Going mechanical with a Moose Omega Marine IP

[n8in8or]

I just did 3 videos with the puff limiter 2 turns out. It looks to be just a little slower to 80. I compared the last speedometer video with the current one. In the last one it was about 5.8 seconds 50-80 and in the current video it's about 6.1 seconds. So is that the difference between 56*F and 65*F or is it the puff limiter? Not sure. Also EGTs are higher, is that the limiter or is that the ambient temp difference? As you can see, it will still dump a cloud at initial take off. I think I can tune that out eventually with a wastegate controller between the intake and the puff limiter. I wanted to do a video before I did timing changes this weekend so I could see what effects timing had on performance.

0-80 speedometer

0-80 EGT & boost

rear view mirror at take off

 

[SS FORCE]

You have absolutely zero lag with that thing . Even with my HX when I floored it lag was several seconds longer. You leave a bigger cloud than I did but your gone twice as fast. It does look cleaned up from your initial run and still puts down a very respectable time. That being said even with that much fuel to start I would point fingers at the temp change being your difference here, your boost still seems to climb just as fast as it did in your previous videos

 

[NVW]

Nice, it cleans up quick.

 

[n8in8or]

You have absolutely zero lag with that thing . Even with my HX when I floored it lag was several seconds longer. You leave a bigger cloud than I did but your gone twice as fast. It does look cleaned up from your initial run and still puts down a very respectable time. That being said even with that much fuel to start I would point fingers at the temp change being your difference here, your boost still seems to climb just as fast as it did in your previous videos

Yeah I've never really had too much trouble getting this turbo to spool up. I looked at both videos and I seem to make about the same amount of smoke, but I didn't time it to see if it's the same duration. I'm going to improve other things and then try to tweak the smoke later. At part throttle it's better than it was so that's good.

Nice, it cleans up quick.

Yup, not too bad. Once I have things optimized I'm going to try dialing the boost back to where it just cleans the exhaust up.

 

[FellowTraveler]

Nope a spool valve will not help, higher rpms w/o forged bottom end P400 gets risky so "I see compounds running low boost in your future to burn all that fuel."
I'm trying to find the research I found from many years ago about compounds being a better choice than all the EPA contraptions required for diesels "this was before compounds were commonplace".

 

[Burning oil]

What about variable vane compounds? Anything good you can think of doing that.

Im trying to spend some more of Nates money

 

[n8in8or]

What about variable vane compounds? Anything good you can think of doing that.

Im trying to spend some more of Nates money

I always liked you Leroy.

 

[Will L.]

Nope a spool valve will not help, higher rpms w/o forged bottom end P400 gets risky so "I see compounds running low boost in your future to burn all that fuel."
I'm trying to find the research I found from many years ago about compounds being a better choice than all the EPA contraptions required for diesels "this was before compounds were commonplace".

Idk, I've seen a few people run QSV on regular 6.5s no issue- WarWagon and somebody else here did it Iirc. Infact WarWagon said it was great with the ATT.

 

[Husker6.5]

The kid up in Wyoming who got his rig into Reader's Rides in Diesel Power ran a QSV on his and had great results.

 

[FellowTraveler]

Idk, I've seen a few people run QSV on regular 6.5s no issue- WarWagon and somebody else here did it Iirc. Infact WarWagon said it was great with the ATT.

As seen on his video spooling is not the issue "he's @ 2.9 +- pressure ratio & mass flow appears not to be ideal." Consider, "more air to burn the fuel he's throwing at it not necessarily higher boost levels as the 6.5 has a high failure rate of HG's when boost is too high but more mass flow and/or a bigger CAC/IC", what can choke mass flow is the T3 turbine housing a T4 housing would allow for more mass flow @ the expense of spool time. Tinkering with the timing to get it too where he likes the performance and the smoke is in check IMHO requires more mass flow with safe level of rpm's.

I hear you Will about some running the QSV in the past but they don't now for various reasons, however as the video shows spooling that big turbo is clearly not an issue it's even better with the amount of fuel he's throwing at his build.

 

[FellowTraveler]

What about variable vane compounds? Anything good you can think of doing that.

Im trying to spend some more of Nates money

Anything to get past the smoking & performance issues related to emissions is always going to cost and we all know performance equates to how fast you want to spend.

Nate has gone leaps and bounds beyond anything anyone else has done on the 6.5td and he is to be commended for his bold efforts....

 

[FellowTraveler]

The kid up in Wyoming who got his rig into Reader's Rides in Diesel Power ran a QSV on his and had great results.

Watch the video a few times "it evidences spooling clearly is not the issue."

