Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

my search came up with lots of topics on how to remove, but not if its bad for engine/turbo etc.

my R34 GTT is on 10psi with stock turbo, just recently under heavy acceleration it seems to missfire asif traction control is on (which it isnt) and i get lovely pop pop pop pop noise (while accelerating) towards redline, happens occasionally not consistantly..

could this be the R&R i've heard so much about? but why havent I had this issue before today?....

rich and retard isn't a popping sound. it is just a dead stop in power. it sounds like you have ignition issues, like a dud coil or spark plug. this isn't that bad as it isn't really doing anything except not sparking. it would actually be cooling the cylinder that isn't firing.

i put boost to 11psi, doesnt happen anymore..

no farken idea.

it almost sounds like a rev limiter so it might pop every .3 seconds under the hard acceleration, then just stops.

power seems to die for the .3 seconds, or whatever, boost holds.

either way, problem gone for the moment.

Hmm, I'd go to the dyno and get your fuel ratios checked.

Popping is most commonly because its too rich. Rich mixture is harder to ignite. Then the mixture is burnt after it has exited the cylinder giving a pop. Usually caused by the air flow metre detecting too much airflow, (usually from intake mods like fmic and pod). The EUC adds not just a littlle more fuel, but a lot more. Too much infact as it thinks the excess flow is a problem.

I regard to the issue going away after the boot rise...

I can't say for r34's, but with 33gtst's, it would seem that the fuel pump only supplies enough fuel for std boost.

Your poping might have gone on higher boost because your fuel pressure might be dropping, and themixture is coming back to lean, or at least closer to where it should be.

Anyway, there are 101 answers to this.

IMO minor popping, as long as it is a minor misfire is not going to cause imidiate problems. However, if it is running rich, and you don't do something about it, then you risk other issues like cat damage and washing the bores.

Best best, get it checked on the dyno and then talk to the tuner about a course of action. Most probably ECU, maybe a fuel pump.

Chriso

Wow, I was JUST about to add about richness damaging the cat. Good point!

I have experienced an engine running way to rich and damaging the cat in a 3SGTE, which has the cat IN the DUMP PIPE! Stupid place I know, so more prone to getting damaged I guess... but yeah, amazing how much power you will be loosing if you are both running rich AND have a blocked cat.

I went from 62fwkws to 125 fwkws on that car with hi flow cat + retune.

Edited by psybic
then you risk other issues like cat damage and washing the bores.

cat damage i undertstand, but 'washing' the bores? i didnt know this was possible. my understanding is that running rich only cause rediculous fuel consumption (blocked o2 sensor) and damaged/blocked cat.

unburn fuel will damage the cat if it gets to much..

other wise miss shouldnt have any detrimental affects..

it will also use more fuel

is damaging the cat really that bad a thing? wont it just start to become a "high-flow" cat?

i put boost to 11psi, doesnt happen anymore..

no farken idea.

it almost sounds like a rev limiter so it might pop every .3 seconds under the hard acceleration, then just stops.

power seems to die for the .3 seconds, or whatever, boost holds.

either way, problem gone for the moment.

Id say its a spark problem, weak coils possibly not causing a powerful enough spark. The higher boost level is blowing the spark out. Try gapping your plugs down (requires less energy for the spark) Also 11psi is as high as you want to boost the stock turbo. It wont last much longer above this level.

Its a very common problem, usually coil/sparkplug related. However it could be something else.

Read all about it here http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...showtopic=32356

Edited by Rolls
ahh, no...

it melts and causes a major restriction or blockage in the exhaust system, not what you want.

i guess ur assuming that when it melts u turn the car off and let it set... my guess is that the melted bits will be blown out the arse of the car.

what happens in reality, is the cat will usually break apart into pieces that are too large to go out the exhaust, but they block the outlet in the cat, (exhaust pressure pushes the loose bits to the outlet of the cat causing restriction) and your car doesn't make much boost/power due to the restriction and it can't melt further because the exhaust temps dont get high enough, because the vehicle isn't making any power.

the above has happened on almost all vehicles i have changed cats on, and they aren't all performance vehicles either.

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...