Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: Converting the CC340 to fuel injection

  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Sonora,CA
    Posts
    11

    Default Re: Converting the CC340 to fuel injection

    The EFII system is already pretty sorted and refined, based on numerous independent user reports. Also very significant to me is that engine builders I have spoken with - Aero Sport Power and Lycon - are experienced with it and they are happy to assemble and warrant engines fitted with the system.


    Thanks Treetopflyer for describing your positive experiences, and particularly comments about the configuration of the throttle body and cold induction. Interesting that ECI is working with it. Is this on the internet somewhere or do you know someone?
    I think the EFII system is evolved beyond the level of basic R&D which CubCrafters recently invested in while developing sump inserts and perforated nozzles. I expect those were expensive projects for the reasons Randy emphasized in his post yesterday. I think the plan for the factory to focus a bit on adapting this more modern system to our planes, rather than waiting on an enterprising builder is a good one.

    The proof of concept idea seems sensible and I appreciate Randy's and the company's responsiveness and support.
    I hope it will lead to significant improvements for the engine.

    Chris

  2. #12
    Member Treetopflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Baton Rouge, La.
    Posts
    40

    Default Converting the CC340 to fuel injection

    Thanks Chris,

    As stated on the EFII website, "As certainly one of the most recognizable sport planes on the planet, Kevin Eldredge (of ECI fame) and EFII have teamed up to make the Relentless Nemesis NXT a primary contender in the Reno 2014 Sport Class. The aircraft is being fitted with a 700hp Continental GTSIO-550 engine equipped with the full EFII engine management treatment".

    Keven is an active member on the vansairforce forum and he has written multiple post regarding the EFII system. You can also go on to the EFII website to learn more about it and read what other people have said about it. http://www.flyefii.com Robert Paisley, owner of EFII, is a great guy and his customer service is second to none.

    The EFII system is basically like what you would find on any modern day car. Once it's dialed in, it's for the most part "fly and forget". During the original setup you have to go through a short series of steps at various RPM's and adjust the ECU interface with the mixture via a rheostat knob, and adjust everything according to your air/fuel ratio. Once everything is configured correctly the ECU, while working with the MAP sensor, throttle position sensor, (and other sensors), will automatically adjust the mixture to insure that you have the perfect air/fuel ratio regardless of your RPM's altitude, or density altitude. You can always override the automatic settings if you want to and adjust your mixture the way you may personally want it. However, the system is designed to do everything for you and make those fine continuous adjustments that a human could never do to keep the perfect air/fuel ratios in all flight configurations.

    There really isn't anymore R&D that needs to be done on the EFII system itself....it's already a proven rock solid configuration. As far as installing it on a CC, I really don't see many modification that would need to be made to accommodate it. For example, the intake manifold and intake runner tubes that are currently being used on the CC could still be used....you don't "have" to use cold air induction with the EFII....it can be installed on any existing configuration. So, the current sump, intake runners, etc. on the CC could be retained. Also, another benefit of the EFII is that it's a perfect compliment to go with the lightweight accessor case that CC has developed. The EFII system uses two automotive (Subaru) coil packs for its spark so there's no need for magnetos (Bendix, P-mags, etc.) so no extra gears are needed in the accessory case to drive magnetos or the like. Once again, nothing would need to be modified or re-engineered and everything could basically be left as-is on the CC. Like I said in an earlier post, it's just like the light-speed ignition that's currently being used in the CC but with the benefit of also having a modern "car-like" fuel injection system. One way or another, the EFII system will be installed in my future CC build.

    Mark



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Treetopflyer; 11-21-2014 at 12:36 PM.

  3. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Vashon Island, WA
    Posts
    30

    Default Re: Converting the CC340 to fuel injection

    Quote Originally Posted by randylervold View Post
    I don't know much about the EFII system as it came on the market after I stopped building RVs, but it looks most interesting. I wouldn't make an F.I. choice without thoroughly investigating it. Jim Richmond, our owner/founder who loves to tinker, is quite interested in it as well. Who knows, you might see a factory project with that next year some time with that system, or a derivative of it. That said it won't be something we offer, just a prototype or "proof of concept".

    I suppose this is as good a time as any to give some insight as to why we at CC can't just snap our fingers and do a project like that. We now have an engineering staff upstairs of 15 people, plus another half dozen or so DERs we use. All projects we undertake, both Part 23 Certified and ASTM certified (LSA), require all sorts of time consuming design, testing, and documentation. Bottom line, it is EXPENSVE and we have to prioritize our projects carefully -- we simply can't take on all the projects Jim and I might want even if we KNOW they will sell. I'm sure this is hard to understand from the outside looking in, but when you sit in my chair it is reality.

    All of that said, you will see CC continue to innovate and bring new concepts to market. I think our track record is pretty good so far and I don't see that changing, but it will never be fast enough to keep some of us happy (including me!). ;-)
    Randy,

    After you and talked this summer about fuel injection for my CCEX I have exchanged a series of e-mails with Robert Paisley at Efii. Since I will be an LAS plane I care DEEPly about weight so I asked Robert about the weight of his system vs the Plasma II's plus carbs on the CCEX. He said that for a single ECU system his EFI system would be about the same. This seems reasonable, since his electronic ignition actually uses his standard ECU as a controller, so the additional weight of his EFI would be the fuel pumps, throttle body, injectors and return fuel lines. Those might well approximate the weight of a pair of carbs.

    In my case, should I elect to proceed with the Efii solution, I would actually use dual ECU's and his bus manager (for my dual batteries). Those two items would add 2.25 pounds (Robert weighed them for me). If the EFI increased fuel efficiency by as little as 5%, that would save 7 pounds of fuel in a 24 gallon tank, which more than "pays" for the 2.25 pound cost, plus one receives all of the well known benefits of EFI.

    Now it is an interesting question (which Robert could not answer) how much fuel efficiency is increased if one adds an EFI to an existing electronic ignition, since the CCEX already has electronic ignition. Maybe most of the efficiency gains of EFI are mostly due to the electronic ignition. This is not easy data to find since all EFI's come with electronic ignition.

    One potential data point is in this article by a fellow who is quite critical of using EFI in sport airplanes.

    http://flycorvair.net/2012/0202/fuel-injected-corvair/

    His argument is that most sport airplanes fly at 75% power, at which point the fuel mixture is likely to be at a 12:1 air fuel ratio or richer, so the EFI is running "open loop", is no better than a carb and just adds cost and complexity. I don't know enough to comment on this point, but happily I do know that my CCEX is going to spend most its time at 45% power where I am sure that the EFI will add a lot of value, so I don't care.

    The data point that I mentioned above happens happens because the writer has a tech savvy friend who ran a distributorless corvair engine on the bench with EFI, and it provided "only" a 6% power increase over a carbureted corvair. If the carbureted engine was also distributorless then this is useful information. If it wasn't then it was apples and oranges and useless. I would be happy with 6% plus whatever the electronic ignition adds.

    Mark

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •