Noswizard wrote:
As stated in the above post, all we needed was some good track conditions but that wasn't to be (not yet anyway) BUT that did NOT stop us getting at least a pointer of the GREAT things to come.
Before posting the results, please keep in mind the following;
1) It was previously using NOS gear in the form of a Direct Port kit and he's being advised by the GREAT NOS EXPERT Monte Smith.
2) He switch to our Pulsoids but mistakenly decided to continue to use Monte Smith's advice to use a DP arrangement rather than the inverted Spider (which was obviously MY advice), that unfortunately lead to a MAJOR piston failure
3) After reviewing the data logs the car owner decided to act on MY advice, which was when he fitted the Inverted Spider.
So with all the above in mind, this is what he had to say after his FIRST few runs in VERY BAD track & weather conditions;
Yes I have good news.
Went out Friday night with just one solenoid flowing 1400 lbs/hr (350 hp) and made one hit to the 330 and she was a little fat so we cleaned it up a bit and went 5.16 @ 142, then 5.13 @ 142 and 5.18 @ 143.
Track was bad and DA was over 3000 with 130 grains of water, it was ugly.
The numbers are a bit low from prior runs at that flow rate, but we were in a lot better conditions then.
Last year we went 5.05 @ 143 in good conditions, on a bigger tire, but a bit heavier.
I am sure we could surpass that and probably run in the 4.90s in better conditions at that flow rate.
Our best 60’ was 1.31 where we went 1.21 on the 5.05 pass.
MPH were the same so she is making just as good power in worse conditions.
We also had 3-4 more degrees of timing out and it was still fat and we did not try to do too much tuning.
The 5.05 pass was finely tuned and clean.
Distribution on the spider only running one solenoid was better than the DP systems.
Just to expand on his last statement;
1) He wanted to run at half the system power, to see how the Spider performed as it was all new to him.
2) I suggested reducing the lift on BOTH Pulsoids but he said he hadn't got time to do the flow testing accurately enough so he disconnected one Pulsoid.
3) The Spider does NOT flow as evenly with 1 Pulsoid, as it does when fed by 2 and yet he STILL experienced BETTER DISTRIBUTION than when using a DIRECT PORT set up.
4) Now this would be FANTASTIC enough if we were comparing a FULL Fogger kit with the Spider, as even on one Pulsoid I'd STILL EXPECT that to be the case BUT the DP set up he was using CONSISTED OF THE FOLLOWING;
1) Two Pulsoids
2) Brock Davidson shower heads connected directly to the Pulsoid outlets
3) Metering jets located in the shower heads
4) Our nylon supply pipe to very basic outlet nozzles
5) MOST IMPORTANTLY - THAT SET UP WAS FLOW TESTED & VIDEO'D WHICH PROVED
THE DISTRIBUTION WAS PERFECT OFF THE ENGINEAnyone want to guess/speculate as to WHY that was the outcome.
A clue for you, is that the DP nozzles were located at the normal location that ALL single stage US kits have them fitted.
While you're chewing on that one, let me just say that the answer CONCLUSIVELY PROVES one of my MAIN PRINCIPLES AGAINST US brand kits.
It was actually Denny but near enough for me. 
