Close

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 272
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    657
    Rep Points
    743.6
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Did you know that 78% of statistics are just made up on the fly? Click here to enlarge

    As far as I know the Walbro "267" pump is rated @ 355 liters/hr @ 70psi @ 13.5v on paper. 1 liter/hour is 1.63 pounds/hr for gasoline. More for E85 of course. So with no over head it's rated at 578 pounds/hr worth of gasoline. Depending on how you configure the system there is overhead with the two venturi jets, the regulator, lines, etc, which I have not measured. But that overhead is present with any setup. Since I don't know the exact overhead I can't give an exact theoretical effective rating on the pump. But I can say with RB turbos using E98 it held full low pressure target in the 520whp+ range running 11.8:1 air/fuel ratios. With a leaner E85 specific air/fuel ratio, lower BSFC from a more efficient turbo setup, etc, I could see it supporting 700whp+ without a hitch. People have made a lot more than that using this single pump. And one could restrict both venturi valves more than they already are for more flow if needed.

    PS. It's interesting your "2 year in the making" fuel system upgrades just happen to also use the first pump I came across on eBay and ordered with maybe 20 minutes of research... Click here to enlarge
    oh snap

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    3,344
    Rep Points
    1,445.7
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Yes Reputation No
    LOL

    i almost believed some of that post until i read '3 pumps for 800+ on e85'


    aaaahhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaah

    there are local 1500hp+ gtr's and supras running two pumps

    if it's going to 'need' an eleventy billion dollar shiv magictouch(tm) fuel upgrade to support high power levels... I'll wait for proefi to bring their PI manifold/tuning to the table.. And be happy with what terry/the rest of the community can provide in the meantime, at least there's no bsing there..

    i'm sure shiv's upgrade is an upgrade, but if he's not going to give hard evidence for the price, may as well just poop on some graph paper...

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    www.bootmod3.com
    Posts
    6,693
    Rep Points
    3,352.2
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rooringhusky Click here to enlarge
    http://www.e90post.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif LPFP Tech info

    Hi guys,
    I hope everyone is enjoying their Christmas and is looking forward to the 2013!

    There also seems to be a little confusion with regards to fuel system design. Specifically, the Low Pressure Fuel Pump (LPFP) system and how to upgrade it. I don't have too much time so I'll make this quick. There are 3 ways to upgrade the fuel pump for those who want to support higher HP levels or run high concentrations of ethanol. We've tested all 3 over the past 2 years. Here's what works well and what doesn't (as others have, and will soon, find out).

    1) Running the factory fuel pump at a higher voltage. By running the stock fuel pump at 15-16v, you'll see 10-15% more flow. So a healthy pump that flows 350lbs/hr at 14v will now flow somewhere around 390lbs/hr. Similarly, a less-fresh factory pump that flows 300lbs/hr will flow around 335lbs/hr. Not a huge gain and probably not a good tradeoff given the added stress to the pump (which means lower lifespan).

    2) Replacing the factory LPFP with a Walbro 400. This approach is better than the first. A Walbro 400 flows 400 liters per hour (LPH) at 43psi. But like most fuel pumps, flow falls off rather abruptly as pressure goes up. At the N54's 72psi of pressure, the Walbro 400 flows approx 305LHP. Which translates to approx 490lbs/hr which sounds great until you realize that got rid of the stock pump and that this pump doesn't offer a dedicated secondary vent, you have to put in a T in the outlet to power the Venturi jet (in order to keep fuel bucket nice and full at all times). This will drop effective flow (flowing going upstream to the regulator) by 15% (or more if the line isn't sufficiently restricted). Which means that the system flow can easily drop to 415lbs/hr. So compared to a fresh stock pump which flows 350lbs/hr, you're picking up approx 20% more flow.