 

[FellowTraveler]

Tinkering with air density while leaving everything else the same maybe the most cost effective way to go "thinking high pressure 1k psi water injection after CAC/IC giving a better burn and dropping egt's at the same time."

 

[n8in8or]

Anything to get past the smoking & performance issues related to emissions is always going to cost and we all know performance equates to how fast you want to spend.

Nate has gone leaps and bounds beyond anything anyone else has done on the 6.5td and he is to be commended for his bold efforts....

Thank you for the kind words FT. Humbly I would offer that others have done what I have done, I have just tried to thoroughly document my results along the way. Having a smart phone sure makes that a lot easier, score one for technology!

 

[n8in8or]

Tinkering with air density while leaving everything else the same maybe the most cost effective way to go "thinking high pressure 1k psi water injection after CAC/IC giving a better burn and dropping egt's at the same time."

Yeah I'd like to try the water injection still, either on a hobbs switch or a temp switch, not sure yet. The idea of propane is tempting too, but I don't know....throwing more fuel at this thing might be pushing my luck. I'll let 3500_6.5 be the guinea pig for trying even more fuel

 

[n8in8or]

I might be asking for too much - wanting all the fuel I have for the power up top and not smoking down low, but I intend to find out. That's where electronic injection systems have the advantage over mechanical systems, it's unfortunate the electronic system can't put out this level of fuel. I'd love seeing what Heath's Merlin pump can do, but so far there's nothing out there to be seen.

My biggest issue to address right now is the loading up at start up. It sucks having a truck that runs really well but when you start it up stumbles and smokes. So that is something that NEEDS to be addressed. Second order of business is trans tuning, but I am waiting to do that so all comparisons are apples to apples. It's all coming together. I have the air and the fuel, now I just need to optimize it the best I can.

 

[Will L.]

@FellowTraveler I agree he is building boost very quickly at the bottom end, and a t4 would help more than the t3, moving more air would help his burn. Back in the day I did it with twin turbos iirc on t3 flanges. So yes more air.

The QSV is not going to give him a higher top end psi. It will simply ramp up to the peak boost quicker. Where he is a .5 now he could be at .6. Where at 1.5 now maybe he gets to 1.9 and so forth. By getting the boost sooner in the rpm band he will burn a little more fuel at lower rpm. I don't think it would eliminate all of the smoke, but 10-20% less is a big chunk.

Head gaskets don't pop because of the rate of acceleration. Think supercharger. If they handle 18 psi at high rpm, and you could have 18 psi at 1000 rpm and hold it there all the way up the band. Building boost faster is not going to pop a head gasket. If building it quicker allows you to hit a new peak at top end rpm then the potential is there to pop it at the new peak level when the shockwave is harder at higher rpm.

One more time back to my past: propane. While propane does have less btu, it has a much lower flashpoint. The propane igniting before the diesel drives the burn time much quicker allowing more diesel to burn in the same stroke degree. This means more of the fuel being put into the cylinder being burned in the same amount of time.
The propane comes in the cylinder through the intake valve (usually) where and how it's injected determines at what compression ratio it ignites. Liquid is up at 17:1 and full gasified is at 15.5:1 ratio. So if you want it to help the egt protecting the turbo seals the most, inject it pre turbo. For less egt cooling but a much faster burn of the diesel fuel, mounting it as close to the intake valve spraying in liquid form gets the most power out of it but a less clean burn. This requires a piezo injector tip, that usually lasts 5-10 minutes of life and the trons to operate them. Not worth it here at all. It was great for me at the dragstrip though. I also had a fogged spray shooting directly into my turbos to eliminate the heat from my incoming air and chill the turbo seals. That set up we later perfected on Shelby's build, and found the liquid injection at the end of the intake runners only being used up to 1,200 rpm greatly extending the injector life and overcoming lag. There is always lag on ANY turbo, compared to a supercharger.

My suggestion on propane would be post turbo. Nate doesn't need much here, and a little goes a long way for cleaning exhaust. He is not fighting tremendous egt, so going into the turbo isn't needed, let it do the cyclic effect of lower iat resulting in lower egt. Besides, it's not fair Leroy spends all your $, I want to help you spend some too.

 

[Will L.]

Is there a current propane injection system that you can AFFORDABLELY use to have it inject during acceleration the at 2000 rpm be cut off? That won't add any top end fuel, and help only to cure the smoke.

 

[n8in8or]

@FellowTraveler I agree he is building boost very quickly at the bottom end, and a t4 would help more than the t3, moving more air would help his burn. Back in the day I did it with twin turbos iirc on t3 flanges. So yes more air.

