The 14b Drag Race Discussion Thread

[1qkfwd]

Phil, your still proof that simple can still go fast!! I've been around tons of mild to wild dsm's and the fact that you are running what you run on the old school safc/eprom combo (without even datalogging) is amazing. I admire it and run the same combo myself at the moment.

That's because it's proven and fool proof.

V3 is just like EPROM tuning with some on the fly bonuses. So you won't lose the drivability.

 

[Phil1320]

Phil, your still proof that simple can still go fast!! I've been around tons of mild to wild dsm's and the fact that you are running what you run on the old school safc/eprom combo (without even datalogging) is amazing. I admire it and run the same combo myself at the moment.

Thanks man! Cool to see you up here. I really just always wanted to keep it simple. Now that my talon is no longer seeing road use, it's time to get with the program and push the limits of power on the 14b. All the company I'm in here, whether they are a tenth quicker than me, or a tenth slower, make ALOT more power than me. It's time to bridge that gap and see where the numbers fall.......

 

[1qkfwd]

Thanks man! Cool to see you up here. I really just always wanted to keep it simple. Now that my talon is no longer seeing road use, it's time to get with the program and push the limits of power on the 14b. All the company I'm in here, whether they are a tenth quicker than me, or a tenth slower, make ALOT more power than me. It's time to bridge that gap and see where the numbers fall.......

How much does your car weigh or did it weigh on your 11.4 pass? I don't think im much more up on power over you.

 

[Phil1320]

How much does your car weigh or did it weigh on your 11.4 pass? I don't think im much more up on power over you.

Total race weight was 2460 lbs. Car was 2255 lbs.

When I say alot of power, I mean relatively speaking. But my belief is that the potential for 40-50 WHEEL HP over what I had is there. Compression, Cams, and ECMlink tune ability should make up a good portion of that estimate, IMHO, of course.

 

[1qkfwd]

Total race weight was 2460 lbs. Car was 2255 lbs.

When I say alot of power, I mean relatively speaking. But my belief is that the potential for 40-50 WHEEL HP over what I had is there. Compression, Cams, and ECMlink tune ability should make up a good portion of that estimate, IMHO, of course.

Well according to a simple hp calculator based on weight and trap speeds, you and I are making the same power. You at 2450 with 116 and me at 2105 at 121.5

 

[Kevin Jewer]

The 2g MAS reads well to 50 lbs/min but becomes a noteable restriction somewhere around 44-45 lbs/min from my testing on Kait's car. Going to SD at this point made more trap speed. At ~30 lbs/min I doubt there's any power to be gained compared to a 2g MAS. Not sure about 1g MAS vs SD at that level. SD isn't hard to tune, but a MAS equiped car practically tunes itself. There are pros and cons to both (and most have little or nothing to do with power), and as someone said, you can go back and forth very easily. ECMlink's implementation of speed density is pretty bad ass.

 

[SBstar]

I think there would be some gain switching to SD, less restriction in the intake, plus the ability to make yourself a CAI of sorts might be worth something. Would it necessarily equate to better ET's? I don't know, might be worth a couple hundreths. If you had the funds and were trying to extract every little bit you could (as we all are) it'd be worth the investment in my mind. If you already have V3 it's a no brainer. If you're like me and you're stuck on V2 and it's about $300ish to upgrade, I'd rather put that towards the lighter wheels, slicks, etc.

 

[Phil1320]

Well according to a simple hp calculator based on weight and trap speeds, you and I are making the same power. You at 2450 with 116 and me at 2105 at 121.5

Fair enough, not sure how accurate that is, however.

But for comparisons' sake use Dave W.'s 2900 lb weight and 118.1 trap.

He's stated he made 324 awhp on a Mustang dyno. And, everyone seems to maintain that Mustang dynos both ''are more accurate'' and ''read lower than Dynojet.''

If we keep that in mind....I made 295 on an awd Dynojet, so if I ran on a Mustang, who knows...275, 280. Let's say I made 10 less on the Mustang for a total of 285. I've got 39 less WHEEL HP. In this game, to me, that's ALOT of power deficeit. Granted, this isnt exact info, but, anyone here can see that a 2900 lb. car that traps 118, is making more power than a 2460 lb. car thats seen 116 on a few passes.

The 2g MAS reads well to 50 lbs/min but becomes a noteable restriction somewhere around 44-45 lbs/min from my testing on Kait's car. Going to SD at this point made more trap speed. At ~30 lbs/min I doubt there's any power to be gained compared to a 2g MAS. Not sure about 1g MAS vs SD at that level. SD isn't hard to tune, but a MAS equiped car practically tunes itself. There are pros and cons to both (and most have little or nothing to do with power), and as someone said, you can go back and forth very easily. ECMlink's implementation of speed density is pretty bad ass.

