Independent Injector Comparison

[kyle43335]

Stock nozzle is 6 hole 6 thou

 

[wetnsloppy4x]

Makes sense that in order to get the highest amount of power with the least amount of cylinder pressure that there would be an optimal PW. I am not sure how to go about figuring that out.

I'm guessing that you have a window for fuel delivery. And that exact window leaves a short amount of time or a larger nozzel would be the key and the stock injector wouldn't need to be modified. Maybe it is me but I wish we could figure out what each companies injector flows. I really get sick of company "a" injectors are 190cc but they heavy on fuel and are more like 205cc. Seems accuracy would be a selling point. If they are 155.175.190 etc have a variance of +/- and stick to it. If your injectors flow more call them that. 196cc injectors.

Windrunner, Lubbockguy thank you for trying to perpetuate the idea I was trying to express in my previous post.

I find this stuff funny. You are all such sheep, any vendor can come on in here, give you 50% of the information you need to make a true decision and you all want to follow them to the new greener pasture. Then you go all over the forums and tell everyone what they should buy, just plain sad. Most of you have no clue what you just saw and have no idea how much you don't know.

WOW maybe I should find some old dyno sheets and post them proving that modded injector with stock nozzles make more power. I will have to take a scissors and cut the graph off at 2500 rpms or so. That should be all the info you need to get the point, heck that is more then 50% of the data. It is just that all the data in 2500 rpms and up show a little different effect then what I would want you to see. But you would all see a 50 or so hp gain in what I would show you.

I take offese to this. I'm pretty sure my posts were not along the lines of being a ***ing sheeple. The questions I put forth were trying to steer this discussion in the direction it needed to be. That is in the direction of gathering actual useful information. I don't gaf what a stock nozzled vs. 75% nozzled 175cc flows at some unrealistic p/w. I doubt you'll find any tune worth a sh!t that uses max pulse width.

Perhaps the phrasing I used makes me come off as some sort of ignorant bumkin. I don't talk about this stuff all day long so I'm not immersed in the lingo. What I do understand is that the injection event is tied to crank angle and RPM. The higher the RPM, the less time you have to get that fuel in the cylinder. You get to a point where you may be able to empty that 175/50% at 2500 rpms but at 4200 rpms that 50% nozzle may not be big enough to let the full 175cc to empty. At that point, it's time for 75% or whatever.

My point is the window of crank angle you have to empty that injector in the time needed for an optimal injection event has nothing to do with the size of the injector. That window gets shorter as RPMs go up. If you have a 1.8ms window to empty your injector, thats how quickly you need to empty that injector. End of story. You need to size the nozzle appropriatly without going too large thus hurting atomization. If a 75% will empty the injector in time, a 100% is just huring atomization and is overkill.

The way I see it at this point with the knowledge I have at hand is that every size of injector will have an optimal % nozzle, each being different. Not too big and not too small. RPMs and time is RPMs and time no matter how much lipstick you put on that pig. If you need to empty that 190cc injector at xxxx RPM you need x% nozzle. If you need to empty that 320cc injector at xxxx RPM you need x% nozzle.

So 2.46ms is the max pulse width in the ECM?

If that is the case, I think a real world race tune p/w at a real world race tune RPM redline would be a little more informative. I'm talking a tune that is set up for "perfect world" conditions using the right size of stick and nozzle, not a bandaided tune trying to compensate for less than optimal parts for the setup.

Don't get me wrong, it's no brainer that the larger nozzled injector will empty quicker given the same p/w. I think it would be usefull info to know where the crossover point is in relation to injector size and p/w.

Say your tune needs a p/w of 1.8 ms @ 4000 RPM for an optimal injection event (made up numbers). What % of nozzle does the 175cc need to empty in that time. What % nozzle would a 190cc to empty in that time? What about a 205cc, and so on. See what I'm getting at?

The way I understand it, the optimal p/w is the optimal p/w regardless of injector size. The injection event needs to happen in the optimal desired window of crank angle regardless of injector size. What we need to know is what each partiular size of injector needs for a nozzle size in order to empty in that optimal window and still maintain good atomazation.

A guy can throw 100% nozzles at 190cc sticks all day long, but does it need that 100%?

Am I articulating my thoughts in a way anyone else understands?

