I have been using a 3.2 .140 gasket as I know a few of you have well
there was a discussion while back about why the 2.8 seals better.
We think it is because of the extra meat between cylinders then some one bought up that there is more meat on block but the gasket has a 87 bore so its has very little to seal with.Not no more for me here is a .140 gasket
with a 85 bore so now the meat on gasket almost matches the meat on the
block.This will also help with the quinch and burn and I might be able to try
a little more boost with this for the new set up.Its gettin close to pushing the limits again of the 2.8

the money shot

Sweet dude, you never stop amazing me as to how far you are pushing your stock block.

:buttrock Lookin good

I think i wet myself. :bj

Your engine bay is going to look sooo nice when you're done with the new setup. :love1

You have already pushed the limits :D.

Well my engine is almost like an m52...that's all I'll say about that. :devillook

That is so sick Ulysses!:redspot Love it!

I can't believe you have been using an 87mm bore HG all this time. YES! The 85mm bore HG should help with more boost! Hot dog! Can't wait to see more pics! I love it! :drool:

When did you get that intake manifold? Looks sick:)

Well my engine is almost like an m52...that's all I'll say about that. :devillook

That is so sick Ulysses!:redspot Love it!

I can't believe you have been using an 87mm bore HG all this time. YES! The 85mm bore HG should help with more boost! Hot dog! Can't wait to see more pics! I love it! :drool:
I love it!

There you go again...Mr. cant help your self Cameron! Just tell me!!!!!!!!! or maybe i can wait...

Can I get a HELL YEA for PPF parts....




Looking nice. Cant wait to see if at the same boost if the manifold makes anymore power due to less restriction.

Where did you get the HG? Is that a new Cometic or the ICS one you were talking about earlier?

ulysses, how many headgaskets have you gone through with using the 87mm bore?

Well my engine is almost like an m52...that's all I'll say about that. :devillook

That is so sick Ulysses!:redspot Love it!

I can't believe you have been using an 87mm bore HG all this time. YES! The 85mm bore HG should help with more boost! Hot dog! Can't wait to see more pics! I love it! :drool:

Nice knife-edged crank and dual springs in your sig!!

ulysses, how many headgaskets have you gone through with using the 87mm bore?
Just one,but it took over 32psi to blow it

omg, whats the price and where can i get it?????

the money shot
Sweet, what size TB do you use?

Sweet, what size TB do you use?


70mm is what PPF recommend for this car

70mm is what PPF recommend for this car
:eyecrazy I'm jealous.

Looks great, where did you get it from? Are they available in .120 or .125? VAC only carries the 87mm bore MLS hgs right?

your numbers amaze me can you post where can i get the head gasket i would like to turn up the boost since I'm running the same motor as you

I can't bolieve that your makeing over 600rwhp on the stock bottom end

thumps up. What's so special about the 2.8L that it can take that much boost.
Thanks

what kind of headgasket is that and where can i get one?

what kind of headgasket is that and where can i get one?

x2

I need that.

Ulysses, Man o man, I can wait to see the kind of power you will put down when your all done. I never knew that you were running the 87mm bore.
Good luck and thanks for paving the way for the lil but mighty 2.8!

God that looks hot. I can't wait for everything to be done.

Looks great, where did you get it from? Are they available in .120 or .125? VAC only carries the 87mm bore MLS hgs right?
i bought my .140 from VAC,it was 85mm bore for M50:)

so if your using a 3.2 HG, the arguement of more meat on the block is Nill, what exactly are you doing that prevent you from getting head lift at high boost? ;)

so if your using a 3.2 HG, the arguement of more meat on the block is Nill, what exactly are you doing that prevent you from getting head lift at high boost? ;)


Good point batman :buttrock

After a few long talks with ARP engineers they said there is no way there bolts are streching. So we came up with a couple solutions one of them worked on the other gasket so we will see what we can boost to after install of the new gasket.There is nothing wrong with the old gasket it is still holding I just figured since Im taking things apart might as well try the new gasket with a few tricks

Wait, I'm confused.

