AH64ID

I got the truck ready towards the end of September. I use Elk season as my trigger. I really don't have to do much thou, reinstall the grid heater, swap tires, and put the chains in the tool box. I have already had the winter front on 2 times this year, but it's currently off. I drove from Challis to Kuna with mine installed (under-hood kind) with all 4 flaps open on a 65° day. It runs normal temps on the flats, but IAT's are the most effected. The last trip from Challis to Kuna I pulled it, it was cooler but it wanted to whistle. Why do you change thermostats?

Diesels in general have such high boost per lb/min because of the low valve lift, unlike a gasser. A gasser at 8 psi may be moving more air than a diesel at 30 psi. So I could see that, but the 80 psi is a result of high resistance, not high flow, at least thats what it sounds like. We are after flow, just like I now run less boost and more air with my current cam/turbo setup and more hp at lower EGT's.

No, the calculator is exact in terms of when you inject. But I am still guessing on ignition delay, and what injection point is optimal for peak pressure at 12-15° ATDC. I don't worry too much about ignition delay, as the pilot greatly reduces it. As far as boost, ECT, and IAT the ECM adjusts timing properly (well I think, not a parameter of UDC). Yeah, fuel burn per hp is the easiest way to measure optimal timing. Dynamic timing should have been on the trucks, and static on the genset. That could be the reason for the timing retard, and emissions. And possibly why the 180 pump is preferred for big power. Well just like on a CR, you can get a variety of hp out of the same mm3. Timing and rpms play a big role in that. IMHO emissions and drivers (wanting diesel engines with gas response) has caused diesels to run more boost than needed. A 21cm housing 12V ran like a true diesel. My 18cm Garrett runs more like a true diesel, still spools and accelerates crazy fast (bb baby!), but it cruises with lower boost and lower backpressure.

Even with all the control of a CR it's still a guessing game, unless you have a way to measure peak cylinder pressure and relate it exactly to rpms. Ignition delay isn't exact, timing has delays, IAT's, ECT's, Cetane, altitude, boost, rpms, and amount of fuel all have an effect.Does the 215 motor run more boost than the lower hp motors?

Without knowing how long the injector is open (above pop pressure) for I don't think you can fill that spreadsheet out, but maybe you could. A CR at high pressure will inject 100mm3 of fuel much faster than a p-pump will, so the CR needs less timing to get a 50% split (or whatever you want). So 16° of timing on a p-pump may be like 13° of timing on a CR (arbitrary numbers). Timing on a p-pump is best set to where you normally spend your time, rpm/load wise. If you lived empty on the highway then a more retarded timing would be good, but load the truck up with a big trailer and it wouldn't be as efficient. Just like you can time it for towing up 8% grades at 2300 rpms, and it will be a little louder and less efficient at 1800. It's still a guess on a CR, but it's easier to change and predict since all the variables of injection are known. We still don't know ignition delay, but can take a conservative guess.

I built a timing calculator that takes pulse width and rpms into account. I think tell the calculator how much fuel I want injected prior to TDC and how much after. Other than low rpm/load and cruise I run about a 50:50 split. The calc then tells me what to set the timing to. The split would be different on a single event motor (VP/Ppump) based on ignition delay being greater without a pilot, so it's not apples-apples, but apples-apple cider. A 12V p-pump will have more ignition delay than a 24V p-pump for the same mm3 and boost, because of piston design and flow differences. 5 psi of boost on a 12V is going to be less flow than 5 psi of boost on a 24V, so the 24V will see greater per-igntion cylinder pressure and temperature, and thus a quicker ignition. The calculator cannot be used on a mechanical injection truck, unless you know how long the injector is open at say 100mm3 at 2000 rpms (pressure and volume effect duration/pulse width). The way the calculator works is you tell it the %age you want injected prior to TDC. So 0% would start injecting at TDC (0.0°), 100% would finish injecting at TDC, 50% would do 50% before TDC and 50% after, 500% would injected it quite a bit before TDC (if it were a 1000us injection event then it would start 5000us prior to TDC and end 4000us before TDC), -500% would start a long time after TDC (if it were a 1000us injection event then it would start 5000us after TDC and end 6000us after TDC). The calculator knows crank and converts us to degrees of timing based on crank speed.So as an example I was running ~200% of my fuel being injected prior to TDC at cruise speed and was getting too much negative torque (pressure building before TDC), so I retarded it to ~100% and mileage went up. As fuel increases ignition delay decreases, as rpms increase ignition delay decreases, in terms of degrees but not always in us. So you need to account for that. A 50:50 split will have low timing at low fuel/rpms and high timing at high fuel/rpms, maybe a 20° difference from 10mm3 at 3000 rpms to 140mm3 at 3000 rpms.What is your advertised mm3, rated rpm, and stock timing?

