HF_monster

Searched and didnt find anything on this so Ill go ahead and ask. I have an old non air gap RPM intake that I was thinking about converting to MPFI. I plan on building the pads for the injectors by using a tig welder then milling them into final shape. has anyone done this/do you think its worth doing? just want to do something you dont see every day just not sure it will work it will be going on mostly stock 76 350 converted to fuel injection when I have the time and money.

Primetime91

iTrader: (15)

Single plane intakes work better I believe, for an EFI conversion.

vetteoz

iTrader: (13)

http://xtremecarzone.com.au/index.php?showtopic=386

HF_monster

Yeah I know I do have a vic jr that I plan on doing this to later when I have more time, although its the non efi version ill do the same procedure. This intake has been laying around forever and just wanted to find a new use for it. That and I havent heard of anyone trying this. theirs probly a good reason too lol

efiguy

iTrader: (2)

It would depend on the application but for most street applications I would say absolutely not.

I went from an EFI'd single plane to an EFI'd RPM on my Olds 350, night and day difference. They use single planes because they're easier to modify due to the fact that the runners are all the same height. And with some EFI's you can tune out most of the inherent puddling issues you have with a single plane. But I'd do the dual plane in a minute.
I read the article, what would you want more for the street, low to midrange torque or high end hp? Remember you'll automatically pick up airflow with EFI because the airstream isn't laden with fuel till the end giving you the best of both worlds with a dual plane. Do the RPM imo.

Hope this helps.
Mark

HF_monster

thanks mark,
the motor this is going on is for the tow rig for the next camaro I build so I can get the drag race motor that was going to go into my late camaro out of it. Im not looking for top end power but low to mid range torque and a lot better MPG's than the 8 miles to the gallon i get now if its even that. cost is a limiting factor or I would buy one of the set ups in the article. the manifold I already have the welding and milling I can do for free. same applys when I modify the Vic JR that I have the rest will be fabricated by be or sourced from a local pick and pull.

When you did yours did you mill down the runner seperator? thanks for all the imput that and I figured if I mess up im not out much lol.

efiguy

iTrader: (2)

If you already have the RPM then I'd certainly do that over the Victor. However for the best in low end torque a TPI would be the most effective.
I milled the center divider in the plenum if that's what you mean. I went down about a 1/2 inch and bullnosed it with a down slope facing the low side, works great.

HF_monster

yeah figured that but out of all the times ive been to the junk yards out here Ive only seen 1 TPI intake, its mostly old CC carbs and TBI stuff they charge an arm and a leg for that too. Though I do like the mechanical fuel injection converted to EFI set up in that article the tunable stacks would be nice.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

For low end torque I'd rather have a TBI system than a TPI. TPI is just a good way to leave horsepower you paid for on the table. At least with a TBI system you can get an intake that actually flows at high RPMs.

HF_monster

TBI was an option I looked at and worked with before and was not all that impressed, its a good system but has its limitations on what it can support. if I decide to upgrade later to a turbo or supercharger its far better to have MPFI than a TBI setup. If I was going to keep the motor stock for the long run I would do a TBI for simplicity, the fact that I can build most of the hard parts IE intake, fuel rails, linkages, and plenum for the TB cuts the cost a lot that and most if not all the material to do it is going to be free. though I do plan on building a motor and pushing the limits I can get out of a dual TBI set up run with a megasquirt II later next year. I have 3 motors sitting around 2 350's and a fully race preped 400 all need good fueling systems and Im not going back to a carb up here as I take many drives in the mountains.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Puddling issues?

-- Joe

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

The theory of a wet-flow TBI and a dual plane is a solid street combination, up to a point. For high HP applications, i.e, to compete with a modern 2011 v6, you need a quad-injector throttle body and an ECM that can drive all four injectors. Your next bottleneck is the fact that you have huge injectors in the airstream blocking air flow.


I've run a ton of singleplanes over the years, and all have worked just peachy with '730 ECM's and tuning. A few were supercharged, and all ran very well.


The performer RPM is a good intake for a daily driver. If you guys are building 350ish HP cars I get it, but if you are going to spend 15 grand building a street/strip car, you don't want to get spanked by a stock 2011 anything, do you?

-- Joe

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

That is basically what I am doing with another project. I started with a Holley Pro-Jection manifold for a TBI setup, and converted it to a dual plane 4-bbl setup. I trimmed the divider down, and opened up the ports substantially. This manifold as it sits will now flow incredibly, and all that's left for me to do is tig weld in the injector bungs, and fabricate fuel rails w/the needed brackets to hold them in place. Won't be too difficult to do though, here are some pics. Once I have it done I'll have a thread showing videos of how it runs....

efiguy

iTrader: (2)

But he doesn't care about high rpms, he wants low end torque, he clearly said that.
All TBI's not matter who makes them will have the same inherent issues that a carb will on a like manifold. The reason most single planes are not good street intakes is because of fuel puddling. At low speeds the fuel actually drops out if suspension. Some EFI systems help in tuning this out by adjusting spark tables to alleviate flat spots or on the fuel side give you somewhat better control of fuel flow. But it's still an issue.

However a dual plane is more conducive to a street application, it is for a carb, why wouldn't be for EFI?
I don't doubt for a minute that some have made the TBI setups run pretty well, but that's not to say they wouldn't run better with a different setup.
Case in point, my EFI'd single plane I thought ran great! Until I switched to an EFI'd dual plane. As previously stated it was a night and day difference, from idle to 6000 rpm, and both manifolds were done by the same people, Wilson in Ft Laud.

Back to topic, either the dual plane or a TPI would be best suited for your application.

Jmo.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Was your singleplane multiport or tbi?

This forum isn't for TPI or TBI, so really we need to stay on topic. The thread is about a performer RPM conversion, so we should be discussing converting it to multiport injection.

If you guys want to talk about singleplane vs dual plane in a wet-flow, i.e, TBI, please move to the TBI forum.

-- Joe

efiguy

iTrader: (2)

Both intakes were multiport and the dual plane I did was an RPM. Thanks.

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

That is an old theory. The reality of it, is that during quench, the intake valves are of course closed so it doesn't really matter if the cylinders are obtaining air through the means of dual plane or single plane, what dictates torque is the amount of fuel that is being supplied to the amount of oxygen entering the engine the moment it is ignited. Most tests that are conducted between single vs dual plane will use the same carbureted setup, and rarely do you see them swapping jets because single planes need more fuel....

It's the fueling that matters, as single planes have more velocity so you need to compensate w/increased fueling. Remember that horsepower is calculated torque, and you don't necessarily lose torque, it just gets moved around. When you know how to tune correctly, you can move that torque around all by yourself, regardless of the intake your using. As far as fuel puddling, I've honestly never had a problem while the engine was running, the vacuum is too great to allow for the fuel to just sit there. Maybe with the engine turned off and with leaky injectors it would give the illusion of puddling, but I have never experienced that myself though....

efiguy

iTrader: (2)

That's absolutely incorrect. Peak torque occurs at the point when the cylinder is filled most efficiently, look it up. Why do you think blown applications have such a flat torque curve? Because they are able to fill the cylinder more efficiently thoughout a wider range of rpms. If you look at an EFI fuel map you can easily tell where the peak torque is, it will be reflected as needing the most amount of fuel to match the amount of air being ingested, and it's never at the highest rpm.
You may want to call Wilson manifolds and tell them how good single planes are, their work on dual planes has caught up and surpassed a lot of areas that were once ruled by single planes.

Jmo.

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

That is completely irrelevant. Single planes clearly have more velocity because it draws air from the full diameter of the intake plenum's orifice, not just from half of it. More velocity equates to faster cylinder filling, so you just contradicted your own understanding of cylinder fill. More velocity EQUALS maximizing efficiency, so it becomes a matter of fueling. Incidently, I have a blown application, I have had many blown applications, and what your suggesting is not only meaningless, it is completely besides the point....

.... lol, again, that is completely besides the point, and your running away from the original argument. You cannot tell me to go "look it up" in one paragraph, then immediately jump to if I look at an "EFI fuel map" because that is what I look at each and every day, all day long. You clearly stated that "a dual plane is more conducive to a street application", and I would like YOU to prove that, factually. Do not direct me to someone else's testing, I want something from you.

I don't need to call Wilson Manifolds, because clearly that is all you are doing here, you are parroting what you hear from other sources without doing, nor concluding, your own individual testing of it. I have run practically every manifold there is; single plane, dual plane, stock TPI, fully siamesed TPI, HSR, LT1, with the exception of maybe the MiniRam because I refuse to pay that much for a manifold, and with every single one of them I brought that "lost" torque right back through tuning. You simply can't install an intake with increased velocity with the SAME heads, SAME cam, and SAME tune, then ask yourself why you lost torque down low lol. Every competent engine builder knows that....

