Finally got theSupercharged 5.4L V8D engine on the rollers

Finally got theSupercharged 5.4L V8D engine on the rollers

Author
Discussion

daxtojeiro

Original Poster:

742 posts

253 months

Monday 16th December 2013
quotequote all
Big thanks to Ray from V8Developments and Shaun from MS2Tuning.com for all their help and expertise!
Boost is at 8psi using a Rotrex C38-81, Fully Sequential fuel and ignition (MS3 of course) water injection and charge cooler.




paulathome

686 posts

225 months

Monday 16th December 2013
quotequote all
Mmmmm very nice power Phil well done.
Have you found any advantage to speak of going fully sequential and did you do any comparisons with the same setup but batch fired?
Oh.......this thread needs pictures smile
Paul.

roseytvr

1,788 posts

185 months

Monday 16th December 2013
quotequote all
Very impressive that, are you watching Peter?

daxtojeiro

Original Poster:

742 posts

253 months

Monday 16th December 2013
quotequote all
Peter who?

I have only noticed that it runs smoother when the fuel firing angle is set up correctly. This did take a lot of effort, but it was worth it. I sorted this before the dyno run and thats why its a little rich, I hadnt had time to finish the tuning off before sticking it on the rollers. I have leaned it out a little now, so it may get a little more power, but who knows. Its quicker than I can drive it!






Hoofa

3,151 posts

215 months

Monday 16th December 2013
quotequote all
You gone coil on plug ?., just wondering what the carbon efi bit above the plug leads ?.

daxtojeiro

Original Poster:

742 posts

253 months

Tuesday 17th December 2013
quotequote all
Hoofa said:
You gone coil on plug ?., just wondering what the carbon efi bit above the plug leads ?.
Yeah, its sequential fuel and ignition, I used the LS2 COPs as they are Coil Near Plug and extreamly powerful. They looked horrible so I made an alluminium cover for them, this still didnt look great so I covered them with that stuff. That is a winter project to make it look a bit better as its still tatty,
thanks,
Phil

spend

12,581 posts

258 months

Tuesday 17th December 2013
quotequote all
daxtojeiro said:
I have only noticed that it runs smoother when the fuel firing angle is set up correctly. This did take a lot of effort, but it was worth it.
So you're saying that sequential injection has more benefits than commonly accepted?

I've always believed evening out the pressure drops by sequential firing the injectors must give more accurate delivery, as well as never quite understanding how there could be no effect from some fuel being blown straight in & some left sitting on the port floor...

daxtojeiro

Original Poster:

742 posts

253 months

Tuesday 17th December 2013
quotequote all
spend said:
So you're saying that sequential injection has more benefits than commonly accepted?

I've always believed evening out the pressure drops by sequential firing the injectors must give more accurate delivery, as well as never quite understanding how there could be no effect from some fuel being blown straight in & some left sitting on the port floor...
The theory is that the fuel starts to go in as the valve shuts, so that it has lots of time to evaporate and mix with the air.
So what I did was set it up theoretically then played with the timing of the fuel until the engine sounded at its best, this actually corresponded with the richest mixture through the angle settings too, therefore the most efficient angle for maximum burn I guess.
The angle is a bit ambiguos in that it was around 80-100 degrees where it sounded best and was at its richest. So all I did was set it in the middle of the range. The rest of the fuel timing (RPM/Load) I follwed the theory of increasing the angle by 40degrees for every 1000 rpm.

I need to sit down and and work out the cycle angle when the fuel is added in relationship to the valve opening time to see if the theory is correct, it probably wont be frown
Phil

MPoxon

5,329 posts

180 months

Tuesday 17th December 2013
quotequote all
Very impressive figures and a stunning engine bay. Is it supposed to be running that rich at higher RPM?

daxtojeiro

Original Poster:

742 posts

253 months

Tuesday 17th December 2013
quotequote all
My lambdas dont agree with the rolling road's, mine are reading around 12.2 above 5500rpm.
The Rolling road lambda was stuffed in the end of the exhaust, so not in a very good place,
cheers,
Phil

Pupp

12,357 posts

279 months

Tuesday 17th December 2013
quotequote all
What ign advance did you end up with at 8psi Phil?

