Jump to content

Gen V 5.3l turbo build - 87 octane and AFM/DOD

BoomBoomBamaPhD
 Share

Recommended Posts

BoomBoomBamaPhD Enthusiast

BoomBoomBamaPhD

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, pokismoki said:

yes, college is where the youth go to waste thier parents money getting an degree in something outdated and obsolete

I'll try not to take this personally offensive, but my parents don't make enough money for that, everything I've spent on college has come from scholarships that I earned academically, and luckily only a couple of loans.

And I'm sorry you think that Engineering is outdated and obsolete. I'd love to see you design a production engine.

 

Sorry for the rant

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

lucas287
lucas287

100% doable with 87 octane. My wife's CX-9 has the 2.5 Skyactiv Turbo and it runs great on 87. Madza itself even claims that use of 91+ will give you 10% more HP but the torque down low stays the same

shakenfake
shakenfake

I promise you once you graduate everything you learned is getting tossed out the window.    Anyways I vote buy the turbo kit do a delete and the whole shebang. I'll even help if you live in

KARNUT
KARNUT

When the 14s first came out there was plenty of experimental tuners tinkering with the 5.3s. They were on this site. They all recommended using premium gas for maximum performance. KR was the reason.

BoomBoomBamaPhD Enthusiast

BoomBoomBamaPhD

Posted
  • Author
Posted

But so back to the ecoboost, so that is still saying that the engine is taking over 15psi of boost on 87?

I think that's pretty significant. Especially because normal tame tunes won't push beyond 10psi for sake of reliability.

And its the premise of the last bit of the article you have quoted, basically if you want more performance, just fill your tank with higher performing fuel.

pokismoki Senior Enthusiast

pokismoki

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, BoomBoomBamaPhD said:

I'll try not to take this personally offensive, but my parents don't make enough money for that, everything I've spent on college has come from scholarships that I earned academically, and luckily only a couple of loans.

And I'm sorry you think that Engineering is outdated and obsolete. I'd love to see you design a production engine.

 

Sorry for the rant

you'll get skooled kid...

  • Like 1
CrawlSlow Enthusiast

CrawlSlow

Posted
Posted

Lol 😆 @ this thread. 

 

The Fast and the Furious is a good source for this type of school project. 

 

Instead of trying to proves what you read on the internet.  You should take a moment and listen to those with hands-on experience.

  • Like 2
BoomBoomBamaPhD Enthusiast

BoomBoomBamaPhD

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well when I mentioned the 10psi and reliability I guess I should have specified I was talking about boosted ls applications

 

Obviously when You add more components and a more complicated system, reliability will suffer. Although ford has to provide a warranty which I'm assuming is the typical 5year 60k miles. So there is something to be said about the reliability there.

 

And I doubt I would get "skooled," although I wasn't suggesting a competition.

 

I'll state this again for everyone who continues to view me as some naive and ignorant brat. I understand how to "properly" build a boosted engine, and how everyone has always done it. Not exact components, but fundamentally.

 

Yes, 87 in a boosted application is improper for maximum performance, I've stated that many times already. Everyone knows that, but it can be done, as shown more than once now.

 

This thread has turned into the pissing contest that I was trying to avoid. 

Thank you to the few of you that attempted to participate in an open-minded conversation while sharing your knowledge.

  • Like 1
lucas287 Enthusiast

lucas287

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, BoomBoomBamaPhD said:

Well when I mentioned the 10psi and reliability I guess I should have specified I was talking about boosted ls applications

 

Obviously when You add more components and a more complicated system, reliability will suffer. Although ford has to provide a warranty which I'm assuming is the typical 5year 60k miles. So there is something to be said about the reliability there.

 

And I doubt I would get "skooled," although I wasn't suggesting a competition.

 

I'll state this again for everyone who continues to view me as some naive and ignorant brat. I understand how to "properly" build a boosted engine, and how everyone has always done it. Not exact components, but fundamentally.

 

Yes, 87 in a boosted application is improper for maximum performance, I've stated that many times already. Everyone knows that, but it can be done, as shown more than once now.

 

This thread has turned into the pissing contest that I was trying to avoid. 

Thank you to the few of you that attempted to participate in an open-minded conversation while sharing your knowledge.

 

100% doable with 87 octane. My wife's CX-9 has the 2.5 Skyactiv Turbo and it runs great on 87. Madza itself even claims that use of 91+ will give you 10% more HP but the torque down low stays the same. Just a matter of how much resources can be put into the project. 

 

I think it's paramount to have full control over the intake and exhaust valves - independent of each other. That would be the best way to keep the chamber cool and prevent detonation. And that's never going to happen with our engines.

 

As I'm sure you're aware, you can adjust SOI (start of injection). It's a map that looks very similar to the timing tables where you tell it exactly when you want it to spray (in degrees relative to BDC, I believe). That would probably help a lot. In fact, the stock SOI tables are kind of a mess. I can get nearly the same fuel mileage as stock by disabling part throttle VVT and retarding (delaying) SOI a good bit. The result is a super responsive throttle and great torque production. 

 

Lastly, I apologize if it's been mentioned - but alcohol-based fuels are superior for boost. Their cooling properties alone are a game changer. I can run my 93 tune on E30 (e85 blended with 87 octane) with zero knock at all. 

  • Like 4
pokismoki Senior Enthusiast

pokismoki

Posted
Posted (edited)

I never been able to find SOI in HPtuners for the K2, are you using a different platform like EFI LIVE? I'll look it up.

 

I played with this feature before on a fuel injected dirtbike and wow throttle response was insane just by re-timing the firing of injector vs valve opening degrees

Edited by pokismoki
BoomBoomBamaPhD Enthusiast

BoomBoomBamaPhD

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I am sure i can find it elsewhere, but since we are leading to this topic here.

What all control can be had over the VVT for the 2015 5.3?

obviously with it only being a single cam it is limited for what vvt can accomplish, but tuning wise, what can be done?

 

And @lucas287, what mix do you use for e30?

lucas287 Enthusiast

lucas287

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, BoomBoomBamaPhD said:

I am sure i can find it elsewhere, but since we are leading to this topic here.

What all control can be had over the VVT for the 2015 5.3?

obviously with it only being a single cam it is limited for what vvt can accomplish, but tuning wise, what can be done?

 

And @lucas287, what mix do you use for e30?


I’m not sure how the 5.3 is set up but I believe the 6.2 is advanced 8 degrees until the ECM says to ****** (I think this forum bleeps that word out lol). WOT it starts to reduce that advance at 3000 RPM and by 5000 RPM it’s retarding 8 degrees so it’s straight up. All of that is great. I have no issues with it. However, in the low load ranges .16-.56 g/cyl airmass is can ****** up to 23 degrees. Basically to introduce the EGR effect of cooling the chamber and reducing pumping losses. 
 

And yes SOI is in HPT, what I use. It’s under the spark tab I believe! 

lucas287 Enthusiast

lucas287

Posted
Posted

Didn’t fully finish my thoughts there. So you have the ability to reduce the ****** to 0 for any given rpm/airmass, but that’s it. You cannot advance beyond its parked position. Hope that helps!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • RyanbabZ71
      Gas Prices

