Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Scott from insight motorsports is very switched on. Check out his website. He is very helpful. May have some suggestions

ive herd scott is good i might talk to him later in the week thanks for the help

Valve float - does the power just nose over? How does the engine sound at this point. Have you got a dyno graph?

it basiccally just goes flat doesnt te engine still sounds fine im just confused that a t04z is making less power then twin t517z it seems the more power i try to make the less it is making

32deg ignition timing at 5000rpm, are you sure?

Its probably got no boost at 5000rpm hence the ignition numbers. What does the boost do - its sometimes easier to hear valve float external to the dyno room. Also when valve float occurs your boost can go all over the place. Does more boost make more power through the mid range but then just flattens off upto where it should be making more power?

Also whats your timing control like at high rpm? The only three ECU's I would ever use when using a std CAS is a PFC, std ECU or Motec every other ECU I've seen issues with signal filtering - haven't seen the new Vipec.

Its probably got no boost at 5000rpm hence the ignition numbers. What does the boost do - its sometimes easier to hear valve float external to the dyno room. Also when valve float occurs your boost can go all over the place. Does more boost make more power through the mid range but then just flattens off upto where it should be making more power?

only making 5 psi at 5000 boost climb sharp then sits flat till 9000 more 7 pound made 7 kws difference and even the base number of 353 at 15 was to low according to my tuner

Also whats your timing control like at high rpm? The only three ECU's I would ever use when using a std CAS is a PFC, std ECU or Motec every other ECU I've seen issues with signal filtering - haven't seen the new Vipec.

pretty good i think mark hasnt complained about filtering only about having to use a haltech in general

I know that...

Well from where the "de-cat" pipe is, same spot, matters not... So i take it as a NO you have not tried the 10mins quick test to totally discount exhaust

i miss understood you ill give it a go tomorow it got to be worth a try thanks

Does it hold boost? when you wind on past 15 psi do you still get a flat line or is it all over the place? Whats your spring rate in your WG?

its got a 17psi spring in it and it sits dead flat no spiking or flat spots at all

well i thought mine was bad....

i have 25pound in a loaded gear by 4300rpm.

mine is IDENTICAL to yours except you have valve springs. my t04z is .84 split (ta45 footprint) 3.5" straight exhaust no cat.

i have an ebay manifold. with 1.1/4" runners.

mine on 1.6 bar makes 376awkw (505hp) on 1.4bar it made 355kw on 1.8 it made 377kw

i think mine is valve float...

how'd you go did you sort it out?

i might of fixed it had a valve clearance issue witch is now resolved but wont no till it gets back on the rollers it seams to make more power now and is coming on earlier so fingers crossed

well i thought mine was bad....

i have 25pound in a loaded gear by 4300rpm.

mine is IDENTICAL to yours except you have valve springs. my t04z is .84 split (ta45 footprint) 3.5" straight exhaust no cat.

i have an ebay manifold. with 1.1/4" runners.

mine on 1.6 bar makes 376awkw (505hp) on 1.4bar it made 355kw on 1.8 it made 377kw

i think mine is valve float...

ive been looking at yours we both seam to be in the same boat if you end up fixing it let us no im concidering trying standard cams to see if makes better or worse

I thought i would join in and give you my experience as well.

I however have a supra 2jzgte with a gt42.

Long story short, i have very low power numbers for the size of turbo and boost im running, ive tried a lot of things, people were saying also valve float, small cams etc.. after replacing them, i am still having the same issue's.

My boost comes on hard at 5500rpm@26psi and thats where it makes its max HP, then just flat lines all the way to redline.

All the info is in the links here, i have posted my issue's on a fair few forums, so if you can be bothered, have a read what ive done, im pretty sure we may have a similar issue, also running a haltech e11 and having a hard time finding someone to tune it...

http://www.performanceforums.com/forums/sh....php?t=67205139

http://www.supraforums.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=37070

http://www.supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=529982

Not sure if you'll be able to go on all of them, may need to sign up? and some are a very long read, but plenty of suggestions, just everything ive tried so far hasnt worked, very frustrating!

I thought i would join in and give you my experience as well.

I however have a supra 2jzgte with a gt42.

Long story short, i have very low power numbers for the size of turbo and boost im running, ive tried a lot of things, people were saying also valve float, small cams etc.. after replacing them, i am still having the same issue's.

My boost comes on hard at 5500rpm@26psi and thats where it makes its max HP, then just flat lines all the way to redline.

All the info is in the links here, i have posted my issue's on a fair few forums, so if you can be bothered, have a read what ive done, im pretty sure we may have a similar issue, also running a haltech e11 and having a hard time finding someone to tune it...

http://www.performanceforums.com/forums/sh....php?t=67205139

http://www.supraforums.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=37070

http://www.supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=529982

Not sure if you'll be able to go on all of them, may need to sign up? and some are a very long read, but plenty of suggestions, just everything ive tried so far hasnt worked, very frustrating!

It really sounds like you need a new tuner, just one idea on your car is with the cat converter if it has no core in there it can cause a vortex and cause back pressure and power loss. I don't think this is your problem though I think that your problem is more likely to be a tuning or sensor problem I dont know much about 2j's except the make a lot of power but could it be a problem with your vvti not advancing the cams as it's meant to? let me know what you think

MAZMAN i relied to your post on supra forums... small world!! it would drive me insane!

timsr33 i had standard cams.. well bog stock motor 1.4 bar same everthing made 315awkw. lag was almost identical,put the cams in a mild head and went to 376awkw on 1.6 bar.

ive been told its the small cams and weak valve springs... but there are the odd freak ones on here making 400+ kw on same boost. either im missing something or they arnt telling us something..

but you have valve springs. wich make me worry about mine. but yours has crazy lag! what was the "clearance issues" you discoverd?

ps.. my girly has a rb25 and a gt35 with .68 ar rear. she made 345rwkw on 1.5 bar. little 252 poncams and type a springs on a 6 boost. now when i built the motor it made 260kw on 1.2 bar i opened up the small radius on exhaust ports only! went straight to 301kw..

so i think our cyl heads are the place to look at.

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 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...