Lithium

Yeah not too surprised that the EFR9180 was out, I would 100% expect the 6870 to outflow it - and by a bit of a margin. The boost threshold however is a definite surprise. Interesting how some results can vary! Hard to know what to make of it.

First time I've ever seen a 6870 come on earlier than a 9180, what other changes were made?

Lol Jesus. I should have proof read, but yes I did and I'm sure people get it but thanks haha

OK, I've just read through a bunch of comments which flowed on from here which I agree and disagree with to a varying degree but as usual there is a little mis- or half-information that I don't feel like anyone considering them are getting enough to make an reasonably informed decision and for a change I actually have time on my side today, so I'll answer with more than just the easy "I agree with Micko". Like always, this is just my view point - I don't profess to know f**k all and know there are people who do or will imply that I don't, so take that as you will but I think it's worth at least using things people say to base your own research before deciding whether it's bullshit or not. ESPECIALLY when it comes to injectors, as they literally supply the fuel for your combustion - debating turbos is one thing, making a decision which could cost you a very expensive engine is a different thing altogether. There are a lot of different things in this topic so I'll try and put some light on the things that usually are or should be on peoples minds about them. This whole post is SPECIFICALLY about "Bosch 2200cc" / ID2000 injectors. So I'll focus on these things for the two major areas people talk about these, firstly the relatively academic/harmless area people debate about these injectors and then will ramble about the bigger issues. ID2000s vs Bosch 2200cc injectors Straight up, they are the same hardware. Injector Dynamics themselves do not hide that fact, and put a lot of work into matching them so strictly speaking they are "better" than just going with generic Bosch 2200cc brands. Check out the link here: http://injectordynamics.com/articles/does-dynamic-matching-really-matter/ There is likely to be less pain tuning ID2000s than generic Bosch 2200cc injectors, but that is missing the point... there is likely to be problems at some point, the question isn't so much if - but how bad, exactly how bad will be under a different heading. So yeah, that Injector dynamics page IS accurate but it's kind of glossed over things and made out like their injectors will fix drivability issues and the flow as tested has a very small range of error at higher pulse widths - which is kinda true, however they have only plotted down to 2ms total pulse width. Below is a scatter plot showing rpm vs actual pulse width from a car using these injectors on BP98, I've set any load points plotted which are under atmospheric to show as green - as it comes into the transition to boost area it will go through from orange to red. Notice how much of the driving around this car does exists BELOW the 2ms range plotted by ID in their graph? (note, the flat line around 1ms is due to the affect of a combination of short pulse adder and dead time settings). These injectors have quite short dead times relative to the flow that they have, and as the linked article suggests - not every injector is made equal. A significant thing about this is that the dead times between any two injectors can vary by a small amount, if that amount is still significant compared to the average (or the configured....) dead time and you have injectors which flow a heap of fuel for a small amount of open time then the amount of variation in flow between each injector can be very significant. Because of this fact, as the pulse width gets shorter the potential for deviation in relative flow between each injector increases significantly - the unmatched ones going exponentially different by 2ms, and the ID2000s even are starting to show the trend. It'd be very interesting to see what would have happened if that chart was shown down to 2ms, it is a shame that they didn't show results closer to the 1ms mark - my logging essentially shows that basically all typical driving on pump gas will be done below the pulsewidths that they will be operating with. Those variations in flow DO matter if you give a shit about drivability, it is the kind of thing that causes shitty starts, hesitations at transient throttle, less than ideal idle quality and such forth. They can be glossed over by tuning them to run richer mixtures, but still bear in mind that this is a band aid - and one that's not lovely. The variation in flow between cylinders in different situations is still going to be there, it's just been masked. This may not bother everyone, and will obviously be less of an issue with E85 where you immediately add >30% to your pulse widths for a given amount of airflow - but then this is the most trivial concern with using these injectors, so I'll move on to the bigger concerns. These injectors are CNG injectors The implications of this seem to be mostly poorly understood or communicated. I'm not going to profess to know heaps about it to be honest, I am not an injector engineer and don't know a lot about how they work *but* this whole tuning lark is like that. Everyone knows some of the picture, doubt the f**k out of anyone who is 100% confident on everything they are talking about. I do feel there are some basic points which aren't questioned or discussed and they are pretty meaningful here. Hear me out... When