Charger Forums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,366 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
There have been a significant amount of our customers that in discussing the new 3.6L VVT Polyhemi V6 that replaced the old 3.5L SOHC Polyhemi, they lament that Chrysler was not using direct injection like Kia, Hyundai, Volkswagen and Audi.

The truth is that DI has problems that Chrysler wanted you to avoid. Remember that 2006 was when VW and Audi located their injectors into the combustion chambers to try and gain greater efficiency. This is when VVT or Variable Valve Timing had been around for about 6 years (2000).

Some of the fuel pumps would create fuel pressure as high as 120 bar or 1741 psi!! Remember that your EGR system will still be flowing through the intake and since the fuel is now directly injected into the cylinders, nothing is taking carbon deposits away! These deposits are now forming in all these engine intakes and creating intake valve deposits.

What a lot of companies are now experiencing is poor starting and loss of performance. Companies have had to take cars in and soak them in solvents to try to get them back to the correct volumetrics and in some cases use walnut shells (a type of blast media....like sand blasting but safe on plastics etc.) just to get them clean.

We have multiple customers that are using ACES IV in DI engines and have been really happy with the results as the lubricity in the ACES IV is vaporous and comes back into the intake and valve area leaving a coating that has a specific affinity to alloys that will not allow carbon to deposit in the valve or intake area. This is fine for a brand new or nearly brand new car.

However, we are working with manufacturers of DI to see if we can make a formula that will get these dirty engines clean without the disassembly, solvents, and blasting that has been going on for several years now.

As we know more about it's effectiveness, we will inform all of you.

The point is that sometimes wanting something like DI that some other car companies have incorporated without full transparency is emotionally chasing wind. The downside on DI right now is a big deal that the OEMs are struggling to deal with! Just thought you should know.;)

Regards,
Brian
BND Automotive LLC:driving:
440-821-9040
www.bndautomotive.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,249 Posts
Good information to know, I'm sure you'll obviously keep everyone updated on the topic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
Go to Audi, VW, and other sites where GDI is common and has been around for a while.
These are not trouble-free systems.
Down the road with some miles on the car, intake valve trouble is not uncommon.

I'm glad both our cars are GDI-free. I hope Chrysler doesn't go that direction. It's not worth the few HP or an MPG or two, considering the tradeoffs.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,366 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Good information to know, I'm sure you'll obviously keep everyone updated on the topic.
You're welcome! It is something that I have heard too many people lament and say that Chrysler is behind everyone else. In 1978, Buick came out with the turbo 3.8L (231). Oil-to-oil and air-to-air cooling only. Ford followed in 1979 with their 4 cylinder turbo....again oil-to-oil and air-to-air cooling. Chrysler stayed out of the turbo game until their introduction of a turbo 4 cylinder but with oil-to-oil, air-to-air AND water cooling with thermal inversion of coolant to keep flowing after the car was turned off.

Buick and Ford had a lot of problems with their non-water cooled engines, where Chrysler did much better waiting for the correct design.

I think it is the same here with DI. Doug Betts has been the head of quality since 2009. He came from Nissan North America and also Toyota. He was the one that was responsible for the success and J.D. Power Initial Quality Survey Award for the Tundra.

Bob Lee who is head of engine development decided not to go with DI due to expense and the problems. Most OEMs use DI as a quick fix to improve emissions and fuel economy in aging engine designs!

I believe Chrysler is working on DI but in their time table.....just like the turbo from the 1980s.

With the advent of DEF fluid (Diesel Exhaust Fluid), additives have now been reviewed much more heavily than ever before because for the first time, a non-mechanical emission device strategy can be incorporated says EPA in search of cleanliness and emissions along with fuel economy.

ACES IV is being reviewed by many high end companies in the search for fixing the issues they are encountering.

Again, I will keep all informed.:beerchug:

Regards,
Brian
BND Automotive LLC:driving:
440-821-9040
www.bndautomotive.com
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,366 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Go to Audi, VW, and other sites where GDI is common and has been around for a while.
These are not trouble-free systems.
Down the road with some miles on the car, intake valve trouble is not uncommon.

I'm glad both our cars are GDI-free. I hope Chrysler doesn't go that direction. It's not worth the few HP or an MPG or two, considering the tradeoffs.
We work with a lot of Audi C5 RS6, A4, S4, A8 etc. Also a lot of VW cars and especially diesels.

