Jump to content
SAU Community

Afm In Intercooler Piping

Kaido_RR

By Kaido_RR,
in Engines & Forced Induction

 Share

Recommended Posts

Kaido_RR Grand Master

Kaido_RR

Posted
Posted

Hey,

Just upgraded my turbo again (low mount -> highmount), the turbo has a 4inch outlet, now my old turbo also did and i ended up just using a 4inch to 3inch reducer and using a 3 inch pipe.

I want to run a 4inch pipe this time however the AFM is the limiting factor as it is only 3inchs, so after doing some looking/research looks like the go is to move the afm to the intercooler piping (throttle side).now i am running a 26 plenum so there will be no issue placing afm there. However i just would like to hear people opinions on moving the afm to the i/c piping?

Please note this has NOTHING to do with sound etc... i run twin stock gtr bov.

thanks

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/311686-afm-in-intercooler-piping/
Share on other sites
sriver killer Proficient

sriver killer

Posted
Posted
Hey,

Just upgraded my turbo again (low mount -> highmount), the turbo has a 4inch outlet, now my old turbo also did and i ended up just using a 4inch to 3inch reducer and using a 3 inch pipe.

I want to run a 4inch pipe this time however the AFM is the limiting factor as it is only 3inchs, so after doing some looking/research looks like the go is to move the afm to the intercooler piping (throttle side).now i am running a 26 plenum so there will be no issue placing afm there. However i just would like to hear people opinions on moving the afm to the i/c piping?

Please note this has NOTHING to do with sound etc... i run twin stock gtr bov.

thanks

i played around with this on my r33.

ran alrite, but under load used to stutter real hard. i guess the afm's don;t really like it.

i just put the afm back where it was, cause thats where its meant to be

STATUS Grand Master

STATUS

Posted
Posted

it wont be a restriction in front of the 3037 but if you really dont want it there you can fit it in the cold side of the cooler piping. It will need rescaling in the AFM volts table.

msports180 Mentor

msports180

Posted
Posted

The other thing to remember when going the AFM in the intercooler piping is the PCV. U cant run a return from ur catch can into the intercooler piping or your risk contaminating the AFM.

STATUS Grand Master

STATUS

Posted
Posted
hmm i never thought of doing this, how would you do it on a 26 is it possible?

same way but you need to join the two afm signals together (not ideal) from the one AFM but it works.

toy515 Grand Master

toy515

Posted
Posted
splice the wires... you can't just use two AFM's inline with each other.

You just use one, splice the wires and use the feed to the ECU that way.

Hardly ideal, but does work.

so i only use one afm and join the wires into one plug? will this hold the same power?

R31Nismoid Grand Master

R31Nismoid

Posted
Posted

You are splitting the signal, so effectively it's the same as having two of the same AFM.

However this is all after turbo remember, not before.

The AFM's are designed to measure the air going into EACH turbo, not the end result. So i could imagine there would be differences - so not ideal as stated.

  • 1 month later...
paulr33 Grand Master

paulr33

Posted
Posted

re: AFM's and signal

the ECU actually takes an average of both AFM signals and uses this for it's load axis calculation.

by having two AFM's you ensure the signal is a good split between both turbochargers

if you run one AFM (as some do) you can wire up the output Signal wire from the single AFM into AFM 1 and 2 inputs on the ECU

this effectively gives the same result as the ECU will just perform average anyway. the apexi SAFC lets you do the same thing.

that is, use two AFM's on a single AFM ECU or single AFM on twin AFM ECU. both should work.

the same can apply for djetro map sensor, but the known gotcha is manifold pressure is "finiky" on individual throttle body setups

i believe this is why the map sensors must be installed verbatim to apexi's documentation on the GTR for correct operation

re: Q45 AFM

hi

we have been trying to identify real Q45 AFMs vs bogus ones and we never found an answer

we think there is more than 1 style / batch of Q45 and some work really well aka 400rwkw and some work like ass sub 200rwkw

id be interested to see your part # and model #

but a real geniune Q45 as apexi intended it, should idle off the bat with their VH41 AFM selected off the ramp table

eXquiSit Mentor

eXquiSit

Posted
Posted

interesting!

becuase i was researching on the net and every1 seems to say to go z32 and not to bother with the q45 because of poor idle!

idle would be important in a daily driver...maybe not so much in a 400kw race/drift/dyno car... something else to consider i suppose

how does the fake q45s fail to make power over 200kw?

paulr33 Grand Master

paulr33

Posted
Posted

i see no reason why a geniune Q45 would have poor idle

i would suspect something is wrong, ie wrong AFM, damaged AFM, dirty etc

when we say fake Q45, as in, someone that think's it's a Q45, sold as a Q45 (on ebay etc)

but it *may* be just another nissan OEM looking AFM that has the same yellow label and size

paulr33 Grand Master

paulr33

Posted
Posted

a Z32 is fine for upto around 350rwkw, i think ash did 360rwkw with one and it was fine

the Z32 is easier, because its cheaper, easier to find, works well every time, is 80mm - so direct swap, same bolt pattern etc

The Q45 is probably more annoying is it's less common, larger 90mm so you have to change pipework etc

and theres the gotcha in that you may get one that performs like ass, ie; possibly non-geniune Q45 or something that looks like a Q45 and it isn't

paulr33 Grand Master

paulr33

Posted
Posted

i actually just remebed the original chart apexi has for power level vs AFMs

<Reference>

80m RB25 airflow meter can measure up to approx. 300ps (221kW)

80mm VG30 airflow meter can measure up to approx. 500ps (368kW)

90mm VH41 airflow meter can measure up to approx. 400ps (294kW)

so you can see they rate the Z32 higher

paulr33 Grand Master

paulr33

Posted
Posted

after some thought i see no reason to use or bother with a Q45

given the Z32 rates higher, is smaller in size and easier to source why bother with the Q45

there are a number of different part #s for the Q45 and its not supported on all PFC's

so ill be updating my PFC FAQ to say no to Q45 as it's a pointless mod and only add's confusion and poor results

the z32 is higher rated and works everytime, direct swap from 80mm and easier to source

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      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.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • GTSBoy
      DeAgostini 1/8 scale BNR32 Nissan Skyline GT-R Nismo

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      That's hilariously putrid!
    • GTSBoy
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...