the "CNG injectors" thing comes up, it is usually when discussing E85 use. That is kind of true, they are not designed to use E85. People talk about them being "OK" if they use stainless internals.... welllll..... that is only part of the picture and that certainly doesn't make them safer. It is true, they aren't designed to use on E85 - but that's more to do with the fact that E85 is a fluid and they are NOT DESIGNED TO WORK WITH FLUIDS. Any fluid. Here is something from the horses mouth: So what does this mean? I can't say exactly what the behaviour inside is, how long it takes, how likely it is to happen etc but I have had the misfortune of having to deal with cars running these injectors and I am finicky enough to analyse the shit out of everything and identify things that are not working the way they should be and try and work out what or how the problem is occuring. A lot of people don't run into issues, from what I've seen they are either lucky or just are not paying enough attention to realise what is going on. Likely a bit of both. What I do know is that these injectors can change how much they flow over time when used with fluids. That can be a mixture between immediate, and longer term. There are PLENTY of cases where people have run into tuning issues or even engine failures and returned them to a supplier who has tested them and found that where they previously were ~2200cc/min at 3bar they are now <2000cc min with possibly a greater margain of error between the injectors. That has been previously deemed not enough to cause the issues seen, they've been given some love and back to their previous flow level and everyone has been happy. At least temporarily. This is where things get scarier though, their flow behaviour can change on a much more minor time scale. Like in the period of half an hour, with no tune changes, the same IAT/ECT and basically all typical variables within a range where you would expect a minimum variance in flow. I'm talking well over 10% in flow, with a significant error between each injector. It seems like it can be associated with fuel temperature, and likely is - however this is not a consistent error... corrected volumetric to mass flow calculations which take into account fuel temperature will not fix this, as it isn't about the density of the fuel changing. It's about how the actual injectors are delivering the fuel, essentially delivering an inconsistent fuel volume for the same pulse width at different times. It is not a huge leap to make to assume that this can be attributed to the whole "swelling behaviour of elastomer seal in liquid media" thing - which is not a one way street with this kind of material. Basically they can swell and contract depending on temperature and exposure to fluids, the elastomer seal is designed to stop a gas from seeping past the injector when the injector is not meant to be allowing fuel through - and the upshot of this is there is a thing which is not intended to be used in a way which can cause it to swell and contract means that the rate which it does it is not consistent in any way. They are meant to be dry. The upshot of this is that when you hear about these cases where a car has had a lean out on these injectors and hurt an engine, the injectors have blamed for being "blocked" due to E85.... that absolutely can be the case, but every now and then you hear about the injectors being tested and they've turned out fine and things get messier - this is where the horror starts. You don't need E85 to cause this issue. You don't need foreign contaminants. The injectors can return back (more or less) to the flow behaviour they had before and not give any hint that one or many of the injectors at one point during operation may have dropped to <2000cc/min of flow on a car tuned assuming 2200cc/min flow potential. A cylinder which was happy running 30psi on E85 at 11.5:1 (petrol scale because most people seem to talk in that even on E85) may not be so stoked with running 13.0:1. The same car can richen up or lean out further depending on the mood of the injectors, and there is no way for you to know how when, if or how bad the problem will happen but based on what I've seen it would be foolish to use these injectors and not expect it. There are other things which E85 and methanol, or even MTBE (which is used in plenty of other fuels and have similar properties to E85 which can negatively affect fuel systems ) which can cause issues - that is a whole different topic which does cross over into this one, but is actually less scary that what I've actually seen. I've been unfortunate enough to see the shenanigans these injectors can offer, owners of cars I've been behind the laptop where these injectors have been used have been fortunate enough to have someone that picky that we've noticed things before they became a problem, and as such I'm fortunate enough to not have melted an engine when using these as I've pulled the plug and insisted they get changed before something goes wrong. I know others who haven't been so lucky. So yeah, this is my opinion and based arguably on anecdotal evidence - but if anyone wanted a more substantial explanation of why not to use these injectors than "throw them in the bin" or "they're shit", I at least feel like I've done my part to ensure there is something to chew on... take it as you will. PS. Just don't. PPS. Sorry for the overly long rant, I look forward to the TL;DRs and hiding under my rock again until next time I get bored and put my neck out with an opinion.

