Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i was hoping for 150rwkw

Stage1 the first dyno was with a cat back 3 1/2" exhaust & K&N pod filter. = 127.6rwkw(3rd gear)

Stage2 the second dyno is with the cat back exhaust,pod filter

also combined dump & front pipe + hi-flow cat(BATMBL)

r33 turbo(rb20 actuator) & r34smic = 126rwkw(4th gear)

Stage3 then added a $22 manul boost controller set to 14psi but drops to 11psi & SAFC tuned by HITMAN = 143.9rwkw(4th gear)

i have a few imperfections on my car such as, 1xbolt missing from dump,number 6 bolt from the exhaust manifold & a suspect intercooler pipe rubber connecter thingy that blew off twice during the 3rd dyno.

1)would these imperfections be holding my car back?

2)anyone know why the car was dyno'd in two different gears?(i was not present at the 2nd dyno)

3)why did i loose 1rwkw between stage 1 and 2?

post-16944-1139998727.jpg

post-16944-1139998971.jpg

Edited by RSTME
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/105984-rb20-dyno-results/
Share on other sites

Ok...

1) This one, using RB25 turbo

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...dpost&p=1894870

2) This one using RB25 turbo

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...dpost&p=1897079

165 odd rwkw or whatever @ a rough conversion.

Using a bit of interpretation here wouldnt go astray.

Obviously you have leaky manifold, so its going to affect power and response.

Every dyno is different, so results varying 20rwkw makes absolutely no difference at all. Its all to do with dyno config.

If you made mods, went back and it made more power, then you cant ask for anymore save going to a dyno day and comparing everyting all on the same dyno, on the same day.

so i guess ill be at the next dyno day, which is the UAS 1 i think.

i just thought id get more then a 16rwkw gain from the above mods.

time to take it to WSID and see what i get.

cheers for the advise R31Nismoid

My R32 with no boost control, stock ic, 3" turbo back exhaust with a regular highflow cat made 10.9psi solid all the way to redline.

Later I fitted a FMIC, made no difference to the boost, still 10.9psi.

Prior to FMIC, 12.5psi had it making 152rwkw with fairly tidy afr's due to the fuel pump being tired. Given your peak power was made with 11psi another 1.5psi is likely to achieve a similiar peak power.

In order to hold over 12.5psi to redline I had it holding boost via 2 methods.

1. Good elec auto (boost curve learning ebc) such as the avcr, Blitz SBC-ID. I ran the Blitz SBC-iD, auto mode I selected to run 15psi, it learnt the boost curve and held it perfectly. Select to run the boost control in manual mode (fixed duty cycle) and it would drop boost.

2. I modified the wastegate bracket. Elongated the mounting holes in order to pull the wastegate towards the front of the turbo, this limits the total opening of the wastegate flap.

This held 15-16psi perfectly so I ripped the blitz sbc-id off sold it and put the money towards the rb25de head for the rb30det setup I had planned on.

Power is pretty much around the mark for a usual non-happy, unfiddled dyno. :)

If the hose is blowing off it's possible that there is a boost leak there aswell. Replacing the hose with a decent one (either reinforced rubber or silicone) is a pretty cheap bit of insurance. But i doubt that's your problem.

As cubes has said, either modding the stock actuator or getting an aftermarket adjustable type will help hold boost to redline and so make some more top end power. Something else worth considering is adding a bit of base timing. 1-2 degrees max. You don't really want to do this unless the car is on the dyno to check for ping though.

ill go take my front bar off now and see what exact shape rubber pipe ill need,how far forward did you move the actuator? 2-3mm?

modifying the actuator sounds heaps cheaper then an electronic boost controller:) cheers

the intercooler pipe looks firmly secure,ill go for a bit of a spirited drive tonight providing the temp. is good outside.

i cant really make the piping anymore efficient without blocking the cooler itself.i guess its time to get a fmic.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...