discopotato03

Please tell me more , I'm just about to order a plug in and any info on updated versions is most welcome . Any other changes ? Cheers Adrian .

All my Datalogit shows is the switch off point as shown in the pic aboue ie 4700 RPM , I never had a reason to change it . I was playing around with the log/monitor functions and it plainly shows this piece of shit Apexi box doing all sorts of stupid things . It still tries to retard the ignition at light throttle openings and low revs - off idle . You can sit there and watch the timing going backwards and often its to various low points . Sometimes I can blip the throttle and it briefly goes to 0 . I don't think I have TPS issues , I think this PFC is a lemon with some kind of internal electronic failings . I think it gets the right input signals and screws up internally and outputs garbage . I think I'm just going to have to live with the fact that this units a dog and no amount of buggerising around tuning wise is going to make it right . So I will be up for an alternative computer because wasting more time and money on this one is pointless . Kill two birds with the one stone by ditching the basket case and get a more modern and versatile replacement . I need this car as a daily so I'm not going to pull the PFC and open it up looking for faults - may not be easily fixed anyway . Like my coils this PFC may well have had problems for years and I'd just put it down to my less than brilliant tuning skills . A .

Sorry for a silly one but how do you tell the PFCs version ? Mines base map says RB25DET Version 5.11 and I'm not sure if thats a software or hardware version . A .

So does this mean you have a potential overlap of VCT off on and user set fuel cut resumption in the same area and the two fighting each other and screwing things up ? It sounds like off idle VCT on is something else Apexi and Datalogit may not give us any say in . Cam timing is something I should look into because I'm using those as well . A .

Garrett classify their housings in the T04 range as T04B/E/S . Back to basics . The real way to classify compressor wheels in laymans terms is by the major or exducer diametre . In recent years the aftermarket has gotten into this nonsensical habit of advertising a compressor wheel by its minor or inducer diametre . Dunno why but probably because this is the diametre you can see when you look into the cold side of a complete turbocharger . Its silly because at a glance you have no idea if its a small family big trim wheel or a big family small trim one . In the pre GT bush bearing days there was generally a given backplate/compressor wheel major diametre association - for example you generally found 71mm (OD) T04B wheels use with T04B sizes backplates and compressor housings . Same with 76mm T04S wheels with the same family sized backplates and compressor housings . T04Es came along a bit later and introduced an in between backplate and compressor housing size for a different configuration 76mm OD compressor wheel . Things changed markedly when Garrett and HKS introduced ball bearing technology and higher speed capable wheels , both sides . You started to get things like BB GT28s with 60mm OD wheels in T04B sized housings where 60mm T3 compressors previously used T3 housings and backplates . Another example is GT3071Rs that use T04E comp housings where older tech 71mm compressors had T04B housings . AFAIK the HKS spec "GT3240R" what the basis of todays GT3582R and the start of 68mm OD compressors in T04S backplates and housings . If I was the OP I would be trying to find out what the major diameter diametre/OD/exducer diametre (same thing) is of the turbo they are looking at and base the comp housing size off that . Sometimes these aftermarket turbo mobs will fit housings with packaging in mind and the turbos results can be compromised by this . Garrett with GT/GTX turbos normally size it like this : 60mm GT/GTX wheel .......T04B comp housing . X wheels and some HKS spec housings are port shrouded . 71mm GT/GTX ................. T04B or E housing . 76mm GT/GTX ................. T04E housing . 82mm GT/GTX ................. T04S housing . GTX wheels have more blades than GT ones and most if not all should havea port shrouded housing . Mobs like FP in the US have developed there own CNC machined billet wheels and they sometimes go up a comp family you'd think to cope with the extra airflow from extra blades often spun to higher speeds and boost pressures . Your call but I like FPs stuff because its often based around Garret GT BB units with alternative compressors and housings . A .

