Kawasaki ZX-10R Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
In comparing cam timing from a GSXR1000, K7-K11 I see a lot of differences in ignition timing from the ZX10. With the ZX10 07 ignition timing you can run safely 70HP nitrous on the stock map with E60 fuel. With a GSXR1000 I wouldn't try it!

Hard to find ignition maps, any one care to share some dyno proven ignition maps on gen 1/2/3 zx10 n/a?

I have run software simulations to get the max power timing curves N/A and on the bottle. Trying to gather data on what works and what doesn't!

I find it interesting the newer GSXR follows the recommended timing based on software, at 100% throttle.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
946 Posts
The 98-99 ZX6R would run that agressive timing, was a 45 degree setup, mind you that was old tech and prob some compensating going on for actual processing time for spark timing and such.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,679 Posts
most tuners aren't going to share their timing maps as they're usually proprietary to their products. doing it yourself is just going to require a lotta runs on the dyno to figure out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
most tuners aren't going to share their timing maps as they're usually proprietary to their products. doing it yourself is just going to require a lotta runs on the dyno to figure out.

I agree with you in part, that they won't share. If you have the right dyno you can load test for peak torque and timing. However, another way is to use an engine simulator. I will post the numbers when I get them sorted.

I looked for awhile to just find the OEM maps, but I got them. Figured the next guy would have a better time finding them.

I simulate all the engines I build. Cam timing, exhaust tuning, etc. Of course it's only as accurate as you enter the numbers!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I digress. It seems the changes in timing are only worth a 2-4HP increase.
These were ran with a stock configuration pipe shortened 4 " and another "drag" type pipe.
Ideal timing at 12K area is 41°, E85, 107.4/107 cam timing. Knock index of .4 max (not even close to knocking @ 12.7. At 13.5 max knock index of .9). Conditions were 85°F sea level. 12.7:1 C.R. highest run was methanol @ 13.5CR.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,679 Posts
Call up George Dean in Washington, he does the best load testing builds on these engines you can probably find anywhere. If he isn't busy he may chat with you about the timing maps.

Have you done many simulations and then dyno tuned after the builds to check for margin of error in your simulation program?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Call up George Dean in Washington, he does the best load testing builds on these engines you can probably find anywhere. If he isn't busy he may chat with you about the timing maps.

Have you done many simulations and then dyno tuned after the builds to check for margin of error in your simulation program?
Good tip, I may give that a shot. Never hurts to see what information can be had.

I have not dyno tested as of yet. I do my own tuning via wideband and ET w/ logger. However, I have compared dyno charts to simulation and they are extremely close. If anything, the end result is not what I look at. I like to make cam changes virtual to see where the power moves and set cam timing that way. I do the same for exhaust length and diameter. I can see where the power shifts based on fuel delivery at RPM and the velocity of RPM changes from a logged run. It's more simple for what I do, drag racing. Road coarse is totally different considering on/off throttle, out of corner torque, drive ability, ETC.

One afterthought in all this, if I had to do it again, STANDALONE.. I currently use a progressive nitrous controller, direct port, dry. So.. I have a progressive nitrous controller, transistors talking to powercommander 5 for map selection, quick shifter, VSS, powercommander ignition, logger with outputs/inputs. What a mess!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,679 Posts
ahhh gotcha, doing WOT tuning for the strip is a bit different. timing on the juice is a bit different indeed. you may wanna call Nels at 2 Wheel DynoWorks and if you get lucky and its a second blue moon of a month, you might get to talk to him on the phone and he's done a ton of tunes on bikes for the strip and a buncha NOS applications, he may be able to give you a tip on where to go with the timing on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
ahhh gotcha, doing WOT tuning for the strip is a bit different. timing on the juice is a bit different indeed. you may wanna call Nels at 2 Wheel DynoWorks and if you get lucky and its a second blue moon of a month, you might get to talk to him on the phone and he's done a ton of tunes on bikes for the strip and a buncha NOS applications, he may be able to give you a tip on where to go with the timing on it.
Sounds like a long shot for sure!, but maybe worth looking into.

Fortunately, the program simulates nitrous, progressive or RPM based. Provides fuel flow and timing. As with anything, proceed with caution. This is what brought me here to validate. I have already been spraying 70HP direct port on stock ignition map, stock motor. Plugs perfect, mixture spot on (my injectors were delivering 388cc and I had to add 38% in PC on E60 fuel @ 55LBS fuel pressure, about 28% on E55 fuel to obtain 11.8 A/F. Now that I will spray 150HP+ I am in unknown territory. Injectors are too small for 70 shot on E85 even at 70PSI presusre (just on the edge). Collecting data from the wonderful internet, but not always true, seems to coincide with the program calculations. What I like even more is the program softens the ignition as the nitrous hits.

I have nothing to gain by posting other than to help a fellow racer. I scoured the internet looking at data, reading, etc to find answers. Thought I would pass it along. More to come, when I get dialed in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,679 Posts
Sounds like a long shot for sure!, but maybe worth looking into.

Fortunately, the program simulates nitrous, progressive or RPM based. Provides fuel flow and timing. As with anything, proceed with caution. This is what brought me here to validate. I have already been spraying 70HP direct port on stock ignition map, stock motor. Plugs perfect, mixture spot on (my injectors were delivering 388cc and I had to add 38% in PC on E60 fuel @ 55LBS fuel pressure, about 28% on E55 fuel to obtain 11.8 A/F. Now that I will spray 150HP+ I am in unknown territory. Injectors are too small for 70 shot on E85 even at 70PSI presusre (just on the edge). Collecting data from the wonderful internet, but not always true, seems to coincide with the program calculations. What I like even more is the program softens the ignition as the nitrous hits.

I have nothing to gain by posting other than to help a fellow racer. I scoured the internet looking at data, reading, etc to find answers. Thought I would pass it along. More to come, when I get dialed in.
at a 150 shot you are definitely out of fuel and need to upgrade your fuel system especially E85 which is already pushing 30% higher rates than e fuels. at the higher compression ratio you'll need to pull less timing but i'm assuming it'll still be retarding between 4-6* when the nos hits
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,812 Posts
....just an idea, but why not run a non-alcohol based fuel meant for nitrous instead of the alky mix? You'd get your injector headway back at the very least...

In my humble opinion, it's not worth chasing a couple % of power with timing once you get into big power adders. It is nice to know where that peak timing is, but you can back it up a couple degrees for safety sake and just pill/wastegate in all the extra power you need, provided you run a fuel up to the task. Your simulation data tells the tale: 4% max improvement (so, 8-10hp) with timing.... but you can lean on the nitrous for 50-70 more at any time if you want... it's not worth the time or possible expense to get it that close to the edge. If your plugs/afr/egt/knock look good on a 70 shot then you have it where it needs to be.... just add a little more pill and follow the same timing trends you have now, say, in 10hp increments until you get it where you want it or you find the power limit of the parts you have.

Pete Hill said something is passing at Bonneville this year that really rang a bell with me... he said "Don't let perfection get in the way of progress". As a perfectionist that kinda stung me a bit, but it's the best advice I've heard in a long time. food for thought.

....and yea, a stand-alone will change your life for the better. For. Sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Good advise on all counts. When I saw the Hp increase in timing I thought... PPPfffffttt.. 4HP.. what the hell is that. Maybe if I was chasing N/A, but it's nothing when spraying 150.

I currently run a 255L/hr pump w/Bosch EV14 620cc injectors. At 300HP I need roughly 650cc on E85. 48PSI will get me that. Keep in mind, this is not a low speed machine. There are some issues with low speed, off idle response. The next route I will make a secondary fuel rail and spray 8 injectors. For this project I want to see what I can muster with this platform.