Was your old HG the 2.8 bore or the 3.2? If it was the 3.2 bore how did u prevent the coolant mixing with the oil at such high boost? What about your new HG, is that for a 3.2 bore too and what kind/how much is it?

-Rich

Wait, I'm confused.

Was your old HG the 2.8 bore or the 3.2? If it was the 3.2 bore how did u prevent the coolant mixing with the oil at such high boost? What about your new HG, is that for a 3.2 bore too and what kind/how much is it?

-Rich

I believe the old was the 3.2 bore (87mm) and the new is a 2.8 bore (~85mm). I don't think the coolant would mix with the oil any more than it would on a 3.2, there would just be a 1mm void between the head and block around the whole combustion chamber.

I too am curious to know what tricks you've got up your sleeve and where you got it from.

Wait, I'm confused.

Was your old HG the 2.8 bore or the 3.2? If it was the 3.2 bore how did u prevent the coolant mixing with the oil at such high boost? What about your new HG, is that for a 3.2 bore too and what kind/how much is it?

-Rich
Old one was the .140 for the 3.2 87 bore new gasket is .140 85 bore
gaskets are the same except bore diameter

Hmm.


Well so if the gasket was 3.2 bore, and you were boosting 25+ psi, and as you say the 10mm ARP studs should not strech perhaps the reason why I've heard istances where the cooling system becomes pressurized and coolant getting into the oil at High boost is strictly from HG failure and not head lift? Since you were using the 3.2 bore with such success, the MEAT issue between the 2.8 and 3.2 shouldn't be valid...

Someone care to educate me on this. Are you using a VAC MLS HG, doesn't look like one though...

I wish I could explain it but all I have is theories no hard facts.
No its not a VAC MLS

:(

No its not a VAC MLS

Well it might not be from VAC, but it's still made by Cometic...correct? So essentially it's the same thing as the gasket miljan3 got, just from a different vendor.

<- too lazy to figure out how miniscule of a compression bump you'll get from running the 'proper' gasket.

I have the cutting rings(not pyramid) and gasket from PPF but it does not lower compression so im scared to use it.This would be a nice set up if you had lower comp. pistons.I want this motor to stay all stock internal we have to find the limits. BIG HORSE POWER THE FINAL FRONTIER TO BOLDLY GO WHERE NO STOCK MOTOR HAS GONE BEFORE!!!!!!!!!!

Can I ask what kind is the one you are going to use right now then is?

Yes you can ask:D

the question is will I get an answer :stickoutt

Just messing its a cometic I called kevin at cometic and we talked for a while so this was the end result.If my comprssion is 10.2to1 stock I wonder what it is now
with the 85 bore .140 gasket.

I did a rough calculation and it was ~8.1 or 8.2:1. I could have been off though.

I did a rough calculation and it was ~8.1 or 8.2:1. I could have been off though.
Wow lower than I thought maybe I should have went with a .120

Check out this thread.

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=519274

A member made an excel spreadsheet (http://mthreemfive.com/Images/compressionnoB.xls) to figure what you CR with different size gaskets.

BP

Wow lower than I thought maybe I should have went with a .120

I was also suprised to see how low it was when I calculated it, which was exactly why I was asking if they made it in .120 or .125. :stickoutt

Dam it I dont have excel so it wont let me change the values:help

Looks great man.

Would you mind telling me how much did the whole turbo process cost you ?

:nono

:nono

Looks great man.

Would you mind telling me how much did the whole turbo process cost you ?

what he means, is that he rather not talk about his problem........he's what you would call a "Mod-a-holic"......his desire to make more RWHP has completely taken over his life, and his $$$$, in his extreme case he's even started buying mods from the other side of the world....
it's really sad, we shouldn't talk about it....:devillook

what he means, is that he rather not talk about his problem........he's what you would call a "Mod-a-holic"......his desire to make more RWHP has completely taken over his life, and his $$$$, in his extreme case he's even started buying mods from the other side of the world....
it's really sad, we shouldn't talk about it....:devillook

:D

Uly,

You need to have SilverStreak (Dave) Drive your car and see what he can bust out of that thing.

If Dave can get 11.3 out of his Z3 w/ 321whp, I'm sure he could do some damage with your clutch, I mean car. :devillook

Uly,

You need to have SilverStreak (Dave) Drive your car and see what he can bust out of that thing.

If Dave can get 11.3 out of his Z3 w/ 321whp, I'm sure he could do some damage with your clutch, I mean car. :devillook

Dave's best was a 11.7 I did a 10.7 with a 1.7 60ft .I think dave might take a while to get used to my clutch its a protoype from clutch masters im not sure its in the market yet you can say its a up graded FX800

Dave's best was a 11.7 I did a 10.7 with a 1.7 60ft .I think dave might take a while to get used to my clutch its a protoype from clutch masters im not sure its in the market yet you can say its a up graded FX800
Sounds like an on/off type of clutch. Did your other one not hold?

Just messing its a cometic I called kevin at cometic and we talked for a while so this was the end result.

Do they stock that gasket or was it custom made?

I don't think you're CR will be as low as 8.1:1...won't it be around 8.7 or so?:confused

Do they stock that gasket or was it custom made?

I don't think you're CR will be as low as 8.1:1...won't it be around 8.7 or so?:confused

I just recalculated it and I got 8.5:1. I assumed that the stock HG was a close thickness to the stock m3 one. Not sure how I got that previously though. :dunno

[QUOTE=rrdawho]Uly,

You need to have SilverStreak (Dave) Drive your car and see what he can bust out of that thing.

If Dave can get 11.3 out of his Z3 w/ 321whp, I'm sure he could do some damage with your clutch, I mean car.

Dave's best was a 11.7 I did a 10.7 with a 1.7 60ft .I think dave might take a while to get used to my clutch its a protoype from clutch masters im not sure its in the market yet you can say its a up graded FX800

What ulysees means is that he's the better driver and no one this side of planet Zargon will get more out of his lil 2.8 than him :alright

so am I right or am I right ulysees??!!!!!! j/k

I know your a modest guy :D

Sounds like an on/off type of clutch. Did your other one not hold?
The fx600 dual disc did not hold after a couple week ends at the track

What ulysees means is that he's the better driver and no one this side of planet Zargon will get more out of his lil 2.8 than him

so am I right or am I right ulysees??!!!!!! j/k

I know your a modest guy

yep thats what I was trying to say:D

Dave is the man of BFc drag racing, but Ulysses doesn't need schooling from anyone :-)

Dam it I dont have excel so it wont let me change the values:help
:lol

I don't know why I thought it was so funny that you have such a sick engine that costs so much $ and you don't have excel!

Here you go, man.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=c8378bf4-996c-4569-b547-75edbd03aaf0&displaylang=EN

:lol

I don't know why I thought it was so funny that you have such a sick engine that costs so much $ and you don't have excel!

Here you go, man.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=c8378bf4-996c-4569-b547-75edbd03aaf0&displaylang=EN

He said he couldnt EDIT the values, thats only a viewer witch I'm sure he has. ;)

He said he couldnt EDIT the values, thats only a viewer witch I'm sure he has. ;)
Damn CC so you were running that HG on an 84mm cylinder? Wow, you are going to triple the surface area contact of the HG between cylinders. Time to turn up the boost brother! :D :thumbup:

He said he couldnt EDIT the values, thats only a viewer witch I'm sure he has. ;)you are correct Andreas

Damn CC so you were running that HG on an 84mm cylinder? Wow, you are going to triple the surface area contact of the HG between cylinders. Time to turn up the boost brother!
More boost is in the plan:buttrock

you are correct Andreas


More boost is in the plan:buttrock
Is 635 your top dyno still? Just curious with all the building you've been doing lately...