BuzzBillsberry

1,306 posts

238 months

Wednesday 18th December 2013
quotequote all
Great figures great looking engine.

Buzz

daxtojeiro

Original Poster:

742 posts

253 months

Wednesday 18th December 2013
quotequote all
Pupp said:
What ign advance did you end up with at 8psi Phil?
We ran a very concervative ignition map, as my knock sensors picked up a lot of noise from the pistons. I will add some advance in the summer when the air temp gets up and see what happens. So on that run it was running a 9.5 degrees, (2 had been pulled out of the map due to air temp increasing above 35C)
As you can see the air temp out of the blower was up at 90C, Ive never seen this on the road, but then I dont have my foot to the floor for 20-30Seconds in one gear either smile

Pupp

12,357 posts

279 months

Wednesday 18th December 2013
quotequote all
Thanks, that's useful to see... probably still good gains to be got. Was expecting you to say you were at 18 degrees or so!

daxtojeiro

Original Poster:

742 posts

253 months

Thursday 19th December 2013
quotequote all
Pupp said:
Thanks, that's useful to see... probably still good gains to be got. Was expecting you to say you were at 18 degrees or so!
I didn't do any tuning on the rollers, its just the map we tuned on the road with a safe spark map. I will add some advance to it now I know its not detonating, should go over 450 then smile

Top half of ignition map:


pjac67

2,040 posts

259 months

Thursday 19th December 2013
quotequote all
Hi Phil - what figures were you getting before the SC ?

Curious as I'm awaiting my 5.4 from V8D - why SC over Turbo ?

Regards, Paul.

phazed

21,994 posts

211 months

Thursday 19th December 2013
quotequote all
roseytvr said:
Very impressive that, are you watching Peter?
I've only just seen this thread, doh!

Nice work Phil.

This will be my next step hopefully next winter on my 5.5.

What compression are you running?

Are you using a bespoke cam?

The torque isn't as much as I thought it might be, ( mines nearly 400 na) which is good otherwise it would be a real handful getting traction, especially on a damp/wet road yikes

daxtojeiro

Original Poster:

742 posts

253 months

Thursday 19th December 2013
quotequote all
This is the dyno run with the old 5L TVR engine (2010) and the 5.4 N/A (2011) the figures were pretty disapointing to be honest.

I fitted a blower to the 5.4 and melted the pistons (10.7:1cr) so V8Developments sorted me out some Diamond pistons giving me a cr of 8.9:1
I had a cam made by Kent, the specification came from the V8Forum, as theres a few guys on there who've already done a load of work on cam designs for blown motors. Kent actually ran it through their software and said in theory it looked like a really good profile, I must confess Im happy with the way it lays the power down, totally useable. Thats what I wanted, there were other options that I could have gone for to get the power at a different rev range, but the way it is now means I can floor it and it doesnt try to rip the rear wheels off straight away, its a little progressive.
Mind you I have spun the wheels at 70mph in the dry, so it still needs some respect smile

Inlet 220 - Exh 225 (at 50 tho)
Inlet lift 0.47"
Ex Lift 0.485"
Lobe Seperation 114



Edited by daxtojeiro on Thursday 19th December 13:01

phazed

21,994 posts

211 months

Thursday 19th December 2013
quotequote all
Is that last graph showing the na 5.0 & 5.4 engines?

Thanks for the other info, I'll log that and see what I have.

900T-R

20,405 posts

264 months

Thursday 19th December 2013
quotequote all
The lower one would be the std 5.0, right? If so, that's bang on.

The upper two assumedly being 5.4 figures I'd say they're about what I'd have expected too - the extra capacity won't do all that much given the TVR five-oh already has just about the biggest valves and ports you can squeeze into an RV8 head (in fact, the heads are massively overported for the valve sizes...) had you stayed NA, further gains would have to come from induction improvements IMHO.

I am rather surprised though that the N/A 5.4's power peak seems to be 4-500 rpm higher than that of the TVR 5.0... I'd have expected this to be the other way round given the modest difference in peak output.