We have been discussing how to augment materials to help these cars.....especially with the sludging problems due to excessive high heat!

I agree that Chrysler really doesn't need to do DI and as I stated earlier, a lot of companies are using DI to get a little more power and better emissions in aging engine designs!

I like my 2011 3.6L VVT engine just the way it is. Got almost 30 mpg out of the Grand Caravan R/T this summer on an 9 hour trip. Not bad for a big square box LOL!!:banana:

Regards,
Brian
BND Automotive LLC:driving:
440-821-9040
www.bndautomotive.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
909 Posts
Some of the fuel pumps would create fuel pressure as high as 120 bar or 1741 psi!! Remember that your EGR system will still be flowing through the intake and since the fuel is now directly injected into the cylinders, nothing is taking carbon deposits away! These deposits are now forming in all these engine intakes and creating intake valve deposits.
I can't speak for the 3.6, but I know the Hemi no longer has an EGR system. What would be the negatives to of using direct injection on that engine

Also, what is a "polyhemi"? Obviously it's the design of the engine, but how does it differ from our V8 Hemi which isn't even a true Hemi?
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,366 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
I can't speak for the 3.6, but I know the Hemi no longer has an EGR system. What would be the negatives to of using direct injection on that engine

Actually, the 3.6L Pentastar doesn't have an EGR and neither do the 5.7, 6.1 or 6.4 except in the trucks. The 2003 doesn't have an EGR but the 2004 and up do. Even the 6.4L Hemi truck engine has a cooled EGR valve.

EGR is only part of the problem. The other part is the PCV valve that brings in oil smoke which condenses in the intake and then lays there and cooks. This is the same reason that the throttle bodies of our cars get all gunked up on the throttle vane. People that use ACES IV don't have the throttle vane issue hardly at all, but that is another matter!


Also, what is a "polyhemi"? Obviously it's the design of the engine, but how does it differ from our V8 Hemi which isn't even a true Hemi?
Several people have asked me that. It comes from my days of racing and seeing the polysphere engines at the drag strip.

http://www.classichemi.com/polywhat.shtml

None are actually true hemispherical valve chambers in any of the modern engines......you are correct.

The shape of the polyspheric combustion chambers are much closer to hemi head than a wedge head, but are really a polyshere hemi design. 3.5L SOHC or 3.6L VVT DOHC or 5.7, 6.1 or 6.4 are really all polyspheric......regardless of whether it has 1 set of rockers or 2 sets of rockers. So we term the v6 cars as a polyhemi since it is a V6 where Chrysler already calls the polyhemi head V8s as a Hemi! Your statement is true that our "hemis" aren't truly hemi like the gen 1 or gen 2 engines were! Actually they didn't use the name Hemi until the 426!;)

Hope this helps!

Regards,
Brian
BND Automotive LLC:driving:
440-821-9040
www.bndautomotive.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
909 Posts
The PCV valve is going to make a mess of the intake whether direct injection is present or not. That's why catch cans are as popular as they are. The injectors spray the fuel in the manifold, but pretty close to the head so it gets where it needs to be quickly. So the area near the injectors is clean, but the rest of the manifold, and often the throttle plate, is an oily mess. Just the nature of the beast. I really don't see the negatives to using DI on most modern engines. Other than the EGR issue which varies from car to car as most engines don't have them anymore, intake cleanliness isn't going to be any different. Luckily we have plastic intakes that don't get heat soaked and bake the crap inside them.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,366 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 · (Edited)
The PCV valve is going to make a mess of the intake whether direct injection is present or not. That's why catch cans are as popular as they are. The injectors spray the fuel in the manifold, but pretty close to the head so it gets where it needs to be quickly. So the area near the injectors is clean, but the rest of the manifold, and often the throttle plate, is an oily mess. Just the nature of the beast. I really don't see the negatives to using DI on most modern engines. Other than the EGR issue which varies from car to car as most engines don't have them anymore, intake cleanliness isn't going to be any different. Luckily we have plastic intakes that don't get heat soaked and bake the crap inside them.
I understand what you are saying but it varies depending on vapor threshold of the oil. More volatility gives you more liquid oil where a very high vapor threshold....oils over 600 degrees will not vapor but stay liquid and not go into the PCV at all.

