Home | Register | Login | Contact Us

 
Auto Math
Classifieds
Forum
Gallery
Games
Garage
Tech Articles
Utilites
 
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch    RegisterRegister    Log inLog in    Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages    Forum Subscriptions1/4 Mile Table 

New 408
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 29, 30, 31, 32  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SMOKEmUP.com Forum Index -> Chevy - Small Block Gen 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Big Dave
Moderator


Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 2646
Location: Tampa Florida
119973.02 points



PostPosted: Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Paul P wrote:
Stainless is lighter by at least 40%


It isn't lighter it is tougher (harder to bend or machine). As such you could make a pipe or any other part smaller dimensionally to lighten it and get the same performance out of a lightened stainless part as you would mild steel.

Often such as in exhaust pipes the pipe wall is thicker for mild steel than needed dimensionally for stiffness, because everyone knows it will rust away and fail over time if not aluminized and made thicker (hence heavier). Otherwise an 16 gage stainless pipe will weight about the same as a similar length 16 gauge mild steel pipe.

They also make stainless exhaust pipe out of a thinner gage metal sheet than mild steel because the 304 stainless cost more to buy as raw material than the mild steel does.

Big Dave
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
af2
Member


Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 5558
Location: grassvalley, ca
71227.76 points


1933 Willys Coupe

PostPosted: Sun Oct 20, 2013 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It all depends on the alloy. But steel and stainless are within .2 lbs per foot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul P
Member


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Posts: 2404
Location: Townsend, Mass.
81616.60 points


1971 Chevrolet Chevelle

PostPosted: Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok just to be clear the stainless 3.5" pipe I have is .060" thick. The steel 3" pipe I removed is near .120" thick. There is the weight end of story. I know that they are basically the same material weight a=b dimensions but they are different thicknesses like I said in my post earlier.

Moving on now. The WB )2 sensor had to be replaced when after warming up the motor it was all over the place. The 22 psi fuel pressure setting has a lean miss as I am accelerating through the higher RPMs. The gauge is reading lean in the mid to high 13/1 AFR and as soon as I hear a miss fire I let off. Mid range is nice! I will have to fatten it up with more fuel pressure and some adjustments.

_________________
2001 Focus 2.0 Zetec
stock cams, bolt-ons and tune
15.63@87 MPH 1/4mi

1971 - Chevelle 408 SBC N/A
6.86@102.5 MPH 1/8mi
10.78@122 MPH 1/4mi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
af2
Member


Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 5558
Location: grassvalley, ca
71227.76 points


1933 Willys Coupe

PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2013 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think the original was .120 wall..... But going from 14 gauge to 16 gauge is going to be lighter.!!
Glad you have a handle on it!!! Good luck Paul the times will tell...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul P
Member


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Posts: 2404
Location: Townsend, Mass.
81616.60 points


1971 Chevrolet Chevelle

PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2013 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Adam,
Torque Tech says that they are 16 gauge steel with aluminized coating. Certainly not .120" thick you are right. They are up for sale too!

_________________
2001 Focus 2.0 Zetec
stock cams, bolt-ons and tune
15.63@87 MPH 1/4mi

1971 - Chevelle 408 SBC N/A
6.86@102.5 MPH 1/8mi
10.78@122 MPH 1/4mi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul P
Member


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Posts: 2404
Location: Townsend, Mass.
81616.60 points


1971 Chevrolet Chevelle

PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

25psi not enough. <TEST TEST TEST>.... Rolling Eyes Not sure how much this regulator has in it.
_________________
2001 Focus 2.0 Zetec
stock cams, bolt-ons and tune
15.63@87 MPH 1/4mi

1971 - Chevelle 408 SBC N/A
6.86@102.5 MPH 1/8mi
10.78@122 MPH 1/4mi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clay
Moderator


Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 3209
Location: South Carolina
318129.23 points


1972 Chevrolet Nova

PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How about the fuel pump? I'm thinking you are exceeding what Holley ever planned that system feeding. However I would think you could get around that by forcing the regulator open and running an external regulator and something like a A1000 pump. That combo would feed a ton as least from a supply point. Keep us posted. Clay
_________________
I have done so much with so little for so long, I can now do anything with nothing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
10sec.et
Member


Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 3473
Location: Houston,Texas
346658.74 points


1969 Oldsmobile Cutlass

PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

clay wrote:
How about the fuel pump? I'm thinking you are exceeding what Holley ever planned that system feeding. However I would think you could get around that by forcing the regulator open and running an external regulator and something like a A1000 pump. That combo would feed a ton as least from a supply point. Keep us posted. Clay


i was thinking the same thing. i just battled with a truck trying to use a pump for TBI on a MPFI system. it wasnt happy.

