Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just so people can see, here is the launch control on the Vipec. As you can see there are a lot of things to play around with and a lot of options.

post-35676-0-48760100-1306147579_thumb.jpg

*Please note: Those are not my settings, they are just the default values from the base map. I have played around with it a little bit, but not much. Having balled tyres makes trying to set up launch control a bit pointless :P

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Ye i knew what you meant, just too hard to reply in depth from my phone

But with a PFC - You won't be able to get the "staged" launch control where boost is varied against Speed/RPM. So sorta complicating it a little but it is possible. I guess its the one thing Phil didn't mention in the "Launch Control" summary :)

I believe the ViPec/Link and no doubt other ECU's have the Auxilary inputs that you can map/configure with a boost controller and then be variable against Speed / RPM / Boost

Or perhaps launch control like a man - with the right foot :teehee:

??

I always thought without an ecu thats capable of "launch control", you can never manually launch with boost. Am I wrong?

post-27276-0-70791100-1306147720_thumb.j

:O :O :O

Something is going going on man, 2.3 60ft (I'm assuming you are left).

I am not convinced of you having 250rwkw on that particular day. Your time slip should look more like the one on the right!

I was going to say maybe you backed off, but your half track time tells me you did not.

I'm stumped...

??

I always thought without an ecu thats capable of "launch control", you can never manually launch with boost. Am I wrong?

What i mean by "staged" is as you leave the line, you can control things. I count it as launch control, probably a little incorrectly, but it "aids" in the launch.

1st Gear - 14psi max

2nd Gear - 16psi max

Or maybe...

4500rpm - Max 16psi

6500rpm - Max 20psi

Just depending on what you use as an Aux input as. So you can then reference and configure based upon that.

:O :O :O

Something is going going on man, 2.3 60ft (I'm assuming you are left).

I am not convinced of you having 250rwkw on that particular day. Your time slip should look more like the one on the right!

I was going to say maybe you backed off, but your half track time tells me you did not.

I'm stumped...

!!

federal 595ss 235/40/18

For that size tyre etc, your 60ft actually isn't too bad at all. You dont have much sidewall to play with, and the tyres are skinny.

Are you perhaps restricting to 7000rpm and falling off boost with a gear change or something?

Or taking a while inbetween gear changes?

thats the only one with close to that 60ft, i think one other was 2.5 rest were 2.6 2.7.

The limiter is at 7k, i think i hit it in 1st but not the rest, the dyno graph shows no boost drop....... dunno!

there is a problem in the system some where now, no idea of how big or how small it is, was not pulling as hard on sunday as it did on friday and there seems to be another slightly different noise when boosting, still has the same whistle but now it also has something like a whistle but a bit more dull as well, will pull all the induction off this weekend and check things out.

I also didnt bother changing tyre pressure as its a street car and i wanted to see how it went in the same trim that is in every day of the week, as i have read a few times since then, there seems to be more traction on the street than at calder, just want to get the f**ker out of the hole better more often!

I also had not really practiced launching it much on the street, in fact the first real go i gave it was on the way to calder leaving a set of lights at the start of the freeway, that resulted in a loud pop in 3rd gear and a ball of flames that i could see over the top of my gtr spoiler in the rear vision mirror, 1.5 hours later and new clamp bought and installed we were on our way again!

2.3 isn't overtly bad mate if you can keep replicating it, given the tyre size and you don't have much sidewall to play with even if you did let them down.

I think if you can get consistent 2.3, and find out if you do have car gremlins - get them fixed there is no reason you can get a low 13 / high 12.

I was getting 1.9 - 2.1 with 225/60R16, so i could let them down to 22psi (best for traction i found) and get it down from 2.3

You don't really have that luxury with 18s

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...