    3) Running a modified Walbro 400 in series with the factory pump. This is essentially what we are doing with our Vishnu/FFTEC in-line fuel pump upgrade. The disadvantage of this approach is obviously cost since you have to machine an adapter that converts what is designed to be an in-tank pump into an in-line pump. This also requires additional lines and fittings. The upside is that you don't have to modify the factory LPFP assembly (cutting it open). The other upside is that running two pump is series drastically outperforms (and outlives) either of the previous two options. Here's why...
    When you put two pumps in series, the total system flows approx 20% than the higher flowing of the two pumps assuming no inlet restriction (more on that later). Which means that the Walbro 400, which flows 490lbs/hr will now flow approx 590lbs/hr. This is because it will operate a lower pressure ratio than it would if it had to work by itself. This is because it is getting pressurized at the inlet (to ~35psi) which means that it is only stepping up pressure by another 37psi instead of having to work from 0psi as it would have if it were working as a lonely in-tank pump.
    The factory pump is also working less hard since it is operating at approx half the system pressure it would otherwise operate at. And with the drop in outlet pressure, the factory pump sees a big increase in flow (up to 480lbs/hr from the 350lbs/hr it provides at its usual 72psi). This is well matched to support the needs of the Walbro upstream up to ~800hp on gasoline or ~620hp on straight E85. Above that, it will start to run out of steam and start to drop outlet pressure, forcing the Walbro to operate a higher pressure ratio which will limit fuel flow as you saw in approach #2. All said and done, running both pumps in series improves flow to approx. 480lb/hr, or a improvement of 37% over stock.

    And yes, we've make some big numbers on this set-up http://www.e90post.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif And it is alway a good idea to "oversize" your fuel system because pumps do constantly degrade over time.

    I've also attached a pic below of the prototype fuel system running in our shop car. It's an evolution of (add-on to) our in-line fuel pump upgrade. Designed for 800+whp on E85. With it, the car has 3 pumps, 3 regulators, a surge tank and Teflon coated SS line conversion! You don't want to know the parts/labor cost on that http://www.e90post.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif

    Hope that sheds some light on things....
    Happy Holidays!
    shiv

    http://www.benzboost.com/images/impo...tc1d1356-1.jpg
    Thanks for the data and looking forward to seeing more. I do like what's been presented. The only thing I don't like the sound of is the fact we'll be running 4 fuel pumps now (3 LPFP and 1HPFP) instead of 2 OEM. Troubleshooting issues is already a bit of a nightmare with the 2 OEM pumps. However, it does also "seem" like having these pumps in series will make the numbers required and take off some of the load off the OEM LPFP making the overall low pressure system work more efficiently while providing more flow. I guess time will tell if this is marketing at work although at this point I doubt it as no one in their right mind would have 3 pumps there unless absolutely required (unless you're trying to make it look more complicated than it is to turn a profit Click here to enlarge).

    Overall, I'm glad there seem to be options for more fuel before hitting HPFP and Fuel injector limitations. Looking forward to more updates and discussion.
    Click here to enlarge

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Doylestown,PA
    Posts
    283
    Rep Points
    913.1
    Mentioned
    67 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    I'm working on something rather interesting in regards to this whole fueling/meth debacle. Pending available time to work out the prototype on the bridge port, I just finished measuring and making a template...It's an approach that hasn't been taken yet... (much to my surprise).I'll start a new thread as soon as I have a prototype made, should be within a week or so...

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Naples, FL
    Posts
    2,086
    Rep Points
    2,209.2
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    23


    Yes Reputation No
    double post, sorry.




  6. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    www.bootmod3.com
    Posts
    6,693
    Rep Points
    3,352.2
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rick@defiv Click here to enlarge
    I'm working on something rather interesting in regards to this whole fueling/meth debacle. Pending available time to work out the prototype on the bridge port, I just finished measuring and making a template...It's an approach that hasn't been taken yet... (much to my surprise).I'll start a new thread as soon as I have a prototype made, should be within a week or so...
    Cool! Click here to enlarge I like your style
    Click here to enlarge

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Naples, FL
    Posts
    2,086
    Rep Points
    2,209.2
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    23


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rick@defiv Click here to enlarge
    I'm working on something rather interesting in regards to this whole fueling/meth debacle. Pending available time to work out the prototype on the bridge port, I just finished measuring and making a template...It's an approach that hasn't been taken yet... (much to my surprise).I'll start a new thread as soon as I have a prototype made, should be within a week or so...
    2023.3997_e.jpgClick here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Did you know that 78% of statistics are just made up on the fly? Click here to enlarge

