CI'd, Fitech'd, turbo 200

[tjnavyblue]

Bumping an old thread here - hopefully the OP is still around. I recognize this car from the Holdener channel, and always wondered how you got it sorted. Very cool to see you went above and beyond.

Neat build, and smart use of that 4150 throttle body to do it up right. Solved all the fuel distribution and timing - just a cool setup.

I'm wondering if you could share a rough timing map, and any timing related learnings from this motor in terms of boost? Curious what timing you are pulling per psi, what you are running at lean cruise, what you're running at 10 psi, etc.

Also curious what the conditions were on the dyno at FiTech that led to the pinging, if you remember.

I have a boosted project that I am building a base tune for (it's using a Super Sniper, but similar), and I want to make sure I'm conservative enough on my base tune. I'm thinking I want to be down around 13 to 15 ish degrees by 10psi, but even that may be high for this chamber.

I'd also be curious if your tuner added a few degrees back in up top once the motor is past peak torque.

Any insight on the timing would be really valuable.

Thanks and cool car.

 

[PSIG]

Hoping to help with a useful diagnostic tuning perspective. If you don't get an answer, the safe and powerful solution is bottom-up tuning, so you can see what the engine likes for fuel, timing, etc, as you progress from idle, to low cruise, to higher revs and loads. As you proceed, you find best fueling for efficient power and best timing to achieve efficient peak power under the changing conditions. The foundation of the tune forms in each area, building on the last area. As this occurs, a 'picture' of how the engine is responding appears with trends that allow some prediction, and then confirmation as you enter that predicted area. No surprises.

An example is after tuning idle and off-idle, mid-range cruise from minimum load and working-up will show a distinct trend of ignition timing change. The timing trends will also shift as Lambda changes from economy mode to power at higher NA MAP. As the engine does not care what "boost" is, and is just a different manifold pressure; the trends from working-up from high MAP to low MAP off-boost can be extended into boost areas. So, the power timing trends from, say, 80kPa to 100kPa are extended to 120kPa and tested. The optimal results from 80 to 120 are then predictable by trends for 120 to 160kPa and tested, compensating for higher heat, turbulence, etc, and so on.

It goes pretty quick into boost, as not a lot changes quickly (relative to off-boost, cruise, idle, etc) and those changes are relatively mild and slow. I always strive to apply optimal fueling and timing for the goals in the areas I'm working, as playing it 'safe' with fuel and timing can bring its own issues, and indicates you are tuning too far out. Be patient, this is the important part that affects everything. Be patient as it allows opportunity to 'see' and interpret all the data sources, check conditions and buffer for det, etc. Best-is-best in tuning, any weakness to solve becomes clear without muddy factors such as slobbering rich fuel or random retard, and solutions are then available to choose the best path. You should know where you're going, and why, before you get there.

Finally, this is why we don't typically share full tunes. I don't keep tune info secret myself. But, setup info, configurations - sure. Fueling and timing - no - as the tables are unique to every engine, hardware, fuel and conditions. Sorry, no safe cheats except to find what your engine and fuel want under your conditions. Incremental is safest. The job is tuning.

 

[tjnavyblue]

Thanks for taking the time to write that, that's a good process you outlined. I don't have your experience or skills I'm sure, but that has been my general approach as well. Start at the bottom, see how she's reacting and don't push it without feeling good about each progressive load range. I have a lot to learn, always will.

I do hope Gus sees this. I'm not looking for a full tune, just filling in rough data points for a base timing map. Have to fill them in anyway, might as well have as much data as possible. Of course it'll all get tweaked. And it's true that every engine is different, but it's also true engines can behave roughly similarly by type. For example, if he saw detonation at 11.5:1/8psi/93 octane/sea level/at 15 degrees, that would be an interesting data point for me, as I survey the tuning horizon.

I agree with your notes on chasing optimal timing/fueling, with the caveat that when I'm starting out, I'm definitely intentionally starting with a more conservative # than I anticipate ending up at. Lower AFRs and bringing in retard against psi isn't random, it's a known need. Just gotta figure out how much.

Once I get closer to tuned, I'm also interested to compare timing maps to known decent tunes to get a rough sense of if/how much I'm relying on my meth/h20 injection.

 

[DON]

I saw the pic from quite a while ago, just curious, did you make your radiator lines?

 

[PSIG]

Not looking to hijack Gus's thread here, but to hopefully increase value of the thread for others interested.

Start at the bottom, see how she's reacting and don't push it without feeling good about each progressive load range.

Yep. But while I think you get the point; there is no 'feel good' except that the data proves it's right. Others may think "that feels good" is an acceptable goal. This close to the edges, it's not. Of course best-is-best always, but near danger you need to know where the edges are, to stay clear of them. Proof of optimal settings for this specific setup and conditions is good to proceed. Know your data indicators, how to test limits safely, and how to be sure you hit the best numbers.

Lower AFRs and bringing in retard against psi isn't random, it's a known need.

It is expected, but unknown, until you find it for yourself. Even unexpected, you'll know it when you see the trends working bottom-up, and you'll also see how much and when something is needed. Starting rich and retarded is a sign of apprehension, not respect. Fear of the unknown, unknown from lack of confidence, confidence from info you don't have yet. You'll get it, slowly and safely. As you see the data come-in, and answers appear, the anxiety will melt away, replaced by knowledge and confidence. Trust your test numbers. This is how I first became addicted to tuning. What a relief, then what a rush!

Follow the data. You don't go where you don't know what to expect, based on the building results right in front of you. So, we don't run extra rich or extra retarded to go there. Remember, too rich or lean are both dangerous, and too advanced or too retarded are also both dangerous. Don't start there intentionally. We run right-on where it's safest. Indicators of right-on is shown by your own data. Use fuel and timing as tools, when and where they are indicated. As the goal is to find "just right", we will enter as close to optimal as indicated, methodically testing too lean and too rich, over and under-advanced around that point.

For example, if he saw detonation at 11.5:1/8psi/93 octane/sea level/at 15 degrees, that would be an interesting data point for me, as I survey the tuning horizon.

Interesting, but not particularly helpful. Once into diagnostic tuning only the real-time numbers are trustworthy, shared tunes are irrelevant and only interesting to see how different yours ends-up to his, for 101 reasons. It would interest you, but to others that don't fully grasp the concepts yet is an invitation to just use his, cross their fingers, and punch it. Seen it too many times. Likewise his identical sensors and gauges will report differently. His thermostat or cold air induction point is cooler or warmer, and so on. "Identical" setups never are.

On-top of that, we have no idea how the original tuner approached the final tune. Is it finished and set 1/2 or 1 AFR rich for assumed 'insurance', or right-on optimal? Or extra advanced or retarded for cruise efficiency or taller gears, or det buffer with different fuel sources, different heat-range plugs, etc. If you want theory, there are plenty of tunes on the web to show general trends with boost on pump gas. Using any other's numbers in tunes is actually a slower way of doing things for these many reasons, and you move slower trying to figure-out if those numbers are right or worng and why. It is quicker and more effective to work-up your own, from no baseline at all, altering before you get there. Seriously. Have fun!

 

[drag-200stang]

At the end of the thread he switched to Holley Hp mpefi for better fuel distribution.

 

[tjnavyblue]

Yeah, this got off the rails a little bit. I was (still am) curious if OP had any timing related learnings from this build. Not looking for a tune file.

