Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

get a new O2 sensor, might help efficiency, same goes with new fuel filter, fresh oil etc (ie service)

Id be looking at a Nismo fuel pressure regulator, SAFC2, Bosch 040 fuel pump (direct battery feed) along with the tune :D but depends on what your goal is.

get a new O2 sensor, might help efficiency, same goes with new fuel filter, fresh oil etc (ie service)

Id be looking at a Nismo fuel pressure regulator, SAFC2, Bosch 040 fuel pump (direct battery feed) along with the tune :D but depends on what your goal is.

Goal is definitely via the budget at the moment! Sounds like a good service and tune for now then.What cost am i looking at for o2 sensor?

Is it worth the $$ considering the only 'mod' i have is a Trust Airinx GT panel filter? I was hoping a tune might/will increase fuel efficiency. Thoughts?

Very little you can do without some kind of "tunable" ecu (piggyback or complete replacement, a topic which has been covered many times on this forum).

I think the only thing a dyno will allow you to do is maybe add some ignition timing safely (which will likely help with fuel economy a little, and give a bit more power/response) and also give you a baseline kw readout as well as show you your Air/Fuel ratio graph.

A piggyback ecu like the SAFC2 (Apexi Super Air Flow Converter) will allow you to tune the Air/Fuel ratios (AFR) and something like the SITC (Super Ignition Timing Converter) will allow you to tune your ignition timing independently. If you have an SAFC but not an SITC, you will notice that tuning the AFR's will also affect your ignition timing as a side-effect. The SITC allows you to adjust ignition timing independently of AFR's, thus giving you more control over the tune.

Rough guess - you'd be looking at about ~120-125awkw at the moment (approx. 140-145rwkw if you use a 2wd dyno). I personally dont think an air filter will show much performance gain. I have an apexi one, but I couldn't honestly say it gives me any more kw than a standard filter. I've also used a K&N filter on a previous turbo car. After AFM problems from it, I replaced it with a cheap bosch one and couldn't tell the difference in performance.

The one modification with the biggest power gain will be an exhaust. That should give you ~20awkw on its own if you get a good free-flowing one (although it will make the car a bit louder - make sure you get 2 mufflers - NOT a resonator - to reduce drone due to the large boot).

After that an SAFC and a bit more boost will happily see you getting over 150-160awkw, but dont go over about 11 psi on the stock turbo if you want it to last. :D

Good luck with it. :D

PS. I'd definitely prefer boostworx to turbotune. Shaun has a lot more experience with tuning nissan imports and many people on this forum trust and recommend him and dont take their cars anywhere else. :D

good post Steve.

thing is, if you are doing an safc, youd be crazy not to add a Z32 afm, a Nismo FPR and a better fuel pump. These 3 items help so much in terms of giving more 'tuneability' to the ecu piggyback.

what is your current fuel economy ?

as standard (pod filter and catback zaust) I had 120awkw with around 460kms to the empty tank, 1st mods (finished zuast, r34 smic, fpr, safc) got to 140awkw with around 450kms to empty tank, then retuned again with sitc, fuel pump, fmic etc got 160awkw at 12psi, then last tune with a highflow turbo I get ~180awkw with around 440kms to empty.

cant complain with that fuel economy, seeing Ive increased power by over 50% (way more in it, final tune coming up soon enough). oil filter relocation kit, new oil and filter, cam gear wheel, and 1.1bar boost. expect 200awkw and roughyl same economy.

good post Steve.

thing is, if you are doing an safc, youd be crazy not to add a Z32 afm, a Nismo FPR and a better fuel pump. These 3 items help so much in terms of giving more 'tuneability' to the ecu piggyback.

what is your current fuel economy ?

as standard (pod filter and catback zaust) I had 120awkw with around 460kms to the empty tank, 1st mods (finished zuast, r34 smic, fpr, safc) got to 140awkw with around 450kms to empty tank, then retuned again with sitc, fuel pump, fmic etc got 160awkw at 12psi, then last tune with a highflow turbo I get ~180awkw with around 440kms to empty.

cant complain with that fuel economy, seeing Ive increased power by over 50% (way more in it, final tune coming up soon enough). oil filter relocation kit, new oil and filter, cam gear wheel, and 1.1bar boost. expect 200awkw and roughyl same economy.

That sounds good too Brenden, but will be too much $$ to do straight away so they will be done over some time I think. Not really wanting to go crazy with the mods as it is after all used by the boss too, quite happy with power at the moment and an increase with an exhaust. Last tank I got 13.3l/100kms with a trip to the Barossa in there. I dumped a bottle of Nulon injector cleaner in that tank which definitely helped, compared to the last tank. Might get some Redline injector cleaner for the next tank and see how that goes. So I'm thinking it's not so bad, and this is before a proper tune too.

standard turbo is unlikely to max out the afm so no need for a Z32.

unlikely to max out the injectors so no need for an FPR.

unlikely to max out fuel pump so no need for bigger fuel pump.

