The Top Mitsubishi Galant VR-4 Resource

Join the best E39A 1991-1992 Mitsubishi Galant VR-4 community and document your GVR4 journey.

  • Software Upgraded - Reset Your Password to Login
    In order to log in after the forum software change, you need to reset your password. If you don't have access to the email address you used to register your GVR4.org account, you won't be able to reset your password. In that case, follow the instructions here to regain access to the forum.

ECMlink plus Cyclone

Hertz

Staff member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
13,501
Location
Chicago, IL
Is anyone here running the dual runner Cyclone intake manifold and doing such with DSMLink or ECMlink? Is it able to control this or are you using a pressure switch?

What is the option if you don't have the stock vacuum canister? If I remember correctly any vacuum reservoir would work, right?

Would I have any issues with a cyclone + 2g head? Shouldn't be any different than a USDM intake + 1g head?

Thanks in advance
 
Last edited:

jepherz

Staff member
Joined
Aug 8, 2004
Messages
7,877
Location
KC, Missouri
If the Cyclone was meant to match up with a 1g head, I can only imagine that the shorter inlets of the 2g head will purchase you a large step when going from the intake runner to the head, just like a 1g intake on a 2g head.
 

i used a vacuum reservoir from a 3g v6 eclipse as they have a cyclone style intake manifold also. It works awsome and is oem mitsu. btw it needs to have the ball inside as it acts as a check valve on one side of the canister.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

You can use the vacuum canister for the Eclipse GTS or Montero 3.8l with variable induction: MD125817. Its only ~$25.
 

Hertz

Staff member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
13,501
Location
Chicago, IL
Quoting jepherz:
If the Cyclone was meant to match up with a 1g head, I can only imagine that the shorter inlets of the 2g head will purchase you a large step when going from the intake runner to the head, just like a 1g intake on a 2g head.



But I should be able to port that out to match, right? Or am I being crazy?

Regarding the JDM ECU control of the runners is it rpm or airflow based? Would it really be necessary to use the ECM to control it if a Hobbs switch would work as well if not better?

I ask because I've read that pressure-triggered water injection may not be as desirable as load or even temperature-triggered delivery. (I've been reading Forced Induction Performance Tuning by A. Bell /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif)

Plus it sounds like I'll only be able to control one "external device" from ECMlink.
 

belize1334

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2003
Messages
3,316
Location
Bozeman, MT
Standard wisdom says that it's an RPM based signal for the runners. Remember that higher airflow measured at the MAS means denser air in the runners but the actual volume flow in the runners is gonna depend mainly on RPM and VE so you want to use RPM to trigger the switch.
 

1990ggsxnj

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
525
Location
Blackwood, NJ
Yes, but isn't that slightly skewed seeing as the charge from a turbo can be different from one car to the next?

I've seen everywhere that it's RPM based, but at a certain amount of airflow opening the runners would help more idealy than just rpm. A stock engine/turbo etc running 12 lbs of boost will hit the point where the secondary runners will help much later than a highly modified one where the that same airflow will be sooner. Am I wrong on this?

Is this what you were thinking Hertz? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif
 

Here's a variation on the merits of RPM versus airflow trigger for the Cyclone. Should it open at the same RPM or earlier if it is used with a stroked motor?
Mike R.
 

1990ggsxnj

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
525
Location
Blackwood, NJ
Watsun? I would think the different Cam overlap would have something to do with it as well...but one thing at a time here! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 

belize1334

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2003
Messages
3,316
Location
Bozeman, MT
The issue of one runner vs. two is mainly about optimizing flow (which is related to how much air the engine wants to breath compared to the drag that the air experiences along the path) vs. turbulence (which improves atomization of fuel). The drag will be primarily dependent on the velocity of the air and thus the volume of compressed air that the engine is consuming (not the same as the volume of uncompressed air that passes through the MAS). The ACTUAL amount of air will play a role as dense air is more viscous and thus causes more drag but it will be a small affect when compared to the influence that velocity plays. So, if you wanted you could make an airflow correction to the RPM trigger, but you'd still want RPM to be the primary factor since you can relate airflow through the runners directly to RPMs via the volumetric efficiency.

As for the stroker issue, I'd think that, given the same manifold, the higher displacement will consume more air so you'll want to activate at a lower RPM. The way to figure it exactly would be to take your exact configuration (cams, CR, displacement, etc will all play a role) and just do back to back dyno runs with and without the runners activated. Then set the trigger to the point where the power curves intersect.
 

Dialcaliper

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
1,287
Location
Mountain View, CA
As far as the 2.3/2.4 goes, I'd say that the RPM point should remain pretty much the same. It may move up or down a couple hundred RPM, but the intake resonance that's being exploited is purely a function of the pulses created by the intake valves opening and closing. You may see OEMs designing longer runner manifolds (that switch over at lower RPM) for bigger displacement engines, but that's only because they want the engine to peak at a lower point.

The main issue with using load triggered water injection is that unless both your WOT and part throttle tuning are spot on, and the water injection system is working perfectly, *and* your load sensitive trigger is tuned for all conditions, it will be extremely difficult to tune safely (You have to individually consider every point on the fuel/timing map, and account for hot days, humidity, etc). You will spend many hours fine tuning - It's probably not impossible, but it is not something you approach lightly.
 

Exactly ^^^^ I agree. The Cyclone runners are tuned for specific rpm's, which doesn't change with displacement, so rpm activation has proven to be the best way to do it. The original JDM ECU's switched at ~4500 if I recall my tests, but I chose 4100 in my chips, based on graphs I have seen of the HP and torque with and without secondary activation.
 

Dialcaliper

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
1,287
Location
Mountain View, CA
Really, the best way to tune it, especially if you have DSMLink or a similar datalogger that lets you calculate "torque" and "horsepower", is to tune once with the vacuum disconnected, and once with the vacuum connected and set to high RPM so the runners don't open.

Compare the two plots and the changeover point will become obvious. My suspicion is that you will end up right around the 4000-4200 range for any setup (unless perhaps you have a thick intake manifold spacer or something). The only factor besides runner length that might affect the RPM slightly is boost pressure (sound pulses travel slightly faster in denser air) but it should be pretty minimal.

Obviously the actual torque and horsepower numbers may not be accurate, but multiple plots will give you a relative comparison of which is better.

It's key to note that the pulses we're talking about are essentially sound (pressure) waves, which travel at the same speed down the runner no matter the actual flow velocity of the air moving through (aka, the speed of sound). As far as it matters, the intake air might as well be not moving. The effect of flow speed on cylinder filling is a completely independent effect.

The "Helmholtz" resonance has an effect solely because the sound waves are nothing more than increased or decreased pressure zones in the intake. The faster the opening/closing of the intake valves, the shorter the length of the pulse. When the "wavelength" matches up with the length of the runner going up and down, you end up with an amplified high pressure zone right at the intake valves. Voila

A cyclone runner specifically designed for a larger displacement engine with the same RPM characteristic would be the same length, but slightly larger in diameter (unless you wanted to speed up flow at lower airflow).
 
Last edited:

Hertz

Staff member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
13,501
Location
Chicago, IL
Great info on the Cyclone guys, thank you.

Quoting Dialcaliper:
The main issue with using load triggered water injection is that unless both your WOT and part throttle tuning are spot on, and the water injection system is working perfectly, *and* your load sensitive trigger is tuned for all conditions, it will be extremely difficult to tune safely (You have to individually consider every point on the fuel/timing map, and account for hot days, humidity, etc). You will spend many hours fine tuning - It's probably not impossible, but it is not something you approach lightly.



So would you advocate taking those variables out by activating water injection with boost pressure?
 

Rausch

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
12,049
Location
Cleveland, OH
Quote:
The faster the opening/closing of the intake valves, the shorter the length of the pulse. When the "wavelength" matches up with the length of the runner going up and down, you end up with an amplified high pressure zone right at the intake valves. Voila

Not to go too far O/T, but this is essentially why they 'tune' intake manifolds, etc. to get better than 100% VE on N/A race applications. I do believe...
 

Dialcaliper

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
1,287
Location
Mountain View, CA
This is way off-topic from cyclone activation, but here's what I'd do (and might someday if the engine ever goes back in the car...)

I would use some of ECMlink's new "nitrous" features - particularly the ability to run dual maps, based on whether the FPR solenoid is activated or not. Tie the FPR solenoid output to a relay, which turns on the WI system. Tune the base map conservatively, without the WI, and tune the secondary map with timing advance for when it's activated.