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Attached is a stock LT1 "fuel map". The VE is highest at the highest RPM. I'm sure I don't have to explain to you the injector PW calculation vs RPM derrived from VE.

I went to their website. Everything was a single plane, or tunnel ram style intake shown in the 'products' and 'gallery'

I realize that in the past few years you have been posting on the forums of your success with the dual plane, and your theory behind it. But it's just your theory. There is no reasonable indication that a dry-flow (MPFI) configuration would work better on a dual plane manifold unless the runner length happened to be tuned to the same operating range as the camshaft, and if so, we're talking a very small camshaft.

For a SBC configuration, not an LS1 with different cylinder port heights, not some other motor with different valve angles, etc but for a SBC a short runner singleplane, MPFI works very very well off idle to 6500rpm.

-- Joe

efiguy

iTrader: (2)

Every EFI tune I've done, and that's dozens, on TBI's, Multiports and even 8 stacks, the same holds true. It requires the most amount of fuel at the rpm where peak torque occurs, plain and simple. I have lots of first hand experience, I'd be happy to email one you one after another calibration showing exactly that. The fact that you tune to get more power/torque is true, but it's still regulated by the cam, intake, heads etc, not the fuel mix.
Now can you raise the peak torque rpm? Yes, for instance if you lean it out there and it's still a good air/fuel then you can ultimatly gain cfm by leaning the mix, less fuel in it will make it move faster, but it still has limitations, and those are controlled by how and when the cylinder is filled efficiently.

By the way, most stock application fuel maps are calibrated to go full rich at full throttle, not stoich like the rest of the map, hence the reason why it has more fuel there.
Download a FAST, Accel or other fuel map, you'll clearly see that when air/fuels are optimized at every rpm/load you will clearly see it will require more fuel at peak torque, not peak rpm.

You do your single planes and I'll do my dual planes. He asked a question, I gave him my opinion and first hand experience.

Thanks

efiguy

iTrader: (2)

You might want to pick up the phone and call them, ask for Terry Wilson, he'll be of help I'm sure.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

You gave him the same thing you post on every forum "night and day difference on my engine".

Why don't you post some numbers, starting with the total combination, cam specs, and either the dyno graph between the two so we can see where the difference actually was in the powerband and what that difference is, or timeslips from back to back tests at the track.

You can also explain your fuel puddling theory that I asked about earlier, since we're tech guys here and we like to analyze that stuff.


-- Joe

efiguy

iTrader: (2)

I didn't do a before and after but here are the engine specs;
9.7:1
Iron heads
1000cfm throttle body
Gen7 multiport/sequential
Erson hyd Roller, 222/230 on a 112 in at 110, .544 lift on both.
Had a Holley Street dominator on it, then went to the RPM, both modified by Wilson.

It was different car with the RPM.
Puddling occurs when the air velocity is slow enough to allow the fuel to drop out of suspension. With some single planes with larger plenums/runners on mild applications this is a common problem. With EFI obviously you have widebands/control to keep this to a minimum but it will still effect drivability.
I did this out of courtesy because you asked, but it seems we will never agree on this topic so I'm done here.
If anyone would like the fuel maps I spoke of I'd be glad to forward the 100 or so that I have.
Otherwise HR monster I wish you success on your project.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

The street dominator was the first conversion I ever ran. The car was an absolute animal on the street, dominated at the track, and was 10mph in the quarter faster than a LTR high-flow/ported intake it replaced.

We're not going to agree, but I need to ensure our members get the right information.

What your talking about typically only happens with wet-flow combinations, i.e TBI.

On a typical GM application, a '165 or '730 ECM fires the injectors at a hot closed intake valve. The fuel immediately atomizes when it hits the hot valve, then the valve opens quickly and the rush of cold air swirls the fuel.

The puddling you talking about, again, is in a wet flow application the fuel will drop out of suspension and stick to the floor of the port where there is hardly any airflow. This doesn't happen with port fuel injection.

I don't know why you think a wideband has anything to do with this.

