Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Gday Matt Greg again.

Have plugged in your ingnition/timing figures.

They are a lot more agressive than mine.

Would I need to match the Injection side as well?

I cant quite dial in the same figures must be different PFC versions I know yours is older. So the higher the figure the more fuel correct?

Lucky I have a dyno day at Tilbrooks tomorrow to test it. Mark or Mick might get a good laugh at my backyard tuning.

Well I grabbed Boostd data and made comparisons to mine. His had a lot more timing up to 4 deg towards the later load points. I matched his however didint touch the fuel side. I have a Z32 airflow meter which is different and good A/F ratios. Anyway drove the car and didnt feel much different. Maybe the fuel needs to be revisited along with timing ajustments. Anyway went to a dyno day and resultently made no more power however changed the power curve at peak to drop off later.

Next we dialed in and extra 3deg which can be done via a single function the HC and only lasts until the motor is turned off. I made an extra 9rwkw however with indications of detonation. So a further 2 deg could be feasable. Anyway got on the road with a mate watching the HC and tried 3deg on the road. Felt strong howerver was getting 40 knock so puched in more fuel and reduced the knock. Took heaps of boost out and tried 4 deg felt just as good and had no knock.

I wish I new all this playability a week before at the drags as potentil to put more fuel or timing accompanied with octane booster and tested my times could have been interesting.

However the fuel side is the key and needs to be done on a dyno.

  • 1 year later...
Here is the Excel file I used to map my Fuel and ignition tables. I am sure some of you guys out there can get some use out of it. I recently had Mick from subzero Dyno my car. You can clearly see the fuel he took out of it at PFC load Value 15-16. The car was being retuned at 1.10bar. The Ignition points around 15-16 need to be trimmed at peak torque to reduce detenation. Did make 225kw tho. When the timing is retarded I think it will negate the extra boost and all I`ll end up with is a slight increase in mid range power only, probably actually loose some up top.

sorry for bringing up a very old thread, but the link doesn't work..

can you email it to (email removed) ???

I would love to put these setting into my powerfc

:bp: I'm working on a R32 GTR map with Datalogit at the moment ......its a lot of work but am making progress. I can post what I've done so far if you like as an excel 3d map?   :jawa:  

Mike

I am sure that the GT-R owners with PFC's would LOVE that, do it dude.

Its a world of knowledge sharing I say.

If I could give anything back ,I would be more than happy to

I have some questions for this mapping you have sent.

Why are some values in red? Are they of some importance or need to be monitored?

And if I enter the 2 top maps in, then thats exactly what you have?

Those graphs are just plotted from your maps right?

(Sorry for my ignorance, I am not very good at this sort of tuning.

Seems like you have a bit of a nack!

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...