Is 635 your top dyno still? Just curious with all the building you've been doing lately...
Yep thats it for now hopefully all will be done in about two weeks and I will have some new numbers

Check out this thread.

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=519274

A member made an excel spreadsheet (http://mthreemfive.com/Images/compressionnoB.xls) to figure what you CR with different size gaskets.

BP
Can some one figure my compression as curiousity is getting the better of me.
I would but I dont have excel

Can some one figure my compression as curiousity is getting the better of me.
I would but I dont have excel

I calculated it assuming your stock HG was 1.75mm, and that the average ompression of your engine with the stock HG is 195 and with the new HG it will be 160. If those numbers are wrong tell me and I'll change them.

0.140 = 8.681
0.120 = 9.055

Can I know now how to get that gasket please??

I calculated it assuming your stock HG was 1.75mm, and that the average ompression of your engine with the stock HG is 195 and with the new HG it will be 160. If those numbers are wrong tell me and I'll change them.

0.140 = 8.681
0.120 = 0.055

Can I know now how to get that gasket please??

x2, i need one as well:)

I calculated it assuming your stock HG was 1.75mm, and that the average ompression of your engine with the stock HG is 195 and with the new HG it will be 160. If those numbers are wrong tell me and I'll change them.

0.140 = 8.681
0.120 = 9.055

Can I know now how to get that gasket please??

Sounds right I think
the stock gasket is .70
stock compression10.2:1
bore 84
stroke 84
new gasket .140 with 85 bore

Sounds right I think
the stock gasket is .70
stock compression10.2:1
bore 84
stroke 84
new gasket .140 with 85 bore
:wow I didn't know your engine stock was 10.2:1. No wonder you can boost so much, you got 8.6:1 now. Man! It would be hella cheaper to just use thicker HGs and buy like 3 m52s. Just keep boosting until one blows and then install the next one. Much cheaper than completely building an engine. Damn! I should have just bought a few of those. What would that of cost me? Like $4k?

:wow I didn't know your engine stock was 10.2:1. No wonder you can boost so much, you got 8.6:1 now. Man! It would be hella cheaper to just use thicker HGs and buy like 3 m52s. Just keep boosting until one blows and then install the next one. Much cheaper than completely building an engine. Damn! I should have just bought a few of those. What would that of cost me? Like $4k?
Thats why I have a few lying around:redspot

I have one tooooo! its under the hood!
And as far as i'm concerned, my car will never be seeing anything but an M52!

M52 for life! I can't believe what they can do with just a HG and studs...the ///M engines need so much more to make the same power...got to love the meat curtains...at least in this case!

I have one tooooo! its under the hood!
And as far as i'm concerned, my car will never be seeing anything but an M52!

M52 for life! I can't believe what they can do with just a HG and studs...the ///M engines need so much more to make the same power...got to love the meat curtains...at least in this case!
Meat curtains:lol

Meat curtains:lol

:alright

meat curtains for the win:redspot \ ; / :)

I still don't understand the meat curtain arguement considering CC was using a 3.2 Bore HG before he started with this new one and never had any problems with it....

Its not like he's putting pistons and rods through his cylinder walls (knock on wood).

-Rich

I still don't understand the meat curtain arguement considering CC was using a 3.2 Bore HG before he started with this new one and never had any problems with it....

Its not like he's putting pistons and rods through his cylinder walls (knock on wood).

-Rich
That's the point; he's trying to (in a sense). His argument is that he is going to try and see the maximum power an M52 engine will make with a stock bottom end before you start punching holes in the side of the block. His last HG with an 87mm bore blew at 32psi. He is going to push the psi up now that he's got a HG that seals better. :thumbup:

..
And as far as i'm concerned, my car will never be seeing anything but an M52!
M52 for life!..

Fantastic guys, keep it up!