 

[gus91326]

Hey guys- long time! Where to begin on the update. I parked the car around October to take care of some blowby and oil consumption issues. I wanted to get a set of Total Seal rings to try them out. My builder got ill and wasn't able to get me the shortblock back until April/May. While it was apart I inspected the head (had it sent out to get refreshed), turbo, etc. I put the engine back together the end of May and drove it about 150 miles before it started smoking- the valve stem seals had gone loose (not sure how) on 4 cylinders. Off the head came and it's back at the shop to have them rectify it. I will say that it was running great after getting the shortblock refreshed. I hope to get it running again before the end of the month as I need to get it to a dyno to do some proper tuning. I will say that from the last time I posted I also added meth injection to the equation, just as an additional safety margin. More to come....

 

[drag-200stang]

Good to hear from you, As you know the ''Tune'' is the key to reliability.

 

[gus91326]

So weird outcome yesterday. I called the shop about my head, and they told me that they had found excessive wear on the valves. To back up a bit, I mentioned before that I took the head to this shop while my shortblock was out- I asked them to go over it and make sure it was ready to bolt back on. I brought the head back to them as I could see that the stem seals on 4 exhaust valves had popped off. They showed me the worn valves (which were intake, not even the source of the smoke) and I can feel a smooth worn area near the base, and there is a minute amount of play while in the guide. No gouging, scratches, etc. Mind you, I have driven a total of about 40 VERY EASY miles on the motor (put together using assembly lube and dino-based break in oil with high zinc).

I asked the following questions of the shop:
1) How are the guides? Are they worn? They said no, they were in spec and fine
2) I asked about how this could happen- they kept saying that it could have worn due to bad valvetrain geometry. (I reinstalled it as it has been for the last 10k miles).
3) Is there any scratches or wear on the guides? No there isn't.
4) Oil residue in the head is clean with no signs of metal particles.

I made the comment that this was one of the last heads out the door at CI- it could have been put together with whatever was at hand and that could have included used valves, which they disagreed with me as they "mic" all the valves. Without signs of obvious new wear, I disagreed- how can it be this smooth and polished in 40 miles with no metal particles in the oil, and no damage to the bronze guides? This would be a first- a bronze harder than stainless!

Anyway, all this hot air for this question: Does anyone know if Mike used an off-the-shelf valve for the CI head? I looked in the archive and I couldn't find any mention of it, other than general valve diameter. It's always something! Thanks as always!

 

[PSIG]

They showed me the worn valves (which were intake, not even the source of the smoke) and I can feel a smooth worn area near the base, and there is a minute amount of play while in the guide.

The tolerances are specific, listed in many manuals including the Ford Shop Manuals, and they can "show" you how the testing fails. With that info, you can determine where the failure is (stem, guide, etc). Those stems would have to be horrible. "Bad geometry" for worn stems - not guides? Not claiming or telling you what to do, but I'm seeing some distant red flags. To confirm - who built the head, and do you have all history of them?

 

[drag-200stang]

The pro flow valves stems are smaller closer to the head of the valve for better flow, could this be what you are seeing?

 

[gus91326]

The tolerances are specific, listed in many manuals including the Ford Shop Manuals, and they can "show" you how the testing fails. With that info, you can determine where the failure is (stem, guide, etc). Those stems would have to be horrible. "Bad geometry" for worn stems - not guides? Not claiming or telling you what to do, but I'm seeing some distant red flags. To confirm - who built the head, and do you have all history of them?

My feelings exactly. I took the parts home as my feeling was that 1) they clearly missed the mic'ing (which I would have said, fine, mistakes were made, let's correct this) but 2) stood firm on something that defies logic. The head is as I received it from Will "Does10s" way back. It was new and I never took it apart to do a detailed inspection; I basically just installed it and it ran great for many years. My only speculation on the parts is related to the fact that when I contacted Will, Mike had since passed and people were starting to see CI not to respond on orders, and generally the business was closing; I saw a chance to buy the head and lept at it.

The pro flow valves stems are smaller closer to the head of the valve for better flow, could this be what you are seeing?

Thanks for the heads up; I'll take a closer look; I'm not super-well versed in the valves.

 

[Jmustang_65]

Gus.
Sorry to hear that. Hope you find a solution to get engine up and running soon to enjoy.