Serious Tuning Help Needed (600+ whp 2.3L Whipple w/ meth)

[HellsBells]

Hey everyone,

So my tuning problems are never ending. I am retuning the car for 91 octane down from 93 octane. My question really homes in on timing and I am at a loss.

Here are my motor mods relevant to tuning:

Brenspeed B326 Block 9.8:1 Compression
2.3L Whipple /w 10-rib kit, puts down 16-18psi...this is where it gets funky (more on this later) -- Whipple blower has 10-rib kit but everything else is as it comes from Whipple (Whipple Elbow, Whipple Intake/Filter)
Stock Throttle Body
Snow Performance 50/50 Methanol Injection, using since 675ml jet, spray starts at 1psi, max set to 18psi.
Anderson Ford F-53 Cams ([URL="http://i650.photobucket.com/albums/uu223/letsdoubleupthedorito/photo_zps0e68b142.jpg"]Click for Specs[/URL])
Anderson Ford Valvesprings ([URL="http://i650.photobucket.com/albums/uu223/letsdoubleupthedorito/DSC_7413_zps1a315fd7.jpg"]Click for Specs[/URL])
Stock Heads
BBR VCT Lockouts
Stock 5-Speed with McLeod RXT and Aluminum Flywheel
DSS Driveshaft
3.55 Gears, factory LSD
Factory Exhaust Manifolds
O/R H pipe w/ Corsa Straight-Through Mufflers
80lbs FRPP Injectors
Fore Fuel Rails
Fore Fuel Hat, Dual 450lph pumps (return style)
Fore FPR
Fore FC3 Fuel Pump Controller (2nd pump on hobbs switch)
Brisk Silver Racing Sparkplugs
Kenne Bell Boost a Spark

Here is the most power it made with 16 degrees of timing up top, on 93 Octane with methanol:

(Ignore the dip up top, you can see it went fat there and then picked up. This never showed up again after we tuned it out)
As you can see the chart is a bit shaky, especially up top--my other pulls from yesterday were much worse and across the entire powerband.

Here's what we did on 91:

Retuned it, AFR's are dead flat 12:1 (i mean, DEAD FLAT) but the hp graph was zig zag up and down through the entire pull. This car has never made a clean smooth line ever since the new motor.

Yesterday, we were putting down anywhere between 540hp/600tq. We were wondering where all the power went. The strangest part was that while horsepower was down, torque seemed to still be fine. SAE correction on/off showed little difference.

So against better judgment, decided to throw more timing at it, especially down low. Ran 4 degrees on the bottom end and put it to 23 degrees up top--leaned it out to 12.5 AFRs. Sure as shit, car made 581/640 on 91 and meth--but the most confusing part was that the graph was the cleanest pull I've ever seen. I always have smoothing set to 0, and this graph was really straight, no wiggling up and down. It was even smoother than my mostly stock pull, which was fairly smooth (I forgot to print out the last 581/640 pull):

So now my dilemma is, I am definitely not making the power I think I can make, but can I throw more timing at it? I can't figure out if leaning out the AFR's made the graph real nice and smooth or adding the timing did. That will have to wait until next time I get a chance to experiment.

In a nutshell, the hp/tq graphs are telling me that the car wants more timing or wants to run leaner. This makes sense with methanol as the effective octane would be basically race gas--I believe it would be around 110 with the methanol and 91--in either case, definitely in race gas territory. The rule of thumb is also that you can/should run motors leaner with methanol but even 12.5:1 makes me really nervous--not to mention the 20 degrees of timing up top on a stock compression motor. If I had a low comp, I would feel much more comfortable--then again, I don't know these motors as well as many of you do.

