STREETFIGHTER COMMODORE 1000HP IN-TANK FUEL MODULE (VE-VF)

[abuch47]

@07GTS do you have a build thread?

 

[07GTS]

@07GTS do you have a build thread?

no i dont but ive been thinking about starting one and just slowly adding to it as its been a couple years now off the road with me slowly doing mods n waiting for engine to be built

 

[villn808]

no i dont but ive been thinking about starting one and just slowly adding to it as its been a couple years now off the road with me slowly doing mods n waiting for engine to be built

+1 vote for thread.

 

[Skylarking]

thats where most get stuck AFR is only usable if u stick to the one fuel type, stoich "lambda 1.0" with any fuel type is the point where the injected amount of fuel and air are all burnt in petrol its 14.68:1 straight ethanol 9:1 (e85 9.7:1) at that point they both burn with the same result for emissions just ethanol itself burns cleaner so its better for environment, when u go into power enrichment that stoich value is multiplied as u need extra cooling to make power just ethanol cools better as it vaporises when ignited and petrol only atomises which dosnt draw out as much heat, ethanol has a lower stoich value only because it carries more oxygen which is partly why it makes more power if u can inject more oxygen in attached to fuel with the intake charge then u can make more power

Ok, starting to make some sense.

Guess I was under the fallacy the there wasn't much of a power difference between 98 & E85 and that similar pollution issues hinder both fuels.

But I did have a vauge recollection that the ideal A/F ration was lambda=1=the stoichiometric ration of fuel and air. Sadly, I had forgotten that differing fuels have differing stoich (stow-ick or sto-itch?) values... chemistry was so so long ago.... Guess the memory isn't what it used to be, just like forgetting where one left the spanner, doh

So, is it correct to say because ethanol burns cleaner it doesn't have the same pollution headache as burning petrol since its a relatively clean gas coming out the exhaust? And with ethanol/E85 the mixture can be much richer to keep flame front/combustion process cool to avoid detonation, producing more power while still meeting pollution needs? If that's the case, is a cat converter even needed if running on only ethanol? Ethanol has a mild nitrous oxide effect?

On another front, it would have been interesting if Holden published a power graph of an L77 running 98RON, 95RON, 91RON & E85 with associated fuel flow rates at max power for each fuel.

(why is it the more one learns the more one realises they don't know much...)

 

[07GTS]

Ok, starting to make some sense.

Guess I was under the fallacy the there wasn't much of a power difference between 98 & E85 and that similar pollution issues hinder both fuels.

But I did have a vauge recollection that the ideal A/F ration was lambda=1=the stoichiometric ration of fuel and air. Sadly, I had forgotten that differing fuels have differing stoich (stow-ick or sto-itch?) values... chemistry was so so long ago.... Guess the memory isn't what it used to be, just like forgetting where one left the spanner, doh

So, is it correct to say because ethanol burns cleaner it doesn't have the same pollution headache as burning petrol since its a relatively clean gas coming out the exhaust? And with ethanol/E85 the mixture can be much richer to keep flame front/combustion process cool to avoid detonation, producing more power while still meeting pollution needs? If that's the case, is a cat converter even needed if running on only ethanol? Ethanol has a mild nitrous oxide effect?

On another front, it would have been interesting if Holden published a power graph of an L77 running 98RON, 95RON, 91RON & E85 with associated fuel flow rates at max power for each fuel.

(why is it the more one learns the more one realises they don't know much...)

yes ethanol burns cleaner as the chemical makeup is better then petrol also why u get the smell from exhaust can tell its on ethanol so overall will make more power and keep emissions requirements, ethanol does have a much broader mixture tuning range and can be at a leaner PE EQratio then petrol as it has better knock/heat resistance or can go richer on boost to aid in more cooling, not sure on the cat converter from an emission point as u need it physically there to pass but if it is clean enough with no bad chemicals to allow out then they may be possible to remove,
ethanol does most of its work when ignited as it vaporises and has some but little inlet air temp reduction unlike methanol that starts to cool in the intake which helps alot but by the time it gets to the ignition point in chamber its lost some of its power but it also carries like 50-60% oxygen with it, ive seen some tests where ethanol at 40% made more hp then all other petrol, petrol/meth, race fuels combos and the only one that made more hp was E85 with meth so ethanol alone is quite a good power adder fuel, yea i found that out with tuning the more u get into it the more u realise u didnt know and even after years of it im still finding out new ways with it and wrapping my head around how some of it all works together

 

[villn808]

Spoke to Dave from KPM today. The “1000hp” fuel module is only a single 460lph pump, he wouldn’t disclose brand, but said it was from an OE manufacturer.

He said this set up is good for 500rwkw on E85 at 320kpa or 46psi, which sounds a bit higher for that pump to me.

I questioned if that pressure was low, as I was under the impression the fuel system should hold 58psi all the way to redline.

He explained that for a deadhead system, many people don’t understand that the FPCM drops the pressure to around 46psi to allow maximum flow? Different for return style systems or systems with external regs.

He also said they are releasing a twin pump system in a couple of months, similar to this, non return with everything housed in tank. Will be roughly $2500.

