Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

you are right wolverine. we put some time into it. the plazmaman plenum is one quality product. they are beautifully engineered and while they arent truly bolt on, they dont require to much in the way of re-engineering to make them fit.

while the car doesnt "hold" 14psi thru to redline i still like to quote the highest boost figure shown on the run as the turbo has still accelerated to 14psi during the power run. just in case you wondering for no reason at all.

only thing to do now is replace a dead clutch!!! some things are a labour of love!

but not the cheese grater type love...........................

g

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Both dyno sheets posted that have made 220rwkw odd are not holding that 14psi or whatever to peak power...

So... Peak power of 219rwkw was made on roughly 12.6psi and the other dude that made 220rwkw... That was on a shade over 10psi.

So yes.. hrmmmmm, either way its a power figure... Who cares, A real 220rwkw I'd expect a high 12 sec pass with a good driver.

200rwkw.. A low 13. Once again with a decent driver who can drive.

Im making 209.5rwkw on 11psi and thats about all i can make really. The tuner and i are confident that it will run into the 12s with decent tyres and a good driver. Or even in full street trim. Does that seem about right? last tiem i had 205.0rwkw and ran 13.1@105 but i could have done a 13 flat or 12

Im making 209.5rwkw on 11psi and thats about all i can make really. The tuner and i are confident that it will run into the 12s with decent tyres and a good driver. Or even in full street trim. Does that seem about right? last tiem i had 205.0rwkw and ran 13.1@105 but i could have done a 13 flat or 12

well i went through 12.9 @ 109mph with 210rwkw.

And my car weights near enough to the same an an R33 :)

Vey impressive results id really like to see a back to back result with the stock plenum vs the plazma man plenum.

cheers

hi munna, here is the back to back dyno charts for you.

the biggest thing with the plenum is obviously the amount of intake length you can remove and and as a result the increased throttle response. we were able to also add a fair whack of igntion timing as well.........

glenn

post-29232-1154323606.jpg

post-29232-1154323661.jpg

we were able to also add a fair whack of igntion timing as well.........

glenn

Hi Glen, excuse me if I am somewhat sceptical, but I have NEVER EVER seen a plenum change give more power on an RB25 until well over 300 rwkw.

Hence I am confused, please help me out here..........

You stuck a new plenum on it and made 17 rwkw more.

Do you have a comparison with just the plenum change, no retuning?

If not, how can you claim that the plenum change made 17 rwkw difference?

“A fair whack of timing” was added, is it possible that the timing change made the extra power?

Is the claim that the plenum “facilitated” the timing advance?

OR

Since the boost remains the same, then to make the extra power you would need more airflow.

But there was no mention of changes in fuel mapping.

Hence the “extra airflow” would result in leaner A/F ratios

Perhaps that’s where the power came from.

Do you have an A/F ratio graph, before and after?

Otherwise. I am left with the conclusion that the extra power came from leaner A/F ratios and advanced ignition timing and the plenum did nothing.

In regards to the claim for improved throttle response, have you actually measured the internal volume of the plenum and the pipework and compared it to the original (standard) plenum and pipework? Due to the extra volume in the plenum I think you may find that any difference in internal volume could have been achieved for way less cost by using intercooler pipework with the 120 degree bend at the throttle body.

:) cheers :D.

Edited by Sydneykid

God damn everyone fire right up.

Just be happy for the guy and don't be jealous. the dyno charts are there he's not telling stories...

everyone is quick to jump on the attack when someone is just trying to share their experiences...

just accept it and move on... everyone talks shit like they know. ie the last post... but the charts are there so accept it and move on.

God damn everyone fire right up.

Just be happy for the guy and don't be jealous. the dyno charts are there he's not telling stories...

everyone is quick to jump on the attack when someone is just trying to share their experiences...

just accept it and move on... everyone talks shit like they know. ie the last post... but the charts are there so accept it and move on.

LOL

yeah. 'cause Gary has no idea what he's talking about... :)

Hi Glen, excuse me if I am somewhat sceptical, but I have NEVER EVER seen a plenum change give more power on an RB25 until well over 300 rwkw.

Hence I am confused, please help me out here..........

You stuck a new plenum on it and made 17 rwkw more.

Do you have a comparison with just the plenum change, no retuning?

If not, how can you claim that the plenum change made 17 rwkw difference?

“A fair whack of timing” was added, is it possible that the timing change made the extra power?

