discopotato03

I am hoping this thread could be a place where people with these computers can share ideas and help each other where posible . I don't suggest anyone blindly load maps up and go blasting down the road . Obviously not everyone is a gun tuner or has a dyno right next door , some people like to have a go at doing some of their own tuning and there's been threads here for a long time about people DIYing PFCs . A

Tech Edge WB3A2 wired in and correcting as per AFR target table . Bosch LSU 4.9 probe from memory . No , not copying anyone elses maps . No to EGT and tuner said at this state of tune (engine) difficult to make it detonate on E70 . As I said I'm not tuning the boost areas just the areas that make a road car - a road car round town . This is said to be difficult to do purely on a chassis dyno . I dunno , maybe people put up with average to poor drivability at less than WOT everywhere thinking it's unavoidable . A

Simple , to try to get info on the 71 and 73HTA compressors because theres not much talk of 3071 and 3073 HTAs . Was hoping to see smaller than T04S comp housings on them . A .

Raising funds to deport Guilt to a penal colony .

I though rather than asking numerous questions about tuning these ECUs for newbys that having its own thread would be easier . I gather quite a few have migrated from Apexi PFCs and the interface is totally different to the hand held or Datalogit . Guilt Toy got into these early and had one thread running for a while . I'm pretty new to the ViPec though I know enough to get around in the software but not to an advanced level . Hopefully people that know these computers intimately won't mind helping the rest of us out occasionally so we can learn something about engines and tuning . Do what ever you will at your own risk but always consider the safety of yourself and others FIRST and at all times . It's obviously not safe to drive and tune at the same time in public places and being caught doing so won't end well . I believe the place for power tuning is on a dyno because with these there's a controlled environment so much less risk to life limb property and engine . Also I've seen many threads turn into Link vs Vipec wars and these don't get anyone anywhere . People buy what they buy and use what they have so please daggers down so we can get where we want to be with our cars . That aside like with most things theres different ways to achieve similar ends but often only a few or one way works best overall . The Vipec/Link opens up many options or a group of options for doing lots of things , options you never had with a Power FC . Showing specific settings or tables is a simple matter of using the snipping feature of Win 7 and saving an image you can load/post like I did with that Aux1 PWM map vs revs cam switch table . From what I've seen there is enough sophistication with these computers to get good results provided the engine is physically capable of it . This means having cams and injectors etc capable of smooth running if thats what you want . Floors open , cheers Adrian .

I was looking into 2868 and 2871HTAs to see what the 28 people were getting on the cold side . I found this thread that has lots of pics of a GTX2867 and a HTA2868 , I know not HTA71 or 73 but its interesting to see the two styles of wheel compared . He also posted pics of inside what he's calling the "GTX67" compressor housing which is almost certainly a T04B 0.60 AR one with port shrouding "machined" into it . I don't know what you people reckon but er the results are a bit shabby close up . The FP turbo started out with the same basic comp housing but they machined up a new snout and bolted it on with cap screws HKS style , some GT2530s look like that . I reckon with a bit of creative maching you could have port shrouding with a bolt in adapter using a generic T04B housing . If there are T04E ones with enough meat in them probably the same . Best answer would be if Garrett sold housings not finish machined inside so the profile and slot could be done later . Anyhow that aside its been said that FP aren't that keen on doing 2871HTA conversions because the mismatch in wheel size/performance . Someone at the Audi site mentioned a 2873HTA which would be worse you'd think though probably not as bad as a HKS 2540 or a Garrett GT2876R . Looking into that now , cheers A .

Just as an update the consumption ended up ok but it drives better overall . I also changed the accel load table from MAP to TPS and I think thats going to work better overall too . Do we have a Vipec/Link G4 plug in tuning thread here or do we want one ? Cheers Adrian .

My tuner did it while I was with him once , its really only around idle up to dunno maybe 13-1400 revs . Best comparison I can give is trying to make a engine with full race cams idle too slow . Wild shaking and constant stalling . You wouldn't go there intentionally if you didn't have to . I'm guessing std cams do a similar kind of thing with the sloenoid switched on at idle . The main issue is engine characteristics change if the solenoid switches at the wrong times , obviously too much valve overlap costs you part throttle off boost torque because the inlets close too late and the exhausts open too early . Once the gas speed is up a bit its better able to flow in the right directions . I also look at RB25DETs as a lowish CR engine off boost and they seem to work best with conservative valve timeing for normal part throttle driving . When my PWM table was referencing off throttle position there was no way to have the solenoid off up to 100 kpa/atmo pressure into the 2-3000 rev range (see table above) and with it on the overlap timing was to much to allow it to make best torque in these areas . It didn't really run camy or rough but it didn't feel sweet and at times a little breathless . Now its very smooth and has more torque meaning you open the throttle less just getting around . It made a big difference to the cold start and warm up characteristics meaning it drives a lot nicer initally now . I am also starting to lean out some parts of the sub atmo pressure fuel map because I had it a tad rich in these areas looking for better part throttle performance . I'll know later today how the consumption looks and theory suggests it should be better . Anything that improves fuel consumption (E70) and gains torque at the same time is all cake I reckon . Cheers A .

