Sydneykid

Hi I actually tuned the IEBC mostly on the road. I had a boost gauge as my reference and the rest is feel. How quick do I want the boost build etc. If I didn't have a boost gauge, I wouldn't have been able to tune it. So I don't really suggest tuning the DFA without an A/F Ratio "gauge". You can get them for around $US400 now as the supply has opened up a lot over the last couple of years. Wide band lambda sensors are also getting quite cheap as the volume steadily increases (around $US150). I reckon you could use a wide band lambda sensor with the IAFRK, but I haven't tried it personally. You would of course have to be careful with sensor temperature stability to get reliable results. I have started another thread on A/F ratio meters, I would appreciate any input.

A couple of people have asked about dissadvantages. Well I wanted to wait until I had a fair bit of driving experience before I commented, so here goes; Firstly the DFA, it has the same disadvantages as any AFM voltage bender. It increases or decreases the voltage signal from the AFM to the ECU. So it affects ALL of the ECU outputs. This means the tuning, ultimately, must be a compromise. For example, you can't lean the A/F ratios out without advancing the ignition timing. So if you want to best tune you can get, a replacement ECU is a technically superior upgrade. But it costs more and (in my case) Power FC's aren't available for autos. There are a lot of load points, and you have to enter them one by one. This can be a little tedious if you aim for perfection as you tune. I found this method overcomes that. Get the main spots right while doing a run on the dyno, then fill/blend in the slopes. You can do this by scrolling through the load points very quickly using View mode on the controller, and blending while you go. This cuts the time under load on the dyno dramatically. For example I did a full tune in under 10 minutes. The IEBC, is VERY different from other electronic boost controllers. It has some great advantages and controls boost very well. But (there is always a but) it has one dissadvantage for autos. It relies on injector duty cycle as its primary input, and that doesn't decrease on upchanges with autos. Obviously this isn't such a problem in a manual as you back of the throttle when changing gears, this decreases the injector duty cycle. In an auto you keep your foot planted, so you get a jump in the boost level as the gearbox changes up. At 10 psi this isn't really a problem, the gearbox handles is easily and the changes are not jerky. But I will be watching it closely when I up the power stakes with the GCG ball bearig hi flow, split dump. FMIC etc. This is not like the aftermarket EBC's, that have a MAP sensor and you simply stick in a boost aim, and the EBC tries to keep boost at that level. So you don't get a boost jump on full throttle changes. But they don't allow the fast boost build that this system does. Like the DFA, there are a lot of load points, and you have to enter them one by one. This can be a little tedious if you aim for perfection in your boost curve. I found this method overcomes that. Get the main spots right while doing a run on the dyno, then fill/blend in the slopes. Same as the DFA, you scroll through the load points very quickly using View mode on the controller, and blending while you go. This cuts the time under load on the dyno dramatically. I have spent a bit of time on the road trimming the IEBC, to get it just about perfect in all conditions. My passengers all say how precise the boost control is, and how it holds it all the way to the rev limit. So a bit of time is well spent. The BIG disadvantage is you have to build them, but you wouldn't buy anything even close, built up, for 5 times as much. So in my humble opinion these kits are a must buy for someone who can solder, read and interpret instructions and who is doing basic upgrades to their car. I can not think of another upgrade that costs ~$200 and gives a 30% power increase and a 12% improvement in fuel economy at the same time. Plus I have the satisfaction of knowing that I did it all myself. Full credit to JE and the guys at SC, they done good:cheers: PS, a couple of guys have asked my about wear on the wastegate/actuator. I really don't see this as an issue, after all the wastegate is designed to open and close rapidly. Plus, with the IEBC, the wastegate sees no boost pressure at all for most of the time when you are driving around. With the standard system (and EBC's and bleed valves) the wastegate sees some boost pressure ALL of the time. So one could argue that using the the IEBC would actually result in LESS wastegate/actuator wear.

Hi guys, if you are a novice to kits, or ruty like I was, my suggestion would be to buy the book, Performance Electronics for Car. On pages 36 to 40 it has instructions on how to build kits, how to solder, what components are polarised etc etc. For ~$20 it's worth it for that alone. Plus it has colour pictures of the kits (the instructions that come with the kits are black and white) and lots of other usefull stuff. Read the book before you buy the kits, that should give you some idea of whether or not you want to spend the money on the kits themselves. These kits have ALL of the parts necessary to get the kit working, even including the tuning resistor in the case of the DFA. You should not have to buy anything else as long as you have the basic stuff like wire cutters, screw drivers, soldering iron and multimeter. Happy building:cheers: PS; If you have bought a kit and are really stuck, PM me and I will help out where I can. Jack Daniels is the currency of choice.

As per this previously posted picture (on page 2 of this thread) As you can see the boost feed (from the intercooler pipework) goes into the top fitting on the solenoid.