Don't forget the more fuel you inject, the closer you get to making peak pressure at the optimal crank position. With too much timing and you end up igniting too early and create a bit of negative torque. So you are probably more efficient at 40% throttle than 10% throttle. Does that mean more mileage beating on it than not, well it might, or might not. Timing my be setup less optimally in a VP truck, but the timing is setup wrong on the p-pump trucks 99% of the time. Even the stock 14.5° of timing is only 100% ideal at near WOT at 2000 rpms ± 200 rpms. So that's not really much of an argument either. In order to reduce NOx you need to retard timing, NOx is created by high cylinder pressure (and why timing get's as low as -8°, maybe lower, on a HPCR). The 24V head is more efficient than a 12V head, so what are we left on a p-pump conversions (other than conversions are not built for efficiency, but power).

I think a lot of the 12V mileage is more than static timing. (fixed my post, thanks). There are many things to consider, but generally the 12V trucks have less emissions, so things like the cam and turbo can be more efficient. The vehicles are older, and thus of lighter construction. They also build power slower, so when an small grade hits the 12V will fuel into it more slowly/linear with throttle changes, where a VP or especially a CR can over-fuel and then find what it needs, the joy of ECM controlled injectors I bet if you were to put a HPCR, with a non-emissions turbo/cam/tune, into your truck your mileage would go up over where it is now. Why, because you can tune the motor to have the timing make peak pressure at the optimal crank angle at any rpm/load, thus getting more power out of the powerstroke.

Since most of the temperature to the coolant comes from gas temperature in the head advancing the timing can actually slow warm up (think low/mid throttle, not heavy throttle like towing). The piston does see more heat, but it's absorbed by the oil and not the coolant. A retarded timing helps warm up the coolant quicker. I do agree about IAT and timing. I know that the IAT foolers increase the temp and mileage increases, but everything I know about diesel timing says that as IAT increases timing should retard. I have spent many many hours reading about timing in the last year, as I am now writing my own timing map. "--IAT or intake air temperature is important because the temperature of the compressedcylinder greatly affects ignition delay, and speed of the ignition event. Warmer airspeeds up fuel evaporation, reduces ignition delay and combustion duration, thusinjection timing must be retarded. If the PCM does not account for this, then the motorwill find itself losing power with non-optimum, advanced ignition. This is especially trueif IAT increases with the increase in vehicle effort, in a thermal feedback relationship.Increase IAT retard timing."I do think it's possible that the timing is retarding and mileage is increasing, and here is why. On my truck I was running about 8° of timing at cruise rpms and wasn't getting the mileage I expected. I dropped the timing to about 3-4° and load went down, and economy went up. So it's all about perfecting the injection, and ignition delay to get peak pressure at about 12-15° ATDC for optimal performance/economy. This is one reason electronically controlled timing is far better than dynamic timing. If you set a static pump at 16° timing it's always 16°, whether it's injecting 10mm3 at 1400rpms or 130mm3 at 2800 rpms. In one instance your injecting it way too soon, and in another way too late, and thus you get a narrow rpm band of optimal performance. But if you setup your timing to take rpms and pulse width into account you can control peak pressure better. It's possible that the timing map on the VP is a little too advanced at normal cruise temps for optimal efficiency, and retarding the timing a little makes for more cylinder pressure at the proper time. That is all just speculation, as I have no clue what is actually happening to timing with the IAT fooler, but by all reason it should be retarding.

