Kawasaki ZX-10R Forum banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Rent this space
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Heres a quick mock up of my new fuel system , the pump and filter will be mounted externally , allowing me a larger tank capacity plus a pre and post filter, I will still utilize the tank sensor for fuel level but mount it a lot lower in the tank(once I have done the math).

The system will run 5 bar pressure and be monitored through the Motec M880 aswell as a permanent gauge for my instant viewing.

I am just waiting on a few pieces and it will go in and run the stock 45psi until I have my new rail finalised and the wiring harness for the Motec.

Just about $1000 complete (minus injectors).

I did it because I could , aswell as having access to the pump and filters without removing the tank.

I just have to get a few AN fittings welded to the new rail and a couple of extra support brackets to cope with the pressure increase.

Fuel.JPG
 

·
Rent this space
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
I was going to run a secondary pump for reserve, but the fuel light is good enough for me right now.
 

·
Rent this space
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
This is a pre forced induction install , still debating on wether to supercharge or Turbo or not .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,483 Posts
I vote turbo, much cleaner install and a lot more power, efficiency. I made 470hp with my old 1080cc blow-thru carb ZRX. I hope to boost my 10 this winter.
 

·
Rent this space
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I made 266hp with my Gixxer 1100 turbo , it was insane but I had way too many problems with engine cooling, Air/Oil engines are not the best for forced induction unless they are specifically designed for it.

Dont know , there are fors and againsts for both , I do like superchargers as you can run a lot less boost and low down too.
 

·
Rent this space
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
With a SC I can run lower boost numbers and still get good power down low, I am leaning that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
Two problems: First one is that you will be heating the fuel as it goes through the fuel rail. You don't need three fittings in the rail. If you put a single one in (I have mine on the right side end by the throttle actuator), and feed the rail from a tee in the line that goes from the second filter to the gauge, you reduce the amount of heat exposure to only the line that goes from the filter to the gauge. You're effectively dead heading the fuel rail which is what kawi does in the OE configuration. That configuration has worked very well for those of us who use these motors in cars.

The second problem is that if the fuel pickup in the tank is every uncovered, you will blow air through the system causing hickups during running.

I don't know what bosch filter you're planning on using, but I use an earls sintered bronze filter that is able to be disassembled for inspection and cleaning, and filters down to 35 microns. Also, you're filtering all the fuel, all the time. The filter could be in the line that feeds the fuel rail off of the tee fitting.

The system I use, which consists of a low and high pressure pump, a small surge tank, aeromotive adjustable FPR, earls filter, and necessary fittings is well under 500.
 

·
Rent this space
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
A couple of things to consider .

I. the fuel in the fuel rail gets heated anyway and stays in there long enough to have an effect.

2.The fuel return runs through a baffle I have made that runs to the top of the tank.

3.The fuel pickup is in a well under the tank which has a volume of 400ml , and at a 50 degree lean angle still holds fuel.

4, The first filter is a 30 Micron earls .

5 The post pump filter is the same as we use in our Porsche Dp engine and has 100micron and 30 micron mesh and acts as a reserve pressure vessel.

6.You cannot tap the end of the fuel rail as it is against the frame.

7. By using two inlets between the injectors gives a more even flow between all cylinders and pressure pulses are reduced.

8. The heated fuel from the rail is dispersed to the top of the tank and because of the positioning of the fuel pump and filters has a lot of time to cool on recirculation.

9.The fuel rail is covered with insulation.

10.The system is virtually the same as we run on our DP cars, Atlantic cars and sportscars and works good enough for Chip Ganassi.

11.I am not dead heading the fuel rail as the fuel is always flowing through the Pressure regulator, I only use as much fuel as the engine requires and the rest goes home.


12. I have seen the damage first hand from returnless systems, and also the inconsistancies in line pressure , lean burning on full tanks, pressure drops from inadequate venting, line locks and pump failures.

13. I am working within the constraints of the frame and bodywork, the picture doesnt show the the real schematics, but the pump and filter are a long way from the engine.

14. I do my homework before I spend money.

I have been in motor racing for 27 years and not once have I seen a decent returnless fuel system that hasnt fried a fuel pump or suffers from bad pressure pulses ( the reason why you have an inadequate pressure vessel in the fuel tank of the bike).