A note on the boost, we made 620/680 with 18.5psi peak. This is where I really wish I had the graphs to show you guys--I might try and run back to the dyno and get them. In comparison, the 581/640 pull only made 16.5psi of peak boost and in many parts of the graph (4500rpm and down), it made MORE power and MORE torque than my 620/680 pull, with 1-2psi less boost. So I'm thinking adding timing and/or leaning it out made the motor more efficient--after all, boost is a measure of restriction--it just seems much happier with the 4 degrees (as opposed to 0) down low. The top end of the pulls were similar though with 20 degrees and a leaner AFR, it was much smoother. Or perhaps the cams are strange and require that sort of timing (though the VCT is locked out)--I am not very good with cam profiles so if the ones up top look strange to any of you, please chime in with any info.

So my questions are:

Does 581/640 seem right for a 326 + 2.3L whipple + methanol, 12.5 AFR, 16.5psi, and 20 degrees timing up top?

It seems the car would make even more power, just comparing graphs yesterday, it seemed it would have hit well over 600hp and almost 700 tq if we just threw more timing at it. All pulls were clean, no detonation that we could hear (though we can't be sure because the iron block from Brenspeed does away with the knock sensors).

Second, how much timing are you guys / would you guys run with a set up like mine? I have looked at some other tunes for Whipples/KB blowers and some run as high as 28 degrees up top--that is just plain scary to me, as my understanding was these 3v motors don't need that kind of timing to make power.

At the end of the day, I'm not looking to put down record-breaking numbers. I realize the 2.3L whipple is the WRONG unit to make huge power but looking at all the signs, it seems low.

Is running 4, maybe even 6-8 degrees of timing in the 2000-4000 RPM range a big no-no? Is 12.5 AFR too lean? I know some guys run their race cars with methanol injection as lean as 14:1 with boost but mine is just a street car--I'd like it to last forever.

All input and opinions welcome! At this point, I am almost ready to throw in the towel. If anyone here knows anybody with real experience with a set up like mine, I'd love to pick their brains a little. My other alternative is to ditch the methanol altogether--but I don't think it could really be hurting anything.

One more sidenote, has anyone seen the stock 3v coil packs go bad a lot? The wiggly dyno charts made me think they were going out. Pull after pull, it got worse and worse. I hate to just throw parts at it when it won't fix an issue. This was before leaning out to 12.5 and adding timing--which made really clean straight pulls, as I said before. So that makes me think it's NOT the coil packs. I put brand new plugs in it yesterday too before the dyno. If anyone thinks going to an MSD coil pack would help, I'd highly consider it but at this point, I don't think the problem is in the hardware.

Lastly, I am running a stock Whipple intercooler, heat exchanger, and pump--my IATs are right around 118-120 degrees--which seems fine to me. This should be a post-methanol intake charge as my IAT sensor is in one of the intake manifold runners.

Thanks in advance!

 

[BruceH]

The first thing that sticks out to me are your cams. Very little duration and if I'm thinking correctly they are advanced quite a bit. IIRC the stock cams have a centerline of 102. Your intake centerline is 108. Since you are locked out you can't use the phasers to retard it.

I'd make sure about the advance that's built into the cams first. It it was like I'm thinking I'd move the sprockets two teeth which would give you about 17 degrees of retard from where you are now. If I'm correct about the centerline this would bring you to about 11 degrees of retard which is pretty close to where the factory tune is with the stock cams.

My Whipple was always 11x degrees at the end of the quarter mile, I think your temps are great.

Once you get above 16 psi the returns really start to drop off with a 2.3 Whipple. The reason is the back part of the intake elbow becomes a restriction. I'd think you could run 19 degrees of spark pretty easy but the big bore doesn't have knock sensors so I'd keep it at 17 or run e85 and add timing until it stopped making more power. I was able to run 23 degrees at 15-16 psi with mine on e85 without issue.

To recap: I'd get different cams or at least retard the ones you have. The specs look almost like stock with 2 degrees less lsa, higher lift, and an advanced intake center line. Pick up some 127450 or 550 and see what happens.

 

[HellsBells]

Thanks Bruce! I didn't even notice that about the cams. Do you think I'd be shooting myself in the foot if I went back to stock cams? I don't really want to throw more money at it at this point.

