Anyone running one of their Turbos? Went and saw them last week and they recon they can get 135rwKW's out of the YD25 and it will run out to 35psi. They also have their own 3rd generation chip which controls boost, injector duration, injection timing and rail pressure
D22 Gturbo Grunter upgrade
- Thread starter dilmah
- Start date
Help Support Nissan Navara Forum:
camo.b
Member
Saw they have a 260 somthing RWKW d4d hilux running a similar turbs.their game!!
I guess the big unknown with common rail tuning is the limit of the common rail pump itself. How long till we see companies offering exchange pumps to push systems up to say 30 000+psi. Turbo technology has come a long way in the last 5 - 10 years and we are now getting off the shelf units capable of 35 - 40psi of boost with boost coming on early in the rpm range as well.
Most of these high HP we are seeing are on stock internals, you have to question the life of an engine with this power. With 3D chips that can control many parameter it is allowing tuners to push the limits that were only reserved for petrol engines.
Most of these high HP we are seeing are on stock internals, you have to question the life of an engine with this power. With 3D chips that can control many parameter it is allowing tuners to push the limits that were only reserved for petrol engines.
camo.b
Member
Some guys in malaysia doing high volume fuel pumps and nozzles.
camo.b
Member
Exciting times!
I'm a bit lost on the fuel pump. The stock pump delivers 1700BAR (I've seen mine go over 20,000psi) and the V9X runs up to 1800BAR. It will turn the entire tank contents over in 10 minutes (possibly less) - that's about 130ml per second or 8 litres per minute. At 5000rpm (the max RPM for our diesels) that's about 3.2ml of fuel available for each power stroke. That's already quite a large amount of fuel! How much more do you need?
camo.b
Member
More tony....just more
I found it interesting that ChipMyDiesel produced a chip that reduced the injector duration while raising the rail pressure. This would squeeze the same amount of fuel into the chamber in a shorter period, so you'll get a harder 'hit' on the piston. That's going to directly translate into more horsepower. Longer duration will directly translate to more torque. Combining the two (higher pressure over a longer period) will use more fuel, but there ought to be plenty available in the rail.
If you want to go nuts the limit will be how much fuel can be injected as determined by start of injection (roughly 32 BTDC) and end of injection( typically around 8 ATDC). To get around that you need injectors that flow more to get extra fuel in over the same time frame.
I want to leave the injectors stock If I can, with a combination of increasing rail pressure, modifying the timing and the injector duration I hope to get around the 170rwkw mark with 33's. I also have another turbo sitting at home which will give some more punch!
camo.b
Member
Not that it matters to you dilmah but Bigger injector nozzles can be purchased for anyone interested ive seen a few for sale.not the easiest way to deliver more fuel but its very safe and no chip required.. 170rwkw seems to be pretty safe for a yd25 by reports back from overseas.id like to think thats where ill end up.with a mix or alcohol/diesel and a shirt load of air
camo.b
Member
Not full injectors just the nozzles..is it not like re jeting a carby?
Bailey's sell bigger injectors but getting in contact with them is difficult. Ive sent a few emails and only got a one response. I started fitting the compound tonight. Took 3 hrs to just get the dump pipe out! Im going away this weekend so Ill get stuck into it when I return
The fuel maps are set up for injectors that flow a certain rate, if you put higher flowing injectors in without recalibrating the maps it will inject more fuel at the same percentage increase everywhere. For example, at idle it might be injecting 2 mg of fuel but with the new injectors that could become 3 mg but the ecu won't know that if it wasn't recalibrated so it will idle higher. There's also duration maps which would have to be changed. There's plenty of info on ecuconnections about it.
No it isn't going to result in more horsepower!
Power = Torque * RPM
You cannot make more power at ANY RPM without increasing torque.
All such a stupidly dumb thing like what you suggest ChipMyDiesel would do is, as you said, is increase the force exerted on the piston with respect to time. THIS IS BAD.
Think about it. It is much better to apply a lower force on the piston for the entire stroke, than to apply a high force for only part of it. If you increase the pressure in the combustion chamber (in anyway, in this case by shortening the duration of combustion), you accelerate engine wear.
Obviously, plenty of us can live with such a trade off to a degree, but there is literally no point increasing the dynamic pressure within the combustion chamber if you can achieve the same result by using a lower pressure over a longer timeframe.
At any rate, the point is pretty moot, as I'm 99% certain what you suggest is just ChipMyDiesel marketing BS.
I'm not 100% convinced that the power -> torque relationship is that simple. Before I posted, I did a bit of research on that chip and that's how this one works. There is a degree of sense with this - compare it to a No-Limits chip, for instance, which can raise the fuel rail pressure to ridiculously high levels with no safeguards.
I absolutely agree that a harder hit on the piston is bad - that's how you punch holes in piston crowns. Applying an increasing level of force at the start of the downstroke and ending with a smaller amount of downforce as the crankshaft angle for that piston passes through 90 degrees will result in more even power delivery (because of how forces are distributed along the double lever formed by the conrod and the bearing-to-crank-centre angle) but I don't think anyone does it that way.
I'm not trying to sell the chip, I'm trying to highlight its flaws.
I absolutely agree that a harder hit on the piston is bad - that's how you punch holes in piston crowns. Applying an increasing level of force at the start of the downstroke and ending with a smaller amount of downforce as the crankshaft angle for that piston passes through 90 degrees will result in more even power delivery (because of how forces are distributed along the double lever formed by the conrod and the bearing-to-crank-centre angle) but I don't think anyone does it that way.
I'm not trying to sell the chip, I'm trying to highlight its flaws.