Mercedes benz and Porsche have returnless systems on their vehicles and they are still diabolical to this day, thats why you dont see them on GT3RSR's and Maclarens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
A couple of things to consider .

I. the fuel in the fuel rail gets heated anyway and stays in there long enough to have an effect.

- Its going to heat up no matter what, no question, but the already heated fuel that doesn't flow through the injectors doesn't have to then be returned to the fuel tank, does it? If the fuel, once its in the rail (and heated), can only go through the injectors, then you're not heating the fuel in the tank.

2.The fuel return runs through a baffle I have made that runs to the top of the tank.

- Nice but not needed if #3 works right.

3.The fuel pickup is in a well under the tank which has a volume of 400ml , and at a 50 degree lean angle still holds fuel.

- Then that should work just fine.

4, The first filter is a 30 Micron earls .

5 The post pump filter is the same as we use in our Porsche Dp engine and has 100micron and 30 micron mesh and acts as a reserve pressure vessel.

- If you've already filtered down to 30 with the first one, these two should never be needed. The filter being used as a "pressure vessel" would only work if it is like an oil accusump - and liquid doesn't compress much. In addition, since you will never uncover the pickup (#3), this is again unnecessary. And, the more metallic components you have, unless they're flapping in the breeze, just provide more places for the fuel to heat up.

6.You cannot tap the end of the fuel rail as it is against the frame.

- Thats where I put it. It doesn't HAVE to go there.

7. By using two inlets between the injectors gives a more even flow between all cylinders and pressure pulses are reduced.

- Pressure pulses are reduced by having a greater volume, and perhaps a trapped volume of air that is compressible. Do you know what a water hammer is in household plumbing, and how to fix it, or how a shock cannister works?

8. The heated fuel from the rail is dispersed to the top of the tank and because of the positioning of the fuel pump and filters has a lot of time to cool on recirculation.

- Where are you going to position the pumps that will provide cooling? If you weren't dumping heated fuel back into the tank, you wouldn't need to go to all that trouble.



9.The fuel rail is covered with insulation.

10.The system is virtually the same as we run on our DP cars, Atlantic cars and sportscars and works good enough for Chip Ganassi.

- DP, Atlantic and sports cars have fuel cells that easily triple the size of a MC fuel tank. In addition, most pro sports cars have redundant fuel pumps, and in-tank pumps.

11.I am not dead heading the fuel rail as the fuel is always flowing through the Pressure regulator, I only use as much fuel as the engine requires and the rest goes home.

I didn't say you were deadheading it. I said doing so was not a bad thing.


12. I have seen the damage first hand from returnless systems, and also the inconsistancies in line pressure , lean burning on full tanks, pressure drops from inadequate venting, line locks and pump failures.

- So? Damage is one thing, the causes of the damage are what we're talking about.

13. I am working within the constraints of the frame and bodywork, the picture doesnt show the the real schematics, but the pump and filter are a long way from the engine.

- Thats fine. I'm just suggesting that you can do it with fewer components and less money, which just might make your life a bit easier. The system I use is also monitored with a computer. I haven't seen any problems in my fuel pressure data.

14. I do my homework before I spend money.

I have been in motor racing for 27 years and not once have I seen a decent returnless fuel system that hasnt fried a fuel pump or suffers from bad pressure pulses ( the reason why you have an inadequate pressure vessel in the fuel tank of the bike).

- I'm not sure what you're calling a returnless system. I'm not suggesting that. Perhaps you're confusing returnless and dead heading. You still have returned or bypassed fuel from the regulator going back to the tank. Unless you had a fuel pump that was regulated to only produce a given pressure would you not need a fuel return system.

Mercedes benz and Porsche have returnless systems on their vehicles and they are still diabolical to this day, thats why you dont see them on GT3RSR's and Maclarens.

Thats "Mclaren"[/QUOTE]
 

·
Rent this space
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Two problems: First one is that you will be heating the fuel as it goes through the fuel rail. You don't need three fittings in the rail. If you put a single one in (I have mine on the right side end by the throttle actuator), and feed the rail from a tee in the line that goes from the second filter to the gauge, you reduce the amount of heat exposure to only the line that goes from the filter to the gauge. You're effectively dead heading the fuel rail which is what kawi does in the OE configuration. That configuration has worked very well for those of us who use these motors in cars.

