Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Aeromotive stealth

Just got mine $240 from ebay, did free shipping cos I bought it without bidding on Ebay

340lph @ 40psi and 13.5V

I was gonna take some pics of the install but it looks similar in dimentions to a walbro. Chances are I wont be able to do it this weekend either

Edited by sucram

Yea but why would you run intank, increases the chance of something going wrong, as well as reduced capacity, and more effort ;)

Wut?

I've been running my 044 like that for years now, so has my mate and that single, in-tank 044 is supporting well over 500awhp.

IMO, the 044 in-tank with a stock-type sock filter setup is way better than the 040 with integral pickup, and the 044 flows more.

Edited by bubba

Aeromotive stealth

Just got mine $240 from ebay, did free shipping cos I bought it without bidding on Ebay

340lph @ 40psi and 13.5V

I was gonna take some pics of the install but it looks similar in dimentions to a walbro. Chances are I wont be able to do it this weekend either

that looks like a good pump @ 340lph :)

have u fitted it as yet & are the dimensions similar to that of the oem gtr pump?

there are 3 versions of the 'stealth' so which is the right pump? would it be the 'centre inlet', 'offset inlet' or 'offset inlet/inline'

a few other q's:

1. stevo - the A1000 has serious flow (800lph @ 40psi), do u know if it fits in the tank of an r32?

2. pierburg pumps have also been recommended, do they flow as much as the aeromotive pumps as i cannot locate a website representing pierburg pumps?

3. the 'stealth' is rated @ 340lph on 40psi, what fuel pressure would the gtr run at high rpm/load? reason i ask, flow drops significantly @ 250lph on 75psi (as per attached flow chart) whereas the bosch 044 flows 200lph @ 5bar = 72.5psi

post-8728-0-88042900-1302755310_thumb.jpg

Marko, fuel pressure isn't rpm dependant, it boost dependant. Our systems are 3bar systems, if you're then running 2bar of boost then the fuel pressure will be 5bar at full boost :thumbsup:

Marko, fuel pressure isn't rpm dependant, it boost dependant. Our systems are 3bar systems, if you're then running 2bar of boost then the fuel pressure will be 5bar at full boost :thumbsup:

ok.

so my calculations should be based on something closer to 5bar fuel pressure as im running 21psi

My calculations are based on 5bar moving forward & here are my options...

1. Bosch 044: 200lph @ 5bar (more info: http://www.bosch.com.au/content/language1/downloads/fuelpumps.pdf)

2. Pierburg E3L series (700228510): 330lph @ 5bar (more info http://www.compsystems.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=106:pierburgefp&catid=2:ecu&Itemid=14)

3. Aeromotive A1000: 700lph @ 5bar (more info: http://aeromotiveinc.com/products-page/fuel-pumps/11101-a1000-fuel-pump/)

4. Aeromotive Stealth: 250lph @ 5bar (more info: http://aeromotiveinc.com/products-page/fuel-pumps/11140-340-stealth-fuel-pump-center-inlet/)

My concern with the aeromotive A1000 is if i can make it fit in the oem fuel pump cradle as it looks massivein comparison to the other pumps, there no dimensions available...

Pierburg flows 66% more than my 044 which is awesome...will the pierburg support 450awkw?

what are peoples thoughts?

thanks in advance :)

The Pierburg is very long and thin, like two Walbro's end to end.

The A1000 is around 3.5 inches round and 6 inches long as I remember. It can be mounted intank apparently but it is single speed, there are similar pumps around with variable speed to stop the fuel heating so much. These require -8 fittings and hoses at least for their rated output apparently.

Best and cheapest option is twin Walbro's cost and price wise, may not be the most reliable though but thats what I went for.

Wut?

I've been running my 044 like that for years now, so has my mate and that single, in-tank 044 is supporting well over 500awhp.

IMO, the 044 in-tank with a stock-type sock filter setup is way better than the 040 with integral pickup, and the 044 flows more.

Designed as an external pump. Not saying it won't be fine, just saying it isn't what it was designed for :)

Designed as an external pump. Not saying it won't be fine, just saying it isn't what it was designed for :)

So? An 044 internal is fine, I use one and control it with Vipec. Stop posting crap.

Designed as an external pump. Not saying it won't be fine, just saying it isn't what it was designed for :)

The 044 doesn't have an open end like the 023 and 040....so you clamp a sock on the bottom of the pump and solve the problem.

how did u set up your twin walbro's? any pics?

The M35 pump is similar to the 350z, it sits under the rear seat. One Walbro and -6 line for each rail running ID1000's, non return valves before the reg should let me know if one pump fails so as not to run lean.

post-63525-0-56664100-1302816785_thumb.jpg

post-63525-0-64411000-1302817351_thumb.jpg

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



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
×
×
  • Create New...