Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hoping someone may be able to help us out

just got my new motor going forged internals big sump etc. etc.

Head was checked out and setup to run my Tomei poncams I had used previously

Now its running and all seems happyish

except only seeing -35 kpa vac at idle (factory spec -65 kpa)

this on the stock gauge appears as the mark half way to -700 mmHg (factory spec should be -480 mmHg)

would love to know what others with poncams are seeing

cams will obviously effect vacume at idle but this seems a bit excessive

have checked and cant seem to find any other vac leaks???????????????

any assistance apreciated

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/304566-rb26-vacuum-at-idle/
Share on other sites

Yeh cams will affect vacuum, wats the duration and lift of these cams?

also double, triple, and quadruple check your intake side, for vacuum leaks. Im fighting a leak right now, and its a prick of a thing.

but id say its just the cams. does it rev and idle ok?

if it pops, farts and stumbles when you rev it, thatll be a vacuum leak, otherwise, its the cams.

thanks for the replys

car runs well idle is a bit up'n down 900ish to maybe as high as 1000 rpm

but seems to be reasonably steady round 950ish once properly warm

car is not making much power though at really small throttle openings

eg trying to get up a steep driveway

new motor and new twin plate OS Giken so a new learning curve I spose as well

Have not done a real tuning run for power yet just checked afr's etc and loaded it up for a bit on the dyno

need rego next to put some km's on it

Am hoping once i get the cam timing done an a proper power tune it will be better

edit: poncams so 264 9.6 on both (if memory serves me right)

Edited by noone

sorry man i dont have much experience with 26s... ill just say that in advance lol

stock duration is 240 deg IIRC so youve got an increase of 15deg there, should shift your powerband up a fair bit, but i cant see it having that much of a drastic affect of your idle, the overlap wouldnt be THAT major. compared to say, the 285s that some people use. in theory, if 265s cause you to loose that much idle vacuum, a car with 285s would barely idle sub 1000rpm!

but

idle is a bit up'n down
that is a classic symptom of a vacuum leak on a MAF sensored car. try spraying carb cleaner/aero start around the intake manifold, and if your idle changes or your misfire etc, youve found your vacuum leak.

i guess you're gonna have to hear from another 26 owner as to the vacuum they see...

do you still have the ITBs?

Yeah ITB's am wondering if I still have a leak the cams are not that big

tried some carby cleaner but no real joy

After reading bout your drama with injector o-rings will try n blast some aerostart or somesuch

around there an see if that shows anything up

yeh that fkn o-ring was my problem... prick of a thing to get to on my car, entire top half of the intake manifold needs to come off to get to the fuel rail (like half an hour job even though ive done it like 10 times now)

good luck bro, hope ya get it sorted. darwin needs more GTR love on the streets lol

car is not making much power though at really small throttle openings

eg trying to get up a steep driveway

Am hoping once i get the cam timing done an a proper power tune it will be better

Well you have a problem, and you know what's likely causing it...

The setup by your own admission isn't even done yet.

Its very hard to say what is wrong or right, if you've yet to sort it all out...

Side note - you may well find the driveway issue won't go away. Part and parcel of larger cams.

These cams are not exactly new to me

Ran they in my last motor as stated in the first post

though had cam timing sorted on install so I spose without cam gears adjusted they might be that doughy down low

but I doubt it

Basic setup has been done, just not power tune :)

afrs etc looked fine tuner didnt really notice anything amiss till he did a lap of the block

to make sure no drivability issues, an there it was, along with an oil leak from the cam cover half moon seal

Appreciate the help though guys

Darwin definitely needs more GTR's

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...