That's the point; he's trying to (in a sense). His argument is that he is going to try and see the maximum power an M52 engine will make with a stock bottom end before you start punching holes in the side of the block. His last HG with an 87mm bore blew at 32psi. He is going to push the psi up now that he's got a HG that seals better. :thumbup:

The arguement I was trying to make was thats its much more expensive to boost a S52 vs. an M52 2.8 because of "meat curtains" when infact CC was using a 3.2 HG.

-Rich

I can't believe what they can do with just a HG and studs...the ///M engines need so much more to make the same power...!
Its not that M engines need any more boost actually to make similar power, actually the opposite (I think Ulysses was running nearly 26psi for his 635rwhp), but that the 2.8 engine is more boost-friendly as a result of the cylinder walls/overall bottom end strength.

Its not that M engines need any more boost actually to make similar power, actually the opposite (I think Ulysses was running nearly 26psi for his 635rwhp), but that the 2.8 engine is more boost-friendly as a result of the cylinder walls/overall bottom end strength.


Again, thats the arguement I've been trying to question.

Is it really because of the cylinder walls?!

I dont see any difference in strength between the S52 and M52 cranks and rods. The difference between pistons on the M52 and S52 are that the M52 has no crowning on their pistons, while the S52 is pretty convex. (Bubble shaped). If anything thats the only thing I would argue which would make a difference, but how much I don't know.

The cylinder walls arguement does NOT make sense because as I have repeated over and over, CC was using a 3.2 bored Headgasket and had no issues. Nor have I heard about HG failure or headlift from him. I have not seen cylinder wall failure on these engines because of too much boost causing it to fail, I have however seen cylinder wall failure due to internals breaking, and when internals break, it doesn't matter which block or bore you have, it will fuck up your cylinder wall. CC hasn't tapped his HG studs and is running stock sized ARP 10mm and he would argue he hasn't had any headlift or streching w/ them. The only thing I can think of that CC is doing different is that he has excellent tuning, excellent installation procedures, a very good HG, and the power of zeus clamping down his head to his block to prevent any leaking :rofl

-Rich

Its not that M engines need any more boost actually to make similar power, actually the opposite (I think Ulysses was running nearly 26psi for his 635rwhp), but that the 2.8 engine is more boost-friendly as a result of the cylinder walls/overall bottom end strength.
Exactly! It takes less boost with the s52 than the m52 to make the 600+ but it doesn't really matter when you are blowing head gaskets every time you have to take a dump.

The girth between cylinders is in relation to the extra girth in between holes in the head gasket. THAT is the issue right there! Not only between the cylinders but between cylinders and water jacket holes in some areas. Get it got it good! :wave

:bash

Its not that M engines need any more boost actually to make similar power, actually the opposite (I think Ulysses was running nearly 26psi for his 635rwhp), but that the 2.8 engine is more boost-friendly as a result of the cylinder walls/overall bottom end strength.
Before i read on and people keep building off what you missinterpretted from me, i did not mean they need more boost cause thats absolutely incorrect....of course they need less BOOST.

BUT, they do need more internal modifications and reinforcements done to the ///M engine to be able to handle the same boost as the M52 with just the HG and head studs...now let me read what has developed after you thought i was saying, and i'll repeat the misinterpretation;that the ///M engines need more boost, cause they dont...they just need more internally to handle the same boost.

Now does everyone get it, got it, good?

I was misunderstood, thats all.

BUT, they do need more internal modifications and reinforcements done to the ///M engine to be able to handle the same boost as the M52 with just the HG and head studs...
Like what? :confused We are talking about an M52 with studs and HG and an S52 with studs and HG...

No one has pushed the S52 so far as to tell us the truth on that one...yet

Like what? :confused We are talking about an M52 with studs and HG and an S52 with studs and HG...

No one has pushed the S52 so far as to tell us the truth on that one...yet

Thank you!!!!

