I don't see myself having temperature problems either. It's a case of thinking a bronze pump just looks more durable than a plastic one to me. The Bosch pumps that I was referring to were on a stock detroit car and the problem that some of them had was with the brushes. They may be brushless now for all I know.
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:
Unless you're running extremely high boost, or have your pump inline after the intercooler and before the heat exchanger, it shouldn't encounter high temps. I would expect the Bosch pump appropriately placed in the system to perform very well unless you are using one different than the Ford Lightning application. OE parts are usually designed around some degree of longevity.
I heard a lot of good stuff about Walbro fuel pumps before purchansing one, I wouldn't buy another thanks to the noise and sensitivity to overheat and shut down under the same circumstances that an OE pump would keep right on pumping. Search the web and find threads where it's being used and see what you come up with.
There is a version of the plastic pump I have that has nearly twice the flow rating that I may consider unless adding the additional .5 gal capacity will accomplish the same thing.
IP: Logged
08:56 PM
dratts Member
Posts: 8373 From: Coeur d' alene Idaho USA Registered: Apr 2001
Today it was 94 degrees ambient outside. Here are the max temps reached in about 40 minutes of city driving with stop n' go traffic in the mix with beaming sunlight.
Startup air temp on the log once again read 100 degrees. I don't start datalogging until after the motor has been running for about 15-20 minutes and is good and warmed up. I hope to have a higher flowing pump in hand within the next week or two to see if it makes any difference on the current average temps relative to ambient, or the startup base temp.
That's the 160+ degree inlet temp level for my engine funny man. I'll go higher later but at that boost level the car is very fast and if you look at the logs you may see in a few of them the MAT temp actually start to decrease a little as the rpm increases at that boost level and the turbo starts to become a little more efficient. 7-10 psi will be my intended limit to reach or exceed the performance level I want although I'm happy where it is now.
Any data once you actually start getting into boost?
[/QUOTE]
The monitor tracings on the previous page show TPS, MAT, Kpa, and rpm. There are 5, one pre IC and two snap shots of two with the IC at the beginning of boost and at the end of boost marked by a vertical line to show the before and after temp.
I calculated my approximate flow, clocking water flow into a gallon jug and came up with ~ 1.6 GPM. The pump is rated 500 GPH free flow and 340 GPH to a level of 3.35 ft for a theoretical flow of 5.67 GPM.
I estimated a circuit flow of 30 ft and used the calculator below to see what proportional percentage benefit I can expect to get from upgrading the lines from 5/8" to 3/4" which I intend to do today. The volume capacity increase going between the diameters is ~30% based on the cylindrical formula. So I could say my 1.6 GPM should improve to: 1.3 * 1.6 GPM= 2.08 GPM
I know this is not a direct calc for what I really want to calculate but with the elevation set to 0 it's a good idea of the resistance trend to flow based on the line diameter of the lines, not to mention any angles and the resistance in the intercooler.
It's starting to cool down and I need to restore my heater system back to normal use. I picked up 10' of 3/4" galvanized conduit and insulation from HomeDepot for the time being for just under $7 total and 10' of 3/4" heater hose for ~$13 from Advance. This should help increase the flow to at least 2 GPM although the current performance may be adequate for my boost level which I believe i'll settle around 10 psi. The tubes are going along side the fuel tank where there is sufficient room.
Be sure to use materials resistant to water corrosion, or coolant that is anti corrosive here. Ultimately heater hose is best.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 03-24-2013).]
Got everything in place despite realizing at the last moment that along with the 5/8" hose I would also need to upgrade the nipple fittings to 3/4", so 3 are still in place and the last ~4 ft of hose back to the reservoir is still 5/8" since I ran out of 3/4". The total length of the line circuit was reduced by about 5' and it was obvious the flow had increased by how much more turbulent the return flow made the water in the tank.