 

[Skylarking]

He explained that for a deadhead system, many people don’t understand that the FPCM drops the pressure to around 46psi to allow maximum flow? Different for return style systems or systems with external regs.

He also said they are releasing a twin pump system in a couple of months, similar to this, non return with everything housed in tank. Will be roughly $2500.

Im no expert but dropping pressure to increase flow simply sounds wrong.

As for twin pumps, are they in series (one feeds the next) or parallel (both feed the output line)? Which set up is more appropriate for more HP?

In any case, aren’t factory in-tank pumps around $300 each, $600 for two? If so, taking a twin pump arrangement to $2500 seems like a huge mark up for what seems like some extra pipe work and a simple circuit to take the PWM signal and recreate it for the second pump? I don’t get why it’s so costly?

 

[07GTS]

Spoke to Dave from KPM today. The “1000hp” fuel module is only a single 460lph pump, he wouldn’t disclose brand, but said it was from an OE manufacturer.

He said this set up is good for 500rwkw on E85 at 320kpa or 46psi, which sounds a bit higher for that pump to me.

I questioned if that pressure was low, as I was under the impression the fuel system should hold 58psi all the way to redline.

He explained that for a deadhead system, many people don’t understand that the FPCM drops the pressure to around 46psi to allow maximum flow? Different for return style systems or systems with external regs.

He also said they are releasing a twin pump system in a couple of months, similar to this, non return with everything housed in tank. Will be roughly $2500.

there is only one manufacture doing the 460 pumps 'walbro" or TI automotive, u will make the 500rkw n/a e85 but no way ur going to on boost, have to remember the 460lph is a open flow rate so it drops lower at 46psi would be about 420lph, it is best to run fuel pressure as low as it likes and 43.5psi or little lower is about as low as u want to go,
it is better on the injector as its not as much pressure on it to open/close as u can find if u got over the 80-100psi some injectors can start to play up so start low as u can, the LSA actually lowers it for idle and then raises it for boost to 65psi so the injectors are bigger (but lower fuel flow), if u lower it for boost then your injectors are going to act smaller so not good (but more fuel flow) so they may be running out of fuel to stay about the 46psi maby, the point of the FPCM is to control the injector delta pressure so going lower when boost goes higher is not right u will run out of fuel, for example i was running 58psi with 1000cc injectors and i had to raise it to 70psi to get more headroom so if i went lower u can see that it just wouldnt have worked at all i would have had less fuel

 

[07GTS]

Im no expert but dropping pressure to increase flow simply sounds wrong.

As for twin pumps, are they in series (one feeds the next) or parallel (both feed the output line)? Which set up is more appropriate for more HP?

In any case, aren’t factory in-tank pumps around $300 each, $600 for two? If so, taking a twin pump arrangement to $2500 seems like a huge mark up for what seems like some extra pipe work and a simple circuit to take the PWM signal and recreate it for the second pump? I don’t get why it’s so costly?

twin factory pumps wouldnt go very far would still be less then one 460lph pump, but its more the developement of the pump module if u look at what goes into making this u will see https://aftermarketindustries.com.au/holden-ve-fuel-system-fs1000-vef-p332 the 2500 is too much as this one i showed link is the best i have seen yet and im waiting for them to be released as i have one on order, yes lower pressure increases flow as if u have to hold 40psi u get xxx flow but if u have to hold 100psi ur using alot of the flow potential to hold the higher pressure then also have to flow so actual usable flow goes down

 

[villn808]

there is only one manufacture doing the 460 pumps 'walbro" or TI automotive, u will make the 500rkw n/a e85 but no way ur going to on boost, have to remember the 460lph is a open flow rate so it drops lower at 46psi would be about 420lph, it is best to run fuel pressure as low as it likes and 43.5psi or little lower is about as low as u want to go,
it is better on the injector as its not as much pressure on it to open/close as u can find if u got over the 80-100psi some injectors can start to play up so start low as u can, the LSA actually lowers it for idle and then raises it for boost to 65psi so the injectors are bigger (but lower fuel flow), if u lower it for boost then your injectors are going to act smaller so not good (but more fuel flow) so they may be running out of fuel to stay about the 46psi maby, the point of the FPCM is to control the injector delta pressure so going lower when boost goes higher is not right u will run out of fuel, for example i was running 58psi with 1000cc injectors and i had to raise it to 70psi to get more headroom so if i went lower u can see that it just wouldnt have worked at all i would have had less fuel

After doing heaps of reading on US forums apparently the GM FPCM (Non SC cars, LSA, ZL1) drops fuel pressure, as flow increases, which then increases injector duty cycle to compensate, which then becomes dangerous if your getting close to 100% duty cycle with less then ideal FP.

And no one knows why this happens. Some have been reprogramming or replacing the FPCM with ZL1 FPCM to get around it.

Any thoughts?

Im leaning towards going with DSX aux pump setup, as twin pump return style is just far more than I’ll ever need, and don’t want to pay for.

Seems to be widely used in US. Tank needs drilled and tapped though. Which I’m okay with.

https://dsxtuning.com/collections/a...uxiliary-fuel-pump-kit-for-2014-2017-chevy-ss