Well why the hell not? CC pushin 26psi on HG and head studs, and i don't see any s50 or s52 doing that shy of icemann/paridigmguy/advant type engine build, right? correct me if i'm wrong, i don't want to argue in a place i have no room to argue...all i'm saying is s50's/s52's that are making similar power to CC and or boosting 26psi, have more than just a HG and head studs.

Like what? :confused We are talking about an M52 with studs and HG and an S52 with studs and HG...

No one has pushed the S52 so far as to tell us the truth on that one...yet
ShawnM made like 550whp with around 24psi with 100% stock longblock. Just good tuning and c16 sick fuel. 10.5:1CR. That was pushing it.

Pushing it with thicker HG. Haven't seen anyone try over 600whp with s52. But alot of the ones with built motors near 600whp have blown HGs. Josh is one. Yellow bee blew a ton. There are more.

heat disapation,cylinder wall distortion,stud pull distortion,gasket squish,
quinch,compression, tune,gas,meat curtains and the clamping force of Zeus.
:woot: :smoke2

AFAIK, George's blue widebody is on a stock motor, just headgasket and studs.

AFAIK, George's blue widebody is on a stock motor, just headgasket and studs.
and HP is what

and HP is what

:) You know that better than me...:devillook :D

I asked him when I saw him run the 10.9@136 at E-town. I'm guessing he can't be too far from you since he's trapping at about the same speed as you. :dunno

heat disapation,cylinder wall distortion,stud pull distortion,gasket squish,
quinch,compression, tune,gas,meat curtains and the clamping force of Zeus.
:woot: :smoke2


I think the biggest variates between the S52 and M52 among the ones you listed would be the way the air is compressed (difference in piston shapes), tune/gas, and gasket squish (type of gasket). But, this is only my opinion.

Oh, and maybe how much zeus clamping force you have ;)

and HP is what
What did George tell you it was?

What did George tell you it was?
:stickoutt

What did George tell you it was?

He said it made ***:evil2 whp and weighed a very light:eek: ****lbs

M52 rules

M52 rules
:alright

Well I got the new head gasket on(.140 85 bore) and wraped the PPF header I know should have got jet hot but I have alot of other stuff to get so I passes on this.
I sent the head out to get it cleaned up and resurfaced so I have a good area clean and true area for the gasket to seal.
Hopfully will be ordering the injectors this week will be getting the 880cc ones
and throttle body (accufab).The throttle linkage might be a pain but gotta do what I gotta do

Well I got the new head gasket on(.140 85 bore) and wraped the PPF header I know should have got jet hot but I have alot of other stuff to get so I passes on this.
I sent the head out to get it cleaned up and resurfaced so I have a good area clean and true area for the gasket to seal.
Hopfully will be ordering the injectors this week will be getting the 880cc ones
and throttle body (accufab).The throttle linkage might be a pain but gotta do what I gotta do
Is it me or do I smell over 700rwhp. :devillook

Is it me or do I smell over 700rwhp. :devillookI sure hope so.:buttrock Thanks for the help today.

Are you going to be using the aa chip or tec3?

Also how do you guys get it tuned ? you guys just send aa your specs and they make a custom chip ?How do you guys dyno tune it if aa does the tuning?

Hey CC,

I tried to follow all the thread traffic but got a little lost, did you actually blow the large bore HG or not?

I used to run an S14 HG (93.4mm) in my turbo M10 that is bored to 92 mm and I think it was screwing up the flame front. Best of luck with the proper bore gasket. After I tore my last S14 gasket I installed a custom Cometic MLS and raised my CR to 8.5:1.

Do you install your MLS gasket dry or use coppercoat? I have seen a thread batting the subject back and forth, you seem to be having very good results sealing the compression forces, can you share the wisdom?

Not sure if you have measured or know your clearance volume, but this CR calculator does not require Excel.

http://www.rosspistons.com/calculator.php

Best of luck, cannot wait to see your 2.8 grunt out more than 700 ponies!

omg, whats the price and where can i get it?????
anyone??? why is this a secret?

