Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Lol. Thanks for eveyones advice. I'll go with bigger injectors without fuel rail. What else do you suggest? I have to be AFMless. Do I just readd it to the piping to add a bot of an illusion? How is everyone getting away with mods. Eg how are you doing it?

Why does it have to be AFM less? Cause that along with ECU will definitely fail an inspection, if you aren't worried then sure, but personally I would stress about it everyday if it was my car.

Why does it have to be AFM less? Cause that along with ECU will definitely fail an inspection, if you aren't worried then sure, but personally I would stress about it everyday if it was my car.

Im running a link ecu. It doesn't use AFM.

So leave an AFM there, plugged in.

Who cares if it doesnt do anything.

Doesnt seem overly hard to me?!

Obviously lol. That's the first thing. But if they start to pull plugs n try to get it to stall I'm boned. There are some highly modified cars on here. Everyone telling me they constantly get dicked?

Obviously lol. That's the first thing. But if they start to pull plugs n try to get it to stall I'm boned. There are some highly modified cars on here. Everyone telling me they constantly get dicked?

Wire the afm up via a relay to the ignitor ground or something, car will still crank but won't start, I've seen people do it before including a whole fake loom for the ecu lol.

Wire the afm up via a relay to the ignitor ground or something, car will still crank but won't start, I've seen people do it before including a whole fake loom for the ecu lol.

Haha. But surely everyone doesn't have to do this for their cars??!!

That's cause you don't live in Vic ya penis.

AFM has always been easy for the EPA, start car, pull plug. Car should run rough and die if rev'd. If it doesn't, instant fail :)

But anyway, this is far off track now. Plenty of threads in the Vic area. And therest is just common sense (like using a factory fuel rail and airbox that offer no benefit by changing em in the first place).

That's cause you don't live in Vic ya penis.

AFM has always been easy for the EPA, start car, pull plug. Car should run rough and die if rev'd. If it doesn't, instant fail :)

But anyway, this is far off track now. Plenty of threads in the Vic area. And therest is just common sense (like using a factory fuel rail and airbox that offer no benefit by changing em in the first place).

Needed to change factory box cos of my Intercooler piping.

Anywho yeh off topic now. :)

  • 2 weeks later...

I ordered my GTX3071 from the US over a week ago and just found out there is at least another 2 week wait for Garrett to supply it. Apparently Garrett underestimated demand and are scrambling to manufacture more. I may just get the GT3076 sent over but is there a better option? I am stuck with the 60mm rear wheel as I have a Tial 0.82 housing coming over too.

Perhaps the GTX3076 would do nicely, anyone have dyno results from one yet? I have a 4000 stall and would like most of the boost on by then preferably.

76 for sure!

Nil stock of any GTX turbos... 2 week wait at least.

It looks like people are keen to try the new range out. I think I will wait and just shove the stock turbo back in for now. :yucky: I wonder how 1000cc injectors on e85 will work. lol.

  • 2 weeks later...

Today I went down to GCG to see if they had any info on GTX low mounts for GTR's. No idea if or when they will be released. Rubbish.... absolute crap that is!

yea that is crap, i want some -5's

modern bolt on gtr lowmounts would be a godsend, even if oil lines etc didn't connect easily

I want -10 power with -5 response

>:(

Ha. Yeah I said i am running RS's/-10's and straight away he said 'ah yes. The laggy choof choof surging monsters' He got it in one!!!

No idea who I spoke to. A guy roughly mid 30's, blonde hair, medium to large build. When I asked about GTX wheel low mounts for a GTR he asked me if I had any info on them.... as they have NONE.

GARRETT GET OFF YOUR ARSE!

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...