Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32

Thread: Which IFR calibration to use - Corvette LS6 or Bosch 28.8 ' 58 PSI

  1. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by joecar View Post
    I thought the injectors used on the Z06/LS6 were rated to flow 28.8 lb/hr at 58 psi...?


    28.8 lb/hr * 0.126 = 3.63 g/s
    Exactly the impression I was under but my measurements today verify the Bosch figures exactly as quoted on quite a few websites! I can only come to the conclusion that the injectors were revised at some point but retained the same GM/Bosch part number. Very hard to argue with real data. Not sure what to expect when I go for another logging run now

    Bosch: 00 280 155 931
    28.55 lbs/hr @ 43.5 PSI (or 300cc / min)


    One thing I have noticed in last my log was that the LTFT's were mostly minus when logging (VE disabled, MAF enabled) but after applying the correction to the VE table they then became mostly positive (VE enabled, MAF enabled). So something was going on and I'm still learning what to look for.

  2. #12
    Joe (Moderator) joecar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    27,752

    Default

    Hmmm, interesting.

  3. #13
    Joe (Moderator) joecar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    27,752

    Default

    Post log file, and screenshots of your maps.

  4. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    78

    Default

    I won't be able to post my VE pic for a bit but the two relevant logs are already posted earlier in the thead.

    #6 - Log_2407.efi (taken after two previous CALC.VET captures)

    #1 - Drive_Home_2704.efi (metric PID, log taken after applying the CALC.VET above)



    <EDIT - I've attached my current B0101>

    This map is from 3 log runs. Unlike my first efforts I don't use the smooth tool on the whole map just some small areas. I tend to just manually reduce spikes n dips now.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	MainVE_2704.jpg 
Views:	262 
Size:	298.1 KB 
ID:	14960
    Last edited by bimbleuk; May 3rd, 2013 at 04:33 AM.

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Hi

    Just to add the more I look at the info for the GM 12561462 injectors the more convinced I am that the LS6 engines did indeed have a 28.8 lbs/hr @ 58 PSI injectors from say '01 - '03. Then maybe from '04 onwards when Holden were carrying on the LS1 in the Monaro's they used an uprated injector from Bosch but with the same GM part number on them (mine have that number on them). Here's some flow data from an LS6 injector (931) with an LS1 (890) injector for comparison. Dated from '05 but the injectors were from a second hand pullout motor in the US.

    Also to back this up if you look at the Holden IFR in post #6 ignoring the somewhat odd shape of the slope, the injector values go up to 4.6 g/s which is 14% above the LS6 injectors.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	LS1_Injector_Flow_Comparison.jpg 
Views:	379 
Size:	240.6 KB 
ID:	14959

  6. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    78

    Default

    I've made two log runs today. First was to get enough data to correct the MAF table. Unsurprisingly after increasing my IFR table to match my actual injector flow rate the MAF table corrected by +12-13% across the cells I was able to hit. I then uploaded that calibration back to the PCM and did another fairly comprehensive run.

    I used the VET corrections from both runs to change my old VE (B0101) table and realised it was changing quite drastically so had to fudge about 30% of the table. Mostly the high load cells so they won't be hit very often (until I get on a dyno in the next couple of weeks). I then made another short log with everything re-enabled just doing some driving and straight away the LTFT corrections are very low, actually mostly below 3% already despite my rough table. Much better than before with the LS6 IFR injector data which used to consistently idle with a +14% correction despite doing the RAFIG etc.

    Maybe worth a sticky thread just to warn or clarify this observation?

  7. #17
    Joe (Moderator) joecar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    27,752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bimbleuk View Post
    I've made two log runs today. First was to get enough data to correct the MAF table. Unsurprisingly after increasing my IFR table to match my actual injector flow rate the MAF table corrected by +12-13% across the cells I was able to hit. I then uploaded that calibration back to the PCM and did another fairly comprehensive run.

    I used the VET corrections from both runs to change my old VE (B0101) table and realised it was changing quite drastically so had to fudge about 30% of the table. Mostly the high load cells so they won't be hit very often (until I get on a dyno in the next couple of weeks). I then made another short log with everything re-enabled just doing some driving and straight away the LTFT corrections are very low, actually mostly below 3% already despite my rough table. Much better than before with the LS6 IFR injector data which used to consistently idle with a +14% correction despite doing the RAFIG etc.

    Maybe worth a sticky thread just to warn or clarify this observation?
    Good deal... it clearly shows that a correct IFR table allows MAF/VE and LTFT's to fall into place.

  8. #18
    Joe (Moderator) joecar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    27,752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bimbleuk View Post
    Hi

    Just to add the more I look at the info for the GM 12561462 injectors the more convinced I am that the LS6 engines did indeed have a 28.8 lbs/hr @ 58 PSI injectors from say '01 - '03. Then maybe from '04 onwards when Holden were carrying on the LS1 in the Monaro's they used an uprated injector from Bosch but with the same GM part number on them (mine have that number on them). Here's some flow data from an LS6 injector (931) with an LS1 (890) injector for comparison. Dated from '05 but the injectors were from a second hand pullout motor in the US.

    Also to back this up if you look at the Holden IFR in post #6 ignoring the somewhat odd shape of the slope, the injector values go up to 4.6 g/s which is 14% above the LS6 injectors.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	LS1_Injector_Flow_Comparison.jpg 
Views:	379 
Size:	240.6 KB 
ID:	14959
    Hmmm, interesting, 2 injectors, with 2 different flowrates, using same GM part number.

  9. #19
    Lifetime Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by joecar View Post
    Hmmm, interesting, 2 injectors, with 2 different flowrates, using same GM part number.
    I realize this is old, but am I missing something? Fact: LS1 and LS6 used the same injector but different FPRs for different IFRs. Would this tidbit have alleviated all the confusion in here? Or was it already pointed out and I missed it?
    1998 GMC Sierra K1500 5.7/4L80E, longtubes, 411 w/COS 5, marine cam/intake, Whipple. 91 octane at 6000'.
    1997 GMC Sierra K3500 7.4/4L80E, 411 w/COS 3, Whipple, small cam.
    2004 Corvette Z06 with longtubes.

  10. #20
    Joe (Moderator) joecar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    27,752

    Default

    I thought LS6/Z06 used 58 psi rail pressure with filter style FPR at the rear (outside the tanks)...?

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2010 A6 Corvette Transmission in 2007 Corvette Model
    By epic in forum E37, E38 & E67 PFI ECM's
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 24th, 2013, 12:23 PM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: August 29th, 2010, 11:15 PM
  3. Will E38 from 08 Corvette work in 2007 Corvette?
    By Chalky in forum Gen IV V8 Specific
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 5th, 2010, 09:00 AM
  4. IFR table for red 30# Bosch gen 3 injectors
    By bsomm in forum Gen III V8 Specific
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 1st, 2009, 12:05 AM
  5. Bosch ECM controller i.d.
    By forcefedjunkie in forum Duramax 06 LLY / 06+ LBZ & LMM
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: June 11th, 2007, 07:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •