SC 5 Port EFI testing...the results are in....interesting!
Turbo Mini Forums

Jean - its good you have comments to make but this thread was not a "mine is better than yours" topic it is simply our version of an easily installed/mapped and effective injecting of a 5 port back to back tested on a full race 5 port with a Weber.

Regards

John

If Carling made Mini engines
it would probably be like this one!

***awaiting more information***

John,

My intention was not to antagonise you or try to put your setup down. As mentioned it is a very nice kit. And it is definitely simpler than doing port injection.

My issue is that you seem to dismiss both Paul and Rod's point as being irrelevant and wrong. And you also seemed to be doing this without complete facts which may not be the case but was not presented.

Anyway, I'll just leave this topic alone. Sorry for the disturbance.

Jean

http://www.jbperf.com/

looks good john,as ever!
keep it up fella!

John, a few questions...
Why the need for a choke/ fast idle mechanism?
Can the throttle body be oriented any way up, for example if you wanted to position the throttle body where the servo nomally goes if you needed bonnet clearance for a Eaton SC setup?
Any reason you haven't addressed the charge robbing issue or was that not part of your criteria for this kit?
Looks a great setup, I would potentially buy one not for any extra top end power but for the superior smooth running over an SU for my SC setup.

turbo 16v k-series 11.9@118.9 :)

Denis O'Brien.

Nice one looks good, IMO it doesn't matter how you get there what ever way works, works IMO.

Best 1/4 mile 13.2 seconds @116 mph
First 5 port miniturbo to make over 200 bhp on a carb?
First 5 port miniturbo to make over 200 bhp on Injection?

http://www.mattwoodsphotography.com

Edited by dazibee on 27th Nov, 2010.

As you well know John, I dont give a toss about bottom end driveability or fuel economy as this has been set up for, so - can it be tuned to deliver more peak power? or even use a TB per port to give some extra whack on the drag strip?

Paul

I seriously doubt it!

I think you might have something there Colin. If it was me I would use the webber setup as a calibration of what EGTs you see in an optimised carb setup. I guess John also has data from testing his 7-port to show that equal AFRs show the EGTs that he has recorded.

From this it would be fair to make an asumption that subsequent setups are the same. As both Paul and Rod have pointed out there is in fact a correlation between EGT and AFR as the outside ports are the same.

I'll stick with my personal preference that injecting a 5-port is still always a compromise, and one-port per cylinder is ideal.

On 26th Nov, 2010 Sprocket said:
EGT is an average temperature since the exhaust gas is a pulse. The funky 5 porter has a single exhaust port for the middle two cylinders, and therefore the EGT will be apparently higher, as it experiences twice the exhaust gas pulses than the outer two exhaust ports would. So you should expect a temperature difference. What that difference is, I have no idea

Fastest 998 mini in the world? 13.05 1/4 mile 106mph

www.twin-turbo.co.uk

So a well known and respected company can present the most simplest form of fuel injection for an A Series, tested with questionable methods and the numpties will all queue up to buy it.

Well done John, I wish I had your marketing skills.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

I take offence at that Paul. I'm not a numpty, I just see it as a reasonable way to get fuel injection for my compromised supercharger setup.

Edited by Paul S on 27th Nov, 2010.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

What we don't know is whether John did in fact take AFR readings of the inner and outer cylinders as well as EGTs - just because he doesn't mention it doesn't mean he didn't do it.

SC could have a variety of reasons for not wanting to publish such data.

On this forum to the best of my knowledge, there are only two people who have measured both EGTs and AFRs at the same time across the inner and outer cylinders.

Both their results (freely published) disagree with what John has said.

However, we don't know exactly where or how SC are measuring their temperatures although the photos do seem to show EGT thermocouples in pretty similar locations to the aforementioned individuals.

So I would want to see more data to explain these inconsistencies.

I don't doubt that a well thought out electronic carburettor could outperform a conventional carburetttor simply because a conventional one has to throttle the air flow to create a pressure drop to draw the fuel out of the float chamber. But it would have to be a well thought out one as conventional fuel injection (short pulses) can be worse than the atomisation a carb produces in an electronic carb/wet manifold/single throttle body setup.

I have equally no doubt that SC are the kind of company that would produce a "well thought out" system BUT, I have seen nothing in this thread that explains why trying to balance EGTs (rather than AFRs) has any credibility.

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

John, what I'm struggling with is that you have acknowledged that there is a problem with fuel distribution. You have seen that the carb gives you an EGT difference of up to 150 Deg C whilst still performing very well. But you have accepted 30 Deg C as better without testing it against widebands.

I last took datalogs of EGT in June 2009 just before I fitted the turbo.

This was using an Innovate TC-4 in an MTS daisy chain connected to a laptop that was simultaneously logging data from the ECU.

The only time that I saw EGTs of the inner cylinders only 30 Deg C higher than the outers was when it was running AFRs of 15:1 and 11:1 on the outers and inners respectively. I can post the log plot if you want.

That was at high speed so it was a sustained condition, not part of a rapid transition from one state to another. We have subsequently fixed the injection timing so that condition no longer ocurrs.

Unless you actually measure the AFRs with widebands on a 5 port, then you are firing in the dark.

Th whole point of the TM effort on fuel injection over the last three years is to move on from the SPi type systems, which this is, by developing a much much better port injection solution that actually is worthy of a turbo mini.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

You mist a trick there then Paul :p go for it john,

Best 1/4 mile 13.2 seconds @116 mph
First 5 port miniturbo to make over 200 bhp on a carb?
First 5 port miniturbo to make over 200 bhp on Injection?

http://www.mattwoodsphotography.com

Really we need to know what the AFR balance is like I suppose- an NA engine being a fair bit more tolerant of mixture imbalance than a forced induction engine would be.

hard to beat an old SU....

9.85 @ 145mph
202mph standing mile
speed didn't kill me, but taxation probably will

morning to all - lets get a couple of things clear - nowhere have I made bad comment about what the siamese code group are doing - I have said I don't agree on some comments and thats my place to do so - no offence was intended by my responses, just like its everyones elses place to sit behind a computer and make their own comments. Secondly I have never said our way of inecting is better than siamese code - its simply a different way of solving a problem. If the siamese code group can't accept this then its not my fault. Go back to my first post - the aim of our kit was

: - simple kit/easy to install and tune
:- get close to or match the power of a well tuned Weber carb on a full race motor
:- kill stone dead the low speed running/torque producing capability of
a weber on a full race motor - implying that anything less than a full race motor will be even better at the bottom/mid range
:- cost effective

so we designed our system around this and have matched the criteria very well. It is not a perfect system - you will never have a perfect system with 5 ports -thats why we do the 7 port and 16v

Paul - you need a head with more flow capacity than the carb can deliver to make more power! (ie more valves or more ports!)

I'll put my hand up and take a closer look at egt's - I may have quoted egt imbalance at part throttle - my mistake.

dazibee - the fast idle is for cold starting - to open the throttle plate slightly - just like a choke on a carb does to raise the rpm to allow drive off straight away.

JK

If Carling made Mini engines
it would probably be like this one!

I seriously doubt it!

Paul - if the engine needs an induction system that can flow say 250cfm to make max power then it doesn't mind if its a carb or a FI throttle body- bolting on something which flows 300cfm won't make the engine make more power

JK

If Carling made Mini engines
it would probably be like this one!

John isn't by any means the first person to do this though, and these arguments have been had before and will continue in the future. Dave Walker at Emerald has done a very similar setup in the past on an a series sprite/midget I think it was using a jenvey twin injector throttle body and got good results (again, no mention of measuring afr's on the outer and inner cylinders) and the customer was very happy.

You might also remember, that I also built my own system, using a home made plenum with a pair of injectors in, using megasquirt, just with the injectors a little further away from the mouth of the inlet manifold (not NA by the way, I was running 18psi boost on a standard t3). With my very crude mapping skills (having never done it before) and just with a single wideband in the down pipe, not only did I manage not to blow my engine up (which is impressive if you've seen the way I drive my mini, I hardly take it easy), but it also seemed to run pretty well.

My point here is that after about 2500 miles of abuse I had killed the head gasket (looked like one of the bad 450's that were about at the time), so when I whipped off the head to check it, I had a good look at what had been going on with the engine as I had already discussed the system with Paul S and he had explained his concerns to me. All cylinders were equally black with carbon deposits which I expected (I had been running at 11.5:1 to 12:1 on boost to be on the safe side), and after a quick clean up, there was no damage at all to valves, pistons, head chambers, or infact anything at all. The whole thing looked just like the day I picked up the brand new engine. All spark plugs and exhaust ports were also equally black and sooty, with no signs of any running lean.

I'm aware that some of you have far more experience with this stuff than I do, and whilst the Siamese code stuff goes way over my head, I think it's brilliant what you guys are doing. However, as a simpler route to injection, I think this is a great idea and stand by Johns reasons for doing it. At best, this system gives a lot more control than with a carb, ie economy and power, rather than one or the other, and at worse, surely it can't be any worse than a carb, that has been proven time and time again to make plenty of power without any major issues.

I may get shot down in flames here, as I know that I'm not providing any readings or science, purely my experiences with this stuff, but I for one, after having tried to make a system like this myself, would buy one of these from John if I were to do it again and would run it boosted and not worry.

Just my tuppence worth.

OK John, cheers, the idea of 2 was just to get a straighter inlet tract

I seriously doubt it!

Oh, also, just as an aside (this is more for JohnK himself) - when I was planning my system, I spoke to Dave Walker at Emerald as I was considering is rather than Megasquirt. I got Dave to quote me for the full system, ECU, throttle body, injectors, fuel rails, linkages, sensors etc... and without an inlet manifold (it was a jenvey throttle body with su bolt pattern) it came to about £1700 including VAT.

So, if you can keep this to under a grand like you say John, including the ECU then I think you're onto a winner.