Thanks for the replies and PMs , the findings are interesting . Something else I'd like to know is if their G4 Extreme/V88 has anything aside from real race car features that would make them a better thing . I know they are not a plug in and you lose the stealth thing , and while I haven't looked for a while I think they used to cost about a grand more than the plug in ? And MASS AFMs , I don't know of anyone thats kept their Z32/VH44s with G4/Vipecs and would that be because of BOV return issues ? Surely they don't flow that terribly ? Cheers A .

Well I think there is more to sequential injection timing than meets the eye but because of the endless engine and component combinations out there its difficult to find common ground . I posted three of four links I had because one wouldn't work . Anyway in one of them it was mentioned that the larger the injector gets in relation to capacity and performance the more important injection timing becomes . We know that when changing from batch to sequential injection the injector size generally has to increase because it has only one shot per cycle to get all the fuel in rather than two like batch systems have . I don't think the car manufacturers went to sophisticated engine management systems for no reason and emissions and consumption would have been the reason why . Also competition cars often now have to put up with limited pit/fueling stops so they need to have performance and acceptable consumption to finish/be competitive . They ALL seem to use sequential injection which when you look at it is reasonably complex when compared to simple batch fire systems . Back to PFC land . For me I'm using 740cc injectors which in theory are twice the size of the OE ones . I'll assume the injector trim business effectively cuts the pulse width in half BUT , is it the start or end of pulse and if its the end then the injection timing point which is generally regarded as the reference will have moved . I can only say by doing it that doing things that I reckon changes injection timing makes a difference to how my car runs , I want to know why making the sorts of changes that get similar AFRS in the fuel table don't achieve the same ends . Granted some of this is probably how PFCs time accel etc changes but if its as you say it shouldn't matter what alters the injection pulse width . How can anyone draw any other conclusion than the given pulse width has moved and made significant drivability and torque differences particularly at small throttle openings . In a flat out high rev/load situation I can see how the injection timing could become insignificant particularly if the injectors are barely large enough at full power/revs and are open most of the time to keep the fuel flow up . But this is not where road cars are most of the time - they are being driven at part throttle light loads and low to medium revs . Anyhow I can go back to using 50% trims but I'm certain that if I got my fuel table close again I could move my voltage corection around and make differences positive and negative depending on what this engine likes most . I hope I have my original dat files from before I started playing with Eflex E70 because even though the fuel table was a bit squiff it made more usable torque than it has since . Overall the only way to know for sure is to use an engine management system that doesn't hide anything , get it tuned and ask the tuner to move the injection timing around and see what happens . I remember reading in one of the above linked sites that sometimes optimising the injection timing means the AFR stays the same with slightly shorter injector pulse widths . It probably wouldn't be that hard with something like a Vipec computer to set it up in auto tune mode , start fishing around with the injection timing and note the injection pulse widths milli seconds whatever . Obviously if the AFR remains the same and with less fuel you've achieved something , if the torque doesn't fall away you've lost nothing . I'm not saying you are wrong , what I am saying is that its worth a go to see if there are any worthwhile gains to be had . I think to some degree we are flying blind with Datalogit because it doesn't tell us some of the things going on we need to know about with PFCs . Maybe most don't have my nasty minded curiosity and those that do just change to a computer that shows all and does rightly or wrongly what ITS told to do not what some invisible third pary thought was right - years ago when PFCs were current . Guilt Toy whats your opinion on this ? Cheers A .

I still haven't got a real answer to the original question . I have been running around with 740 Nismos and using std injector trims 100.00 , Paul reckons this is right but I've yet to hear from workshop tuners . In my experience you tend to have to use slightly rich AFRs and if you try to lean them off drivability goes through the floor . I just happened to be looking at someone elses PFC maps yesterday and noted it had standard injector settings (both) but was used with RX7 Turbo injectors - top feed conversion . I gave this a go and it went real lean and would barely idle . So I went back to the 0.13 correction 740 Nismos are supposed to run - and tried 0.15 as well which made all the normal drive stuff much better as in smoother and torquier . I am convinced that the larger the injector you use the more critical injection timing as in end of pulse timing becomes . Obviously having all the fuel in at the most advantageous time in relation to inlet valve timing makes a difference . It would be real interesting to know which end of the injection pulse these PFCs change to alter the pulse width , and if its different for fuel table and injector trim changes . I don't believe the theory that untimed or batch fire injection works as well as sequential injection overall , and if no thought is given to injection timing with a sequential system its a bit of a waste IMO . I went searching for opinions of sequential injection timing and these threads may interest some people . http://www.miataturb...njection-55183/ http://nissanroadrac...read.php?t=3568 http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=131&t=38399 Cheers A .

I virtually always used datalogit , my controller wouldn't even be run in . I gave up on it as soon as it caused problems with the Datalogit . I really would like to have access to the idle learning stuff and injection timing . People keep telling me that PFCs are a bit light on processing power and I'm not sure if they do things in real time like the current crop of EMSs seem to . I like most of the features Vipec plug ins have and being in the OE case gives a bit more stealth protection - not that anyones ever wanted to look inside my kick panel . One thing I would like to know is if the Vipec can use the Apexis boost control solenoid and map sensor since they're already in place . I remember Scott telling me a while back that using the Z32 is no problem but I think I'd fit the air temp sensor anyway to leave the MAP option open . A .

I may be getting to the stage where I've outgrown my PFC and its , or Datalogits , limitations are frustrating . Its hard to know whats going on inside the PFCs tiny brain when Datalogits software doesn't give you complete access to all its functions . I think the selling points of PFCs is that they try to be a reasonably straightforward thing and are capable of getting acceptable results depending on where the user/tuner is with "acceptable" . I'd like to hear from those that migrated from a PFC to a Vipec or G4 Plug in because thats what I'm contemplating ATM . Please don't turn MY thread into a Link vs Vipec war because I've read all the previous ones and they get everyone nowhere fast . I would buy from Scott at Insight because I know him from a distance and I believe in trying to support a tuner who is a dealer . Also people I know and trust think highly of his facility and tuning skills . I want something thats capable of giving better than standard drivability - start - idle - return to idle - mixture/timing/boost control and has a few flex fuel smarts available as well . I want a choice of MAP or MAF and I couldn't care less about wasted spark ignition . It has to drive nicely because its a daily which also means fuel consumption needs to be reasonable in a car thats mostly driven "normally" . Only want to hear from Vipec Plug In converts , cheers Adrian .

Standard , all my inlet plumbing is bar the panel filter GTRS and GTt IC . I had to do a run to Hornsby yesterday and with the mapping I was running and trims still at 50% I was actually starting to get some half reasonable fuel consumption . On the way back I was thinking about this trim business and thought WTF and loaded the 100% injector trims and the fuel map I briefly threw together last week . Not surprisingly it felt flat so on a whim I loaded the default RB25 timing map and that really brought it to life . Under load it was a tad rich IMO at 0.85 lambda so I leaned off the on load cells and its now feeling pretty good and giving what looks like good consumption . The fuel table numbers look different ranging from 0.500 ish to something like 0.722 but anyway it feels better to drive . I'll be interested to see what sort of mileage I get out of this tank of Ultimate . It occurs to me that the piss poor consumption I was getting on E70 EFlex was probably partly because of where I had the injector trims ie 65% - 50% for the double size injectors + 15 for half the extra 30% for ethanol . I may stick another tank of E70 through after this one to see if it works for that as well . Cheers A .

Maybe I didn't read Trents post right - as in which is the wrong way to go . So can someone who tunes properly tell me if using 50% trims on 100% oversized injectors was the right or wrong way to go . There has been things mentioned like like other things in the background being affected by these trims if they are not set correctly . Back in my Autronic SM2 days I thought I rember reading that sequential injection timing was set up around the end of injection pulse and where that was in the four stroke 720 degree cycle . If you wanted to inject more fuel the ECU opened the injector earlier to widen the pulse width . I really don't know how Apexi sets these things up and I have no way of knowing if they allow for any of this with their injector trim function . Some people must know if using the trims IS the right way to go with larger than standard injectors - or they are just a quick dirty way to get your car started when you fit larger injectors . A problem I have , have always had , is that my mixtures seem to go rich every time I back off except when I'm right off the throttle and it goes into fuel cut mode . Often it goes rich and stays that way on a gradually reducing throttle position and won't change unless I increase the throttle or lift right off . Nothing I do with fuel or timing tables seems to cure this one . Obviously my "tuning" strategies are very wrong or there is some issue with the PFC/maybe Nismo 740s are dated slow reacting technology/something weird going on with my Tech Edge WB3A2 . IF I can get the trim business right , 50% or 100% , I can punch workable numbers in my fuel table - enough to get around ok . So spell it out , which way do I go because questionable drivability and poor consumption shits me up the wall . PFCs may be dated technology but it would be a shame to burn the bucks and replace it with something else having not had the best out of it . Cheers A .

I never use the game boy gadget , not real flash if the Datalogit interface is that slow . I was thinking the same about if the PFC was that slow how could it work . So , how old is the hardware in these Power FCs ? A .

Is it true what I've seen that a Vipec V88 is something like 2.8K in your lap meaning it needs installing and tuning ? A .

TPS in and working and I like to think its a tad snappier but maybe placebo effect ? I had the Datalogit in log and moniter mode because I wanted the closed throttle voltage to be exactly the same . What surprised me was that this system is so slow to register position changes and a quick prod of the throttle often shows no voltage change ? I/m really not sure which part of the loop ie car/PFC/Datalogit could cause this but you'd think it was the PFC . Can someone realy into these Power FCs give me a history lesson on what era electronics they have ? BTW I bought mine through Performancewise before the supply dried up through lack of CPUs ? I'm going to search for threads on PFCs vs plug in G4s/ViPecs to see what people who've used both really think results wise . I really want my car to run as well if not better than standard and have better consumption if possible . I'd like to think that engine management has come a long way (OE and aftermarket) since 1996 . A .

I thought a bit more about this and changed my trims back to 50 yesterday and made whole fuel table changes to get back in the ball park . I'm beginning to think that the trim changes I made when I was using E70 E50 and E25 blends , as in over 50 just for the Nismo 740s , was the wrong way to go about increasing the fueling and was probably a large part of reason why I had such poor consumption with high ethanol blends . It sounds like the injector trims and "dead time" compensations have to be right in relation to the standard injectors or the tune will never be really right . Thats not to say you can't use different numbers if you choose but I'm trying everything I can to make my car run nicely and not just throw fuel away for no good reason . Cheers A .

I have ordered a new TPS because I want to be sure that its doing the right thing . Just for the record the Pt No on the outside of it is Jecs A22 661 , this is for a 96 Series 2 manual GTS25T . Nissans part number is 22620 17U10 but I'll have to confirm that . I'm doing this because I get some strange feathered throttle things going on and through other peoples experiences it seems TPSs are a consumable item . A .

Ok so I gather using the trims , which is what I did , is the way to go and set up the extras to suit . I was just curious to know which way they widen/shorten the injection pulse because I keep getting a rich spike every time I lift off and nothing I do fueling wise seems to help . Just because I did try setting the trims to 100 and halving my fuel table but it didn't do anything positive so I'm back to 51 - residual ethanol because I'm back on pulp again . Something I really don't know is if these PFCs are a it slow processing wise and possibly slowing down their responses . I'm saving my pennies and the proceeds of parting the old Roo will probably go towards a G4 or ViPec Plug in . A .

Quick question . A while back I remember people saying better to leave the trims at 100 and punch in numbers in the fuel table to suit . I'm curious to know if using say "50" trims and 740 Nismos has any affect on injection timing . Battery going flat , cheers A .

The issue would be that your oil pump has to prime then fill the oil filter before any significant oil pressure got to the main gallery / bearings / valve train etc . The usual process is that countries like this offshore manufacturing because they cannot be price competitive with countries that have pathetic wages and conditions . Oh , and the mass market buys on price too . This is not to say that the most expensive items will always be the best quality ones because as we we know manufacturing cost often has little bearing on retail price . The burning question is why has not the price fallen if manufacturing costs have ? Anyway I think if people are going to be a bit serious about expensive oils and PULP fuels they should extend this towards good filters as well . A .

Your R31 should have an RB30 in it and I'd be doing everything I could to keep it that way . Bigger engines make it easier to spool cheaper bush bearing turbos so factor that in . I seem to remember R31s being heavy for a RWD Skyline so keeping the cubes would be good . Your call but finding a twin cam top end and fitting that would be easier and have fewer rego issues IMO . A .

Jecs would be Japanese but not sure if standard , looks like it needed replacing a long time ago . The current genuine filter top wraps around a rolled edge at the top of the can , the opposite to your one . A .

GUD Automotive has only in recent times outsourced manufacturing to PRC . Google Ryco filters made in China and read about quality control or the - yeah you know . Certain lines of their filters are known problems and trying to fix this looks to be driving the local distributors crazy . Your calls but my fuel and lube systems are worth more than $57 and having fuel pooling on the ground isn't healthy . Lastly the boxes have in ant sized print made in Japan not the other joint nearby like Ryco ones do . A .

The details of the leaks was in the other my other thread . I DID buy brand new 5/16" (7.94mm) EFI hose and I DID use the OE Nissan fuel line clamps and its the NEW hose that leaks on the garbage grade Z201 fuel filter . I had to refit the original hose below the filter and it doesn't leak now . This hose is not RS by the way and considering its in real good nick where the clamps were- and are again . The PRC Z201 is supposed to have 8mm tubes either side but only the outlet one is . The inlet side is slightly smaller and it is out of round as well , both sides are . The inlet was 7.91 to 7.93 and the new 5/16" hose is not exactly tight on the filter outlet or the fuel rails inlet . When you screw up a genuine clamp that tight that its beginning to physically crush into the hose but you can still twist the clamped hose on the rail it doesn't inspire confidence , using the original hose everything is snug - even on the undersized POS Z201 inlet tube . I decided to put money where mouth is and buy a genuine oil and fuel filter from John Robinson Nissan at Rockdale , they do the Nissan import bits in Sydney . For the record the fuel filter is Nissan 16400-41B1A and the oil filter is Nissan 15208H890C and cost $57 . The fuel filter fittings are exactly the same 8.03 mm and ARE round . To blow through there is NO resistance at all where in a brand new Z201 there is . If I didn't know any better I'd say the genuine article is a fine mesh strainer , the invoice quotes "Strainer ASSY-Fuel" , where the Z201 uses paper cartridges . If I can find a used genuine filter I'll cut it open to see what Nissan thinks is best . From RIPCO a Z201 bites you around $28 where Nissan wants ~ $36+ GST . For oil the Z145a was ~$6 and genuine $15 and a bit + GST . Must be interesting making an oil filter and sending it half way round the world and making money retailing it for six dollars . I'll be paying the extra tenish dollars and fitting what the manufacturer uses thank you . A .

Hi all , I've been using Ryco oil and fuel filters since forever but they are now being made in in Great Wall land and I think the quality and standards have suffered . There was a thread started by Cubes about oil filters back in 2005 and rather than revive it I'd like to hear about others experiences , in recent times particularly , with oil and fuel filters . In another thread I mentioned I got persistant fuel leaks using the made in China Z201 fuel filters but only at the inlet tube - which is a slightly smaller diameter than the outlet one . These days I suspect the anti drain back valves are doing bugger all in Ryco Z145a oil filters as I get a slight momentary valve train like noise at cold start up that I'm sure didn't happen in the past . Unless anyone knows of anything better I suppose I'll try genuine Nissan oil and fuel filters for my R33 , it would be good to find them made in Japan but thats a lot to hope for nowdays . Thoughts ? Cheers A .