Y'all are so frikin bright! Lol....still waiting for my injectors. I will leave feedback once I get and install them.

 

Once you get them, let us know the part # listed on the side. It should be 0280158096. As of right now, that is the best JCW 380 alternative for our cars. Stay tuned, as I've got a good line on several sets and will sell them to anyone interested at cost.

 

Incidentally, the new production method we're implementing for the old style EV1-EV3 injectors will allow production of the DEKA 1D short injector as well. Unfortunately, production will likely be over a year from now as we get in mfg equipment and parts converted over. Once we get to that point, any aftermarket company will be able to place a custom order for any flow/spray pattern that can be produced.

 

So then in about a year we should have better product thats going to give us proper, if not high quality spray, and be more tune friendly for our R53's?

 

^ Those things already exist. You just have to be willing to step outside your comfort range, and try something that isn't sold by a MINI vendor with a made-up name and scratched off part numbers.


Regarding body size comparisons between our Siemens Deka units and "standard" body EV14's: The base and JCW R53 injectors are 68mm total and about 54mm between O-rings. EV14 standard length is 65mm overall, and 49mm between O-rings. Our Siemens Deka units are larger in every respect when compared to standard sized EV14 unit.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/FORD-FOCUS-ST-225-2-5-INJECTOR-RAIL-PRESSURE-SENSOR-INJECTORS-/111158298205?pt=UK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item19e18d065d
Whoever wants to chime in and experiment, go ahead. Just sharing with all of you.

 

Or you can put your injectors in and chime in

 

I will, they will get here wednesday and the plug converters on thursday. Gotta wait my friend. I'm surprised not many have taken the initiative lol. Anyways I will take pics and post them here once installed.

 

Mostly true but most people are reluctant to do this.

There's a British company out there making adapters and o-ring spacers for injector applications, but our marketing department takes a pretty hard line about "OE appearance" which is why we don't put things in the box that work but don't look the same. They have to "look" like the OE part as well.

My point from above is we will be able to produce the Deka D1 short outline in about a year, but it will be based (internally) on our G injector design. From just a consumer repair standpoint, this is a good project because we currently buy the injector from Delphi. For the performance market, a vendor would have to request a specific flow and spray pattern and we be able to produce to order, likely in a different color just to keep parts separate.

To your point about using taller injectors, I completely agree provided there's clearance under the hood and proper spacers are fabricated. Personally I'd rather see the entire rail on spacers rather than injector cup spacers. That just adds another possible leak path.

 

Technically yes. I plan on matching the OE flows and spray patterns, but the tuner version would have to be special ordered by a perfomance company.

 

Agreed; having the rail on spacers is preferred for taller injectors, reducing the likelihood of leaks compared to using cups on the tips. Also, when you use cups, you change the area which the injector will actually effectively spray by backing the injector tip out of the manifold. Usually negligible, but worth noting.

Maybe I misread somewhere, but my point is that Bosch EV14's in standard length are actually shorter overall than our current OEM injectors. They mount perfectly fine, and only need special attention when using USCAR to Jetronic adapters (intercooler interferes with adapter).

I suppose that my point is this: I believe our fuel rail and manifold can accept any Bosch EV6 and EV14 injector in standard size, and not require cups, spacers, or "anti-spacers". I believe anything in "long" form will require rail spacers, and anything in "short" form will require different hardware to secure the fuel rail.

Again, forgive the rambling if I get off-topic. I just want to continually add info to this thread, as I plan on writing an R53 injector manifesto :0)

 

These are in the lab. Should get them back in a few days with data.

The flow curve, btw, is constructed but you have to know the dynamic flow in order to do it.

 

Just the flow at the moment. Our tech left off the spray pattern.

I'll have to get the admin to post the Excel file if anyone wants it over the pdf. Probably wait until the spray pattern data to consolidate into 1 file.

All values are grams/min heptane.

 

Right on. Thanks for doing that, it's much appreciated.

For those who rather avoid the math, results as follows, converted to cc/min.

JCW 380cc @ 3 bar: 371cc
JCW 380cc @ 3.5 bar: 399cc

Base R53 330cc @ 3 bar: 347cc
Base R53 330cc @ 3.5 bar: 373cc


At this point, two things are clear. 1) As suspected, like essentially all other injectors out there, ours also got their names based on their static flow rates at 3bar, not 3.5. This is industry standard, and helps us shop for alternatives with more certainty. 2) The common term "330cc" used to describe base R53 injectors is quite a bit off. The test performed here also matches WitchHunter's actual flow data, which states that our base R53 injectors actually flow 348cc @ 3 bar, not 330. They were right.

I stand by my recommendation that Genesis 380cc, and Bosch Part# 0280158096, are the best alternatives to pricey JCW 380cc units. This is based on their impedance, flow rating, body size, spray pattern, and modern build and operating characteristics. I can provide a list of cars that the above Bosch part is found in, should anyone be interested. I will be running these in my car next week.

Thanks again, Ignition. We know for a fact that the factory spray pattern is twin beam, but whether it's 15 or 20 degree is yet to be seen.

 

I'll probably have spray by the end of the day, cone angle, separation angle and orientation.

When we commonize parts here for the aftermarket, we can get away with a narrower rather than a wider cone. Widening the cone without changing the fuel map (or intake runner geometry for that matter) usually results in wall wetting, which is bad.

On flow variation, you should expect no more than +/- 5%. Injectors with a lot of mileage might be outside that range.

Also, now that you have the dynamic flow, you can build the real flow curve. I will try to get to that this morning to see if there's a response difference beteen these two injectors.

 

Absolutley.

If you deviate too far from the original cone and separation angle, you can start having idle and tuning issues due to fuel being sprayed on the manifold port's central bridge or "exterior" walls. Though this is mainly an issue when poor atomization is also present with the extreme change in cone/separation angle. There are some vehicles out there who use multi-port heads, but from the factory run injectors which use a very wide, single cone w/ great atomization. These spray a bit of fuel on the central bridge, but with the large majority of fuel being well atomized and distributed well over the intake valves, tuning, idle, and AFR stability is not an issue.

I'm still very interested to see the spray pattern analysis of our OEM injectors.

 

Hey guys,

Got the fuel injectors today. Thought I might post some pics so you can have a better look at them. Anyways, I will have an extra one laying around if you decide to run some tests. I'm getting them cleaned at a local recommended shop. Hopefully by this weekend I can say if they work or not. I'm still waiting for the connector adapters.

Manny

 

i dont know much but i wanted to say i notice the tops dont have o rings?

 

Those are the correct injectors

Yes, the tops need O-rings. They're so cheap, don't reuse your stock ones unless they're in great shape. Also, seeing as though you'll likely be using the adapters that I recommended, you're going to have slight clearance issues with the intercooler mounting after the injectors are installed. Talk to Vietnameeh about what he did to give a bit more room; I believe a couple small washers do the trick just fine. To avoid the interference, you can use a different type of harness adapter. Instead of a one-piece, they sell two piece units with a small section of wire in between the two connectors.

Like these:

 

Injector sprays done. Lab says the JCW may actually be a cone rather than twin spray.

 

Ohh yeah I have the O-rings, I took em out to verify they were not dryrotten or bad, seem to be good. I'll have to use some washers because I got the one-piece adapters, no biggie. Thanks!

 

Very interesting. Not quite sure what to make of the graphs, honestly. When we say "15 or 20 degree spray pattern", we're talking about the angle which exists between the two interior limits of the spray beams. Viewing the Mynes video below, the 15 or 20 degree angle looks to be accurate, by rough eyeball.

For reference:


Mynes Tuning did bench flow testing that clearly displayed twin beams spray. This video is on YouTube, and tested Siemens 330cc, Siemens 380cc, Bosch 550cc, and Bosch 440cc:

 

That's about what we saw. Our gas building, where we keep the explodey stuff, has a fairly accurate, though older analog system consisting of progressively larger annular rings that sit under the injector and collect the heptane. The graph is a representation of where all the fluid landed.

The tech's data showed a 19 degree separation (so 20 degrees) and what we would probably call a pair of 10-12 degree cones. The JCW injectors had a "bushier" spray. Probably just the larger flow and possibly high mileage injectors.

FWIW, the more modern spray pattern analysis machines are similar to ours, they just have a larger number of collection pockets laid out in a grid. The injector is mounted a fixed distance above and results in a 2-D picture of where everything lands.

 

Fantastic info. Thanks for clarifying the angle of deviation.

 

i wish i had used the 2 piece adapters but no biggie lollooks like it would provide really good clearance