Ok.....cool.....and pretty much why I didn't really consider it. Well, we'll see as time goes on. I'll most likely fire the car back up as it was with the AFC/550s, make sure there are no leaks/issues, then toss the 950s and the link into the mix. I will pick up the relative sensors for SD in the interim. Maybe I can do a before-after dyno comparo to see what, if any, gains are there.

I think there would be some gain switching to SD, less restriction in the intake, plus the ability to make yourself a CAI of sorts might be worth something. Would it necessarily equate to better ET's? I don't know, might be worth a couple hundreths. If you had the funds and were trying to extract every little bit you could (as we all are) it'd be worth the investment in my mind. If you already have V3 it's a no brainer. If you're like me and you're stuck on V2 and it's about $300ish to upgrade, I'd rather put that towards the lighter wheels, slicks, etc.

Well, let's see here. The filter in the stock location where I have it is basically a cold air set-up, as I have the signal light opened for air entry and the two vertical pieces of sheetmetal behind that cut away. I like the filter up top and a bit more protected, rather than sitting down behind the foglight opening. I also like the filter as close to the turbo as possible without taking heat from the manifold. I like response.

I obviously have V3, as I just purchased it. However, I will not automatically go to SD. What Kevin stated above is enough for me to not have to jump right to it. All the other stuff I'm doing should be the major difference for me. Still, I'm not convinced the 2g MAF is a restriction of any magnitude with the 14b. Maybe if you rid the MAF and the filter, but, I will most likely never run like that.

 

[9!'clipseDOHC]

Before SD I was using a 1g MAF and was getting MAF overrun with the 14b. The 1g MAF is quite useless. Rather then swapping to a 2g MAF I just went straight to SD.

 

[Phil1320]

Before SD I was using a 1g MAF and was getting MAF overrun with the 14b. The 1g MAF is quite useless. Rather then swapping to a 2g MAF I just went straight to SD.

Well, yeah, that makes sense. I was on a 2g MAF with AFC about 10 years back now I'd guess...

 

[1qkfwd]

Fair enough, not sure how accurate that is, however.

But for comparisons' sake use Dave W.'s 2900 lb weight and 118.1 trap.

He's stated he made 324 awhp on a Mustang dyno. And, everyone seems to maintain that Mustang dynos both ''are more accurate'' and ''read lower than Dynojet.''

If we keep that in mind....I made 295 on an awd Dynojet, so if I ran on a Mustang, who knows...275, 280. Let's say I made 10 less on the Mustang for a total of 285. I've got 39 less WHEEL HP. In this game, to me, that's ALOT of power deficeit. Granted, this isnt exact info, but, anyone here can see that a 2900 lb. car that traps 118, is making more power than a 2460 lb. car thats seen 116 on a few passes.

Well Dave W just doesnt count . But yes I see what your saying. 39hp is a huge difference I think. I would've love to have that extra 39hp at the track the day I was out. Now I need to find out where its hiding at. Might have to go against myself and finally take the car to a dyno. As much as Im against it, it might help me.

 

[1SloEvo]

When it comes to tuning, I'm a fond believer of starting with a good dyno tune and tweak it at the track for track day conditions. That way if it's cold with better air at the track compared to the dyno, you might get away with running a little leaner or an extra degree of timing to pull out that extra few hp.

I dropped my cylinder head off today to get the guides installed, valve job, and decked! Can't wait to start getting things back together. My weight removal is through the roof!

 

[Phil1320]

Well Dave W just doesnt count . But yes I see what your saying. 39hp is a huge difference I think. I would've love to have that extra 39hp at the track the day I was out. Now I need to find out where its hiding at. Might have to go against myself and finally take the car to a dyno. As much as Im against it, it might help me.

Agreed.......however, I think he's probably made the most 14b AWHP. I think Joe B. made a number higher than that to the front wheels. Yeah, I'll take 40 hp more please!

I'd say a trip to the dyno can't hurt. ECMlink has to be pretty damn good as I know several people who street or track tune and run really good numbers at the track.

When it comes to tuning, I'm a fond believer of starting with a good dyno tune and tweak it at the track for track day conditions. That way if it's cold with better air at the track compared to the dyno, you might get away with running a little leaner or an extra degree of timing to pull out that extra few hp.

I dropped my cylinder head off today to get the guides installed, valve job, and decked! Can't wait to start getting things back together. My weight removal is through the roof!

Nice, sounds like it's coming along well!

