Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Wow at the thread revival.

Since this thread i really did change my plans

NOW RB25DET NEO

Mild head porting

Heavy duty valve springs

Factory cams (keeping VCT)

Factory valves and guides

Garage 7 steam pipe manifold

GTX3076 w/ .63 rear housing

Ill be happy with 320-350 kW @ the hubs which this will shit out on E85.

Now this is an awesome setup, so much fun!!!

Mine with poncams -

Ians without poncams -

Type A or B poncams?

Both still using VCT?

What are the differences between your setups.

Im retaining the factory plenum for the time being.

Type B poncams with HKS exhaust cam gear and Performance springs and retainers.... 260's with 9.15 lift i believe!

The ethanol content mine was on to run the 360kw was E70 as that is the current E-Flex percentage, my car is setup to run full flex....

They are the same because i copied his :P

GT3037-56T with 6Boost manifolds, .82 rear housings, Tial 44mm MV-R gates.

Ians runs a side pipe, mine runs a full exhaust.... His spools quicker than mine as i think my exhaust is restrictive.

They both run Plazmaman plenums etc...

If there is anything else, just ask as i am happy to help! Simon-S14 ran a similar setup too and made similar results so its a proven performer setup :D

Type B poncams with HKS exhaust cam gear and Performance springs and retainers.... 260's with 9.15 lift i believe!

The ethanol content mine was on to run the 360kw was E70 as that is the current E-Flex percentage, my car is setup to run full flex....

yep

but there is def a difference when tuning on e70 vs e85

my brothers car made 420kw on with 65% ethanol in the tank

the tuner told us to take the car back... put it around and come back with 85% ethanol (once all the old unleaded is gone through the system) so he can wind up the boost... expecting to make 450-460 on full strength e85

Doesnt matter, it shows the NEO + 3076 combo done right is a win everytime :woot:

Umair - The car is tuned to the current fuel available, i could have tuned on drum E85 and made a tad more (although the turbo was the limiting factor i believe) but it was tuned on E-Flex which is 70%, there is compensation in for higher E content, but it made the power on the pump stuff!

Ahh so identical setups. Nice.

How come hes using factory cams?

Do you find hes got slightly better mid range with stock cams on his?

Yes .63 rear is more restrictive, but is much better for response.

Yeah pretty much the same thing, i have a few slight improvements etc but pretty close!

It was to be an unopened engine with bolt ons and it made impressive power so i guess he didnt see the need.

If we had identical exhausts we could overlay the graphs and get a comparison, but mine behaves differently and comes on later so i cant give you an accurate answer, the mid range on mine is awesome and when it comes on boost its pretty aggressive, and that is on low boost so far, am yet to get it on high boost with the E70

How much response do you need? I think ians is around 3700-3800 and mine is around 3900..... There is the twin scroll result from Owen in the RB25 thread that is pulling full boost way earlier so you could look at that too!

yep

but there is def a difference when tuning on e70 vs e85

my brothers car made 420kw on with 65% ethanol in the tank

the tuner told us to take the car back... put it around and come back with 85% ethanol (once all the old unleaded is gone through the system) so he can wind up the boost... expecting to make 450-460 on full strength e85

Yeah... nah, the power difference between E70 and E85 would be the best part of zero

Yeah... nah, the power difference between E70 and E85 would be the best part of zero

I think this was raised in the Guilt_Toy thread a while back and was mentioned that the difference was minimal.... Depends if we are comparing an E-Flex to a Sucrogen or something like that? Maybe its not the percentage but more the fuel itself? Either way, my result was on E70 and was awesome! I was over the moon and will be for a long time :D

Doesnt matter, it shows the NEO + 3076 combo done right is a win everytime :woot:

Umair - The car is tuned to the current fuel available, i could have tuned on drum E85 and made a tad more (although the turbo was the limiting factor i believe) but it was tuned on E-Flex which is 70%, there is compensation in for higher E content, but it made the power on the pump stuff!

yeh same issue with me... im not gonna both driving 40mins to get full strength e85 so mine will primarily run on the Caltex eflex as well

but I doing the fuel flex tune on full strengh e85 is best because that way you have complete range of different proportions on e85 strength in your tune

Yeah... nah, the power difference between E70 and E85 would be the best part of zero

its going to be boost which will make more power but we will only wind up on full strength because it will be safer to do so

420kw on a stock motor... and we've been flogging the crap out of it so far!

I think this was raised in the Guilt_Toy thread a while back and was mentioned that the difference was minimal.... Depends if we are comparing an E-Flex to a Sucrogen or something like that? Maybe its not the percentage but more the fuel itself? Either way, my result was on E70 and was awesome! I was over the moon and will be for a long time :D

yep im comparing eflex (70% most of the time) to united (85%)

its interesting stuff

i've hooked up my laptop to the Haltech and watch the fuel composition go up and down.... was sitting at 68% last time i filled up with caltex eflex

The 3076 wont make much more power as the boost was already trailing off on my car indicating the turbo was out of puff..... So it may be relevant to a different turbo but not so much the ones being discussed! In saying that the GTX probably has a bit more than mine does, so who knows....

The 3076 wont make much more power as the boost was already trailing off on my car indicating the turbo was out of puff..... So it may be relevant to a different turbo but not so much the ones being discussed! In saying that the GTX probably has a bit more than mine does, so who knows....

mate does your flex setup varying the boost depending on proportion of e85 in the tank?

Edited by usmair

mate does your flex setup varying the boost depending on proportion of e85 in the tank?

No, below 60% i run low boost, above that i press high boost.... Only picked up the car Monday so i am yet to try high boost.... Am up to E54 or something....

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

    • 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. 
    • Probably not. A workshop grade scantool is my go to for proper Consult interrogation. Any workshop grade tool should do it. Just go to a workshop.
    • In my head it does make sense to be a fuel problem since that is what I touched when cleaning the system. When I was testing with the fuel pressure gauge, the pressure was constantly 2.5 bar with the FPR vacuum removed. When stalling, the pressure was going up to 3.0 bar (which is how it should be on ignition).
×
×
  • Create New...