discopotato03

Edit : Vipec increases your eretile capacity - and car runs sick too - do it ...

When we fitted a Z32 MAF we had the outer two wires wrong way round and it was a bit like that . Is it std or been played with ? A .

Wasn't Mr Mafias original octane drama because he didn't have a local supply of 98 ULP ? People I know that work there tell me its often very hot and humid and not the best conditions for high performance petrol engines . Water injection sounds good and is possibly the only practical alternative if you can't get higher octane fuel or E85 . Dusty dirty hot humid salt air , enemy of machinery . A .

Its probably not easy to get at but that housing underneath for the IAC motor would be a good place to consider . Plenty of people here like the Vipec or Link branded plug ins and MAP source aside it seems like an easy install , they come with start up maps from memory . Personally I don't know Haltech any more since they moved from Taren Pt so I've not kept up with their products and software . I think its fine to look at a range of computers and their various functions but at the end of the day its not what it has but how well it runs your individual engine . Dozens of unused features achieve zip . Different tuners know different products and generally get the best overall results from systems they know and like . Its probably not unrealistic to find a tuner you are most confident with and go with their recommendation . I think you'll develop a better working relationship with them if they supply fit and tune the thing inhouse . Really if you make it easy for them to do a good job generally they will . Or you can run around buying a bit here and a bit there trying to save money and risking having to run around all over the place if any part fails to deliver . If they supply its their problem and with systems they know and like they know the issues ahead of time and have them sussed or spares for known issues . If you give them something they are unfamilliar with they have to spend time working out the hardware and software and thats something someone has to pay for . Fixing unexpected problems is walking cane stuff and your the one without a car while all this is taking place . I suppose if you already have a good relationship with the supplier/tuner you could ask what fiddly time consuming things can be done ahead of time to make the changeover easy - like a MAP tapping point . You might change filters and plugs and maybe fuel pumps do an oil change etc . I hear a lot of dyno time goes into solving existing problems . All this assumes you do things properly because if you're unsure leave it to them , mechanics hate backyard bodges and don't tend to respect those responsible . Your call , I'm running a PFC and if I wanted something better I'd go ask Insight for a Vipec V44 plug in . People I know get good results with them and Scott is familiar with the product . PFCs are a good product but a bit dated nowdays . They do a reasonable job but todays engines are a lot more refined in their running characteristics and a lot of this is because they used sophisticated engine management systems - and tuning strategies . A good aftermarket system should be able to run 90s era engines as well if not better than the original system did if they are firstly capable and secondly tuned properly . At the end of the day you should get back a safe and usable car because it has in theory been worked on by professionals , just make sure you go to known professionals who have happy customers . Just my views , cheers A .

Yeah well thats what used to make me wonder - estimation . How the hell can they estimate every different conceivable engine combinations charge temperature ? Sure for type approval a manufacturer can probably afford the test gear to know what a mass produced engines charge temps will be . A mass (measuring air by weight) flow meter tells the computer whats on the way in and knows its densityand therefore temperature . To me its reasonably simple in that if you know how much air is being injested its not hard to inject a suitable amount of fuel to come up with workabe air fuel ratios . With a MAP sensor system theres more crunching going on and you want to be sure that the constantly changing air pressures/temperatures/density can be accurately measure by a pressure and a temperature sensor and processed to give a reliable and accurate load signal . In the recent past most but not all production engines including performance engines ran some form of mass flow meter and to get todays emissions and consumption results the system must work pretty well . Just my thoughts , cheers A .

I just think on a single turbo car its easy and if you have a Z32 already these plug ins are literally plug and play . I'm not so sure a Z32 is a major restriction and if it was the V8 one shoudn't be . If I remember correctly these Vipec/Links are set up as a throttle position signal load sensing with either a MAP or MAF correction table ? Just as a point of interest years ago I ran my Autronic SMC on the old FJ20 with the air temp sensor in the manifold , throttlebody actually but after several of them died I was told to put it in the plumbing just short of the throttlebody . It sort of made sense here because it was measuring air temp upstream of the TB so probably closer to ambient , well post intercooler anyway . I noticed Guilt Toy has his in the plumbing rather than the inlet manifold . A .

