Eleventeen

Wow, thanks for the information Brandon! Look at that torque number My butt dyno was showing a power curve just like that; great power down low due to the very early onset of boost, but seems to drop off up top. That's where I'm looking at my day planner, just waiting for the 3rd-4th shift. It looks like I better stay out of it for a while.

I would like to make this combination work and am willing to upgrade the injectors and retune to do it, but if it becomes no longer feasible, when do you expect to have that mid-size pulley ready? It looks like it makes for some great gains at less boost than my current configuration. If worst comes to worst, I could sell my current Code3 on the black market (a.k.a. eBay), and invest in the mid-size version

Eleventeen

Damn, that's a nice 60'!!! I would be okay with losing a little down low to get a strong top end. I think overall it would make the car get down the track faster. You're right about the 4-5 MPH, but when you consider I was already trapping 108 with my ASP alone, I believe it is possible since I wasn't even tuned with my ASP.

I've already ordered my Code3 intercooler as well. Actually, I was thinking that my current, leaking intercooler might be part of my problem. I just realized today that I have lost over a quart of coolant from my intercooler circuit in just about a week.

mkonei

how about adding separate injectors for boost only fueling?

c32used

I think we all are learning here....

jturkel

+1

+1

Newzchspy

That's not the solution. Jerry and I have yakked at length on the phone about this issue. The solution seems to be a 170-173 crank pulley with the current Code III SC pulley. You're getting the boost you want (+20) but not "overboosting."

c32AMG-DTM

Well, it's really about the ratio, isn't it? Current C3P S/C pulley with a special 170mm crank pulley may yield the exact same results as a 178mm crank pulley with a mid-sized C3P S/C pulley

EDIT: If you haven't already, read this chart (post #4):

http://www.crossfireforum.org/forum/...highlight=Code

loungn14

great point...I was looking for that thread but you beat me to it...

TopGun32

back to my first post on this topic..

the first I would of done was to remove the extra intake CP3 to lower boost... maybe it would of help just a bit.



for a permanent fix.. smaller crank pulley or mid size SC pulley (in R&D from I understand)

Eleventeen

Yes, this mid size pulley Brandon is developing is definitely a nice option However, if I can get ahold of some larger injectors and accompanying tuning for them, that may be the way to go. I remember LET mentioning many months back that they and TVT would be offering larger injectors. I guess I'll keep my ears open.

jturkel

on the TVT website under performance packages, for the C32 one of their packages includes larger injectors. maybe they just arent listing them as being sold separately and maybe they could sell them separately to you if you ask?

http://n.b5z.net/i/u/6138924/i/C32_PACKAGES.pdf

Eleventeen

Good lookin' out. I guess I'll have to ask and find out for sure.

AirFrcd

Kris:

That is THE solution.

Code3 Performance

I will have injectors available with pricing in the next day or two.

Brandon

Eleventeen

I know you and Jerry were doing some pulley combo testing last week. Did he devise a fuel map to accommodate the larger injectors yet?

OverDrive

When you do you have a buyer... if there price appropriately.

Newzchspy

Brandon (Code III) , where are we at on this (injectors??)

LAZA_C32

I had the same issue with A/F ratio when I dyno'd the car with 178mm crank pulley plus the C3P SC pulley. I tried a custom LET tune with no luck. I've given up on this set-up, I don't know anyone that has got this to work properly, regardless of what anyone claims (inc both LET and C3P). Clearly there is not enough fuel for this set-up, I think the duty cycle of the injectors are at saturated, hence the need for additional/larger injectors. This is now becoming an expensive exercise.

I've removed the C3P SC pulley for the time being and am waiting for the mid size C3P SC pulley.

c32used

I can see how not enough fuel or even air can cause Tuning nightmares but sure someone is creating larger injectors or a solution to the air....this can be a killer setup if it works right but its not as cheap as changing the pullies unless a new midsize SC pulley comes out. Pretty sure someone here will get it to work properly

BrianBrave

Thanks for the link - glad to see we are sharing info on both forums since we share the same powerplant.

I've been running the LET 185 pulley for about 10K miles so far with no issues what so ever. (Never a CEL) I installed the SL55 intake, 185 pulley and a colder set of Iridium plugs all at one time. I was very worried about running lean (I just had a bad injector replaced under warranty prior to install) so the next day I went in for a (91 octane) dyno tune and on my first pull (factory tune) discovered that I was running an AFR of 10.0 to 10.5 - way to rich. After some tweaking and about 25 pulls later the AFR was reading 12.5 - 12.8 all the way up to 6,200 RPM. (about 362RWHP) I have also added a larger HE and separated my cooling systems and have since dynoed on several other machines.

I ran three pulls on the same dyno Code3 uses - I pulled 362RWHP but my AFR was reading was all over the place. I even asked the operator to replace the O2 sensor on his machine.

Concerned - the next day I went to a local Vette tuner and jumped on his DynoJet machine and ripped off a 350RWHP pull and my AFR was a solid 13.5 and this was with the O2 sensor clipped on at the very tip of the exhaust pipe - not inserted deep into the pipe. If you guys want - I can provide the part number to the injectors I'm using - but I also suspect that you may also have fuel pump (pressure) issues as the SRT6 fuel pump is external to the gas tank.

Here are some dyno graphs to view

MikeR

Brian, you're running the factory injectors aren't you?

MikeR

BrianBrave

Yes - here are some pics of the stock SRT6 fuel injector (Bosch and MB part numbers) - forgot I had loaded pictures of them on the other forum.







Enjoy!!

Eleventeen

Okay Brandon, I know you and Jerry were playing around with stacked pulley set-ups trying to get it to work, so I'm sure you're kicking ideas around. If we simply upgrade the injectors we will have enough fuel potential, but the ECU is still going to start bitxhing when the MAP sensor maxes out at 22 psi and might not know what to do. I think in addition to larger injectors, we need to run a 3 bar MAP sensor. It still works on a 0-5V scale with 3 wire hook-up, so Jerry should be able to recalibrate the ECU to work with it. Instead of the MAP hitting 5V (max) at 22 psi, it won't hit 5V until about 29 psi.

http://www.maperformance.com/gm-3-bar-map-sensor.html

Newzchspy

This is exactly why I am staying away from a 178 and the Code III together!!! Too many issues and too many CELs. I think a 170-172 would solve most of the issues and give the boost you want.

Eleventeen

I don't blame you at this point, but I think it has the potential to make lots of power. Look at the charts Brandon provided; 390 lbs of torque! I'm hoping the top-end can be made to work that well, too. We're still in the R&D stage of this mod. I'm sure that eventually (if proven feasible) it will just be a matter of buying the parts and having the ECU tuned.

Upgrading to a 3 bar MAP is a very common (and necessary) upgrade for many high boost cars, and works fine once the ECU is retuned. I think that and larger injectors (if necessary) will tell us if this combo makes efficient high RPM power. If not, it's probably going to be due to compressor efficiency.