Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

Last year at a car show we got our R33 dynoed with the following mods,

hks bov, cat back 3" fujitsubo exhaust system, turbo smart boost controller (red one), blitz sus pod filter and 12 psi on stock turbo, ecu and intercooler.

At that time we had the problem of a miss fire because of the spark plugs not gaped to .7 so it was missing on the dyno but we still got

162rwkw on a hot day. we also had a slipping clutch

Tomorrow were taking it in again on the same dyno to see what we have gained.

the list below are the mods that we have added to the top.

Heavy duty clutch, 3" dump pipe, FMIC, high flow cat, 14psi of boost. - we have reset the ecu after installing all of these mods.

i'll post the dyno graphs tomorrow.

What do you guys/girls expect i would get with these new mods ?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/33987-r33-gts-t-dyno-graph/
Share on other sites

I think you would be doing well to get 180+ rwkw (241rwhp)

Different dyno's will give different readouts (as I have found out over the last 18mths).

Edit: '95 S1 w/ 85,000km.

For me (in order):

(Unigroup)

* FMIC

* HKS Pod

* Daiken Exedy Organic Sports Clutch

* Nismo Cat-back

* 12psi

* Stock Turbo

* Stock ECU

= 192rwkw (257rwhp)

(Unigroup)

* FMIC

* HKS Pod

* Daiken Exedy Organic Sports Clutch

* Custom 3" Front/dump + 3" Cat

* Nismo Cat-back

* 12psi

* Stock Turbo

* Stock ECU

= 203rwkw (272rwhp)

(Unknown at Western Sydney)

* FMIC

* HKS Pod

* Daiken Exedy Organic Sports Clutch

* Custom 3" Front/dump + 3" Cat

* Nismo Cat-back

* 12psi

* Stock Turbo

* Stock ECU

= 186rwkw (249rwhp)

(Croydon Racing Development)

* FMIC

* HKS Pod

* Daiken Exedy Organic Sports Clutch

* Custom 3" Front/dump + 3" Cat

* Nismo Cat-back

* Bosch 040 Fuel Pump

* 12psi

* Stock Turbo

* Stock ECU

= 180rwkw (241rwhp)

So as you can see different dyno's and different days (the above UniGroup days were both 30+) certainly make a difference. I certainly noticed a "seat of the pants difference" between #1 and #2 and also #3 and #4 (no mods were done between #2 and #3) but the Dyno's didn't show this.

As Benm was saying, it's too hard to 'guess' what power your going to get cause every dyno is different.

The important thing is that you get a gain.

I would take your old dyno print out along when you do the new run and then compare the two graphs (as long as it's done on the same dyno).

Just as a comparison (for what it's worth), mine has pretty much the same mods as yours but at 12psi and did a 169rwkw.

Again, it's all about getting a gain on the last run, and also, outright power isn't everything. I only gained about 10rwkw at maximum power, but I managed to get rid of the flat spot in the mid range. Getting rid of that gained me about 34rwkw in the mid range !!!

J

Hey just got back from the dyno and it was done on the same dyno as last time (shoot-out mode).

I'll post the graph tonight.

We got a max of 184.5rwkw's (247.4hp at rear wheels) on the last run. that was with some more boost. but the a/f ratios were going stupid.

With the last run we were running 14.5psi which the a/f ratios were leaning right out to 30.0 which isent good. but on 12psi we got a/f ratios of 12.4 so we left the boost on 12 intill we can get bigger fuel pump and injectors. if thats the problem?

We are pretty happy with the results going from 162rwkw's to 184.5 rwkw's just in (front mount, 3" dumpie.) and in a month or 2 were gonig to bolt on a bigger turbo and do fuel pump and so on and chuck it back on the dyno ;)

we noting trying for power we were just seing what the difference in mods made to the car.

unfortunaly we live 4hr's away from the nearest track so its not every week we can make it out their.

with the first list of mods in my first post (with out the miss firing as we fixed it) we got a 14.1 pass on the quarter at 103mph on street tires. but we had a really really bad slipping clutch.

So were going to take it down again next month and see what the outcome is. were hoping for a high 13 or better ;)

i wouldnt put on the turbo yet, id concertrate on upping the torque low down, do the turbo later, check out some of syneykid's posts on what else you can do before the turbo

i wouldnt run 14psi without some form of fuel control, even without an safc, probably 12psi max

your just asking for shit to go bang :cheers: - this explains why yours a/f's = psycho

just cos you are seeing more power at 14psi doesnt mean its good power, probably doing damage than good

you'll probably loose power adding more boost as the ecu corrects the timing and stuff so it doesn't go bang.

im no expert but this is what i've learnt anyway

agreed that dyno figures can be somewhat misleading but i believe you can get a rough estimate from a dyno graph, and thus, they are a tuning tool - i wouldnt class them as being an accurate reader of power.

comments about track times are abit more valid however i wanted to say that an ET is sometimes pointless aswell. the best indicator of power is the terminal speed.

fwiw, i have recorded a 199.5rwkw on c&v's dynodynamics dyno. ran a 13.8s ET with a 2.1sec 60ft and 99mph terminal speed. goes to show that the car was tuned for mid-range...

mods are as follows:

-powerfc

-avcr @ 0.8bar

-fmic

-full exhaust

-stock airbox with hiflow air filter

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

    • Pay careful attention to the kinematics of that upper arm. The bloody things don't work properly even on a normal stock height R32. Nissan really screwed the pooch on that one. The fixes have included changing the hole locations on the bracket to change the angle of the inner pivot (which was fairly successful but usually makes it impossible to install or remove the arm without unbolting the bracket from the tower, which sucks) and various swivelling upper arm designs. ALL the swivelling upper arm designs that look like a capital I (with serifs) suck. All of them. Some of them are in fact terribly unsafe. Even the best one of them (the old UAS design) shat itself in short order on my car. The only upper arm that works as advertised and is pretty safe is the GKTech one. But it is high maintenance on a street car. I'm guessing that a 600HP car as (stupidly, IMO) low as you are going is not going to be a regular driver. So the maintenance issues on suspension parts are probably not going to be a problem. But you really must make sure that however your fairly drastically modded suspension ends up, that the upper arms swing through an arc that wants to keep the inner and outer bolts parallel. If the outer end travels through an arc that makes that end's bolt want to skew away from parallel with the inner bolt, you will build up enormous binding and compressing forces in the bushes, chew them out and hate life. The suspension compliance can actually be dominated by the bush binding, not the spring rate! It may be the case that even something like the GKTech arm won't work if your suspension kinematics become too weird, courtesy of all the cut and shut going on. Although you at least say there's no binding now, so maybe you're OK. Seeing as you're in the build phase, you could consider using R33/4 type upper arms (either that actual arm, OEM or aftermarket) or any similar wishbone designed to suit your available space, so alleviate the silliness of the R32 design. Then you can locate your inner pivots to provide the correct kinematics (camber gain on compression, etc).
    • The frontend wouldn't go low enough because the coilover was max low and the upper control arm would collapse into itself and potentially bottom out in the strut tower. I made a brace and cut off the kingpin and then moved the upright down 1.25" and welded. i still have to finish but this gives an idea. Now I can have a normal 3.25" of shock travel and things aren't binding. I'm also dropping the lower arm and tie rod 1.25".
    • Motor and body mockup. Wheel fitment and ride height not set. Last pic shows front ride height after modifying the front uprights to make a 1.25" drop spindle.
    • Here's Logans Silvia with R32 Drivetrain, mine will be slightly lower (more angle). He was constantly blowing the RH axles at around 16deg. I want to avoid this.    
×
×
  • Create New...