    As far as I know the Walbro "267" pump is rated @ 355 liters/hr @ 70psi @ 13.5v on paper. 1 liter/hour is 1.63 pounds/hr for gasoline. More for E85 of course. So with no over head it's rated at 578 pounds/hr worth of gasoline. Depending on how you configure the system there is overhead with the two venturi jets, the regulator, lines, etc, which I have not measured. But that overhead is present with any setup. Since I don't know the exact overhead I can't give an exact theoretical effective rating on the pump. But I can say with RB turbos using E98 it held full low pressure target in the 520whp+ range running 11.8:1 air/fuel ratios. With a leaner E85 specific air/fuel ratio, lower BSFC from a more efficient turbo setup, etc, I could see it supporting 700whp+ without a hitch. People have made a lot more than that using this single pump. And one could restrict both venturi valves more than they already are for more flow if needed.

    PS. It's interesting your "2 year in the making" fuel system upgrades just happen to also use the first pump I came across on eBay and ordered with maybe 20 minutes of research... Click here to enlarge
    (going to sound stupid)

    but he said Walbro 400 and you said Walbro "267"

    Different pumps?




  8. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Doylestown,PA
    Posts
    283
    Rep Points
    913.1
    Mentioned
    67 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    Cool! Click here to enlarge I like your style
    your gonna really like it...promiseClick here to enlarge

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    www.bootmod3.com
    Posts
    6,693
    Rep Points
    3,352.2
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu
    You were doing good right until the last couple sentences when your true intentions got the best of you. If you have a better solution, have at it. Because there is no no glory at sitting by the sidelines and taking pot shots at others who are offering solutions that everyone will, either directly or indirectly, benefit from.


    @shiv@vishnu , argument wasn't my intention. The reason I said what I did about marketing vs. true value with time I think was fair given some of the history. In any case, that's behind us, at least it is for me and having said that I do hope its not overhyped marketing and is the best way to approach this upgrade and that's why I said time will tell as I'm sure others will try similar/different solutions in the coming months as well.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu
    Just to clarify, the prototype fuel system in my personal car (3 LPFP pumps, 1 HPFP) is just a engineering exercise to test the viability (and limits) of a certain fueling approach. It is not something that is destined for production in it's current state. Not only would it cost a lot, it also involves some pretty extensive modification of the factory hardware (FPR, fuel filter assembly, level arm, fuel lines, etc,) that isn't in-line with what most people are willing to do at home with basic tools.


    Just to clarify, the current LPFP upgrade contains 1 inline pump along with the OEM LPFP and no additional regulator or changes to the OEM regulator? This upgrade supports 620whp on 100% E85 with your single turbo and 700+whp on pump/meth, correct?

    The one you're testing is for 800+?
    Click here to enlarge

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    216
    Rep Points
    331.7
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Yes Reputation No
    What about using the following. It's only $333.00 dollars and flows 600LBS hr.
    Aeromotive A 1000

    Click here to enlarge

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Roanoke VA
    Posts
    1,632
    Rep Points
    2,248.3
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    23


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by NJrep335i Click here to enlarge
    What about using the following. It's only $333.00 dollars and flows 600LBS hr.
    Aeromotive A 1000

    Click here to enlarge
    Pumps like that tend to be very loud(coincidentally i just saw on e90 that was a big part of why shivster didn't just go with a simpler single in tank pump.) However, for MY money i would MUCH rather deal with a little more noise and have a simpler, probably more effective, upgrade such as that Aeromotive pump.
    Click here to enlarge
    MOTIV750, MOTIV P-1000 PI, MOTIV/FUEL-IT! low pressure fuel system, AEM EMS/COBB AP, Aquamist HFS-3, ETS FMIC, SPEC stage 3+ clutch/SS flywheel, BC Racing coilovers and VMR wheels wrapped in Hankook RS3s.

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Naples, FL
    Posts
    2,086
    Rep Points
    2,209.2
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    23


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rader1 Click here to enlarge
    Pumps like that tend to be very loud(coincidentally i just saw on e90 that was a big part of why shivster didn't just go with a simpler single in tank pump.) However, for MY money i would MUCH rather deal with a little more noise and have a simpler, probably more effective, upgrade such as that Aeromotive pump.
    +1 between sub's, window's down, exhaust mod's, Meth Pump, etc. A little noise wouldn't be a big deal.




  13. #63
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,217
    Rep Points
    9,356.2
    Mentioned
    654 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    94


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Shiv@Vishnu
    Why have you not measured this? Aren't you suggesting this upgrade to others?
    I don't see measuring the overhead as overly relevant except in these theoretical discussions. Measuring low fuel pressure at peak HP tells you everything you need to know. Our tuning system measures it along with high pressure.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Shiv@Vishnu
    You are bleeding off the 70psi pressurized output of the pump to feed the venturi bleed (a plastic fitting no less) and yet you haven't measured the effective flow reduction? Maybe you should do that before trying to convince people that your solution is sound and that ours is less so. For someone who didn't even understand how a venturi jet worked or why removing it was a no-no until I told you, you should take a back seat here and just sit back and learn. You have no business recommending unquantified solutions to others, let alone attack us for providing a solution that works.
    You are quite an odd guy Shiv. What is up with the uncalled for insults? I'm well aware how venturi valves work and have been for the last 20 years. I was also aware of what it's purpose was when I removed it for testing. And that testing showed it's really not required as I had expected. But since we have plenty of overhead with the pump as is we suggest keeping it in place. Should someone experience a fuel pressure drop in the future adding a restrictor or eliminating the valve all together would be the next move to get a little more flow out of the system. You are dreaming if you think it's going to be 15% though. You are using the same internally restricted plastic valve at the same pressure with the same "drawbacks".

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Shiv@Vishnu
    2 years in the making? Hardly. But it is pretty clear which one of us spent the last 2 years of our time developing fuel system upgrades more effectively. When we get back to the shop after the holidays, I'll post a video and flow test results of both option 2 and option 3. I encourage you to do the same.
    You made your big "fuel system research" thread on 4/6/2011. You know, the "series" where you stated the OEM pump runs at 11v and then did the math showing it was not up to the task of supporting power levels that had been supported for years prior to you making the outrageous claim?

    I'm not insulting your fuel pump solution. We both know an inline booster pump is a hack but it is a hack that gets the job done. I only take exception to the implementation which requires an expensive CNC adapter and a few bits that should not be required. In my opinion rather than doing all that, running 100' of wire through the car, etc, just select a larger in tank pump if you feel one is required. If you really must have a booster pump then select one that has barbed fittings.

    It's funny that you are now "threatening" to show the data you should have shown around 5/2011 and certainly long before you offered your booster pump for sale. The only real data that one would be interseted in would be low fuel pressure logs from a high HP car at a constant power level with the OEM, Walbro only, and OEM + Walbro pumps. Do the logs on a dyno so we can see power levels are roughly unchanged. And if you get a pressure drop Walbro only then get a better pump. The one we're both using is a proven inexpensive pump but not exactly the highest quality stuff out there.

    This is the data sheet I was referencing for the Walbro flow: http://www.bimmerboost.com/attachmen...1&d=1356412113
    Last edited by Terry@BMS; 12-25-2012 at 07:56 PM.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,931
    Rep Points
    4,044.9
    Mentioned
    325 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by NJrep335i Click here to enlarge
    What about using the following. It's only $333.00 dollars and flows 600LBS hr.