I have never heard that terminology used together, "Jetro" is a term used by Apexi and obviously the term "FCon" is HKS. A HKS FCon can be used for AFM or MAP, most I have seen use MAP. Most cars that arrive with Fcon have them removed as they are unknown here (except for one place in Sydney). Plus they need specialist software (and interface) to tune via a laptop. They don't have a Commander like Apexi Power FC. If you intend to get the car tuned once and never make any other mods, then you could stick with the FCon. But it is risky, what happens if its tuned on a warm day and it doesn't run right on the first cold day, or in high humidity, or in traffic with aircon on a 40 degree day. What happens if BP or Shell come out with 100 octane? What happens if you have to change something because it fails? Or want to take advantage of that cheap pairs of cam you always wanted?

Master fuel correction on the Commander, the pure mathematical subtraction (444/680) is 35%, but , try minus 20% to start with. On the Commander, "Settings" Menu, "Fuel/Ignition Timing Correction" Menu, "Inj Adjustment" use down arrows. Reference is Page 30 of the Commander Manual (the English language version for RX7). Most items are the same for Skyline. Remember the PFC will "forget" this correction when you turn the ignition off. But it is usefull for determining how much to take out of the Injector Maps. You will need a lambda sensor to achieve the correct A/F ratios.

Looooooking Goooood:cheers:

I am not a rotary expert, but I think the S5RX7T had 4 X 550 cc injectors. I got mine off a well know rotary race engine builder a couple of years ago, we went though 8 to get 6 good ones. I believe you would have problems with just low impedance injectors. but the resistors should fix that. As for settings, I didn't tell the Power FC anything, I just tuned the maps. The default injector lag is 0.528 milliseconds at 14volts. I believe that Rochester make high impedance top feed injectors, so maybe try them. The Electromotive ECU (popular in US racing) runs peak and hold which likes low impedance, so they should be cheap and popular over there. With no import duty (free trade agreement, good on you Johnny) they are even more economical. Hope that helps:cheers:

Simple, use low impedance, top feed injectors and put a resistor in series with them to bring them up to high impedance. I am using the usual S5RX7T, which are rated at 550 cc's, but actually flow around 565 to 570 cc's at 36 psi base rail pressure and 625 cc's at 45 psi.

It was my experience that when accelerating hard, it wasn't a problem, I could have gone up in 10% steps. But I got surging when driving along at lightish throttle settings, like going up a hill when you need a little more power. Not a lot (to accelerate), just a little to hold speed. The auto box and kickdown made it worse sometimes. I could see it on the Hand Controller, it would flicker between 2 or 3 load points. So I tried 2% steps and the surging almost stopped, so I went to 1% and it is gone. Maybe it wouldn't be a problem with an exhaust upgrade, plus I am fussy, I like my cars to run "nice". I will sacrifice a couple of horsepower for "nice" every time.

That's still pretty low for a 1650 kg waggon. Anticlockwise winds up the bottom spring seats and raises the car. Clockwise is harder. The Tein shocks are usually not too bad, but the spring rates are way too high. Hope that helps:cheers:

There is no absolute answer, it's not like a light switch, OK at 180 rwkw and not OK at 181 rwkw. It depends on soooooo many factors, how clean is the fuel filter, what voltage is the fuel pump seeing (do you have a big stereo that sucks power and lowers the voltage), have you improved the efficiency (cams for example) that mean you get more power out of each molecule of fuel, how good is the ring to bore seal, are the injectors clean )hows there spray pattern), how efficient is the turbo, the intercooler, the exhaust etc etc So some people get 200 rwkw and some don't, and that's as good an answer as I can give:cheers:

Currently have 265 rwkw using GTR pump, so should be OK. Ok price:cheers:

My suggestions. as always, is to first work out what it is that you want to do with the car, then how much power you need to achieve that result, then get an appreciation as to how much that is going to cost. An example, if 200 rwkw will achieve what you want, then you don't need any of the stuff you have listed, and $3K should get you there. If its 400 rwkw then $10K won't be enough. So what is it that you want to achieve? PS; an EManage is a piggy back solution, it is NOT comparable with a Power FC which is a full computer. The Power FC will always be superior in a manual application. For autos, an SAFC is a lot cheaper than an Emanage for similar results.

