one for the techys - additional fuel rail

robkendall · Post by **robkendall** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:09 am

How hard would it be to add another fuel rail on the car?
what would be the options to do it?
i imagine it *could* be done making a splitter for the original inlets, and mounting two rails in that, but im not sure.....imagine doing this would only give about the same results as bigger injectors?

its just a conceptual thing at the mo....am thinking along the lines of the RS500....it had 2 fuel rails....aston martin modified 'normal' cossies to produce the rs500, so adding in another fuel rail is possible....i dont think they produced a completely different head or anything.

rgrds
rob

Ettore Bugatti · Post by **Ettore Bugatti** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:29 am

Very hard.
The problem is to get the two rows of injectors working. Fueldistribution is the a problem at some spots it gets too dense and on the other spot it gets too lean. This would mean a new custommade inletmanifold
An other problem is to get the injectors controlled. The ECU would have to be modded or an extra fuel injector controller is needed.

It is a very nice idea, but it requires (IMHO) an custom inletmanifold and an aftermarket ECU

robkendall · Post by **robkendall** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:32 am

couldnt you run two ecus? (one for rich!)
if both the ecus are 'tuned' the same, wouldnt this work?

rgrds
rob

martinholmesuk · Post by **martinholmesuk** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:38 am

I don't see the point mate, I already have injectors from a 760 V6 2.8lt that spray more, MatBat has injectors that spray around 10 feet into the air (no joke) crazy bat!

If you want to go very fast then get a turbo and have Rich mod it.

of course the rich mod uses more/other parts to make all that power

robkendall · Post by **robkendall** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:39 am

yeah, i agree that upgrading the injectors is gonna give you more ooopmh, but theyre not gonna get near the extra power a totally seperate fuel rail is gonna give.
(plus, you can always upgrade the injectors in both those rails too!)
like i said...its just a thought at the mo....aston martin obviously saw a benefit in doing it, and the rs500 with both rails connected gave 500bhp on a 2ltr engine, so theres proven ability there.
rgrds
rob

480_rocket · Post by **480_rocket** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:22 am

Maybe having the two stages of injectors was to get it to idle right and get some drivability.

Ettore Bugatti · Post by **Ettore Bugatti** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:34 am

Here is some more talk over an additional fuel-controller
http://volvo480.northernscum.org.uk/for ... php?t=5052
I remember it was also mentioned in the ECU tuning thread in the first pages

dbsvolvos · Post by **dbsvolvos** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:47 am

this was the first idea with MS , the original injectors would kepe a nice lovely idle etc , the second set only operating when needed , its a space consideration - there really isnt enough room to mount it properly and safely - the best position would somewhere over the turbo - a slight leak or broken mounting and er , you know what .

you could mount them at the front (maybe two or so) , the fuel has a long way to travel and mixture distibution would be a problem , most injectors are designed to spray directly behind a valve , altho F1 cars have two injectors in the tract - thats primarily because at 18000rpm , the fuel needs more time to mix with air .

Anyway - its still a good idea - but tuning can be acomplished with 4 injectors so we didnt go that route .

martinholmesuk · Post by **martinholmesuk** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:50 am

but theyre not gonna get near the extra power a totally seperate fuel rail is gonna give

I think that's why I have big injectors, cheap and works so far

robkendall · Post by **robkendall** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:13 pm

dbsvolvos wrote: the best position would somewhere over the turbo - a slight leak or broken mounting and er , you know what .
Anyway - its still a good idea - but tuning can be acomplished with 4 injectors so we didnt go that route .

im an NA guy....dont know how much if any effect doing this kinda thing would have on an NA engine.....richard has said that the NA ecu is tuneable, but too much hard work, so at least it IS tuneable.....im just aware that a decent percent of the owners on here are NA owners, and the majority of mods/tunes etc are only for the turbos, so just trying to redress the balance!!
of course, we could all do the 'decent' thing and buy turbos, but until then....
lol
rob

martinholmesuk · Post by **martinholmesuk** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:33 pm

I'm sure if you waved some nice cash then Richard would do another b18ep mod, My ES (almost lol) has the Richard mod.

