The Top DSM Community on the Web

For 1990-1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon, Plymouth Laser, and Galant VR-4 Owners. Log in to remove most ads.

Please Support Kiggly Racing
Please Support ExtremePSI

Dynoed the 74mm - New Best 835AWHP @ 46psi!

This site may earn a commission from merchant
affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

I am running staged injection based upon boost level with the secondaries transitioning in around 6-10psi with AEM EMS. The secondary fuel pumps (in-tank/in-line system) are also controlled by the AEM EMS by wiring in the ground wire for the secondary system relay to a low switch pin that was not used (in my case, pin 9 for EGR system was used).

The primary injectors currently are FIC Bluemax 1350cc and the secondaries were Bosch 1600's. I will swap out the Bosch junk for a set of FIC Bluemax 1750's as they will be smoother to control on the initial ramp-in of the secondary injectors under boost.

As for running out of fuel....The 835AWHP was done on only the 1350cc injectors and one in-tank/in-line pump combo (two pumps on one feed line) at 46psi on Q16. This was where I calculated the limitations to be at a safe duty cycle of 90% prior to tuning with a 43psi base pressure (actually 825AWHP was what I was expecting). So, my numbers were within 0.4%-1.6% target value of what I calculated based upon the correction factor (817AWHP Uncorrected, 822AWHP SAE, 835AWHP STP). At my boost levels, I was at 90psi line pressure. I am sure you could eek more out of the system as I was only on a 43psi base pressure and 46-47psi boost pressure, and the pump combo can easily handle above 120psi line pressure in my configuration on a 12-14V power supply. The secondaries were not even tuned in because we were dealing with a dead #4 injector and didn't want to waste time trouble shooting if it was clogged or if it ohmed out good or failed, so we just ran on the primaries.

Effectively, the 1350cc injectors and twin pumps are at their safe upper limits at 825AWHP on a good electrical system. Keeping good voltage is so important with power levels and fueling.

The 1600 secondaries alone should be able to handle around 980AWHP on gasoline with a safe duty cycle, and the FIC BlueMax 1750's should handle around 1065AWHP alone on gasoline.

With 1350 primaries and 1750 secondaries on the quad pumps on E98 it should be able to handle around 1150-1200AWHP, while on gasoline it would be able to handle around 2000AWHP. We all know I will never run more than 1100AWHP, so it is just a large buffer of having overkill for my setup on race gas, and at the right limits on straight E98.

Wow, good to know you are okay for 2000awhp. LOL.
what are the benefits to the secondary injectors?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, the secondaries cool down the intake runners dramatically and should increase a bit of efficiency, along with giving me the extra fuel I need and maintaining an easy to tune injector size. There are of course other benefits, but I cannot think of any drawbacks with it.

Tim Zimmer via Evo Phone
 
Congrats on the great -numbers! Why are you only running 2.5" intercooler piping and stock 1g tb
 
Congrats on the great -numbers! Why are you only running 2.5" intercooler piping and stock 1g tb

An upgraded TB isn't really needed. It would do him good but many people use stock TB's and run low 9's, high 8's with them.

I also would like to know why you haven't upgraded to 3" IC piping or even bigger?
 
Lol. Clearly. Just didn't know if it was a certain reasoning for it or the lose of power from the bigger piping was the reasoning, is all.

I believe with the 2.5 inch piping you get more velocity ,I do remember either on evom or high boost forums Buschur did a comparison between both the 2.5 inch and 3 inch piping and there was no real advantage going to 3 inches. I have to look for the link..
 
Yea I am not saying he's doing anything wrong I just want to know why run that stuff. What are the advantages and so on. Trying to learn from people that have made power and ran the times.
 
I believe with the 2.5 inch piping you get more velocity ,I do remember either on evom or high boost forums Buschur did a comparison between both the 2.5 inch and 3 inch piping and there was no real advantage going to 3 inches. I have to look for the link..

I've heard the same. Power loss from upgrading to bigger IC piping was a problem but just a question.

Yea I am not saying he's doing anything wrong I just want to know why run that stuff. What are the advantages and so on. Trying to learn from people that have made power and ran the times.

I'm with you on that for sure.
 
I've heard the same. Power loss from upgrading to bigger IC piping was a problem but just a question.



I'm with you on that for sure.
I'm using my smart phone so I don't know how to cut and paste however Buschur states that he lost both low end and midrange and gained nothing up top all using 3 inch piping.
Best results were achieved with the 2.5 inch piping all around.
 
That much power from a Kia crank? amazing! gives me something to think about on my build...
Are these 2.4 cranks hardened?

they're 4g64 engines from mitsu. kia just used them in their cars.


dam amazing work. makes me think about scrapping my 6 bolt stroker that I havent finished and going with the 7 bolt. less of a hassle with the 6 bolt swap and you've proven the 7 bolt very capable.
 
