Welcome to CPGNation.com! Log in or Sign up to interact with the CPGNation community.

EZ EFI 2.0 Injection With Dual Plane Intake Vs Single Plane

Discussion in 'FAST Support Forum' started by A A, Mar 15, 2016.

  1. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    I have a small block 406 Chevy running the 110 LSA Extreme Energy HR 282. This isn't a radical camshaft at 230-236 duration @.050 but it has made good horsepower for my street engine with turbo 400, 2500 stall speed, and 3.73 rear gear. I used the EZ EFI 2.0 Throttle body system with a deep plenum dual plane, air gap design, and within a few thousandths of the same height of the single plane Victor Jr. 2900/2975. The car has always run well since I built it - and better than it would have using a carburetor.

    I know, everyone says use dual planes for better idle on the street - and the dual plane I used was rated for 1500 RPM use with top end at 6500. The Victor Jr. intakes, I've used for years, were always used with more radical engine builds and higher gearing - as they should be with their rating of 3500-8000 RPM. As we now know, the FAST throttle body fuel injection prefers single plane intakes - so just leave the dual planes for use with a carburetor.

    After a year of use, my throttle body MAP just started acting up due to the end seal decomposing from fuel reversion. I replaced it with a used GM old style 1 bar sensor and a new adaptor cable from FAST - leaving the FAST MAP to seal the factory throttle body port.. That could have been the end of this story - but, only days later, I noticed what appeared to be an ignition problem. I checked the secondary wiring and pulled the sparkplugs on the passenger side cylinder bank. What I saw was a little surprising. The plugs for cylinders 2 and 8 looked correct for their heat range, but 4 and 6 looked liked they were a little cold. This wasn't the only problem I found, but I noted cylinders 4 and 6 fueled from the lower plenum of the dual plane intake - a less direct route than used by 2 and 8. The other problem I found was a partially burned away center post in my distributor cap - causing some arcing between the rotor and the coil terminal.

    I had driven my 406 Chevy for a year, and performance was good. Power off idle was more than enough to burn the tires to the ground, and the idle was decent with a throaty sound out the exhaust. With top end power at 490 horsepower, I wasn't complaining. But, my engine tended to run 10-20 degrees hotter than I prefer, and the exhaust odor was rich but not anything denoting or causing a problem.

    I thought of using a low height single plane intake, but decided against one since I never cared for them. I figured so what if I lost some low end power using a Victor Jr with this engine. The plenum of a Victor Jr should help lower fuel reversion in the intake, I thought. I was in for some surprises - some nice ones.

    I purchased a 2975 Victor Jr. and installed it. Of course, my MAP readings remained the same per RPMs, but my fuel maps started changing as the engine warmed - two tenths leaner. My exhaust system is an oversized Flowmaster stainless steel performance exhaust designed to support my horsepower level. It's not that quiet, but the engine was strangely quieter out the exhaust at idle and part throttle. At part throttle, the engine now sounded like a bone STOCK GM! The exhaust also had lost all the fuel odor - like I might have installed a catalytic converter (I didn't)! I thought I must have set something wrong during re-assembly. I hadn't. I haven't had the car on the road yet, but I have already noticed it is running at least 10 degrees cooler!

    From years of experience using the Victor Jr manifolds, I know top end power just improved. But, it also looks like my low RPM power has improved. I can hardly wait to put my foot in the throttle to see the improvement on the road. I never would have expected such a change in just going from a dual plane intake to the Victor Jr. with this engine. The difference is really noticeable for the better.
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2016
  2. TurboNova

    TurboNova Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Location:
    Lake Havasu City AZ.. but mostly travel tuning
    What you find with the dual plane intake is there will be a couple if not more cylinders that will be real lean. If you had 8 O2 sensor you would be able to see. Now that it is EFI and not a Carb intake you can somewhat throw out the RPM range of the intake, yes that is recommended RPM ranges but the vic jr on a SBC actually usually makes more bottom end power than the single plane intake. What you found is the common plenum single plane intake balances the fuel better to all the cylinders. I am not a fan of using a dual plane intake with the throttle body EFI stuff no matter who is making it.
     
