Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys!

ok so this thread is a thread for talking power fc tuning and all associated bits and peices. if you dont like what you see or read here then please save the criticism and go elsewhere...this is a positive thread only please!

its also for those who are completely technically minded, so some speculation is allowed as long as you have something to back the speculation up...lets keep it scientific too please.

ok so here are my two maps at the moment (if you want to comment on them please do):

gallery_30866_2266_77758.jpg

gallery_30866_2266_24033.jpg

most of my tuning is done on the road, with ocasional dyno tuning. this tune is 100% road tuned.

i will post more info about this tune as i have more time, but right now im at work.

my mods are:

RB25DET

Apexi Power FC with Boost Control Kit

Apexi Power Intake

Custom Intake Pipe (AFM to turbo)

Custom CAI (from front bar to pod)

Custom Pod Filter Enclosure

HKS Adj Ex Cam Gear (retard 4deg)

Nismo 555cc Injectors

HKS GTRS Turbo

HPI Low Mount Ex Manifold

Xforce 3"-3.5" turboback exhaust

Just Jap Bar and Plate FMIC

Tuning details:

CAS position is 15btdc with timing light sensor wrapped around the three wires just before they plug into coilpack on cylinder 1. the loop wire gives a false reading on my battery powered timing light.

injector settings in power fc are 66.6% correction and +0.18ms lag adjustment

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

don't want to burst your bubble, but comparing maps is useless because some people have their injectors dialed in differently, different lag times etc and also the CAS can be in a completely different spot and thus making the timing different.

I'm keen to see if any has made and good changes to the other parts of the FC though, or the other tabs in FC-Edit

no i aggree with you there.... but we can atleast say... 'i did this, and this happened'

its not about comparing maps but rather tuning techniques. this thread is about tuning and leraning how to tune. i have books and the way from america about advanced efi tuning. this is a personal project and i am interested in getting feedback from people that know more than me if they are interested in helping. i am just getting the ball rolling on here...

new info above...

Thats a huge amount of timing in the low load cells..i.e in the 50 deg vicinity. I know Guilt toy mentioned not to go over 38 deg anywhere in the map due to increase in cyl temps. Was that BS or not.

I know mine could handle a lot more timing in the top left corner 10x10 but I havent as yet.

also just something i thought about, if you adjust the ex cam gear you alter the base timing by that amount too...so 4 deg retard would be taking 4 deg out of the base timing as well....

can anyome confirm?

If you pull off the CAS to adjust the cam gear, then good practice is to use your timing light and adjust your ignition to the same base timing. Otherwise yes, the whole timing map will be out by that amount.

Here's something about the two maps:

IGN. for full load tuning use Map Watch to follow the diagonal downwards ramp as the engine accelerates from say 1600rpm to 4800. Aim to make the progressive reduction in timing incremental (ie no huge steps). Watch your knock counts in those cells, and be aware of interpolation from adjoining cells. Interpolation is something to be aware of particularly for full load fuel settings as well. This can make it difficult to get a particular cell "nice" because of an artificial raise or drop in fuel or ignition for that cell because of the variance in its neighbour.

INJ. especially on very light trailing throttle decel as you go from load row 2 to row 1 where decel fuel cut occurs, it can be difficult to eliminate a slight throttle hunt that feels like it cycles on-off-on-off-on-off. If you get that feel, check the AFR log via a chart to verify. I have run row 2 very lean (around 15.5 AFR) and it was terrible. At around 13.5 the hunt is greatly reduced but still slightly noticeable. Trying to get any meaningful log of AFR on row 1 is virtually pointless due to decel fuel cut.

As per Mafia's comments, some of the other settings that can be adjusted are worth reviewing too.

i like what you have to say mr dale...

one point about the timing light and cas though...because the cas uses the cam for the 'turning' of the sensor...if you set the timing to that then the intake valves are opening at the wrong time. the timing i would imagine needs to be set to the intake cycle rather than the ex as the cas also tells the ecu/pfc when to fire the injectors...

so hence my question...if i have 4 deg retard of ex cam timing, the do i set the cas to 11deg base timing or 19deg...

The CAS uses the signal to determine the position of the CRANK, not the camshaft. It's just convenient to mount the sensor on the end of the cam. So reset your timing to 15 degrees.

Remember the timing event is described in relation to TDC - Top Dead Centre of the piston through its stroke. So it's all about the crank position.

Edited by Dale FZ1
set the entire row of P01 to 0ign timing if you want your car to pop and fart its ass off on gear change or deaccel

Other than because you can do it, why would you want your car to sound like it's poorly tuned?

Guilt toy mentioned not to go over 38 deg anywhere in the map due to increase in cyl temps. Was that BS or not.

I recall some comments from him about ignition timing, but suspect it was in relation to tuning for emissions. Less advance generally equates to higher exhaust temps. My understanding is that extra advance will result in more efficient running + torque, but past a certain point the emissions output is increased in a certain area. So there is a sweet point for tuning for either emissions or torque, but they are often different. Browsing Guilt Toy's thread about emissions sort of covered his findings.

Edited by Dale FZ1

No, not necessarily. You set a base timing figure, arbitrarily 15 degrees. The amount you see in the electronic map is added to the base figure, to give TOTAL advance. It is total advance that counts.

The reason for checking your base timing is so you don't have to make wholesale changes to the IGN map to compensate for whatever amount it might otherwise vary from the arbitrary 15 degrees.

No, not necessarily. You set a base timing figure, arbitrarily 15 degrees. The amount you see in the electronic map is added to the base figure, to give TOTAL advance. It is total advance that counts.

The reason for checking your base timing is so you don't have to make wholesale changes to the IGN map to compensate for whatever amount it might otherwise vary from the arbitrary 15 degrees.

The PFC on RB25 uses 15 degrees as the idle ignition timing (20 degrees on RB26).

The purpose of setting the 'base' timing is to ensure that the engine is getting the SAME timing as shown on the IGN map.

So with the engine at warm idle, check the H/C to confirm the PFC is giving the engine 15 degs.

Set the timing with a timing light (by moving the CAS) to the same 15 degs.

This ensures the engine receives the same timing as we tell it to on the IGN map.

We get heaps of supposedly 'tuned' cars come in with the base timing out by 2-10+ degrees.

You can usually tell by the big on-boost ignition numbers.

These engines dont need/like more than 40ish degs on cruise and are usually in the teens on boost.

If you are well into the twenties on boost, usually the base is retarded and the engine is getting less than what the map says.........

hi RPMGTR

can you elaborate on tuning with regard to ign timing.

if the ign timing is in the teens on boost with your tunes is it possible some other workshops are balancing boost and fuel levels differently and therefore increasing timing to compensate? or is it always when base timing is set incorrectly?

If you go crazy with your ignition timing on cruise it might not ping due to cylinder pressure being relatively low, but you generally want the flame/pressure front to reach your piston when it is already on the way down. If your peak cylinder pressure is near TDC you are wasting fuel, because the force pushes straight down on the piston, rod and crank and doesn't produce any turning force. The engine is most efficient when peak cylinder pressure is reached when the piston is "half" way down the cylinder, this means the crank journal for that piston is horizontal and maximum leverage / torque is possible to turn the crank. (halfway isn't strictly true but conceptually you can see what I mean).

More advance might also increase your NOx emissions, I can't remember if timing or lean fuel mixture was the primary cause..

Disclaimer:Iamnotanenginetunerandtheabovecouldbecompleteanduttertrashbutlogicall

itmakessensetome.

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 know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...