I can't find any real reasons to run C16, YET. If I was bracket racing it would be better or more consistent. The cost of injectors is much less than 2-5 gallon pails of C16. I have heard from many "why do you run E85?" - I don't know.. it seems to work well thus far! Motor teardown shows no issue running it. When I ask "why not" - I never get any answers. I don't doubt there are valid reasons and I would love to hear pro's and cons.

This is not setup on a sportbike. Its a different platform- 710lbs rider and bike. 1.53 60ft, 121mph 1/8 mile, hand clutch

Here is the suggested timing map from the program. Keep in mind it's a progressive rate nitrous starting at 4500. Not saying that is what I am doing. It was just a simulation. When I was hitting the 70, I started at 6K, 10%, 1.2S ramp, speed permissive for the launch. 2nd stage kicked in over 62MPH and ramped one time over .7S. Spray through the shift on fuel kill. Runs like butter on toast!
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
683 Posts
I had EAP at one time. Is the ZX10 engine already in the files? I remember having a tough time trying to figure out what to enter. It is very cool you are using it with proven results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
I had EAP at one time. Is the ZX10 engine already in the files? I remember having a tough time trying to figure out what to enter. It is very cool you are using it with proven results.
You have to measure everything. The hardest part is finding the [email protected] lift numbers. Theoretically, you can back figure it out by simulating it against a known dyno curve. Again, the numbers are not really what were looking for in a sense, but the flow characteristics will change power for sure, all the power is in the head. The idea, for me, is to simulate known changeable variables like cam timing, exhaust primary length and diameter, timing, CR, fuel type, ETC. They all follow math laws and are predictable. Knowing where you want the power means a lot. The only real issue I have with the program is the exhaust configuration. It won't simulate 4-2 4-2-1, firing pulses for scavenging and return waves that coincide in paired cylinder systems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,812 Posts
Good advise on all counts. When I saw the Hp increase in timing I thought... PPPfffffttt.. 4HP.. what the hell is that. Maybe if I was chasing N/A, but it's nothing when spraying 150.

I currently run a 255L/hr pump w/Bosch EV14 620cc injectors. At 300HP I need roughly 650cc on E85. 48PSI will get me that. Keep in mind, this is not a low speed machine. There are some issues with low speed, off idle response. The next route I will make a secondary fuel rail and spray 8 injectors. For this project I want to see what I can muster with this platform.

I can't find any real reasons to run C16, YET. If I was bracket racing it would be better or more consistent. The cost of injectors is much less than 2-5 gallon pails of C16. I have heard from many "why do you run E85?" - I don't know.. it seems to work well thus far! Motor teardown shows no issue running it. When I ask "why not" - I never get any answers. I don't doubt there are valid reasons and I would love to hear pro's and cons.

This is not setup on a sportbike. Its a different platform- 710lbs rider and bike. 1.53 60ft, 121mph 1/8 mile, hand clutch
C16 would be a poor choice of fuel for an NA nitrous application. Sure it has a ton of octane, but a look at its distillation curve will tell you it really wants to see a little bit of charge heat (great for boosted motors); Q16 would probably be a better choice, or some of their other more specialized fuels. Alky is kind of neat for what you're doing.... being such a slow burning fuel is probably what allows you to get away with all that timing lead, and with nitrous you're essentially running an oxidized fuel with another oxidizer.... you would need a lot of fuel for sure! And the charge temperature has to be pretty low too... maybe low enough on an NA motor that it may start getting difficult to get all that fuel mixed up/out of suspension when you start spraying a lot of it. And if you can't get it out of suspension you're just displacing air with it that could be in the cylinder...... Another thing I'd like to ponder would be the effect of less advance with a much faster burning fuel... if you can get the same amount of combustion/pressure done with less advance you'd theoretically be fighting the piston less on the end of the compression stroke... seems more efficient, so long as the fuel and parts can handle the higher pressure delta.