 

[alwil]

I find this stuff funny. You are all such sheep, any vendor can come on in here, give you 50% of the information you need to make a true decision and you all want to follow them to the new greener pasture. Then you go all over the forums and tell everyone what they should buy, just plain sad. Most of you have no clue what you just saw and have no idea how much you don't know.

WOW maybe I should find some old dyno sheets and post them proving that modded injector with stock nozzles make more power. I will have to take a scissors and cut the graph off at 2500 rpms or so. That should be all the info you need to get the point, heck that is more then 50% of the data. It is just that all the data in 2500 rpms and up show a little different effect then what I would want you to see. But you would all see a 50 or so hp gain in what I would show you.

Or you could come to the table with something real instead of just instead of running down somebody else's work....some people are actually interested in this thread so go did up your dyno sheets and show us otherwise.

 

[DZL JIM]

...You are all such sheep...

Some, maybe. Not all....

 

[lubeowner]

There are roughly 14.5 psi in one bar.

 

[Charles]

Do 6oh owners huff paint all day or what? How can we be sitting here in 2012 with a current thread of this type? I'm sure you can find this same thread sitting somewhere on TDS from a decade ago.


No, there's no mystery, nor any need to bench injectors of IDENTICAL displacement in order to see if they are "really" ____ cc injectors. Unless there was a machining error, or a damaged component, they will displace ___ cc evvvvvvvery time if given ample duration to go full stroke.

Will a nozzle of larger flowable area displace more fuel than one of smaller flowable area...... well..... MAYBE! Maybe NOT! If you flowed them both at 6,000,000ms of pulsewidth, then NO! If you flowed them both at miniscule injection pressure then you still may see no measurable disparity.


But flowing injectors of the same displacement with varying nozzle areas at a duration below that needed to fully stroke the smaller at the given ICP, and then noting that the one with the larger flowable area flowed more is hardly groundbreaking news... Nor does it mean that anyone was mislabeling anything.

It's not rocket science. There is displacement, and flowable area. Injector total capacity is determined by the former, the capacity for injection rate by the latter.

Thinking that a test as that illustrated in this thread shows that one injector "isn't really ____ cc" is no different than taking the faster one in the test, cutting the pulsewidth in half from what you tested with before, and then proclaiming that it "isn't really a ____cc injector EITHER" ..... with accompanying gasps and fainting in the crowd when the news is unveiled....

lol.


This test is akin to taking two trucks, each producing 500rwhp and then racing them down the highway from a 70mph roll on. One truck weighs 7000lbs and the other weighs 10,000 and loses miserably each time, so we all conclude that the heavier one didn't really make 500rwhp.... WRONG...

The problem was.... you might have wanted a 12 second truck, but instead, asked for one making ____hp. If you want a 12 second truck, ask for one. If you want an injector that displaces ___cc in ___ms, ask for one....

Picking two trucks and running 12's in one and 17's in another that make the same power doesn't mean that the power claims were wrong. If your goal was running 12's, then you simply don't know what to specify.



Nozzle size should be determined by the fuel rate you need. The fuel rate you need should be determined by the amount of fuel needed divided by the width (in time) of your injection window. The fuel needed is directly related to the bsfc achieved, and the injection window by the operating rpm and fuel burn rate. With most of these diesels, maybe figure somewhere in the 25* neighborhood for actual injection window, net of any injector actuation lag.

 

[JAP]

Do 6oh owners huff paint all day or what? How can we be sitting here in 2012 with a current thread of this type? I'm sure you can find this same thread sitting somewhere on TDS from a decade ago.


No, there's no mystery, nor any need to bench injectors of IDENTICAL displacement in order to see if they are "really" ____ cc injectors. Unless there was a machining error, or a damaged component, they will displace ___ cc evvvvvvvery time if given ample duration to go full stroke.

Will a nozzle of larger flowable area displace more fuel than one of smaller flowable area...... well..... MAYBE! Maybe NOT! If you flowed them both at 6,000,000ms of pulsewidth, then NO! If you flowed them both at miniscule injection pressure then you still may see no measurable disparity.


But flowing injectors of the same displacement with varying nozzle areas at a duration below that needed to fully stroke the smaller at the given ICP, and then noting that the one with the larger flowable area flowed more is hardly groundbreaking news... Nor does it mean that anyone was mislabeling anything.

It's not rocket science. There is displacement, and flowable area. Injector total capacity is determined by the former, the capacity for injection rate by the latter.

