Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

AFR tuning is different from car to car - you can run some engines leaner than others it depends upon many factors - fuel density, chamber shape, piston dwell at TDC, piston diameter, spark plug postion, intake and exhuast design, exhaust backpressure - the list is endless.

Well thank goodness 99.99% of people are running RB's on this forum, with a large number of them running the same comparable setups :D

Edited by GeeTR
im talking low to mid (75-108k's) to be exact... you could lean on yours at least a ratio in those initial dips safely.... as im guessing the a/fs are taken from the tailpipe and not the dump..

^^^

that there is gospel...

Yes, that is the plan. I noticed this when you see the little bumb in power increase at 75kmph. I've done mostly road tuning so I am not able to see these nice AFR curves to adjust, and also, I only tuned the top end on this one to be a show off at the dyno day. And it worked :D

If it was running so lean that it's dangerous, wouldn't the PFC knock sensor detect knock and have an extremely high knock count?

12.5:1 and higher I consider dangerous but you don't have room for bad batches of fuel, a idiot driver, or hot days. And there aren't a lot of people looking at the high knock count. They are too busy showing off to their mates.

But in saying all of this, the original AFR plot should be flatter not all over the place.

Well thank goodness 99.99% of people are running RB's on this forum, with a large number of them running the same comparable setups :yes:

ohhh I'm sorry all rb produce maximum torque at 12.35467:1 AFR with 22degrees of timing at 6500rpm and 15psi of boost.

Wake up clown, no two cars are similar with even the same mods - that was the point I was trying to make. Its no good saying that there is a certain AFR or timing advance that to achieve X amount of horsepower in all situations.

Found the original dyno result for the car dating back to late 2005 - click to read, scroll down page

Scale on my dyno - 1AFR= 2 big blocks, or 10 small blocks.

Scale on original dyno below - 1AFR = .4 of a big block

therefore zoom/magnification is 5 times on my graph compared with the graph below. Perhaps that is the reason that Mafia commented that the AFR was all over the show. His AFR probably looks the same at a higher level of magnification.

crd29.jpg

Edited by futurewa

You are looking good for a power run now!

post your dyno sheet after your power run, it would be interesting to see if it has changed much over time.

don't worry about the power numbers, they vary wildly from dyno to dyno, more interested in the power curve shape and the afr.

that is what shits me about CRDs sheets. they always use such a wide AFR scale that everything just looks flat. I mean seriously is there any reason they need to have 2.5:1 to 22.5:1 AFR on there? I would love to see the same graph but with a more sensible scale for the AFR. maybe 8:1 to 18:1 or similar.

that is what shits me about CRDs sheets. they always use such a wide AFR scale that everything just looks flat. I mean seriously is there any reason they need to have 2.5:1 to 22.5:1 AFR on there? I would love to see the same graph but with a more sensible scale for the AFR. maybe 8:1 to 18:1 or similar.

Great point!

They are probably showing everyone how "flat" they have tuned their a/f ratios. Meanwhile when zoomed in its probably all over the shop

I was thinking the same thing, why the hell would they want to read 3:1 AFR ? the sensor wont even read that low !!! :(

Anyways i like to run the engine rich, 11.6:1 has kept my engine alive on 25psi so thats where its going to stay. Just seems like the guys in sydney like to run em really lean or something, maybe they get paid more money and can afford a couple of rebuilds a year ?? or they want their customers to come back in for engine rebuilds soon after ??

More blown up engines = more engine work needed LOL

*shrug*

that is what shits me about CRDs sheets. they always use such a wide AFR scale that everything just looks flat. I mean seriously is there any reason they need to have 2.5:1 to 22.5:1 AFR on there? I would love to see the same graph but with a more sensible scale for the AFR. maybe 8:1 to 18:1 or similar.

well here is a perfect example. the graph is one of mine. 32 GTR. scale is 10-18:1. Plenty of scope. on scaling like the above my AFR would probably look ruler flat too... but that is not what I wanted anyway.

0517002ui9.jpg

thats a good AFR too! nice tune there

well here is a perfect example. the graph is one of mine. 32 GTR. scale is 10-18:1. Plenty of scope. on scaling like the above my AFR would probably look ruler flat too... but that is not what I wanted anyway.

0517002ui9.jpg

yeah it's pretty much what I asked for. 11.8:1 for most of the rev range and richening up to 11.5:1 closer to readline to give it a little insurance up top. in reality it's probably a little rich overall, but it's still very punchy, not doughy at all as the extra fuel seems to allow a little extra timing. :cool:

Had a quick read through and one thing I think everyone is missing , correct me if i am wrong ?

The tuner said there was too much TIMING !

no matter how much you look at a dyno graph is never going to show that ! You need your dirty paws on the hand controller to see the numbers.

That original graph is pretty wavery up top. Also as beer baron pointed out the scale is 2.5 afr points, so will be VERY up down on a different scale.