Since each turbo is different, plus the mods for each car are not going to be the same (zero mods on mine) I wouldn't suggest copying my settings, but the trend may be usefull. The biggest difference is going to be the restrictor (vent) diameter, I used the standard Stagea 1.25mm; 1 - 0==The wastegate is closed to ensure the fastest boost build 2 - 0 3 - 0 4 - 0 5 - 0 6 - 0 7 - 0 8 - 0 9 - 0 10 - 0 11 - 0 12 - 0 13 - 0 14 - 1= Slowly opening the solenoid 15 - 2= I found it I went too fast it would surge between settings 16 - 4=This is because the boost builds very quickly 17 - 6=Especially with the standard turbo 18 - 8 19 - 10 20 - 20 21 - 30= It realy builds boost very fast here 22 - 50=So I had to step up the rate of climb 23 - 50 24 - 70 25 - 90= This is the max opening needed to hold the boost at 0.6 bar 26 - 90 27 - 90 28 - 90 29 - 90 30 - 90 31 - 90 32 - 90 33 - 90 34 - 90 35 - 90 36 - 90 37 - 90 38 - 90 39 - 90 40 - 90 41 - 90 42 - 90 43 - 90 44 - 90 45 - 90 46 - 90 47 - 90 48 - 85= I found the boost dropped off slightly 49 - 85= So I closed the wastegate slightly 50 - 85 51 - 85 52 - 85 53 - 85 54 - 85 55 - 80= Needed a little more to hold 0.6 bar 56 - 80 57 - 80 58 - 80 59 - 80 60 - 80 61 - 80 62 - 80 63 - 80 64 - 80 Hope that is of some help:cheers: PS; If I wasn't about to change from the standard exhaust, I would make the hole in the restrictor (vent) slightly smaller. This would reduce the duty cycle on the solenoid. Around 60 would be a good target.

Agree with the other guys, piston slap is all about machining tolerance and selecting a forged piston with a silicone content the suites your application. Read through the piston manufacturers specs, they have suggested piston to bore clearances for each alloy composition. The question to RB31 or RB26 is a bit tougher. It usually boils down to how much power you want to make, what you want to use the car for and how much money you want to spend. There is no doubt that you can sell your unused RB26 bottom end for far more than the 4wd sump adaptor will cost. So I wouldn't let that influence the decision. So ...... 1. How much power you want to make? 2. What you want to use the car for? 3. How much money do you want to spend? Keep in mind if you want say 800 bhp for drags, then an RB26 is going to cost a lot more as it will need much higher rpm to make that power, compared to the RB31. This means including the cost of a close ratio gearbox and lower diff ratios (both of them) whic the RB31 may not need.

No problems Richard, oil thermostats are one of those useless things (in Australia) that retailers throw up to make you spend twice as much on a Jap "brand name" oil cooler kit. It gets a bit annoying after a while

Launch control? Whats it wired to?

Maybe where you live, that could be a problem. But any place in Australia that my cars have been to or are ever likely to go, too low oil temp has never been or will ever be an issue. I have not seen the need to have an oil thermostat on any car and I have never had a problem. Most of my cars run on Castrol Formula R Synthetic 10W60 it has a cP at -25 degrees C of 4,700 and a Pour Point at -42 degrees C. Somehow I don't think I will be taking my Skyline or Stagea anywhere that cold. However I could always use Castrol Formula R Synthetic 0W40 which has a Pour Point at -54 degrees C, just in case it gets really chilly.

If you had done a search you would have found hundreds of threads on this exact subject. Your requirements are very well covered in other threads which you will find when you do a search. A search will show you the most common and recommended turbos for your application. The search button is your friend. PS; Did I mention do a search?

Not only is it the best place it is the ONLY place. Before the AFM defeats the purpose, as it would measure the air twice. After the turbo would be under boost so it wouldn't flow.

Hi Bass, N1 water pump is designed for sustained high rpm running (as in ciruit races). If you drive it on the street in traffic, with the aircon on, it's exactly what you don't want. An N1 oil pump is the same as a standard RB26 oil pump, except it has a stronger spring in the pressure relief valve. A bit more oil pressure, but no more flow. Bottom line, spend you money on something worthwhile.

Hi Steve, who the hell said that crap? It's the sort of rubish you get on VL forums, "SOHC is better cause you dun havta rev it". :wassup: The RB26 head is all about airflow, getting the most air in and out efficiently. So a 3 litre is going to flow the same at 7,000 rpm as a 2.6 litre flows at 8,000 rpm. To me that sounds like an ideal situation.

Power FC is a full replacement computer, there is no comparison between that and an EManage which is a piggy back. If you buy the stuff to get an EManage even close to a Power FC, it will cost more anyway. If you want to tune air/fuel ratrios only, then the SAFC is a cheaper solution, that looses nothing to an EManage. If you are really tight on budget try the Jaycar Digital Fuel Adjuster kit, just as good as the SAFC for 1/5th the price. But you do need to able to read instructions and solder components on circuit boards.

Hi, the DFA would be quite a bit cheaper than a chip upgrade, plus you will already have a hand Controller (for the IEBC). Ultimately the chip upgrade and tuning will give a superior result. But if the budget is tight, you should give it some thought.