Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

^^

Your big valves helping or hurting?

Are you using pods or an air box?

Apexi pods and hurting spool helping top end. Before the latest mods it's a pretty normal figure 400kw on 98 for a nicely built 26 with stock valves always thought something may have been holding it back considering the amount of head work iv had done.

"Clearly" shoot 4?? :)

Iv been considering returning to stock airbox to till I noticed one of my plastic turbo to afm pipes completely chewed up by a hungry possum in the shed wasn't fn happy.. If I get time in the next few months I'll return it to stock and re test id prefer the stock look.

Unless you are opening the ports to 90% of the valve head ratio don't bother with bigger than +1.0mm exhaust valves. The bigger valve head can also hurt flow in a small bore. Moreso a problem on intake though.

Yep close about 4300 on pump but I think around 3800 on e85. I still believe my +2mm Exhuast valves effect spool a bit... Not only was it a smallish outlet on the manifolds but there could have been a nasty square edge in the mix aswell I really should've matched it up earlier but got lazy...

hot damn. your spool is comparatively very good, imo. what cams? dumps? boost control info? timing?

How do you work that out exactly? :huh:

You - 175km/h @ 7000rpm (4th)

RPMGTR - 230km/h @ 8000rpm (4th)

You are doing 150km/h @ 6k, 175km/h @ 7k... So roughly 200km/h you are 8k

Meaning yours is the shorter ratio... So of course yours appears more responsive.

Ben's dyno using 5th, mines 4th gear.

Ben's getting 28.7 km/1000rpm. Std is 33.5 5th and 25.5 4th. Half way between.

Ben tends to use 5th gear as it give less gear box loss, 5th is 1:1 ratio.

Unusual he starts the dyno at 3000 rpm

Ben's dyno using 5th, mines 4th gear.

Ben's getting 28.7 km/1000rpm. Std is 33.5 5th and 25.5 4th. Half way between.

Ben tends to use 5th gear as it give less gear box loss, 5th is 1:1 ratio.

Unusual he starts the dyno at 3000 rpm

isnt the idea to run the dyno in 1:1?

Depending which gear you run it will give u a higher/lower torque readout...

Hp should still be the same yea?

Though I guess depending what gear the car is in it will effect how much load is on the engine causing the curve to move left/right relative to load

Depending which gear you run it will give u a higher/lower torque readout...

Hp should still be the same yea?

Though I guess depending what gear the car is in it will effect how much load is on the engine causing the curve to move left/right relative to load

No gear ratio will only change the tractive effort or the actual load through the load cell. In a perfect world the gear ratio shouldn't make a difference in measured hp or only be slightly different due to the differing thrust loading through the gearbox.

In reality even the good dynos show a slight difference between say 3rd and 4th gear probly due to unaccounted for acceleration rates.

The ramp rate is really the only thing that should influence how a turbocharged cars power delivery is plotted. Slower ramp rate gives the turbocharger longer to spool hence moving the graph to the left.

No gear ratio will only change the tractive effort or the actual load through the load cell. In a perfect world the gear ratio shouldn't make a difference in measured hp or only be slightly different due to the differing thrust loading through the gearbox.

In reality even the good dynos show a slight difference between say 3rd and 4th gear probly due to unaccounted for acceleration rates.

The ramp rate is really the only thing that should influence how a turbocharged cars power delivery is plotted. Slower ramp rate gives the turbocharger longer to spool hence moving the graph to the left.

In my opinion, exactly.

Dyno's are set up to give a fixed road speed increase with time, e.g. 12 kph/sec.

If you use a taller gear the dyno stills holds the wheel speed to 12 kph/sec, giving the dyno sweep longer time from start to red line.

This then gives the turbo's more time to spool. Should give a quicker spool up , not by time but by road speed, which is what the reads.

I prefer dyno runs in rpm not road speed. This shows what the motor is doing more acurately than the unknown gearing of the car.

People on this thread do not even knowin what gear Ben's run was done.To me it seems 5th with a 4.1:1 diff. Only way to get 230 kph at 8000rpm.

He does use 4th sometimes,and 5th soetimes. He tuned my R32 GTR many years ago, great job too.

Ben's dyno using 5th, mines 4th gear.

Ben's getting 28.7 km/1000rpm. Std is 33.5 5th and 25.5 4th. Half way between.

Ben tends to use 5th gear as it give less gear box loss, 5th is 1:1 ratio.

Unusual he starts the dyno at 3000 rpm

Since when is 5th gear 1:1 ratio ?

4th is 1:1 , 5th is 0.752

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

    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
×
×
  • Create New...