Thinking that a test as that illustrated in this thread shows that one injector "isn't really ____ cc" is no different than taking the faster one in the test, cutting the pulsewidth in half from what you tested with before, and then proclaiming that it "isn't really a ____cc injector EITHER" ..... with accompanying gasps and fainting in the crowd when the news is unveiled....

lol.


This test is akin to taking two trucks, each producing 500rwhp and then racing them down the highway from a 70mph roll on. One truck weighs 7000lbs and the other weighs 10,000 and loses miserably each time, so we all conclude that the heavier one didn't really make 500rwhp.... WRONG...

The problem was.... you might have wanted a 12 second truck, but instead, asked for one making ____hp. If you want a 12 second truck, ask for one. If you want an injector that displaces ___cc in ___ms, ask for one....

Picking two trucks and running 12's in one and 17's in another that make the same power doesn't mean that the power claims were wrong. If your goal was running 12's, then you simply don't know what to specify.



Nozzle size should be determined by the fuel rate you need. The fuel rate you need should be determined by the amount of fuel needed divided by the width (in time) of your injection window. The fuel needed is directly related to the bsfc achieved, and the injection window by the operating rpm and fuel burn rate. With most of these diesels, maybe figure somewhere in the 25* neighborhood for actual injection window, net of any injector actuation lag.

Is it true that hybrid 6.0 injectors are faster than stock 6.0 injectors? LOL

When is the 6.0 crowd going to be at that point?

 

[faster6.0]

well said charles.

 

[Charles]

Is it true that hybrid 6.0 injectors are faster than stock 6.0 injectors? LOL

When is the 6.0 crowd going to be at that point?

I'm pretty sure that's one main reason that the 6oh jumped in power so far back when Shawn first started making ridiculous power in that crew cab. Larger P&B's.

 

[Gearhead]

What ICP and PW was used for said flow test? Without those numbers, the test data can't lead to a conclusion on this subject.

 

[lubeowner]

What ICP and PW was used for said flow test? Without those numbers, the test data can't lead to a conclusion on this subject.

Icp was 200 bar based on the screen shot and pw was said to be 2.46.

 

[wetnsloppy4x]

Thank you for your input Charles.

 

[3brorce]

My stock injectors with 30% nozzles ran pretty darn good. On stock tune it ran like it had a 50hp tune on it.

 

[Pizza pig]

Icp was 200 bar based on the screen shot and pw was said to be 2.46.

I'd like to see this test done at say 1800rpm and 2200rpm

 

[kyle43335]

I'd like to see this test done at say 1800rpm and 2200rpm

id like to see it done around 4,000rpm.

 

[Fox hunt]

I'd like to see this test done at say 1800rpm and 2200rpm

+1 lower rpm is where the bigger body, stock injector is supposed to shine so I would be more interested in that than an rpm higher than 3000.

 

[sly1types]

Oh yea I forgot too (got all tied up in the discussions). Thanks Jared and RCD for the video. It is good to be able to confirm theory with real world, no kidding, what will happen to dispel of any myths and/or misconceptions.

I dont suppose we could see a video with say a 175/75 next to a 175/100 next to a 190/75 and a 190/100 could we?? I know it is a long shot but I have heard that hardly nothing is gained by using 100% nozzles on a 175 injector over 75% nozzles. Not sure how to take that really. Would just really like to see 175s next to 190s.

Thanks again for video. Great Job!

I agree that would be the video to see..cause those are most common modded injectors:thumbup:

 

[Sully]

tyler would know better than me but I'm pretty sure rpm doesn't change anything when flowing them other than how fast the test is over with. You have the number of shots,pw,icp.1k injections is what they base the flow on.ie: 1k shots from x injector flows ??cc @ said pulse width. You change rpms and nothing else and you only get a longer or shorter test. Useable pw should be the focus.

 

[Gearhead]

Icp was 200 bar based on the screen shot and pw was said to be 2.46.

okay so add at least 500 psi to that to show where most 6 liters operate at wot, although 2.2-2.3 ms is a better guage of HP potential.

 

[Gearhead]

+1 lower rpm is where the bigger body, stock injector is supposed to shine so I would be more interested in that than an rpm higher than 3000.

it would only shine with a stock nozzle because the big pw needed to empty the injector can acually make power at 2000 rpms. Low RPM isn't problem for even stock injectors..... fuel per time with good atomization is what wins the HP war.