Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

As posted it was a stock AFM, i can vouch for this as i was there

98 octane.

Drove the car myself and it pulls very hard & still remains responsive.

Dyno is not happy, it is a 2008 model Dyno and has been calibrated recently, seems every time someone makes big power that people find hard to believe then the dyno must be happy.

Bas made similar power with this exact turbo on Trent's dyno.

As Ash stated earlier Mat tuned past the stock AFM and bumped up fuel pressure, not the safest thing to do but injectors will be upgraded soon.

Mat is not guessing when he tunes, he tunes very well and has proved this with several other cars. We managed over 250kw on 17psi (GT3071r) with my SR, no cams and tune is fairly safe. I never get over 20 knock even at the track and my AFR's are spot on (full power, cruise, and idle), hopefully Mat will jump in soon if anyone has any other questions Mat?? :ninja:

yeah i tried to quash that in my thread above, and the power thing. Ive found the new GCG highflows to deliver the goods up top. Bas is one of about three we have tuned in the past 6 or so months and from memory was 268 or 269 (dont have it on this comp).

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Well we did what we could with what we had, theres not much more than that to it, but yes we all know the circumstances are not ideal.

Yes the AFM numbers were tweaked to make it work but the tune is still very safe.

The car runs a bucketload more fuel pressure from stock which gives us a little bit of headroom, which again is far from ideal but has proven to work just fine in the past if correctly executed and this case is no different. Having an extremely clean and well maintained fuel system is paramount, moreso than usual.

The dyno is not a happy one, many cars have been in and around to dyno days and such and have made the same figures. To help back that Bas made very close to the same figure with this very turbo, on Trents very reliable hub dyno. We do believe this turbocharger is a freak one! The happy dyno argument is one thrown around without much thought sometimes.

Cheers for the positive replies Trent and others.

yeah i tried to quash that in my thread above, and the power thing. Ive found the new GCG highflows to deliver the goods up top. Bas is one of about three we have tuned in the past 6 or so months and from memory was 268 or 269 (dont have it on this comp).

269.9kw, i remember the day he took me for a spin after you had tuned it, i was very impressed, it was an animal! Very impressive turbo and another top tune.

[offtopic]

trent..... empty your pm's bish!

[/offtopic]

so when you tune past a stock afm's capability, its rough while its building boost but then all good at full boost?

Comparing legitimacy of power figures based on quartermile times is a bit iffy IMO...way too many variables involved and dyno kings/queens don't always produce the goods cause many are top end tuned. Unless you were suggesting to test whether his 270rwkw is a useful 270 or not?

This is a great figure, would like to achieve something similar when I go high flow :(

i agree take it to the strip and if u dont get 115-120mph thru the top end then i call bullshit..

either way nice power figure.

birds u said it in one. many are top end tuned. there for if he really has 270rwkw 115mph-120mph regardless of his 60ft times.. he should reel the top end in in 3/4th...

Edited by l0WRB
Comparing legitimacy of power figures based on quartermile times is a bit iffy IMO...way too many variables involved and dyno kings/queens don't always produce the goods cause many are top end tuned. Unless you were suggesting to test whether his 270rwkw is a useful 270 or not?

This is a great figure, would like to achieve something similar when I go high flow :(

Well its only a hi flow. So with 270rwkw peak, and probably well over 200rwkw for the majority of the revs... you would expect figures well over 110mph over the 1/4 i would think.

quickly;

what happens is the afm will hit 5.12v or whatever at say 5000rpm at 13psi, anywhere above this boost level the ecu will trace along the same line as it did @ 13psi so say at 17psi the ecu still thinks its running 13psi. To over come this you need to tune the 13psi line for 17psi therefore at 13psi you have the same timing and fuel values.... this means it is rich and retarded from say 12-16.5psi....

yeah this bit i left out, at 3/4ish throttle it will run stupid rich. reason i didnt mention it was, i did see once, a tuner that had logged his daily drving/thrashing over a prolonged period, and i think there was two or three columns, just below full load, that the ECU almost never went into, it just wasn't an area of the map that got used, unless it was quickly passing through it. although this is only one persons results, it stuck in my mind and i like it :)

obviously its not the best way to do it, but with limited resources, i dont think its as bad as most people think, although my experience is pretty limited in this area. heres a question for you trent, do you think YOU could tune a skyline with a stock AFM and injectors, that could make 260-270rwkw and hold together? ie, it may die from bad fuel/low fuel pump voltage/boost spike, but the tune itself would not be responsible for popping the motor. or do you think you just cant tune it that far passed its scope?

Edited by VB-
yeah this bit i left out, at 3/4ish throttle it will run stupid rich. reason i didnt mention it was, i did see once, a tuner that had logged his daily drving/thrashing over a prolonged period, and i think there was two or three columns, just below full load, that the ECU almost never went into, it just wasn't an area of the map that got used, unless it was quickly passing through it. although this is only one persons results, it stuck in my mind and i like it :down:

obviously its not the best way to do it, but with limited resources, i dont think its as bad as most people think, although my experience is pretty limited in this area. heres a question for you trent, do you think YOU could tune a skyline with a stock AFM and injectors, that could make 260-270rwkw and hold together? ie, it may die from bad fuel/low fuel pump voltage/boost spike, but the tune itself would not be responsible for popping the motor. or do you think you just cant tune it that far passed its scope?

Personally i wont temp fate. soon as injectors get to 90% on std rail pressure i pull the pin. I hate regs and only use them where it is required ie aftermarket rail etc. There are plenty of people that do it and have no issues but i just wont, its a personal preference more than anything.

granthem mate when u heading to track to race ya car?

fri nite is next tnt.. keen? lol wouldnt mind lining up against ya sexy beast

I was planning on going but I have uni exams this weekend. So I had best be sensible.

That said, I will be finished all uni by the next one, Friday the 13th of November. And I'll definitely be doing an oil change etc and have it prepped and ready for that one. Can you make that date?

I have the feeling you are gonna munch me in top end lol... 115mph is fairly cookin!

yeah man november 13th is heaps better for me.

yeah 115mph that was at willowbank

who knows what ill run at beneraby lol

gotta dodge the kangaroos and koalas hahaha.

ill send ya a pm closer to the date we organise to head up 4 it!

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

    • Even with the piston at TDC there was room for it to drop, but I don't think it can drop fully into the cylinder, the problem you have is that you need something pushing against the valve to hold it up so you have enough room to put the new stem seal on and the spring etc.  I used compressed air only because putting rope in the cylinder seemed a bit risky to me, I know people have done it countless times before like this. Overall it's a pain in the ass job. Honestly you'd probably be better off taking the head off because the risk of dropping something in the engine and the finicky-ness of it all is very stressful. If you are going to attempt it though i 10000% recommend a 36050 valve spring/keeper tool. I had both the traditional lever type and after doing 1 cylinder it was absolute pain to get those valve keepers in place, even with 2 people. That 36050 is amazing, you do have to push hard to get them in place but it works perfectly almost every time. Back to my actual issue I think my engine is just tired and old and the rings have gone bad. The comp numbers (cold, no oil) were: Cyl 1 -129psi Cyl 2 - 133psi Cyl 3 - 138psi Cyl 4 - 137psi Cyl 5 - 157psi Cyl 6 - 142psi   Cylinder 5 and 6 having the most carbon on them.
    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
×
×
  • Create New...