The Micheligns I have are 16/32nds, just like the replacements. They are also hockey puck hard, so I hope they aren't softer :-)

Most 265/70/17's are within ± 0.5" of 265/75/16. Only half of that will effect you entry height, and I doubt you notice any of it on cruise rpms. The only way to drop rpm's would be to go a size larger, with a 285, in either rim height, it's about a 4% reduction in cruise rpm, and about a 0.5" gain in entry height.

That is in the FSM. I know the 05 FSM is uploaded on this site, not sure about the 04.5, but they should be very similar.

Happy Birthday!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqolSvoWNck

I have modified my CAI to pull warm engine air in the winter, but in the summer I don't want engine bay air. The air on the side of the box can be 150°+ warmer than the air in the box.

Are you running the 2" or 4" filter?The OEM box can support about 450-500 rwhp, but does need some help to do so. Instead of swiss-cheeseing the box (increase IAT's and EGT's) I would do a home depot CAI (decrease IAT's and EGT's). It only runs about $15. The baffled section in the middle is also a big hindrance to airflow above stock. The airaid MIT is the best replacement I have found.

The field service manual has all of those. It's in the downloads section.

They are starting to show signs of being loose, so it's preventative... but not by much.

My front end repair/upgrade this winter is scheduled to include- dynatrac upper/lower BJ's- Spyntech or Yukon free spin kit- Bilstein shock/steering stabilizer- tie rod ends, mfgr TBD

The lift wont effect the BJ's, but the tires will, especially if you ever leave the pavement. If you don't wheel hardcore then you probably don't need the Carli parts, but I would step up from stock. I will be going with Dynatrac's this winter, and still not sure for tie-rod ends. I head mixed results on the 08.5+, and will stick with my OEM 05 stuff as I already own it :)Did your lift come with a drop pitman arm?

That's a WIDE tire for OEM rims. I personally didn't like the fact that 285/70/17's took a pressure change each time the load was changed to keep the tread flat, I can't imagine the PITA that would be on 315's. Unless you are at a constant and HEAVY weight I wouldn't consider that a good choice. Being 75's they may not be as bad, but that's still a lot of section width compared to the rim width.

If any of the centramics hype is true, then they are worth the cost. Balance is like injection timing, I want it to be dynamic! I want some on the truck and travel trailer.

My 30' TT runs about 1300lbs of Tongue with 56 gals of water (fwd of the axles). I run an equal-i-zer and it works GREAT! I highly recommend it.

3rd gen's can't handle any more heat than a 2nd gen, infact the 04.5-07 piston is the easiest piston to melt of any ISB ever put in a Dodge. The cylinder temp is what we want to keep under control, on a 3rd gen the timing is VERY retarded and that puts the heat into the exhaust and the piston sees much less heat. So a 05 at 1400° will have lower cylinder temps than a 01 at 1200°. If you use 1250° as a peak on a stock 04.5-07 you are leaving a lot of power on the table. So on a STOCK 04.5-07 1450° is fine pulling grades, and some will hit 1500° which is fine for shot periods. If you have any timing then that number is reduced. A Smarty Jr on TM2 should limit sustained EGT's to 1250° and momentary peaks to 1300° when towing. When going WOT down the street I don't think the Jr will get hot enough to do damage. So.. sorry, but a 3rd gen doesn't have a blanket answer on safe EGT's but those numbers should help.

I am probably going to run the rings (bolt between the wheel and hub) with my next set of tires.

I agree, Smarty Jr is a good choice if your just after a little mileage bump.