Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey mate

Yes i did lose quite a bit of power. I still have the same cat on since the test i think its 2 and 3 quarter inch.

not interested in power atm.. i gotta upgrade the fuel pump and retune it on boost to go for around 350 - 380rwkw so I am going to invest into a 4" high flow cat which will cost around $400.

For now i will go back to using my xforce 3" highflow

Is it restrictive?

Did you loose much more power when you used this cat?

  • Replies 185
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

IF it does cost that much in VIC to get the test then you should look for a tuner that has a 5gas sensor system and pay him to tune it so you can pass the test the first go.

i cant stress how important it is to get a HIGH quality cat that has been proven to remove emissions. Catco is the way to go - i believe there is one that is a little better.

What was the procedure for the test? What did they do...

Max 4 min test on a dyno designed to simulate various load conditions (eg normal driving). Will stop earlier if it has clearly passed/failed the test, otherwise will continue for the full 240 seconds (hence the name).

The full 240 second test simulates driving over a 3.1 km course with an average speed of 47.3 km/h and a maximum speed of 91.2 km/h.

wooahhh.. nice answer :(

but they never stopped when i went the first time and leaned it off and the nox went up like nothing else :) they kept going and gave me a print out.

if you look at the sheet that i posted you can see the different gas's and the speed that the car was going as well. the top line is the speed the bottom is the emissions - as you can see its very low on bottom one. i should scan my first test and show you.. its pretty interesting the differences between the 2 tunes.

They drive it for around 30 seconds and then they come to a complete stop then keep going and then get up to 90ks an hour and cruise then come to a complete stop.

I think a stock turbo r33 would go into boost - so maybe disconnecting the actuator might help ;)

Max 4 min test on a dyno designed to simulate various load conditions (eg normal driving). Will stop earlier if it has clearly passed/failed the test, otherwise will continue for the full 240 seconds (hence the name).

The full 240 second test simulates driving over a 3.1 km course with an average speed of 47.3 km/h and a maximum speed of 91.2 km/h.

UPDATE !!

I passed the noise test today!!! just scraped in by 1db :)

got 87db at 3500rpm and 89db at 4000rpm

So now its smooth sailing to my engineers certificate !! just got to brace the huge hole i got the 3" intake pipe going through and take it back and pay my money!

UPDATE !!

I passed the noise test today!!! just scraped in by 1db :ninja:

got 87db at 3500rpm and 89db at 4000rpm

So now its smooth sailing to my engineers certificate !! just got to brace the huge hole i got the 3" intake pipe going through and take it back and pay my money!

how have you been advised to do this bracing?

  • 2 months later...

Congrats on passing the emissions testing!

I wonder though, what the point of it was? You say that you pro-actively submitted your car to these tests because you "wanted your car to be legal"...

But you say that you are going to replace the very restrictive catco cat with a 3" and possibly a 4" cat. That will render this passed test obsolete and irrelevant? Are you going to keep this tune, or are you going to lean it out again for greater fuel economy?

Fantastic job building and tuning your own car to a degree that you can control gas emissions to such a fine line, but I have to wonder what the point is, if you're just going to continue modifying your car and render this passed test useless?

The reason i did this was to get my car legally engineered. The way it works is that you must get the IM240 test to get a engineers certificate to prove that the modifications you have made ie - intercooler and plenums and exaust manifolds and injectors and ECU etc etc do not change the emissions of the car.

I have heard that EPA can do road side tests and when they do the legal limits are different to what the RTA is - i have heard that the RTAs IM240 is twice the limits as the EPA so if you get a good high flow CAT the EPA tests will pass without any issues.

Oh and i have not touched the cruise tune since the testing at all as it is fine as it is and still gets good fuel economy but not as good as it was.. bit of a trade off i guess.

Edited by Guilt-Toy
  • 5 months later...
  • 1 month later...

Good to hear is all clear..

I got detoured to an epa station last night.

They got me for;

* Exhaust (noise)

* Air Filter (induction noise)

* non-standard intercooler - turbo

* adjustable fuel pressure regulator

* catch can has a filter on it

Can anyone give me some more advice as to what i should change or do.

