Originally posted by 4thfiero: and one guy who wanted to ask some question in the forum (he was new) but didnt bcc he saw how ppl can go off on them and make them feel like idiots for asking... like....thats garbage, we are all here to help in a calm respectful way.
...you probably know a lot more about swaps and electronics and cars and Fiero's than I do Will, thats great, it really is. But no-one likes a "no it all" who doesnt know how to deal with ppl in a respectful manner. Just chill out, use your expertise in healthier ways and have some more discernment on how to talk to ppl.
I think you're the one that needs to chill out, here. Being direct and accurate is not being a "know it all" or disrespectful. Turning to calling people names, however, is. Just because someone isn't bowing down to praise you for doing your swap, doesn't mean they aren't being calm and respectful. Stop expecting things to be more than they are. They are just words on a screen. Don't take them personally.
ugh u know what, If anyone is interested in anything that has to do with my swap or whatever, just PM me. I have better things to do with my time than troll forums. Im out.
Some of whom interestingly, NAMED you, and said "Dont worry about Will, guy loves to start crap over nothing" and one guy who wanted to ask some question in the forum (he was new) but didnt bcc he saw how ppl can go off on them and make them feel like idiots for asking... like....thats garbage, we are all here to help in a calm respectful way.
I don't "start crap", I insist on posted information being correct, as it benefits future users of this forum when they search for answers (ever noticed how many topics start with "I searched for this and found conflicting results"?). I have helped a LOT of newbies over the years, but eventually get tired of the same questions and don't stick my head into many threads anymore.
Some people may see me as abrasive because I don't suffer fools. I'm okay with that.
[This message has been edited by Will (edited 10-07-2014).]
So, got replies back from Haltech regarding the Elite unit and DI support. It does not support DI, due to apparently the way in which the piezoinjectors need to be driven, and as they are apparently often driven by 100-250V circuits rather than 12V. I was told that while the Elite doesn't support those systems, that Haltech is working on a possible future version of an Elite unit that would support DI. The Elite does allow running all the other tech on modern engines though, so it is a feasible standalone option for modern engines like the Ecotec, High Feature V6, and Gen IV LS with VVT though, as long as DI is not used.
Originally posted by BillS: The DI injectors on the LNF are the largest available and put out enough fuel for more power per cylinder than the C7 engine. The C7 uses the same ones - 74 lb injectors.
Given what I've learned recently about how DI and the injectors work, I'm not sure that injector size is the issue. The injectors operate quite differently than conventional injectors, where the way to get more fuel is simply to have a bigger hole for the fuel and to hold the valve open longer. Once the programming is entirely unlocked for DI systems, or if you want to spend the money for an aftermarket system, it should be possible to open and close the injectors more times, when adding significant increase in air to the cylinder. The piezoinjectors can be opened many times during the intake and compression cycle, maximizing the efficiency of the mixture. Instead of dumping all the fuel into the cylinder at the start of the intake stroke, like conventional EFI, the fuel can be injected at appropriate times during the intake/compression cycle, allowing for a much better atomization and mixing of the fuel. However, since AFAIK, nobody has unlocked the portions of the ECU necessary to do this on a factory system yet, nobody is doing it, and instead adding the supplemental conventional injectors, into the intake runners, to get more fuel.
Apparently the stock turbo on the LNF is really inefficient needing 30lbs of boost to make around 280 hp. Where as they use about 15 pounds of boost to get about 350.
More misinformation. Whoever told you that was ignorant. The stock LNF runs around 15 psi to put out 260 bhp. The GMPP tune uses around 19 psi to put out 290 bhp. I'll be using around 25 psi to put out over 400 bhp.
30 psi is way out of the operational window for the Borg Warner K04 unit and only a moron would try and operate it up there - it would be functioning more as a heat pump than a power adder and wouldn't last long.
