elite 200s vs mpd 100% over testing and results

Dzchey21

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
11,784
Reaction score
0
Location
wyoming
Ok i want to start off by not wanting this to be a bashing thread either way, i was perfectly happy with the elite 200s that were in my truck the last two seasons. Something just has been making me want to test both nozzles back to back to see if there truely is any difference in the two. Most builds include a laundry list of modifications and changes so a swap in nozzle is usually hard to tell if and what actually helped or hurt the power ect.

I decided that i wanted to see if any difference there are between the two nozzles. Elites nozzles flow 100% over stock on a bench. they are also an 8 hole nozzle

Not sure how MPD gets their number but im betting the hole is 100% larger than stock, they are a 6 hole nozzle



baseline number on the 8 hole

1.7 pw was 675hp i didnt take torque readings, the truck kept lifting and loosing signal
2.0 pw was 875 hp

2.2 pw was i beleive 840hp, when i get the graphs i will verify that


switch to mpd nozzle, first impression is there is definatly more fuel at idle. Cold starts are a little more rough with more blue/white smoke from unburnt fuel. Truck seams to run fine and just as smoke free under acceleration ect as before. Egts seam cooler, low 600s cruising typical 1000 degree getting up to speed, but the egts seam to be cooler at idle than before 325 compared to 375 or so.

trip to the dyno yeilded some interesting results, same tune as before, nothing else was changed other than the nozzle swap

1.7 pw shot up to 880 hp
2.0 pw was 920 hp
2.2 lost hp but i think it was in the 860 range, no surprise as the other nozzles lost, ill let the graphs show the power as i didnt lock that into my memory

So as you can see the power is up substantially with the mpd nozzles. I will try and get some vids of the truck cold start ect for compareson ect

Overall thoughts so far are if you are looking for good street, cold start, cold opperation then elites nozzles are for you, if you are looking for all out power then mpd nozzles might be your nozzle of choice. I plan to update this thread as i drive the truck more ect on the nozzle
 

Attachments

  • 1.7 pw.jpg
    1.7 pw.jpg
    23.5 KB · Views: 138
  • 2.0 pw (1).jpg
    2.0 pw (1).jpg
    24.2 KB · Views: 139
Last edited:

Gunnnin

New member
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Messages
233
Reaction score
0
Could the seen effects of mpd's noszles such as blue smoke ect. be from 6 hole injectors not atomizing as well as the 8 hole elite injectors?
 

Dzchey21

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
11,784
Reaction score
0
Location
wyoming
Could the seen effects of mpd's noszles such as blue smoke ect. be from 6 hole injectors not atomizing as well as the 8 hole elite injectors?


That would be my guess, or the fact that maybe the actual nozzle flow differently, i know elite flows theres, im not sure if mpds are flowed 100% over or if the actual hole size is 100% bigger which might mean more or less flow just depends

Very interesting, I would have never guessed such a big difference on the 1.7pw tune

It just didnt drive the turbos hard enough, only made 50psi on the dyno
 

bigrpowr

<How I Fly
Administrator
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
15,240
Reaction score
1
back to back cc comparisons would be the logical next choice. great start dustin.
 

Dzchey21

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
11,784
Reaction score
0
Location
wyoming
back to back cc comparisons would be the logical next choice. great start dustin.

I agree, i would be willing to bet that the mpd nozzles flow more than 100%

I had to raise idle rail pressure to 7250 to get them to stop hazing, they are clean once the engine warms up, but before that holy cow LOL lots of unburnt fuel
 

bigrpowr

<How I Fly
Administrator
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
15,240
Reaction score
1
I agree, i would be willing to bet that the mpd nozzles flow more than 100%

I had to raise idle rail pressure to 7250 to get them to stop hazing, they are clean once the engine warms up, but before that holy cow LOL lots of unburnt fuel

just a cc comparison would do, but thats hefty hp gain you got. wonder how much more its gonna show at the track. im guessing a good amount.
 

jdgleason

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
7,993
Reaction score
0
Location
Fort Collins, CO
Good work man! Way to step up to the plate!

Can't believe the test came out that way. Interested to see what else transpires.
 

Dzchey21

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
11,784
Reaction score
0
Location
wyoming
just a cc comparison would do, but thats hefty hp gain you got. wonder how much more its gonna show at the track. im guessing a good amount.

Im with you i think the track might show more gains then the dyno but i wont know till spring.
I think there might be some more to be had even on the dyno, i found that bumping up from 24k to 27k rail pressure at 2.0 pw actually lost hp, which tells me that i already have too much fuel.

I built some tunes for this weekend that have 1.7-1.8 1.9 and 2.1 pw to try at a lower ellevation, guess we will see how it works out.
 

Dzchey21

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
11,784
Reaction score
0
Location
wyoming
graphs are in the first post, i think the dip is from the big charger but im not positive, i usually dont watch in mph and i think by rpm its usually smoother, either way im going to try and flatten that out but its hard to get the big turbo lit on the short run on the dyno. Mike @ mpd said he had the same dip the last time he was on the dyno, i find it hard to believe its the nozzles, both graphs have the dip it just looks more pronounced with the 6 hole nozzle
 
Last edited:

madman1234509

New member
Joined
Nov 20, 2011
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Location
mayfield, ny
Was the loss on the 2.2pw just from too much fuel? It makes me wonder how many people that run large nozzles could benefit from pulling some pw back.

Very interesting results, esp considering debates on 6 vs 8 hole. A cc comparison would be a great idea.
 

Dzchey21

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
11,784
Reaction score
0
Location
wyoming
Was the loss on the 2.2pw just from too much fuel? It makes me wonder how many people that run large nozzles could benefit from pulling some pw back.

Very interesting results, esp considering debates on 6 vs 8 hole. A cc comparison would be a great idea.

Yeah its pretty clear on the dyno it has no more room for that much fuel, thats why the power falls off.


I want to see exactly where it falls off thats why im going to run 1.7 1.8 1.9 and 2.1 and narrow it down some
 

Strokin6.4

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
1,117
Reaction score
0
Dustin I've never messed with it because Eric tunes my truck, but I've noticed with my MPD 60% nozzles when my truck high idles to 5700psi rp compared to normal 5000psi give or take it completely stops hazing. My question is can you up rp and not mess with rpms?

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
 

Strokin6.4

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
1,117
Reaction score
0
Also right now I'm running a 2.2 or 2.3 pw tune. You think the 2.0 pw I have would make more power? 60% nozzles and a single 472...

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top