A chap I know has tried all of them, actually just tuned a car running a 6466 with a 1.00 and is looking at going 1.15 - said the difference in flow between .84 and 1.00 is significant in itself, picked up a LOT of power "pound for pound" when going north of 20psi and only lost about 200rpm on a stock stroke RB26. It's holding peak power at around 8000rpm with the RB26 at ~650awkw on a Dynapack on E85. He is pretty certain the 1.00 is a better balance of response versus power than the .84 even on an RB26.

Nice, please update with build details and results As you know, there is very little info out there on this kind of setup

The only engines I've tuned which have been hurt have been hurt by things which anything the ECU sees or controls would not have been able to do anything to warn for or protect against, and plenty have had fuel pressure issues - among other things. It is amusing how often people get frustrated at what your protection strategies have done... until the topic of what would have happened if their hard lap wasn't disrupted by a big reduction in power/rev range. IE, the same kind of disruption to their session but more things to fix. Edit: Just remembered you seem to assume the worst when other people are involved... I'm not quite up to making a tune which will protect against valvetrain failures.

Agreed, and I don't want my post to be taken out of context. I was simply pointing out it the target was on the fatter side (which as you say, may be perfectly right - it's literally why I said arguably as everyone have their own approaches and views even if they tuned the same engine), and the fact that it was a bit rich of target - even if ~3% is SFA. When you factor that in along with the fact that while he is running ~3.2psid the Bosch 1650cc injectors are actually rated to their advertised 1650cc/min at 4bar psid (compared to ID1700+ which flow ~2000cc/min at 4bar) and the fact he has a good few % of duty cycle to play with still means even with the same target mixture there is possibly a bit of moving room depending on how they want to approach it. Make sense? Fwiw I wasn't questioning his choice here, I definitely didn't mean to make it seem that way - I was just listing variables which added up to the fact that the thing may have a bit of headroom and I am sure he would be good to talk to about that to work out what a good way forward would be. Some people have doubts about the Bosch 2000+cc injectors and ethanol use, so do your homework/talk to your tuner if you haven't already to make sure you're happy with where you go Surprises with fuel systems aren't fun.

I'm guessing if the highest you'd ever seen before was 15 driving it like an animal, and 14 is strange - it used to be more like "0" just putting around? (I'm not really a PFC man so not sure what is 'normal' here). Even with dodgy fuel or injectors I wouldn't expect the knock sensor to pick up any rowdiness at light load, it'd be more likely to do a misfire which the knock sensor is not interested in. I am not saying that it is this, but whenever I see an engine which is noisy even at light load and REAL noisy under load I start wondering about bearings - maybe get someone to give it a gentle rev while you have the bonnet is up and listen out for any cyclic noisiness that you wouldn't normally expect... ie, knock that isn't det. If it is something like that and you can catch it early then you may save yourself from fixing more than you might if you keep driving it with an unhappy bearing. Good luck!

Quite interesting looking at it all there, his target lambda is arguably on the rich side - and he's ~5% rich of that target (ie, it's running 10.7:1 "gas scale" AFR). It could be that rich of target due to the fact he is running at part throttle at that long point, but at face value if he was running your lambda at the same MAP he'd be <70% duty at this point which isn't so bad. Also, those Bosch injectors are "1650cc @ 4bar" while the target differential pressure appears to be 3.2bar, and it's around 3.1bar at that time spot. One way or another, there should be room for AT LEAST 10% more power with that fuel system which isn't all bad

Are you on 1300s or something? That won't quite cut it Should still be able to make plenty of power to be a very fun ride

Awesome, has potential! Sounds like a very nice setup... If you are going to run E85 and aren't shy of boost then it should be capable of some solid numbers still I'm guessing. So what hotside on the turbo, 1.05?

Awesome! What is the rest of the mechanical setup you are running? What hotside did you go for? Looking forward to hearing result

Odds are it'll do what they expected from it, there will potentially be some interesting data to come from it for those who appreciate that kind of thing, and there will always be keyboard warriors who find something to hate on - typical of the times. I'll post in here if or when there is any more news.

