Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys,

Finally got the install, tune and dyno done, here it is, I just thought I might share it with ya'll. This figure was achieved at 18PSI. I have no cams, just the usualy supporting mods, ie 555 cc injectors, Z32, front mount, exhaust etc etc.

272.3 RWKW. The Curve does look very jittery up top, not sure why?

post-48356-1207905239_thumb.jpg

Cheers

fair effort, im half way through putting the same turbo on my rb20, i assume yours is rb25?

was it a remap or you have aftermarket comp? what rear housing do you have?

Yes mine's a RB-25.

I have a Power FC, I and strongly suggest you get one to. A remapp doesn't have any where near as many adjustable parameters as the PowerFC does. That's just my 2 cents worth.

I have the 0.68A/R housing.

I would have gone for something like a GT-RS for an RB-20. Even in my car (RB-25) there is a MASSIVE difference between the stock turbo and this one in terms of spool time. Having now installed it, I strongly suggest you get something smaller.

Cheerio!

Hi,

Could i ask you to tell me when the turbo starts to spool and full boost say in 4th gear? Also does your dyno sheet run out at 6500 or 7000 rpm. so i can work out were the power is to rpm. Cheers

it looks like it is hitting full boost around 4200 rpm. and as soon as it does (115kmph) you are making peak torque and you have ignition breakdown. Are you still using original coils? looks like spark is having issues at 18psi. what size is your plug gap?

also as someone else mentioned it looks like your timing map may be a bit flat around full boost. 18deg would be the sort of timing i would imagine at that sort of boost.

either that or you are having wheel spin, but it looks to erratic to be wheel spin.

cheers :(

Nice results, does look very "jittery" up top though.

Pretty much the same power as my hks 3037 pro s but i am using 95octane and 17psi.

You must be running 98 yes?

Hmmm 0.68 housing wheel spin for sure on the street looking at the graph part from that you wouldn't have the data for the rest of the graph, ie: IT, AT, Gear, Shoot_6f or Shoot_6. just a query as it clears any inconsistencies and makes the graph true to a point., plus i wouldn't be surprised if the 0.68 would be starting to choke that high.

Cheers

The rough curve can be the sample rate of the dyno software. lower sample rate, smoother curve. Maybe spark issues, but that should have been very obvious to the tuner as you can see it, hear it and feel it

Nice curve though, i'd suggest your tuner didn't get on the gas until 3k or so. I have seen enough of these turbos on a dyno to know you should have 18psi in the very low 3k range if the tuner is into it from 2k and the ramp up of the power happens earlier as well obviously.

The rough curve can be the sample rate of the dyno software. lower sample rate, smoother curve. Maybe spark issues, but that should have been very obvious to the tuner as you can see it, hear it and feel it

Nice curve though, i'd suggest your tuner didn't get on the gas until 3k or so. I have seen enough of these turbos on a dyno to know you should have 18psi in the very low 3k range if the tuner is into it from 2k and the ramp up of the power happens earlier as well obviously.

18 PSI was reached at 95 KM/H. I don't know the conversion of KM/H to PRM. About 3,500 RPM I assume?

Yes I have splitfire coil packs and platinum spark plugs. I'm not too sure what the tunner re-gapped them too, but I do recall that he did regap them.

Not sure about when he put his foot on the pedal?

I think the jittery graph may have been from the wheels spinning, even on the road, when it reaches full boost the wheels are spinning insanely in 2nd.

Do you think I should take the car back to the tunner to resolver the jittery dyno?

And is my turbo spooling up late assuming that he had his foot on the pedal the whole time?

Cheers

EDIT:

Hi Guys, 18 PSI was reached at 93.4 KM/H.

And sorry, I thought it was 18 PSI that I was running, but it was 17 PSI that I was running when I achieved the 272.3 RWKW.

Boost spiked up to about 20 PSI ( I have a turbo tech boost controller, looking to buy a PFC Boost controller kit to avoid the spike) and gradually dropped down to 17 PSI.

So just to confirm, the 272.3 rwkw was acheived when the boost was at 17 PSI. (Boost remained at 17 PSI from about 156KM/h until the end (180KM/H)

Hey guys, I had a look at GTS25T dyno, he has the same turbo as mine, no cams, pretty much the same mods, and at about 90km/h, he has about 30 rwkw more then me....

Now, this could be due to the following:

1) The tunner didn't step on it until 3000 rpm, (which I don't think is the case as boost appears to be rising at a more rapid rate all the way) at 89km/h, boost is at 12PSI.

2) the tunner doesn't know what he's doing

3) something is up with my turbo? (I got the 0.68 A/R housing)

DO you guys think I should go back and have a chat with my tunner?

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 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...