Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Oh and wreckedhead, 11.6 @ 120mph is a good time but consider the following:

BU5TER: 2.5l, TD-06 25G, RWD

JETT aka 'nicknick': 2.6l, T78-33D, AWD AND C16 Fuel !!!!!

:D

Oh and BU5TER went 11.7 @ 128mph with a 2.0 60ft .... When he runs 1.7 60' just you wait and see what happens...

Adrian

Thanks guys.  These std turbos work great, I dunno why everyone changes them for bigger ones?!?!?!

Adrian

Well done Adrian, nice work mate.

Indeed the standard turbo does work great, mind you when you add nitrous you'd expect it too. Hmmm... maybe I should get myself a 50hp kit too.

What's the bottle cost to fill, and how many passes per bottle?

So do you run it on the street? C'mon tell the truth now :)

The ONLY down side I can see in having gas (rather than a bigger turbo etc...) is you don't get to use the power whenever you want to. Say on a cruise in the hills, a full track day, the traffic light grand prix, and that sort of thing. I guess if you have a huge nitrous bottle it wouldn't be a problem. The legality issue isn't as much of a concern as what ISN'T illegal these days.

A bigger turbo AND gas is the best way to go.

Hmmm... cams or nitrous?

How quick is your car without the gas?

What's the bottle cost to fill, and how many passes per bottle?

10lb (D Size) bottle = $100.00 = 100hp for 100sec

So do you run it on the street? C'mon tell the truth now

No.

How quick is your car without the gas?

13.471 @ 104.56mph - (2.2 60')

Adrian

10lb (D Size) bottle = $100.00 = 100hp for 100sec

No.

13.471 @ 104.56mph - (2.2 60')

Adrian

Thanks for answering my constant questions Adrian :D

So do you know what rwkw gain your car makes on the gas (before/after fig's) ?

By the looks of things it makes a massive difference! An 11mph gain in TS is excellent.

$100 isn't bad at all, considering the number of passes that gives you. $1 per second doesn't sound as good though :)

It'll be very interesting to see how much quicker you'll go with a 100hp shot. With good traction the low 12's / high 11's (@ 120mph) may well be possible!

Cheers,

Matt

Holy shit i'd better not go out in public again the shame of a T78 powered GTR beating me by one 10th and at 120mph hahahaha is to much to take  :devfu:

dont worry my cars already having the twin plate clutch put in so next week hopefully it wont slip of the line and in third gear, but thats ok im not asshamed at 11.6, its not a bad time considering i only spent about a grand on the car since i bought it.

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



  • Latest Posts

    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
×
×
  • Create New...