I know this might not be ideal but, suppose I didn't change the cams or tweak the sprockets--would there be any way to tune around that without VCT? The last 580/640 pull was really nice, car felt real solid on the dyno, no variations, engine sounded healthy.

Could it be possible that with the centerline at 108, it just wants more spark down low? That kind of makes sense in my head but I'm not sure if this is a good long-term solution. I upped all the 0 values down low to 4 and it cleaned up the entire pull. Maybe I could run the 4 degrees down low and bring it back down to 17-18 degrees up top?

And just to be sure, the drop in boost with more timing/less fuel would be from the motor being more efficient if it's actually making more power than before (on 91 vs 93 even), correct? (ignoring peak power, the 580 pull made more power and torque than my 619 pull all the way until about 5000RPM).

 

[BruceH]

I just did an online calculator on the stock cams. I was wrong. They have an intake centerline of 109 which is real close to what you have. I'd still retard them though. The stock cams have 9 degrees of retard at wot.

 

[CPRsm]

Don't add 4 at a time to start!!!! That's how you blow shit up. Add 1-2, see how it reacts. In your case it would have gained 20-40rwhp, which means it wanted timing. Although AFR isn't technically changing, the timing is why the AFR showed leaner. I still wouldn't do 12.5, but that's me. 3700-5500 I wouldn't add more timing. That peak torque/high VE area/danger zone. Try richening it up across the board like 2% and add 1.5 deg starting at 5500 and see what happens. If it picks up 15rwhp+ again try another .75 deg across the board. Make sure you didn't have another AFR shift from the timing from the last pull. Make adjustments if it did.

 

[HellsBells]

Thanks guys!

Dustin: I actually pulled about 5% fuel from the maf transfer when I bumped up the timing--it was an experimental pull against all my better judgment--we didn't have any knock though. I don't plan on running it like this or anything, it was just interesting to see that the car ran much smoother that way.

For now, I am looking for someone who has made 600+ with a whipple 2.3 on a 3v....hoping they can help me out, or I could buy a tune file off of them (wishful thinking? lol).

 

[BruceH]

Something I forgot to add is that unless you tune for the meth it will take power away. At least that was my experience with it. That's probably why you saw the big increase with 22 degrees.

Have you tried or thought about turning the spark back to 17 or so degrees and turning the meth off? I'd keep an eye on the a/f if you did it because the meth is adding to it right now.

Are your a/f readings coming out of the tailpipe? It's usually good for a reading of .5 or more lean than the a/f really is. My whipple was happiest at 12.0 or 12.5 at the tailpipe. I wouldn't go that lean unless you have flow matched injectors though.

 

[HellsBells]

Something I forgot to add is that unless you tune for the meth it will take power away. At least that was my experience with it. That's probably why you saw the big increase with 22 degrees.

Have you tried or thought about turning the spark back to 17 or so degrees and turning the meth off? I'd keep an eye on the a/f if you did it because the meth is adding to it right now.

Are your a/f readings coming out of the tailpipe? It's usually good for a reading of .5 or more lean than the a/f really is. My whipple was happiest at 12.0 or 12.5 at the tailpipe. I wouldn't go that lean unless you have flow matched injectors though.

Injectors aren't flow matched, just out of the box FRPP 80lbs. The AFR is at the tailpipe and I also have an on-board wideband at the O2 sensor location to monitor--they read fairly close. I'm not sure how all shops do it, we have the sensor working off a venturi, it's been good to us so far.

I think what I'm going to do next is start from the bottom up. Tune it without methanol, get it all happy and good to go. Then turn on the meth and adjust from there. We're definitely seeing a good bump in fuel from the meth, no doubt about that.

 

[CPRsm]

Thanks guys!

