[hereinmissoula]

Going to Holley XFLOW Sniper

68 Chevelle
406 SBC 500hp/500tq
Nitrous 200 shot

Holley retro tank with 340 pump , has -6 seems too small to split for motor and nitrous ???


Thanks

 

[hereinmissoula]

Also considering hyper fuel tank with 440 pump . Stepping up to -8 to front of car then splitting to reg for nitrous.

 

[mrpaticular]

I would -10 from pump to front. Lack of fuel on a nitrous engine is not a good recipe for longevity.

 

[Geo71]

Depends on how big a shot you are going to spray. I was fine with either the 388 or 6.0 spraying 100 and now 150 with the Walbro intank 255LPH and -6. Other than the tank having to be at 3/4 or higher. Stepped up to a new tank and Walbro 450LPH with same -6...so far with 150 shot its fine.

Probably step up to -8 from tank to reg so I can get the fuel pressure alittle lower. That 450 pump is a beast and SUPER quiet.

 

[chasmalo]

"Pumps make flow, pressure comes from resistance to flow". If the pump generates enough volume and the fuel lines don't restrict flow pressure is controlled by the regulator.

Chas

 

[GoFast Beaumont]

Buddy just made 650 whp on a single 340 pump. Engine was a GM performance LSA with 12psi boost. 3/8” fuel line front to back.

20-25% drivetrain loss should get you a crank number

 

[chasmalo]

GoFast,

Your comment about RWHP is interesting. I've heard many thoughts and comments on drive train loss - from 15% to 25%. One thing that makes sense to me is higher loss percentage for higher horsepower / torque. My thoughts are that more power equates to more friction, therefore more DT loss. What do you think?

Chas

 

[GoFast Beaumont]

GoFast,

Your comment about RWHP is interesting. I've heard many thoughts and comments on drive train loss - from 15% to 25%. One thing that makes sense to me is higher loss percentage for higher horsepower / torque. My thoughts are that more power equates to more friction, therefore more DT loss. What do you think?

Chas

i think its more relevant to the build you have more than a straight line number. If your talking about an older style transmission, gear set, steel driveshaft, conventional fluids, etc it will be higher. If your talked about modern transmission, gear set, aluminum drive shaft, synthetics, etc you can really chisel the number down. As much as the old stuff has stood the test of time its no doubt its not the most efficient at time compared to todays cars. As well the horsepower climbs efficiency does drop in my opinion.

todays modern automatics vs a dated stock TH400 is way different.
a Muncie is a completely different build to a TR6060
Steel vs Aluminum vs Carbon drive shafts
Wheel size and weights
and so on and so on...

 

[chasmalo]

Thanks GF.

Chas

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk