30% nozzle on stock HPFP

[Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto]

When I originally did the test, "Maintaining" was defined as running an all out tune, just as any other truck would. An X race or 310 type tune at 2.3us.

NEVER SAID YOU COULDN'T BACK PW OFF TO GET BACK TO 24,500PSI.

And morgan this isn't directed at you, I just quoted your response lol.

Gotcha.

I'm not doubting that a stock hpfp will have problems holding a 2.3 tune with 30%. But my thing is, can you make any gains from doing so with an appropriate tune? If there is an upside then it will help others. If there isn't then there is a definite case for dual fuelers on anything but stock nozzles.

We will see.

 

[Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto]

Double post, carry on.

 

[Strokin6.4]

So what I read is:

2.2pw - carries 18,000 rail.
2.0pw - carries 24,500 rail.

That seems like a huge difference, I'd love to see those two tunes compared at the track or dyno.

24,500 on the older extreme street
22,500 on 2.0
18,000 on 2.2 (might be 2.3, whatever extreme x is)

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[MINK]

24,500 on the older extreme street
22,500 on 2.0
18,000 on 2.2 (might be 2.3, whatever extreme x is)

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

That makes more sense, I would assume the Old X-street is 1.8pw then?



On the other hand, how much power is beeing lost through rail?

As in if I throw dual fuelers on mine with no other changes will maintaining my commanded rail make much more power? Basically where does power fall off with these trucks?

 

[mike@haller's]

That makes more sense, I would assume the Old X-street is 1.8pw then?



On the other hand, how much power is beeing lost through rail?

As in if I throw dual fuelers on mine with no other changes will maintaining my commanded rail make much more power? Basically where does power fall off with these trucks?

Depends on your turbo setup and available air. Stock replacements setups seem to be maxed out a little after 700hp depending on setup.

 

[Strokin6.4]

That makes more sense, I would assume the Old X-street is 1.8pw then?



On the other hand, how much power is beeing lost through rail?

As in if I throw dual fuelers on mine with no other changes will maintaining my commanded rail make much more power? Basically where does power fall off with these trucks?

Idk man like you said I never fully maintained 24,500 with stock nozzles either and my truck was pretty fast or faster when compared to same trucks.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[jdgleason]

I was on extreme street when I dynoed mine held 24,500 psi rail pressure. Eric seems to think whatever pw it takes to get around 22,500-23,000 will be your most power with 30% nozzles which for me is his 2.0pw custom single tune I have. Now I'm sure if you can maintain atleast 23,000 on a 2.1 or 2.2 you'll make more power but most don't. I know for everyday driving my 2.2 tune spools my 472 10x better than stock and probably average a drop in egts of 100 degrees but it only maintains 18,000ish psi at WOT. But going by JDs test it doesn't suprise me seeing the added fuel helps more at low RPM even if it won't maintain at WOT

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Mine stood up and spooled a little quicker with the nozzles, but seemed to fall on its face up top.

Just thinking out loud, I wonder if fuel atomization makes more of a difference here at altitude since we are air deprived to begin with. Normally with nitrous, atomization isn't as important as volume of fuel (if your goal is maximum power). Maybe trucks at lower elevations with less rail pressure (less atomization) aren't hurt by that as much? Seems kinda far fetched but maybe it will spark some conversation

That makes more sense, I would assume the Old X-street is 1.8pw then?



On the other hand, how much power is beeing lost through rail?

As in if I throw dual fuelers on mine with no other changes will maintaining my commanded rail make much more power? Basically where does power fall off with these trucks?

That was my plan with dual pumps - to see what kind of power it picked back up. Seems like my trans had other plans though.

 

[powerstrokin15]

Eric's tuning. 2.1 pw, I'll be throwing more pw at it when I get on his dyno. I'm just running a mild email file right now to keep the trans intact


Sent reeming out the newly rebuilt Clifford

 

[powerstrokin15]

I was maintaining 24,500 with stock nozzles 2.3, maintaining 25k with 2.1 30% nozzles or 60hp 48k on HPFP


Sent reeming out the newly rebuilt Clifford

 

[Tree Trimmer]

if wayne gets back here, he could post up his two dyno graphs, that showed the curve difference going from stock to the 30%.

i think that visual, is what JD experienced.

as a side note, whats the elevation where your going to do the testing on steves truck, JD.

and morgan, could you look up the actual elevation of where your going to do the testing as well? i would think that might be pertinent information as well, as JD alluded to.

 

[jdgleason]

if wayne gets back here, he could post up his two dyno graphs, that showed the curve difference going from stock to the 30%.

i think that visual, is what JD experienced.

as a side note, whats the elevation where your going to do the testing on steves truck, JD.

and morgan, could you look up the actual elevation of where your going to do the testing as well? i would think that might be pertinent information as well, as JD alluded to.

Testing on Steve's will be exactly the same altitude as mine... I want to say Haller's is 5800' or something.

Here is the graph from my tests with the 15% nozzles.

And in case anyone missed it, my thread from doing the full test.

http://powerstrokearmy.com/forums/showthread.php?p=606118#post606118

 

[Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto]

We will be around 600ft where we will be dynoing. I will have all the specs and particulars when we dyno. I would like for me and Steve to both data log the same parameters on our runs so they are more comparable.

 

[jdgleason]

We will be around 600ft where we will be dynoing. I will have all the specs and particulars when we dyno. I would like for me and Steve to both data log the same parameters on our runs so they are more comparable.

Let me know what you'll be watching.

 

[Strokin6.4]

I was maintaining 24,500 with stock nozzles 2.3, maintaining 25k with 2.1 30% nozzles or 60hp 48k on HPFP


Sent reeming out the newly rebuilt Clifford

So wait your maintaining 25k on a 2.1 tune with 60hp nozzles? Those aren't 30% nozzles....

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto]

So wait your maintaining 25k on a 2.1 tune with 60hp nozzles? Those aren't 30% nozzles....

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

He has 30%'s

 

[powerstrokin15]

So wait your maintaining 25k on a 2.1 tune with 60hp nozzles? Those aren't 30% nozzles....

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

sorry. thought 60hp was 30%.


but I'm running 30%.. we don't sell ours as horse, I was just guessing.


Sent reeming out the newly rebuilt Clifford

 

[forcefed6.4ford]

Hats off to two spronsors working together on this. Nice display of mutual respect.

 

[jdgleason]

I didn't catch that. Elites 30% are called an 85hp nozzle, for reference.

 

[B585Ford]

Hats off to two spronsors working together on this. Nice display of mutual respect.

:whs: I was a little worried in the beginning this would be an air vs fuel debate but this is a great thread.

 

[jdgleason]

:whs: I was a little worried in the beginning this would be an air vs fuel debate but this is a great thread.

I feel like I come off like a dikk a lot of the time and I want to make sure it's known that I'm all for finding new ways to make power and figuring out what works and what doesn't. But on the flip side, I'm tough to convince with out factual data in front of me. That's why I'm all for testing and why I tried the nozzle test on mine. My nozzle test burned me and I was not pleased. I'm once again interested to see what comes of this new round of testing.