The reason for 2.5" IC pipes and the 60mm 1G throttle body is simplicity. If it isn't broken, don't fix it. I have had this IC setup for around 6 years now and it has worked just fine. IAT's were always excellent, and no spoolup sacrificed or bottle-necked. I am sure with the current setup that I would see even higher power levels on 3" IC pipes and a 70+mm throttle body, but it is negligable when compared to the overall setup. Maybe 30, 40 AWHP tops?

I will get around to it sometime next year, but for now I will just run what I have. I do have a bolt-on 70mm billet throttle body but I am not going to put it on until I do larger cold pipes. For the GT42R, I will make a fresh hot-pipe setup that is 3.5" to 3" @ the intercooler, and just reuse the 2.5" cold pipes for a bit longer.

As for running larger IC piping than 2.5" on a 60mm throttle body, I don't see a reason to do so; the bottle-neck would then be at the throttle plate. You want to have matched size IC pipes to your throttle plate diameter effectively.

So far though, the 2.5" IC pipes and a stock 1G 60mm throttle body has done just fine to over 1000HP at the crank without problems.
 
One word of advice for the guys wanting to run a stroker 7-bolt....

Unless you have ALOT of money to spend, DO NOT GO ALUMINUM ROD 7-bolt stroker! It is a very delicate process to properly clearance the block for big aluminum rods that cost me thousands of dollars in machinework, sonic-testing, hand grind time, CNC 4-axis time, and alot of patience. The 7-bolt engine main oil galley is extremely thin where we had to grind to clearance the rods which was the reason for all the sonic testing and CNC work. I am running CP pistons with Groden aluminum rods.

Personally, I would recommend my old setup for anyone wanting to make 750-850AWHP on a 7-bolt stroker in a 97-99 block which was:
Eagle Rods (or another high quality H-beam rod)
Ross Pistons (w/ coated skirts)
Heavy duty thick-wall tool-steel wrist pins
ACL or Mitsubishi bearings
stock crank -- DO NOT cut weight off of it unless you are going to be seeing less than 600AWHP. I bent my crank from lots of boost and lots of rpm (as high as 52psi and 8800rpm).
 
Wow would a lightened 6 bolt crank in a 2.0l suffer from this as well at almost 600 awhp ?

NO. The 2.4 crank rod and main journals dont overlap as much so they are weaker. I was always told not to knife edge my 2.4 crank when building my 2.3.
 
Last edited:
Last edited by a moderator:
WOW TIm! You're doing amazing things with your setup! Congrats!

NO. The 2.4 cranks dont overlap as much so they are weaker. I was always told not to knife edge my 2.4 crank when building my 2.3.

I was told the same thing. It makes sense. One reason why I'm sticking with the 2.0L motor and looking to other avenues to increase boost response.
 
You made 835whp @ 46 psi on your primary injectors how much boost where you gonna run if the other injectors were working.

I am intending on running 55-60psi of boost. Essentially, I want to max out the 5-bar MAP sensor. Lol.

Tim Zimmer via Evo Phone
 
60psi? Sounds a bit outlandish, you have so much more displacement ;) . . .

Keep figuring out how to turn up the wick! Though this is so far beyond impressive right now, "You can do it!"
 
60psi? Sounds a bit outlandish, you have so much more displacement ;) . . .

Keep figuring out how to turn up the wick! Though this is so far beyond impressive right now, "You can do it!"

Outlandish you say....:) They said the same about me running a 7-bolt to this power level. I think there is a bit more in this turbo still, but it will likely require a rebuild before attempting it.
 
A built 7bolt has a slightly larger crank journal diameter (I think?) and a fat girdle, which you mentioned. Those aspects are "outlandish" :) . . . Your results are a good lesson for us :thumb: . Are you going back to eagles? Or what are you thinking?
 
Tim,

Looks good. Curious on a few things from one stroker guy to another if you dont mind sharing. Is the 8* sync'd (not sure what CAS you are running) or was it not counting base? I have found on mine and others at that boost level we can usually get more into them safely and really watch it pickup. This is me at 15* on my new setup-

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v505/Hurrikain/Evolution/aaron831.jpg

I have run it at 18-19* without headgasket issues on the 3586(I realise you arent on E85) and Jeff's we are at 17* right now at 44psi. THe other thing I was wondering is if you had played with a larger housing or just the 1.1? We found on his that the bigger divided only made the car look laggy, it works very well in the real world. Of course we are on a 1.44 twin but you might find the 1.25 works better for you and keeps the motor happy.

Congrats for stuffing aluminum rods in that beast. I looked into it and gave up (on the 2.4) when I ground through the oil galley on my 94mm and had to sleeve the oil galley.

Aaron@ER
 
Support Vendors who Support the DSM Community
Boosted Fabrication ECM Tuning ExtremePSI Fuel Injector Clinic Innovation Products Jacks Transmissions JNZ Tuning Kiggly Racing Morrison Fabrications MyMitsubishiStore.com RixRacing RockAuto RTM Racing STM Tuned

Latest posts

Build Thread Updates

Vendor Updates

Latest Classifieds

Back
Top