Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

hmm i dont like that little dib on the curve..

But still good figure none-the less..

What gear was that tune in?

wait is yours auto isnt it? how does the dyno reading work?

anyways where did you get your safc2 from?

Stupid apexi :P

im fairly certain its 1.1, its not harmful to the car is it?

0.8 are better.. 1.1 is too big..

I just changed the GTR ones last night.. wooo!

SAFC have aids and are so ghay to tune!

p.s your a/f are all over the place!

With regard to gaps, you go for the largest gap you can use without getting misfiring. Stock gap is 1.1mm but generally when you start upping the boost you need to drop the gap to about 0.8mm. If you have to go lower than that it's because your coilpacks aren't up to the job but in regards to your car Paul, if it's running fine now, great. Don't change anything. Equally don't be surprised if that misfiring comes back at some stage. It will be the coilpacks if it does.

I don't think the AFR's are too bad considering it's just an SAFC. You'll never get a flat line with that.

The dip in the curve is fairly typical of a stock ecu/fuel computer piggyback.

Guilt-Toy - Not denying that's a good tune but it's a happy dyno too.

I don't think the AFR's are too bad considering it's just an SAFC. You'll never get a flat line with that.

The dip in the curve is fairly typical of a stock ecu/fuel computer piggyback.

Thats true, Thats what I don't like about the SAFC's you can never get them perfect..

And in regards to replacing coil packs, i won't have a problem with miss firing as the spark plugs are more than cable of running the car with the standard turbo.

I will only need to replace coil packs say if i do a high flow and start pushing for close to 300rwkw or so...

If u run the right plugs at the right gap, and the right sort of fuel, say good buy to miss firing!

Yeah, in optimum condition the standard coil packs are up to the task of working correctly with low/mild boost. Yours aren't in optimum condition though, they're more than likely 100,000+kms old. You will need to replace the coil packs WHEN (not if) they fail, regardless of whether you're pushing 200rwkw or 300rwkw.

The issue with setting your gap too small is that the spark duration will be very quick and the spark will be weaker. The consequence is high exhaust emission levels due to the mixture not being burned as completely as with a fatter hotter spark. It'll result in an increase in fuel consumption and potentially a minor decrease in power. Rather than 'curing' your misfiring at 1.1mm by gapping directly to 0.7, it's smart to decrease in increments of .1 until the problem goes away. Often tuners wont do this though as it can be time consuming. If you are confident with doing this yourself you may save yourself some petrol..

Exactly what promordial said.. i seriously think gapped to 0.7 is way too much..

Refer to the thread ages ago about plugs. There was a huge debate about it. Someone dig that thread up lol..

so anyone keen on explaining that graph to me..

Or is all the power coming on after 80kms?

lol= no idea with this graph!!

cheers..

Edited by siddr20
Hey homo-spec lol...

My boot is still going to look better than yours at S'n'S

Sif Doof is HOMO Spec :blush:

What are you putting in the boot ?

yeah probably... i dunno if mine is gunna be done by then...

What the...... I hope it will be :w00t:

Yeah I agree those AFR's are pretty good for a SAFC. its hard to get a SAFC to read that straight. If you changed that to lambda it would be much better to look at :blush:

The dyno is not as happy as some people think.. it read 100hp less compared to the auto salon dyno the next day. but every dyno is different.

With regard to gaps, you go for the largest gap you can use without getting misfiring. Stock gap is 1.1mm but generally when you start upping the boost you need to drop the gap to about 0.8mm. If you have to go lower than that it's because your coilpacks aren't up to the job but in regards to your car Paul, if it's running fine now, great. Don't change anything. Equally don't be surprised if that misfiring comes back at some stage. It will be the coilpacks if it does.

I don't think the AFR's are too bad considering it's just an SAFC. You'll never get a flat line with that.

The dip in the curve is fairly typical of a stock ecu/fuel computer piggyback.

Guilt-Toy - Not denying that's a good tune but it's a happy dyno too.

Paul: Auto :):O:blush:

Graph looks good AFR wise and power I suppose.

Get new coils now! :) They make heap a difference.. Just ask Ed.. Bastard too my coils :w00t:

I miss my car :(

BTW Can I ask how much was the tune at C&V? How long did they take?

Oh and for dump and cat, just get them ones from Justjap. They work fine :)

Someone explain that graph to me dammit!!

Some tuners prefer to display the km/h on the bottom axis instead of RPM.. It looks like a 4th gear run judging by the speed. Why you would want to know power vs km/h i dont know? I would think power vs rpm would be much more useful. There's probably some reason why they would choose km/h instead of rpm, no idea what that is though? :thumbsup:

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...