Mach 4s in, DD2s out-- pretty impressed!

[Hohn]

does everyone with mach 4s get a nice lope/ miss/ stutter at about 1800-1900 rpms sitting out of gear with steady peddle?





Hohn what was it like when you had the unseated crossover/injector?

I don't have that miss/stutter that I know of. I'll have to check for it. Obviously, if it's there, it's not something I've noticed yet, so what does that tell you?



When I had my unseated injector, I had had starts and lower mpg. Truck would lose prime if it sat for a while, especially with the nose pointed uphill.

 

[Hohn]

Hi gang,

I just stumbled into this thread. Sure enough it's not easy to immagine that in a thread about injectors my toy is discussed. I don't have the time to read each and every thread here on the TDR... so sorry I'm late!



Well, let me get to the point. The CaTCHER is what it is today because that's the way we ( beta testers and me ) wanted it. I've written that software, yet nobody sez that it HAS to remain what it is. In other words, I can change things. That's IF you want me to.



What about a new version with a little less aggressive fuelling down low?

Do you think that could help? Let's talk about it.



Marco

Marco, the only thing I would change about the ECM is making it more CONTROLLABLE. IN present configuration, you seem to hit 100% fueling at about 50% pedal movement. Maybe less.



I think these should correlate more. Maybe you shouldn't hit 100% fueling until you have the pedal floored? The response of the ECM to the pedal needs to be more linear.



Imagine a graph-- pedal position (in percentage) on the X axis, and fueling rate on the Y axis. The current Catcher FEELS like it's graph would like like a VERY steep climb, then a plateau that goes to the end. As a result, the last 2 inches or so of pedal travel makes no difference whatsoever.



I'd personally prefer to have a graph that looked more a like a ramp, with a 1:1 correlation of pedal position to fueling rate. IOW, 20% pedal gives 20% fueling. 50% pedal gives 50% fueling. 100% fueling would only be available at 100% pedal, or WOT footpedal buried in the floor.



With this setup, you could still have the same responsiveness from the engine, it would just take more pedal to make it happen.





One thing I do like about the present incarnation of the CATCHER is that it seems to all but ignore the MAP input. As you know, stock fueling maps wait for boost (MAP value must exceed X amount) before any real fuel is given to the engine. Fueling is also linked to HOW MUCH boost.



I'd like to see the MAP removed from all fueling decisions and have JUST the APPS input used.



IMO, the MAP input should only be used for TIMING, not FUELING.



So, my dream ECM would have the 1:1 correlation between pedal and fueling, with the MAP only contributing to timing (which should retard slightly as boost comes up, right?).



Timing should be, imo, based on RPM and BOOST, not so much with fueling. You could program in a certain amount of timing retard just off idle to make the turbo lag disappear, since the high EGTs from the retarded timing would light the turbo faster.



I'll see if I can work up a fictitious EXCEL spreadsheet to get some graphs that would illustrate what I'm trying to say. I'll post a new thread so that it's easier to find. This thread has changed from M4 to ECM discussion, so we should start a new thread to avoid confusion.



Justin

 

[Turboman]

I get us back on topic. How would a set of M4's with a stock ECM and a boost fooler work on an '02 ETH? Anyone tried it yet?

 

[Hohn]

I'm running that very combo-- without a boost fooler, though. It's great. I'm losing about 50hp though because the ECM shuts off fuel to prevent overboost.



Schied has a low-cost boost fooler for $70, which would give me more power, but I'd rather just get a box. Still haven't decided which one to get. I'm leaning towards a VA-- the better to stack with a TST comp

 

[rivercat]

Im all for hohn's suggestion let the fueling solely depend on the right foot.



I am running the catcher now and it is not as sensitive as I thought, can be easily driven smoklessly but I still like the full pedal action of stock.





hohn I belive tst boxes to be real jerky and hard to daily drive. More suited to race only applications and not to be relied on for fuel to spool a big single in a daily driver, At least this is the rumor. I have been told that it would take the PMCE(waiver required) plus timing to equal a edge comp. Seems to me like timing should equal at least 45hp and that combined with the more conservative PM2 at 45+90 you could equal a comp with a PM2+catcher but you would lose adjustability without a remote.



Someone better educated in electrickery correct me if Im wrong.



As of now though I am aiming for the adjustability and popularity of the comp to run with my catcher if bob will setme up for reflash.

 

[rivercat]

stick with that catcher and stack a tst of blue chip box



don't you read about the high comp failure rate?



you will also have a higher hp number going that route.

what would you recomend for me?



I am planing on buying a htb2 killerb2 So I need some more fuel either: special MAD and comp or reg and tst pm2 or more



would the ETH pump be able to push much more

I noticed that the TsT site says that the PM comp or "CE" is "not recomended for High Output motors" what does that mean not enough fuel out of the ETH or not enough air in stock form for the CE to be run alone?





I would like to have an in-cab adjustible box so If I do tow I can turn it down and it would be nice to have adjustibility so you can fine tune/ balence spoolup and topend heat.

 

[Hohn]

The reason the PMce is NOT recommended for HO engines is that the pump is basically out of fuel, or at least to the point where more duty cycle does NOT increase HP. A regular pmax and pmax comp will dyno about the same on an HO truck, and the manners of the HO truck with the PMce will be rough.



Especially with large injectors in an HO, a regular TST box is going to give you about all the HP you can get from the engine. NO need for the Comp model.