Is the claim that the plenum “facilitated” the timing advance?

OR

Since the boost remains the same, then to make the extra power you would need more airflow.

But there was no mention of changes in fuel mapping.

Hence the “extra airflow” would result in leaner A/F ratios

Perhaps that’s where the power came from.

Do you have an A/F ratio graph, before and after?

Otherwise. I am left with the conclusion that the extra power came from leaner A/F ratios and advanced ignition timing and the plenum did nothing.

In regards to the claim for improved throttle response, have you actually measured the internal volume of the plenum and the pipework and compared it to the original (standard) plenum and pipework? Due to the extra volume in the plenum I think you may find that any difference in internal volume could have been achieved for way less cost by using intercooler pipework with the 120 degree bend at the throttle body.

:D cheers :D.

sydneykid,

i do apoligise that i dont have a "as driven" unretuned dyno ramp for it. i am the first to agree that an aftermarket plenum CAN be a waste of time. A GReddy manifold on an sr is an often quoted mismodifiction.

i will also be the first to tell that that with no extra timing added to the maps that this would have been a grandeous waste of the time.

the power we made with the plenum came from timing added. we were able to add the timing to less restrictive pipework, shorter intake and the cooler intake charge that is a product of this. simple as that.

we have also been able to pull out a little fuel and still been able to maintain a safe detention barriar. so yes the power came from timing and fuel changes. the plenum faciltated this.

the reason the plenum was added was to facilate the changed pipe style setup. i measured the removed pipework at 2.68metres. you can make your decisions re throttle response by adding that much to ur existing setup and getting back to me..........

:) cheers :)

Less restrictive pipework equals more ignition timing... interesting comment.

How do you know it was restrictive?

Did pressure test @ the turbo outlet and then again @ the plenum when it was in stock form?

If you didnt, there is no way to can make that claim.

I wanna see before graph with AFR and after with AFR.

sydneykid,

i do apoligise that i dont have a "as driven" unretuned dyno ramp for it. i am the first to agree that an aftermarket plenum CAN be a waste of time. A GReddy manifold on an sr is an often quoted mismodifiction.

i will also be the first to tell that that with no extra timing added to the maps that this would have been a grandeous waste of the time.

the power we made with the plenum came from timing added. we were able to add the timing to less restrictive pipework, shorter intake and the cooler intake charge that is a product of this. simple as that.

we have also been able to pull out a little fuel and still been able to maintain a safe detention barriar. so yes the power came from timing and fuel changes. the plenum faciltated this.

the reason the plenum was added was to facilate the changed pipe style setup. i measured the removed pipework at 2.68metres. you can make your decisions re throttle response by adding that much to ur existing setup and getting back to me..........

:) cheers :)

I would be more than glad to do the measurements. I assume that's 2.68 cubic metres, since there isn't 2.68 linear metres of pipework. That's a saving of 600 mm of 75 mm pipework. You could have saved more than that by going to the 120 degree pipework at the throttle body style. Like this;

med_gallery_1903_124_22845.jpg

The other check of effectiveness would be to do the numbers on the time taken for 2.68 cubic metres to travel through the inlet system. Let's use 1 bar and 3,000 rpm as basis;

2.5 litre engine running 1 bar at 3,000 rpm =

2.5 x 2 / 2 x 3,000 / 60 = 125 litres per second

So 2.68 litres = 2/100ths of second

Half that at 6,000 rpm (1/100th of a second)

That's not much improvement in throttle response

I am not sure that it is good value for money on a road car

Logic tells me any improvement felt in throttle response comes from the advanced ignition timing, rather than the tiny decrease in internal volume.

:D cheers :D

Edited by Sydneykid

we have also been able to pull out a little fuel and still been able to maintain a safe detention barriar. so yes the power came from timing and fuel changes. the plenum faciltated this.

apoligises guys, i just did a comparison on datalogit. we have added just a bit of fuel across touched areas of map. sorry

I would be more than glad to do the measurements. I assume that's 2.68 cubic metres, since there isn't 2.68 linear metres of pipework. That's a saving of 600 mm of 75 mm pipework. You could have saved more than that by going to the 120 degree pipework at the throttle body style. Like this;

med_gallery_1903_124_22845.jpg

The other check of effectiveness would be to do the numbers on the time taken for 2.68 cubic metres to travel through the inlet system. Let's use 1 bar and 3,000 rpm as basis;

2.5 litre engine running 1 bar at 3,000 rpm =

2.5 x 2 / 2 x 3,000 / 60 = 125 litres per second

So 2.68 litres = 2/100ths of second

Half that at 6,000 rpm (1/100th of a second)

That's not much improvement in throttle response

I am not sure that it is good value for money on a road car

Logic tells me any improvement felt in throttle response comes from the advanced ignition timing, rather than the tiny decrease in internal volume.

