ardly ever 'appen!
 
Will L. said:
On the fuel system, I don’t remember if it was here or the hummer forum as Greenmeanie aka @greenmeanh1 here did the write up on his electronic controlled lift pump hat he can adjust fuel pressure on the fly. He mentioned noticable improvements in playing with it at different loads.

I can’t remember details now, but I burned it in my brain that that is seriously a great idea. It makes sense that varied fuel pressure is going to cause better performance at different rpm. Being able to tune the fuel supply just seemed obvious once I read it.

For a dd vehicle I can’t see it helping a ton. But on performance- heck yeah. Theoretically even an algorithm that auto adjust through power band/rpm range.

Following close as I am really thinking about outing my set up for something better.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I don't recall seeing that thread here, but it's quite possible I missed it. Was his IP a DB or DS? I'll have to try to find that thread because I'm interested what the results were and how the varied fuel pressure affected injection timing. Perhaps higher pressure at higher RPM didn't affect timing because the timing was all in at that point, but it still gave the added benefit of cramming more fuel into the pump? Now you have me thinking. So if my pump is calibrated for 25psi inlet pressure, then to get even more flow it's going to need even MORE pressure. That's going to be a serious pump to get me that much pressure and flow.
 
He has a ds4. I think more electronics in his Hummer than any other non military unit around. I mentioned to him I think it is a marketable idea, not just for 6.5 world but all rigs that are trying to improve efficiency- whether power or mpg.
 
Yeah, the idea makes sense.

How about a boost and or rpm referenced lift pump pressure curve.

Sorta same basic idea behind the smoke puff limiter. Why stress the LP when the flow is not needed. But at higher rpm/boost max out the flow/pressure of the LP.
 
schiker said:
Yeah, the idea makes sense.

How about a boost and or rpm referenced lift pump pressure curve.

Sorta same basic idea behind the smoke puff limiter. Why stress the LP when the flow is not needed. But at higher rpm/boost max out the flow/pressure of the LP.
Click to expand...
The idea does seem to have merit. I would have to understand the pressure/timing relationship more to implement that idea, but I REALLY like the idea of limiting fuel on the bottom end with fuel pressure to tame smoke at lower boost and rpm. I think you're onto something there. The puff limiter alone doesn't fully tame the smoke at my fueling level, especially during the warmer months, and I don't like being that guy that takes off from a stoplight puffing black smoke.
 
From what I remember, he just has a knob and a gauge- then played with it to see results. Any of us that played with ds4 know how valuable 9-13 range is under hard acceleration. But iirc he said traveling down the hiway at constant speed it seemed to like lower pressure- like 8ish maybe?

Making the leap to a computer controlling it, especially since all the info is there in obd2 rigs anyways, seems like a dream.
Now for obd1 / db2 rigs- maybe sensing the tps position as auto feed for increase pressure, then when cruise control is set it could back off a hair to preset level based on individual desired performance/mpg.

Idk electronics at all, so idk if it ends up being a $200 item or a $2000 item. But there are so many hot rodders out there in gas and diesel world that don't bat an eye at 2 grand even if it is only 2% gain.
 
Will L. said:
From what I remember, he just has a knob and a gauge- then played with it to see results. Any of us that played with ds4 know how valuable 9-13 range is under hard acceleration. But iirc he said traveling down the hiway at constant speed it seemed to like lower pressure- like 8ish maybe?

Making the leap to a computer controlling it, especially since all the info is there in obd2 rigs anyways, seems like a dream.
Now for obd1 / db2 rigs- maybe sensing the tps position as auto feed for increase pressure, then when cruise control is set it could back off a hair to preset level based on individual desired performance/mpg.

Idk electronics at all, so idk if it ends up being a $200 item or a $2000 item. But there are so many hot rodders out there in gas and diesel world that don't bat an eye at 2 grand even if it is only 2% gain.
Click to expand...
I feel like since what you’re suggesting is for a DS4 application, this would be/could be accomplished with a good tune. Varying the inlet fuel pressure would just give somebody without tuning capability to modify one of the parameters in a DIY manner, but I doubt it would work as well as a good tune since you aren’t also varying timing at the same time. Probably close enough, sure, but you’re still just trying to reinvent what’s already been invented....again, as far as the DS4 goes. Now for the DB2/4, that could be an advantage, yes. Of course I could be wrong since I’ve never tuned a DS4, but it seems to me that the same thing could be accomplished through tuning software.
 
schiker said:
Yeah, the idea makes sense.