Yes you should be seeing knock levels, assuming your knock sensors are working and not disabled.

What knock numbers were you getting on the street ?

I think you will find a good portion of WA tuners will tune on the cautious side of AFR's. There have been a couple of breaker tuners that given WA bad rep, so most tuners very careful now days.

Your car is at what I understand to be a good tuner.

Also Beer barons tune would be the sort of AFR"s i would be aiming at !

Edited by Butters
It says 12.4:1 to 12.6:1 in the mid range.... why do you think that is "way to rich"? If you thank that is way to rich, then you need to re-think your idea of tuning..

Seriously, a safe tune is 11.7:1 to about 12:1 afrs..

12.5:1 and above is considered very dangerous, but I can get away with it due to a fairly obvious reason - WMI

If circuit GTR's can run around with 400rwkw and 13:1

12.5:1 obviously isnt as 'dangerous' as you make it out to be now is it? :cool:

  • 2 weeks later...

Finally had a chance to scan my dyno runs -

11LBS AFR Taken at each exhaust (Twin System) (Possibly injectors need cleaning, as the run was terminated due to the knock count going up to 50)

15Lbs Boost 336HP - No knock issue

20Lbs AFR (Not sure which exhaust?) - Run cut...too much knock, up to 50

11Lbs Boost 300HP

12Lbs Boost 308HP

14Lbs Boost 325HP

By my calculations, the 20Lbs run reached 169km/hr in 4th, generating 380HP. The run shown earlier in the post but in 2005, looked like it would have had 10-20hp more at the same speed in the same gear. Possibly the dyno? Possibly my calc?

some quick advice mate would be to find a work shop in perth that tunes rb26's often and get them to check out then possibly retune to your needs and wants ( xspeed, top racing ect ), then you know whats safe and whats not.

Edited by monga

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

    • GCG is a good company, they're a major distributor for Garrett in Japan as well.
    • Nah, OEM washer bottle and brake fluid reservoirs are fine I don't know what it is with the plastic that Mazda used, some plastics, like the washer bottle and brake fluid res are fine, and still look new after 20 years use, where as the coolant expansion tank, and PS reservoir, that I replaced with new OEM items when I first got the car, turned yellow and started getting brittle a few years later If the dirty yellow stained plastics didn't trigger me there wouldn't be an issue, but they did, much like the battery bracket....... Meh As for going back to work full time to support car stuff, nope, why, because I own a Mazda NC MX5, not a Nissan R series Skyline 🤣
    • I've never heard of CJ-motor, so can't advise you on them. I'd just go straight to GCG for a GCG highflow though. Seems no point to use a middleman. I'm somewhat surprised that the price on the CJ site is lower than the GCG retail price. Even though CJ would get a discount of some sort, you would hardly expect them to give up so much margin. Maybe the price is out of date? Having said that "I'd go to GCG"...when I did my highflow, I went to Hypergear. I did this https://hypergearturbos.com/product/rb25dethighflow/#tab-dyno-results with the R34 OP6 450HP profile. With the BB centre (extra $400) and intially with the standard boost actuator, but I eventually got him to send me the high pressure one when I got to the point of being able to actually use it. Ends up costing the same sort of money as the GCG highflow, but this is, of course, the turbo that I KNOW has a shorter length core and so moves the comp cover rearwards. The GCG apparently doesn't do that. My mechanic also swears by the GCG highflow, given that we have another turbo rebuilder who does something essentialy the same as theirs, using Garrett wheels. He says it stands up at really low revs and makes good power. I haven't pushed my HG highflow past ~240-250rwkW yet (should have a little more in it, but unclear how much) and it does have a fairly gentle boost ramp. OK, it's much better now that I have gotten my boost controller tuned up on it.  A lot of my earlier unhappiness was because I couldn't keep the wastegate flap as closed as it needed to be (including some mechanical issues). I'd still prefer it to boost up nearly as quickly as the stocker, and it certainly a bit slower than that. So maybe the GCG one is worth the first look (for you).
    • Ok thanks 🙂 I will higly consider this. Any "known" company for a good reviews and experience to send that off? Is that CJ-motor good one? Or go straight to GCG site? I need to use VPN to even find some of those "shops" let alone access them 🙂 
    • You can literally put in as much WMI as it takes to quench the combustion totally (and then back it off a little, obviously), and it will keep making more and more power. The power comes from the cooling effect of the water (and the meth) and the extra fuel (the meth, which also has massive octane). It is effectively exactly like running E85. One might be slightly better than the other, but they are damn close. But with either you can lean on the boost or the timing (or both) waaaay more than with just petrol and the results are similar. Here's the first thing I googled for an anecdotal bit of evidence. Can't access the attachment without being a gold member, but it is there for the getting if able to, or searched up elsewise perhaps. https://www.hpacademy.com/forum/general-tuning-discussion/show/wmi-vs-e85/
×
×
  • Create New...