Car - 1990 R32 GTR

Current Mods

* PowerFC dejetro

* cams

* Single hi-mount turbo

* bigger fmic

* airfilter

* exhaust

* Fuel pressure regulator

* External Gate

* Catch can

Your help would be greatly appreciated

Dave

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

    • I think the concept is highlighting the various scenarios where thicker oil helps, and thicker oil potentially doesn't help and only generates heat and costs power, in turn for safety which isn't actually any safer (unless you're going real hot). If anything this does highlight why throwing Castrol 10w-60 for your track days is always a solid, safe bet. 
    • Jason should have shown a real viscosity vs temp chart. All the grades have very little viscosity difference at full operating temperature.
    • Oops... I meant to include the connector  view... BR/W - power from fuse L/W - motor negative to fan control amp (and off to HVAC pin19) OR/B - PWM signal (from HVAC pin20) B --  ground  
    • Yep, if you are applying filler it sounds like there is something wrong with the body lol. Safe to assume there is going to be a lot of sanding going on if your still applying fillers.  Picture a perfect bare metal panel, smooth as glass. You lay down your primer, it's perfect. (why are you going to sand it?) You lay down the colour and clear, it's perfect. No sanding at all took place and you've got a perfectly finished panel.  You won't be chasing your tail, sounds like you were prepping to start laying filler. If your happy with the body after the sanding, there is some bare metal exposed and some areas with primer, no issues at all, start laying the filler. You are safe to lay filler on bare metal or primer (of course check your technical data sheet as usual for what your filler is happy to adhere to).  This isn't a 100% correct statement. There is primer that is happy to adhere to smooth bare metal. There are fillers that are happy to adhere to smooth bare metal. Just make sure you're using the right materials for the job.  Typically if you are using filler, you would go primer, colour and clear. I've never seen any instances before where someone has laid colour over body filler (maybe this happens, but I haven't seen it before). So your plan sounds pretty normal to me. 
    • I don't think there's any way someone is push starting this car.. I honestly can barely move it, and moving it and steering it is just flat out not possible. I'm sure it is, but needs a bigger man than me. I have a refurbished starter now. The starter man was quite clear and consise showing me how nothing inside a starter really should contribute to slow cranking, and turned out that for the most part... my starter was entirely fine. Still, some of the wear items were replaced and luckily it didn't show any signs of getting too hot, being unfit for use, etc. Which is 'good'. I also noticed the starter definitely sounded different, which is a bit odd considering nothing should have really changed there.... Removed and refit, and we'll pretend one of the manifold bolts didn't fully tighten up and is only "pretty" tight. GM only wants 18ft/lb anyway. I also found a way to properly get my analog wideband reading very slightly leaner than the serial wideband. There's Greg related reasons for this. The serial output is the absolute source of truth, but it is a total asshole to actually stay connected and needs a laptop. The analog input does not, and works with standalone datalogging. Previously the analog input read slightly richer, but if I am aiming at 12.7 I do not want one of the widebands to be saying 12.7 when the source of truth is 13.0. Now the source of truth will be 12.65 and the Analog Wideband will read 12.7. So when I tune to 12.7 it'll be ever so slightly safer. While messing with all of this and idling extensively I can confirm my car seems to restart better while hot now. I did add an old Skyline battery cable between the head and the body though, though now I really realise I should have chosen the frame. Maybe that's a future job. The internet would have you believe that this is caused by bad grounds. In finding out where my grounds actually were I found out the engine bay battery post actually goes to the engine, as well as a seperate one (from the post) to the body of the car. So now there's a third one making the Grounding Triangle which is now a thing. I also from extensive idling have this graph. Temperature (°C) Voltage (V) 85 1.59 80 1.74 75 1.94 70 2.1 65 2.33 60 2.56 55 2.78 50 2.98 45 3.23 40 3.51 35 3.75 30 4.00   Plotted it looks like this. Which is actually... pretty linear? I have not actually put the formula into HPTuners. I will have to re-engage brain and/or re-engage the people who wanted more data to magically do it for me. Tune should be good for the 30th!
×
×
  • Create New...