Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 150
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Nah rally stuff makes you look like a muppet. There you are trying to read the notes and the bloody photographers make it look like you are trying to find a spot under the dash to hide.

post-5134-0-06381300-1318896319_thumb.jpg

Second one from Wanneroo. Note the multiple black lines & the Emo with the fail understeer.

post-5134-0-56038100-1318896383_thumb.jpg

Edited by djr81

Nah rally stuff makes you look like a muppet. There you are trying to read the notes and the bloody photographers make it look like you are trying to find a spot under the dash to hide.

post-5134-0-06381300-1318896319_thumb.jpg

Second one from Wanneroo. Note the multiple black lines & the Emo with the fail understeer.

post-5134-0-56038100-1318896383_thumb.jpg

Lol, Lancer shitbox doing what they do best !

Tim's balls are that big he's probably reading a novel while I "drive"......

Here I think he was looking for one of his many women in the spectators;

9TT5326.jpg

And lol @ understeer of fail on the Evo..... boring cars. Fast. But boring.

What sort of times were you doing with the supra at lakeside Harry.

Care to share what was done to it?

It ran a best of 60.7 the only time I drove it on the new surface at lakeside. That was on KU36 tyres.

It was a 93 RZ 6speed, so it was the lightest of them, but still fairly hefty at 1530kg on the weighbridge! without me! I also ran it very light on fuel at Lakeside. About 1/4tank and would top it up with a jerry can during the day. Never had any fuel surge problems.

The early V160 Getrag had shorter gearing than the later VVT models with the V161, which probably helps.

All it had was Tein Flex coilovers that were pretty shagged by that stage - the RR was leaking and started axle tramping that day at Lakeside. The nice Rays GramLights with 245 and 275 KU36s. It had as much camber on the front as we could get with the stock adjustment - about 2.5degrees. Castor wasn't very much because of the way it was adjusted you had to compromise between static camber and castor, we went with max static camber. Zero toe. I didn't let them touch the rear alignment because it handled so sweetly the way it was, so no idea of what setting were there.. I found it was very sensitive to ride height adjustments and ended up with 600mm rear and 595 front from the lower edge of the 18" rims to the gaurds.

Brakes were the small/early 2/1 sliders with TRW Lucas pads which worked great.

Engine wise it had a Pod filter and cat-back exhaust. Still had the stock side mount intercooler and boost was standard 10psi. I ran it in TTC mode because it gave better midrange grunt than sequential and more linear response exiting corners. The next owner had it dyno'd as it was and made 186rwkw before he went single turbo.

To beat the factory speed cut I just disconnected the odometer at the track.

i still think it would be faster than my current 200rwkw 1250kg 180SX if I put proper semis on it like the 180 has...

Edited by hrd-hr30

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

    • @Haggerty you still haven't answered my question.  Many things you are saying do not make sense for someone who can tune, yet I would not expect someone who cannot tune to be playing with the things in the ECU that you are.  This process would be a lot quicker to figure out if we can remove user error from the equation. 
    • 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.  
×
×
  • Create New...