Emre

40 awkw gain just by raising the boost from 1 bar to 1.2 bar sounds a bit excessive. Here is the thing : Fuel alone does not give you any additional power, it allows you to tune the car more agressively to extract more power. Stock ECU doesn't recognise the higher octane and advance the timing; from what you watched and described he is only gaining this power from increasing the boost by 0.2 bar. Why does he need 103 octane to run 1.2 bar...? I ran small busts of 1.2 bar on pump fuel without any signs of detonation. A small amount of higher octane can be used for safety, that is all. Why does he need 103 octane to get 249 awkw...? What happens when he runs out of $300 per tank fuel...? He is down to 208 awkw. By spending the money on cam gears, he could get that power permanently at the same boost on pump fuel. (assuming he has a decent exhaust) At that point, if you are still chasing more power, decent fuel still couldn't help you much. It would allow you to run more timing, but more boost from stock turbos wouldn't be advisable as you are already stressing the little buggers. That's when you upgrade the ECU, turbos and fuel system to get up to 300+ rwkw mark, still on pump fuel. Higher octane fuel would be more beneficial at this point, as you are able to flow more air with an easier control of the timing and fuelling. Back to your original question after all this rambling. Sure, some gains can be had.

If you don't adjust your tune to suit the chosen fuel, you are not getting the optimum gains. This could be considered as a waste of money by some, especially when said fuels cost a considerable amount per litre. If you have a stock vehicle, a better bet would be to spent money on some permanent gains rather than using an expensive fuel as a temporary gain. If you have a somewhat modified vehicle, consider whether upping the boost will effect other things like : fuel flow, turbo efficiency etc. If you have all bases covered, than decent fuel will yield excellent results with a quick change to some parameters. You don't need an aftermarket ECU to adjust timing. Base timing can be controlled and extra timing can be added with the crank angle sensor. He may have used this method, or he may not have; the question is : what exactly did he achieve at what cost...?

The cams are ground totally different to factory specs, quite possibly (total assumption) with some retardation on the exhaust side. So, by advancing it 8 degrees, you basically would be returning it closer to factory spec. It's still amazing how one can settle on 8 degree advance and someone else on 8 degree retard, when according to the manufacturer they should be pretty close without any adjustment. Mine are going to go in sometime next year, can't wait now. rev210, Very nice curve. The black line, being your second run, was it with no or minimal adjustment...? Was your first run before the cam change...? If yes, can you post that up as well...? Cheers.

They are calibrated ever so slightly different, not enough to cause any dramas with a stock ECU. If you have Power FC, you can choose either from the menu. At full voltage, BNR32 AFMs are able to measure a smidgen more compared to BCNR33 ones. This would translate to 32 AFMs running slightly leaner in a 33 and 33 AFMs running slightly richer in a 32 with the stock ECU.

Rightio... This makes you the second person who had a positive result by advancing the exhaust cam on Tomei poncams. As their Gts-t cams, if the profile is quite different to factory spec and already have a lot of retardation built into the cam, it's quite understandable. Who else is running poncams on an RB26...?

For the $$$ they fetch or the pain they cause to manufacture, I don't see them as a cost effective mod. Big hp is being had with stock GTR piping, as imperfect as they look. That's another reason I wasn't quite interested in the aftermarket piping. Would love to see some test results if anyone has done it though.

Here is the easy way to calculate it. Click on this link, have a quick read, than put your numbers up. If you want a challenge than go to this link. I put your numbers through this extremely complicated calculation and got a reading of 5.31 sec. PS: Do not take any of the results as gospel as they are just a calculation.

There is no flat-shift feature in Datalogit, as in, there are no flat-change option boxes to tick and calibrate. However, there is an antilag feature which in my mind works in a similar principle to flat-shift you are talking about. Now, if one was keen and able enough to play with this, I'd dare say it could work. I have a Power FC Pro and the datalogit software, but these features never tickled my interest to look into them any further. I haven't even used the launch control function to date, but while playing around with the unit, I got it to work and thought, fark... that's easy. Have you finished that cask yet...?

