Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey I have an safcII being delivered to me as my car runs real rich with noticable flat spots in the rev range. My question is though does the SAFCII help to stop R&R? As in could i run ( hypothetically) 12+psi and not get bogged down by the rich and retard mode? Or would a require a fuel cut defender? I understand it intercepts the signal running to the ecu telling it that is is recieving less air than the car really is but by doing this does it also prevent the timing from being retarted at higher boost?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/153002-safc-ii-question/
Share on other sites

it will slightly improve it when you remove a bit of fuel from that rev range (on a dyno) but it's only a bandaid, not a solution.

PFC is required to change the ignition timing to completely get rid of it.

someone please clarify...

Edited by Ryanrb25

It won't prevent R&R as it still runs off the factory ecu.

I used to run an safc-I and at cold nights at calder it

ran into R&R almost instantly.

R&R is there to protect your engine from detonating!!!

Power FC is the cure!

SAFC is a patch-up!

Im getting an SAFC2 as well this week. Basically, it depends on what power figure your going for. If your happy with under 200rwkw (12psi with fmic,air filter and exhaust should see you to 190+ depending on other mods) then the SAFC2 can map the airflow to trick the ECU to thinking there is less air at certain rev points where the ECU is R&Ring because it thinks there is too much air flow.

As others have said, it is only a bandaid solution, but for my purposes, its enough. in direct answer to your question, yes the SAFC2 will stop the R*R but only to a certain extent. As soon as you want to push that power figure past 200 by upgrading turbo and injectors, your up for a new ECU.

You can still exceed the R&R value.. Another problem is the timing goes off the adjusted value not the new value so it picks it off a lower point on the ECU map..

I believe there is ways to get around this by using higher flowing injectors so that even though you are lower down in the map it is injecting the correct amount.. blah blah.. something along those lines.. it's all been discussed before, search for sydneykid's thread on SAFC

Bigger injectors with only a SAFC2 would be hard to tune. Alot of correction would be required.

I don't think its hard to understand how an SAFC works. People should firstly work that out with a search, then the answers would be so much more obvious.

Its only altering the signal to the AFM input into the ECU. Thats the ONLY thing it alters. It uses other inputs to work out how much by, like RPM, TPS... but thats ALL it actually has any effect on...

Ofcourse, changing the signal saying how much air is on the way in, changes things according to the way the ECU deals with that new info, including Ign and Injection control.

Its just shifting the section u are in on the map.

Shifting you slightly closer to, or away from R&R in your case. So you'll put x amount of correction and you'll have that little more air allowed to come in before you hit it.

Well I just got my SAFC tunned. It was the old school 5 nobs type. I have to take off 10% of fuel to gain 20 -25rwkw across the rev range. The car felt good at the top end and was pulling much harder. Very happy.

Great Sounds good, that is quite a large result. I got mine today and am very keen on getting it tuned asap! I'm still running the standard turbo and at this stage don't plan on upgrading as 180 - 200rwkw will be quite sufficient for me as a street car. When i get it tuned and dynoed i will post the results. atm i have xforce 3" stainless turbo back, hybrid fmic, blitz stainless pod, turbosmart bov, 11psi of boost, and soon to be tuned safcII :) . I considered the pfc route but figured it would be more beneficial if i had an aftermarket turbo or hi-flow etc. Just sick of flat spots and terrible fuel econ! :D

ok i know obviously a power fc would be the best option to overcome this but would it be possible to manually adavance the timimg on the cas along with a tuned safcII that way it wouldn't be running so rich and the advancement in timing could counterbalance the retardation by the ecu??

as the safc advances the ignition timing as you lean out the mixtures, usually you cant lean them out enough, as the advance gets too high, and detonation occurs, im about to install a jaycar DFA(does the same thing, and im going to retarc the base timing on the cas by about two degrees so that i can pull a bit more fuel out with a safety margin and try to get the full load mixtures up to 12.2:1. If youy dont reatrd the timing, usually you can only lean out the mixtures to about 11.5:1

cool thanks guys, I installed it today with all the readings n stuff coming up fine so i'll just have to go get it tuned on the dyno next week - can't wait. fingers crossed for some better fuel econ and less noticable flat spots at least.

interestingly i have about 10-15% negative dialed in on my SAFC and also have bumped up the timing on my SITC. I think it is pretty borderline detonation but R&R usually cuts out heaps of timing.

What kind of power gain do you figure these two items give you? I was thinking of a similar setup, as it's quite a cheap option with seemingly a fair amount of flexibility

at a guess youll probably get similar gains to an SAFC. ~15-20kw.

I hope to be able to support a high flow turbo and get to 200-210rwkw with safc and sitc.

The only gripe i have with the SITC is that its adjustment points are too far apart. it adjusts at 800/2400/4000/5600/7200 rpm. I would love to have a 4700rpm adjustment heh.

Heres something that might interest a few of you.

This is a datalog of the timing the ECU runs through R&R at about 11-12psi. Notice the sharp drop at 4000rpm and the pickup at 5600 rpm. This is the exact time that you feel R&R and a lot of the reason why it feels so lame.