Honestly, I think that is all just splitting hairs/bench racing... results speak for themselves! The only real reason "why not" at this point was just about your hardware (injector/fuel system): you could run a much more power dense fuel with good octane and not have to size up your fuel system. Now if your system was forced induction the Alky would hands down be the way to go; the high charge temperatures would just eat that up. But I understand the appeal even in an NA application... the stuff acts like race gas to a point, and it is much cheaper! But I think you may run out of injector quicker than you think.... I run a set of ID715 on GAS with a fairly high BSFC (boost 11.4:1. Ish), and I'm knocking on the door of 90% duty cycle at 315ish whp @ 13000 rpm. No one talks about rpm in injector calculations it seems, but high rpm really takes the piss out of what should be easy injector calculations. At 13K rpm you only have about 9ms of injection event available, and latency eats up a significant portion of that (that higher fuel pressure band aid? yup, that increases latency, along with dropping voltages from a pump having to draw 20 amps to make that kind of pressure, nevermind coils working their asses off to make that much spark that often).

...I digress, but it sure is a neat project!! I appreciate the hell out of you sharing the data, keep us posted on how it turns out!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
C16 would be a poor choice of fuel for an NA nitrous application. Sure it has a ton of octane, but a look at its distillation curve will tell you it really wants to see a little bit of charge heat (great for boosted motors); Q16 would probably be a better choice, or some of their other more specialized fuels. Alky is kind of neat for what you're doing.... being such a slow burning fuel is probably what allows you to get away with all that timing lead, and with nitrous you're essentially running an oxidized fuel with another oxidizer.... you would need a lot of fuel for sure! And the charge temperature has to be pretty low too... maybe low enough on an NA motor that it may start getting difficult to get all that fuel mixed up/out of suspension when you start spraying a lot of it. And if you can't get it out of suspension you're just displacing air with it that could be in the cylinder...... Another thing I'd like to ponder would be the effect of less advance with a much faster burning fuel... if you can get the same amount of combustion/pressure done with less advance you'd theoretically be fighting the piston less on the end of the compression stroke... seems more efficient, so long as the fuel and parts can handle the higher pressure delta.

Honestly, I think that is all just splitting hairs/bench racing... results speak for themselves! The only real reason "why not" at this point was just about your hardware (injector/fuel system): you could run a much more power dense fuel with good octane and not have to size up your fuel system. Now if your system was forced induction the Alky would hands down be the way to go; the high charge temperatures would just eat that up. But I understand the appeal even in an NA application... the stuff acts like race gas to a point, and it is much cheaper! But I think you may run out of injector quicker than you think.... I run a set of ID715 on GAS with a fairly high BSFC (boost 11.4:1. Ish), and I'm knocking on the door of 90% duty cycle at 315ish whp @ 13000 rpm. No one talks about rpm in injector calculations it seems, but high rpm really takes the piss out of what should be easy injector calculations. At 13K rpm you only have about 9ms of injection event available, and latency eats up a significant portion of that (that higher fuel pressure band aid? yup, that increases latency, along with dropping voltages from a pump having to draw 20 amps to make that kind of pressure, nevermind coils working their asses off to make that much spark that often).

...I digress, but it sure is a neat project!! I appreciate the hell out of you sharing the data, keep us posted on how it turns out!

You got me sucked into this one. I started modeling a turbo engine and didn't come up with near the fuel you are using. Then again, I don't know the boost level and if you are using a 1:1 ratio regulator with boost tied to it. Guessing without it, at 20 lbs you would only be at 525cc/hr. I had to play with timing to get it to not knock.