The K04 unit it perfectly chosen to operate in the volume and pressure range of the stock engine and is capable of serving maybe another 50 bhp or so while staying within the design envelope. After that you need to move more volume (not pressure) and resort to a larger turbo (or modified K04)
The stock direct injection system is perfectly adequate to supply fuel up to the mid 400 bhp range but to go beyond that, they add more fuel - bigger fuel cam lobe, higher pressure, and/or a 5th injector.
Please, please stop repeating the misinformation about the LNF, whether it comes from Alpha's ignorance or your own. Go to HP Tuners forum and research what this is all about.
Given what I've learned recently about how DI and the injectors work, I'm not sure that injector size is the issue. The injectors operate quite differently than conventional injectors, where the way to get more fuel is simply to have a bigger hole for the fuel and to hold the valve open longer. Once the programming is entirely unlocked for DI systems, or if you want to spend the money for an aftermarket system, it should be possible to open and close the injectors more times, when adding significant increase in air to the cylinder. The piezoinjectors can be opened many times during the intake and compression cycle, maximizing the efficiency of the mixture. Instead of dumping all the fuel into the cylinder at the start of the intake stroke, like conventional EFI, the fuel can be injected at appropriate times during the intake/compression cycle, allowing for a much better atomization and mixing of the fuel. However, since AFAIK, nobody has unlocked the portions of the ECU necessary to do this on a factory system yet, nobody is doing it, and instead adding the supplemental conventional injectors, into the intake runners, to get more fuel.
The DI injectors pretty much do work the way that port injectors do... in that a given pressure through an open injector results in a given flow rate. Since DI uses mechanical pumps (and, I *think* uses computer controlled regulation), the pressure can vary, which is why the system has a rail pressure transducer. The ECU has to compensate on the fly for different fuel pressures. DI has to run very high fuel pressure to get good atomization.
There are several differences between DI and PFI in terms of operating strategies. -Injection duration: PFI can inject for about 620 degrees of the 720 degree cycle (85% duty cycle on the injectors). DI can inject fuel from when the exhaust valve closes to when the cylinder pressure on the compression stroke interferes with good atomization... so about 180 degrees. Consequently, DI injectors for a given power output flow more than port injectors, BUT the orifices in DI injectors are smaller, owing to using 10-20 times more pressure to atomize the fuel.
-Injection timing: PFI actually has lousy atomization due to fuel puddling on the back of the intake valve and depends on in-cylinder mixture motion to get a quality mixture ready for combustion. DI has to deliver much better atomized fuel due to less mixing time, but is still dependent on in-cylinder mixture motion to ensure homogeneity of the charge. That's where injection timing comes into play, as injecting later means that the fuel hasn't moved very far before the plug sparks. Injection timing can be used to "place" fuel within the cylinder where it will burn best, based on predictable mixture motion. This is impossible with port injection.
Originally posted by Will: The DI injectors pretty much do work the way that port injectors do... in that a given pressure through an open injector results in a given flow rate. Since DI uses mechanical pumps (and, I *think* uses computer controlled regulation), the pressure can vary, which is why the system has a rail pressure transducer. The ECU has to compensate on the fly for different fuel pressures. DI has to run very high fuel pressure to get good atomization.
There are several differences between DI and PFI in terms of operating strategies. -Injection duration: PFI can inject for about 620 degrees of the 720 degree cycle (85% duty cycle on the injectors). DI can inject fuel from when the exhaust valve closes to when the cylinder pressure on the compression stroke interferes with good atomization... so about 180 degrees. Consequently, DI injectors for a given power output flow more than port injectors, BUT the orifices in DI injectors are smaller, owing to using 10-20 times more pressure to atomize the fuel.
-Injection timing: PFI actually has lousy atomization due to fuel puddling on the back of the intake valve and depends on in-cylinder mixture motion to get a quality mixture ready for combustion. DI has to deliver much better atomized fuel due to less mixing time, but is still dependent on in-cylinder mixture motion to ensure homogeneity of the charge. That's where injection timing comes into play, as injecting later means that the fuel hasn't moved very far before the plug sparks. Injection timing can be used to "place" fuel within the cylinder where it will burn best, based on predictable mixture motion. This is impossible with port injection.