I sure hope so.:buttrock Thanks for the help today.
Hey bro what are you doing for fuel supply? I know a single Walbro 255 HP is usually only good to about 600cc at 13+ volts...I imagine you are using two fuel pumps... ?

Hey bro what are you doing for fuel supply? I know a single Walbro 255 HP is usually only good to about 600cc at 13+ volts...I imagine you are using two fuel pumps... ?

Good question I will have to lok into this

Thanks,I dont know all the info to get that C R calculator to work,wish I did.
I use the copper coatHey CC,

I tried to follow all the thread traffic but got a little lost, did you actually blow the large bore HG or not?

I used to run an S14 HG (93.4mm) in my turbo M10 that is bored to 92 mm and I think it was screwing up the flame front. Best of luck with the proper bore gasket. After I tore my last S14 gasket I installed a custom Cometic MLS and raised my CR to 8.5:1.

Do you install your MLS gasket dry or use coppercoat? I have seen a thread batting the subject back and forth, you seem to be having very good results sealing the compression forces, can you share the wisdom?

Not sure if you have measured or know your clearance volume, but this CR calculator does not require Excel.

http://www.rosspistons.com/calculator.php

Best of luck, cannot wait to see your 2.8 grunt out more than 700 ponies!

Are you going to be using the aa chip or tec3?
Tec3 Although I wish AA karls program did work on bigger injectors The tune is dead on runs great I hate to have to take it out.

Tec3 Although I wish AA karls program did work on bigger injectors The tune is dead on runs great I hate to have to take it out.

...but gotta do what I gotta do

;)

:evil2

:buttrock

Good question I will have to lok into this
Might look in to a nice Bosch 044 fuelpump, they're used widely in the high-hp european and japanese racecars abroad. You can use them inline or in-tank, and are relatively inexpensive. About 220ish if you look around.

Might look in to a nice Bosch 044 fuelpump, they're used widely in the high-hp european and japanese racecars abroad. You can use them inline or in-tank, and are relatively inexpensive. About 220ish if you look around.
Ulysses have you asked George what the limits of the Walboro 255lph pump that you currently run are??

Ulysses have you asked George what the limits of the Walboro 255lph pump that you currently run are??

He said it should be ok but would like to run a voltage booster on it by Kenny bell.
Increases voltage to pump at a certian psi like over clocking a CPU

He said it should be ok but would like to run a voltage booster on it by Kenny bell.
Increases voltage to pump at a certian psi like over clocking a CPU
Just run 2 of them. :)

He said it should be ok but would like to run a voltage booster on it by Kenny bell.
Increases voltage to pump at a certian psi like over clocking a CPU
Nice. I havent gotten my issue of EC yet, but Im hoping they mention what fuel pump is in the 1025rwhp M3. (as I am willing to bet its not the 255lph)

Anyone know the limits of the 255lph pumps? (~700rwhp??:confused)

Nice. I havent gotten my issue of EC yet, but Im hoping they mention what fuel pump is in the 1025rwhp M3. (as I am willing to bet its not the 255lph)

Anyone know the limits of the 255lph pumps? (~700rwhp??:confused)

Your right it's not a Walbro and it's not in the tank and first letter starts with W
second letter is E....

Your right it's not a Walbro and it's not in the tank and first letter starts with W
second letter is E....
Thats right, I knew they were running a Weldon pump and must have forgotten it...I think Barrett has one of those on his Idiing car as well.

Speaking of your pump, though, with the addition of the new manifolds and TEC3, you should be over 660rwhp (I would guess) which means that the 255lph pump is good up through that level.

Just run 2 of them. :)
They'll play nicely together for a little bit, but apparently they start tearing each other apart in short order. Here on our local mustang dyno the Walbro's start to lean out around 550ish whp regardless of the size plumbing to and from the rail.