here is a model of a turbo at 13.5 max boost with max timing and trimmed timing to reduce knock. The area to watch out for is the 7500 to 8500 range. This is E85 fuel model @ 11.5:1. Keep in mind I just picked a turbo to get 350HP. Not sure what you have.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,812 Posts
Yup! When I did the calculations myself I figured that ID725's would be more than enough for E85 and about 300hp... being dead wrong was a bit of a shock. :) I'll see if I can find a datalog of that run, but you're pretty close (see attached graph). This was about 185kpa manifold pressure with a GT2860RS (.86 a/R exhaust housing, internal gate)... the extreme drop in torque at 12.3k rpm was from an improperly jetted water injection system.... was trying to build a system to cover poor octane fuel (pump) at stupid boost/timing. Fuel was C16 (probably with a bit of pump mixed in), stock 2nd gen timing with ~.3 degree of timing pulled out per 7kpa above 100... I think. Given that the DA was well above 6K feet on that pull (4500' static, decent barometer, and close to 100F ambient air), that poor little turbo was struggling it's guts out to make 13psi... and I think I may have had a little boost leak somewhere as wastegate duty cycle was higher than normal. The lumpy torque curve is a result of trying to ramp control in based on mph with a crude external wastegate... there's a touch of overshoot/oscillation at or about 9.5Krpm. With a good external gate on a G25-660 turbo I'm pretty confident it would make that 350 even at my altitude and 95F degree ambient temp. :)

CR is in the 10:1 range somewhere... probably closer to 10.5:1. Cams/cam timing is stock. Intake temps were kept under 150F degrees at peak.... 100F at the start to 140ish at peak (this dyno applies wind load based on mph, so a pull from 50-160mph actually takes a little time and you get some soak). AFR's were too low for the fuel... in the 11.2-11.4 range at peak, though I try to ramp it down from 12.5:1 at 100kpa to about 11.4 at 200kpa when I use pump fuel/water injection mix.... if I cleaned up the tune for C16 it would make more... but having it wide open for 5 straight miles makes me want to err on the side of a little too fat. The system DOES have a 1:1 rising rate regulator and an in tank 340 lph Aeromotive Stealth pump... I log fuel pressure and it seems pretty stable, if a touch low across the board. Part of the reason for that is a contributing factor for the 'injector shrinkage' (haha!): Voltage. The charging system will not keep up with all those electronics under full load and battery voltage starts to drop... generally into the high 11's/low 12's.... there is 25% (!!) more latency at 12V vs 14V, and that really starts to add up when you are running high pressures and over-rich mixtures. And my silly ass is still running this as a fully street legal bike, so there ends up being a bit more electrical load then you'd want to see on a full race bike.

Simulation stuff is great and I love it! But it sadly doesn't prepare you for the problem children that generally show up en mass to these events. There are a lot of other factors too of course that would be hard to simulate... I do have a good bit of airbox/plenum volume, but exhaust manifold volume and backpressure is sadly unknown in this set-up. Altitude and ambient temps/humidity play hell with stuff. Dyno's have their own built in fudge factors from brand to brand, but this one is currently calibrated pretty close to standard dynojet numbers that I've seen (a beat up 2nd gen with a PC3/filter/full system made roughly 150-something, and a new Super Duke 1290R with a pipe & tune made just a touch over 160). But, back on point: Fuel systems are becoming my pet projects lately.... I'd say on at least 3/4's of the last turbo things I've had my grubby mits on/in have ultimately had problem children in the fuel delivery department. The majority of ash trays or concave rotors hanging around the shop have been given birth by fuel delivery gremlins that show up well after the dyno party. That being said, I need to start using simulation stuff myself.... having a dyno in the garage to fact check it would be an amazing combination.

TL;DR: Advertised injector ability is usually a whole lot different than what you get once you factor in all the real world stuff that happens. :)
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
I put the ev14's in today. What an excellent injector thus far. 16 hole 620cc. No problems off idle. Looking forward to test and tune this weekend.

I can't believe how close the simulation is to your actual curve. Granted, I was not able to get your info. Granted, this run was E85 at 102 octane simulation. Fun to bench race and get data to prepare for the real thing.
 

Attachments

1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top