FFD Rail System

KCTurbos

Active member
Joined
Jan 18, 2014
Messages
1,295
Reaction score
12
That's great , glad you can do some testing.
Too bad you couldn't do it all on the same dyno in the same day. As we all know air quality and altitude play huge roles in numbers. Looking forward to see some results.

Actually... that is why dyno's have "corrected numbers". Because you can't keep all variables exactly the same even 1-2hrs apart.

The "corrected numbers" take into account temp, altitude, humidity, etc... all the variables that change. It uses a fancy formula to "give and take" as needed to keep the baselines the same. It is pretty accurate from all of our testing. Just last week we took a truck that we had on the dyno 8 months ago when it was much cooler out, swapped around turbos a bunch of times, and went back to the original testing turbo. We are about to test something other than turbos and wanted to make sure our baseline was still correct... but who knows what can happen with a truck that is beat on over 8 months and did not want to throw off the data. So we put the original turbo testing turbo and went back to the dyno this week... EXACT SAME power curve and within 2 hp (which is negligible and can vary more than that just between dyno runs).


Long story short... that is why we use "corrected numbers" for all of our testing because it keeps a baseline and allows us to test things all year round and not have to worry about having he "exact same conditions".



Granted that is also why sometimes "corrected numbers" don't align 100% with track numbers.

I know this goes contrary to popular "internet" belief... but Dyno's are much better for testing products back to back because they can take these variables into account. They can also monitor and catch much smaller details.
 

jbolen323

New member
Joined
Sep 18, 2015
Messages
278
Reaction score
0
Location
Arizona
ran into a motor issue hiccup on my end that im tearing into that is affecting a lot of things along with sending off my injectors to be gone through. started dumping blue smoke after a hit on the dyno again.

I can barely crack 500hp on 350/200 and a s472 when all of my other trucks here are low 500hp on 238/80


ill keep everyone updated.
 

Swaan

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
734
Reaction score
0
Prob the new oil rail restrictions . Lmao

Sorry couldn't resist.

Hope you get it figured out and she's not hurt too bad.
 

superpsd

Active member
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
1,928
Reaction score
3
Location
Missouri
If it's like half the parts that come to market for the 7.3 no unbiased controlled tests will ever reveal if the new restrictor tubes work.
 

hucorey

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
538
Reaction score
14
Location
Defiance, Ohio
These rails seem go against the science of fluid power. I wish I saw this thread much earlier. Testing that has been done for our crossover line (anyone's really) we seen as high as 300-400psi difference between the two heads with an analog gauge on each head. With an hpx line, pressures were the same. Keep in mind 400psi is A LOT at either a 5:1 or 7:1 pressure intensification for fuel nozzle pressure loss of 2000-2800psi.

Reason behind the above info is that there needs to be more pressure sensors (at least 3 more IMO) installed on the heads to see if ICP is only showing well because it's close to the pump and the tubes are restricting flow to the injectors further away from the pump. So cylinder #2 (where the ICP sensor is at) sees the pressure quicker, but cylinder #7 potentially will be low. PCM won't throw a low ICP code for #7 because there is no sensor to read it.

As mentioned earlier, when laying out a fluid power system, you need to know how much pressure and volume is needed to operate the device(s) in the circuit without causing high duty cycle to the pump. It simply takes X amount of oil volume at Y pressure to run the injectors at Z pulse width.

And Dave didn't sell Swamps. They went bankrupt, are now called Swamps Motorsports. Last I heard from another former employee, he's not even with the company any longer.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 

lincolnlocker

Well-known member
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
27,828
Reaction score
134
Location
Central Michigan
These rails seem go against the science of fluid power. I wish I saw this thread much earlier. Testing that has been done for our crossover line (anyone's really) we seen as high as 300-400psi difference between the two heads with an analog gauge on each head. With an hpx line, pressures were the same. Keep in mind 400psi is A LOT at either a 5:1 or 7:1 pressure intensification for fuel nozzle pressure loss of 2000-2800psi.

Reason behind the above info is that there needs to be more pressure sensors (at least 3 more IMO) installed on the heads to see if ICP is only showing well because it's close to the pump and the tubes are restricting flow to the injectors further away from the pump. So cylinder #2 (where the ICP sensor is at) sees the pressure quicker, but cylinder #7 potentially will be low. PCM won't throw a low ICP code for #7 because there is no sensor to read it.

As mentioned earlier, when laying out a fluid power system, you need to know how much pressure and volume is needed to operate the device(s) in the circuit without causing high duty cycle to the pump. It simply takes X amount of oil volume at Y pressure to run the injectors at Z pulse width.

And Dave didn't sell Swamps. They went bankrupt, are now called Swamps Motorsports. Last I heard from another former employee, he's not even with the company any longer.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Isn't removing the check valves in the hpop lines at the pump fitting the same concept of a hpx crossover? Or shoud both be done for equal pressure?

live life full throttle
 

hucorey

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
538
Reaction score
14
Location
Defiance, Ohio
Isn't removing the check valves in the hpop lines at the pump fitting the same concept of a hpx crossover? Or shoud both be done for equal pressure?

live life full throttle
Nope, we seen the 300-400 psi pressure difference between the two heads with the check valves out. I didn't realize other shops made these, but back when I was working at the steel mill, the engineers would always call out crossover piping on the big hydraulic pumps with dual outlets to stabilize pressure in the systems. That's where I got the idea from.



Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 

lincolnlocker

Well-known member
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
27,828
Reaction score
134
Location
Central Michigan
Nope, we seen the 300-400 psi pressure difference between the two heads with the check valves out. I didn't realize other shops made these, but back when I was working at the steel mill, the engineers would always call out crossover piping on the big hydraulic pumps with dual outlets to stabilize pressure in the systems. That's where I got the idea from.



Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Wowza!! Thats a big difference then!

live life full throttle
 

cjfarm111

Member
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
642
Reaction score
2
I’m starting to think it’s a joke. I always give someone the benefit of the doubt so I’ll be patient. I won’t be purchasing until I see some performance gains
 

Chvyrkr

New member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
2,197
Reaction score
0
I have MORE than enough modeling and other cool things on my plate - I don't need to do something else just for enjoyment. LOL I have a truck that needs finished so the owner can have it and enjoy it. Might be my last thing PSD at least for a while.

Speaking of...

I have a thing I've been meaning to talk about with you, but never remember to talk to you about...

My excuse is I took a desk job that gobbles up my time like I never could have imagined. When I get time away from my desk, I don't even want to look at a computer.

I'm posting in the off chance that this reminds us to talk about it.
 

Latest posts

Members online

Top