I myself have one of Jon's pumps on the way ...but that doesnt mean I think that CPE's is not a good option at all..... I would like to think most ppl can make an educated opinion
mrlilguy's vs cp-e fuel pump?
- Thread starter sleeping_blue
- Start date
I myself have one of Jon's pumps on the way ...but that doesnt mean I think that CPE's is not a good option at all..... I would like to think most ppl can make an educated opinion
SPEED3TYPE2
Member
exactly and threads like this are a good help...
check your pm's man
mrlilguy157
Member
- :
- 07 mazdaspeed 3
lol thanks zach (redrocketz)
yes, the motor popped, no it had nothing to do with the new turbo. I was cruising on the highway at about 65mph and misshifted. dumb mistake but i don't even care. it just means i get to build the motor faster, and upgrade the clutch while i'm at it
As I said last night on the phone with Neil (Tru-Boost), "When life gives you lemon's, you might as well make lemonade"
anywho, to the pump stuff - all names aside, Autotech APR mrlilguy or CP-E, lets talk about the designs.
The APR design: a thicker piston from top to bottom, which allows for more volume of fuel to enter the pressure chamber of the pump per stroke. What you get is higher pressures throughout and more volume pressurized. Their new internals are pictured here:
As you can see, the APR internal upgrade utilizes new seals, a drilled retainer nut, a new piston, a stiffer spring, and new bore, all while maintaining the same factory Hitachi retainer.
I have no pumps with me right now, so I cannot work out the math, but will do so once I return to Dallas. That way you guys can understand the new volume displacement by the upgraded pumps, which will also show that the upgrade kit that I utilize outflows the APR design, which is used by CP-E.
Moving onwards...
The other guys, Autotech, have a different design, noted as 'plunger style'. This allows for the stock retainer to be used, as well as the stock seals. When APR decided to go with a complete thicker diameter piston, they HAD to drill the retainer nut to allow the new piston to fit through, which also requires the use of new seals. Both designs are acceptable - both do the job, both seal the compression/pressurization chamber from the head of the motor (where possible fuel/oil dilution could occur). The plunger style, once again, allows for the stock seals and retainer to be used. Also, the stock spring is used. Although many have presented controversy about this, the mass difference in the Autotech design, is minimal, further proven in this post.
Here is a picture of the plunger design, as well as the new retainer.
Looking closely, you can see that the bottom end of the pistons diameter is larger than the top end - which defines 'plunger style'.
Look again, here, at my amateur photography and out of focus pictures:
Clearly, the larger end of the piston is shown. This, just like APR's design with a larger diameter full length piston, has a larger diameter part of the piston where it matters, just longer than the stroke of the actual piston as the tri-lobe of the intake camshaft forces the piston in and out out the pump, to create pressure.
As stated, I'll work the exact math for you guys to prove the new volume displacement and flow percentages, between APR and Autotech designs. Also, dada stated earlier in this thread that the Autotech designs were never tested. They were before production began on a diesel pump tester up the road, which proves the mathematic equations to be true, just like Physics. You do the math and figure out your solution, or you can do the mechanical experimentation and lab work to further take note of data, to get your answer. Autotech opted not to purchase and build an $80,000 test rig, and use one up the road from their facility in Aliso Veijo, CA.
As to the debate with the increased mass of the new piston (in either design) as well as the spring force, I will quote myself from another thread, in which I also added more details for futher clarification:
The mass difference between my piston and the stock piston is about a gram, if not less. I don't have a scale next to me at the moment, but I'll be sure to measure and take some picssssss. Also, the car's RPM isn't really increasing. Redline is still near 7k rpms. My buddy JC has a monster of a 2.0t GTi and drives it up to 8k, using this pump, and no side effects have presented themselves
Yes indeed it did, for the whole piston in the APR pumps is larger diameter and larger mass, from beginning to the end. Therefore, APR found it necessary (and I agree) to include a new, stiffer spring for the increase movement in mass. After weighing in, the new retainer and piston assembly weighs approx. a whopping 1.25g heavier.
