Glad to hear it went well. I'm looking forward to hearing updates from you.

I was trying to find something that might make a comparison between engine hp on biodiesel versus D2. Found this from John Deere:

http://www.deere.com/en_US/rg/servic...sel/index.html

"Expect up to a 12 percent reduction in power and an 18 percent reduction in fuel economy when using B100"

That % reduction in power and fuel economy seem a little high to me. I think I read a Cummins paper one time showing 10% less power and 5% less fuel economy. Anyway, if I would've dyno'd with D2 the numbers would've likely been higher by ~10%.

P.S. If any of you guys could pray for, help, give to those people ravaged by the floods around here I'm sure they'd appreciate it. It's just unreal.

 

I did figure out my smoking problem. I was burning some used oil (about 10% mix) which was working out well but accidentally got some used synthetic mixed in which was causing all the black smoke. Took a couple of tanks of fuel to clear it up.

 

Thanks for sharing that. Based on what you said I advanced my pump just a touch more. The engine sounds good and I'm not seeing/hearing any indication it's too far advanced. I was at ~3 degrees and now I'm at ~4 degrees. I think that's about all the farther I can rotate my pump.

 

Got the raw data files from the dyno shop. Made some plots with Excel for RWHP, RWTQ, Boost and EGT's and show the two runs at the same "tune" with the different rpm start points. I think if I would've asked him to start even lower the peak torque would've been higher. Also, the peak rear wheel hp was 99.0 on run 1 and 98.8 on run 2.

 

I see you are hitting almost 17lbs of boost. Do you still have your wastegate connected?

 

Yes, the waste gate is still connected.

My boost gauge has never shown numbers as high as what their setup was recording (we pulled the tube to my gauge off the port and put their tube on there). My gauge shows ~13.5-14 psi max with the present tune. My EGT gauge also reads a little lower than what their gauge was reading (they used the 2nd threaded hole in the exhaust manifold to put their gauge in so that might be part of that issue). I'm not sure which gauges are more accurate but since I had their data aligned with the engine rpm and hp/torque data I thought it was an interesting baseline of information.

 

what?? does it still pull like a beast??
even at top end of rpm range.

 

TDIwyse & Macet
I have been wondering........why are you guys using 2 engine mounts per side? I would have thought 1 mount per side at the front would be adequate. 1 mount per side may even transmit less vibration into the Jeep. Nearly everyone on www.4btswaps.com is mounting 4Bt's with 1 mount per side. The 4BT's weigh ~200 lbs more and the front mounting bosses are farther forward than the B3.3. In fact the 4BT's in the step vans are mounted with only the front mounts.

I am hoping to use 1 mount per side. I think it will be difficult to use both front and rear mounts in a ZJ Grand Cherokee. I've attached a link to a buildup of a 4BT ZJ. In post #25 you can see the ZJ frame rails with his motor mount brackets. He is using the step van liquid filled mounts.

http://www.mallcrawlin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13679

I am planning to use 1989-1993 Ford F150/250/350 with 4.9L six cylinder liquid filled mounts. They are similar in design to the step van mounts, but smaller.

http://www.partsamerica.com/productd...ype=27&PTSet=A

3.3Sonoma
Have you replaced the polyurethane motor mounts with rubber? Did it help your vibration? Are you using 1 or 2 mounts per side?

 

According to my calculations based upon the Jeep's Cd and frontal area at 70 mph you have to overcome ~40 hp of wind drag. At 80 mph it's ~60 hp. 90mph it's ~86 hp. At 100 mph it's ~ 118 hp. So if you're doing 70 mph into a 30 mph headwind you need about 118 hp just to overcome wind resistance. And this is rear wheel horsepower and doesn't include rolling resistance losses. There just isn't much reserve at high speeds on a wrangler (interestingly enough I have drive 70 mph into a 30 mph headwind going up hill on the interestate in 5th gear over drive without having to downshift so my theoretical hp numbers may be off a bit or I'm actually putting down more hp than what the SuperFlow dyno measures).

 

I did put my rubber mounts in and yes it helped with vibration dramatically. I only used 1 mount per side they are old style sbc mounts. Something with thicker rubber would work better but I just did not have room. I used part of the front mounting holes and center mount holes and fabricated some steel angled plates to adapt to the mounts I used. One of the reasons I went this way was on the passenger side the chevy mount bolted right in and on the other side I used an existing hole and had to do little other modification.

As for driving in a head wind it obviosly must be a lot harder to push a wrangler through the wing than my Sonoma. At 82-85mph and about 10-15 mph head wind last night I only run 6lbs of boost and about 700 deg egt. It will still accelerate really good but run out of rpm in the low 90 mph range.

TDIwyse did you just turn up the max speed screw to get that kind of rpm? It still appears to be making power above 2600rpm so didnt know if you changed any springs in the pump like a 4bt or 6bt cummins?

 

The Wrangler is an absolute aerodynamic nightmare

Glad to hear your vibrations have improved.

I just modified the high rpm screw setting to get the extra rpm room. Back on post #48 was where I first started messing with it. I've got it set to defuel about 3100-3200 rpm now. HP seems to be pretty flat (but constant) above ~2800 rpm. Having a little more rpm headroom is nice for merging onto the interstate.

 

I tend to be rough with equipment at times. I am not a professional welder by any means. My design is from what I have seen used on ag equipment.

I wonder if any of these jacklegs, like myself would discuss problem they have had using only two mounts for a 4b. Maybe if I studied a bread truck setup I would think otherwise.

I guess I have no real reason for doing mine that way other than what I have had experience with in the past.

I can take two off and see if there is a diffenence, I also think there will be. With four I am happy with the isolation though.

 

Regarding the mounts: I had never welded in my life before doing this. I wanted a backup in case the front mount(s) broke. The back ones are setup so they nominally carry almost no weight. Last year the front mounts had sagged enough so the rear mounts were taking considerable weight and the engine vibes transmitted to the jeep chassis did increase. I added more support to the front mounts and reset things so the rear mounts have very little weight on them. Things haven't sagged again so I think my hack welding job might be holding up.

I also tried a polyurethane transmission mount. I went back to rubber

 

Just an FYI, the 6BT's in Dodge trucks are mounted with one mount per side. The 6BT weighs 1000+ lbs. 1989-1993 use a rubber "slab" type mount. 1994-2002 use a vertical rubber donut type mount. The 6BT has 2 sets of mounting bosses on each side of the block and the 6BT/Dodge flywheel housing does not have mounting bosses. The mounts are attached to the rear bosses which are located near the center of the block. Not sure about 2003+ Dodge trucks.

 

95Z28A4,

can't believe you brought up the subject. It has been going through my head. Stock Cherokee engine weighs slightly less than the 3.3 and torque on 3.3 is slightly more. I am going to drive on-road and no off-road with my setup. My 2006 CRD Liberty has only one set of liquid-filled mounts. I believe they are like the Mercedes mounts. Like TDIwyse, I have limited welding skills, but feel competent enough to make a solid mount.

Chris
AKA: BigBlue