Its mapped against rpm and AFM voltage. AFM voltage at the start of R&R is at 4.2v.

datalog.jpg

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

    • My first car was a HG. I'm very familiar with them. A mild cam upgrade is a good idea. The 186 is a very flexible engine - meaning it has good torque from down low. You can give up a little torque down low for quite a lot more excitement in the mid range, and a bit more up top - but they are not exactly a rev monster. You need to upgrade valve springs at the minimum. For a bigger cam, you'd want to make sure it wasn't still running the original fibre cam gear. That would be unlikely, given that most of them shat themselves in the 70s and 80s, but still within the realms of possibility. Metal cam gear required. Carbies are a huge issue. The classic upgrade was always a Holley 350, which works, but is usually pretty bad for fuel consumption. The 186S had a 2 barrel Stromberg on it that was very similar to the one on the 253, and is a reasonable thing if you can find one, and find someone to help you get it set up (which is the same issue with setting up a 350 to work nice). The more classic upgrade was twin sidedraught CD type carbs, or triples of same, or triple Webers. The XU-1 triple Webers being the best example. You can still buy all this stuff new, I think, but it's a lot of coin to drop. And then the people able to set them up are getting fewer and further in between. There's still some, but it used to be everyone's** dad and uncle could do it. **Not everyone's! But a lot. All in all, I wouldn't get too carried away with the engine. Anything you do to it without a full rebuild for power and revs will only make it slightly faster. I am all in favour of a complete teardown rebuild, with nice rods and pistons, 10 or 10.5:1 compression, and a clean port job with at least a big enough cam to run 98 with that compression, if not bigger. And if I did that to a dirty old red motor, I'd want to inject it too, which I'd struggle to fight against the devil on my shoulder that would argue for ITBs and trumpets. But the bills would start to mount up, and it will still never make stupid power. OK, a few people still know how to build absolutely mental red motors, courtesy of the work that went into HQ racing and modern knowledge being applied. But even a 300HP red motor is no match for an RB20 with a TD06. So you have to decide what it's worth to you. I'd just put a set of 6>2>1 extractors, a 2.5" exhaust and an electronic ignition conversion/dizzy on it and just run the old girl like the fairly slow old girl that she really is.
    • Thank you so much for the comments.  This is very interesting and gives me some great ideas to think about. Keen to keep it simple and relatively classic looking. That said, i am not too worried about staying 100% period correct.  A little extra performance and relatively good (or improved) economy is just what i am looking for. Ill be keeping any parts i swap out so if i get nostalgic i can always swap it all back in.  Right now just trying to get some good ideas from people in the know (I still have a lot to learn in this space). Thank you again!  
    • Wrt the engine, you're very much limited by 'production quality' as to how much extra power you can extract from them (I'm talking i6 red-motor) -- a lot here depends on how 'authentic' or 'period correct' you want the modifications to be... ...I'm too old... <grin>...the first true performance engine Holden made, was in the HD/HR models ~ this was the 'X2' performance pack...it came with twin downdraft strombergs on an otherwise unimproved intake manifold, with a two piece exhaust manifold (reckoned to be as good as extractors)... ....these engines were built upon the '179HP' cylinder block, which included extra webbing in the casting to make it stronger and less susceptible to block distortion... The next performance i6 came out with the HK Monaro (also found it's way into the LJ GTR Torana ... the car I wish I hadn't sold)...it had pretty much the same manifold setup, but was built against the '186S' block...this block retained all the extra webbing of the 179HP block, but added a forged steel crankshaft (instead of the stock cast crankshaft), because it was possible to snap the crank... ...apart from the inherent weaknesses in the stock (cast crank) blocks, the next limiting factor is the cylinder head porting & combustion chamber design, and the actual valve sizes. Back in the day, you could buy a 'yella terra' cylinder head (from stage 1 to stage 5 gradients), and this was the way to get serious power out of them -- with the extra breathing of these heads, you could fit a triple SU or DCOE Weber setup... ...obviously, these mods were a waste of time on a stock cylinder head/camshaft grind. My housemate rebuilt the i6 in his VH dunnydore about 6 months back -- this is a 186S block with the 12port 2850 blue motor head and intake/exhaust manifolds, with a dual throat Weber off an XF Falcon mounted on an adapter plate ; it's not a bad makeup...got more torque & fuel economy just light-footing it about on the first throat, but stand on it and it makes more giddy-up than the standard 2850 blue motor that it replaced. Personal note: I'd just fit an RB30 and be done it it 馃槂  
    • Thanks for sharing. That's a great video! My buddy is doing the same thing on his build (S chassis struts and towers). He's building an S14 with billet RB30 shooting for 2000whp... a race car with a TH400 just like this video. For a road car I just couldn't go this route as the strut has to be almost vertical and the caster is not going to pivot correctly (let alone camber gain). You think the R32 frontend is bad, wait till you put a MacPherson strut on without modeling it all in Solidworks to check geometry. I'm not saying it's a bad way to do it but I'd be really curious to see how it affects the geometry.
    • Hey Christof and welcome!  Sounds like an awesome project! I'm not sure many of the regular users on here would know much about the HK but I could be wrong.  Looking forward to updates.
  • Create New...