Welcome to DSMtuners - the largest Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon, 4G63t and 420A DSM performance resource on the web



















Login



Go Back   DSMtuners > DSM Forums > Racing & Motorsports > Dyno Talk
Welcome to DSMtuners - the largest Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon, 4G63t and 420A DSM performance resource
You are browsing the site as a GUEST. Please login (or register) and gain the ability to post on our site and interact with other DSMers. You also get to browse the site with fewer advertisements. It is FREE to join!

Dyno Talk: For all the DSM dyno queens. Discuss dyno results here. For tuning discussions, use the Tuning Forum.

Reply
 
LinkBack   Thread Tools
Old 07-02-2011, 08:00 AM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #21 (permalink)
DSM Wiseman
 

twicks69's Avatar
Timeslip: 9.499 @ 148.360
Registered: Mar 2004
Tech Posts: 2,497
Photos: 95
Classifieds Rating: 9
Reputation: You can trust this leader of the site
It is a 4G64 7-bolt 2.4L crank. Works just fine.

Tim Zimmer via Evo Phone



____________________________
Tim Zimmer
1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX
Visit twicks69's homepage!  View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2011, 09:08 AM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #22 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

400hp93talon's Avatar
Registered: Aug 2009
Tech Posts: 388
Photos: 5
Classifieds Rating: 11
Reputation: 400hp93talon is more helpful than not
I feel you on the 2-4 hours of sleep a night. My mission times changed so randomly that I just don't sleep until my body forces itself to shutdown for little bit. I love the dyno vid as soon as that thing hits boost it's game over!!


____________________________
STroKE iT!!!!
View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2011, 09:14 AM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #23 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

atownturbo's Avatar
Registered: May 2008
Tech Posts: 176
Classifieds Rating: 14
Reputation: atownturbo is an unknown
Send a message via Skype™ to atownturbo
Wow nice numbers, keep it up.

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2011, 09:23 AM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #24 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

DSMReviver's Avatar
Registered: Mar 2008
Tech Posts: 631
Photos: 5
Classifieds Rating: 3
Reputation: DSMReviver is pretty helpful and trustworthy
Tim, how are you using the primary and secondary injectors? Is it running out of Q16 with 40psi?
View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2011, 11:24 AM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #25 (permalink)
DSM Wiseman
 

twicks69's Avatar
Timeslip: 9.499 @ 148.360
Registered: Mar 2004
Tech Posts: 2,497
Photos: 95
Classifieds Rating: 9
Reputation: You can trust this leader of the site
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSMReviver View Post
Tim, how are you using the primary and secondary injectors? Is it running out of Q16 with 40psi?
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.


____________________________
Tim Zimmer
1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX
Visit twicks69's homepage!  View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2011, 09:48 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #26 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

DSMReviver's Avatar
Registered: Mar 2008
Tech Posts: 631
Photos: 5
Classifieds Rating: 3
Reputation: DSMReviver is pretty helpful and trustworthy
Quote:
Originally Posted by twicks69 View Post
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?
View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 11:07 AM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #27 (permalink)
DSM Wiseman
 

twicks69's Avatar
Timeslip: 9.499 @ 148.360
Registered: Mar 2004
Tech Posts: 2,497
Photos: 95
Classifieds Rating: 9
Reputation: You can trust this leader of the site
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


____________________________
Tim Zimmer
1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX
Visit twicks69's homepage!  View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 03:49 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #28 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

Diehardmitsu's Avatar
Car: Mitsubishi starion
Registered: Apr 2011
Tech Posts: 49
Classifieds Rating: 1
Reputation: Diehardmitsu is an unknown
Quote:
Originally Posted by twicks69 View Post
It is a 4G64 7-bolt 2.4L crank. Works just fine.

Tim Zimmer via Evo Phone
That much power from a Kia crank? amazing! gives me something to think about on my build...
Are these 2.4 cranks hardened?

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 04:29 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #29 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

wvturbo2's Avatar
Car: 93 Mirage awd
Registered: Jan 2006
Tech Posts: 910
Photos: 4
Classifieds Rating: 10
Reputation: wvturbo2 is more helpful than not
Congrats on the great -numbers! Why are you only running 2.5" intercooler piping and stock 1g tb
View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 04:31 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #30 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

96awd's Avatar
Registered: Dec 2009
Tech Posts: 673
Photos: 12
Classifieds Rating: 17
Reputation: 96awd is more helpful than not
Quote:
Originally Posted by wvturbo2 View Post
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?