A stiffer spring is suggested for a significant increase in mass.
edit: Pics found.
^^^^that is the stocker and the retainer^^^^^^^
that is the piston we use, without the retainer. the retainer weighed in near 4.25grams (no scale is perfect). btw - the cloth weighs 7g
As shown, the increased mass for the plunger style, is almost negligible (1.25grams), where as the APR design - larger diameter piston has increased mass from top to bottom - has an increased mass throughout, resulting in probably 4 or 5grams heavier. This, although doesn't sound like a lot of weight, is moving at 3strokes per revolution of the intake cam, which is a lot of mass to be thrown around at such high speeds.
Another point of comparison is here:
The contact point on the cam follower unit, with the new pump upgrade. APR decided to use the factory Hitachi pump retainer unit, great idea, thats nice.
The contact area with the Autotech upgrades to the cam follower unit is the same, as shown in the picture. Notice that the very center circle of the retainer which is pictured 'closer' to you, is the only point of contact on the cam follower unit:
I hope this all makes some sense and shows you that both pump upgrades will do the job, and both are extremely effective solutions. The only difference which can actually be proven to create a different end result, is the larger diameter of the piston, which Autotech surpasses APR, but only by the smallest margin. Both companies did their homework on the design, and both companies have hundreds upgrades performing flawlessly for over hundreds of thousands of miles.
So, in conclusion to all of this explaining - Thumbs up to both designs. CP-E's pump will get the job done, and so will mrlilguy's. Both are taking orders and both are shipping soon. Last week CP-E said 2 weeks, I would think that would mean next Monday. mrlilguyCDFP's will go out this next Monday.
Furthermore, if there is any questions or concerns, let me know through PM's. I'm on vacation and not doing much browsing of the forums throughout the rest of the week. As always, moderators, please give me the green light on this post, or let me know what I need to change, before deleting or locking down the thread. I wanna play by the rules
yes, the motor popped, no it had nothing to do with the new turbo. I was cruising on the highway at about 65mph and misshifted. dumb mistake but i don't even care. it just means i get to build the motor faster, and upgrade the clutch while i'm at it
As I said last night on the phone with Neil (Tru-Boost), "When life gives you lemon's, you might as well make lemonade"
anywho, to the pump stuff - all names aside, Autotech APR mrlilguy or CP-E, lets talk about the designs.
The APR design: a thicker piston from top to bottom, which allows for more volume of fuel to enter the pressure chamber of the pump per stroke. What you get is higher pressures throughout and more volume pressurized. Their new internals are pictured here:
As you can see, the APR internal upgrade utilizes new seals, a drilled retainer nut, a new piston, a stiffer spring, and new bore, all while maintaining the same factory Hitachi retainer.
I have no pumps with me right now, so I cannot work out the math, but will do so once I return to Dallas. That way you guys can understand the new volume displacement by the upgraded pumps, which will also show that the upgrade kit that I utilize outflows the APR design, which is used by CP-E.
Moving onwards...
The other guys, Autotech, have a different design, noted as 'plunger style'. This allows for the stock retainer to be used, as well as the stock seals. When APR decided to go with a complete thicker diameter piston, they HAD to drill the retainer nut to allow the new piston to fit through, which also requires the use of new seals. Both designs are acceptable - both do the job, both seal the compression/pressurization chamber from the head of the motor (where possible fuel/oil dilution could occur). The plunger style, once again, allows for the stock seals and retainer to be used. Also, the stock spring is used. Although many have presented controversy about this, the mass difference in the Autotech design, is minimal, further proven in this post.
Here is a picture of the plunger design, as well as the new retainer.
Looking closely, you can see that the bottom end of the pistons diameter is larger than the top end - which defines 'plunger style'.
Look again, here, at my amateur photography and out of focus pictures:
Clearly, the larger end of the piston is shown. This, just like APR's design with a larger diameter full length piston, has a larger diameter part of the piston where it matters, just longer than the stroke of the actual piston as the tri-lobe of the intake camshaft forces the piston in and out out the pump, to create pressure.
