Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

lets use a real life example here...

paul diemar with his drag car TWOOGLE;

when he had the car tuned with the standard head it was within duty cycle of his injectors.

he then had head work done which gave him similar peak power, however, the torque increased substantially.

as a result, he maxed out his injectors & upgraded these to suit.

i only wish he was still on this forum to set the record straight :(

Marko I think you're just getting confused mate.

I don't doubt Paul made more torque with the mods he made. And what he was saying was that he was making more torque "at a given revs or range", ie he was making more horsepower at that rpm range. And if you are making more horsepower (as a result of more torque) then you need more fuel.

So the point is: Its not a RB30 that 'needs bigger injectors' because of the extra torque it makes.

Based on that theory, a 510 Cube V8 making shitloads of torque but only 400hp needs bigger injectors than all of us!

Also think about this. You sometimes hear people say 600cc Injectors can support X amount of 'horsepower' (ie Torque x RPM). You never hear people say 600cc injectors support x amount of 'torque'.

Here is another example.. suppose you have two motors, an RB26 and an RB30 that both make the same Horsepower. But that the RB30 makes more torque (usually at lower revs right?)

Lets say the RB26 makes 400ft/lb of torque at 8000rpm. HP = Torque x RPM / 5252.. therefore about 609hp.

Lets say the RB30 makes 500ft/lb of torque at 6400rpm. Do the Maths = about 609hp.

The RB30 makes more torque, but it only needs the same injectors to support 609hp.

What Paul was telling you (most likely) was that he now made even more than 500ft/lb of torque at 6400rpm (and therefore made more horsepower) which of course requires more fuel. (Obviously Paul makes more than that - I am just using the figures from the example I made up)

Make sense?

Well theory and flow charts are fine and can be helpful but I'll just reiterate that two different top tuners (one a Japanese tuner who gets most of the best GTRs in NZ and the other a very experienced RB man with a 7 second R32) both of whom use hub dynos and all the gear ( including fuel pressure gauges - can't believe the number of posts I've seen here of people saying the tuner "thinks there may be a fuel problem" - doesn't he know how to tell?) are independently saying when tuning between 300 - 400kw that for a single in tank pump the Nismo ones don't hack it and the O44 do.

Marko I think you're just getting confused mate.

I don't doubt Paul made more torque with the mods he made. And what he was saying was that he was making more torque "at a given revs or range", ie he was making more horsepower at that rpm range. And if you are making more horsepower (as a result of more torque) then you need more fuel.

So the point is: Its not a RB30 that 'needs bigger injectors' because of the extra torque it makes.

Based on that theory, a 510 Cube V8 making shitloads of torque but only 400hp needs bigger injectors than all of us!

Also think about this. You sometimes hear people say 600cc Injectors can support X amount of 'horsepower' (ie Torque x RPM). You never hear people say 600cc injectors support x amount of 'torque'.

Here is another example.. suppose you have two motors, an RB26 and an RB30 that both make the same Horsepower. But that the RB30 makes more torque (usually at lower revs right?)

Lets say the RB26 makes 400ft/lb of torque at 8000rpm. HP = Torque x RPM / 5252.. therefore about 609hp.

Lets say the RB30 makes 500ft/lb of torque at 6400rpm. Do the Maths = about 609hp.

The RB30 makes more torque, but it only needs the same injectors to support 609hp.

What Paul was telling you (most likely) was that he now made even more than 500ft/lb of torque at 6400rpm (and therefore made more horsepower) which of course requires more fuel. (Obviously Paul makes more than that - I am just using the figures from the example I made up)

Make sense?

Cylinder filling is at max at max torque, therefor there is the most amount of air in the cylinder and requires MORE fuel to achieve the same afr.

So the more the engine can fill (cubic inches and boost etc) the more air is in and more fuel is required.

Max injector duty cycle should be at max torque

Cylinder filling is at max at max torque, therefor there is the most amount of air in the cylinder and requires MORE fuel to achieve the same afr.

So the more the engine can fill (cubic inches and boost etc) the more air is in and more fuel is required.

Max injector duty cycle should be at max torque

You are forgetting that the cylinder will be filled more times per minute at higher revs. Demand for fuel will increase (more duty cycle) but increase in demand will not be linear if torque drops off so duty cycle curve should have more in common with power curve than torque curve.

But to get back to reading what the OP said: his tuner told him that the Nismo was running out of puff but when he hooked up a 040 it went fine. How can you argue with that? Do you want him to tell the tuner " other people can do it why can't you"?Although I would get a 044 intank.

Cylinder filling is at max at max torque, therefor there is the most amount of air in the cylinder and requires MORE fuel to achieve the same afr.

So the more the engine can fill (cubic inches and boost etc) the more air is in and more fuel is required.

Max injector duty cycle should be at max torque

no, max injector opening time is at max torque. max IDC is at max power, assuming of course that AFR's and timing are normal.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi, SteveL Thank you very much for your reply, you seem to be the only person on the net who has come up with a definitive answer for which I am grateful. The "Leak" was more by way of wet bubbles when the pedal was depressed hard by a buddy while trying to gey a decent pedal when bleeding the system having fitted the rebuilt BM50 back in the car, which now makes perfect sense. A bit of a shame having just rebuilt my BM50, I did not touch the proportioning valve side of things, the BM50 was leaking from the primary piston seal and fluid was running down the the Brake booster hence the need to rebuild, I had never noticed any fluid leaking from that hole previously it only started when I refitted it to the car. The brake lines in the photo are "Kunifer" which is a Copper/Nickel alloy brake pipe, but are only the ones I use to bench bleed Master cylinders, they are perfectly legal to use on vehicles here in the UK, however the lines on the car are PVF coated steel. Thanks again for clearing this up for me, a purchase of a new BMC appears to be on the cards, I have been looking at various options in case my BM50 was not repairable and have looked at the HFM BM57 which I understand is manufactured in Australia.  
    • Well the install is officially done. Filled with fluid and bled it today, but didn't get a chance to take it on a test drive. I'll throw some final pics of the lines and whatnot but you can definitely install a DMAX rack in an R33 with pretty minor mods. I think the only other thing I had to do that isn't documented here is grind a bit of the larger banjo fitting to get it to clear since the banjos are grouped much tighter on the DMAX rack. Also the dust boots from a R33 do not fit either fyi, so if you end up doing this install for whatever reason you'll need to grab those too. One caveat with buying the S15 dust boots however is that the clamps are too small to fit on the R33 inner tie rod since they're much thicker so keep the old clamps around. The boots also twist a bit when adjusting toe but it's not a big deal. No issues or leaks so far, steering feels good and it looks like there's a bit more lock now than I had before. Getting an alignment on Saturday so I'll see how it feels then but seems like it'll be good to go       
    • I don't get in here much anymore but I can help you with this.   The hole is a vent (air relief) for the brake proportioning valve, which is built into the master cylinder.    The bad news is that if brake fluid is leaking from that hole then it's getting past the proportioning valve seals.   The really bad news is that no spare parts are available for the proportioning valve either from Nissan or after market.     It's a bit of a PITA getting the proportioning valve out of the master cylinder body anyway but, fortunately, leaks from that area are rare in my experience. BTW, if those are copper (as such) brake lines you should get rid of them.    Bundy (steel) tube is a far better choice (and legal  in Australia - if that's where you are).
×
×
  • Create New...