Cummins 4BT & Diesel Conversions Forums banner

Bosch VE inj pump build

20K views 82 replies 33 participants last post by  LincTex 
#1 ·
OK I sent my inj pump & injectors off to have them built/checked out. I'm refrencing cpl# 858 . I told the builder I wanted 150HP & maybe close to 400lbft & check if the injectors match the inj pump. Is this going to be enough HP? He hasn't started on anything yet as the pump will arrive at his location monday. I'm thinking I might have to buy some injectors because 1 or 2 had rust on the tips, if I do what do u guys recommend ? I think I want more than the 105 hp it had but not 250. Any thoughts ?
 
#2 ·
Is 150 HP enough? That is purley a personal question. 105 is enough........what are you trying to accomplish that you need the extra power. Is the gain desired purely personal? I would start there becuase without the demands, we cannot offer guided insight IMHO
 
#3 ·
Since my pump & injectors might have to be built is it worth it to up the hp while their at it. I don't know how the 105 would feel. Trying to get someones opinion that has a motor producing around 150hp. Also how much hp can the stock injectors support ?
 
#34 ·
1) i never said anything about a backhoe. you did. you also said
LOL. You don't need any actual power to pull something out when spinning the tires like hell isn't mandatory. To simply drive something out you can use a Briggs 5hp engine if you gear it accordingly, lol.
put your money where your mouth is.

Imagine what my 943 Cat would do to those stuck trucks. Look at the power it makes......is that relevant? NO.
NO, just like your opinions vs fact. the poster is interested in a 4bt, not a navistar, not a drag truck, not a cat, or a briggs and stratton or whatever else you are spewing

ill stand by my earlier post 150hp is PLENTY, this comesf from someone who actually ran a 4bt. why dont you build one and run it before you spout off at the mouth about what anyone needs. you're only speculating. i may have no idea about racing one, i do have an idea about running one, and i think the original poster plans on driving a 4bt powered vehicle on the road, not an internet sled truck.



so how does 105hp feel? i answered him. you apparently can answer how 150hp feels.
 
#4 ·
In my experience tuning to the numbers you want is very easy with a stock #858. Your pump shop may be able to get you close, but you will still have to advance the timing and do a final adjustment on the pump once its running. IMO I would concentrate on the torque number you want at the rpm you want and let the hp fall wherever it ends up. :smokin:
 
#7 · (Edited)
Heres my pennys worth Charlie. Cpl 857 (120 hp 4bta) with just a small fuel pump adjustment. It hauls my truck up to speed as well as the 400 2v that came out of it, and whatever speed I decide to run it holds it there much better than the 400, effortlessly.
Hope this helps, Carl

Oh yeah, if you modify it much you better be running an egt gage because these little engines will literaly work themslves to death.


1979 F-250 crew cab 4 x 4
4 bta
ZF S-42 5 speed
Borg Warner 1356 x-case
Dana 60 rear
Dana 44 front
3.55 gears
255/85R16 tires (33.5x10.5)
Hydroboost steering and brakes
Custom 40 gal. fuel tank
Much more later
 
#8 · (Edited)
Not Usefull Information
 
#10 ·
Carl, those sb 400 Fords run pretty well. I guess its the torque the 4b produces that is going to feel great. I have a sb 400 in my 72 4x4 that really is responsive . How responsive is the 4b ? Bob says that that little motor (4b)is really going to throw around my truck. I've heard other guys say they think its going to be a dog. I hope not. I've also heard a diesel is twice as efficient as a gas motor. Probably since the compression ratio is twice that of a gas motor plus turbocharging.
 
#11 · (Edited)
Not Usefull Information
 
#12 ·
Torque vs Horsepower

Torque vs Horsepower

The word horsepower was introduced by James Watt, the inventor of the steam engine in about 1775. Watt learned that "a strong horse could lift 150 pounds a height of 220 feet in 1 minute." One horsepower is also commonly expressed as 550 pounds one foot in one second or 33,000 pounds one foot in one minute. These are just different ways of saying the same thing. Notice these definitions includes force (pounds), distance (feet), and time, (minute, second). A horse could hold weight in a static position but this would not be considered horsepower, it would be similar to what we call torque. Adding time and distance to a static force (or to torque) results in horsepower. RPM, revolutions (distance) per minute (time), is today's equivalent of time and distance. Back to horses, imagine a horse raising coal out of a coal mine. A horse exerting one horsepower could raise 550 pounds of coal one foot every second.