      By RyanbabZ71 · Posted

      Wawa and Meijer here have ethanol free (88 & 89) I use for my mower and lawn equipment.  Its not much more than reg.  I paid $3.29 a few weeks ago.  
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      tl; dr I've now reached the 6th floor of hell. I'm chronicling my journey for my morning readers.   Pulling the top of the intake apart was moderately easy but it involved a lot of parts, connections, and minutae. I was preparing for the new fuel lines to arrive ("nut and bolt kit" it's called). The fuel line connections are notched and held in place by the manifold and a metal plate with a T27 screw.   It's on the back of the intake, under the firewall, with little clearance, and two hard metal fuel lines in the way. I was using Franken-tools (weird combinations of 1/4 inch ratchet with/without an extension, with a bit holder for my T27) to get in there. One of my sockets and bits fell off and has yet to emerge on the floor. I lost a second setup and that's when I almost started throwing tools. But that was the point at which I had gotten traction on the Torx head, and it promptly stripped. No more traction.   I started humming "1-877-kars-4-kids" because I was about at that point. You know what? I'm $1500 into this thing and I can make it disappear just as quickly. This isn't fun anymore. I had spent a lot of time already "tidying" around the engine bay: Fixing all the "someone's been here before!" BS. The truck has been exclusively dealer- and shop- serviced and I'm reminded of why I never let other people work on my cars unless absolutely necessary.   Speaking of dealer service. This truck has a 1" stack of records going back to 1995. I put them all in an excel spreadsheet, date/mileage/description.   The CPI spider has been replaced 4 times in 85k miles. The EGR? Another 4. Multiple, multiple O2 sensors. One Cat. 4? Sets of plugs and wires, and I swear half the stack is diagnosis paperwork for "misfire, runs rough, extended crank, dies at stoplights".   GM was producing some proper crap back then. And it was still well within the era of brittle/crappy plastic. (Windows 95 was released the same month this truck was sold new, we HAD the technology!!)   There (was) a plastic shroud around the evaporator core and HVAC fan in the engine bay. I noticed a chunk of it missing so I poked at it some more and it literally shattered. Touched it some more and pieces were crumbling off. Had a good laugh. Clearly whatever plastic garbage they were using had broken down over 30 years and was literally turning to dust. That was a good half hour of using a shop vac to remove the rest of it.   Back to it.   I was going to give up for the evening but then decided I'm already level 10 pissed off at the stripped screw: G* D* it, give me my tools back -- and my JOY. We'll do this the hard way: The whole intake is coming off.   Blazer won Round II. After finally finding and accessing the 12 intake bolts and using a pry bar to unseat it from the heads, it popped loose in an explosion of gunk and grime raining down into open ports. Awesome.   6 times I reminded myself: Be careful of the temperature sender on the front of the intake.   YEAH, I forgot again and snapped it clean off in the removal. Add another $20 to the ever-growing list of new parts this thing is consuming.   The shame is, long before removing the intake, I had changed the oil in prep for Tuesday's momentous fuel line replacement that was going to be the magic fix and I'd have a running Blazer to tool around in this next weekend. The intake removal, including raining gunk, also gushed dirty coolant all over the valley. Of course it did. Welp, there goes another $35.   I now need an intake gasket set, bolt set, coolant temp sensor, another 5 quarts of oil, some RTV. Don't worry, I've already got 3 new jugs of Dexcool and a thermostat waiting. I'll fill it with clean water first to get it running, dump it, and then add the Dex later on in case... well, let's not go there. I'm only tearing this down once, next time the truck is going on Marketplace for FREE.   Oh, and I'm going to need vacuum hose for all the stupid connections placed at the rear of the engine which have since disintegrated. Come on, GM....tell me you don't do that anymore?   Oh, and the ears on the distributor where the cap screws down are both cracked. I mean, why not put a new distributor in it too. You get a distributor, YOU get a distributor, Everyone gets a new distributor!   This truck isn't out of the woods yet...I'm already questioning how much more time I'm willing to sink in.
    • William Aldrich
      Bent valve in 2025 GMC Canyon Denali - Requires engine swap at 14K miles

      By William Aldrich · Posted

      NewDude, thank you for the suggestions!    I did follow up and the dealer indicates he has an open CX case and is working with DPAC (Dealer Parts Assistance Center).   Per the dealer, GM has had a quality spill and is not providing an update for when a replacement engine will be available.
    • Silver Yeti
      Poll: Does your truck have the rear window leak?

      By Silver Yeti · Posted

      That's interesting.   There was a factory wire-hole in the back, top of the rear cab, which had a wire for the third brakelight assembly running through it, as well as several holes (10 of them I believe) for all of the studs coming off of the 3rd brakelight assembly itself.   I sealed all of those holes with RTV/silicone as well.   I found it kind of odd, that none of those holes, were sealed with any kind of sealant by the factory - if there was any there, it wasn't very much.   That said, I've been out in heavy rain and have ran the truck through high-pressure car-washes a few times now and she has been 100% water-tight to this point.   I feel very confident in the repair, we'll see how it holds up.
    • Jay-22-2500
      2024 Silverado 2500 HD with the 6.6 Gas (L8T) Engine

      By Jay-22-2500 · Posted

      I bought a used 2022 2500hd with 6.6L in February. In March took a 2200 mile trip towing our 6500 lb trailer. Changed the oil day before leaving and when we were arriving at our 1st destination, low oil light came on (roughly 1000 miles) it was 2 qts low. Now it towed like a dream, no issue there, and we did go through the mountains of TN, but still, 2 qts! Luckily I did purchase an extended warranty. Brought it to the dealership in April, oil change and consumption test. Brought it back last week, 1300 miles, no towing, and no oil showing on the dipstick. GM is reccomending a new engine (cheaper than them rebuilding), we'll see if the warranty company comes through. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...