Right. By adjusting the timing dynamically, DI can stay much closer to the stoich AFR. If the ECU is not unlocked enough to do this, then the cheaper alternative to switching to a $10K ECU from Bosch which can let one do whatever you want there, is to add supplemental PFI injection to get more fuel. The opening/closing of the piezoinjectors for DI is also much faster than what the port injectors can achieve. So instead of just dumping all the fuel all at once, some creative timing can be used to enrich the mixture as the cylinder compresses. The shape of the piston surface and the chamber of the head can help the dispersal pattern as well. With that in mind, I *think* it should be possible to use the stock DI injectors to make more power than is currently estimated.
I could be wrong if that programming has been unlocked and it's actually being used in this way already, but I haven't seen evidence that it is. I'm quite happy to be proven wrong. I'm just very interested in the technical details of all the new technology in these engines, and trying to learn as much as possible, and share what I do know, and my perspective on how to use it.
-Injection timing: PFI actually has lousy atomization due to fuel puddling on the back of the intake valve and depends on in-cylinder mixture motion to get a quality mixture ready for combustion. DI has to deliver much better atomized fuel due to less mixing time, but is still dependent on in-cylinder mixture motion to ensure homogeneity of the charge. That's where injection timing comes into play, as injecting later means that the fuel hasn't moved very far before the plug sparks. Injection timing can be used to "place" fuel within the cylinder where it will burn best, based on predictable mixture motion. This is impossible with port injection.
Yeah, that was what they intended SFI (implemented early 1990s by GM IIRC) to alleviate. It did always seem ...inelegant to have the fuel go in there and then hang about until the cylinder fired. The sequential injection placed it better in terms of timing, but I think it only operated until 3500 or 4000 rpm.
FWIW I believe the fuel system for DI is pretty much an open book now to the after market tuners, so there should be no need to go for a stand alone programmable ECM
Yeah, that was what they intended SFI (implemented early 1990s by GM IIRC) to alleviate. It did always seem ...inelegant to have the fuel go in there and then hang about until the cylinder fired. The sequential injection placed it better in terms of timing, but I think it only operated until 3500 or 4000 rpm.
FWIW I believe the fuel system for DI is pretty much an open book now to the after market tuners, so there should be no need to go for a stand alone programmable ECM
SFI did what it had to do at the time, which was reduce idle and part throttle emissions and improve fuel economy. It can also do a lot to civilize cams that are way bigger than anything the OEM's use. MOST of the time, the injector operates at such a low pulse width that timing the injection event to the valve event DOES result in all the fuel going through the intake valve in suspension.
However, as pulse width increases, the injector will at some point be open longer than the intake valve. At that point, fuel puddles on the valve and gets slurped into the engine in a big gulp when the valve opens.
SFI does NOT revert to batch fire... it just transitions from less fuel delivery time than air delivery time to more fuel delivery time than air delivery time.
[This message has been edited by Will (edited 10-09-2014).]
SFI does NOT revert to batch fire... it just transitions from less fuel delivery time than air delivery time to more fuel delivery time than air delivery time.
Very interesting, Will - I hadn't realized that before.
Very interesting, Will - I hadn't realized that before.
If you think about what's involved in getting sequential to revert to batch fire with no AFR hiccups, as well as how the fuel delivery algorithm would have to be coded in order to do that, it's clear that having SFI revert to batch is unnecessary complexity that OEM's would avoid.
However, as I said, SFI DOES still puddle fuel on the intake valves at high pulse widths... which is a disadvantage that DI overcomes.
Just an update - I was in touch with a couple of guys that used DI Ecotecs in swaps (not into Fieros) and they found that all the programming knowledge they needed was readily available. Both used HP Tuners, although Trifecta is another option. So maybe no need for an after market ECM.
Just an update - I was in touch with a couple of guys that used DI Ecotecs in swaps (not into Fieros) and they found that all the programming knowledge they needed was readily available. Both used HP Tuners, although Trifecta is another option. So maybe no need for an after market ECM.