I performed the flow test again and came up with ~ 2.5 GPM and that's erroring on the low side. It may climb to nearly 3 GPM once the remaining 5/8" fittings and hose are swapped out. It would be wise to move up to 3/4" lines if that's the size fitting on your pump and you're running smaller.
IP: Logged
09:17 PM
PFF
System Bot
ericjon262 Member
Posts: 3133 From: everywhere. Registered: Jan 2010
I would ditch the insulation, it will hold heat in, it's not like your heat ex will be below ambient temp, so there's no need to insulate it considering it isn't around exhaust or the main coolent tubes, maybe sheild them int he engine compartment, but otherwise, you're not going to be doing yourself any favors.
------------------ there's a Group on 60degreeV6.com for us 660 Fiero owners!
Originally posted by ericjon262: I would ditch the insulation, it will hold heat in, it's not like your heat ex will be below ambient temp, so there's no need to insulate it considering it isn't around exhaust or the main coolent tubes, maybe sheild them int he engine compartment, but otherwise, you're not going to be doing yourself any favors.
It's not significant enough to matter beyond protecting my fuel tank and other lines from what would otherwise be bare metal banging against them. If the tubes had fins on them it might make a little difference but not enough to matter considering the temp change is so low. The water spends more useful time in the exchanger than it does in the 5' return pipe, hardly enough time to loose any noticeable heat and certainly not comparable to the gains switching from 5/8" to 3/4" tubes. If I'm wrong it'll show in the datalog and I'll state so here.
IP: Logged
10:43 PM
Oct 12th, 2012
BV MotorSports Member
Posts: 4821 From: Oak Hill, WV Registered: May 2001
I calculated my approximate flow, clocking water flow into a gallon jug and came up with ~ 1.6 GPM. The pump is rated 500 GPH free flow and 340 GPH to a level of 3.35 ft for a theoretical flow of 5.67 GPM.
I estimated a circuit flow of 30 ft and used the calculator below to see what proportional percentage benefit I can expect to get from upgrading the lines from 5/8" to 3/4" which I intend to do today. The volume capacity increase going between the diameters is ~30% based on the cylindrical formula. So I could say my 1.6 GPM should improve to: 1.3 * 1.6 GPM= 2.08 GPM
I know this is not a direct calc for what I really want to calculate but with the elevation set to 0 it's a good idea of the resistance trend to flow based on the line diameter of the lines, not to mention any angles and the resistance in the intercooler.
It's starting to cool down and I need to restore my heater system back to normal use. I picked up 10' of 3/4" galvanized conduit and insulation from HomeDepot for the time being for just under $7 total and 10' of 3/4" heater hose for ~$13 from Advance. This should help increase the flow to at least 2 GPM although the current performance may be adequate for my boost level which I believe i'll settle around 10 psi. The tubes are going along side the fuel tank where there is sufficient room.
I hate math... LOL I can offer no help to you there! Good luck with the project.
Originally posted by BV MotorSports: I hate math... LOL I can offer no help to you there! Good luck with the project.
Math is your friend. At ericjon, there didn't appear to be any significant change in the base MAT, still hovers around 10 deg above ambient although I'll have to check again more closely since I didn't focus on the startup temp until a little late. After looking at about a 20 min log reaching 6 psi a few times all appears to be about the same so far despite the improved flow through the circuit although I'll have to look more closely later on.
This is where the math comes in BV, if the bilge pump that often gets bad mouthed is still moving water fast enough to prevent saturation of the volume of coolant inside the intercooler while in boost at your set level, the only thing you stand to gain from a high end pump is longevity in theory, since it has not yet been proven that the bilge pump is not dependable as well. At the start of this thread much was said to the contrary of what it could do and so far it has performed quite well. Another important benefit is that it is quiet and can't be heard with the engine running and barely when the motor is off.
The bilge pump is also available in 800 and 1000 GPM units and is inexpensive compared to the Meziere pump which is very nice but I understand is really intended to cool engines so it's quite the overkill in my application. I'd still like to have one though. I hope to get the car to the track before long where I know the system will be taxed a bit more in a 1/4 run.