  3. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Hi Brian,

    Yes, the Vic Jr. single plane is making every bit as much or more low-end power than the dual plane made (as best I can tell driving the car) - and my new plugs are all showing identical coloration now. I've run carbs since the 60's and what I found proved to me my choice of a dual plane was a mistake with the throttle body injection. Funny thing is, if I had done a more radical build, I would have used a Vic Jr. since I always liked the power they made for me going back some 40 years with a carburetor.

    I'm curious now if going to the Vic Jr. also lowered the fuel reversion enough to go back to using the FAST throttle body MAP sensor without future problem. The TBI sensor wasn't bad yet - only the broken end pieces of its seal were blocking its vacuum passage. If good to go back with the original MAP, I'll just get a new seal from FAST and use that MAP sensor again.

    I have an older port matched Super Vic on a pickup truck with my other EZ EFI 2.0 Throttle Body. The engine is a smaller 355 Chevy with a larger duration cam and Brodix Track heads - and it has given me unexpected good low-end power with that intake and the 2.0 TBI. So far, the 2.0 Throttle Body MAP there hasn't acted up - but it hasn't been driven more than a few hundred miles.
     
  4. CWPottenger

    CWPottenger Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2014
    I've asked this before and still no one has answered the Science of how or why TBI injection is "better" single plane vs dual and negates all the "rules" that apply to a carb setup.

    A carb and a TBI unit are both wet intakes so the fuel and air is mixed and atomized in the intake runners. A dual plane is "tuned" to balance and increase the air pulse at the low end through to mid-high rpm. A single plane suffers low end due to low air pulse and turbulance in the large open center. So again I will ask for a scientific understanding of how EFI suffers in a dual plane. The injectors of a TBI provide better atomization and even fuel flow vs a carb so that should improve the wet flow distribution in both single and dual, but at low rpm it would seem that a single would pool the fuel in the middle and run erratically at idle more then a dual that would still be optimizing air pulse for the fuel/air mixture. Only issue I can see that would cause a potential issue is if the dual plane is "sealed" side to side without an equalizer slot or open spacer because the FAST Map sensor would then only measure one bank and not avg both.
    I ask these questions because I am running EZ 1.0 w/ a dual plane on a 383SBC and I have none of the issues that I keep seeing reported as the norm for dual planes.
     
  5. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    I didn't see issues either - as the engine ran well on the road with TBI and the dual plane. Making 490 horsepower with the dual plane was also nothing to sneeze at. So I was satisfied. When the throttle body MAP problem arose, I just corrected it with the adapter and an old style GM 1 bar MAP sensor. When I then decided to do a tune-up after over a year of use, and pulled the plugs, just looking at their coloration immediately told the tale. From over 40 years of experience, I knew there was a problem even if I hadn't noticed it in a years driving time. I've always kept my engines tuned for maximum power and clean running. One look at those plugs, as I laid them out, and I knew the engine was not running at the optimum level I had thought it was. That kind of half-a$$ tune is completely unacceptable for long term performance, or on anything I own. Had I pulled all those plugs earlier, and read them all together, I would have corrected that previously un-noticed problem long ago.

    As stated before, the runners of a dual plane are NOT balanced - they are unequal and this affects F/A. VE in a dual plane works for a carb, as it adjusts the F/A for each cylinder pulse present in the intake. Injectors adjust F/A by the ECU varying their electrical pulse duration - only according to fuel map parameters, the O2 sensor in the exhaust, and the MAP average - and cannot adjust to any cylinder pulses present in the intake like a carburetor venturi booster can. The MAP only shows the average vacuum and load, and relays that to the computer - so it is also of no help in balancing for uneven runner length.

    Carburetors do not atomize fuel as well as injectors, and neither "puddle" fuel in the intake unless they have a problem.