Dustin: I actually pulled about 5% fuel from the maf transfer when I bumped up the timing--it was an experimental pull against all my better judgment--we didn't have any knock though. I don't plan on running it like this or anything, it was just interesting to see that the car ran much smoother that way.

don't lean it out and add timing either lol. Unless you are VERY rich. The plug gap may be on the verye of blow out and liked the leaner mixture. Most any engine is going to like 12.5-1, it's just the fuel that doesn't lol

 

[HellsBells]

I hear ya. I'm hoping to end up around 17-18 degrees up top and back down to 0 in the lower RPM range. This car just hates me......nothing has ever gone smoothly.

 

[CPRsm]

0? If it takes 18-20 midrange it will take more up top. More timing because it has less time to burn. So it gets more advance.

 

[HellsBells]

0? If it takes 18-20 midrange it will take more up top. More timing because it has less time to burn. So it gets more advance.

My initial tune had 0 degrees timing down bottom, even in high load. Is it okay to run 4 degrees even at 2000rpm? I thought it was best at 0 when the RPMs were low.

I ran 23 degrees up top on the 580/640 pull. However, I am beginning to get a feeling that the motor isn't actually seeing that much timing...would there be modifiers or another table that would affect the values in the Borderline Knock table?

 

[CPRsm]

Nah 0 is too low. Good way to burn exh valves and crack headers. I'd try 12 deg down low to start under load. You do need to be careful of low piston speed and instant boost, but 0 is nuggin futs lol. Can probably do a bit more than 12 bit creep up on it.

I'm not sure on that strategy but you should be able to log source 1 iirc for anything that might be pulling timing. But logging timing will tell you what you're actually running.

 

[dysan]

From my recent experience I am not a fan of the FRPP 80lb injectors. I had one start having an issue so temporarily I switched my 60lb ones back in and with everything else the same my car picked up over 2 tenths at the track. I am also on E85 so Lito just bumped up the fuel pressure and the car feels and drives much better as well with the 60's.

If you need that much injector I really suggest going with a better injector like the ID's. The 80's are very poor at low pulse / fuel demand and I believe they also have a poor spray pattern.

 

[05yellowgt]

My initial tune had 0 degrees timing down bottom, even in high load. Is it okay to run 4 degrees even at 2000rpm? I thought it was best at 0 when the RPMs were low.

I ran 23 degrees up top on the 580/640 pull. However, I am beginning to get a feeling that the motor isn't actually seeing that much timing...would there be modifiers or another table that would affect the values in the Borderline Knock table?

Are you talking about 0 degrees in the timing tables in the tune or 0 degrees added/removed from the handheld from 0-4000rpm? I want to make sure I am following you correctly. If you were running 0 degrees in the timing tables, that is WAY LOW as has already been said.

 

[Department Of Boost]

If you need that much injector I really suggest going with a better injector like the ID's. The 80's are very poor at low pulse / fuel demand and I believe they also have a poor spray pattern.

What were the symptoms?

 

[dysan]

What were the symptoms?

Poor response especially when drag racing when I get off and back on the throttle, gas mileage, difference in the tone and smoothness of the engine overall especially part throttle, when I would start the engine I would have to hold my foot lightly on the throttle until I built some heat in the cylinders and I'm sure there were a few other things that I can't remember right now.

Since putting the 60's back in I can just simply turn the key and the car will start and idle beautifully now, it is smoother, just feels better overall.

 

[05yellowgt]

I never experienced that with my 80's, but running E85 I think took care of some of those issues because of the added fuel demand.

 

[dysan]

I never experienced that with my 80's, but running E85 I think took care of some of those issues because of the added fuel demand.

I am on E85 as well but I may have just had a poor batch of injectors...that's quite possible.

 

[05yellowgt]

I am on E85 as well but I may have just had a poor batch of injectors...that's quite possible.

I wonder if when your car was tuned, it used the original injector specs that FRPP released. I fought with it for several WEEKS on the dyno because the injector values that were released were flat out wrong. Once they revised them, things smoothed out nicely.