    Click here to enlarge
    That would be way too simple...Click here to enlarge I have one sitting on my desk from my LS3 TT project. I am sure it would work fine. Honestly they are pretty beefy and LOUD and would have to be run in the trunk. But hey looking at Shivs trunk kit it, would be much smaller. Speaking of shivs trunk kit. I built something similar on my Turbo 16V VW in 99 but under the car. Its really nothing new. Saying that, why I am posting is this. I honestly have been built a few fuel systems for turbo cars over the years but do not in anyway claim to be an expert. I want to pose this question to get feedback from people who ARE experts in fuel systems. Ok so the Walbro cost around $200 we all know this. It can be had in both barbed and threaded format. So my question is.... If the walbro run in series inline with the factory pump is shivs claimed solution as it bumps up the factory pressure and flow of the factory pump to X, but others claim the factory pump itself is a restriction. Then others claim the Walbro intank is enough to get to X number of HP but might have its flow limits. Will running the walbro intank, $200 AND then running a barbed one in series inline another $200, plus any labor. Solve all these issues. You get rid of the stock pump restriction and you have the 2nd pump boosting the first. If my logic is flawed here from some fluid dynamic reason please let me know. Just throwing this out there. Either way if it did work its still $200-250 less then the other one.

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,177
    Rep Points
    801.6
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9


    Yes Reputation No
    I just want to clear this pump business up. There are TWO Walbro pumps. There is the F90000262 which is gasoline only and referred to commonly as the Walbro 400lph and there is the E85 Walbro sometimes referred to as the 450lph pump with PN F90000267. The 400lph pump flow 316lph at 13.5v and 70psi, the 450lph flows 355lph at 70psi. Terry has been recommending the 450lph version which obviously makes sense.

    From Shiv post he uploaded the following chart:

    Click here to enlarge

    The 450lph flow chart:

    Click here to enlarge

    The 400lph flow chart:

    Click here to enlarge

    So Shiv is NOT using the same pump as Terry, but instead using a 50lph lower capacity pump. Why he would use this pump instead (it isn't even e85 rated)? Your guess is as good as mine. Maybe cost?
    Last edited by rudypoochris; 12-25-2012 at 08:51 PM.

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,931
    Rep Points
    4,044.9
    Mentioned
    325 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rudypoochris Click here to enlarge
    I just want to clear this pump business up. There are TWO Walbro pumps. There is the F90000262 which is gasoline only and referred to commonly as the Walbro 400lph and there is the E85 Walbro sometimes referred to as the 450lph pump with PN F90000267. The 400lph pump flow 316lph at 13.5v and 70psi, the 450lph flows 355lph at 70psi. Terry has been recommending the 450lph version which obviously makes sense.
    I thought this had been made clear long ago? The only pump in question here is the E85 Walbro to my understanding...

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,177
    Rep Points
    801.6
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
    I thought this had been made clear long ago? The only pump in question here is the E85 Walbro to my understanding...
    Edited my reply to include flow charts. On E90post Shiv threw up the flow data for the 400lph pump. He must be using that in series...

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,177
    Rep Points
    801.6
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9


    Yes Reputation No
    Somebody feel free to copy the two pump data to E90post.com as I am sure Shiv isn't going to select to do it himself as he has already copied half of this thread over to there out of context.

    Click here to enlargeClick here to enlarge

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,931
    Rep Points
    4,044.9
    Mentioned
    325 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rudypoochris Click here to enlarge
    I just want to clear this pump business up. There are TWO Walbro pumps. There is the F90000262 which is gasoline only and referred to commonly as the Walbro 400lph and there is the E85 Walbro sometimes referred to as the 450lph pump with PN F90000267. The 400lph pump flow 316lph at 13.5v and 70psi, the 450lph flows 355lph at 70psi. Terry has been recommending the 450lph version which obviously makes sense.

    From Shiv post he uploaded the following chart:

    Click here to enlarge

    The 450lph flow chart:

    Click here to enlarge

    The 400lph flow chart:

    Click here to enlarge

    So Shiv is NOT using the same pump as Terry, but instead using a 50lph lower capacity pump. Why he would use this pump instead (it isn't even e85 rated)? Your guess is as good as mine. Maybe cost?
    Contrary to what a lot of people here believe, Shiv is far from stupid and is actually very smart. I HIGHLY doubt he would be using a physically identical pump that flows less and is not rated for E85 for running E85, when I think it costs something like 20 dollars less. Before we just say he is using this pump we should actually make sure this is factual. I am not taking any sides here, just looking for useful factual data to go off of.