    You keep saying "wet" systems. Try visualizing water running through pipes of differing lengths. The water flow from each pipe will be affected by heat, cold , pipe length, and pipe sizing or constriction. The same applies to an engine intake. Dual plane intakes have always been a compromise - even using a carburetor, and relying on the physical characteristics of carburetor operation. Optimally, balanced intake runner length and size is used to create power where engineers want it in an engine - in combination with cam design. The same applies to head flow, and the header and exhaust sizing. The old drag strip saying of, "Watch out for that guy with the tunnel ram." , reinforces this. The tunnel ram balances cylinder pulses in its very large open plenum, keeps the A/F mix denser, and dumps that A/F mix directly through equal runners tuned by size and length for a specific power band. Even so, there is still some A/F balance issue between the middle and outer runners with a tunnel ram. This has long been known, and is one reason dual carb tunnel rams are more efficient than with a single carb top for producing maximum power.

    I've had tunnel ram engines (which are single plane intakes) with carbs that had custom tuned runners for lower RPM street applications. With them, there was no "suffering" at low RPM. They just couldn't make as much power, as they could have, in the higher RPMs since they weren't designed for that.

    I guarantee, if you put a TBI vehicle on a dyno and record the results with a dual plane, and then changed to a single plane intake, the dyno results would prove to you the all around power advantage of a single plane intake with TBI. I'm in my 60's and I can tell the difference just by ear and feel. It is that clear to me. I just didn't expect it to be as obvious as it turned out to be, and I've developed and run experimental cams and engines designed for all kinds of racing hobby use since the 60's.
     
  6. TurboNova

    TurboNova Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Location:
    Lake Havasu City AZ.. but mostly travel tuning
    I would suspect you have less reversion pulses coming back to the throttle body with the single plane intake. The only scientific proof I can give you CWPottenger is with the dual plane intake the cylinders don't get fuel as even as the single plane intake. I just had one on the dyno 2 weeks ago that had so bad of fuel distribution side to side you would have to pump the throttle to get it above 2000 rpms then it would run ok. Some cylinders were real lean and others not, this combo was the worst I had seen.
     
  7. CWPottenger

    CWPottenger Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2014
    I'm sure I'm just being stubborn, but is it possible that since I have port matched and polished everything cut an equalizer slot in the plenum divider and use an open spacer, that would be negating the negative symptoms that are being discussed? When I have pulled my plugs in the past they all appear similar in color. I have amazing throttle response, low end torque by the train loads and strong pull all the way to 6000-6500rpm where I have set my rev limiter and de-fueling points. My car is a street machine not a track brawler, so power across the entire rpm band not just WOT is my goal. Everything that I compare from Carb to TBI swap has improved. Better throttle response, Better MPG, Better idle, Better low end and high end characteristics. The only "negative" change that TBI has that my Carb did not is a large Lean pop on decel only after a WOT pull and then release throttle and even worse if downshift at the big end. If I keep my foot slightly on throttle it does not occur. Just don't want to spend the money and do all the matching work again on a new intake unless it will produce gains that are substantial.
     
  8. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    That is a lean "pop" you have described. If you see a shiny spot anywhere on an insulator, whatever color, the plug is glazed and will cause a "pop" on decel. A plug one heat range too hot, with a white (clean looking) insulator will also cause a "pop". I didn't have a "pop" on decel, but more of a "burble" that is now gone. After I installed the new Vic Jr. intake, I installed new plugs one range colder (#4s) than the suggested heat range 5 plug. I've also done a completely new low RPM tune. The engine now likes 28 mechanical degrees initial with A/F two tenths leaner at idle - that's also 8 degrees more idle timing than the engine wanted with the dual plane in place. My MAP has also gone from 62 to 58 in gear, and IAC in gear has lowered 10 counts. All the plugs are looking the same with zero glazing. I can feel my bottom end torque has improved as well as mid range. I'm even considering using some of the ECU 2.0 vacuum advance. But, I'll have to do some pulls before changing my slope, total timing, or adding any vacuum timing. I've already raised my cruise A/F slightly, but the engine doesn't seem to want much change there over the previous A/F setting I had with the dual plane. This is also a street car - a 1985 Trans Am - very docile and drivable with far more power than it needs. The new changes have also improved my MPG in this vehicle.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2016
  9. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    After adding 10 degrees of ECU vacuum advance, and some driving, the engine likes the same idle and cruise AF settings I had before changing the intake to the Vic Jr.. MAP has improved to 56 in gear at my idle of 950 RPM. With the dual plane, the engine made best power at 34 degrees total timing. I've pulled the all-in mechanical back to 28 degrees (38 total including vacuum advance) and I'm watching for any trace of ping before adding more mechanical - and watching to see if the WOT needs any adjustment. Just by feel, sound, and gauge readings, the engine is making more mid-range torque and horsepower than it had before. I've dialed my rev limiter back to avoid any catastrophe - I didn't build the bottom end for over 500 horsepower.
     
