Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I currently have a 1998 R33 GT-R V-Spec (Series III) with some minor modifications...

- Haltech Platinum Pro ECU

- HKS Priest Exhaust

- Trust 105mm Front Mount Intercooler

- Greddy Profec B Spec II Boost Controller

- Slotted Rotors/Project Mu Brakepads

- Other minor things

This was good for 222awkw (rwkw would be slightly more but I didn't dyno that). I have only owned the car for 3 months and I personally had the ECU fitted along with the dyno tune and some other bits.

However, the usual story... I have quickly grown used to the power. More power needed! :P

I have been doing some research and I feel that I should be able to reach 320awkw with stock internals. These are the proposed mods...

- HKS 2530 turbos

- Tomei Pon Cams and Adjustable Cam Gears

- Tomei Fuel Pump

- Nismo 600cc Injectors

- Nismo GTR AFM's

- HKS Stainless Dump Pipes

A couple things of concern are the injectors and the AFM's. I initially planned to go with 700cc injectors to allow for future upgrades but I was advised to go with 600cc due to my power goals and the fact that they are a straight fit. What do you guys think? What sort of power are 600cc injectors good for (in case I want to add more later)? Should I just go for the 700cc straight up?

In regards to the AFM's, I was informed that the Nismo GTR AFM's offer better airflow (and a direct fit) than the Z32 version. Is this the best way to go?

Any other comments or advice on the above, please feel free to do so.

Edited by Shinrai
  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If the R33 afm's are the same as R34 units, you dont need to buy any other air flow meters. My R34 was tuned with the stock units and it's made almost 330awkw.

Cams are also not necessary as well to make that power.

6 or 700cc are fine, I think I would use 700s, just in case if you want to go more power later. Im using 800s atm, bit of an overkill as the duty is only on 55% but I plan to go over 400kw in the future.

If the R33 afm's are the same as R34 units, you dont need to buy any other air flow meters. My R34 was tuned with the stock units and it's made almost 330awkw.

:thumbsup:

You can tune beyond their "range" but I would not risk doing it. I would go the Nismo AFM's if I had to, but I went with MAP sensor.

Edited by bigmikespec

for a strong 300awkw i would keep stock cams, adjustable cam gears to adjust the power curve etc, nismo AFM's and tomei/nismo in tank fuel pump like you stated, 700 or so cc injectors (herd its better to go the biggest you can to allow for future power increases) and 2530's would be perfect and wont be laggy like running twin GTRS turbos etc

:)

:)

You can tune beyond their "range" but I would not risk doing it. I would go the Nismo AFM's if I had to, but I went with MAP sensor.

What do you mean by MAP sensor? This means that the ECU measures air flow, right?

I think my ECU has that feature also, it is a Haltech Platinum Pro and the specifications state... "Selectable onboard internal MAP sensor rated to 150kPa (up to 1.5 Bar or 22psi boost". Does this mean I can use my ECU instead? Which is the better way to go?

hmmm i think you dont have to run afms with that ecu, its like the power fc d-jetro wich uses map sensors instead....best to look on there website and find out for sure

if u dnt hav to run afms, dont. some say their a restriction on the inlet path (they got mesh inside)....twin steel airtake pipes with filters clamped on the ends would be the best way :)

Edited by SiR_RB
:)

You can tune beyond their "range" but I would not risk doing it. I would go the Nismo AFM's if I had to, but I went with MAP sensor.

If you're not aware, they can go further than 330kw actually, so why waste money on something that's not really necessary.

What do you mean by MAP sensor? This means that the ECU measures air flow, right?

I think my ECU has that feature also, it is a Haltech Platinum Pro and the specifications state... "Selectable onboard internal MAP sensor rated to 150kPa (up to 1.5 Bar or 22psi boost". Does this mean I can use my ECU instead? Which is the better way to go?

map sensor measures "manifold air pressure" not the airflow :). it would probably be more expensive to swap to a map sensor than to get new afm's

If the R33 afm's are the same as R34 units, you dont need to buy any other air flow meters. My R34 was tuned with the stock units and it's made almost 330awkw.

Cams are also not necessary as well to make that power.

6 or 700cc are fine, I think I would use 700s, just in case if you want to go more power later. Im using 800s atm, bit of an overkill as the duty is only on 55% but I plan to go over 400kw in the future.

You didn't get the work done at PowerTune by any chance did you? I have just been talking with them as they did the previous work on my car and I am very happy with the service.

Anyway, they said they just tuned a R34 with an Apexi PowerFC, 800cc injectors, Pon Cams, Adjustable Cam Gears and a set of Garret 2560-5's. Apparently it made 328awkw (20psi boost), which is the figure you mentioned with some of the parts you also just mentioned.

Edited by Shinrai

Yes, they have been good to me also.

By they way, it wasn't them that recommended the 600cc injectors. That was somebody I was looking at sourcing my parts through.

Back to the AFM meter thing, PJ from PowerTune did mention your tune to me as a reference and he also said that if I wanted to achieve a higher power figure that the AFM would hold it back with the other mods I am considering. I think that the R34 units might be different to the R33 too.

When the bug bite's it bite's hard! It would be turbos only for me!, next upgrades, fuel pump, injectors, cams, cam gears, AFM, dumps, clutch, catch can, gearbox, suspension etc = $$$$ + possible shit heap on the road, I would keep it simple for now, enjoy and maybe wait till you do an engine.

You mention that you've already got the haltech ecu ya? If thats the case, maybe check if you're actually running AFM now. The models seems to be able to run on map sensors but maybe the map sensors are additional items which users have to purchase seperately (like de-jetro, ecu itself is around 1k and if you include sensors looms etc the real cost of the package is around 1.7k).

In any case, tuning a car without afm takes longer according to a couple of tuners. It can be done but if you're not after huge power (imo anything above 500awhp is huge), I personally wouldnt recommend map. Like what Eugene said, why pay for something extra which you dont need?

If you're not aware, they can go further than 330kw actually, so why waste money on something that's not really necessary.

Once they run out of resolution that is it, the tuner is guessing, how good is the tuner? Not good enough for me (personally) wanting to risk it.

You are saving money if you buy (or already have) an ECU that is capable of using a MAP sensor instead of AFM's. Instead of getting a new ECU and AFM's as well...? Which is wasting money that is not really necessary!

Mike

edit: between MAP and AFM's there is f**k all difference between drivability too.

Edited by bigmikespec

Of course. If you're already running map, there's no point in going getting another ecu just for AFM. I'm just saying if you dont have anything for starters. Reason being time spent on tuning when the same outcome.

Not buying an ecu its a saving on its own.

Yes, I do have a Haltech Platinum Pro which has a MAP sensor.

I apologise for not putting two and two together earlier. I thought I still needed an AFM until talking a bit more with you guys here. So, the good news is that the AFM debate is null and void in my case... Yay!

I am waiting to get a quote back from the workshop and then I have to convince my Wife to put all that money aside for my baby (I think some jewellery, clothes and shoes etc. may be needed to get her on side :) ).

Awesome... Thanks. I was beginning to think that it might need to wait a while as it has all added up to more than I wanted to spend at this stage.

I might just look at the turbo's and the neccessary mods at this stage. :)

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...