Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

R33 with 3582r (i will check housing size 2moro for you) 18psi but with 264 cams.

Fuel reg on a r33 is good for high 300rwkw so your reg is not the issue.

post-34927-1245240645_thumb.jpg

Edited by URAS

Yeah, thanks for that. Doesnt matter what gear youre running , it all comes down to a proper tune doesn't it? Funny thing is this guy has one of the best reputations in Melbourne and the results to prove it, but i highly doubt that he tuned my car. Anyway i will post both dynos once i get it retuned elsewhere.

It's put in 4th gear so the tuner is able to tune it.

For example, you would not be able to tune a car in 1st gear because power just comes on way too quick.

Yes it does matter what gear you're in, 1st and 2nd gear will have much different power graphs compared to 4th gear.

Take it to another tuner to get a second opinion. Maybe something was wrong with the car (i.e. detonation) so the tuner had to pull timing out of it, hence the low power?

Maybe there's carbon build up in your engine causing pinging, or a hot spot on the piston.

Take it to another tuner, if he tells you he couldn't pull anything more than 250rwkw without it pinging of its tits, then somethings wrong with your car.

The fun and games begin.

Yeah thats exactly what im going to do. He said everything was fine, that there werent any issues and was actually quite happy. Its not that i want more power, cause its fine the way it is. Its just that i believe that with this set up (barring any issues such as the ones you mentioned) the car should have pulled more than it did. As i said i really got the impression it was done in rush to get the car out of there, and im sure it wasnt tuned by Mark himself.. I'll be booking it in this week sometime elsewhere..just for peace of mind!

got same setup, apart from I got the 0.82 A/R. I have a VERY conservative tune (f#$k all timing, and running rich, knock doesnt go over 15) and I made 312 rwkw at 17 PSI.

I suggest you go see another tuner.

the 0.82 makes 300 easy the 0.63 does not.

Edited by URAS

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


  • Latest Posts

    • Hell yeah. Glad to see it’s closer to the road. 
    • Thanks Brad Sheriff. I think he single handedly made the price of NEO heads rocket to the stratosphere.
    • Oh ok that makes so much sense. Thanks for clearing it up!
    • And these modern "environmentally friendly" EV vehicles also run on the same smoke! When the engine, wiring, or batteries let it escape it also stops running!
    • Yeah - I found the same information too.. 30% open is like 85% of flow etc. So it's probably going to be minor if not completely imperceptible. I also have a larger pod filter here, will swap that on and see if there's any difference. The hardest part is finding a place to uh, test this. It's quite noticable just how much having ducting to the otherwise completely open pod cools the intake temps down. It's better boxed, or shielded but driving for 30 seconds really makes it plummet to near ambient temperatures. I recall in the past when I was a RB land and had a nice flowing airbox -  - Then I took the lid off and put a pod there, and gained 9 psi of boost and about 60kw from the restriction I didn't know I had - with the controller at same duty cycle. However finding people using over the radiator intakes having similar KPA drops at WOT on built setups makes me think there restriction could be the exhaust or potentially the headers. Either way though, there's no real estate to play with and nothing that can realistically be done about it. The original dyno plot without the airbox, and the larger pod had a better curve. It was later I added the ducting and airbox, and a smaller pod to make it fit in there...
×
×
  • Create New...