He351ve stand alone Arduino controller code for 2nd Gen Cummins

[Me78569]

Also gotta say the turbo is much nicer at sea level.   If you punch it at 60 the tires just lite up.  Spool is VERY quick and smoke levels are low regardless of what level the tuner is on.

 

 

Now I just have to come to terms with the fact that I live in stupid Colorado at stupid 7000'........ not mad about it at all....

 

 

Mpg's for the turbo are pretty much the same as the hx35.  They really don't change regardless of the vanes being set to wide open or running at 9cm.  MPG's still follow speed closely.  55 23ish mpg, 65 20mpg, 75 17mpg.

[Vais01]

Here a very short video of the truck at Sea level ( well closer to 1500' at that point it was even cleaner at sea level),  0% throttle to %100, not rolling into it, just right to WOT.

 

 

i cannot believe how clean these 7x.009's are at sea level

I am a little smokier but then again converter is lower stall than whats normal and I am also using Chris' injectors. From a dead stop I will produce one heck of a cloud until the turbo catches up then it is nothing but power. If I roll into it for just a second then squash the skinny pedal then all you get is a little grey and a whole lot of cheeks clenching the seat.  

[Vais01]

Also gotta say the turbo is much nicer at sea level.   If you punch it at 60 the tires just lite up.  Spool is VERY quick and smoke levels are low regardless of what level the tuner is on.

 

 

Now I just have to come to terms with the fact that I live in stupid Colorado at stupid 7000'........ not mad about it at all....

 

 

Mpg's for the turbo are pretty much the same as the hx35.  They really don't change regardless of the vanes being set to wide open or running at 9cm.  MPG's still follow speed closely.  55 23ish mpg, 65 20mpg, 75 17mpg.

 

Interesting fuel economy. I get close about 20 MPG when cruising at around 75 MPH. I also am doing 1900 RPM at that speed. 

 

What is your cruising boost value at 60, 65 and 70 MPH?

[Me78569]

I also have a "super low" in my revmax converter.  

 

My truck has always been like that, as soon as I get over 60 mph mpgs start to fall off quick

 

turbo in default mode

Boost at 55 is 0 drive at 55 is 1-2

Boost at 65 is 5 drive is closer to 7

Boost at 75 is 10 drive is closer to 13

Turbo vanes open

boost at 55 0 drive at 55 0

boost at 65 0 Drive at 55 0

boost at 75 1-2 Drive at 75 2

 

Didn't make any difference in mpgs though.  I was VERY curious about that.

[Vais01]

I also have a "super low" in my revmax converter.  

 

My truck has always been like that, as soon as I get over 60 mph mpgs start to fall off quick

 

turbo in default mode

Boost at 55 is 0 drive at 55 is 1-2

Boost at 65 is 5 drive is closer to 7

Boost at 75 is 10 drive is closer to 13

Turbo vanes open

boost at 55 0 drive at 55 0

boost at 65 0 Drive at 55 0

boost at 75 1-2 Drive at 75 2

 

Didn't make any difference in mpgs though.  I was VERY curious about that.

Run down the highway with the vanes open somewhat. I had gotten my best with 5 PSI of boost pressure measured in the air intake (air horn).

 

Now if your not seeing any MPG gains I have to ask what exhaust manifold are you using?

[Me78569]

I did 4 different tanks on this last trip.  

 

first was vanes normal at 60 mph somewhere around 21-22 mpg

sencond was vanes open at 60 mph somewhere around 21mpg also

third was vanes set to 14cm at 60 mph, again same 23ish mpg slight better.  

last was vanes normal 75 mph 17 mpg.

 

stock 2nd gen manifold.  

 

I am working on a 4th mode on the controller for cruise that pretty much keeps the vanes between 10cm and 14cm

[Vais01]

I did 4 different tanks on this last trip.  

 

first was vanes normal at 60 mph somewhere around 21-22 mpg

sencond was vanes open at 60 mph somewhere around 21mpg also

third was vanes set to 14cm at 60 mph, again same 23ish mpg slight better.  

last was vanes normal 75 mph 17 mpg.

 

stock 2nd gen manifold.  