The QSV is not going to give him a higher top end psi. It will simply ramp up to the peak boost quicker. Where he is a .5 now he could be at .6. Where at 1.5 now maybe he gets to 1.9 and so forth. By getting the boost sooner in the rpm band he will burn a little more fuel at lower rpm. I don't think it would eliminate all of the smoke, but 10-20% less is a big chunk.

Head gaskets don't pop because of the rate of acceleration. Think supercharger. If they handle 18 psi at high rpm, and you could have 18 psi at 1000 rpm and hold it there all the way up the band. Building boost faster is not going to pop a head gasket. If building it quicker allows you to hit a new peak at top end rpm then the potential is there to pop it at the new peak level when the shockwave is harder at higher rpm.

One more time back to my past: propane. While propane does have less btu, it has a much lower flashpoint. The propane igniting before the diesel drives the burn time much quicker allowing more diesel to burn in the same stroke degree. This means more of the fuel being put into the cylinder being burned in the same amount of time.
The propane comes in the cylinder through the intake valve (usually) where and how it's injected determines at what compression ratio it ignites. Liquid is up at 17:1 and full gasified is at 15.5:1 ratio. So if you want it to help the egt protecting the turbo seals the most, inject it pre turbo. For less egt cooling but a much faster burn of the diesel fuel, mounting it as close to the intake valve spraying in liquid form gets the most power out of it but a less clean burn. This requires a piezo injector tip, that usually lasts 5-10 minutes of life and the trons to operate them. Not worth it here at all. It was great for me at the dragstrip though. I also had a fogged spray shooting directly into my turbos to eliminate the heat from my incoming air and chill the turbo seals. That set up we later perfected on Shelby's build, and found the liquid injection at the end of the intake runners only being used up to 1,200 rpm greatly extending the injector life and overcoming lag. There is always lag on ANY turbo, compared to a supercharger.

My suggestion on propane would be post turbo. Nate doesn't need much here, and a little goes a long way for cleaning exhaust. He is not fighting tremendous egt, so going into the turbo isn't needed, let it do the cyclic effect of lower iat resulting in lower egt. Besides, it's not fair Leroy spends all your $, I want to help you spend some too.

Propane sounds fun to try for sure. A downside of the propane for me though is the tank in my already spatially challenged Tahoe. I have a plan in the works to make a custom front bumper that will house the intercooler radiator - this will free up the space under the truck midships and maybe a cylinder could go there. Then there are the fillups. All doable possibly, just more challenging than water. I do worry about what my EGTs are going to do once I start towing with this thing so I am working on contingency plans in my head. Water injection is probably quicker and cheaper to implement so that would probably be my starting point. For now the money has pretty well dried up (THANKS GUYS ) so I'll need to be more selective with upgrades for a bit.

Just to be curious, what are the chances water and propane injection would use the same nozzles?

I feel like it wouldn't be hard to do an rpm-based cutout switch for propane injection. They have rpm-based cutin switches so worst case it would just be a relay system to reverse the polarity I think. But I bet it can be easier than that. If I did that though I'd lose the cooling effect of the propane at the higher rpm and i don't think i'd want that. It's probably more of a situation of finding the right amount that cools EGT and helps complete fuel burn but doesn't boost fueling of the cylinder a ton. Sounds like fun to try. Dammit Will

Oh also just for clarification, when you suggest post-turbo injection, are you thinking pre-intercooler?

Oh also a note on the QSV. I can see how that would have benefit the sustem but my problem with the QSV has always been the packaging - they seem to take up so much space in an already awkward location. My mind is still pretty fixated on the variable turbo idea (not COMPOUNDED Leroy ) because it would give the best of both worlds: small turbine housing at low boost and an even larger turbine housing than I'm running now at high boost. Plus the housing could be opened right up on the highway for more-efficient cruising. Win, win, win. Oh and the packaging is pretty good too. I always thought I would do one in a center mount application, but with the air I can flow now, and the effort I have in my current header, maybe the added trouble of engineering a center mount isn't worth it. At some point I need to be happy enough with this thing so I can stop spending money on it and finally work on one of the other projects waiting in the wings.

 

[Burning oil]

I have a couple propane systems in stock. One is a fogger type, the other has an injector for each cylinder the problem with the later is you would need some way to trigger its ECM to fire the injectors at the right time. On a gasser you just tie into the gas injectors signal, basically turn off the gas injector and use the signal to fire the LPG injector.
If one of you brainiacs can figure that out it could be a real nice system (simulate gas injection). Its been a few years but I believe the fuel curve on the LPG is completely tunable too. They also come with several sizes of orifices for the injector.