So I gather no one sticks with a mass air flow meter like a Z32 ? I did ask Scott at Insight a couple of years back about Vipecs and MAF sensors and he said all good . I just like the idea of an air flow measuring device that takes temperature into the equation and spits out one I think 0-5v signal . I was never happy with trying to factor in air temp sensor compensations and map sensors when trying to play with early Haltechs and an SM4 . I think MAP sensors are the go when regulating boost pressure but personally I was never happiy using manifold pressure for primary load sensing . If I end up with one of hese plug ins it will use my Z32 MAF meter . Just my thoughts , cheers A .

I ran my first tank or so of Eflex and changed my filter (Z201 on R33) just so I know the filters good . I replaced the rubber hose on the pressure side (filter side) just because I tend to do this with fuel hose when working on it . I will get around to doing the return side eventually again just so its a known quantity . I think the main concerns are in the engine bay because of the fire risk if they fail . Also I bought 5/16 EFI hose and it proved difficult to get the new hoses over the barbs with the original clamps , had to put the clamps on the steel lines and then the hose over the barbs and the clamps back on the slightly larger OD imperial hose which is awkward . The lesson learnt is buy metric hose or slightly larger clamps . BTW picked open the old Ryco Z201 filter which looked fine as in no garbage , a little dark but they probably all do that . I want to rat up an R31s fuel filter bracket and see if it will fit so I can use the larger can and hopefully filter element area Z202 filter . Bigger filter can't hurt and I will open an R31 filter next time I'm at a you pull it wreckers . I would like to see more United E85 in Sydney so I could try some and compare E70 to E85 mixture ratio differences . Ultimately the Eflex may give a bit better mileage/consumption and the 15% ethanol difference is probably unimportant in a road car provided its in a sensible state of tune and not on the bleeding edge of detonation . The exception would be EPA testing where the higher the ethanol content the better and a real good cat and tune . We need to get GT kicked out of Georgia so he has to come home and tune our cars , A .

It was intended to be a club spec turbo that had more hot side flow potential flow for its compressor side than your usual GT2860R type turbos . The idea was to have a better pressure balance across the head (boost vs turbine inlet pressure) so that typical 1800 odd cc fours could run for extended periods on boost without melting anything . Actually JKav mentioned that his original one (he worked at Garretts in the US years ago) had a non gated 0.9 something AR turbine housing and an external gate and his Miata (MX5) did quite well with it . A .

I think some of the problems with these DE+Ts is that the NA compression ratio and cam combinations don't suit turbocharging . Really they are set up to have good part throttle performance because thats where production cars are intended to be used most of the time . The higher static CR gives a higher dynamic or effective CR and thats where these engines are tuned to run efficiently - consumption and emissions considerations too . OE turbocharging is generally sized to make a small amount of boost at lowish revs provided the throttle is open far enough . Also its comon for the ignition mapping to run a bit more advance because the lower combustion temps/pressures allow closer to best torque timing . Also many more current engins have variable cam timing on one or both cams and this which allows them to effectively alters the cylinders "trapping efficiency" and literally the dynamic or effective CR . I think given a choice a turbo short block is always a better basis because of piston oil squirters and turbo plumbing oil/water holes . Pistons you have some say over and cams are open too . With todays pump fuels I don't think I'd built a turbo engine under 9.3 to 9.5 to 1 particularly since everything has some form of intercooler nowdays . In the bad old days things like 280ZX turbos/VLTs/Z18 Bluebirds/early DR30s had no intercooling and had to live with lower static CRs so they didn't detonate to death on boost . Often the last revision of any turbo engine ie last of the RB25s and SR20s is worth looking at because with tightening emissions laws the manufacturers had to find ways to run leaner and hotter whilst reducing detonation as much as possible . To reduce detonation they often looked at combustion chamber and piston crown designs to get the most energy from lean mixtures and add cooling in areas that made earlier engines detonate . It can be as simple as water jacket redesigns to pull a bit more heat from around the exhaust side of the chambers and exhaust valve seats . I suspect this is what Nissan did with RB25 Neo heads and having a more compact combustion chamber probably ment less surface area for the head casting to absorb combustion heat . You'd think they tried pretty hard to get the quench working well with a revised piston crown and with a more compact chamber you can have close to a flat or even slightly dished piston which is ALWAYS better than having a mountain across the middle of the piston to get the static CR high enough with the larger volume chamber ie R33 spec RB25DET heads . If I was serious about building an efficient RB25 it would be a Neo headed one for sure because the factory spent millions developing a more detonation resistant engine . Not that we would have it as lean as Nissan did but less detonation allows closer to best torque timing and that makes all the differenece in a performance engine . I'm not up on SR engines so I'm not sure if the last or S15 spec heads and pistons were different to earlier ones - the VCT ones I mean . I know the S15 spec GT2860R turbos had higher temp spec turbines and turbine housings than the S14s version so you'd think they were running leaner and hotter (combustion temp wise) than earlier versions . Lastly that GT2860RS was designed by JKav for a specific purpose and that was not high end performance . Back in a sec .

Round tripped Canberra yesterday to get TechEdge to mod my box cable and supply and calibrate the 4.9 sensor . I had it in today and it does heat faster and the readings are slightly leaner than the original sensor showed . I got out on the M5 to check the higher (legal) cruise mixtures and they float around 0.98 - 1.00 lambda. Something I've noticed with Eflex E70 is that lean mixtures under load cost power/torque but my engine doesn't detonate . It doesn't make good poer on boost much above 0.95 lambda , it likes 0.9 much better and on full load the settings I use ramp down to 0.85L and even 0.82 at times . I was having a few off idle and very low rev drivability problems and the answer seems to be having idle mixtures in the 0.99 to 1,02 area and accel enrichment on the PFC in the 1000 rev area set to I think 3.4 amd sustain at around 0.7 to 0.8 . Sometimes it still gets a bit twitchy if I back off at 15-1600 and slightly open the throttle again , mixture shows slightly lean with this . Its probably now almost as good as I can get it with my limited tuning skills and a little more experimenting may improve drivability and consumption a little . A .

I think its possible to make an RB20 reasonably sporty as in torquey but it would be at the expense of higher end revs . Having a turbo thats "responsive" as in boosts readily and makes good torque is straighforward but not necessarily dirt cheap . Generally turbos (properly sized ones) get the best transient response with ball bearing center sections because they have less innitial oil shear drag to overcome . The next thing is having enough turbine (and exhaust energy) to drive an adequately sized compressor wheel . The compressor wheel is critical if you want good transient response because the greater its size and capacity the more turbine energy is needed to get it up to speed . I think you need to have set power goals and actually know what the figure feels like real world . The compressor needs to be sized to achieve that goal - and NO more . Manufacturers don't often spec OE turbos with excess capacity because they set their goals and size the turbocharger accordingly . I think you need to look at the power number and compare that to the std engine output so you know by what factor the ask has gone up . Basically the greater the number the greater the compromise and the more you lose where its needed most often . I think if you set the bar at no more than 220 you can have a good usable road engine thats a bit of fun as well . And it can be cheapish for a 37% increase ie 160-220 . Personally I'd look at Garrett BB cartridges because they can be the basis of a Hi Flow using RB20 turbo housings . They are a bit shorter than the original Hitachis center section but the housings obviously suit the engine setup . Water and oil plumbing is different and needs some customisation but not too bad . Cartridges to look at can be from the SR spec GT2860R or possibly the larger BB spec GT28 turbine which is what HKS used for their RB spec GTSS turbo . Not the same wheels as the RB26 spec GTSS , bigger both sides . Anyway one of these two cartridges would get you ~ 200-210 and maybe 220 with the slightly larger trim compressor from the GT2860RS or HKS spec GT2530 which is very similar . In a road car bottom end performance is more important 80% of the time so IMO its important to bias performance towards where its used most of the time . If you drove it flat out everywhere it'd be different but who does ? If it were me and I had a standard R32 GTST , do these still exist ? , I'd do a mild turbo with the 34T SMIC and probably a 2 1/2" exhaust . Probably a cheap PFC and GTR pump and injectors maybe look into E85 if available . Plenty good enough for 200-220 and if I really wanted more I'd start with a bigger engined car . Possibly one cheat would have been to have found a GTS2500 NA and stuck all the GTST bits into that , and do a 25DET rebuild on the original block . A .

I know of one person that has a GCG BB Hi Flow based on an RB20s turbocharger , at least I think the turbine housing is from an RB20 . This is on an early auto Stagea . For torque at low revs cubic inches are hard to beat , it can have torque from lowish revs with a smallish turbocharger and thats fine provided you don't expect much beyond say 5-5500 revs . I think its a good idea to lose the ceramic std turbo anyway and doing so makes them breath better exhaust wise and makes the engine work as a more efficient air pump . Aftermarket wise as I said possibly an RB20 GCG Hi Flow or a HKS GT2530 would be the go . The thing is that most go looking for more mid range and higher end performance and use larger turbos to achieve it . If you want same maximums as std and a bit more low down punch overall the turbo needs a little more exhaust flow than the RB25s Hitachis turbine has but in a turbo that boosts a little earlier . A .

Actually I was not long home from a trip on the rails and a smart phone I don't have . The laptop and 3G internet plug in go out on the tracks often . Been in touch with TechEdge and they need my controller box and cable to switch to the later Bosch LSU 4.9 oxygen sensor . The box gets a jumper change and firmware reflash and I'd say the later sensors cable uses a different plug socket . I'm going to change fuel filters today just so I know it won't be an issue in the near future and I'll open up the used one to see iff emptying the tank pumped through any crud . Wheres everyone getting their ethanol "test tubes" , cheers A .

Hmm injector settings over the set value 1.047 , will look into that . Edit - looked at that thread Jessie did at Celica.org and he reckons PFC feedback works so poorly that he leaves it off permanently . I reset my idle speed to 700 and have less agro at very low speeds , however the tacho doesn't always show ~ 700 so with have to look at cleaning the throttlebody and find out how to check the TPS . The low fuel light is just starting to show when pulling up so my first full tank of Eflex has got me almost 400 Km . My PFCs maps are better than when I started tuning with this stuff so with luck the next tankfull should go a bit further . The best I think I did on 98 was about 420 but the level never got down to where it is now - never saw the fuel light before ... I must grab one of those ethanol content test tube things soon , cheers A .

The expressway Lambda readings were still around the 0.95 dipping to 9 and at times 8.5 on boost . I'm really not sure if these are accurate but driving it feels fine , if anything smoother than on BP98 . I think some of my low speed drivability issues could be a combination of the IAC valve trying to overcompensate for very small throttle openings . ATM I have it set at 850 revs , was 950 to allow for the lightened flywheel but it can probably come down to 700-750 if that cuts some of the IAC motor agro . Also I suspect the throttle plate may not be closing fully always or the TPS is a bit screwy when the throttle is shut . At least the closed throttle fuel cut off seems to work because the mixture reading goes off the scale then just says lean . My display is the small LCD backlit one like I think Guilt Toy had when he was here . My TechEdge is a WB3A2 and to reset it it for a Bosch LSU 4.9 probe it needs an internal jumper change and I think a firmware reflash . I'll talk to TechEdge tomorrow and hopefully get down to them and get it sorted sometime this week . Its pointless trying to tune with a wideband that tells lies . TechEdges site shows two LSU 4.9 probes and they are basically the same except for the cables lengths . My 4.2 probe is what they call the Bosch 7200 (0 258 007 200) and their 4.9 is a 7123 or 7025 (0 258 017 123 / 0 258 017 025) . By the way what sort of ignition timing are people using with their RB25s ? I'm mainly interested in the light to medium load ranges because I think its riskiy tuning higher load ranges without a chassis dyno - for all concerned inc the engine . I'm not using anything over 40 and thats at reasonably light loads , all my high load ranges are set to 25 to be safe with limited intercooling and tuning inexperience . Boost is whatever a GTRSs actuator is and from memory the Apexi elec valve was set to 12 or 13 pounds back in the ceramic turbine days . Cheers A .

I'd be working out what my maximum fuel requirement was and seeing if you've overkilled your fuel system . Excess fuel going round in circles achieves nothing other than to transfer heat throughout the fuel system . In a lot of ways surge tanks are a PITA and if the original tank could be made to avoid fuel surge you would not need them . JE found out many years ago that using a roller cell high pressure pump as a lift pump transfered more fuel to the surge tank from you main tank so what was in the surge tank did less circles from tank to rail and back etc etc . Ideally you want the least material in a metal fuel rail because the less material there is the less heat it can absorb from the engine/bay which means less heat absorbed by the fuel running through it . I'm not sure what injectors you're using but if they are side feeds is the std rail that bad ? A .

My 02 feedback injector correction is set up the same as in Pauls pic above ie 1.047 whatever that means - assumes 1.047 Lambda . My probe is the LSU 4.2 pn 0 258 007 200 and has not seen a lot of use . I think once or twice I started up in the past on petrol without it being up to temp but otherwise it should be ok . It came out of the dump last night and is very clean from Eflex compared to Ultimate 98 . Anyhow the plan is to talk to TechEdge about converting to the more current LSU 4.9 probe and I may end up down their way next week if they can make it happen quickly . These later probes are supposed to operate differently and heat up faster than earlier ones like mine . Something I should have mentioned was that my dump pipe only has provision one probe so the PFC with feedback on would have been looking for something that wasn't connected while the Tech edge was operating . Anyway with feedback off the TE shows sort of what I'm expecting to see even though I've no way of knowing if my probe is good . Something definately changed when the feedback was disabled and the Lambda numbers indicated this . Also have to reset the LCD screen so it wakes up in Lambda rather than AFR , easy when you know how . Might get out on the F6 in a while where I can do 110 up some reasonable hills and see how the upper middle load range mixtures are . Need to research EGT gauges/probes and look into those Kmon knock sensor gadgets but those were pretty exy from memory . More later , cheers A .

This is breaking away from the thread I started on E85 RB25 vs RB30 . For those that didn't see it I changed my GTS25T over to Caltex Eflex recently and it was straightforward because I was sort of set up for it . Basically I have the typical PFC Z32 MAF Datalogit 740s slightly bigger pump and a Tech Edge wide band already . Previously my PFC had very basic tuning when I ran BP98 and the car did very few miles . When the 740s went it the injector trims were set ta 48% and whatever the lag time was - don't remember off hand . SK and I did a rough road tune to get by on which was sort of Ok for a time . As mentioned elsewhere the fuel fuel change needed 7 feet of 3/8 EFI hose and pumping the 98 out into fuel containers . The first "start tune" consisted of raising the fuel trims to 62.4% which is 30% more than the 48 setting used with these 740s for PULP . It started up and ran well enough to drive around for a day . I started altering the PFC fuel and ignition tables to see what gave the most throttle responsive drivability and was surprised to find the around idle bit had been a tad lean . I made some alterations to the cold start coolant temp and cranking enrichment values and I'm not sure if it starts better from stone cold - its not that hard to start cold as it was . Before changing fuels Gary noticed my 02 probe feedback was not selected so it was ticked - remember this bit . Tonight I got around to setting up my Tech Edge wide band to see what the mixtures looked like . I use the TE LCD readout which lets you select AFR or Lambda and I use Lambda now because I think it makes more sense . Anyhow at hot idle the result was around 0.94 to 0.96 which I though may be a smidge rich but not too bad . Driving around the reading was more like a reasonably constant 0.85 which I though was strange because it should have been moving around a bit more with more or less throttle . I stopped a few times to lean out the light load round town revs areas and all that did was lose torque and drivability . It then occured to me that I should turn off the oxygen sensor feed back so that I'd get a better indication of alterations I was making and what numbers the wide band showed when it felt good - or better anyway . MAJOR difference , I was able to easily get the cruise mixtures more like 0.95 Lambda and it felt better everywhere . The mixtures moved round at varying loads more like I think they should . Mt inexperience with a PFC is showing here so can someone tell me if they are not set up to deal with E70-85 as far as closed loop mixture triming goes ? Is it possible to change settings to make it work in closed loop with suitable E70-85 cruise mixtures ? I know some people here bag the humble Power FC and if I was starting with a factory ECU I wouldn't buy one now , it is what I own and if I can make it work for a roadie less to spend . I too was recently keen to have a flex fuel setup but to be honest I don't think I want to go back to petrol and Caltex Eflex is available from three servos not too far away . Gary and I looked online and if I had to drive to Melbourne its aavailable in Goulburn and a few places between there and Melbourne . I'd carry a jerry just in case but I could also stick a petrol tune back in it to get to the next Eflex location . I would be interested to hear the sorts of Lambda numbers people use that work in RB25DETs though high load tuning should really be done on a dyno with an experienced operator IMO - controlled conditions . I'd also like to hear about ethanol content sensors because knowing whats in your fuel system gives you the ability to "trim" the ethanol content if necessary to try to keep it consistant . The sensor Holden are using on the late Eco Nizi Door looks interesting and looks like it has 8 or 10mm barbs straight through it , different style to the Siemens "tugboat" one . Exhaust temp probes are also not a bad idea and I'd like to know knoe about whats available and where poeple are mounting their probes . Also speaking of probes Bosch has had a later LSU 4.9 02 sensor out for a while which is supposed to be more accurate reliable and heat up faster from cold . I want to talk to Tech Edge about setting up my wide band to use them . Eventually I want Insight to tune my car properly but I'd like to lean a bit more about getting my car in a reasonable state myself . If it starts easily drives nicely and gets acceptable consumption i'll be happy - then get it dynoed . Anyhow if others can share their E70 tuning findings others may get on the band wagon a bit more easily . Cheers A .

Actually I mentioned this crud into alky converted cars business to Gary (Sydneykid) and he said provided cars are driven from full tank to almost empty often it shouldn't be a problem . He said many people never run their cars below half a tank but the day they have to go to virtually empty they get a system full of crud . Anyway they opened the filter on their Lancer and it was clean too . I was planning to run this first tank of Eflex through and then replace the filter which has been there for 19k km . A .

I gave it a bit more cranking fueling for this mornings cold start but I don't think that made much difference . I really have to get the Tech Edge in to see whats going on . Um also need to keep an eye on the fuel filter , don't suppose someone can tell me the Ryco one for an R33 so I can go grab one or two . After searching I think the std replacement is a Z201 but the larger diameter Z202 from the R31 and 300ZX Turbo may have more filter area . Cheers A .

Ok first cold start took about threeish seconds to fire and ran well . I got a wiff of the good stuff so must be tossing plenty in . I have not touched any cold start stuff yet but I'm thinking of increasing the cranking enrichment rather than the actual coolant temp based enrichment . It was a slightly jerky around 1500 revs but I've altered a few other things which I think will solve that . This Eflex makes my engine run smoother and idle better than Ultimate 98 did . I've mainly been trying to make it drive nicely at low revs and ATM it pulls smoothly away at 12-1300 revs in 3rd so no complaints there . I'm not sure what timing numers I can input at low revs and light loads so just playing around with this ATM . This car was always a bit touchy at very low revs in 1st and its lightened flywheel doesn't help with slow speeds and taking off . Its much better now and getting better as I muck around with the PFCs settings . Overall I think going to E85 , well Eflex anyway , is a good step to take because it allows you to get the best out of your current engine with tuning and is far simpler than changing engines . In my case I already had the Z32/PFC/GTR pump/740s in place and getting it to run acceptably with a few corrections has not been real difficult . Andrew pointed out to me that the only easy legal way to get a 30 short block in was to tune for emissions compliance and take that to a willing engineer to certify . I'm going to see how this RB25 goes and I have a feeling I'll outgrow the GTRS and GTt SMIC in the not too distant future . Really the intercooler needs to be upgraded first and then a tune should show how far a GTRS can go on an RB25DET . I have seen some impressive dyno numbers for a GT28 based turbo in the dyno results section - upwards of 270 RWKW though a lot of other things were improved to get it there . Things like headwork Poncams FMICs e85 injectors - and a good exhaust . A .

Well so far it owes me $20 worth of fuel hose and the apple juice itself . Having that Eflex servo closer than the other two seals the deal and fingers crossed more around soon . My car should go better again with a propper tune and if it has better part throttle torque than now it can probably use a bit more intercooler and turbo . It still breaks traction in second (pre Eflex and a cold dry morning) but the Mitchy Super Sports are on the water and should help improve traction . If it doesn't will need a better diff center . First cold start soon , cheers A .

When I went to gas it up the temp gauge was showing zip but it started again first time . I added a bit more timing here and there and it just continues to get better . The only unusual thing it did was not return to idle as fast as it should and when starting revs briefly to 2000 sometimes . It been years but maybe I have to do that idle learning thing again . The local Caltex Eflex servo is selling at $1.129/L and 90L cost ~ $79.60 , beats paying when the price was low $1.469/L for Ultimate 98PULP . Will dust off the Tech Edge and see what it shows tommorow , A .

Thanks , I'll have a look now and see what my PFC settings are cheers A .