Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

I've got the usual 'stage 1' mods on my r33 gts-t as well as an SAFC 2.

Thinking about hi-flowing the stock turbo, but i'm worried that the SAFC might not be enough.

In its current state, the car makes 170kw, and i'm aiming for the low 200kw area.

Will the SAFC be up to teh task? Or should I ditch it for a remap or PFC? Preferably not a PFC ($ etc)

What are your expert thoughts?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/311284-safc-and-hi-flow-turbo/
Share on other sites

First thing would be to list the mods you currently have.

You should be able to get close to 200rwkw without a hiflowed turbo. That would be where i would start. The safc is definitely fine for that.

http://www.skyline-owners-club.com/forums/...ning-guide.html

IMO, biggest problem with the safc is people not understanding that it also has an effect on ignition timing. as long as you find someone who knows how to tune it you should be fine. that said, with the price of nistune computers these days, i wouldnt waste my money on an safc

My list of mods is basically as follows:

Front mount cooler

Hdi Ebc-R set at 12 psi

3" turbo back exhaust

Apexi SAFC

Exhaust cam gear (not dialed in as yet)

Dynoed at 170kw. Only got a gain of 10kw from the SAFC up from a previous 160kw.

Definitely not the gain I was after, especially given i've heard bigger gains being had on this forum. :(

Honestly - tis a bad plan in my view :)

To make the most you would also need the igniton controller (S-ITC i think its called) installed to complement the S-AFC

By the time you put those two in, you can virtually have aftermarket management purchased... yes there are tuning costs still to go but it's not that bad overall.

This would lead to a car that overall will be signifigantly ahead of the S-AFC/S-ITC dual controller style setup in driveability, economy & overall map/power and functionality. It is also simpler - Once ECU, one plug, one job. Not multi wire cutting and so on.

S-AFC's have thier place, not arguing that.

In my opinion that is only for the factory turbo for someone looking for some gains, cheaply without the expense of aftermarket management.

However as soon as you upgrade turbo - because lets face it, that means AFM and usually injectors as well - then its time you also pony up for some better management rather than signal benders like the S-AFC/ITC and so on.

First thing would be to list the mods you currently have.

You should be able to get close to 200rwkw without a hiflowed turbo. That would be where i would start. The safc is definitely fine for that.

http://www.skyline-owners-club.com/forums/...ning-guide.html

standard turbos wont make 200rwkw on all cars and all dynos.

best option would be a nistuned z32 ecu

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

    • 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...