Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

it shouldn't be running that lean from factory, even with your mods.

my money would be on

-remapped ecu

some other possibilities

-fuel pump

-fuel filter

-fuel pressure regulator

-injectors

^ I would think problems with fuel system would cause it to lean out at higher load, i don't think they would explain it leaning out across the board.

if you want the cheapest solution possible, grab one of the old-school Apexi AFC's, one knob - rich or lean...

whoever did that dyno cabration is a f**king tool.

There is no way in hell so little mods could make that much power.

to get 210rwww, I needed a full exhaust, Powerfc, FMIC, toluene, massive timing advance etc.

My engine was tested and had 169psi compression accross the board, and 2% leakdown.

f**k I hate it when I see dyno graphs like that - they are just bullshit. I know dynos are a tuning tool, but yeah, why don't they just set it to make 1000kw, and work from there? You know, add a boost controller and make maybe 1050kw then?

oh, and those AFRs are completely rooted. The tuner is a tool for not bothering to point out that your car will most likely blow to pieces due to a very dodgey fuel pump, FPR or something in the fueling system.

Oh, and you can't simply "tune" a factory ECu, unless you have a SAFC, or someone that can burn new chips for them. (And thats rare)

Edited by The Mafia

In everyone's experience, what would you expect a stock (computer) R33's AFR's to look like with those mods (Ie full exhaust, pod etc)

Maybe start off around 13.0 then to 12.0-11.5 at 2400rpm to 4500ish rpm, then maybe to 11.0 or even 10.5 on to 6800rpm etc?

That AFR looks to be the flatest i've ever seen come out from a 'stock' cpu'd 33.

whoever did that dyno cabration is a f**king tool.

There is no way in hell so little mods could make that much power.

to get 210rwww, I needed a full exhaust, Powerfc, FMIC, toluene, massive timing advance etc.

My engine was tested and had 169psi compression accross the board, and 2% leakdown.

f**k I hate it when I see dyno graphs like that - they are just bullshit. I know dynos are a tuning tool, but yeah, why don't they just set it to make 1000kw, and work from there? You know, add a boost controller and make maybe 1050kw then?

oh, and those AFRs are completely rooted. The tuner is a tool for not bothering to point out that your car will most likely blow to pieces due to a very dodgey fuel pump, FPR or something in the fueling system.

Oh, and you can't simply "tune" a factory ECu, unless you have a SAFC, or someone that can burn new chips for them. (And thats rare)

U need to get ur facts straight my friend.

1) I have already said i will check wat the ECU is, coz ive never looked at it

2) It is not a BS dyno graph, and I have not got a boost controller

3) The tuner did point out to me that its lean and to take it easy

4) Its already been established that it is most likely not a fuelling issue

5) I neva said that i tuned the stock ecu.

If u dont have nething constructive and useful to add other than obvious things like "u cant tune the stock ecu" then dont bother posting. Obviously u have just scrolled down to the bottom of the thread without reading everything inbetween

Edited by Taso84
In everyone's experience, what would you expect a stock (computer) R33's AFR's to look like with those mods (Ie full exhaust, pod etc)

Maybe start off around 13.0 then to 12.0-11.5 at 2400rpm to 4500ish rpm, then maybe to 11.0 or even 10.5 on to 6800rpm etc?

That AFR looks to be the flatest i've ever seen come out from a 'stock' cpu'd 33.

Apparently it goes down to 13 first then when max torque hits it should dip down to 12. In most ECU's however, it will usually go into R&R mode and AFR will dip down to 11.

Can any1 confirm this?

U need to get ur facts straight my friend.

1) I have already said i will check wat the ECU is, coz ive never looked at it

2) It is not a BS dyno graph, and I have not got a boost controller

3) The tuner did point out to me that its lean and to take it easy

4) Its already been established that it is most likely not a fuelling issue

5) I neva said that i tuned the stock ecu.

If u dont have nething constructive and useful to add other than obvious things like "u cant tune the stock ecu" then dont bother posting. Obviously u have just scrolled down to the bottom of the thread without reading everything inbetween

I am being constructive - I'm telling you not to believe that stupid figure.

Ther are possibilities -

1. Remapped ECU - But even then at 8.5psi you wouldn't be able to make 200rwkw.

2. High Flowed Turbo

3. Tuner "adjusted" the dyno to make himself look good.

Just looked at ECU, it looks pretty stock. Its got a Nissan badge on it and says Hitachi, made in Japan.