As stated, I'll work the exact math for you guys to prove the new volume displacement and flow percentages, between APR and Autotech designs. Also, dada stated earlier in this thread that the Autotech designs were never tested. They were before production began on a diesel pump tester up the road, which proves the mathematic equations to be true, just like Physics. You do the math and figure out your solution, or you can do the mechanical experimentation and lab work to further take note of data, to get your answer. Autotech opted not to purchase and build an $80,000 test rig, and use one up the road from their facility in Aliso Veijo, CA.
As to the debate with the increased mass of the new piston (in either design) as well as the spring force, I will quote myself from another thread, in which I also added more details for futher clarification:
****************
The mass difference between my piston and the stock piston is about a gram, if not less. I don't have a scale next to me at the moment, but I'll be sure to measure and take some picssssss. Also, the car's RPM isn't really increasing. Redline is still near 7k rpms. My buddy JC has a monster of a 2.0t GTi and drives it up to 8k, using this pump, and no side effects have presented themselves
Direct from Brian@Autotech (AutotechRD) said:
Yes indeed it did, for the whole piston in the APR pumps is larger diameter and larger mass, from beginning to the end. Therefore, APR found it necessary (and I agree) to include a new, stiffer spring for the increase movement in mass. After weighing in, the new retainer and piston assembly weighs approx. a whopping 1.25g heavier.
A stiffer spring is suggested for a significant increase in mass.
edit: Pics found.
^^^^that is the stocker and the retainer^^^^^^^
that is the piston we use, without the retainer. the retainer weighed in near 4.25grams (no scale is perfect). btw - the cloth weighs 7g
****************
As shown, the increased mass for the plunger style, is almost negligible (1.25grams), where as the APR design - larger diameter piston has increased mass from top to bottom - has an increased mass throughout, resulting in probably 4 or 5grams heavier. This, although doesn't sound like a lot of weight, is moving at 3strokes per revolution of the intake cam, which is a lot of mass to be thrown around at such high speeds.
Another point of comparison is here:
The contact point on the cam follower unit, with the new pump upgrade. APR decided to use the factory Hitachi pump retainer unit, great idea, thats nice.
The contact area with the Autotech upgrades to the cam follower unit is the same, as shown in the picture. Notice that the very center circle of the retainer which is pictured 'closer' to you, is the only point of contact on the cam follower unit:
I hope this all makes some sense and shows you that both pump upgrades will do the job, and both are extremely effective solutions. The only difference which can actually be proven to create a different end result, is the larger diameter of the piston, which Autotech surpasses APR, but only by the smallest margin. Both companies did their homework on the design, and both companies have hundreds upgrades performing flawlessly for over hundreds of thousands of miles.
So, in conclusion to all of this explaining - Thumbs up to both designs. CP-E's pump will get the job done, and so will mrlilguy's. Both are taking orders and both are shipping soon. Last week CP-E said 2 weeks, I would think that would mean next Monday. mrlilguyCDFP's will go out this next Monday.
Furthermore, if there is any questions or concerns, let me know through PM's. I'm on vacation and not doing much browsing of the forums throughout the rest of the week. As always, moderators, please give me the green light on this post, or let me know what I need to change, before deleting or locking down the thread. I wanna play by the rules
Last edited:
SPEED3TYPE2
Member
good attitude man build that beast up!
So, in conclusion to all of this explaining - Thumbs up to both designs. CP-E's pump will get the job done, and so will mrlilguy's. Both are taking orders and both are shipping soon. Last week CP-E said 2 weeks, I would think that would mean next Monday. mrlilguyCDFP's will go out this next Monday.
Furthermore, if there is any questions or concerns, let me know through PM's. I'm on vacation and not doing much browsing of the forums throughout the rest of the week. As always, moderators, please give me the green light on this post, or let me know what I need to change, before deleting or locking down the thread. I wanna play by the rules
Awesome post!
Now they just have to get cheaper
mrlilguy157
Member
- :
- 07 mazdaspeed 3
haha. i've been toying around with more options in my head.