Here is an example of another way horsepower could be directly measured. Say you have a horse hitched to a plow. In the hitch is a spring scale (like a fish scale). The horse pulls the plow one foot every second and you see 550 pounds on the scale. That horse would be generating one horsepower.

We see horsepower can be directly measured. However there is a problem directly measuring horsepower of modern day internal combustion engines because they produce rotary motion not linear motion, and unless the engine is geared down, the speed at which they do work (time and distance or RPM) is too great for practical direct measurement of horsepower. It seems logical then that the solution was to directly measure torque (rotational force eventually expressed in pounds at one foot radius) and RPM (time and distance, i.e. distance in circumference at the one foot radius) and from these calculate horsepower. Torque and RPM are easily measured directly. Early dynamometers used a brake device to load the engine. A torque arm was attached to this brake's stator. The brake's rotor was coupled to the engine's crankshaft. A spring scale or other measuring device connected the torque arm to the stationary fixture holding the engine and brake. During a test the brake's application loaded the engine. Torque and engine rpm were observed and recorded.

On modern day dynamometers horsepower is a calculated value. It's important to remember the dyno measures torque and rpm and then from these calculates horsepower. On the dyno it takes more water flow to the water brake to increase the load on the engine being tested. As the test engine's torque rises more water flow is needed. As the test engine's torque drops less water flow is needed. The dyno's water brake does not respond to Horsepower. Major adjustments to water flow are needed as an engine crosses its torque peak but none are needed as it crosses its horsepower peak. In other words the water flow to the brake during a dyno test follows the engines torque curve and not its horsepower curve. Torque is what twists the tire, prop, or pump. Horsepower helps us understand an amount or quantity of torque. (Torque + time and distance)

Now if we are measuring torque and RPM how can we calculate horsepower? Where does the equation HP=TORQUE * RPM / 5252 come from? We will use Watts observation of one horsepower as 150 pounds, 220 feet in one minute. First we need express 150 pounds of force as foot pounds torque.

* Pretend the force of 150 pounds is "applied" tangentially to a one foot radius circle. This would be 150 foot pounds torque.

Next we need to express 220 feet in one minute as RPM.

* The circumference of a one foot radius circle is 6.283186 feet. ft. (Pi x diameter 3.141593 * 2 feet)
* The distance of 220 feet, divided by 6.283185 feet, gives us a RPM of 35.014.

We are then talking about 150 pounds of force (150 foot pounds torque), 35 RPM, and one horsepower.

Constant (X) = 150 ft.lbs. * 35.014 RPM / 1hp

35.014 * 150 / 1 = 5252.1

5252 is the constant.

So then hp = torque * RPM / 5252

Here is another way; Remember we know 150 foot pounds and 35.014 RPM = one horsepower

1hp is to 150 ft.lbs. * 35.014 RPM as X hp is to observed ft.lbs.torque * observed RPM

Example; We dyno test and observe 400 ft.lbs. torque at 5000 RPM

1 hp is to 150 ft.lbs. * 35.014 RPM as X hp is to 400 ft.lbs. * 5000 RPM

When we cross multiply X hp * (150 ft.lbs. * 35.014 RPM) = 1hp * (400 ft.lbs. * 5000 RPM)

X hp * (5252 ft.lbs. RPM) = 1 hp * (2,000,000 ft.lbs. RPM)

Divide both sides by 5252 ft.lbs. RPM

X hp = 1 hp * 380.80

X hp = 380.80 hp

Horsepower = torque x rpm / 5252

Here's an interesting bit of trivia; below 5252 rpm any engine's torque number will always be higher than its horsepower number, and above 5252 rpm any engine's horsepower number will always be higher than its torque number. At 5252 rpm the horsepower and torque numbers will be exactly the same.
 
#13 · (Edited)
Not Usefull Information
 
#14 ·
Outstanding explanation Bob! Are you married? Seriously, A simpler answer for those of us with half a brain: A gasoline engine with 482 rwh would not have enough power (torque) to propel your heavy truck to a 12 second 1/4 mile like the 930 lb/ft diesel engine will.
Carl
 
#17 · (Edited)
Not Usefull Information
 
#18 ·
First let me clarify my previous posts.
My first post was in agreement with post #4 by brut67
My second post was to further explain torque & horsepower and why I was in agreement. We are now at the point where we are changing the subject and intent of the original thread AKA off topic. :innocent:
 
#20 · (Edited)
Not Usefull Information
 
#21 · (Edited)
i ran a 105hp cpl858 in a 6300+ curb weight truck. it ran fine for me. i was satisfied with milage, acceleration and reliability. but what would i know.

here it is pulling out TWO stuck vehicles at once in second gear, low range(2:1) 4.56 gears and 39" tall tires. i guess if i had 200hp, or 400hp it should have done what better????

i think 150hp would be PLENTY
it probably was 7400+ in the video, passengers, gear etc.

http://homepage.mac.com/ltalessi/iMovieTheater124.html
 
#22 · (Edited)
Not Usefull Information
 
#25 · (Edited)
LOL. You don't need any actual power to pull something out when spinning the tires like hell isn't mandatory. To simply drive something out you can use a Briggs 5hp engine if you gear it accordingly, lol.

Our understandings of something being underpowered are vastly different.

If you like to have the power to weight ratio of a backhoe, then that's fine.

That's not gonna cut it for 95% of the world.
thats an UNDERSTATEMENT!

do you know what spinning the tires is for? you spin the tires because they are clogged with mud and you need more traction.

the bronco spun 32" super swamper TSL tires his like hell, and he didnt pull the jeep out,not an inch. and he had MUCH more hp than me. and 200ft lbs of tq slightly off idle is what allowed me to pull the vehicles out. and the other FACT is the jeep tj put it in drive and the bronco stood on his brakes once i had them both out of the hole, and you can see it in the video, trying to embarass me and force me to stop. i drove the "victory lap" for the guy in the jacked up dodge 2500 (42" tires) with a magnum v8 and no front drive shaft who kept telling me my truck was underpowered.

i believe the 4bt, in its stock form, is much more capable than people give it credit for.
 
#23 ·
you asked for weight, i gave you weight. my truck was slightly lighter than a modern crew cab srw truck. it drove 75mph and i routinely passed people on city streets and the highway and from red lights, got 25mpg doing it with 105hp.

you keep posting opinion as fact. im posting facts based on real experiance.

ill give you 1000 dollars cash to pull out the two mired trucks in my video with a 5hp briggs and stratton motor. gear it howerver you want i dont care. LOL
 
#26 ·
Ill echo the above. Seeing the video of the 715 pulling out not one but two mired vehicles (wich if you are not sure what that does to the amount of WORK that must be done........ mired to the hubs you roughly double the vehicles weight to determine pulling force needed....to the frame, triple. This is a condensed version which the military has used and proven). There is a great write up on pirate4x4 by Billavista if you care to school yourself

ANYWAY, seeing the truck pull two mired vehicles in addition to getting out itself on 105 HP, I was convinced. 105 HP was enough to clean the lugs, attain and keep momentum. So 105 is enough for a vehicle. That is proven. Ill maintain its purely personal from there, is more speed wanted, towing in the picture, etc.

IMHO as always
 
#28 ·
correct.
1992 ford bronco, 150hp, 265tq (same tq of the 4bt, and 50 more hp) and it weighed 4600+lbs (curb weight on a STOCK bronco)
2003 wrangler TJ STOCK curb weight 3400+lbs.

so figure a 9200+lb mired force on the bronco and 6800+lb mired force on the TJ for a total 16000+ lbs and my own weight of 7000+ weight and for a grand total of 23000lbs of force was being moved by a truck in SECOND gear which was 3.04, a 1.98 to 1 low range and 4.56 gears. so it was the ever elusive not possible crawl ratio of 27.4 and about 7mph. your telling me thats low geared???


taken from http://www.4x4abc.com/4WD101/lowcrawl.html
A well built 4WD for the more difficult off-road stuff with manual transmission should have a crawl ratio between 60:1 to 100:1 - about 70:1, like in this example, is pretty good. With automatic it should be around 50:1
now tell me how my truck did not fit 95% of the world. 95% of the world? your kidding. i apologize if i am being led on by a troll.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top