:D cheers :D

sydneykid.

sorry i miss read you above post. the timing was definately a positive in the throttle response stakes. but the reduce pipework, in my mind, was a major contributing factor.

Edited by 202.3rwkw

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

    • Hi, is the HKS  Tower Bar still available ? negotiable ? 🤔
    • From there, it is really just test and assemble. Plug the adapter cables from the unit into the back of the screen, then the other side to the car harness. Don't forget all the other plugs too! Run the cables behind the unit and screw it back into place (4 screws) and you should now have 3 cables to run from the top screen to the android unit. I ran them along the DS of the other AV units in the gap between their backets and the console, and used some corrugated tubing on the sharp edges of the bracket so the wires were safe. Plug the centre console and lower screen in temporarily and turn the car to ACC, the AV should fire up as normal. Hold the back button for 3 sec and Android should appear on the top screen. You need to set the input to Aux for audio (more on that later). I put the unit under the AC duct in the centre console, with the wifi antenna on top of the AC duct near the shifter, the bluetooth antenna on the AC duct under the centre console The GPS unit on top of the DS to AC duct; they all seem to work OK there are are out of the way. Neat cable routing is a pain. For the drive recorder I mounted it near the rear view mirror and run the cable in the headlining, across the a pillar and then down the inside of the a pillar seal to the DS lower dash. From there it goes across and to one USB input for the unit. The second USB input is attached to the ECUtec OBD dongle and the 3rd goes to the USB bulkhead connected I added in the centre console. This is how the centre console looks "tidied" up Note I didn't install the provided speaker, didn't use the 2.5mm IPod in line or the piggyback loom for the Ipod or change any DIP switches; they seem to only be required if you need to use the Ipod input rather than the AUX input. That's it, install done, I'll follow up with a separate post on how the unit works, but in summary it retains all factory functions and inputs (so I still use my phone to the car for calls), reverse still works like factory etc.
    • Place the new daughterboard in the case and mount it using the 3 small black rivets provided, and reconnect the 3 factory ribbon cables to the new board Then, use the 3 piggyback cables from the daughterboard into the factory board on top (there are stand offs in the case to keep them apart. and remember to reconnect the antenna and rear cover fan wires. 1 screw to hold the motherboard in place. Before closing the case, make a hole in the sticker covering a hole in the case and run the cable for the android unit into the plug there. The video forgot this step, so did I, so will you probably. Then redo the 4 screws on back, 2 each top and bottom, 3 each side and put the 2 brackets back on.....all ready to go and not that tricky really.      
    • Onto the android unit. You need to remove the top screen because there is a daughterboard to put inside the case. Each side vent pops out from clips; start at the bottom and carefully remove upwards (use a trim remover tool to avoid breaking anything). Then the lower screen and controls come out, 4 screws, a couple of clips (including 3 flimsy ones at the top) and 3 plugs on the rear. Then the upper screen, 4 screws and a bunch of plugs and she is out. From there, remove the mounting brackets (2 screws each), 4 screws on the rear, 2 screws top and bottom and 3 screws holding in the small plates on each side. When you remove the back cover (tight fit), watch out for the power cable for the fan, I removed it so I could put the back aside. The mainboard is held in by 1 screw in the middle, 1 aerial at the top and 3 ribbon cables. If you've ever done any laptop stuff the ribbon cables are OK to work with, just pop up the retainer and they slide out. If you are not familiar just grab a 12 year old from an iphone factory, they will know how it works The case should now look like this:
    • Switching the console was tricky. First there were 6 screws to remove, and also the little adapter loom and its screws had to come out. Also don't forget to remove the 2 screws holding the central locking receiver. Then there are 4 clips on either side....these were very tight in this case and needed careful persuading with a long flat screw driver....some force required but not enough to break them...this was probably the fiddliest part of the whole job. In my case I needed both the wiring loom and the central locking receiver module to swap across to the new one. That was it for the console, so "assembly is the reverse of disassembly"
×
×
  • Create New...