Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

A few facts

- my R34GTT ECU doesn't want to reset (ie. disconnect the battery and pump the brake a heap of times doesn't work)

- my near stock R34 runs a ton better and with heaps better fuel economy when I add octane booster

- my near stock R34 seems to go a bit quicker than I think it should

- have now installed a SAFCII (not yet tuned) and found some of the ECU wires have been previously messed with - indicating a removed device

- the ECU has been opened (warranty/sticker is broken)

- it runs 12-13psi max with no probs (and no boost control whatsoever), but detonates (or boost cuts not sure) right at the top of the rev range - even with a full bottle octane booster added

So, what I am after is for anyone that has seen inside an R34GTT ECU to have a close look at my photos to tell me if anything is different to stock (chip etc). Nothing looks out of place to me, but thought I'd pose the question.

Thanks.

post-669-1144245800.jpg

post-669-1144246079.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/112534-have-you-seen-inside-an-r34gtt-ecu/
Share on other sites

its un-chipped.

Remember your car with the stock ECU is tuned for Jap fuel, not Aust Fuel

What do you mean by it does not want to reset? Its not like the thing flashes lights to tell you it "has" been reset :D

the ECU does not control the boost solenoid under the engine bay, so your actuator might be modded.

Are you basing it off the stock boost gauge or aftermarket one?

Split wires to the ECU just means an S-AFC or similar was used in japan

its un-chipped.

>> I figured as much, thanks

Remember your car with the stock ECU is tuned for Jap fuel, not Aust Fuel

>> yes, hence why I'd notice the ECU being reset - the car would run differently, but doesn't. It shoud relearn for 98ron fuel to some extent, but continues to run very lean at the top of the rev range.

What do you mean by it does not want to reset? Its not like the thing flashes lights to tell you it "has" been reset :D

>> see above - but the fact that it runs much better and is much more fuel efficient with octane booster indicates it is still tuned for 100ron fuel (ie. not reset).

the ECU does not control the boost solenoid under the engine bay, so your actuator might be modded.

Are you basing it off the stock boost gauge or aftermarket one?

>> true, I haven't checked the boost solenoid yet. Aftermarket boost gauge - the boost is definitely hitting 12/13psi max, but 10psi most of the time. Interestingly my car doesn't do the low/high boost thing - makes me double wonder about the boost solenoid.

Split wires to the ECU just means an S-AFC or similar was used in japan

>> true. Not sure why the ECU has been opened though (and it definitely has been) - seems strange to me.

Your car could be running lean in the top end as the fuel pump isnt upto the task.

Quite a common problem in all skylines.

I'd change the fuel pump.

Dont expect resetting the ECU to make a really big difference as it doesnt

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

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...