 

I am working on a 4th mode on the controller for cruise that pretty much keeps the vanes between 10cm and 14cm

An HE351VE uses a T-4i flange so I am guessing your using an adapter and the downpipe has a cast elbow with a 4.21 O.D. if i remember correctly. If you hooked up with no cast elbow then you must have used an HX40 downpipe and its about as close as you can get.

 

I am bringing this up because I you may be loosing to much drive energy on the turbo. When I had the HE351VE I used a Steed Speed manifold but the geometry for the turbo position was definitely off a bit. Keep an eye on your manifold because the HE351VE is heavier than most traditional turbos.  

 

I do believe 14 sq cm(.80 A/R) to be the best suited for the second gen rigs if you run 7x.009 injectors or larger. If your running 7x.0085 injectors or smaller I would say run 12 sq cm(.70 A/R) housing. 

 

 

What RPM are you at 60 MPH and 70 MPH?

[Me78569]

I have 3.55's on 235/85/16

 

60 mph is 1500 ish 70 is 1800 ish I think.  75 is 2000 on the nose.

 

I have the adapter and I am using a hx40 downpipe attached to the back on the turbo housing,  no elbow.  

 

I am coding in the 10-18cm map now.  That should put cruising position around 14cm.

[Me78569]

aright version 1.03 is out.

 

added a cruise mode.  So now the pot will control 4 curves.  m,t,d,p  (mpg,tow,dd,perf)  

 

The M mode was added.  Start position is still 5 or 6 cm, but the housing size ramps up to 14cm by the time the turbo rpm is at 40,000 rpm.  

[Vais01]

I have 3.55's on 235/85/16

 

60 mph is 1500 ish 70 is 1800 ish I think.  75 is 2000 on the nose.

 

I have the adapter and I am using a hx40 downpipe attached to the back on the turbo housing,  no elbow.  

 

I am coding in the 10-18cm map now.  That should put cruising position around 14cm.

I am running 75 MPH at 1900 RPM according to the fueling map for the factory set ISB 235 engines. 

lb/BHP-HR / RPM

 

.339 / 1400

.337 / 1600

.336 / 1800

.334 / 2000

.344 / 2300

.354 / 2500

.365 / 2700

.371 / 2800

.393 / 3200

 

So that being said you will be most efficient at 1900-2000 RPM down the interstate. 

 

Are you still using the factory torque converter?

[Me78569]

nope low stall revmax 3.5

 

The engine might be most effiecent at 1900 rpm, but at 1900 there is too much wind resistance to be getting good mpgs for me at least.  

[Vais01]

nope low stall revmax 3.5

 

The engine might be most effiecent at 1900 rpm, but at 1900 there is too much wind resistance to be getting good mpgs for me at least.  

I have a large industrial camper, nearly leveled front end, ranch hands front and rear I have plenty of that wind resistance driving empty.

 

Also what is the stall speed? I know this doesn't really make a difference after 55 because the converter is in lock-up but I am just curious. 

[Me78569]

I thik it is 300 or so lower than stock.  It's VERY tight.

[Vais01]

I thik it is 300 or so lower than stock.  It's VERY tight.

Well that puts you near 1600-1700 RPM. I am alot closer to 1200-1300 RPM just keeping the truck from wanting to move is not easy.

[Me78569]

that shouldn't do anything in regards to highway egts/mpg though.  

 

Also I dunno what my stall is exactly, it's around 1400-1500 that I would guess.

[Vais01]

that shouldn't do anything in regards to highway egts/mpg though.

Also I dunno what my stall is exactly, it's around 1400-1500 that I would guess.

It's probably about right. When was the last time you ran the overhead adjustments?

[Me78569]

overhead adjustments?

[Vais01]

overhead adjustments?

Valve lash adjustments.

Also what air filter are you using? Aftermarket air intake?

[Me78569]

when I put the injectors in 4k ago.

[Vais01]

when I put the injectors in 4k ago.

Ok I just wanted to be sure that wasn't affecting MPG.

Now one thing I will say is the fuel return banjo fitting on the back of the head can leak causing air to enter the return side of the fuel system and cause a tiny leak. I actually had this happen to me and after replacing those banjo seals I gained 1 MPG due to the fact I was no longer bleeding fuel. This seal just fails with age but is nothing absolutely serious.

I doubt this is what's occurring but inspecting it once a year wouldn't hurt.

I am waiting for your next MPG report with the latest controller programming.