_________________
af2 wrote:
It seems we can look at our magical Balls and come up with a fix?

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul P
Member


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Posts: 2404
Location: Townsend, Mass.
81616.60 points


1971 Chevrolet Chevelle

PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes I have thought of regulating it from outside.

Remember this thing was running well with the old injectors which did flow better than the new style. The supplied pump is 255 LPH with a with a 100 PSI peak pressure. Should be fine for near 900 HP normally aspirated.

_________________
2001 Focus 2.0 Zetec
stock cams, bolt-ons and tune
15.63@87 MPH 1/4mi

1971 - Chevelle 408 SBC N/A
6.86@102.5 MPH 1/8mi
10.78@122 MPH 1/4mi


Last edited by Paul P on Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:53 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clay
Moderator


Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 3209
Location: South Carolina
318129.23 points


1972 Chevrolet Nova

PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought you were close when the injectors failed but never knew you had it figured out. Looks like Holley did good on putting plenty of pump capacity in that system - sounds like you've got a good handle on it and are close. Cool. Clay
_________________
I have done so much with so little for so long, I can now do anything with nothing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul P
Member


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Posts: 2404
Location: Townsend, Mass.
81616.60 points


1971 Chevrolet Chevelle

PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hope so. The original injectors were doing well with only 21psi until they quit. Adjusted it last night and the pressure is fluctuating about 1/2 psi but holding at 28. There might be more in it still.

If I had 2000 to drop on Fast 2.0 I would do it.

_________________
2001 Focus 2.0 Zetec
stock cams, bolt-ons and tune
15.63@87 MPH 1/4mi

1971 - Chevelle 408 SBC N/A
6.86@102.5 MPH 1/8mi
10.78@122 MPH 1/4mi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
10sec.et
Member


Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 3473
Location: Houston,Texas
346658.74 points


1969 Oldsmobile Cutlass

PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 11:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

just my opinion but, i dont really care for the FAST EFI. I have never installed one i didnt have issues with. I do like the Holley setup. IMO, the best option is to build your own with a factory GM computer and harness.
_________________
af2 wrote:
It seems we can look at our magical Balls and come up with a fix?

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big Dave
Moderator


Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 2646
Location: Tampa Florida
119973.02 points



PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

10sec.et wrote:
just my opinion but, i dont really care for the FAST EFI. I have never installed one i didnt have issues with. I do like the Holley setup. IMO, the best option is to build your own with a factory GM computer and harness.


Keith since you are the acknowledged expert in EFI what are the advantages of the GM system? I thought because they all have to be flashed to be reprogramed that you would be better off with a programmable chip up front and use a hand held controller with preprogramed tables to load or program it from a lap top by tweaking the values in the table.

Is there a difference in the processor speed or number of data lines that makes the GM computer superior? (I am assuming a wire is a wire, so the wiring harness I figured if I had to I could recreate one crimp at a time using those new water tight plugs). I figured the FAST was a Bosch or similar Japanese made computer that they recycled for their own needs.

Inquirying minds want to know Confused

Big Dave
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul P
Member


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Posts: 2404
Location: Townsend, Mass.
81616.60 points


1971 Chevrolet Chevelle

PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

10sec.et wrote:
just my opinion but, i dont really care for the FAST EFI. I have never installed one i didnt have issues with. I do like the Holley setup. IMO, the best option is to build your own with a factory GM computer and harness.


Have you installed the new FAST 2.0 system or heard any news about it? I heard that has been improved quite a bit.

_________________
2001 Focus 2.0 Zetec
stock cams, bolt-ons and tune
15.63@87 MPH 1/4mi

1971 - Chevelle 408 SBC N/A
6.86@102.5 MPH 1/8mi
10.78@122 MPH 1/4mi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clay
Moderator


Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 3209
Location: South Carolina
318129.23 points


1972 Chevrolet Nova

PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm guessing it's programming related. From what I've seen in the Ford computer there are a tremendous amount of parameters dealing with drivability, idle, air conditioning control, emissions, etc. and about another 100 that I have no clue whaty they deal with. I don't think it would be hardware related but I'm just guessing. Clay
_________________
I have done so much with so little for so long, I can now do anything with nothing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SMOKEmUP.com Forum Index -> Chevy - Small Block Gen 1 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 29, 30, 31, 32  Next
Page 30 of 32

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
Home | Contact Us | Automath | Cam Files | Dyno Search | Forum | Garage | Picture Gallery | Reaction Timer

Copyright 1997-2016 SMOKEmUP.com All rights reserved.
Advertising Info     Disclaimer     Privacy Policy