This is what Mark told me, as I spoke with him for about an hour. With a HRVP, the story is different-- the PMce will net up to 180hp while a regular PM3 would give about 140.



A TST doesn't need timing to match a comp in hp. Generally, though, the TST will give slightly higher EGT because the timing is less. The TST can be ordered in any custom program you wish, up to 85% or so! Show me a Comp that can do that! A TST can be configured to be MUCH hotter (more aggressive) than a Drag Comp, even-- and the manners will reflect that you are pushing it.



I wouldn't worry too much about adjustability. That's one reason I like big injectors. You don't need ANY box when towing if you have stout sticks. Just reach down and flip the switch on the TST off, and you're fine.



Let's face it, most of us run a drive in such a way where we either want full power, or low power would be fine. Being able to adjust to a millio different levels appeals to the tweaker in all of us, but in the real world most of us never mess with it that much once the novelty wears off.



jmo

 

[Boondocker]

adjustability

Let's face it, most of us run a drive in such a way where we either want full power, or low power would be fine. Being able to adjust to a millio different levels appeals to the tweaker in all of us, but in the real world most of us never mess with it that much once the novelty wears off.

That's pretty consistent with one of my comments earlier in the thread. Fortunately for the tweaker in me, the 25 possible combinations novelty hasn't worn off yet That being said, I have narrowed down my typical selections to just a few with my Comp/Mach 1. 6 combo.



4X1 - 90%, i. e. daily driving. This is what I call the "power on demand" setting. Level 4 provides all the fuel my turbo can support when I tip into the accelerator, and sublevel 1 fuels under stock parameters to minimize smoke at launch.



1X1 - towing. Timing benefits EGTs, not too much fuel or too soon.



5X5 - in case I ever feel the need to be an a-hole and smoke someone. I haven't done that yet. So far it's enough just to know I could.



Off - yeah whatever. Off feels a little smoother, kind of lazy until about 10psi boost, then it's Hi Ho Silver - Away! Oddly enough, having the Comp on, practically any setting, feels more linear.



The ultimate horsepower setup isn't for everyone. The trick is figuring out what you think you would be happiest with. My current setup will have to last me for a while because next year's truck budget will be spent on tires, routine maintenance, and saving for the inevitable VP44 replacement.



Cheers,

Neil

 

[Fishin Guide]

The reason the PMce is NOT recommended for HO engines is that the pump is basically out of fuel, or at least to the point where more duty cycle does NOT increase HP. A regular pmax and pmax comp will dyno about the same on an HO truck, and the manners of the HO truck with the PMce will be rough.



Especially with large injectors in an HO, a regular TST box is going to give you about all the HP you can get from the engine. NO need for the Comp model.



This is what Mark told me, as I spoke with him for about an hour. With a HRVP, the story is different-- the PMce will net up to 180hp while a regular PM3 would give about 140.



A TST doesn't need timing to match a comp in hp. Generally, though, the TST will give slightly higher EGT because the timing is less. The TST can be ordered in any custom program you wish, up to 85% or so! Show me a Comp that can do that! A TST can be configured to be MUCH hotter (more aggressive) than a Drag Comp, even-- and the manners will reflect that you are pushing it.



I wouldn't worry too much about adjustability. That's one reason I like big injectors. You don't need ANY box when towing if you have stout sticks. Just reach down and flip the switch on the TST off, and you're fine.



Let's face it, most of us run a drive in such a way where we either want full power, or low power would be fine. Being able to adjust to a millio different levels appeals to the tweaker in all of us, but in the real world most of us never mess with it that much once the novelty wears off.



jmo

I agree with Hohn. But, I want that PM COMP!!!!



Dave

 

[Hohn]

me, too I just have to teach my pump to say: "That which does not kill me only makes me stronger

 

[Boondocker]

me, too I just have to teach my pump to say: "That which does not kill me only makes me stronger

I think you can do it! After all, you taught your last pump to roll over and play dead. :--)

 

[Hohn]

I think you can do it! After all, you taught your last pump to roll over and play dead. :--)

>>>ZING<<<

:{ :{

 

[Boondocker]

I'll be paying for mine when the time comes :{ Then I'll be the one getting zinged.

But we digress. How are those Mach 4's hangn'?

 

[Hohn]

I'm getting a little experience with them in cold weather, since it's getting cold enough now to ice up the windows in the AM. NO starting problems at all-- truck always fires right away. .



Lotsa white smoke when cold though. Engine feels like it wants a tender touch when first started-- like a car where the choke isn't quite right. I think that they are big enough to were a heavy left foot on an ice-cold engine is enough to hamper the burn, and the engine hesitates.



I feel sorry for someone following me on those cold mornings-- they are getting facefuls of raw fuel vapor to inhale.



That said, these appear to be a great all-weather injector. No drivability issues-- great mpg, easily controllable smoke.



Now, make a Mach 6 this clean and I will buy it tomorrow

 

[Marco]

Now, make a Mach 6 this clean and I will buy it tomorrow

Well, then better get the cash!

I'm running them sixers with a HX40 and CaTCHER. It is possible to control the smoke! Highest EGTs' Ive seen so far is 1350°F, granted I don't tow.



Marco

 

[GiesJ]

Marco -

I think the Wyoming elevation comes into play. 6100 feet makes a big difference.

glad the 6s work for you though.

J