Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Lads,

Rex Has his KingPinny 'budget hack' on the Dyno the other day for its post-build, pre-thrash checkup. It makes respectable grunt with AFR's sticking nicely between 12.3 and 11:1 for the whole run.

However at the top of the run just prior to limiter (perhaps 500rpm) the AFR suddenly makes a dead vertical up past 14:1 which is where the operator jumps off the acceleratix. We repeated the run three times, peak power was within 2-3rwkw and the same massive sudden vertical leanout condition.

The dyno was done as a favour so no fault finding was performed, Rex was thinking that perhaps the AFM may be faulty (NIssan's are renowned for them) causing the ECU to basically drop the injector duty cycle right off.

The engine R32 RB20DET and is stock, along with the ECU and turbo etc. Only modifications are filter, exhaust and intercooler setup. Boost is un-modified but up to 11psi due to removal of restrictions in pipework etc.

Rex has considered AFM maxing however it seems more likely that Mr ECU would just go massively rich safety-like instead of lean.

Anyone seen/heard similar problems? He has seen a couple of other graphs with the same problem, but not an explanation.

Rex has some diagnosis to do on Mondey such as AFM peak voltage etc, but would be good to have some things to check if He runs dry ideas wise. It also seems very unlikey to be a fuelling issue because of the shape of the graph.

Have included printout below if it helps...

KingPinnyupload.jpg

Thanks Lads

Rex

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/142860-massive-sudden-lean-out-rb20det/
Share on other sites

Rex considered fuel pump not to be the problem because surely if pressure couldn't be maintained the AFR would rise gradually. PUMP is R32 GTR

Fuel injectors maybe, but supposedly they are good for 230odd rwkw at 100% DutyCycle. HOWEVER with stock reg, He knows not.

Sounds like Rex may need a slightly different Multimeter...

As for the power, trust Him, Rex cannot believe it either. Approx 140rwkw would've been a delight but the 192.6rwkw peak almost made Rex pass-out.

Edited by Rex_Kelway
Rex considered fuel pump not to be the problem because surely if pressure couldn't be maintained the AFR would rise gradually.

Fuel injectors maybe, but supposedly they are good for 230odd rwkw at 100% DutyCycle. HOWEVER with stock reg, He knows not.

Sounds like Rex may need a slightly different Multimeter...

Injector size: 270 cc/min injectors(25.7 lbs/hour)

Number of injectors: 6

BSFC: 0.65

Duty cycle: 100%

This combination will supply fuel for 237 horsepower

237hp = 182kw...

I knew this was going to happen, believe Rex he has heard it muchly since the day it was dyno'ed.

The engine is approx 60,000kms ex-GTS4 R32 from around 1993 He believes. Wether or not they use a different turbo (M-spec or whatever??) He knows not, but it IS the turbo that came in the half-cut. On Mondey he shall get serial no's to confirm.

Rex works for an importer, and yanked the motor out himself.

The car was 100% stock, no filter not even a timer or boost gauge. all of the factory bolts/sheilds/gaskets/retainers were in place with no signs of ever have being removed. Thats whay leads Rex to believe its stock.

Believe it or not the turbo is not the 'be all and end all' of the intake system. It is VERY dependant on the systems around it.

This was designed to be a help diagnose thread, not a 'you're a liar' thread. The Dyno may be wrong, but the operator has done it a thousand times. The car does feel that fast.

Back to the problem...

Fuel pressure shall be checked on Mondey to be sure

Edited by Rex_Kelway

no one is calling anyone a liar. the figures quoted are at the top end of the believable scale.

all we are doing is trying to help diagnose a problem. if you get as many suggestions as possible, you can eleminate them one by one.

craig

Yep, maybe a bit premature ;) ...

Rex is just geared for the 'Thats too much power, its impossible...You're a liar!!!' arguement that is likely to follow that printout and specs list.

Edited by Rex_Kelway

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...