  10. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Noticed my engine was having a delayed warm-up as the ECU began making corrections with the new MAP sensor - just before the dual plane intake change to the single plane Victor Jr. My Wilson Failsafe 180 thermostat (still good) had locked open - evidently with heat soak on engine shutdown around 210-215 degrees. I replaced that thermostat with a Milodon 180, during the install of the new intake, and now see temps staying stable at 195 since the ECU adaptive learning changed the maps - with the increased timing the single plane Victor Jr intake change allowed me to set. Running temps with the dual plane intake had been averaging 195-208, and that dual plane intake limited my idle timing to 20 initial with my cam. The engine now likes 28 initial. Basically, my mechanical timing is locked at 28 degrees initial and 28 all-in, with vacuum advance adding 10 degrees for a total of 38. That may change some with more driving time as summer heat sets in. But, the engine is running sweeter on the street for now.
     
  11. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    The dual plane vs single plane saga continues - Yesterday, I decided to see how close I could get my idle to that of a factory engine for my '85 TA, as the dual plane had never allowed as much idle timing as I now have with the single plane Victor Jr. - or the current MAP of 56 idling in gear at 950 RPM.

    The single plane Victor Jr also made a big improvement in lessening surge when easing off and at light throttle while driving. But, the new lower idle throttle position seems to have eliminated
    the traces that were left of it in low speed driving.

    Mind you, this is a 500 horsepower engine - and it definitely tells others it is out the exhaust, and makes a lot of heat even using a custom Be Cool radiator and fans. I'm going to work some more on that later. Although I used a high flow street performance muffled exhaust system, and extensive sound deadening materials throughout the interior, it's still a lot more than a little loud inside with the windows rolled up - you won't hear the annoying sound of a sub turned up in a vehicle near you in traffic. But, I covered that already by installing my own 1400 watt RMS enclosed sub and stereo system. The thunder of my engine in street driving still violates the half volume setting of my stereo - a bit uncomfortable.

    I set the new idle at 750. Previously, that had been completely impossible running the dual plane intake - as MAP stayed at 62 at idle in gear at 950, and changed to 65 at any lower RPM. IAC
    also quickly exceeded its limit in gear with a lower idle setting - using the dual plane.

    With the new idle at 750, MAP changed to 62 in gear at idle, and IAC became lower and much more stable when shifting between neutral and in gear. Creep in gear is now so minimal, at 750, you have to look closely for it at this idle while stopped on a very slight smooth incline. Shifting into and out of gear really isn't noticeable now until applying some throttle. Acceleration is still excellent in light to hard throttle. I reset the IAC and TPC adjustments. As the engine changed its fuel maps, my idle drastically improved in gear and at idle. My lbs. per hour fuel measurement on the handheld also changed from 7 to 6 at idle. At this point, I still haven't tweaked my timing from the earlier new higher settings the single plane Victor Jr allowed. I'll do some more driving first before working with the timing again.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2016
  12. CWPottenger

    CWPottenger Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2014
    I'm still watching your progress and still wonder why yours had issues and mine does not. With my engine I can take all the way down to 500rpm and she just lopes along. I prefer a higher rpm so it comes out of the hole better, but as far as ability I can set idle anywhere. Coolant runs about 210 idle.
     
