My kegger mod
Thread Starter
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
From: Mesa, AZ
Unfortunately my Dad is the one that does the filming and he's in the process of finishing up chemo and radiation for a very small spot of cancer in his throat. The chemo is wiping him out and he's too tired to go to the track. So if there are any videos it'll be with my camera and they won't be very good. Once he's back on his feet I'll get some good ones.
A.J.
A.J.
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
From: Upstate South Carolina
Unfortunately my Dad is the one that does the filming and he's in the process of finishing up chemo and radiation for a very small spot of cancer in his throat. The chemo is wiping him out and he's too tired to go to the track. So if there are any videos it'll be with my camera and they won't be very good. Once he's back on his feet I'll get some good ones.
A.J.
A.J.
Thread Starter
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
From: Mesa, AZ
Thanks. His doctor is happy with his progress and says the tumor is shrinking.
The butt dyno says I've definitely got more top end where before it seems to be stagnant. My best time at the track pre 52mm TB and kegger mod was 15.2 but that was in January when it was 60* out. A friend of mine did some looking and found that 30* hotter would add about .5 of a second. Last Saturday with detonation and 100* out my best time was 15.4 but most of my time slips were 15.7.
A.J.
The kegger turned out awesome. Let us know what kind of results you get from the butt dyno and maybe what the difference in the et's are since the kegger mod. I still have to do that to my truck but just been putting it off until I can find a non egr keg with 2 coolant sensor ports.
A.J.
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
From: Upstate South Carolina
Im guessing your best time of 15.4 was probably one of the first passes if not the first if you were hot lapping. My best with my truck in the 1/8th is 9.8 @72mph and that was before the efan install. I really need a locker because I spun half track. My 30 foot time was 2.2 and I wonder what I could pick up with the kegger mod. By the end of october I should have the powertrax no slip, Harland Sharpe 1.7 rr's and kegger mod so im hoping to break into the 8's with all that plus cool weather.
Thread Starter
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
From: Mesa, AZ
I went to the track last night. My best time was 15.3 and it was 95* out. I had to run 91 octane because the previous week I was getting detonation with 87. My BEST time was last January pre 52mm TB and kegger mod but it was in the 60's. So I'm kind of comparing apples to oranges as far as temperature goes. I was having a problem with traction but I think 15.3 @ 95* with the 52mm TB and kegger mod is an improvement over 15.2 @ 60* with stock TB and intake. When it cools off I'll try again. I'm sure I can break into the 14's.
I also played with fuel pressure and '94 5.2 and '94 5.9 computers. Running the 5.2 PCM at 65 psi fuel pressure my air/fuel ratio according to my wide band O2 sensor at WOT was in the high 13's low 14.s and my average time was 15.6. My 15.3 was got with this set-up. I tried the 5.9 PCM. At stockish fuel pressure (43 psi) I lost .2 seconds consistently and my average time was 15.8 (twice in a row). I first tried the 5.9 PCM with 65 psi fuel pressure and my a/f ratio was in the 11's so I had to back it off. I'd like to get both back to back on a dyno because those test results will be more consistent with each other. At the track I could loose traction and skew the results. But with back to back 15.8's I think it's safe to say the 5.2 PCM with higher fuel pressure is a better stock performance piece.
A.J.
I also played with fuel pressure and '94 5.2 and '94 5.9 computers. Running the 5.2 PCM at 65 psi fuel pressure my air/fuel ratio according to my wide band O2 sensor at WOT was in the high 13's low 14.s and my average time was 15.6. My 15.3 was got with this set-up. I tried the 5.9 PCM. At stockish fuel pressure (43 psi) I lost .2 seconds consistently and my average time was 15.8 (twice in a row). I first tried the 5.9 PCM with 65 psi fuel pressure and my a/f ratio was in the 11's so I had to back it off. I'd like to get both back to back on a dyno because those test results will be more consistent with each other. At the track I could loose traction and skew the results. But with back to back 15.8's I think it's safe to say the 5.2 PCM with higher fuel pressure is a better stock performance piece.
A.J.
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
From: Upstate South Carolina
I went to the track last night. My best time was 15.3 and it was 95* out. I had to run 91 octane because the previous week I was getting detonation with 87. My BEST time was last January pre 52mm TB and kegger mod but it was in the 60's. So I'm kind of comparing apples to oranges as far as temperature goes. I was having a problem with traction but I think 15.3 @ 95* with the 52mm TB and kegger mod is an improvement over 15.2 @ 60* with stock TB and intake. When it cools off I'll try again. I'm sure I can break into the 14's.
I also played with fuel pressure and '94 5.2 and '94 5.9 computers. Running the 5.2 PCM at 65 psi fuel pressure my air/fuel ratio according to my wide band O2 sensor at WOT was in the high 13's low 14.s and my average time was 15.6. My 15.3 was got with this set-up. I tried the 5.9 PCM. At stockish fuel pressure (43 psi) I lost .2 seconds consistently and my average time was 15.8 (twice in a row). I first tried the 5.9 PCM with 65 psi fuel pressure and my a/f ratio was in the 11's so I had to back it off. I'd like to get both back to back on a dyno because those test results will be more consistent with each other. At the track I could loose traction and skew the results. But with back to back 15.8's I think it's safe to say the 5.2 PCM with higher fuel pressure is a better stock performance piece.
A.J.
I also played with fuel pressure and '94 5.2 and '94 5.9 computers. Running the 5.2 PCM at 65 psi fuel pressure my air/fuel ratio according to my wide band O2 sensor at WOT was in the high 13's low 14.s and my average time was 15.6. My 15.3 was got with this set-up. I tried the 5.9 PCM. At stockish fuel pressure (43 psi) I lost .2 seconds consistently and my average time was 15.8 (twice in a row). I first tried the 5.9 PCM with 65 psi fuel pressure and my a/f ratio was in the 11's so I had to back it off. I'd like to get both back to back on a dyno because those test results will be more consistent with each other. At the track I could loose traction and skew the results. But with back to back 15.8's I think it's safe to say the 5.2 PCM with higher fuel pressure is a better stock performance piece.
A.J.
Thread Starter
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
From: Mesa, AZ
I'm guessing the 5.9 PCM is tuned for towing more so then the 5.2 is. With the MP PCMs they're tuned for power/racing and I know for a fact that the 5.9 MP PCM says it it not for towing. So unless you go through the effort of converting your returnless fuel system to a return like I did, you'll be okay getting the 5.9 MP PCM. That's why I said for a stock performance piece, the 5.2 PCM is the way to go.
On your 5.2 MP PCM, do you have to run premium fuel? I know with the 5.9 MP PCM you do.
My fuel pressure regulator set-up is in here on the first page: https://dodgeforum.com/forum/1st-gen...-360-swap.html.
A.J.
On your 5.2 MP PCM, do you have to run premium fuel? I know with the 5.9 MP PCM you do.
My fuel pressure regulator set-up is in here on the first page: https://dodgeforum.com/forum/1st-gen...-360-swap.html.
A.J.