Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Also it cant be duty cycle based as all nissan's use dumb ignitors.

In a 300zx for example there is is a 32 byte table (location 7b50-7b70) . It represents Ignition Dwell Duty, the values in the table * 0.33, represent percentage of Dwell Duty. Scale: 400 rpm to 12800rpm in steps of 400 rpm.

Edited by URAS
  • 3 months later...

When installing my new splitfire coilpacks I remember reading that they recommend going to a heat range cooler plug as well

would this mod to PFC settings be done as well as cooler plugs or instead off cooler plugs, am still getting a bit off knock 60-80 range with the new tune and am thinking off trying both plugs and these settings to try an sort it.

I assume dwell changes allow for better coil saturation and resultant "better" spark yeah?

Yep, and the colder heat range plugs should reduce the knock a bit.

Upon researching the stock settings for dwell , the recharge time of the coils is rpm dependent, and follows the torque curve, i guess nissan realised the coils would overheat if given a set dwell, so they increase it around 4000rpm, and it drops off steadily both sides of this.

cheers for the reply bud it was knocking a bit, much the same, before the new coils will give plugs a go I think an (as I dont have datalogit) chat to my tuner bout changing these other settings

interesting how you say the dwell settings drop off after 4000 rpm coz it seems to be after 4000 to bout 5000ish mine seems to be struggling

Edited by noone

interesting how you say the dwell settings drop off after 4000 rpm coz it seems to be after 4000 to bout 5000ish mine seems to be struggling

Thats for the stock ecu, setup for the stock turbo, i would find a dyno shop with datalogit, and just get them to change the dwell settings, if you want a bit more grunt there, no need to put it on the dyno to do it, shouldnt cost much.

Could b wrong Mafia but i dont think either setting could hurt em but stock type settings just wouldn't utilise the coils to the max as they dont have enough time to get full satutation so dont put out the maximum spark they can do.

If only I had a copy of datalogit I could find out without having to try an convince my tuner

It seems that the amount of dwell drops off after 4000 rpm because the maximum value that nissan use is E9 (Hex), It is scaled against rpm as a dwell duty %. As rpm increases there is less time between firing events to charge coils.

There seems to be a few differing methods of determining dwell duty %, 1. Divide by 10 , 2. Multiply by .33

  • 11 years later...
On ‎4‎/‎05‎/‎2007 at 10:05 AM, STATUS said:

There is almost always two settings;

IGNITION VOLTAGE DWELL COMPENSATION (amount of time added to base ignition dwell as a function of ignition voltage)

IGNITION DWELL PERIOD ((length of time the ignition coil dwells as a function of rpm) sometimes this is a percentage of duty, like remaps for example)

I'm putting R35 coils onto the RB25 shortly, and seems adjusting the dwell in a Power FC isn't straightforward as there's no table labelled  " Dwell Ms > Voltage" , and all the info I can find on setting up the R35 coils refers to directly entering the specified ms against the voltage point.  While researching I read one post saying the "IGN Vs BattV" table referred to adjusting the actual IGN timing rather than dwell, but it would make much more sense if it referred to the dwell compensation as noted above by Trent, although doesn't seem he was specifically referring to the PFC. 

90555600_STATUSsignchange.jpg.95a6f01fc9179ef28b296f805e80bd26.jpg

I also found this post screenshotted below, and the formula makes sense, giving around 1.7 as the dwell for stock coils.

1975316605_PFCdwell2.JPG.237596f1148c308924aff06f1af6a9a7.JPG

so from there, with that formula making the figures in the "IGN dwell vs RPM" > "Adjust" column around 1.7 for stock coils, to get the R35 coil dwell into the mid-4ms range needed at 14 volts you would need to enter the new increased values into the "Adjust" column at each rpm point, and once done, then move to the "IGN vs BattV" table and enter the change at each voltage as a percentage to get the desired ms at each voltage point.  

1722042730_r35coildwellvoltage.JPG.310761da3105ed38c6bb3ffd0476b6ee.JPG

 

Does that make sense, or does anyone have any details on how new coil dwell should be set up in the PFC? ..thank you

 

Edited by hardsteppa

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 came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...