I don't run an IC on the Fiero, but limit boost to about 10 psi and have a knock sensor and it all works out well. If I did, I'd likely use an air to air IC as is used on my Solstice (which boost to 26 psi).
Why did you opt for water instead of air? And what size IC tubes are you running and where did you run them?
I don't run an IC on the Fiero, but limit boost to about 10 psi and have a knock sensor and it all works out well. If I did, I'd likely use an air to air IC as is used on my Solstice (which boost to 26 psi).
Why did you opt for water instead of air? And what size IC tubes are you running and where did you run them?
An air to air intercooler was not practical for me in the Fiero. It would need to be in the front for the best air flow and although I actually did it once, it was too much wrangling to keep it that way.
The water heat exchanger works exceptionally well in the Fiero. It has brought my MAT temps down considerably and instead of 170 deg at 7-8 psi, its about 10 deg above ambient.
My charge pipes are 2.5" and I have a 3900 build thread that shows pics of the build along with the pictures on the first page of this thread. So far I've run as high as 13 psi and I'm sure the water injection helped since my compression ratio is 11:1 but it's not set to come on until about 7 psi.
IP: Logged
07:00 PM
BV MotorSports Member
Posts: 4821 From: Oak Hill, WV Registered: May 2001
I decided to invest in a dedicated tank and to update the entire system to 3/4" ID fittings and hose only from start to finish. I also moved the tank to the trunk since it was a little too big to do a battery relocation style install up front. The system volume increased from about 1 gallon to about 3.5 gal. I filled it with 3 gal of distilled water and will leave the .5 space for ice packs. Home Depot sells heater hose at a better price than the parts stores in quantities needed for this install, 10' for about $19 as opposed to 6' for ~$14 at Advance.
I also walked into a West Marine store to pick up a Rule 1100 gph submersible pump to replace the external 500 gph pump (on the right) and stumbled across a store brand pump with a 1250 gph rating (I think it flows that freely and pointed at the ground) for about $10 more at $54, made by Johnson in the USA as opposed to the Rule made in Mexico and according to what I've been reading and the rep at the store, not very well since the plant move
I installed both pumps in series, the 500 gph pump is mounted to the outlet side of the intercooler and since both pumps are cartridge style, I'll be upgrading the second pump to an 1100 gph cartridge. Together they pull a total of just under 4 amps.
The pumps will be connected directly to the alternator through a relay and my left over boost activated switch from the water injection pump now managed by the variable controller, so that the pumps are not in continuous use. I'll also have an over ride switch installed so that they can be run continuously if it turns out the in boost only operation is not as effective.
The pump fit nicely in the tank and can't be seen in the first picture although its working.
The pumps are performing very well although I have a little more work to go putting the car back together before I can test drive it. It appears at this point the most functional benefit to using a more expensive water pump as opposed to the economically priced bilge pumps is the ability of the higher end pump's to push sufficient quantities of water through smaller hoses. The Mezier pump can probably move more, or the same amount of water through a .5" hose than my combined pumps move through the 3/4" hose.
My heat exchanger sprung a leak and I can't say if it was because of a defect or because I got a little careless and put something in it I shouldn't have to address the presence of slime. It was an easy fix thanks to Gorilla Glue. Once the space with the leak was detected and dried, I laid the exchanger down and poured several drops of glue down it and the adjacent space on both sides, then ran a steel tie down each to disperse the glue, followed by a repeat dipping the tie in water along the way.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 03-24-2013).]
For those who decide on using a submersible pump here is a heads up, the return water can not be allowed to land in close proximity to the pump as seen in the picture above. While topping off my water level with the pump running, I discovered that the water landing near the pump was creating large bubbles that were interfering with and causing cavitation in the pump.
