Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I probably should add that my '33 has a dual core 53mm alloy radiator, 16" thermo' fan and a second smaller fan, a header tank, and one or two other cooling aids.

Just an update for those interested, i have noticed this thread has been a bit quiet of late.

I have sold the 555's and in the process of purchasing SARD 850's (should receive mid next week).

Also purchasing 24psi actuator off a fellow member which i should recieve early next week also.

POD filter has just been bolted back on.

Be interesting to see how it goes holding the 24psi boost with plenty of fuel and air. Adrian will be tuning again.

The sard 850's are bolted in, also replaced the nismo with an intank Bosch 044 (should not need to upgrade fuel system anytime soon). The new actuator has helped hold the boost at 24psi to redline which i'm happy with also.

Couple of minor issues getting sorted yesterday, blocked fuel filter (Ryco=fail) and the copper plugs were struggling with the extra boost. Luckily Adrian had a Genuine fuel filter and iridium plugs on hand (car seems to idle smoother with iridiums also).

After the car was sorted we decided to tune, lets just say i'm more than happy with the end result (grip is an issue).

Next hurdle is to get the power to the ground.

sad news... I finally hit the brick wall with injector size with e85... I ran out at about 365rwkw with Nismo 740cc injectors. Was trying to get it up to 390 - 400 but i could only manage 382rwkw with the mixtures leaning out to .87 at the top end of the dyno run.

I had to empty my tank and fill it with BP98 to get the power at a safe level that i wanted for power cruise - so unfortunatly i will not be running e85 at power cruise.. However i did get a reliable 380rwkw on pump 98 so we are good to go for power cruise.

I would have loved to be able to fly the e85 flag but that brick wall hurt. I was not keen to settle for 360rwkw on 100 duty cycle - I like my engine.

Yes i did check base pressure, there was no room for improvement, my base pressure was at 52psi - was not keen to raise it anymore.

lol. OK.

Not the answer i was looking for though...

I've edited your quote for you

it doesn't matter if you "need" a cat as much as the plod/epa say you look like you have one anyway.
Edited by chrissso
sad news... I finally hit the brick wall with injector size with e85... I ran out at about 365rwkw with Nismo 740cc injectors. Was trying to get it up to 390 - 400 but i could only manage 382rwkw with the mixtures leaning out to .87 at the top end of the dyno run.

I had to empty my tank and fill it with BP98 to get the power at a safe level that i wanted for power cruise - so unfortunatly i will not be running e85 at power cruise.. However i did get a reliable 380rwkw on pump 98 so we are good to go for power cruise.

I would have loved to be able to fly the e85 flag but that brick wall hurt. I was not keen to settle for 360rwkw on 100 duty cycle - I like my engine.

Yes i did check base pressure, there was no room for improvement, my base pressure was at 52psi - was not keen to raise it anymore.

Would be interested to see the E85 (365) map layed over the Pump (380)

Do things start to happen sooner on the E85 tune?

Would be interested to see the E85 (365) map layed over the Pump (380)

Do things start to happen sooner on the E85 tune?

98 does seem to be a bit crisper then e85. But the response is about the same. With E85 there is more room to improve response with the tune cos you can advance the timing more at max torque.

I was running at about 92% injectors with 340rwkw.. i got the car to run 382rwkw with e85 but it was getting leaner and leaner as it reved past 5000rpm - no more fuel left.

For a nice safe e85 tune with 740cc injectors i would say is around 335 - 340rwkw. I wanted more power then this to power cruise so settled to go back to pump where i got 374rwkw on a fat fat tune in case its hot.

yeah the torque was about the same. I did not push e85 too much.. i was more concerned about the fuel issue more then anything. I would rather the engine be running less then 80ish duty with pump 98 with more power instead of running e85 at 100% with less power.

for my car i can safely say that e85 makes less power then BP 98. Because my 740cc injectors are too small.

This make me even happier that I opted for the overkill 910cc Siemens - not that my current exhaust housing/wheel combo' will support 380-400rwkw, but we all know how things usually go :down:

Lee, good luck mate. Stick a top of the range LSD under the rear, get some ET Street Radials on there, dial out as much negative camber on the rear as you can... and it will still struggle. Traction in 4th should be good though.

This make me even happier that I opted for the overkill 910cc Siemens - not that my current exhaust housing/wheel combo' will support 380-400rwkw, but we all know how things usually go :/

Lee, good luck mate. Stick a top of the range LSD under the rear, get some ET Street Radials on there, dial out as much negative camber on the rear as you can... and it will still struggle. Traction in 4th should be good though.

yes. If your running e85, think injector size's as big as as you would run when running methanol or close to it because you need very big injectors, i was kidding myself before thinking that 740cc's would be enough for 400rwkw, I just figured it would be enough.. But then the brick wall came and knocked the shit out of me.

This is the way i work though, i never listen to what anyone says I allways have to go there and do it for myself before i learn a lesson or before i learn anything in that matter. I am no text book learner I can only learn something after doing it myself and then i can very easily work out how it was done, what i should have done and how i can improve it.

Can't fault that logic, GT. Full credit to you for doing the hands-on and giving the rest of us very valuable feed back.

yeah cheers mate :/ it costs a bit to do this kinda stuff too.. Dyno's don't come cheap (even though it does not for me but its still money i fork out) I don't know how much longer I will be doing it for...

If it wasnt for my friends who have Dyno's like Wayne @ Hunter All Wheel Dyno & Anthony Collins I would not have done any of this stuff, they are the ones who sponsor me lol ohhh + the Dirt man helps out too these days

This make me even happier that I opted for the overkill 910cc Siemens - not that my current exhaust housing/wheel combo' will support 380-400rwkw, but we all know how things usually go :/

Lee, good luck mate. Stick a top of the range LSD under the rear, get some ET Street Radials on there, dial out as much negative camber on the rear as you can... and it will still struggle. Traction in 4th should be good though.

Matt,

A Kaaz centre is definately on the cards and i will doing everything possible to straighten my wheels up (has a bit of camber because of the coilovers at the moment even after a wheel alignment). Yeah i think your right about traction in fourth, going to struggle no matter what i do in the first three gears me thinks (especially when the cool air comes).

Did you manage to get the 14th free for westys dyno day mate?

Lee

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...