The second problem is that if the fuel pickup in the tank is every uncovered, you will blow air through the system causing hickups during running.

I don't know what bosch filter you're planning on using, but I use an earls sintered bronze filter that is able to be disassembled for inspection and cleaning, and filters down to 35 microns. Also, you're filtering all the fuel, all the time. The filter could be in the line that feeds the fuel rail off of the tee fitting.

The system I use, which consists of a low and high pressure pump, a small surge tank, aeromotive adjustable FPR, earls filter, and necessary fittings is well under 500.
I can make a decent fuel system for about $500 but I can make a better one for more, the Starlite line alone is very expensive, but a 3rd of the weight of braided and it doesnt heat soak like stainless steel braid.

On our 6 cylinder DP engine , a lot of people at Weissach tested a non return system to try and cut down heat soak, we monitored fuel temps at the rail for a year before they tried it, fuel temps were higher with the non return system and tuning was not as accurate, we ended up with a return system that divided from the pump to the ends of both rails and then converged back to a single return through a diaphragm pressure regulator.

The most efficient fuel system we had was very similar to a good diesel system , each injector had its own feed and returning through a common bleed, running at 120PSI fuel pressure, it got banned because there were too many amateurs out there who didnt realise the consequences of bolting down a fuel rail correctly, I watched 3 pontiacs burn to the ground because of this.

With the non return systems I have personally seen Blue fuel pumps on Porsche 997's from majotr overheating, we had one car on the chassis dyno that would make 20 more horsepower with half a tank of fuel until we put a -10 aeromotive vent in the filler neck.

Also by having the return system you can utilize the fuel pressure regulator with manifold pressure to increase fueling with increased airbox pressures, or just modulate fuel with barometric changes in the airbox, plus or minus.
 

·
Rent this space
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
10RMotor, I apologize for my blunt responses, I have had a rough day , finalized by the puppy pissing on my laptop.

I agree that the system could be simpler, but I am looking ahead for going to forced induction and without an easy way to regulate fuel pressure from within the tank and all the problems I have had with the pile of junk fuel filter and pump, I have a solution.

The pump and filters will actually be mounted under the seat cowl , a long way from the motor , there are several reasons for doing this, one being the size of the plenum I will be using later, the other is to keep the pump away from engine heat and the real bad harmonics from the top of the airbox, I have had my old pump in pieces and it literally has shaken itself to pieces.
The post pump filter serves 2 purposes , the main one being to catch fuel pump debris if it fails and the other as I stated earler to hold a reserve of fuel pressure.
The outlet from my tank goes through a swirl assembly in the well to stop any frothing pre pump , with a closed system the bubbles have nowhere to go other than through the engine ,the filters are also placed at the back of the bike for ease of maintenance , also by having longer fuel lines pre pump allows for cooling and extra line capacity.

For sure it could be an easier and cheaper install, but being an endurance specialist for most of my racing life, I like to have failsafes.

The reason for 2 inlets on the fuel rail is quite simply for better fuel distribution under heavy loads and to reduce the small pressure differentials you get in a rail from one end to the other.
Initially I was going to have one in and one out , but because of how close the injector mounts are to the end of the rail and how close the rail is to the frame , I couldnt do it, we have also found from a long time testing that the way I have it has some efficiency values ,and if I am spending money , I want some return, no matter how small.

The pump I am using has a very high flow rate aswell as a 100 PSI pressure capacity , I chose this because of fluid flow I wanted through the rail at 5 bar pressure to eliminate any chance of emulsion in the rail .

The problems we have found with non return systems have always been the same, pressure spikes at the injectors in particular and the inability of small in tank pumps to handle the system with any kind of uniformity, even the 997 in tank pump as large as it is always struggles and has been the cause of many engine failures( even though the 997 engine is a piece of junk).Why this should be a problem with closed systems I can only presume to be the inability of the pump to modulate pressure frequencies constantly , not really sure.
 

·
Rent this space
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
10R , I just reread your postings, you are dead heading the rail and using a 3 way fuel pressure regulator to run back to your tank ?

Thought about that too, but came back to the same conclusions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,018 Posts
This conversation is way over my head. I had to re read the page a few times and look up a few of the terms on google to figure out what everyone is talking about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
683 Posts
Same Hear...Put both of them on a team together they should have good results with fuel return/non fuel return systems....This is wayyyyyy over my head......
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top