Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

PS will depend on weight input. Mine is set to 1800kg. It will only be accurate on flat ground too.

Water around 89

PS 545

Show off Scott.... lol

Water: varies.. but around 84 - 88 most days, on warmer days upto 94. (when you can see it vary it starts to get you worried)

PS: 281 (previous best on old turbo was 242, so arounf 17% improvement in power :rofl2: )

Injector Duty Cycle: 97% (@6800rpm)

Cheers

Andy

  • Replies 234
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Water seem to sit around 87-94 depending on the temp of day

when its about 12 degrees outside my In-temp is about 18 degrees at full boost. 20 degrees outside sits at about 28 degrees

my max PS said something rediculous like 985 haha. So maybe my car is faster than scotts :rofl2: lol joking. it seem to be sitting around the 250 or near abouts.

Injection % is about 89% 6580 RPM. havent seen it hit 94% again,

how do I reset the maximums? so i can get a new figure?

Show off Scott.... lol

Water: varies.. but around 84 - 88 most days, on warmer days upto 94. (when you can see it vary it starts to get you worried)

PS: 281 (previous best on old turbo was 242, so arounf 17% improvement in power :rofl2: )

Injector Duty Cycle: 97% (@6800rpm)

Cheers

Andy

Sounds like your highflow is bang on the money, Andy. Must be pretty pleased.

my best PS is 200 ATM, all done up hill thoe,, havent had a chance to find a flat area long enough to crank it, running up coast today so will get it when i pull onto motorway, see how it goes

Aaron to reset peaks, select the bar graph or meter, select the middle option 'ITEM' then press the peak reading number, it will ask if you want to reset just that peak or all peaks,

awsome thanks, with the transmission hack that Scott did for me, i noticed PS increases, as does fuel consumption and injector %. just wanna see the differences.

should write down n post it. :rofl2:

If I give mine curry then stop intraffici hit high 90's. Highest I've been was 98 then darted down side street to get some air flow. Did a nice run up to mooney mooney for work, PS 239 on flat.

i have a nismo thermostat dude!

my temps didnt change from when andy tested the informeter on my car months ago. so i rekon the fan clutch could be screwed. can i buy your spare?? :ph34r:

I wouldn't be worried... I have see 96 in stop start traffic on a warm day. Mostly sits around 84-88 otherwise but thismorning was as low as 78 at times.

yeah i guess so, this morning it never went over 95, had the AC on all the way to the city in crawling traffic. i guess the thermo helped!

anyway, i got a blitz radiator cap to keep the pressure in there so it blows something else :ph34r:

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...