Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

ive been getting a mixed response, even from workshops....hence my confusion...

The reason why you have been getting mixed responses is because you haven’t fully thought through what it is exactly that you are trying to achieve. The fact is you have already “boosted” it, by removing the restrictions in the exhaust you have increased the airflow. The turbo is flowing more air, hence it is working harder and revving higher. So if you are intent on not “boosting” in an attempt to avoid turbo wear, you have already failed in that regard.

Secondly, in a turbo charged engine, the real advantage is you can easily, quickly and cheaply increase the power output by increasing the airflow though the engine. Reducing restrictions (as you have already done) is one of those items, increasing the boost to a “safe” level is another, the third is improving the tune for power productivity.

By increasing the airflow you have already put the standard ECU outside its operating parameters. It is currently running rather rich and somewhat retarded in its ignition timing. Any further mods will simply exacerbate that poor state of tune.

So, my best suggestion is to think carefully about what it is you want to achieve, set a power target and determine what uses you are going to put the car. If you enunciate those things then you will find that you get solid and consistent responses.

:P cheers :)

Edited by Sydneykid
Liz - what split pipe did you have?? what was wrong?

I had a 3inch split dump pipe from place in Sydney, the welding wasn't ground back causing more turbulance rather than less, and also the pipe wasn't a direct fit and exhaust hole was actually smaller than stock causing the wastegate to not open fully causing significant overboosting.

The exhaust was done by HiTech in Sydney, and have offered to replace the part free of charge with a correct part. I would recommend HiTech to anyone getting an exhaust, they know what they are doing and released the mistake straight away and fixed me up.

At least I know now to check the parts before they get put on!

i realise a turbo back exhaust has already 'boosted' the turbo because its less restrictive, but what i was trying to say is that i wouldnt go any further. i think i pretty much have said what i want to acheive, if your still confused, i dont know what else i could say.

Basically mechanics and other drivers with the afc and pfc have said in relation to my car, a pfc is over doing it, but they think i should get it INCASE i choose to futher modify the engine

i realise a turbo back exhaust has already 'boosted' the turbo because its less restrictive, but what i was trying to say is that i wouldnt go any further. i think i pretty much have said what i want to acheive, if your still confused, i dont know what else i could say.

Basically mechanics and other drivers with the afc and pfc have said in relation to my car, a pfc is over doing it, but they think i should get it INCASE i choose to futher modify the engine

sounds like youve awnered your question, your final conclusion is spot on! Its just up to you to make the desision cause unfortunatly we cant do that for you and would take away all the fun of customizing your car.

good luck!

i realise a turbo back exhaust has already 'boosted' the turbo because its less restrictive, but what i was trying to say is that i wouldnt go any further. i think i pretty much have said what i want to acheive, if your still confused, i dont know what else i could say.

Basically mechanics and other drivers with the afc and pfc have said in relation to my car, a pfc is over doing it, but they think i should get it INCASE i choose to futher modify the engine

Let’s talk specifics;

1. What is your power target?

2. What do you use the car for? Road, circuit, drag?

3. What other tings are important to you? Reliability, fuel economy, resale value, cost, response?

4. What is your budget?

:P cheers :)

1) Reasonbly happy with the power, just want to improve the other things i have mentioned

2) Everyday use.

3) All of the above, reliability and response & performance mainly though.

4) No expense spared really, i dont like taking shortcuts.

Is there any thing other than what i have mentioned in this thread i could do to improve perfrormance besides boosting?

Edited by PAV34
  • 1 year later...

hey all.. just bringing up a old subject instead of a new one..

im happy with around 200rwkw.. will a apexi neo afc be ok for me?. how much kw at the wheels will this allow until i need to upgrade to a ecu?.. also, will this allow me to get a different afm?, like a q45?. or will i need a ecu for this?. thanx..

Edited by seriesII

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 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...