 

[Steve93Talon]

Phil, I'm sure you've mentioned it in this thread but I'm not going through 100 pages. Do you know what your AFRs or timing curve looked like on your previous tune? I know you weren't logging at the track, but did you ever log the car at all, or use a wideband? When you're starting out on V3, the default fuel table will most likely be very rich compared to how you were previously set up, and the stock 1G timing table is very aggressive for higher boost on pump gas, but may be ok for you on race gas. Regardless, you'd probably still want to start out with either a 2G table, a modified EVO table, or a custom mapped table.

If you haven't already done so, sign up on the DSMlink forum. There's tons of info on there about how to get set up. You can also start reading up on their wiki page:

start [ECMTuning - wiki]

Here are some of the replacement tables you can download:

v3configs [ECMTuning - wiki]

 

[Phil1320]

Phil, I'm sure you've mentioned it in this thread but I'm not going through 100 pages. Do you know what your AFRs or timing curve looked like on your previous tune? I know you weren't logging at the track, but did you ever log the car at all, or use a wideband? When you're starting out on V3, the default fuel table will most likely be very rich compared to how you were previously set up, and the stock 1G timing table is very aggressive for higher boost on pump gas, but may be ok for you on race gas. Regardless, you'd probably still want to start out with either a 2G table, a modified EVO table, or a custom mapped table.

If you haven't already done so, sign up on the DSMlink forum. There's tons of info on there about how to get set up. You can also start reading up on their wiki page:

start [ECMTuning - wiki]

Here are some of the replacement tables you can download:

v3configs [ECMTuning - wiki]

....

I never logged. I'll have to find what timing changes Dave made in my chip, pretty sure it was all stock except for three or four spots at like 5500, 6000, 6500, & 7000.

My wideband generally read 12.2:1 with some flickers to 12.4:1...that's in fourth gear over the whole second 1/8 mile.

Thanks for the links, I do need to sign up on that forum asap!

 

[Bud92gsx]

Anyone know the record for 450s and a 14b?

 

[1990AWD]

Anyone know the record for 450s and a 14b?

Why bother?!

 

[Bud92gsx]

Cause I'm peicing together stuff still and I havnt bought large injectors yet..I thought tho i'll run these at 50 psi which should flow about 482 ccs..

 

[LandSpeed-DSM]

Anyone know the record for 450s and a 14b?

Some food for thought, Bud:
http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/newbie-forum/422900-things-not-do-14b-450s-boost-turned-up.html

 

[Diamond Star Werks]

Some food for thought, Bud:
http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/newbie-forum/422900-things-not-do-14b-450s-boost-turned-up.html

I've read that. Though for a few months I had run 16-17psi on them. But just recently checked them over with link and at 16psi 450s go over 100% idc around 5000-5500. So yeah its not a good idea though you could stretch that with a higher flowing pump and higher base fp. Couldn't say how far though.

 

[SBstar]

Well Dave hit 11.67 on the 450's still. But, again it's Dave, the guy will probably forget more about tuning in the next week then I currently know.

 

[LandSpeed-DSM]

On gasoline you can get a good bit of power down on the 14B using only 450s, just not a great idea. Maxing injectors is not a great idea, and the money involved to set an injector record would be silly. Pump, rewire, lines, filter and a regulator just to set an injector size record

Curious to know what that setup I was running in the thread I linked would have dyno'd or trapped, ETs would have been garbage though. Chassis was a beater. The motor/head and intake/exhaust systems seemed to have found a sweet spot to get that flow out of the 14B. That car made 250whp/260wtq on a dynojet almost completely stock @ 16psi, the graph is on posted up on Tuners somewhere.

 

[Phil1320]

Anyone know the record for 450s and a 14b?

12.02@112

stock engine
stock ecu-non eprom
stock injectors
stock FPR
no fuel pump rewire
walbro 255 low pressure
21 psi
266 awhp, 282 lb.-ft.

 

[Diamond Star Werks]

Link estimated me at 280 the night running 15 psi on the 14b. So i think its safe to say I'm near that same area of power. I'm running evo8s now though not 450s.

I'll do another log run soon and recheck. The road was slightly wet so there may have been spinning but during that pull I didn't notice any slipping.

 

[pneumo]

Well Dave hit 11.67 on the 450's still. But, again it's Dave, the guy will probably forget more about tuning in the next week then I currently know.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that!
I was running 52psi base pressure on the stock 450's with a rewired Walbro and C16. I remember when inj DC transitioned over 100% the car would give out a little cough/sputter then run cleanly above 100% DC.

Phil, I can look up the timing in the chip I made for you. IIRC I left the timing stock up to 6k rpm where the stock map peaks, then I added one degree for every 500 rpm. So 6k was 24*, 6500 was 25*, 7k was 26*. I think you said you were using the CAS to fine tune it?