How about a boost and or rpm referenced lift pump pressure curve.

Sorta same basic idea behind the smoke puff limiter. Why stress the LP when the flow is not needed. But at higher rpm/boost max out the flow/pressure of the LP.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a rising rate fuel pressure regulator however I suspect the fuel return would need to be enlarged too. Consider, a smaller tank (surge) placed close to the engine running an additional pump larger feed line and return line back to tank this can get pricey.
 
n8in8or said:
Ok back from the second dyno session. This one went much better. We had a good RPM signal off of the Ferret adapter after a little fidgeting around with it. You'll see in one of the graphs that we had a pretty erratic signal for the first two runs (we only printed 1 of the graphs, but you'll see why), but then the last two runs were really nice. Final number: 347 and 599. I'll take it!! For every run we've gotten a really consistent horsepower number. Run 4 had a better torque number than run 3 and that seemed to be because we let it idle for a long time between those runs which must have cooled the intercooler back off. I talked to the operator about inertia versus load cell and he said this dyno only runs in load cell mode. He said that with the tiny rollers this has he can't really hold cars back like a larger one. I also suggested loading the turbo with the foot brake and he said the dyno would act funny if I did that because there would be a spike from when it was not loaded due to me holding it back with the brakes and then an instant torque hit when I released the brakes. We talked about running in overdrive instead of drive to see what that did and we were going to try that, but first he wanted to try it in drive again. He wanted to lower the trigger RPM for the dyno so it would react to the RPM of the engine sooner. This would help load it sooner and build boost sooner.

So that's what we did....and it was a much better pull! I could feel the engine working harder and sooner and it was a longer pull up to the higher rpm. I feel like we have a pretty good setup working now. I think it would still be interesting to run on a dyno that's used to running diesels so I could compare and contrast, but this is going to work just fine for my testing purposes.

I'll attach some pics now. One will be of the exhaust vent tube. So it did end up working well, but interestingly it stretched way out after the first hit! I think the combination of heat and exhaust pressure made it expand. He said the tube itself was smoking pretty good during that first hit. He took a video so I could see during the second hit and this is the only outside video I have because I didn't bring my entourage this time. I also have EGT & Boost videos for all 4 runs which I haven't really looked at myself too much. I did take a quick shot of the fuel pressure gauge at the end of a run too for fun.

So I think I have a solid baseline now. On to more upgrades and future tests now!!

What the vent looked like after the first runView attachment 49319

Run number 2, you can see the Ferret was acting up. Love that torque number!!View attachment 49320

Run number 3View attachment 49321

Run number 4View attachment 49322

Videos in a sec.
Click to expand...

Bringing up an old post here, I was looking at this post again and wonder if you are still running the 3" downpipe? I ask because a single straight 3" diameter pipe can only flow around 742 +- cfm which equates to 339 +- hp which is very close to what you are putting down to the rollers.
 
FellowTraveler said:
Bringing up an old post here, I was looking at this post again and wonder if you are still running the 3" downpipe? I ask because a single straight 3" diameter pipe can only flow around 742 +- cfm which equates to 339 +- hp which is very close to what you are putting down to the rollers.
Click to expand...
Yes, still running the 3" downpipe. Judging by how my exhaust clears up, I don't think I'm air limited....I'm fuel limited. I could see a larger downpipe reducing pumping losses though.
 
n8in8or said:
Yes, still running the 3" downpipe. Judging by how my exhaust clears up, I don't think I'm air limited....I'm fuel limited. I could see a larger downpipe reducing pumping losses though.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that ole rule one HP needs 1.5 cfm in and 2.2 cfm out, any plans for more fuel, or?
 
I called Fass today about the FPR-1001 regulator but they said they couldn't give me specific flow pressures due to the fact that every setup varies which I understand. After looking at the housing I was thinking if the lower housing where all of the fittings go is one chamber it would take a pretty stout pump to hold 25-30 lbs with the return line relief don't you think?
 
I don't mean to hijack this thread and Nate if you'd rather I can start a thread on the subject but I figured you've been giving this some thought. Has anyone tried to install something like this Fuel Lab pickup tube to the OEM sender assembly and using the old pickup for a return? BTW I ordered a FASS pressure regulator today, I guess I'll be the guinea pig. LOL

https://www.jegs.com/i/Fuelab/083/2...m_FLNVOufpFUWTiFxknUbXXYyxANvfJhoCteYQAvD_BwE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top