Who made any excuses about anything? You are the only one acting like there is an issue

He said 674whp which is decent power but not anything which makes it seem like it is running an upgrade from an EFR8374

Yeah, the owner would be the first to say that it's not going to do the turbo justice - he won't be winding it up, engine is relatively stock spec.

I've been keeping an eye out and know of about 3 cars (two RBs, one 13B) which are going to be running them at some point but no idea on ETA. The only EFR black series result I know of other than Eric's EVO is an EFR9274 on a 2JZ drift car which made around 1000whp.

If you have long term cold start issues which are caused by injectors which are blocked up enough to make it drop cylinders then I would have serious concerns about your engine health by now. If you have been using the power you have and haven't hurt your engine then you are either quite lucky, or the dropping cylinders while in the warm up cycle is more likely to be a tune issue than "blocked injectors which magically clean up when the engine is warm, only to freshly block up again when it gets cold".

Those turbos look smaller than EFR7670 as well, probably 6758s or 7163s in that frame - definitely not 1600hp worthy haha. Guess they figured they can use the bigger Precision turbos and use other tech to try and spool them faster was a nicer setup than making less power with naturally more responsive turbos. Simplicity is not the theme of this car haha

Lol! That would be pretty grand, and to be fair - they are using pretty advanced lag reduction techniques so they can probably run a relatively potato turbo and it shouldn't be too much of an issue. Pretty funny seeing the now old/iconic Precision "bullet" antisurge ports on something this fancy.

Absolutely, I realise the variables... though haven't had the data to play with to say much about how all that will be but just some thoughts I'm curious about or which come to mind * MAP/TIP - You sound to be targetted 3500mbar MAP, and the pressure at the turbine outlet will be down as much as the pressure at the compressor inlet... give or take (not sure how restrictive the feed to your compressor is). Are you finding at altitude that TIP is going significantly past where it would be at sea level? * Makes sense that you will need to bypass less exhaust gas to support a higher pressure ratio * Turbine overspeed - I think you already alluded to this in a previous post I didn't get to before you added more... so you are pushing THAT hard already that you don't have much wriggle room. Are you basically "off the map" already? * Comp map - I'm guessing this ties with the above comment, as otherwise the EFR9180 looks (to a point) to actually hold better efficiency at higher flow rates than it does at lower ones. Assuming the pressure ratio needs to be 10% higher to contend with the lower compressor inlet pressure the EFR9180 seems to be in the region of 2% more efficient for flow rates >74lb/min at >3000mbar It's a shame that the likes of Precision and Xona Rotor don't publish compressor maps, anecdotally they are VERY friendly to high pressure ratios Probably going a bit off topic for this thread, but pretty cool!

Oh my god, I'd heard about this thread and for some reason decided to have a look. Kudos to the people who have tried to help, @Slap... I say this not to be a hater, but to try and help you. You really have so many of the fundamentals quite quite wrong, please slow down and listen, think and research a bit more - you are sprinting with scissors through a minefield blindfolded and it's scary to watch.

Are you talking specifically your case of 1000m above sea level? That is around a 10% difference in inlet pressure, so maybe .4 higher PR for the same absolute manifold pressure? Realistically that is not a huuuuge amount different... a safely matched turbo I'd hope would absorb a lot of that change, overly simplified but on an EFR9180 compressor map the efficiency is pretty good between 3.5:1 and 3.9:1... almost favourable to the higher PR. The guys who are running their turbos on "kill" will suffer though. The topic of setting up and tuning for varying altitudes is one which off the internet and over bourbons or laptops has definitely been one I've enjoyed and head scratched on a lot, turbo matching isn't necessarily even the least of the issues. Thermal management (lower air density = less efficient heat transfer from things you are relying on to cool stuff), and on the other side of the coin - less air density also means less drag, or less power needed to cut though the same volume of air which is more of a thing when you have a lot of speed and/or aero involved. I feel like this all fits into typical turbo/setup matching strategy, work out what you need from it and make sure it will be able to supply what you need in the situation it will operate in. Do you think you will be going off the map at 1000m above sea level? Or have you already run into issues with this?

FMMMLLLL, it's hard enough trying to keep things under control in there