  13. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    I decided to do a little timing change anyway this evening - set the mechanical initial to the handheld maximum of 30 degrees and raised the mechanical all-in to 34 degrees (where my engine had previously made best dyno power with the dual plane intake). It was easy to see the engine liked the 2 degree increase to the idle timing. I pulled the vacuum advance back to 4 degrees for a total of 38 degrees. The MAP changed to an average of 61 idling in gear - one point better than the previous 62 MAP average in gear @ 750. The engine had been idling at 197 degrees and, within minutes, cooled to 187 degrees - and one of my dual fans began staying off, the engine only reaching a maximum of 192. Outside air temp was 70 degrees. The engine continued to like the 13.0 idle A/F setting. I did a little brake torqueing in gear, and experienced zero ping or detonation with the added two degrees of idle timing. So, it's looking like the only EZ EFI 2.0 tuning changes I'll be making (once driving around in the summer heat) will be to the amount of vacuum advance and the cruise A/F setting. I also haven't made any change to the 12.0 WOT the engine has used all along. I won't change that until I can see some acceleration times.
     
  14. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    It probably has a lot to do with the Comp XE282 HR cam I used. If I go any lower with the idle, intake vacuum suffers too much. The more radical a cam is, the more reversion/less vacuum it creates in the intake.

    Change the intake, and with some tuning changes, the coolant temp should come down - along with a few other nice benefits.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2016
  15. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    With a very small timing change (noticed I hadn't turned my idle trim back on), the engine now idles well at 700 RPM - in or out of gear. Strangely, it is also allowing me to lean the AF ratio now at idle and cruise - plug insulators were staying a light gray (could have something to do with the current summer fuel blend being sold). The only problem with the new low idle - I had to buy a smaller March 206 alternator pulley to keep system voltage up, with my 12Si 150 amp alternator, when one or both electric radiator fans turn on. It's hard for me to believe this engine has the low RPM torque it has now - and how low it will idle with its COMP HR cam and FAST EZ EFI 2.0 TBI fuel injection. All trace of any surging is now gone after pulling the idle down.

    Update: With the headlights, fans, air conditioning, and stereo system on, voltage was still dropping excessively at the new 700 RPM idle. I promptly solved that by swapping a 200 amp CS144 alternator in place of the older GM 12Si design. The later GM CS144 design alternators have internal switching providing more amps at idle - and tapering at higher RPMs. Since I use a March bracket and pulley kit, the swap was an easy one.
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2016
  16. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Just some notes on the new 700 RPM idle. The EZ EFI 2.0 throttle body system is now running like a dream with this engine - even cold start now works as good as it does on any modern OEM GM fuel injection vehicle. The car feels great with no lacking of performance - and the handheld now shows the new lower idle fuel reading at only 4 pounds per hour. Shifting from neutral into gear with the Fairbanks Turbo 400 feels like it would in a Cadillac - soft, until you touch the throttle. I have incredibly smooth tire burning torque available from idle - have to use a light foot on the pedal. Coming next, as this low idle vacuum is too low for the power brakes, upgrades to my front disc brakes. Even vacuum at 850 RPM didn't help my braking much, so its no big deal. I'll start with larger front discs using multi-piston calipers.

    With the new CS144 XS Powermaster 478068 alternator installed, I do hear a very slight whirring under the hood at idle speeds while behind the wheel - similar to alternators in newer stock vehicles (the exhaust is also quieter at 700 RPM). It's no problem, and the faint alternator sound is actually nice - adding a factory new car sound under the hood at idle. With my March system 7" crank and 2 3/8 alternator pulleys, voltage stays above 12.6 volts under full load at idle. Unloaded at idle, and at higher RPMs, voltage stays between 14.4 and 14.8 - and that just using the one-wire feature. Soon, I will be using the Powermaster XS voltage remote sensing feature to maintain an even more steady voltage. I think the EZ EFI 2.0 may even be liking the power output of this CS144 over the output provided by the previous 12Si 150 amp Powermaster.