Now one thing that does stand out is the Gen7 sequential EFI system you were using. As we all know, sequential injection has it's merits for stable idle, cylinder trims on unbalanced intakes (i.e, lt1, miniram, dual planes), however if your injector timing is not right you very well could be firing too late (valve open), way too late (valve closing), or some combination of the two or any random scenario. The whole idea of batch fire is to fire at a closed valve, and allow the sudden surge to help mix the fuel. If you are running an intake with lower velocity, and you fire the injector way too late, AND if it's a poorly converted intake with a bad injector angle, then yes you could have problems. The dual plane might mask the bad tune.

Most of the guys on here are running diy, so a '730, '165, '749 or some other GM ECM. Most are batch fire. Many with modified/patched code. I'm not sure that your experience or issues with a non SBC, non thirdgen ECM, and questionable tune should be a scientific baseline for members to follow.


-- Joe

efiguy

iTrader: (2)

How does any ECM know what brand engine it's controlling? It has to do with the intake tract length, runner size, valve timing etc. It has nothing to do with it being a SBC or not. As you know certain principles apply to any internal combustion engine.

Thanks in advance for your explanations.

Mark

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Your lack of ability to quote makes it nearly impossible for me to respond do your questions without making this a full time job, but I'll make a stab at it.

For your last statement, my point was your experience on an engine that nobody here is using is not very helpful. The way that engine, it's heads, valve angle, and your tune respond won't be like anything a member is building.

Next, Batch fire. I'm using a holley MPFI, and I've used a few of them over the years. They work great. The old 4DI ECU was crap, but the commander 950 isn't too too bad. Either way batch is fine, and to answer your question about knowing when the injector is firing, well it's tied to the DRP and is also why you have a duty cycle. For example, at 6,000 RPM you have exactly 10ms firing window.

Your camshaft duration could also, in theory, effect your firing window. On a sequential port, you need to know both the crank AND cam position (DRP gives you firing event relation) to know which cylinder to fire next. If you have ever tuned the A9L stuff (MAF mustang 5.0) you realize how much of a nightmare recalibrating that is after a cam and injector change.

Unless your injector is up near the throttle body blades (i.e, a poor conversion?), the injector should be firing at the backside of the valve, it should be high up in the port where the airstream is. If you are shooting down at the floor of the intake, then sure you will probably get puddling. I didn't convert your singleplane, I didn't do your EFI tune, so I don't know where you failed, but my point is you shouldn't be running around the forum telling everyone a dual plane is superior with absolutely no comparison numbers to back it up, and your only real life example being some obscure engine that most people on this forum have never wrenched on.

You are welcome to share information, but if your going to state things as FACT please provide numbers and real data. Otherwise your stating opinions, which are welcome, but should be disclaimed as such.

-- Joe

efiguy

iTrader: (2)

Thanks for the feedback but I have a few questions and maybe we can all learn something here;
First off, batch fire, I'm not talking higher rpm stuff (you mentioned 6000rpm). Take you Holley 950, fire all 8 at once as it does every revolution, please tell me how some injectors aren't firing at the wrong time. If you fire all 8 when #1 is at compression then by the time you get to cyl # 4 and 3 they're firing with the intake valve open and in the case of #4 then it may even be when it's closing, caught in the normal reversion process, not good. Cylinder #6 will be in overlap so I think it's fair to say some fuel will go right out the tailpipe. At lower speeds this will most certainly effect driveability and efficiency.
I will pm you and give you the name of the gentlemen at Univ of N.C Charlotte who did a test on a SBC with a 950 then a sequential system.

Secondly injector placement, aimed at the valve is mainly for lower rpm/emissions applications. Moving the injector upstream is a common practice among higher rpm applications for better mixing of the fuel and air. I'll tell you how well it works as we are entering the EMC with a Gen 7 managed 425 inch SB2.

And both tunes on my car were nearly perfect, I have dual O2's and they never varied more than .2 side to side.

Thanks
Mark

HF_monster

wow was gone for a few days and looks like things got a little out of hand lol.

I would like to try on the RPM before i do this to my Vic JR as a learning curve so if I screw up im not out much, but also this intake is going on a 75 LS9 350 165hp truck motor all stock/stock replacement parts as far as I can tell, looks to have been rebuilt not too long ago.
I dont plan on this engine to see past 5500 RPM if even that and will be using a towing/4x4 cam something with a little more than stock. The ECM and other components are up in the air at this point but I do want to run a 4l60E trans if possible not having OD is killing me right now.
and dont think it matters much but also dont have to worry about emmisions where im located.