P7100 fuel output vrs VP44 output.
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Browns Valley CA
Posts: 763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P7100 fuel output vrs VP44 output.
I asked this question 3 years ago and no one had an answer. More conversions out there now so I thought I'd try again. Has anyone figured out a way to compare fuel output between the two pumps. Or a hp comparison between a P7100 set to flow a certain number of cc's vrs a vp44 with the various add ons(smarty, drag comp, etc). It seems that it takes around 400cc of p7100 to get around the 600 mark with Mach 6's. That's around 1.5hp per cc. I think 520cc or so is the limit for a 215 pump without going to larger plungers and barrels.That would figure to 780(probably probably more like 730). What kind of #2 only numbers are the vp44's putting out?
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jeffersonville, Ohio
Posts: 3,604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bend, OR. / Oak Harbor WA.
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trending Topics
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I asked Brian Block if you could put bigger plungers in a vp like he did in his ve(627 hp on fuel) he said it could be done but there are twice as many, and it still didn't fix the electronic issues. And with common rail making big power and p pump conversions on 24v for competition I wouln't expect to much inovation to continue on the vp.
Also even if you get it to move more fuel youll never get it to move fuel like a p pump spinning alot of rpm. a p pump strokes at half engine speed while a vp is the same so you would have it turning 6000 rpm at 6000 rpm on the motor while a p pump would only be turning 3000.
Also even if you get it to move more fuel youll never get it to move fuel like a p pump spinning alot of rpm. a p pump strokes at half engine speed while a vp is the same so you would have it turning 6000 rpm at 6000 rpm on the motor while a p pump would only be turning 3000.
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=HOHN;1235056]P-pump is king of quantity, though VP generally offer more power for a given quantity of fuel (better efficiency).
I would agree and disagree with that statement. It should be a ton more efficent due to variable timing, however the milage kings are still the 12v's.
Also it seems like most of the hot 12v's that make big power never clear up the smoke while 24v's at the same power level do. I think this is in part due to the rack travel they run(duration) all the 3rd gens ive seen running alot of duration smoked alot as well. If you had a pump that would move alot of fuel in a short amount of time (short rack) youd get less smoke probably. but to get alot of fuel from a 215 you need alot of rack travel which translates into duration.
jmo
I would agree and disagree with that statement. It should be a ton more efficent due to variable timing, however the milage kings are still the 12v's.
Also it seems like most of the hot 12v's that make big power never clear up the smoke while 24v's at the same power level do. I think this is in part due to the rack travel they run(duration) all the 3rd gens ive seen running alot of duration smoked alot as well. If you had a pump that would move alot of fuel in a short amount of time (short rack) youd get less smoke probably. but to get alot of fuel from a 215 you need alot of rack travel which translates into duration.
jmo
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mopar_Mudder
Performance and Accessories 2nd gen only
16
06-28-2003 12:50 PM
Mopar_Mudder
Performance and Accessories 2nd gen only
30
02-17-2003 04:18 PM