vegtech
WVO Enthusiast
dont know what happen to the "quote" in my last reply.
-
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!
Problems registering? Click here to contact us!
Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!
Put the screws to the HX40II on the rollers.
- Thread starter WarWagon
- Start date
You are correct. It is like running a restriction plate to use the same tune for both turbo's. You can throw more fuel at the ATT than you can the HX40II or GM3, but, in different areas. Like high fueling down low for the GM3 but less fuel on top vs. the ATT with low fuel down low but all the IP can throw at her up top. Again low smoke is the goal.
So keeping things simple to compare the turbo's may not be fair because the tune could make a difference to optimize the specific turbo on the engine.
I ran several tunes on the rollers and they were very close. I also have NA military precups making a difference on this engine. Simply put this setup doesn't have the power potential another 6.5 has with different precups because it won't burn the fuel. We tried. The smaller precups won't let enough fuel and air through fast enough. I have another tune I could throw at the ATT because it will burn a little more fuel with the ATT than it could with the HX40II. (Some of the extreme EGT's I have seen have Buddy and I thinking we were shooting flames out the exhaust valve because it didn't have enough time to exit the prechamber.)
This engine has a battle with smoke vs. my 1993 that has 6.5 NA precups. The ATT runs fairly clean on the 1993 depending of the fuel screw setting.
The next run should show what I feel with the SOTP: the ATT pulling harder then the HX40II in the top RPM. I am very curious to see how close the TQ and HP curves are with the ATT on it and same tune. Likely the TQ and HP may start at a higher RPM. The 2K starting RPM may hide the HX40II advantage.
In the future I home to run one of Dennis's tunes as well. Might as well on the 'rolling laboratory' burb with as many tunes is it has seen...
So keeping things simple to compare the turbo's may not be fair because the tune could make a difference to optimize the specific turbo on the engine.
I ran several tunes on the rollers and they were very close. I also have NA military precups making a difference on this engine. Simply put this setup doesn't have the power potential another 6.5 has with different precups because it won't burn the fuel. We tried. The smaller precups won't let enough fuel and air through fast enough. I have another tune I could throw at the ATT because it will burn a little more fuel with the ATT than it could with the HX40II. (Some of the extreme EGT's I have seen have Buddy and I thinking we were shooting flames out the exhaust valve because it didn't have enough time to exit the prechamber.)
This engine has a battle with smoke vs. my 1993 that has 6.5 NA precups. The ATT runs fairly clean on the 1993 depending of the fuel screw setting.
The next run should show what I feel with the SOTP: the ATT pulling harder then the HX40II in the top RPM. I am very curious to see how close the TQ and HP curves are with the ATT on it and same tune. Likely the TQ and HP may start at a higher RPM. The 2K starting RPM may hide the HX40II advantage.
In the future I home to run one of Dennis's tunes as well. Might as well on the 'rolling laboratory' burb with as many tunes is it has seen...