SAFC, a bleed valve are all bang for your buck mods.

incorrect; in the terms that they ALL help aid the tune

I can vouch for that, sure its not all necessary, nothing is, but they ALL aid in helping sort out a real nice tune.

yup

it all comes down to the fact "how far do you want to go"

and when you are doing it "what is the budget"

Nismo fpr $160 delivered Nengun

Bosch 040 $200 delivered

Z32 second hand $150 delivered

safc - search for best price.

I can guarantee when using a SAFC that the FPR helps sort out the tune - youd be foolish to install a safc and not a fpr, and so does Z32 (higher resolution for air intake measuring), fuel pump may or may not be overkill, each to their own tho. Im not going to preach to you what works for me

tangles did it occur to you that using your hi-flow you are:

a. on the limit of resolution of the standard AFM

b. close to maxing your injectors

c. on the limit of your fuel pump

hence all the above items are necessary or close enough in your case.

standard turbo......should not require any of these items.

tangles did it occur to you that using your hi-flow you are:

a. on the limit of resolution of the standard AFM

b. close to maxing your injectors

c. on the limit of your fuel pump

hence all the above items are necessary or close enough in your case.

standard turbo......should not require any of these items.

sorry dude, pls dont try to make me out as a fool - I might come across that way (quite deliberately) now and then and take the piss outa myself, but I learn fast and research thouroughly................

my case example: standard turbo, cat back exhaust, bleed valve. 120awkw, 2yrs ago now.

supplied a safc, and with my readings from this site supplied a nismo fpr due to the fact that the fpr maintains the rail pressure that you are altering when using a safc. but using a fpr (cause you are using a safc) leans the fuel pump a bit, obviously. from that tune (140awkw) the standard afm was looking a bit cockeyed, wasnt working well at all, so it was thoroughly recommened to me at the time by the respected tuner to get a z32 afm for the next tune.

next tune, finished off exhaust with the dump pipe, added fmic, and supplied the larger afm as the z32 provides greater gain and measurement of the air, being used with a safc and fpr it seemed "normal" to do this, considering it was recommened but the engine tuner. also added a sitc and fuel pump. fuel pump was added to make sure I had no issues with fuel, seeing a z32afm/sitc/fpr/safc were being used. why do all this and risk leaning out the fuel pump? that was 160awkw standard turbo.

added the highflow (always had the goal to do this) and at same psi gained ~25awkw outa the box.

so yes in my case it comes down to your overall plans.

as I said before, depends on how far you want to go. depends on budget, but a $150 fpr wont break the bank, nor would same price for z32 afm.

BUT, in summary, I wouldnt add a safc without also adding a fpr. then by adding a fpr you should consider a bigger fuel pump, eventually, each car/engine is different tho, horses for courses. why lean too hard on the stnd pussy 10yr old fuel pump? z32 afm has greater tuneabililty than stnd afm...... my course of action with the 1st/2nd tune showed up the afm, could have been unlucky but again just my particular story.

highflow turbo was the last thing I added, everything else was good and ready for it.

So that should be about what i get then with my 206kW Neo6 engine with just a hi flow panel filter?

Set your expectations at about 110awkw just so you dont get disappointed if its not what you want. Remember that all dyno's will read differently from each other and also possibly different on any given day, as your car will run better some days than others. I had my car dyno'd at 157awkw on a ~35 degree day and I only have the standard S2/R34 SMIC so I'd argue that it would definitely get a better reading on a cold day. I can notice the difference after driving for say 20 minutes, ie. cooling issues. It always feels faster when its cold (ie. engine heated up to efficient running temperature but intercooler and intake temps still cold).

Tangles (and others), thanks for the compliments - I was just putting together most of the things I've picked up from this forum and my own (limited) experience with turbo nissans.

When my car was stock I got 13.5-14L/100km in town and 10.7L/100km on the highway. Now with significantly more power (had an exhaust manifold leak when I bought the car which gave it only 100awkw, compared to ~160awkw now), I'm getting 11.5-12L/100km in town and have seen 9L/100km on the highway (brisbane to goondiwindi, early morning). Thats a huge improvement in fuel economy AND performance which is a very nice achievement in my opinion. Mostly thanks to the exhaust for freeing up the engine and the bigger turbo for keeping it off boost in town. :)

I too have ~160awkw at 12psi, although as my sig states, at the top end of my dyno its actually only running 9psi (boost controller cant keep up) so if it had 12psi all the way through I could pick up maybe an extra 10awkw?

My wishlist for the car is a mile long and realistically none of it will probably happen. I have so many maintenance items now coming up that I need to pay for otherwise I wont be able to afford to even keep the car :) Things like new tires, brakes, possibly radius rod bushes, possibly front shocks and springs, and its due for an engine and transmission service...it all just creeps up on you. Its a lot of money that I would have happily spent on a FMIC and SITC (hello 180+awkw@14psi!!!) but we all know that part of owning a car is keeping up with all the boring stuff like servicing etc. ;)

tangles, i am not trying to make you out as a fool.

i am disagreeing (also based on facts). nothing more nothing less.

sorry dude, yeah I know that..... my bad.

long hard tiring day last friday.

Im still keen tho with the safc + adj.fpr tho, thats all.

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


  • 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...