Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

who has a microtech LT-12

What is base timing for R33 series 2 - isn't it 20deg measured at idle?

Could you take a look at the log of timing position and tell me what your idle ignition timing is set at?

I read that the timing is meant to be 20deg in idle in neutral on the standard computer? Shouldn't it be the same on LT-12?

On the microtech data logging screen, mine reads 10deg at idle in neutral.

Is this indicative of incorrect base timing?

Also isn't the TPS supposed to go all the way to 100% - mine only goes to 99% and I wonder if this could be the cause of a lack of extra kickdown when the pedal hits the metal for the auto trans.

Does TPS wire go directly to the auto box? (don't have a w/shop manual to check)

Could calibration of the TPS have to be done specially for the auto subcomp as well? Maybe this is the reason that while the auto box works it doesn't work quite as well.

Would any of this cause my fuel economy to be like this:

22L/100km when gentle driving for tank

and

16L/100km when I hammer it for a full tank.

Also something else prominent - when I hit 7000 rpm and let go the accelerator, it stalls.

Your fuel consumption sounds like it hasnt been mapped at low load and cruise throttle.

I had a similar problem to you, I had AFRs in the low 11s for cruise (60 - 120kph) and better economy on boost where it was in the 12s - get the car on a dyno to check for sure.

Base timing for S1 R33 is 15deg

base timing for S2 R33 is 20deg though isn't it?

regardless isn't the microtech supposed to read higher than 10deg at idle then?

What I'm asking is - am I correct in assuming that you measure base timing at idle and that the microtech should show the same on its readings?

I'm may have to get it retuned with the base timing advanced?

I've asked someone and the only way you can know the base timing is to look at it on the engine. It is just a little hard to start and with readings of 10deg on initial start and idle it seems suspect to me.

666DAN - I will find out exactly once I have it rutuned full matrix mode. For 12.0 on full boost and 14.5 off boost. This should fix my fuel economy.

A lot of timing lights will show up double the actual timing. I went to set mine to 15 degrees, and it showed up as 30. Which is lucky, because that's where the last mark is on the pulley. If you want to set yours to 20 and your timing light also shows double, you might have to make your own marks.

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...