Dale FZ1

Members
  • Content count

    2,064
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3
  • Feedback

    100%

Dale FZ1 last won the day on June 1

Dale FZ1 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

152 Excellent

About Dale FZ1

  • Rank
    Rank: RB30E
  • Birthday 10/29/1968

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Sunshine Coast

Previous Fields

  • Car(s)
    ECR33 Series 1

Recent Profile Visitors

7,465 profile views
  1. Overall a decent result. Be interesting to see the boost curve with this one. I'd say that no VCT is a big cause of the relative torque deficit across the 2500-4500 range. Torque peaks at 5500 then starts dropping, so power has peaked before 7000. Not sure why the tuner says it will make more hp with more rpm. Hope he pointed to the saw-tooth shape of the graph over 5000. Might be worth investigating timing scatter, see if that needs to be addressed. Not uncommon to pick up 10-15kW by fixing those issues.
  2. Look at the NZ Wiring cam trigger kits. May provide the solution you require if it all gets difficult. Crank trigger is the best solution to achieve consistent/accurate timing though.
  3. Dale FZ1

    Watched Bathurst race 2 - fairly busy there! Car looked to run well, no obvious vices just running out of revs. Going up Mountain Straight too? What calculated road speed?
  4. Dale FZ1

    If you're achieving 465rwhp the in-cylinder pressures are getting up there. With good tuning the pistons/rods ought to survive. But the OEM head gasket with a bit of age might not be that long lived if the car sees a lot of heavy duty use. MLS type + head stud kit would be worth looking at IMO. Tune will dictate what's "safe".
  5. Dale FZ1

    It comes down to what you want to achieve with this setup. For me, traction is king. Some want maximum mid range punch and enjoy the struggle to master throttle/skid control even on dry roads. My particular setup allows for more/less boost via a dashboard knob, for driveability in various track conditions. (relatively easy process with an ECU that's newer/more advanced than the Power FC). In your case, I think what you could try is to get that boost controller functioning, and have the boost come up to the targeted value earlier across that 3800-4800 rpm band. Given that your target is 1.4 bar, and you're getting 1.35 bar from a 1 bar spring, it's probably fit for purpose. End of the day, a rock steady flat boost curve might look good on a graph, but not give the desired driving experience. It's down to your preference. But play with the controller and see what you like from the result.
  6. Dale FZ1

    As per Johnny's comments, you need to make 100% sure the boost control plumbing is correctly hooked up. That boost graph scale is terrible, but trend seems to be creeping from 3800-4800. That's where your controller should be doing its thing and bringing up boost (and torque) in that range. That said, how's it drive right now - does it put power to the ground through that range, or turn tyres?
  7. Dale FZ1

    I agree - mine is functional too, just found it annoying that it the observed boost level so out of whack with the spring rate. Probably fair to say that with the engine/turbo combinations we really aren't legitimately targeting 1 bar boost though.
  8. Dale FZ1

    Greg for interest/comparison, do you have pics of your gate setup? This may help with conversation here. A lot of effort went into my 6boost gate takeoff angle but we found measured/logged boost pressure around 6 pounds higher than the rated (and bench tested) weight of the gate spring (50mm Pro Gate). Boost was steady/consistent, just higher than we expected. Solution was to run a lighter spring than what the actual target is. Pragmatic but effective; and lots cheaper than more fabrication work.
  9. Dale FZ1

    Got any pics of your gate + piping setup? Gate takeoff angle and plumbing is a critical aspect to achieving proper control. Graph showing how boost ramps and what control through the range without BC active would be useful. Have you spoken with either the fabricator, or your turbo equipment supplier?
  10. Billet block questionable value or purpose at that hp level. Would look at the Kulig bottom end bracing kit for sure though.
  11. Indeed. When 3.4 is a tried and tested option.
  12. Dale FZ1

    Do like the appearance of that housing, looking down the throat and the outlet.
  13. Hoping you could throw up a data graph trace showing IMAP vs EMAP? Might help people visualise how that relationship affects the scavenge and overall engine efficiency. Guessing the engine has become a bit more vocal with the bigger housing.
  14. Dale FZ1

    Just a case of using what works really. With the ready availability of accurate/reliable oil pressure sensors to input into ECU, and easy/cheap oil sample analysis I'd suggest not too hard to monitor and change if required. People in areas where winter temps are in single figures overnight might want the viscosity numbers lower esp for daily driving and cold startups. My hydraulic non-Neo head has had no issues with a 15w50, or even the HPR30 with initial startups. Queensland temps though.
  15. Dale FZ1

    With that much hp you're not likely to treat it nicely. Plenty of revs and load, use the grunt. So the mains and big ends are going to want film strength to carry the load of those cylinder pressures. And you have solid lifters, no hydraulics to complain about oil thickness on cold start. What did your engine builder recommend?