Here is the next pending upgrade to the intercooler. Since the heat exchanger out front reduces the heat added to the water by about 1 deg or more per second depending on the speed, it's necessary to install a bypass in order to get the most out of a tank full of ice water otherwise the exchanger will rapidly raise the water temp toward ambient. I've identified a GM valve with 3/4" fittings below along with an electric vacuum control solenoid from a Mercury villager to operate it from the drivers seat. I still have the old vacuum canister left over from converting to digital cruise control so that will be employed if necessary to make the system work continuously, it will need a vacuum release to return the system to open circuit and since I don't have the parts in hand yet and don't know if the solenoid will be able to operate the system by itself as it appears to have a check valve in place. On the other hand a 3 port wastegate solenoid would be able to handle the task.
GM/ four seasons part # 74607
Ford part # F4XY-18495-A
IP: Logged
07:02 AM
ericjon262 Member
Posts: 3133 From: everywhere. Registered: Jan 2010
Originally posted by ericjon262: I'd get a "choke" cable and run the valve off of it. sounds a hell of alot easier to me. just hack the vacuum pot off and put a cable on.
The extra effort to accommodate a cable isn't worth it since this would only be a special occasion application only, like on the dyno for example or, special days where I intend to run it and reload for a while. A vacuum line would plug right in and two wires and a switch that can easily be placed anywhere in the cabin would be easier for me. I would definitely use a 3 port solenoid instead of the OE control switch I posted a picture of as it would allow rapid apply and release action of the regulator.
IP: Logged
11:18 AM
ericjon262 Member
Posts: 3133 From: everywhere. Registered: Jan 2010
well to me, if it's only going to be used occasionally, I'd just have a lever on the valve. and not mess with wiring it in, and plumbing the vacuum lines. a would be cake to implement IMO.
------------------ we're in desperate need of a little more religion to nurse your god-like point of view...
well to me, if it's only going to be used occasionally, I'd just have a lever on the valve. and not mess with wiring it in, and plumbing the vacuum lines. a would be cake to implement IMO.
Vacuum line plumbing is a straight line from an intake manifold "T" to the valve, no more difficult then the two on the car running from the intake to the blowoff valve and the wastegate to the compressor housing. The switch and the solenoid would be nearly 1 wire only as the B+ would be the only source needing to travel. A cable would first have to be the right length and custom connected to the valve which is already setup for vacuum operation. I prefer my electric exhaust cutout to the cable operated options also.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 04-23-2013).]
IP: Logged
12:11 PM
ericjon262 Member
Posts: 3133 From: everywhere. Registered: Jan 2010
yeah, but if you're only going to use it a couple of times a year, why go through the trouble of even that? just cut the vacuum pot off and manually actuate it. when you need it.
------------------ we're in desperate need of a little more religion to nurse your god-like point of view...
Originally posted by Joseph Upson: I've identified a GM valve with 3/4" fittings below along with an electric vacuum control solenoid from a Mercury villager to operate it from the drivers seat.
it will need a vacuum release to return the system to open circuit
Originally posted by Will: Sounds like an EGR valve solenoid would work.
I haven't seen any EGR solenoids smaller than the GM 3 port wastegate solenoid about 2x1x1" or smaller. It's small enough to mount directly to the control valve which will fit in the palm of your hand for a compact install.
quote
Originally posted by ericjon262: yeah, but if you're only going to use it a couple of times a year, why go through the trouble of even that? just cut the vacuum pot off and manually actuate it. when you need it.
I'd use it more than a couple of times a year and the reason it needs to be remotely operated is that I'd have to get under the car to operate it manually other wise. The switch point needs to be immediately after the intercooler otherwise the added time traveling to the front of the car to byapss the heat exchanger will just add more heat to it.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 04-23-2013).]
yeah, but if you're only going to use it a couple of times a year, why go through the trouble of even that? just cut the vacuum pot off and manually actuate it. when you need it.
The valve pictured below is not the correct manual valve option, you would need to purchase the one above without the vacuum module unless ofcourse you would like to include it in the function.
Part# 74882 with 3/4" fittings
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 07-12-2013).]
Good luck with the project.