So speaking of SFI is there any way to get precise enough control at very low pulse widths that you could run larger than necessary injectors that could be run at a lower duty cycle to lower necessary pulsewidth at or near WOT/high rpms?
I ask because I have been reading tons of MS3 literature and I wonder if I could get some really high components to drive the injectors very precisely
Originally posted by zkhennings: So speaking of SFI is there any way to get precise enough control at very low pulse widths that you could run larger than necessary injectors that could be run at a lower duty cycle to lower necessary pulsewidth at or near WOT/high rpms?
The duty cycle is just a calculation of pulse width versus engine RPM. So, by definition, using a larger injector, you should need to have it open for a shorter period of time, to deliver the same amount of fuel. Running larger injectors you will need to lower the pulse width across the entire fuel table, unless you're also adding an appropriate amount of air to balance the AFR when you add more fuel.
I think on modern SFI ECMs, the pulse width can be less than 1 millisecond, but at WOT it certainly wouldn't be that small. Precision amount will depend on the ECM and the size of each cell in the fuel map (# of bytes).
So speaking of SFI is there any way to get precise enough control at very low pulse widths that you could run larger than necessary injectors that could be run at a lower duty cycle to lower necessary pulsewidth at or near WOT/high rpms?
I ask because I have been reading tons of MS3 literature and I wonder if I could get some really high components to drive the injectors very precisely
I've heard that "Pseudo-DI" can show power gains in the 3-5% range. Pseudo DI is running larger than indicated port injectors sequentially such that the injector is only spraying when the intake valve is open. This obviously assumes good injector targeting--that is, compatible with the injector's spray pattern.
The usual problem is that this leads to using 2.5x as much injector capacity as usually used and makes idle tuning difficult. If you pay extra dollars, an outfit like Injector Dynamics can send you a set of injectors with MATCHED DEAD TIMES (*AND* the parameters you copy/paste directly into your engine management) that makes tuning idle with large injectors MUCH easier.
[This message has been edited by Will (edited 10-17-2014).]
Originally posted by akademikjeanius: And people here yammer on and on about the "impossibility/improbability" of this in our lil ole cars...
No engine swap is impossible if you're willing to put the time/money into doing it. But some are more unlikely to happen than others, particularly in the Fiero crowd, as most owners don't want to spend the time/money to do it, and would rather have more cylinders. Then the people who do claim to want to spend the time/money to do it, get in over their head with claiming to want to make 500+ HP out of the LNF in the Fiero, and of course never do anything.
If you or anyone else wants to spend the time/money to get an LNF done properly in a Fiero, then by all means do it. From my POV, the only people "yammering on" as you put it, about the LNF swap, are the ones who keep saying it should be done, and never do it.
No engine swap is impossible if you're willing to put the time/money into doing it. But some are more unlikely to happen than others, particularly in the Fiero crowd, as most owners don't want to spend the time/money to do it, and would rather have more cylinders. Then the people who do claim to want to spend the time/money to do it, get in over their head with claiming to want to make 500+ HP out of the LNF in the Fiero, and of course never do anything.
If you or anyone else wants to spend the time/money to get an LNF done properly in a Fiero, then by all means do it. From my POV, the only people "yammering on" as you put it, about the LNF swap, are the ones who keep saying it should be done, and never do it.
The reason that guy did the LNF swap is that BMW's comparable engine, the N26, is an electronic nightmare. I've heard of one N54/N55 swap, which is electronically similar, but the swapper had to install several extra computers from the donor chassis into the recipient chassis. They didn't do anything but talk on the data bus, but that's what the engine computer needed to work right.
Originally posted by Will: The reason that guy did the LNF swap is that BMW's comparable engine, the N26, is an electronic nightmare. I've heard of one N54/N55 swap, which is electronically similar, but the swapper had to install several extra computers from the donor chassis into the recipient chassis. They didn't do anything but talk on the data bus, but that's what the engine computer needed to work right.
What I read in the link you posted suggested he bought the LNF with the intention of swapping into an Opel, then decided not to, and acquired the BMW to put the engine into. I didn't see anything about swapping a BMW engine in, in the first couple of posts (I didn't read the whole thread).
But anyway, until Trifecta had managed to do the BCM delete option that's pretty much what you would have had to do for an LNF swap as well, in a Fiero. Put the stuff on the data bus so it works, but doesn't really do anything. There's even at least one LS4 swap where a PassKey antenna was wired in, and a key left inside an unused ignition switch, to "bypass" the VATS. Bit of a hack IMO, but it works.
No engine swap is impossible if you're willing to put the time/money into doing it. But some are more unlikely to happen than others, particularly in the Fiero crowd, as most owners don't want to spend the time/money to do it, and would rather have more cylinders. Then the people who do claim to want to spend the time/money to do it, get in over their head with claiming to want to make 500+ HP out of the LNF in the Fiero, and of course never do anything.
If you or anyone else wants to spend the time/money to get an LNF done properly in a Fiero, then by all means do it. From my POV, the only people "yammering on" as you put it, about the LNF swap, are the ones who keep saying it should be done, and never do it.
If you have no interest, as countless others have suggested, stop your yammering and enjoy you V8. Sick of the negativity...
[This message has been edited by akademikjeanius (edited 12-02-2014).]
Originally posted by akademikjeanius: If you have no interest, as countless others have suggested, stop your yammering and enjoy you V8. Sick of the negativity...
LOL. If you want me to install an LNF, give me $20K in cash and I'll have it done next week. Otherwise, shut your own self up, and stop trying to tell others what to do. I didn't say I had no interest in the swap. But I am not going to do one myself, just because you think someone should do one. If you want one done, do it yourself or shut up.
On the other hand, I'm quite happy to follow a build thread of someone who's going to actually do one, and provide any possible knowledge and help that I can.
LOL. If you want me to install an LNF, give me $20K in cash and I'll have it done next week. Otherwise, shut your own self up, and stop trying to tell others what to do. I didn't say I had no interest in the swap. But I am not going to do one myself, just because you think someone should do one. If you want one done, do it yourself or shut up.
On the other hand, I'm quite happy to follow a build thread of someone who's going to actually do one, and provide any possible knowledge and help that I can.
Never have I been accused of being board "troll". Can you say the same? That being the case, rather than further entertain the sewer-level debating/hating style you've mastered and would be overjoyed for me to join you in, I'd rather keep it productive and positive, saying: good luck and god-speed, internet tough guy. Granted, you've taken a markedly different tone as of late and have been more fact then fiction driven. We'll see if it's indefinitely on-going.
Great job, 4thfiero, on moving along w/ your turbocharged Ecotec swap. Soon, I'll be following suit to shut up the naysayers as well (but will be going a little different via the LNF/LDK route).
[This message has been edited by akademikjeanius (edited 12-03-2014).]
Originally posted by akademikjeanius: Never have I been accused of being board "troll". Can you say the same? That being the case, rather than further entertain the sewer-level debating/hating style you've mastered and would be overjoyed for me to join you in, I'd rather keep it productive and positive, saying: good luck and god-speed, internet tough guy. Granted, you've taken a markedly different tone as of late and have been more fact then fiction driven. We'll see if it's indefinitely on-going.
Great job, 4thfiero, on moving along w/ your turbocharged Ecotec swap. Soon, I'll be following suit to shut up the naysayers as well (but will be going a little different via the LNF/LDK route).
Then stop trolling.
If you'd use a bit of reading comprehension instead of outright bashing any of the slightest disagreement to your opinions, or any evidence that something might be a bit more difficult or costly than you think it is, then you wouldn't be going around calling the people providing such information, trolls, naysayers, etc… Instead you might learn something.