____________________________
-96 TSI AWD - Sold :/
-90 TSI AWD
View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 06:59 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #31 (permalink)
Supporting Member
 

ceedawg's Avatar
Registered: Jun 2004
Tech Posts: 779
Classifieds Rating: 5
Reputation: ceedawg is an unknown
Quote:
Originally Posted by 96awd View Post

I also would like to know why you haven't upgraded to 3" IC piping or even bigger?
He's got a 9 second car so the 2.5 inch pipes must be doing something right.

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 07:00 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #32 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

96awd's Avatar
Registered: Dec 2009
Tech Posts: 673
Photos: 12
Classifieds Rating: 17
Reputation: 96awd is more helpful than not
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceedawg View Post
He's g
ot a 9 second car so the 2.5 inch pipes must be doing something right.
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.


____________________________
-96 TSI AWD - Sold :/
-90 TSI AWD
View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 07:10 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #33 (permalink)
Supporting Member
 

ceedawg's Avatar
Registered: Jun 2004
Tech Posts: 779
Classifieds Rating: 5
Reputation: ceedawg is an unknown
Quote:
Originally Posted by 96awd View Post
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..

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 07:14 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #34 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

wvturbo2's Avatar
Car: 93 Mirage awd
Registered: Jan 2006
Tech Posts: 910
Photos: 4
Classifieds Rating: 10
Reputation: wvturbo2 is more helpful than not
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.
View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 07:22 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #35 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

96awd's Avatar
Registered: Dec 2009
Tech Posts: 673
Photos: 12
Classifieds Rating: 17
Reputation: 96awd is more helpful than not
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceedawg View Post
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wvturbo2 View Post
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.


____________________________
-96 TSI AWD - Sold :/
-90 TSI AWD
View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 07:39 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #36 (permalink)
Supporting Member
 

ceedawg's Avatar
Registered: Jun 2004
Tech Posts: 779
Classifieds Rating: 5
Reputation: ceedawg is an unknown
Quote:
Originally Posted by 96awd View Post
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.

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 09:06 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #37 (permalink)
Proven Member
 

ed1380's Avatar
Registered: Sep 2007
Tech Posts: 2,301
Photos: 2
Classifieds Rating: 29
Reputation: ed1380 is extremely helpful and trustworthyed1380 is extremely helpful and trustworthy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diehardmitsu View Post
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.
View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 10:25 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #38 (permalink)
DSM Wiseman
 

twicks69's Avatar
Timeslip: 9.499 @ 148.360
Registered: Mar 2004
Tech Posts: 2,497
Photos: 95
Classifieds Rating: 9
Reputation: You can trust this leader of the site
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.


____________________________
Tim Zimmer
1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX
Visit twicks69's homepage!  View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2011, 10:31 PM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #39 (permalink)
DSM Wiseman
 

twicks69's Avatar
Timeslip: 9.499 @ 148.360
Registered: Mar 2004
Tech Posts: 2,497
Photos: 95
Classifieds Rating: 9
Reputation: You can trust this leader of the site
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).


____________________________
Tim Zimmer
1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX
Visit twicks69's homepage!  View photos of this member's car 

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2011, 05:20 AM Show Printable Version Show Printable Version   Email this Post to a Friend Email this Post      #40 (permalink)
Supporting Member
 

ceedawg's Avatar
Registered: Jun 2004
Tech Posts: 779
Classifieds Rating: 5
Reputation: ceedawg is an unknown
Quote:
Originally Posted by twicks69 View Post
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 ?

mark post as helpful recommend reputation points    Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
twicks69 tmz performance

Thread Tools

 

» Recent DSM Photo
» Current Poll
How many times have you been to the Shootout?
1 - 40.00%
168 Votes
2-5 - 41.67%
175 Votes
6-10 - 10.48%
44 Votes
11-15 - 3.10%
13 Votes
16-20 - 4.76%
20 Votes
Total Votes: 420
You may not vote on this poll.
» Online Users: 893
251 members and 642 guests
Most users ever online was 1,704, 03-17-2008 at 09:11 PM.
DSMtuners Main Sections
DSM Forums
DSM Regional Forums
DSM Builds/Journals
DSM Articles
DSM Tech Guides
DSM Upgrade Paths
DSM Parts Reviews
DSM Vendor Reviews

DSM Classifieds
DSM Parts Guides
DSM Photos
DSM Videos
DSM Timeslips
DSM Dyno Sheets
Shirts & Apparel
DSMtuners Decals

Advertising Info
Our Sponsors
Site Rules
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
Site FAQ
About Us
Contact Us

© 2014 DSMtuners.com - All Rights Reserved

DSMtuners is not affiliated with Diamond Star Motors. The Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon, Plymouth Laser, Mitsubishi Galant VR-4, and associated logos are trademarks of Diamond Star Motors, Mitsubishi Motors, and Chrysler Corporation. No, we do not hand out car sponsorships.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:05 PM.


Vendor Tools vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0