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    www.bootmod3.com
    Posts
    6,693
    Rep Points
    3,352.2
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
    Contrary to what a lot of people here believe, Shiv is far from stupid and is actually very smart. I HIGHLY doubt he would be using a physically identical pump that flows less and is not rated for E85 for running E85, when I think it costs something like 20 dollars less. Before we just say he is using this pump we should actually make sure this is factual. I am not taking any sides here, just looking for useful factual data to go off of.
    Given he's posted 400lph a couple times in the post and the flow numbers indicating 316lph at 13.5v and 70psi I think he was indeed referring to the gasoline 400lph pump and not the higher flowing E85 455lph one. If its a typo on his end then there's more than a typo there given flow charts were posted as well.
    Click here to enlarge

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,177
    Rep Points
    801.6
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
    Contrary to what a lot of people here believe, Shiv is far from stupid and is actually very smart. I HIGHLY doubt he would be using a physically identical pump that flows less and is not rated for E85 for running E85, when I think it costs something like 20 dollars less. Before we just say he is using this pump we should actually make sure this is factual. I am not taking any sides here, just looking for useful factual data to go off of.
    I am going off the pump specs he provided and the fact that he has referred to it as the Walbro 400lph multiple times. If he truly believes the flow specs he posted are for the E85 pump, then it seems he doesn't really know what he is selling...?

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,931
    Rep Points
    4,044.9
    Mentioned
    325 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rudypoochris Click here to enlarge
    I am going off the pump specs he provided and the fact that he has referred to it as the Walbro 400lph multiple times. If he truly believes the flow specs he posted are for the E85 pump, then it seems he doesn't really know what he is selling...?
    Man if you guys are right, then I really would be surprised. The pump is being touted as designed for E85, and the gasoline pump is literally I think around 20 bucks less. Shiv you may want to chime in here and clear this up on which pump you are actually running and if it is in fact the 400lph gas pump that is going to lead to a lot of questions, since the E85 pump is readily available and cheap.

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,177
    Rep Points
    801.6
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9


    Yes Reputation No
    IMHO, Its all moot anyway since it doesn't take half a brain to realize that leaving a pump that probably flows 255lph or so upstream of a 450lph pump is a hack at best. That's like leaving the stock turbos in there and then adding a GTX3582 after them but keeping the same boost limit. Sure the stock turbos don't have to work as hard, they are being sucked through. Either ditch the stock pump for the 450lph E85 pump, or run them in parallel since they both can supply 72psi independently.

    This is a stupid exercise anyway, since Terry has already proven the E85 450lph pump alone can max out the stock HPFP anyway (HP falling, LP steady). That is the weak link now.

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,217
    Rep Points
    9,356.2
    Mentioned
    654 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    94


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
    Contrary to what a lot of people here believe, Shiv is far from stupid and is actually very smart. I HIGHLY doubt he would be using a physically identical pump that flows less and is not rated for E85 for running E85, when I think it costs something like 20 dollars less. Before we just say he is using this pump we should actually make sure this is factual. I am not taking any sides here, just looking for useful factual data to go off of.
    Shiv is fairly smart but not always detailed oriented. I suspect FFTEC is using the correct 267 pump and Shiv is just looking at the wrong numbers to make his marketing arguments for how great it is. It would not be the first time Shiv fumbled a detail that was keystone to his entire argument.

    No one has explaind to me why they don't use a barbed fitting pump instead of a $230 custom CNC machined adapter on the in tank version of the same pump.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,177
    Rep Points
    801.6
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9


    Yes Reputation No
    I also just want to state, for the record, that Shiv clearly is a smart guy. I just don't think he does whats best for his customers and the community. I think he will gladly trade that away for a quick buck. That can be seen throughout his product lineup in pricing and features (VIN lock, 50% markup, argue the obviously wrong to the death, etc). He may be able to get away with that for a while, but eventually its just not going to work anymore. I do like that he does try to come up with different solutions to problems. I just think he often drives to an end and justifies the means afterwards.

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •