Cavalli Turbo......

[FreddyG]

What kind of fuel pressure does this motor put out?

Being a Ford (I know GM products, but not so much about Fords) and running Direct Injection, I'd think that the fuel pressure was pretty high. I think that it's around 2200 psi on a GM motor, so I'd guess that it was similar on these, but thought for sure that one of you Guys would know.

Can the pump be "Boosted" using something like a KB Boostapump, which just "Boosts" the pump voltage when called on? Are the fuel pumps even electric or some type of cam driven setup?

I don't have a clue if it would work or not, but I do know before DI came along, there are a bunch of Guys running these (I was one of them, along with a Racetronix/LPA setup which supplied 1000 rwhp amount of fuel, but not at the current fuel pressures).

Just asking because I want to learn more about these motors and what makes them tick. Thanks :cheers:

Sponsored

 

[LeonBorden]

They're cam driven. It'd be interesting to hook up a fuel pressure gauge between the HPFP and the fuel pump in the tank. It's very possible that the in tank pump is slacking, and making the DI pump do more work. This is a common issue on diesels but not sure how sufficient our lift pumps are.

 

[Dirtleg]

What kind of fuel pressure does this motor put out?

I was monitoring the Fuel Rail pressure the other day (Torque App) while driving and saw pressure near 3000 psi when in the throttle hard. I'd have to do some hard pulls and datalog to get a honest reading but needless to say it's higher than I expected.

Also saw that the rail pressure at idle varied a lot. A very jagged/spikey graph to say the least. But I have another thread started on my theories about that so I won't hijack this one.

 

[dragonacc]

It does? Those heavy bastards sure are quick compared to where most have hit a roadblock w/ the 2.3...

If you read through the Ecoboost Articles on Full Race's website it talks about it.

Edit:

"Ford On-Engine 2.3L Full-Race Twin Scroll Prototype Testing: Ford engineers successfully built a 2.3L prototype engine on which they could implement and fully test this twin scroll system - for real, on an engine-dyno. Using a special camshaft to drive an F150 EcoBoost GDI fuel pump, the fueling was in place for our target of 300hp/300tq with full boost by 2000rpm for a v8-like powerband"

From here -

http://www.full-race.com/articles/Mustang-EcoBoost-SingleScroll-Vs-Twinscroll.php

 

[JerseyDevil]

They're cam driven. It'd be interesting to hook up a fuel pressure gauge between the HPFP and the fuel pump in the tank. It's very possible that the in tank pump is slacking, and making the DI pump do more work. This is a common issue on diesels but not sure how sufficient our lift pumps are.

Insufficient pre hpfp pressure/flow was the initial limiter on the BMW turbo engines. I have monitored the pre and post pressures on my accessport and they have been stable at tuned(300hp) levels.

 

[LeonBorden]

I'm just wondering what they look like on larger turbo setups.

If the HPFP is having to lift fuel AND inject it, this could cause a lot of fluctuations at higher power levels.

 

[Juben]

I'm just wondering what they look like on larger turbo setups.

If the HPFP is having to lift fuel AND inject it, this could cause a lot of fluctuations at higher power levels.

There is a LPFP (lift pump) in the tank.

 

[LeonBorden]

:clap2:

There is a LPFP (lift pump) in the tank.

I'm fully aware. Which is why I stated earlier about the performance of that pump. If the pump is not performing up to par at higher HP levels, the HPFP will pick up its slack, lowering the fuel ceiling.

 

[RubyRedBoost]

Wouldn't a custom cam grind with say 5 or 6 lobe system boost the duty cycle quite significantly. Perhaps I am thinking too simplistic. However based on the engine cut aways I've seen it seems like a solid avenue.

 

[dragonacc]

Wouldn't a custom cam grind with say 5 or 6 lobe system boost the duty cycle quite significantly. Perhaps I am thinking too simplistic. However based on the engine cut aways I've seen it seems like a solid avenue.

Full Race did mention that they are experimenting with different profiles for that. Not sure replacing the cam would be any more cost effective than replacing the pump itself.

 

[Alex]

Excellent discussion here.

There is a lift pump (LPFP) in the tank. The pressure is regulated right at the pump by the ECU using a varying PWM voltage. The pressure under load is regulated at 71psi but you will see variations. Any of the tuning tools such as the COBB AP allows you to monitor and adjust the pressure.

On the 2.0 this in-tank pump has plenty of flow. Tested that it is capable of supporting well above 400whp.

After this pump there is the cam driven pump. The amount of fuel it can deliver is based on a few variables.

1. Piston diameter. This is internal to the pump can difficult to adjust without building a brand new pump.
2. Piston stroke. This is determined by the cam as well as the pump itself.
3. Number of cam lobes. The more lobes the better but every time you add a lobe you end up decreasing the stroke so you have to be careful.
4. Engine speed. The higher you go in RPM the more fuel there is available. This favours bigger well breathing turbos.

The HPFP used to be a part that we could swap out the piston and cylinder in on the early DI engines (VW, Mazda) but the Ford units are sealed and are damaged if opened up. The good thing is that they can deliver a lot of fuel out of the box. On the 2.0 EB motor which uses a 3 lobe cam there is enough fuel to approach 370-390whp and 360-380 ft lbs of torque before the pump starts to have significant pressure drops.

The pressure this pump delivers under load in stock form is up to 2900psi. At idle it will sit around 250psi. You can monitor all this via a tool like the COBB AP. This is also all tunable electronically.

Past this the injectors come into play. On the 2.0 they are good to around 400whp ... matching the pump quite well. There are some aftermarket DI injectors marketed but really they are just OEM injectors out of different products that fit and we are talking about small increases such as 10% so far. The HPFP is out of fuel by this point anyways.

An effective way to add more fuel is to add a port injection system that is only used under high loads/boost. This is something OEMs have done (Toyota) and it is effective in that you keep the efficiency of DI and add the much less expensive port injection (easy to upgrade as well) which is only used under high loads. It also cleans the valves somewhat which is nice. This is what Juben was mentioning and what I have been working with and on with the 2.0 and Mazda 2.3 DI before this (they are the grandfather of the Ecoboost). But really first the true limit of the DI system has to be found on the 2.3 EB and it should be higher than the 2.0. For some this will be enough and others will always want more and there are solutions for this.

The beauty of the Ecoboost is that there is a lot of cross design between the engine iterations and as a collective we all learn from what has been done on the 3.5, the 2.0, the 1.6 etc. and the all apply to the 2.3.

 

[dragonacc]

Good info Alex, thanks for the post.

 

[FreddyG]

They're cam driven. It'd be interesting to hook up a fuel pressure gauge between the HPFP and the fuel pump in the tank. It's very possible that the in tank pump is slacking, and making the DI pump do more work. This is a common issue on diesels but not sure how sufficient our lift pumps are.

I was monitoring the Fuel Rail pressure the other day (Torque App) while driving and saw pressure near 3000 psi when in the throttle hard. I'd have to do some hard pulls and datalog to get a honest reading but needless to say it's higher than I expected.

Also saw that the rail pressure at idle varied a lot. A very jagged/spikey graph to say the least. But I have another thread started on my theories about that so I won't hijack this one.

Thanks for the info! :cheers:
The C7 Vette Tuners changed something that had to do with the camshafts, so that makes a bunch more sense now!

Thanks again!

 

[Alex]

The best place to start learning about the behaviour of the car (and all its systems) is by datalogging and live monitoring. A great amount of insight comes from this - not sure if this is something that is common in the community yet.

If it's something that is new, let me know and I can put together a little write-up about what to look at, what it means, and what to look out for.

 

[Juben]

The best place to start learning about the behaviour of the car (and all its systems) is by datalogging and live monitoring. A great amount of insight comes from this - not sure if this is something that is common in the community yet.

If it's something that is new, let me know and I can put together a little write-up about what to look at, what it means, and what to look out for.

What is your opinion on the data sampling rate of the ECU for datalogging and live monitoring, Alex? I know Livernois seems to think it's pretty inadequate, but I've never seen anyone else mention it or discuss it.

Sponsored