So the only possibility is that its remapped.

In terms of saying tuner rigged it, u obviously don't know Ray coz his an honest guy and wouldn't do that. Plus its not in his interest coz then I would not need to buy further mods from him coz i would be happy with the power of my car >_<

Hi-flowed turbo: Mayb, but it I've seen it off the car and it seems like it hasnt been touched since the factory.

What other possibilities can u come up with, coz it does seem wierd, mayb just a freek motor?

Mafia, have a good read of this thread: http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...?showtopic=9292

I dont think i mentioned it, but my car in a 95 build, which according to some ppl has some kind of diff chip that get better gains and tends to not go into R&R mode. It also doesnt have the infamous flat spots.

I jus wonder, it doesnt make much sense but mayb the '95 skylines with the diff ECU are ok on AFR 13. Just a thought

No turbo'd car is 'ok' with a 13:1 AFR. >_<

damn, beat me to it cubes :laugh:

Mafia, have a good read of this thread: http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...?showtopic=9292

I dont think i mentioned it, but my car in a 95 build, which according to some ppl has some kind of diff chip that get better gains and tends to not go into R&R mode. It also doesnt have the infamous flat spots.

I jus wonder, it doesnt make much sense but mayb the '95 skylines with the diff ECU are ok on AFR 13. Just a thought

this "different chip" is nonsense.

I have a 96 and if that chip was so good, do you think they would have removed it from the later models?

Mate, I'm pretty sure you have a remapped ECU, and a few other things wrong to bring the AFR's up to 13:1. No tuner in the world would tune a turbo car to those kinds of AFRs. Thats just death wating to happen. If you don't believe me, go take your car down to the track, and tell me how long it lasts until you start hearing crunching noises coming from under the bonnet.

And and you are saying that your mate tuner is reliable?

He told you he tuned the car right? WRONG. A tuner can't to a single thing to a car with a factory ECU. Maybe turn the CAS a little to advance the timing, but thats definately not going to make the AFR's change or allow your car to run 200rwkw off 8.5psi of boost.

Also, just to give myself a little credibility, I have a R33, tuned by ME (powerfc), 90% of the work done by ME, and is currently running 12's, with enough power and a good launch to run low 12's.

Edited by The Mafia
Thats excellent Jono... whats the settup (mods) you got on ur SII R33???

thanks..

She's worked a little

Powerfc + Datalogit for Tuning

Full Exhaust

FMIC

Garrett GT30 with a RB25 Ex housing and a .7 comp cover

Water Methanol Injection

I know its got a bigger turbo, but yeah..

Sorry about being a slight thread troll, just trying to be clear about what is actually going on here with this particular dyno run. Something is fishy - and I want to know what.

So, say the ECU has been remapped for arguments sake, then what should i do to fix this problem. So far I can think of a few solutions.

1) replace with powerfc or SAFC + tune cost = $1000 - 1500

2) Find out wat the remapped ECU settings (if this is possible) and modify my car (prob will need to ugrade turbo) to run remapped settings cost = unknown. If ne1 has done this before PM me ASAP

3) Somehow (if possible) unmapp ECU. Cost = unknown (<$500 i estimate) prob not the smartest choice

I really want to fix this leaning problem but at the same time I dont want to throw away wat could potentiolly be a awsome remapped ECU.

If you want to fix the leaning out problem head back to your tuner and have him suggest what he thinks it is.

Hell he deals with cars every day so no doubt he will have half an idea and will most likely book it in when he has another r33 there so he can swap out the ecu's. OR if he deals with the skylines a lot he will have spare parts laying around for trouble shooting.

the last two posts are god ideas.

I have a stock 1996 ECU you can buy if you want.

I am pretty sure they fit the 95's, and my mate has a 1995 GTS-T and it ran perfect with it.

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 i found that alot of parts can be wrong or "very" hard to get the real right one. I already bought some brakes years ago on me "old" GT calipers and they were wrong too 😄  I told them too. Even send them pictures...but they said "EBC catalogue has them on my car... So i dont know what their answer will be. I call monday them and let them know that they are really not on my car. If they were they would be already on a car...
    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
×
×
  • Create New...