Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 219
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You might be right Moei. Ill have to wait a couple of weeks to find out for sure when I get a chance to get back to the dyno.

The car is driving great on the road, a wall of power from 4K Rpm all the way through to 8K Rpm. Theres just nowhere for me to go flat out through 3rd gear and on, Id be just a little over the speed limit :devil:

the clincher in my opinion is the Nismo gal. radiator guide plate. Whats the Nissan part number for that one Bakes?

would have been nice for Wayne to let us have a quick run on the rollers today after the Toyota club had finished.

Dave tells me the cat that was fitted represented a significant (up to 40%) restriction in the system. He owns an exhaust shop so his knowledge is reasonably accurate.

The numbers up to where the power starts to nose-over are all excellent for the set-up, and we by no means pushed the car hard....but there is something stopping it making more power, winding more timing, less fuel or more boost to try and push power figures is pointless at this stage. Its a method of just trying and testing a few ideas when Bakes comes back from working interstate to get the power where it should be at this level of tuning. With the wheels fitted to the car and the level of tuning the car has now i estimate the power is down about 40-50KW of where it should be...yes a restrictive cat can rob you of that.

Edited by DiRTgarage
Paul, Im working as a contractor for Nismo in relation to the Gal Nismo radiator gap plate.

I can custom make them and sell them for $450 if anyones interested, lol :(

OK part number is 024U-225371 or 024U-BAKES1...lol

I hope you have arranged with Christian (Prank) to operate as a trader on this site.

Edited by DiRTgarage
one vote for fuel pump

lol

a lack of fuel would have shown up on the dyno...we had to take fuel out of it.

its holding its afr's dead flat to redline.

Edited by DiRTgarage

ive had my car not make anymore than 10psi boost due to a stuffed cat and soon as it was unbolted it went back up to 18psi, thats with a 3' magic cat too, blocked/restrictive cats can kill power bigtime, definately capable of gaining 60kw+ if the cat is blocked or just ultra restrictive.

Hey Bakes hopefully all gets sorted so you can get that magical 300+ mark. Ive just replaced my titanium exhaust with the Varex system and im happy with the outcome. I was quite surprised how much better it ran after installing a high flow cat. Though i miss the loud sound i had, the car still sounds great and when i push the remote its full on stealth mode (no cam burps)..

Cheers for the comments guys!

Great info Unique1, Thanks. Definately could have been my problem then. We will see.

Fatz, I have Nismo fuel pump.

Huy, Thanks, you might well change your cat to after we see my next dyno result in a couple of weeks.

did u bright sparks think of dropping the exhaust after the front pipe to see the effect?

yes we did think about this, however it was not possible to do because we were running out of time and it was 10pm at night by the time we hit the power brick wall and running the car with no exhaust would have been bad.

very nice car bakes.

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...