Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys

im about to install my Apexi Power Fc D-jetro into my r33 gtr

so i need to know where to drill the holes for the vacum in my inlet manifold and how big to drill (what size drill bit)

where to run the harness and map sensors?

and what ever else i would need to know

i did try searching but didnt have any luck

thankyou kindly

I've never installed one of these myself - but why can't you just use one of the existing vacuum lines? there is one at the rear of the inlet manifold (after the throttles), one at the rear of the plenum (before the throttles) and the line to the BOV or FPR.

YOu drill into runner three and four into the section betweem the head and the throttles. I used 1/8 bsp fittings which require a 8.8mm drill bit, and a tap. To do it properly is a full days job, removing the plenum & throttles etc. Just make sure you get some gaskets, and dont clean the throttles.

dont know but when you find the answer please let me know, ill add to the pfc faq

I noticed by fitting it the right way I had much better tune. Lot smoother, better response, better economy, and lot less time in tuning.

By teeing it off the fpr and factory boost gauge line took so much time in tuning and still doesnt go as good as the other.

I noticed by fitting it the right way I had much better tune. Lot smoother, better response, better economy, and lot less time in tuning.

By teeing it off the fpr and factory boost gauge line took so much time in tuning and still doesnt go as good as the other.

Have to agree....the added air volume of the vac rail must dampen the signal or something. Its worth the effort to tap the runners.

Duncan musta been tired :3some:

Running a motor off a MAP sender straight up, is a feat in its own.

Your using a pressure sensing device in the manifold to assist the ECU, in guessing what mass of air is being ingested. Comparing that to a one of these "AFM" contraptions, that spits out a voltage, fairly relative to the direct mass thats going through it?... The ECU's job with a MAP sender as main load deriver is much harder.

Single throttle blades make it so much easier. Theres a 10L+ plenum that blends and muddy's up inlet pulses, making life so much easier for a MAP ECU (baring in mind, in this instance AFM's are better for ridiculous cams)

.. On the other hand, you have a 6 throttle blade RB26 setup, where you need to take a air sample from between the throttle body and inlet valve (wot? 3 inches max) on EACH cylinder... then combine that into ONE accumulated pressure zone to stick the MAP sender in...

Getting to the point :) The two MAP senders with the D-Jetro, i would have thought, need to be spaced geometrically equal along the length of the .. (collection tube, i think Nissan call it) in an attempt to gain a true manifold pressure reading, as per Adrian's post.

Important maybe, is that i myself have never personally owned and tuned a MAP referenced car. These thoughts are purely from my peers experiences and my deductions; debunk away.

There is a diagram in the D-Jetro manual that shows where and how to do them. but as stated above, it's runners 3 and 4 post throttle. I have the manual somewhere, but god knows where. maybe someone else with one can scan that for your page Paul?

Have to agree....the added air volume of the vac rail must dampen the signal or something. Its worth the effort to tap the runners.

haha yeah, i went the lazy route first then after a few drives and pulls was not happy with the way it traced throught the map.... re did it the correct way and the result was 1000% better.

Take it from ben and myself that if you are going to the effort of a D-JETRO then do it right, the system STR8E180 has posted pics of works poorly.

haha yeah, i went the lazy route first then after a few drives and pulls was not happy with the way it traced throught the map.... re did it the correct way and the result was 1000% better.

Tae it from ben and myself that if you are going to the effort of a D-JETRO then do it right, the system STR8E180 has posted pics of works poorly.

Gold.

:P

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

    • 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.
    • 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...