Your right but there may be more to this than you think.

* Ultra lean burn mode is used for light-load running conditions, at constant or reducing road speeds, where no acceleration is required. The fuel is not injected at the intake stroke but rather at the latter stages of the compression stroke, so that the small amount of air-fuel mixture is optimally placed near the spark plug. This stratified charge is surrounded mostly by air which keeps the fuel away from the cylinder walls for lowest emissions. The combustion takes place in a toroidal (donut-shaped) cavity on the piston's surface.[citation needed] This technique enables the use of ultra-lean mixtures impossible with carburetors or conventional fuel injection.
* Stoichiometric mode is used for moderate load conditions. Fuel is injected during the intake stroke, creating a homogeneous fuel-air mixture in the cylinder. From the stoichiometric ratio, an optimum burn results in a clean exhaust emission, further cleaned by the catalytic converter.
* Full power mode is used for rapid acceleration and heavy loads (as when climbing a hill). The air-fuel mixture is homogeneous and the ratio is slightly richer than stoichiometric, which helps prevent knock (pinging). The fuel is injected during the intake stroke.

I read it on the internet, it must be true :)

Seems like to tune this would be pretty complicated especially when you add in the variable valve timing. With so much computer controls on this thing I wonder if it would mostly just tune itself? Just add more air. Which may be why a CAI and exhaust improve this thing so much.

Diesel by the way (at least my engine) uses a two phase injection on compression where the first(small) charge starts the burn and the main charge is then delivered. Compression is much higher (upwards of 24:1) for diesel.

Ok just food for thought. Like I said I'm no tuner but I do understand the basics. I've been studying this engine for a while and.... me likey :D

GM's next generation of the LS series V8 will still be a pushrod design. The block and heads are already designed to be OHV, not OHC.

I think I'd rather it be OHV anyway. With a pushrod valvetrain, you get better low end torque and power. Most OHC V8's lack the low end grunt that a pushrod V8 has. Not only that, but GM's LS series is much more compact in dimensions than a comparable DOHC V8, just look how enormous Ford's DOHC Modulars are. And because of that, the LS series weighs less, has less rotating parts, and is easier to do valvetrain upgrades in. And one of the best parts about the LS engines is the fuel economy. The Corvette LS3 is rated at 16MPG city 26MPG highway - thats awesome for a 6.2L, 430HP V8, and most competitors can't match that, even with smaller V6 engines. Hell, look at the new Lancer Evolution - with a gutless 2.0L DOHC 4 banger, it only matches the Corvette in city driving, and it gets a pathetic 22MPG highway.

However, I do agree about adding DI. It would improve both fuel economy numbers as well as horsepower and driveability, there are no downsides. They would just need to redesign the cylinder heads to accommodate the injectors.

:iono:

I cant find mine, but I have one where an intake/catback cobra (stock tune) goes from ~12 @ 4500 rpm and dips down to 10.8 @ 5000 and ends at ~11.2 @6500 rpm.

Forced Induction has different A/F requirements. Its better to be a little fat when boost is present. All these cars are dynoing rich because of the break-in tune they are running on.

Aloha Everyone....

Well I thought I would let everyone know that there has been alot of advances on the DI 4 banger used in Saturn Skys in the last couple years and alot can be learned by crusing over to our forums. My wife has a redline version (turbo DI motor) and its freakin crazy. There is an unfortunate thing with ECU in the kappa platform (too many nannys) But its starting to get worked out. But there is ECU's out there or atleast Im sure the same people selling the 4 banger DI ECU's may have already started working in the V6 ECU's. From my experience so far with our redline these motors are great and love FI. For me anyway if I choose the v6 model a turbo would be a requirement. But jsut as a little side note. People have been pushing 20-22 psi with stock engine with our factory turbos for over a year now without any problems. I cant wait untill someone throws on a turbo on one of these V6's.

Mahalo

Ed

Dyno seems a bit low, whats the drivetrain loss on this thing? for 304 hp i would expect to see dyno's in the 280's

aaaand my head hurts... who knew this stuff was so complicated? :laugh:

Those numbers don't appear very "real-world"...they are still way low, that's like a 23% drivetrain loss...:facepalm:

Like that CTS, it should be hitting at least ~260 at the wheels with the SAE certified 300+ rating.

hmmm i dynoed at 276 to the wheels stock 300hp :D

you have to back up what you say. where's your slips

:word: screenshot or it didn't happen! :D

thats like standard.. lol google it.

here is 280 stock s197
http://allfordmustangs.com/forums/20...yno-today.html

http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum...selinedyno.jpg

here is 278 stock s197

http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum...k1-mustang.jpg

i can find more if you want? any questions?
stock s197 dyno #'s = 270-280 on average

306*.82 (which is 18% loss, ) = 249.28

Within ~3hp of average loss on a automatic, which is 18%. Humidity, dyno type and the age of the engine *DO* play a large role. Also, the super-rich condition of the run doesn't help the total numbers either. The ECU may still be learning, so again...take everything w/ a grain of salt.

Just so we're clear, the caddy 261rwhp mark was done through a manual on a dynajet if memory serves :thumbup:

Anyone who claims they dyno'd 276rwhp (That is 8% driveline loss...pretty much a miracle) on an engine rated at 300bhp is either:

1) lying
2) had a dyno operator who didn't know what they were doing :laugh:

Cheers