There are several Ecotec swaps that have been done at this point. 4thfiero's is another in a line of them. But still nobody has done an LNF swap, despite all the "yammering" to have one done. If you plan to do one, by all means do it. But don't come on here trampling over everyone else for being "negative" about LNF swaps, simply because you, and nobody else, has done one yet.
Seriously, you and so many others on this forum, need to learn how to not take the tiniest little disagreement or difference of opinion, as some over the top personal attack. It's rather exhausting and only wastes everyone's time on the forum.
Originally posted by Will: ...DI has to run very high fuel pressure to get good atomization.
I'd forgotten that about the turbocharged 2.0L LNF(?) engine in my OEM Saturn Sky Redline. The audible clicking sound made under hood by that engine, either by the fuel pressure pump or fuel pressure regulator (I don't remember which) was irritatingly noticeable, more so than in any other car I've ever owned.
That of course, led to my usual calm and measured response when learning of a supposed car problem firsthand --- just before the warranty on that used car wears out --- an experience succinctly depicted within this illustration below:
GM's temporary "fix" for this that came with the car, was a ratty, thin, cheapo, cardboard and felt cover over the under hood component making this racket.
A subsequent "fix" for this irritation was a more muffling plastic cover by GM that helped muffle the tick-tick-ticking sound but certainly didn't eliminate it. It was of a better construction than the ratty, thin, cheapo, cardboard and felt cover over the under hood component making this noise, but still didn't muffle much of anything.
For any contemplating an LNF swap into your Fiero, just be aware of this under hood noise I've mentioned, and don't automatically do this:
The ticking sound is endemic to DI motors, and some evidence the sound more than others. Early DI Audi owners voiced a lot of complaints about the sound, but I never found it annoying or a problem on my Solstice. I actually kind of liked the sound it made on throttle overrun - kind of like a clock winding. :shrug: I just don't mind mechanical noises as long as they are the correct, expected noises I guess.
The ticking sound is endemic to DI motors, and some evidence the sound more than others. Early DI Audi owners voiced a lot of complaints about the sound, but I never found it annoying or a problem on my Solstice. I actually kind of liked the sound it made on throttle overrun - kind of like a clock winding. :shrug: I just don't mind mechanical noises as long as they are the correct, expected noises I guess.
It's just annoying when you can't easily tell if it's the normal injector ticking, a lifter, or exhaust leak. Ah, Fieros.
A subsequent "fix" for this irritation was a more muffling plastic cover by GM that helped muffle the tick-tick-ticking sound but certainly didn't eliminate it. It was of a better construction than the ratty, thin, cheapo, cardboard and felt cover over the under hood component making this noise, but still didn't muffle much of anything.
For any contemplating an LNF swap into your Fiero, just be aware of this under hood noise I've mentioned, and don't automatically do this:
My 09 has that cover in place and I rarely hear anything from the high pressure pump. Most of the owners of earlier years say the same thing without having the cover, so I guess the issue is a hit and miss thing.
I'm currently running a modified stock turbo unit with a larger impeller that kicks the power up (with tuning) to around 375 bhp. It still gets 30 mpg because it is off boost when cruising. A nice combination of performance on demand and frugality the rest of the time.
I remember that ticking noise in my 08 Cobalt SS. I called about it and got the "muffler cap" as I called it and didn't really notice it any more unless I was really listening for it. You would probably here it more in a Fiero though b/c of the lack of sound deadening and the heat extractor vents would led the noise out. I know I hear the PS pump on mine sometimes until I get on the gas and the beautiful N* exhaust note over powers it
For me I think the pros about an LNF swap would be the launch control and no lift shift/rev matching features combined with ridiculously good fuel economy so I'm not stopping for gas all the freakin' time with the tiny tank. In a car that light weight and without stability and traction control I don't think I would want more power than and LNF can make with just a tune and a MAP sensor upgrade anyways. An LNF would literally give you Turbo 3800 power levels with Iron Duke mated to the 5 speed fuel economy.
Granted, you've taken a markedly different tone as of late and have been more fact then fiction driven. We'll see if it's indefinitely on-going.