I'm not suggesting that people are masking temperature with high eth fuels its just you can fend off detonation that could cause damage otherwise when searching for limits . Also just wondering if its worth going past the 71mm HTA hybrid as I said on an IW std manifold engine , what do we think the reliable limit in this form on a stock block RB25DET burning E70 ? A .

Well that was the impression he gave me when I last saw him which was just before he moved . A .

This is what I'm using and it seems to work quite well . It feels much better at part throttle for most of the sub atmo 2-3000 rev area and the 4 across the middle of the top row is an attemp to lose the closed throttle kick/buck I'm get in this area when cold . I think the cam switching and throttle closed fuel cut resumption were fighting each other in the 1400-1600 rev area . I guess it makes sense to get the best trapping efficiency (shortest overlap period) at light loads and aside from a bit more torque in this area I could use better fuel consumption numbers too . My consumption yardstick is how far I get before the needle drops to the top line from full to the neck - which is real scientific is't it . Better than 50 is reasonable and better than 100 by the first 1/4 has been hard in the past . A .

Hi all , have had a few minor dramas setting up cam switching with a ViPec plug in . Is the best way to make up a table of MAP vs revs and run with the solenoid switched off up to say 3000 revs and 100 kpa (atmo) pressure ? Mine had been using a TPS vs revs table and that created drivability problems . I set up a MAP/revs table which is off up to about 1600 revs and the off/on divide is sort of a diagonal line from 120 kpa at 1600 revs to around 0 kpa at 4000 revs . Its not really linear more a curve with its radius facing the lower RHS of the table if that makes sense . Referencing off TP cost lots of off boost torque and fingers crossed I'll get better fuel consumption if not booted everywhere . It's surprising how wild 256 Tomeis get with the solenoid on at very low revs , no hope of idling anyway . Also it's set to switch off at all pressures between 4690 and 4700 revs . Sorry if a silly question but I migrated from a PFC and you had no choices in this area , you did the idle learn and hoped it sorted itself out . Hopefully this is where I get the consumption back I had with the Apexi . Realy like the versatility of the ViPec but it's a learning curve , cheers Adrian .

Interesting thread fellas and the results look positive . It sounds like these HTA GT30BB hybrids are doing what Garrett and HKS did with GT37 and GT40 compressors back in 1989-90 . Power and response . We really should look at what they were trying to beat ie the bush bearing centres with heavier dated tech not so high speed wheels - both sides . Basically T series compressor and turbine technology . I don't see GT35/37/40 series compressors as dinosaurs but like with anything time and development moves forward improving performance . GT wheels have their place and they do seem to have their own specific characteristics . Its probably race technology and production economics thats pushed the whole machined compressor wave , CNC machines can no doubt spit these wheels out quickly and reasonably cheaply and make it so quick and easy to experiment with different styles . As has been said the hub area can be smaller and the material denser so making strong light wheels gets a lot easier . Two things I wanted to say . 1) These HTA variants are bulkier because they seem to be using the 0.70 AR T04S compressor housing where Garrett use T04E ones on their 71 and 76MM GTX turbos , and the 76mm GT ones . Curious to know if what FP thinks about their 71mm wheel in a T04E housing . 2) How far do we think we can get with a std cast manifold and GT30 IW turbine housings ? I'm guessing the 71HTA and maybe the 73HTA with a 0.82 IW GT30 housing would probably run Nissans exhaust manifold to the limit . Roy I know what you are saying about E70/85 masking high exhaust manifold pressures - it just doesn't want to detonate up to a point . Evos , yep love them or hate them they were designed to make a lot of torque in a limited rev range so they had to get the boost up early . By our standards a TD05HR turbo is not big but it isn't exactly small next to an RB25s OE Hitachi . That TD05 turbine looks huge compared to the ceramic CPU fan Nissan used and its part of the reason Evo 4G63T 2L four bangers cranked out 206 Kw with number plates . The twin scroll turbine housing was the way to make good torque from low revs without being restructive within the limits of a 16G6 turbocharger . The Evo X uses an even larger turbine housing but it also has a more modern 2L four with VCT on both cams . What would you give for an RB25 with VCT both sides and a twin scroll turbo ? Um nearly forgot to say that Mark at GT Pumps in Sydney has a technology tie up with FP and may be able to make up HTA hybrids if you ak him nicely . A .

I was just looking at an American board and I think they quoted the 71HTA wheel as having same inducer and exducer sizes as the GTX71mm compressor only 7 blades rather than 11 . I think they also quoted these wheels as both having 51 pounds air flow capacity . A .

I'm sure Lithium would agree that the GT3073HTA would also be interesting to see wound up on an RB25 . I don't know if FP would ever consider doing a GT3071HTA but that could also have potential . I don't suppose anyone knows which compressor housings they use with the 71 and 73mm HTA wheels ? I think they use T04S 0.70 AR ones on GT3076HTA turbos . Thinking about it they have a 68mmHTA compressor and I wonder if it could beat the GTX3067R for a razor sharp 300 WKW capable turbo . A .

Must really be wringing that 3076Rs neck though the external gate and manifold would make all the difference over an IW version and OE cast manifold . I can't keep traction in the dry (1st or 2nd) with th poor little GTRS and 271 Kw and I though those 245/45 Mitchy Pilot Super Sports would be grippier . I'm interested to hear what people think are the best all round , most responsive I suppose , 300 Kw capable turbos on engines with the best help ie cams and E70/E85 fuels . Those 2835 Pros sound like a good fit particularly if they came with everything to make them fit . I envy Wolverine for having the chance to try both . I know he sometimes misses the low down poke of the GTRS but thats a choice I guess you make if aiming for 290-300 wasps . A .

Evolved cakee ? A .

I still have to rat up a Neo GTt rail and reg set before I can do anything with injectors . Cheers A .

I think the shorty EV14Ks are whats used in the later Chev alloy V8s and the ID 850GMs are intended for these apps . I'm told that GTt fuel rails are a bit taller than R33 side feed ones so I think shorter injectors would leave more space to clear everything under an R33 RB25s plenum section . SK is going to lend me a spare 33 inlet manifold (both halves) so I can dummy something up without pulling my car apart . I'll have to get a GTt rail with all its pipes and reg and a set of those injector adapter washers , then if I can lay my hands on two short EV14s I can put it together something that hopefully works . I think someone here "cold forged" a Neo rails brackets and managed to bolt it to an R33 manifold . A .

Side feed 740s ATM like you had and I'm going to look into either Xspurt 750s or IDs 850GMs . Both of these are the shortest EV14Ks ("kompact" being Bosch/German) because I want to try and get them on a std R33 inlet manifold with an R34GTt rail . Limited space under 33 plenum section . I don't like aftermarket rails with barb fittings either end and R34GTt rails are designed to take a 14mm top sized injector which EV14Ks are . Just have to frig around with rail mounts and any differences where the supply/return/reg are using 34 rail on 33 inlet manifold . My tuner really likes IDs and reckons Xspurts are almost as good , both more accurate than older injector designs . I'm a bit pedantic with normal driving manners because I like cars to drive like factory or even better if possible . What I have is not challenged making 271 RWKW and yours were good for around 360 from memory . I just want to have fine control at very small pulse widths and responsive transients at lowish engine speeds . Better fuel consumption would be good as well . I leave the power tuning to my tuner (Scott/Insight) and I do the normal range bit myself so I guess its a bit of a work in progress - gives me something to do and something to learn from . Lets know what your findings are with IDs and Xspurts , cheers Adrian .

Finished reading that paper at last . What I got out of it was some interesting details on fuel injection timing for direct injection (DI) and port fuel injection (PFI) . P52 and 53 I think . I know some here have reservations about injecting fuel on the back of closed inlet valves but , it seems its not brilliant spraying onto an opening inlet valve because they open before top dead centre (BTDC) before the exhaust valves are seated so some fuel can be blown across the chambers and straight out the exhaust valves . My plug in has the timing set at 360 and I may move it around at some stage at low revs/light loads . Around P60 they mention that it was only 97ULP and E10 that allowed detonation before best mean torque timing occured using PFI on their engine . Higher ethanol blends moved the detonation threshold beyond best torque timing . Its around P117 118 119 and 125 they speak about what ethanol percentages the benefit levels out ie ~ 40% . They also make it clear that this is the chemical % plateau and that higher ethanol percentages may help engines where evapourative charge cooling is needed . For us I guess it means given a choice there would be some advantages to running say E40 or E50 if the state of tune is not right on the edge and you are not after every block bending Nm you can drag out of your engine . As I mentioned in my last post E10 E70 and E85 is whats mostly available so thats what the alcos generally use . Also note that its highly probable that the 15-30% "petrol" content of E85 and E70 is pov grade ULP rather than 98PULP and even if we could get E40-50 the other part would be cheap crap too . Anyway I'm having good times on EFlex and its not too far away . I would like to have modern injectors because its obviously critical how fast they operate and how well they spray in larger sizes . I've seen significant differences in driving charactersitics and even boost onset playing with the tunes , my engine never ever knocks even if the settings are out enough to make it drive badly . I think better injectors should make a significant difference to power drivability and consumption . A .

Thanks for the link Kinks . Will read more of it later because various ethanol blends interest me though the trouble is we get what we get at the pump and DIY blending gets old quickly . I was speaking to people on the weekend that reckon the whole flex fuel thing does not work out so well in the real world . The feeling was that the protections built into current production PCMs don't want to allow the same gains you would get from a fixed consistently blended mix . It was mentioned that some tuners don't want to remove these protections for obvious reasons and therefore you may not necessarily get the expected gains with a range of ethanol blends . Will start a new thread in the near future , cheers A .

Hmm , well my R33 RB25 is still being fiddled with tune wise and I have mixed opinions of my GTRS . My feeling ATM is than tune is critical with how and when a turbocharger comes onto boost so having that out could create wrong impressions at times . As to the RB25 well I think Nissan did a good job of making an engine that feels reasonably strong at part throttle and probably makes people think that will continue through the low to mid range . With a bit more throttle they do get going but like Lithium said not gorilla strong at that point . Now I don't find my engine super torquey opened up in the low to mid 2000 range even with a GT28 based GTRS turbo . It will pull high gears uphill and down dale but sinking into the seat - not quite . Having said that a GTRS is a reasonable std replacement turbo for an RB25 but I wouldn't expect to go drag racing and win with one . I think somewhere in the RB25s make up they prefer to get cracking probably from 2800+ revs at wide open throttle and maybe a it more . Its possibly tune related but my engine gets serious from I think about 3500 upwards and you can forget traction in first and second when it does . I re read this thread and I looked closer at Joeys results with his HKS GT2835 and the graphs do make it look for a great all rounder s in get you 300 at the wheels and not take all day to wind up . I think I can understand what he ment by "aggressive" - feels like it has a bit more urgency in its power deliverly and thats probably what HKS were shooting for in "power with response" . I would like to know which sized turbine housing he has because they were made in 0.68 and 0.87 AR ratios . Its a shame they are no longer made because they sound like a good if expensive unit . The FP HTAs do sound good and results from the 73 and 76 versions would be good to see . So you have an Evo 7 Joey , I have a basically std 6 engine wise and while its ok it could always have more and a bit more than std boost . I bought a rebuilt second series Evo 9 RS turbo for mine but its not fitted yet , fingers crossed the later style single flap turbine housing and lightweight wheels will punch up the mid range together with a boost increase . The larger diffuser 9 type compressor housing is supposed to be worth having but it only fits the 9 sized center section/bearing housing . You could speak to Mark at GT Pumps because he knows Evo turbos inside out and has a tie up with FP as well . Evo 10s have the advantage of a more modern engine design than a 4G63 and variable timing on both cams . With the extra weight they need it . Tuners say that the Evo 9 MiVec head makes a big difference with the low to mid range power on a 63 and makes them feel a bit like a stroked non MiVec engine . If I could find the Mivec bits and the means to control it I'd do that on a 7 or 8 . We are lucky that all turbo RB25s had variable inlet cam timing and its probably this that makes them feel good at light loads and part throttle . A .

Same thing . Garrett don't make a plain bearing version from memory . R means rolling elements - ball bearings . A .

If you want to use Mobil 1 synthetic you can buy it with higher ZDDP levels than the "GREEN" spec Mobil 1 oils . They make different spec oils for different purposes and some applications call for higher ZDDP percentage content . Its not available everywhere but the sport bike M1 is called Racing 4T even though its not a competition oil . I've used the 10W40 and the 15W50 versions of this oil and had no issues . There is also a 20W50 version of it called called M1 Racing V Twin and its the one you put in a high tech Harley lump . GL Lubricants in Sydney sell the 4T Racing 10W40 in quart containers . Check it out but from memory the ZDDP content is something like 1700 PPM though 1300 PPM is probably adequate . Its the 1000 PPM and lower levels that could be a worry with cam lobe on bucket valve trains . I honestly don't know what the story is with ball bearing turbochargers but some claim that ZDDP helps the thrust bearings survive in hard worked plain bearing turbochargers . Anyone thats read about FPs high flow plain bearing turbos for Evos knows the larger ones like I think Reds and Blacks need better than average quality lube oil . Back to the Shell Rotella the synthetic version is called T6 and theres a lot of info and opinions about it on the web . I don't think I've ever read of anyone having bad experiences with Rotella T6 and the draw to seems to be that its reasonably good oil and not expensive by performance oil standards . You can pay more and get less ZDDP so price is not always a good indicator of durability . I'm using it in my 116K old R33 and it works fine . A .