Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys, I was wondering if you had any input on this problem i am facing at the moment.

I just got a hks 2535 onto my rb20 and got a dyno tune...during which we found the current plugs were too hot and so we whacked some heat range 7 plugs on which were gapped at 0.8mm...when that was done the tune was all good but i have found that the car now idles terribly now...it constantly hunts between 700-1000rpm and misses occasionally...the car however idles fine with heat range 6 plugs...does anyone have any suggestions? what can i do to improve idle quality?

Anyone? I was thinking of splurging on some SPITFIRES but i'm not keen to do so if the coilpacks aren't the problem...

Splitfires won't help if it's fouling all 6 plugs. I;'d check your AFR at idle/light throttle to see if it's running rich - this will foul plugs quickly. 7's s/be ok on the street if you give it some full throttle a couple of times per week to clean off the plugs. I found copper 7's gave me a lumpy idle/slight fouling wheras platinum 7's ran smoother & didn't foul as much (but blew out under high psi unlike the coppers).

How did you come to the conclusion the plugs were to hot??

I have used 6's in 350-400Kw engines and never ran into problems. All said engines run 7's when they are on the track but for most use they are happy with 6's

However id be looking at the AFR at idle and going from there. Its goingto be tunning issue if you really do need to run 7's

It was to reduce detonation...we were getting decent results at 14psi with 6s but then when i wound in 18psi and after several power runs detonation got pretty bad...so you say that you have run high powered engines on 6s with no issues? if so then i might have to look deeper into this matter...i kinda figured that the coils were fine as the engine idled flawlessly with 6s...

What were the water temps like?

Possibly that was partially the cause of det.

6's are fine as said for 300rwkw, I've seen one push close to 400rwkw on 6's without problems.

When I ran 7's I had to put a bit of work in to the temp correct table as the defaults were simply too rich and would foul the plugs.

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...