    One more thing - I was rolling along about 5-6 miles per hour in first and gave the throttle a 3/4 burst. The tires lit up, bit, and the front end came off the ground - and I got off the throttle almost as quickly as I was instantly pinned hard into the seat. That can get you arrested where I was near my home. The new brakes (and a lighter foot) are a must. But, remembering my early years with drag cars sure felt good - even though it really made my back ache!:D
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2016
  17. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Just an update on the new alternator at 700 RPM. The plug I needed to access the Powermaster alternator options took a while to arrive. (It's just a standard four pin CS144 plug, but I didn't have one) I now have it installed and have the connector red wire connected to the battery, for maintaining constant voltage from the alternator, and the voltage never varies to any excess under load now at the 700 idle or off idle. :cool:

    Voltage stays between 13.7 and 14.2 with this alternator feature activated, according to load and any RPM. My battery is an Odyssey PC1200MJT that is still holding a resting voltage of 100% after 12 years. I keep a BatteryMINDER connected while the car is parked in the garage. This prevents any sulfation that would cause a loss of capacity.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2016
  18. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Over the past week, my AF O2 correction began wanting leaner mixtures - like 14.2 at idle and 14.8 at cruise. No IRM counts and no codes were set. Without the new settings the plugs were sooty black, with it, they returned to normal coloration. I replaced the O2 sensor thinking it could be going south on me, but the new one made zero change. All during this, my engine was running smooth as a top. I reset the ECU using the Wizard several times and replaced my user data and input the timing, my engine likes, in the Wizard setup. The Wizard set idle AF at 13.5 and cruise at 14.0. After some driving, for the ECU to relearn maps, the engine appears to now be liking the 13.5 AF. I did notice one other change - TPS volts changed from 4 to 3 at idle - and only a very slight adjustment of the IAC target was needed - which didn't change the TPS volts. Previously the IAC target had been staying in the green as it was set, but it now required a very slight change.

    I did make one other change while the vehicle was up in the air for the new O2 sensor. I added a 3" Vibrant 1142 perforated tube stainless resonator to replace the catalytic "test pipe" I had in place. This was good for a 4 dB decrease in my Flowmaster American Thunder 3" stainless exhaust at idle - which had been extremely loud at idle. The 4 dB made a huge difference, but the exhaust still gives away my horsepower level. I plan to try lowering the new lower exhaust note further by adding in one short 3" perforated tube stainless race muffler before each outlet tip. Trying to listen to my 1400 RMS watt stereo, at under half volume, just became a lot easier with the Vibrant 1142 in place.
     
  19. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Spoke with NGK today about why their NGK FR4 plugs run cooler than the FR5 plugs I first installed and had to change when I swapped intakes to the Victor Jr. I am tired of the NGK FR4 plugs running dry black sooty with a tan insulator. They said the FR5 is the colder plug and I must have gotten bad plugs. I can see the design of my FR4 plugs is colder than the FR5 plugs that ran hot - so much for that. I purchased and installed BKR-5E plugs today - which have a slightly shorter tip that FR plugs. I also purchased a set of BKR-6E plugs in case the BKR-5E plugs are too hot. At least the design of the BKR plugs appears to be correct for the standard NGK heat ranges (higher number, colder heat range). I also prefer the less extended tip.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2016
  20. A A

    A A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    I was correct. The BKR5E plugs were too hot when I pulled and read them today. I installed the BKR6E and reset the ECU using the timing figures I already knew my engine likes. Then drove the car for about ten minutes. After a fast 1/4 mile run and high RPM shutdown, I pulled one plug and its side electrode looks correct. The F/A I'm currently using is the 13.5 idle and 14.0 cruise the Wizard set. I'll be watching closely for any signs of running too lean.
     

Share This Page