The key here is that you can tie the FPR solenoid to specific conditions, including load factor if you want. More importantly, you can also set a knock condition (only activate with 0-7 counts of knock for example) for the solenoid to be activated. That way, if *anything* goes wrong (whether it's a WI system failure, or simply an incorrect timing or fuel setting), the system will kill the WI system, *and* revert to a safe timing map until the knock count drops, instead of only retarding timing slowly.

Once that's in place, you can add whatever fancy features you want. If you can live without a two-step, you can even use the clutch switch input to determine whether the FPR solenoid triggers (and also the WI timing maps tied to it), giving you a dual mode setup, or even use a momentary steering wheel button to make the WI function like a nitrous button. You can even tie a dual-stage boost controller to the same relay output as the WI system that will allow you to run higher boost, but *only* while the WI system is running, *and* you have low knock. If knock is detected, the system will also drop the boost to a safe level.

Basically, you have knock sensor control tied completely into the WI system and the advanced timing that goes with it. It's the ultimate failsafe system that doesn't have to rely on flaky things like detecting pressure loss or a "clog" in the WI system, and will allow you to tune the system safely.

I'd been thinking about something similar with DSMlink V2, using the nitrous control to add a static timing advance for WI instead of retard (if that's possible), but the dual maps system on ECMLink would be much more elegant, and give you a better non-WI tune instead of just a static timing retard.

Anyway, it might be pretty ambitious, and would require a lot of tuning time to do the set-up, since you'd have to completely tune the car twice (unless you dialed in the tune already before installing the WI system), but having knock control tied to a timing map seems like the safest way to do it.

Regardless of what you do, you need to at least restrict the WI system to activate only under boost, probably just specifying a minimum load factor unless you want it active all the time under cruise, or you use something like the clutch switch to manually disable it). With this setup, you cannot have a separate control "downstream" of the ECU that disables the WI, or the ECU will be trying to switch to WI maps without the WI running.

So in short, no, I would take the variables out by tying it to knock instead of to boost pressure.

The only problem I see is that unless you're logging, or paying attention, you may not even notice the power loss in a situation like driving on the track, unless you also rig something like an indicator light to the FPR solenoid output.




Quoting Hertz:
Great info on the Cyclone guys, thank you.

Quoting Dialcaliper:
The main issue with using load triggered water injection is that unless both your WOT and part throttle tuning are spot on, and the water injection system is working perfectly, *and* your load sensitive trigger is tuned for all conditions, it will be extremely difficult to tune safely (You have to individually consider every point on the fuel/timing map, and account for hot days, humidity, etc). You will spend many hours fine tuning - It's probably not impossible, but it is not something you approach lightly.



So would you advocate taking those variables out by activating water injection with boost pressure?

 
Last edited:

Dialcaliper

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
1,287
Location
Mountain View, CA
Note to the above - the solenoid activation will only control the system being on or off. Unless you could use the BCS to run duty cycle, or base it off injector duty cycle, you would still only have whatever control (RPM and/or boost pressure based probably) that the system has.

If you have WI control valves that can be based off injector duty cycle (ala Aquamist), you could essentially treat the water injectors like a set of secondary injectors, either using a fixed water/fuel ratio, or influenced by whatever controller is in the loop.

Then you'd actually have "load based" water injection control, instead of just "load activated"
 

I designed a system like that for #1886, one of a kind. I used the $150 Aquamist highspeed solenoid. If I recall, it comes on at 15psi with 50% duty, and by 20psi it is 100%.
 

prove_it

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
4,201
Location
Sioux Falls, SD
Going back to the link and cyclone intake, I'm running the combo with 8.5 wisecos and a stock turbo for now. I had problems with my engine showing about 1-2 degrees knock(sometimes 4 degrees) when the rpm's hit the activation point. I tried the switch over at 4500, 4400, 4300, 4200, 4100, and even 3700 and still showed knock. I set link to pull 3 degrees timing when activated and still showed light knock. Finally I just pulled the vacuum off to test it. Runs strong with no knock at all. Also I was running 93 octane. Anyone have any ideas as to why this would be happening? Could the butterflies be causing a knock like vibration when opening?
 
Support Vendors who Support the GVR-4 Community
Boosted Fabrication ECM Tuning ExtremePSI Fuel Injector Clinic Jacks Transmissions JNZ Tuning Kiggly Racing Morrison Fabrications RixRacing RockAuto RTM Racing STM Tuned
Top