Sydneykid

No such thing as boost cut, the ECU has no way of knowing what the boost is. cheers

Hi Dalals, with engine componets I only recommend what I have actually done in real life. I am not going to say "should", or "might", "look good for" etc when it comes to engine components. I have seen an engine with Carrillos make 1100 bhp, and run 1/4's several times. I have actually used the Argo I Beam rods up to 950 bhp so I know that they are good for at least that much. I have only used the Spool H Beam rods up to 750 bhp, so I know they are good to that level. They may well handle more, when we have built an engine with them that makes more, then I will say that they handle more. When you think about it, 750 bhp is close to 500 rwkw, rods that will do that for the price tha tSpool charges are very good value for my money. cheers

Hi A, no the Gibson cars had the radiator lowered so that the ambient air inlet and the air filters for the turbos could go above the radiator. Since the radiator was lower, the filler on the header tank was no longer the high point, so it wouldn't collect the air. So they had a aluminium collector mounted up near the brake master cylinders, as it is the high point in the engine bay. It had 3 small hoses so the air could travel up to it, hence eliminating the chance of any trapped air bubbles. I have posted pictures in the Group A Skylines thread. cheers

Hi Alan, no different to using the IEBC on any car, it works great. cheers

Almost as good as the standard one. cheers

Ask petroleum engineer, obviously they manage it somehow. cheers

Had an LM1 before (good unit), it got sold with one of the team race cars. Please post up your tuning experiences, every little bit of knowledge helps. Cheers

I thought we had previously agreed that the test methodology for that result was erroneous. It did not allow for the opening/closing of valves and was done using negative pressure at the cylinder head interface. Both of which mean it doesn’t duplicate the real world. I should add that we have done primary exhaust pipe EGT testing on an RB25 running a standard inlet manifold/plenum and it shows very little temperature difference at 315 rwkw (~500 bhp). That is without any fuel correction being applied to individual cylinders. A 13% differential (256 versus 290) would stick out like the proverbials. cheers

Does that mean less than 5.2 litres is OK on an RB26? cheers

Do a search, try "+Auto+ECU+SAFC+SITC" for threads from "Sydneykid" and select "all dates" cheers

Nope, but we always run the standard loopy lines, so maybe they work I have purchase a braided line for my own R32GTST but I haven't fitted it yet. So maybe I will have a problem then. cheers

Reply sent cheers

Sounds like excessive negative camber. Generally ride height is the first place to look for excessive tyre wear. What is the ride height , front and rear all 4 corners, centre of wheel to guard? It may just need a camber kit, front $272 and rear $123. cheers

The pipework loop is there to cool the clutch fluid. Obviously Nissan believed that under extreme circumstances the clutch fluid can overhead/boil and leave you with no hydraulic pressure. cheers

Yep, 2 degrees negative is a bit much, although it is very height sensitive. What is the ride height front and rear, all 4 corners, centre of wheel to guard? It has been my experience that very few wheel aligners know that there is limited camber adjustment on the rear. They look at the front first and find that there isn't any there and incorrectly assume that the rear is the same. There are pictures of the standard rear camber adjuster in the thread, to save you looking here it is. The rear camber adjuster is the eccentric bolt on the inner joint of the upper control arm. As you can see that one is in the middle position, adjusting it to lengthen the arm decreases the negative camber. cheers

Regardless of what EBC you are using, you are bleeding off 10 psi which is simply too much. Get a wastegate spring for the minimum boost you are likely to run. My rule of thumb is never to bleed off more than 25% For example if you have a 20 psi then + 25% = 25 psi cheers PS; I don't believe in high/low boost settings, if I want a lower power ouput I don't push the pedal down as far.

Nope, Geoff is 100% right and I was 99% ( I still reckon Reynolds has an effect in the rail). Hence #1 cylinder gets the highest pressure, as long as the pump is up to the flow rate required of course. cheers

See, I didn't have to say anything cheers

A few guys have asked my (via PM’s) for a quick rundown on the tuning methodology. This is what I do; I tune the (up to temperature) idle first in the driveway with closed loop off (unplug the slow and narrow lamba sensor), I aim for 15 to 1 at all idle rpms (aircon, power steer, electric load). Once that is done I then drive to my favourite test road, it has a long hill with good visibility and a freeway bit at the end. I punch the logging button as soon as it is making some boost in 3rd gear on the way up the hill. Then I stop, upload and look at the TEBLOG data on the laptop, make some changes, then back up the hill again. My target is 12 to 1 at full boost and I have enough experience with the Power FC to guess the changes needed. Once or twice up the hill with quick adjustments in between, that’s about all I need to get a good base tune. At all times I watch the Commander knock readings to make sure I am not getting any knock readings above 20. Then I do the cruise tuning, down the freeway. Log it at 80 kph, then 90 kph then 100 kph then 110 kph in 4th gear then repeat in 5th gear. Get to the end of the 6 k stretch, stop and adjust to achieve 15 to 1. Then drive back home, checking the A/F ratios as I go. The trickiest bit to tune is the boost build load/rpm range. I don’t know whether the following is right or not, but I do know it is safe. Remember the off boost load/rpm is tuned for 15 to 1 and the on full boost is tuned for 12 to 1. As soon as I see any boost I tune for 11 to 1 A/F ratios, that’s about as safe as I like to make it. You could probably get away with ramping it straight to 12 as the boost builds, but I like it safe in that area. I then take the lap top inside and take a long look at the load points I have adjusted. I then fill in the load points in between, it’s pretty logical/simple stuff. The basic shape of the Power FC default maps are truly excellent. I then stick the lap top back in the car with the Datalogit plugged in and tune the ignition timing, the no knock over 20 rule applies. If I do that in one night it takes me from 8 pm till around 10.30 pm to get a satisfactory tune. I then drive it around for a few days, watching the knock and punching the logging on and off when I fee like it (that’s where the 2mb comes in handy). After a few days of mixed conditions I upload the log into TEWBLOG and make any fine tuning adjustments that I see are necessary. When we go to the drags, I plug the WB02 in and log each run. I also have the A/F ratio display up on the dash (that’s where the small size comes in handy). The drivers (both of us) know that any long readings (ignoring the leanness on gearchanges of course) at above 12 to 1 means a problem and he will abort the run. The driver also punches the start log button before each run, sometimes one of the drivers forgets to turn it off though. I have a look at the log afterwards just to make sure all is well and maybe do a little bit of fine tuning at the same time. Having had the WB02 for a couple of months now I don’t see how I could live with out it. I used to go to the dyno 3 or 4 times to tune a car after any serious parts upgrades and it’s an hour’s drive from my home. Plus I was never 100% happy with the off boost tuning, you just never seem to have enough time on the dyno to get it right. Now it is beautiful, the cars run nice at all loads and rpms and get good fuel economy, which I never ever got around to tuning on the dyno. The only missing bit is I don’t know the power output, plus I would like to compare the accuracy of the WB02 to the Motec A/F ratio meter we use in the dyno room. I check the free air calibration of the WB02 regularly and it is very stable. I will pop over to the dyno one day soon and give the R33GTST a quick power run, logging everything. Then I can compare it to the WB02 A/F ratios. When the new RB31DET goes in the R32GTST I will tune it on the track as I run it in, as it is not registered. I reckon in one day I can run the engine in and tune it, then I will pop it on the dyno and let Dyno Dave tell me how good or bad I am. I do know that I am crap on the dyno as I am too slow, what takes me an hour to do Dyno Dave does in 20 minutes. That’s why he is the race team tuner and I am the race team manager. Hopefully that answered a few questions cheers

Depends on the power target. For over 750 bhp we use Argo (www.argorace.com.au) for up to 750 bhp we use Spool (www.spoolimports.com). Being in the US, you really should have talk to Carrillo (www.carrillorods.com). cheers

Sorry, I thought I was very careful in using both EGT (Exhaust Gas Temperatures) and A/F ratios. I don't think I am guilty of mixing them, I apologise if I was. If I remember my fluid dynamics correctly (it was a while ago) the pressure is highest at the pressure controller (ie; the fuel pressure regulator) not the source. This overrules the Renolds number (pressure drop along a pipe length). Maybe the hydraulic engineers on here can clarify. Not having used either, I can only go on what I see and the Nismo plenum (not the GReddy) seems to be used by the leading GTR exponents such as Mines. This is the road and circuit environment, when used with multiple throttle bodies, where throttle response is all important. In an all out drag environment, the usual double the engine capacity (minimum) plenum and single throttle body are the rule. As usual it depends on where you are on the power tree and what your uses are that determine the inlet system layout that best suites. cheers

Hi Brad, it's all a bit circular, you end up back where you started from. So you run ever higher boost You need to lower the compression ratio And retard the ignition timing Plus add a larger intercooler to scrub the increased temperature To avoid the detonation And that loses power So you add some more boost Then you have to run jungle juice Which not many people can afford to do on the road So you turn the boost back down Now you have a low compression engine With retarded ignition timing And a monster intercooler Running lower boost than the turbo is efficient at That's both unresponsive and laggy Except when it is running the 1/4 Then it's a weapon But would it be better with a bigger turbo? For less turbine restriction So it makes the same power At lower boost So you don't need to lower the compression ratio And retard the ignition timing Back where you started from, except you have just raised the rpm threshold. cheers

Hi Chris, we did 2 at the same time early last year, one is in 240SX in Florida (9.3 at 150 mph) and the other is going into an R32GTS4 in the UK. We are also doing one for a Canadian at the moment. Not enough racing here I gues for the guys to justify the costs. Sports Compact is so big in the US, they race every couple of weeks. cheers

So did I cheers

Shoot, remind me never to go anywhere near your machine shop. I have never spent more than $1K on an RB engine's ports, and that was for 1100 bhp plus. cheers