Drunken, Antilag works in a similar way to the flat-shift feature, but only when the car is stationary. So i'd say, if you were keen enough, you may be able to integrate something like that into the system. The thing is, if you were to use the launch control feature and bounce of the rev limiter at the starting line, how is it any different to hitting the rev-limit for half a second during flat shifting...?

The version of your FC comes up on the hand controller when you turn the ignition on. Duncan, The FC has ports for extra switches to be configured, antilag being one of them.

No, it's a feature of Power FC PRO only.

If the boost control kit is for an S14, it should just be a matter of plugging the unit in to the factory harness (where the factory boost solenoid plugs in). If the unit is from another make or model, most likely the plugs will be different. This link may help.

Nah mate... A lot simpler than that. On the rev limit menu, the second from the top is your launch rev-limiter. Set it to, say 6500rpm as an example, and the rev limiter will kick in at that point while the car is stationary. Once you get moving, it's void and your actual rev-limiter kicks in.

Congrats on the mighty fine effort BLUEGTR, You wouldn't happen to have a dyno chart of this baby with the Apex turbos would you...? A few people (including me:)) were interested in a comparison of these to HKS low mounts a while back and they are fairly hard to come by. I was thinking exactly the same thing... They make Nittos seem somewhat redundant. Are they a street tyre or a semi-slick of some sort...? Did you have any mods on the driveline like transfer case, etc...?

Yes it does. It's worth to have it if you want to log some data, if you just want to make some quick changes to the tune, do not bother. Hand controller is a much usable option for most of the time. It's still not a viable option for the tuners as all the different versions of Power FCs available out there are not integrated into the software yet. It's basically being done as a new version pops from a new user.

The crank collar on the R32s is the only difference I know. If you keep the revs to within factory limits you shouldn't have an issue with that. Pistons and rods are interchangable if not identical. They may have changed the quality of the metals in the hardware over the period of 10 years but I'm not sure. The top end is slightly different, but that wasn't your question. 350rwkw is quite achievable, the question is, what do you intend to do with that 350rwkw. It should be OK on the drag strip but may be stressed on the circuit. No problems with the low 11s and mid to high 120mph either.

WTF is your problem...??? I never accused you of showing off or anything else. I put down my experience compared to yours. Stop your crying and grow some skin !

To be honest, -and don't be offended for being blunt- the other stuff that flies around is no different to me than what you claim. For the record, the specs you've listed are very similar to mine. I have stock cams, 2530s, Nismo AFMs and a Bosch 044 with sard 700ccs. Only way I could claim 400rwkw was with race fuel, extra timing and boost peaking at 25-26 psi. Do people realize that most of the disagreements on this board are related to a dyno figure...? At the end of it all, how many GTRs are there that have done ~125mph...? The answer would be, quite a lot and I'm sure most would claim somewhat different horsepower.

I appreciate the fact that you are passing on the info you have. I wasn't having a dig (for a change:)), just passing on the info I have.

You have to change the values, the car wouldn't even start and idle. Ideally, you need a fine tune on the dyno.

I went for brand new Nismo items, purely because they are brand new. Z32 and RB20 AFMs are over 10 years old now and I witnessed a GTR destroying a motor because of an AFM failure. pnblight, I've been reading on your cars progress on here and each time I end up scratching my head. Firstly, your cam gear settings surely makes me think WTF even today and now achieving near on 400rwkw on 20psi with reasonably small turbos. Your 125mph makes a little more sense however as I did 126mph with ~340rwkw on a VIC dyno.

Bugger you Roy, Do you think he is going to let out his trade secrets to you or anyone else...? If you are doubting him, I'm sure he'd be more than happy to show the car to you next time you are in Malaysia. So, are you in the group build thingy or not...??? I'd say join us before it's too late !

Hey Snowie, I want a piece of this action, don't keep it all to yourself mate ! Maybe we should organise a group build and save some $$$. I will ask Ben as well and see if he needs some TOPZ work done on his car too. Thanks Shadowstrike.

Hmmm... The boxes my unit came in has no reference to AP Engineering. Power FC : 414-N001 Commander : 415-N001 Regardless, it's a damn good deal, good luck.

PROs are not made by AP Engineering. You should be sweet.