The throttle plate gets oil vapor and mainly gasoline vapors that plate on to the intake internals regardless of temperature. Multiport/Multipoint injection on our cars is relatively close to the valve but still tends to wash the intake much better than when you bypass the lower intake and valve area like DI does. So everything that plates on to the components when the engine is turned off will have much more of a coating on it. Over time, it can't help but build up due to the nature of reactive oils and typical ethanol gasolines.

What you need is something to modify the gasoline and produce a residue compound that reduces carbon from forming and produces a repelling surface reaction. What is then sitting in the bottom will be drawn out of the intake into the valve area via air volume similar to RainX on a windshield. This is what we are offering and doing for several OEMs. They are checking it out and testing it in their labs now.....ACES IV DI version. :bigthumb:

Regards,
Brian
BND Automotive LLC:driving:
440-821-9040
www.bndautomotive.com
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,140 Posts
Brian,

Doesn't the cam profile also contribute to intake valve deposits? We no longer make cars with zero overlap.. so even with the PCV issue addressed with better oil one would still see intake valve deposits correct? This is why a cleaner or better detergent is needed to keep the deposits from forming, this is where ACES or a version of it could solve the problem
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,366 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 · (Edited)
Brian,

Doesn't the cam profile also contribute to intake valve deposits? We no longer make cars with zero overlap.. so even with the PCV issue addressed with better oil one would still see intake valve deposits correct? This is why a cleaner or better detergent is needed to keep the deposits from forming, this is where ACES or a version of it could solve the problem
Cam dynamics are an interesting science! Remember that air has momentum and the intake valve needs to open before TDC even though you would think that it should be TDC. The intake valve has to open long enough to sufficiently allow the air/fuel charge (air charge only in DI) while the piston starts moving downwards while having the least amount of restriction!

The exhaust gas leaving the combustion chamber creates a vacuum that perpetuates the flow of the intake process so there really is a need for some overlap (both the intake and the exhaust valves are open at the same time).

Most people know this as the amount of scavenge in the cylinder heads. This is why exhaust manifolds and or the configuration of the headers assist in scavenging out the exhaust....assisting the intake. Exhaust pulse dynamics.

Extended overlap creates the ability of the intake charge to help push out the exhaust charge too!

Now remember that crankshaft dynamics at TDC and BDC have 20 degrees of movement/rotation in either direction with the piston moving hardly at all. Pistons move at a non-linear speed and respond in a sine wave. Basically they accelerate increasingly from TDC to a specific point exactly halfway down, where it then decelerates to a stop at BDC.

Basically it is Volumetric Efficiency that I talk about pretty regularly here on the forum. The goal is to have a an efficiency of close to or at 100%. Turbo cars and supercharged cars have an efficiency over 100% because of atmosphere stacking. Remember 14.7 psi equals 100%. Whenever these other forced induction engines are in boost they exceed 100% efficiency et.

What we have been focusing on is an augment of the detergency compounds in the formula, more lubricity released to keep components slippery (kinda like you can't spray paint water as it won't stick) and allow the carbon to just be sucked in and blown out the exhaust while keeping it from blowing down into the oils!

So having an engine with overlap does help volume, scavange and volumetric efficiency and create more efficiency and tends to cut down on deposits especially with ACES IV. :bigthumb:

Regards,
Brian
BND Automotive LLC:driving:
440-821-9040
www.bndautomotive.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Very interesting reading in regards to the issues with Direct Injection.

I'm sure there might be a few of us here that have second car with DI.

It would be great to hear about what new developments you come up with to combat these issues as i'm afraid it wont be long before most vehicles are fitted with DI systems.

It's good to know ACES IV might help DI issues.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,366 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Very interesting reading in regards to the issues with Direct Injection.

I'm sure there might be a few of us here that have second car with DI.

It would be great to hear about what new developments you come up with to combat these issues as i'm afraid it wont be long before most vehicles are fitted with DI systems.

It's good to know ACES IV might help DI issues.
I believe that the way to address the issues is to have an oil that is very high on vapor threshold so it remains liquid and not vapors out ending up in the intake. Mix that with the ability to keep the piston sealed as well as the valves, and you are going to have a much cleaner intake and a much much cleaner throttle vain.

We will continue to work.:beerchug:

Regards,
Brian
BND Automotive LLC:driving:
440-821-9040
www.bndautomotive.com
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top