Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys

i have an rb20 with the following mods:

-turboback exhaust (Hiflow cat)

-Pod filter

-turbotech boost controller at .7bar

-SAFC

i had the SAFC installed by a mate but i dont have an airflow guage to tell

me weather its running rich or lean. The settings at the moment are as standard

but i was just wondering if someone could post there settings up because i will be

getting a tune in the next couple weeks.

cheers adrian...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/162899-safc-settings/
Share on other sites

dude get a AFM gauge and get it tuned .. On the forum I think someones flogging one for $20 .. Will let you know exactly how its running all the time.. and then you can also make sure the pro is right ..

and off course update every time you get a new part :D

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/162899-safc-settings/#findComment-3023801
Share on other sites

you need to be careful with the air fuel ratio guages as most of then are not wide band, to be able to see what your car is actually doing in terms of air/fuel ratio you need a wide band sensor in the exhaust and a guage that can read this, the standard o2 sensor in your car is not a wide band sensor,

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/162899-safc-settings/#findComment-3024096
Share on other sites

so your saying i shouldve paid 600 for a dr drift remap.

im better off buying a pfc arnt i.

At the moment im not up for massive gains just yet so ill see how it all goes.

PFC are about 1000 bucks plus there is install, tune etc. Im not quite sure about power gains for a safc but is should be noticeable. I still have not got around to getting mine tuned yet.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/162899-safc-settings/#findComment-3026400
Share on other sites

the reason y i bought one was because it was hesitating and it missfired so i was

told to get an SAFC. after gapping pluygs at .8mm everything seems well.

i had a read on a few threads on here about tuning the safc n most ppl say they gain anywhere between 13 and 25rwkw with the correct tune.

the more the better i guess

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/162899-safc-settings/#findComment-3026424
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

well i got my safc tuned 2day and this is what came up:

Mods:

-turboback exhaust with hiflow cat

-pod filter

-turbotech boost controller at 10psi

-SAFC

Before:

max power: 130.1rwkw @ 6324 RPM

max torque: 506.7Nm @ 5497 RPM

max M.A.P kPa: 179.9kPa @4141 RPM

After:

max power: 137.2rwkw @6344 RPM

max torque: 538 Nm @5082 RPM

max M.A.P kPa: 177.7kPa @3792 RPM

he said that i gained 7 rwkw just from the SAFC and without touchin the boost

for safe reasons. He didnt want 2 up the boost because i still had the factory cooler.

Would u guys say that this was a successful tune or not?

also....

if i decide to get a FMIC and up the boost will i need another tune or will it be ok?

cheers guys...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/162899-safc-settings/#findComment-3049556
Share on other sites

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...