Radium Engineering E90 In-tank Surge Tank
- Thread starter sirdaft1
- Start date
yeah of course, you can control the pumps any way you like. this is a hardware solution for everyone who goes around corners quickly without going to a more traditional externally mounted surge tank.
It will but if you look at the install instructions its going to be difficult to go back to stock without a major expense if you want to part out your car
Going to wait for the eos solution and go from there
Going to wait for the eos solution and go from there
sure, its overkill for most people. I had already drawn up and planned on getting a system like this custom fabricated so for me it saves a lot of hassle. I couldn't believe my luck when I saw the design and it was basically what I planned on doing, else build a surge tank in the boot which I wanted to avoid. left part out a long time ago so that's a non- issue.
The installation instructions simply have it set up as pumps on, pumps off. If you want integrated pwm control over some or all of the pumps the eos controller still has its place in this set up. Otherwise you can make up your own variable control depending on how familiar you are with that process, or have them staged pumps on, pumps off which is the common method used on this platform with a Hobbs switch 's signal. At least one surge pump needs to be running, so if it's just pump on triggered it will be running full steam all of the time. For many people looking for this solution that is not a problem. For others controlling the surge tank pumps is desirable.
Okay that makes sense i didn't realize the pumps were either on or off . So then yeah this surge tank with the eos controller would basically be the ultimate setup. I then wonder if the eos controller will be able to control the lift pump and the dual pumps in the surge tank.
I'm a bit disappointed they didn't provide a provision for a return line. Many of us run a port rail and while I'm sure some are running the port rail at the same pressure as the stock low pressure system, I run mine at a lower pressure with a FPR with standard MAP compensation.
On a separate note, they do make a really really nice quality product. I'm certain it will perform exactly as advertised.
On a separate note, they do make a really really nice quality product. I'm certain it will perform exactly as advertised.
Seems like something to do if car was modified to PI only. Do you see a benefit / measurably better injector consistency running lower pressure at the rail? I won't be running another return from my PI rail. Won't need it.
Controller will control 1 and 2 and lift pump will just be ignition triggered to run always on. Small difference but felt worth clarifying.
Benefit? Certainly. If your port rail pressure is constant, the same injector pulse at low boost and high boost would result in an uneven amount of fuel dispensed. If your rail pressure adjusts itself relative to MAP (std fuel pressure regulator), then the boost pressure becomes irrelevant and fuel delivery is much more consistent.
If I can ask, what are you using to control fueling / tune as it sits now?
Genuine question. If the pressure is being regulated more carefully, then why require another return from the rail?
There are only 2 ways to control fuel pressure. An ecu utilizing PWM speed control of the pump and a pressure sensor (which requires the computer to compensate the target pressure by using another sensor (map) for an offset) or a fuel pressure regulator with a manifold reference and a return line.
The factory method uses an in-tank FPR and there is no reference line so it is gauge pressure. This is perfectly acceptable since the low pressure pump on an N54 is simply a lift pump to the high pressure direct injection pump.
You can tune around not having constant rail pressure. It requires an additional table to increase/decrease pulse duration based on rail pressure and manifold pressure. That's in addition to the table that increases/decreases duration based on throttle position and rpm.
I'm using a Syvecs, but the same rationale holds regardless. I would also say that mechanical FPR would result in more stable pressure than modulated speed.
So using the Syvecs, you could simply add the BMP4 controller that was just released, use twin or triple 450s to maintain exact pressure requested by ecu and remove the need for a rail return, no? Or is it more complicated then I’m understanding to maintain pressure to both hpfp and lower pressure rail?
Edit: Ok, I think I get it. Because you have the secondary regulator at the rail would require the return.
Edit: Ok, I think I get it. Because you have the secondary regulator at the rail would require the return.
Not to take away from this thread as it is for a different product. But we will be releasing our drop in modular replacement pump system for the E-series cars very soon. The billet top hats have multiple configurations, so you can run a regulator at the tank or one upfront however you wish. And you can switch it at anytime ;-)
Your module arrived quickly. Packaged well.
Relay harness wiring is good quality, not some Amazon $20 special. I'll be heat shrinking the connector ends cuz ocd but no complaints.
Everything that is supposed to be in the box is. Look forward to putting it to work. Should pair nicely with surge tank system.
Attachments
Similar threads
