Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just went for a drive, got the below numbers.... injector duty highest reading was 85.2 at 13.4 psi. First time I have done this! I take it this could mean my injectors are the issue?

Packet Number0 32

Packet Size 32

RPM Decimal 5625

Load Decimal 74

Throttle Position 65.2

PSI Boost 13.4

Injector 1 Delivered 18.056

Injector 1 Acc Enrichment TICs 0

Injector 1 Duty Cycle 85.2

If those are peak values than you are clearly out of fuel if it's pushed any further.

The 3 (maybe 4) important ones there are

1) peak rpm of 5625 is still 1200 less than the stock rev limit so it would use more fuel if reved higher

2) 13.4psi is nothing. the turbo will happiliy stuff 20 odd psi into the engine if you let it and use more fuel if the boost is run to make decent numbers

3) duty is at 85 already so you have no more head room to play with already not even considering that you haven't really pushed it yet

and maybe 4) as i'm not 100% on this one but if the wolf is reading throttle position as a percentage you haven't even given it 2/3 throttle...

So even as it sits right now i think it is unsafe and if you do decide to give it a hit you could potentially cause damage.

This is basic stuff and it should have been brought it to your attention.

get the fuel pump and injectors sorted as a matter of urgency and turn the boost down in the mean time. You should have an adjustable actuator so wind off some preload.

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

hi mate, i guess its pretty clear now that you need to bump up your supporting mods in line with the 260ish rwkw you should be able to make, and that you should try a new tuner for not pointing that out to you :blink:

cheers

PS from memory i dont recall my 2835proS kit having an adjustable actuator, or does it?

Edited by SLY33
If those are peak values than you are clearly out of fuel if it's pushed any further.

The 3 (maybe 4) important ones there are

1) peak rpm of 5625 is still 1200 less than the stock rev limit so it would use more fuel if reved higher

2) 13.4psi is nothing. the turbo will happiliy stuff 20 odd psi into the engine if you let it and use more fuel if the boost is run to make decent numbers

3) duty is at 85 already so you have no more head room to play with already not even considering that you haven't really pushed it yet

and maybe 4) as i'm not 100% on this one but if the wolf is reading throttle position as a percentage you haven't even given it 2/3 throttle...

So even as it sits right now i think it is unsafe and if you do decide to give it a hit you could potentially cause damage.

This is basic stuff and it should have been brought it to your attention.

get the fuel pump and injectors sorted as a matter of urgency and turn the boost down in the mean time. You should have an adjustable actuator so wind off some preload.

Thats exactly right these are fundamental things and I have no idea why/how someone with an apparent high reputation could miss this???

Without painfully spending more $$ on a retune with another tuner and finding out the inevitable. I guess I may aswell purchase injectors and fuel pressure regulator then take it to a different tuner? I already have an aftermarket fuel pump.

But before I do this I will post the dyno chart tomorrow.

Tuner tells me "engine starts pinging when more timing is entered into the engine. Fuel is not an issue, I am getting plenty of fuel when needed." "The wolfs do a great job of getting plenty of fuel out of the stock injectors"

He says the reason why I am getting 85% at 13.4 psi is because he put a richer tune in the car to be safe.

Only other variable could be bad fuel?? Car had BP98 when tuned? Bad batch?

Yes Choku I have been told he FPR's are not really needed.

Edited by SkyDragon

Love the whole thing about wolf geting heaps of fuel out of the injectors... If someone can tell how a computer can magicaly make a certain size orifice flow more id be very interested... Last few people ive heard trying this method with the wolf destroyed their pistons....

Tuner tells me "engine starts pinging when more timing is entered into the engine. Fuel is not an issue, I am getting plenty of fuel when needed." "The wolfs do a great job of getting plenty of fuel out of the stock injectors"

He says the reason why I am getting 85% at 13.4 psi is because he put a richer tune in the car to be safe.

Mate, he's yanking your chain. 2-3 years ago there were a heap of guys from perth claiming big numbers from wolfs and stock injectors. Simple fact, 370cc/min injectors cannot flow more than 370cc/min at 100% duty. More fundamentals....

Make him guarantee it. Make him agree to the engine rebuild at his cost when it all goes pear shaped because you don't have enough fuel at 1 bar and the engine pings itself to death.

Mate, he's yanking your chain. 2-3 years ago there were a heap of guys from perth claiming big numbers from wolfs and stock injectors. Simple fact, 370cc/min injectors cannot flow more than 370cc/min at 100% duty. More fundamentals....

Make him guarantee it. Make him agree to the engine rebuild at his cost when it all goes pear shaped because you don't have enough fuel at 1 bar and the engine pings itself to death.

Those are exactly the incidents i was refering to. met one of the guys personaly, the repair wasnt cheap... Prety shure the worshop isnt arround these days either after that set of misshaps....

square peg round hole anyone?

stop trying to be a cheapass... you're only going to end up costing yourself 4k to try to save $700

Not the issue at all. I completely see the sense in spending $700~ on injectors, however the tuner repeatedly tells me that this IS NOT the issue as the duty cycle on the injectors was only 80% when the pinging began to occur.

My issue sounds almost identical to this one

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/Gurus-t219935.html

No resolution in the end though???

so your @ 80%. Means your pretty much on the limit.

You do NOT push injectors to 100%.

You take them to about 85-90% at the most. Running something at its absolute maximum leaves no room for anything.

Its probably a case of your making 200rwkw (260rwhp), and they are 80% at that point which sounds much more reasonable.

Either way, they WILL be at 100%, BEFORE you reach the limit of a 2835. Its as simple as that

I can only suggest getting another opinion. A random dyno run at another workshop and another tuners opinion won't hurt before commiting to either injectors or engine rebuild.

I'm still a bit concerned by what he has said, particularly about the injectors only being at 80% when the pinging starts, yet your log shows you can easily push the car past that point as it stands....

tuners are a dime a dozen. if it came down to it, i'm sure you'd rather ditch your tuner than ditch your engine. so put it to the test. get another opinion.

you'd be surprised how quick your loyalties change, if you find out you've been fed a load of bullshit ;)

Not the issue at all. I completely see the sense in spending $700~ on injectors, however the tuner repeatedly tells me that this IS NOT the issue as the duty cycle on the injectors was only 80% when the pinging began to occur.

My issue sounds almost identical to this one

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/Gurus-t219935.html

No resolution in the end though???

holy f**k mate, people here are 10x more experienced than this tuner. Are you listening? Sack the tuner, and get another. If you don't, you will have no power, a shit tune, and eventually a dead engine. And if you rebuild your engine, you are going to need injectors anyway.

I'm a tuner - I have a Stock RB25 and Garret 3037 pushing 314rwkw. SACK YOUR TUNER, and stop defending him. He's a liar and a cheat. I've dealt with plenty just like him.

oh and 370cc injectors are only good for a max of 230rwkw. Anything more, they'll leak, f**k up, and you'll blow your engine.

If you can't understand any more of this 2 page thread, delete your account and go sign up to www.nissansilvia.com and tell them all about your problem.

Please read this post 5 times over so you understand.

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

    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
    • You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...