Ettore Bugatti · Post by **Ettore Bugatti** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 3:07 pm

Well, it doesn't make much sense to tune a N/A on 480.
It would cost a lot more to get the cylinderhead done, install sport camshaft and installing a better exhaust and inlet on a N/A. Then chipping a Turbo.
Both ways would give you about 150 HP but the Turbo wins on torque. Besides a Turbo has nicer equipment then a S (generally)
However there's a cheaper way too have a powerfull N/A engine: Installing a Renault 1.8 or 2.0 16V with 130/ 150 hp.

rpruen · Post by **rpruen** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 3:53 pm

robkendall wrote:couldnt you run two ecus? (one for rich!)
if both the ecus are 'tuned' the same, wouldnt this work?

rgrds
rob

That is more difficult to do than you think!

It would be quite possible to fit a turbo LH in addition to an ES ECU to use that for fueling.

That would give all the flexibility you would need for fitting a hot cam etc.

Since it's based on the actual flow of air, the LH would not need any special tuning for even a highly modified ES engine. That's the way I would be going (instead of add on fuel controlers / fuel rails). There's no point in adding extra fuel unless you can get extra air in there to burn it. Just more fuel on it's own will make your car slower!

You can use insane size injectors with the LH and still have a car that passes the MOT (mat's B18FTM passed with 1.5% CO). He has Saab red top injectors that are huge for the requirements of the engine. So it looks like fueling up to and above 300hp isn't going to be a problem.

Richard

rpruen · Post by **rpruen** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 4:00 pm

martinholmesuk wrote:I'm sure if you waved some nice cash then Richard would do another b18ep mod, My ES (almost lol) has the Richard mod.

I still say it's not worth it. In total you will get a few hp more, that's just increasing the fuel a little, and advancing the timeing a touch at higher rpm (still controled by the knock sensor).

A free flowing exhaust would then help a little more, but I can't see you getting much more than 10 - 15 hp more, and a little more torque at high rpm.

The ES ecu is also a pain to do as it requires unsoldering the chip, then putting it back after. It's just not cost effective.

Richard

chris1roll · Post by **chris1roll** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:13 pm

There is a "bodge" you could do yourself to the ES though.
Remove the crank position sensor, and file out the holes on it to allow you to move it in the opposite direction to the engines rotation. This way you should be able to advance the timing in a similar manner to the old twizzle the dizzy cap trick.
I guess you would need a stroboscope to set it up properly, but the knock sensor should still protect your engine.
If i race this year i'm going to try this, rather than hassling Richard!

Course this might not work at all, but Edd and I thought of it a littlel while ago, and can't see why it wouldn't. Oh, and don't do it the wrong way and retard the timing, that would be...interesting.

Chris

rpruen · Post by **rpruen** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:21 pm

Chris,

That's a good idea, it's cheap and simple for anyone to do.

It's going to be hard to file the holes out enough to hurt the engine, you will make a few degrees change, and that will be fine. It should be about 1.2mm per degree of timing advance (aproximatly).

Richard

chris1roll · Post by **chris1roll** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:37 pm

Murf · Post by **Murf** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 7:31 pm

wahey, put me down for that one!!
i'll let someone else be the guinea pig though!!

Oh, and the RS500? *Drool*

chris1roll · Post by **chris1roll** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 7:35 pm

If you work out which way the engine rotates first, and then make sure you file the holes the correct way, then you can easily set it back to standard, i.e. hard against the original edges.

From an insurance POV it virtually untraceable too!

tobi480turbo · Post by **tobi480turbo** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:02 pm

Hi there

hmhmhm could this little idea by chris probably be useful at my engine ?!
so that I can adavance the base ignition timing a little bit ?

regards

Tobi