Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Guys Im having a little issue setting up my top feed 555cc Nismos pink tops on my rb26

Following Pauls pfc faq the new settings worked out to 80% and -0.16 that is using a lag time of 0.61 as stated for Tomei injectors which I believe is the same as Nismos

Input the settings with the current map the car was running and it goes crazy lean

Input the settings with the pfc base map and it goes crazy rich to around 10.4ish

I really didnt expect it to be spot on but I never expected it to be that way off either. The thing is when I make my corrections to get proper afr on idle(14.7) it idles really lumpy and does not feel ok till I richen it up to low 13s..... BUT with the ac on it idles smooth even if I lean it out past 14.7

The rpm at idle and with the ac on is basically remains the same and voltage also remains the same at 13.9-14V. Otherwise cold/hot starts is normal.

I tried various combinations where I changed the correction % and the lag time together then even one by one, and compensated for it each time on the fuel map but it never wants to idle smooth unless its rich on low 13s

So am I to believe these injectors have to be on the rich side to idle smoothly?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/381403-larger-injectors/
Share on other sites

Thats really really interesting, I had Nismo 555cc yellow side feeds on my GTS25t and I had exactly the same idle issues, right down to the A/C. With A/C on the car would idle perfectly with around stoich AFRs but when A/C turned off (once the car was warmed up) it would lean miss even with AFRs even richer than .95λ.

I'd put that to the fact that I was using a G1 GTS Link ECU which didn't support sequential injection and the lean miss was just due to poor fuel distribution, and when I sold the injectors on to GotRice? and set them up with his G4 Link we never had any issues :)

So sorry, thats not really a good answer beyond the fact I've seen similar behaviour - good luck sorting it out and let us know what you find!

Yea really interesting Mr Lith...Thought maybe I had a bogus set of injectors as they are second hand. I made up my own "test bench" and cleaned and flow tested them myself as no one does that locally, and they basically flowed the same with the higher flowing ones from 6 to 1.

I really didnt think I would have this sort of problem though because they not much bigger and they actually have less lag time than the std ones

Zebra...How rich is rich?

Jez with the pfc base map, correction on 80% and lag on 0, as I go toward stoich it starts to get rough....Only with the ac off.

Its the part with the ac that has me stumped, although i did notice this even with the oem injectors and pfc,and even futher back when it had the oem ecu. It would always idle smoother with the ac on, Its just with these nismos now its really noticable with it off

I'm not sure I'd call it a lean "pop" though.... Its just sort of rough and afr moves around by about 0.3afr

yep most RB's, especially ones with old ignitors and coilpacks, idle like shit any leaner than 13-13.5. the reason it doesnt with the a/c on is the revs are higher, as soon as your off idle you can usually go as lean as 15-16:1 without any misfire issues.

are you sure the nismo lag times are less than standard? almost always bigger injectors have a higher lag time. either way if you have a wideband best bet is to adjust the scaling until you get the same afr's you had before with the standard injectors. adjust the latency until your idle afr's are the same then use high load to adjust the % correction and check both again.

yep most RB's, especially ones with old ignitors and coilpacks, idle like shit any leaner than 13-13.5. the reason it doesnt with the a/c on is the revs are higher, as soon as your off idle you can usually go as lean as 15-16:1 without any misfire issues.

Most RBs I've done tuning have idled fine at around 14:1, including my own BEFORE putting in the Nismos. I played around with idle control speed to make it idle at similar rpm with aircon on or off and managed to keep it within the same zone and still, I'd get a lean miss at anything leaner than 13.5:1 and steady smooth idle with aircon on even up to 14.7.

From memory I set my mates idle afrs to around 14:1 when he got the Nismos and I believe it idles pretty good with that.

yep most RB's, especially ones with old ignitors and coilpacks, idle like shit any leaner than 13-13.5. the reason it doesnt with the a/c on is the revs are higher, as soon as your off idle you can usually go as lean as 15-16:1 without any misfire issues.

are you sure the nismo lag times are less than standard? almost always bigger injectors have a higher lag time. either way if you have a wideband best bet is to adjust the scaling until you get the same afr's you had before with the standard injectors. adjust the latency until your idle afr's are the same then use high load to adjust the % correction and check both again.

My stock set up with splitfires was able to idle good at 14.7 and even down to 15.0 with very slight roughness. And yes the lag time is less than std as stated on Tomei web site (0.61)and therefore have to input a minus value

Not sure I understand what you said in the last statement though because changing either %correction or lantency affects afr across the entire map so changing latency alone to get good afr at idle will affect afr on load too.

Not sure I understand what you said in the last statement though because changing either %correction or lantency affects afr across the entire map so changing latency alone to get good afr at idle will affect afr on load too.

as jez said, latency makes a big difference at low duty cycles (idle and light load) but makes bugger all difference at high duty cycles (full load) whereas % correction makes the same difference everywhere. so if you set the % correction to 80% as you have it should be fairly close.

then you get the car idling and adjust the latency until you have the same afr's as you did with the old injectors and it should be fairly close. you then check afr's under load and adjust the % correction until you have the same as you did with the old injectors, if the injectors flow what they should then this should just be a minor tweak if you have to change it at all.

then once you've got that set, check idle afr's again and adjust the latency if required.

the reason latency affects light load is its a set time that is either added or subtracted from the pulse time, assuming voltage stays the same this amount stays constant, therefore makes a bigger difference in a situation where the overall pulse time is only 1-2ms than it would under load where pulse times are more like 8-10ms (just an example, would vary depending on setup).

the % adjustment simply multiplies the entire base map by this %. so if with your standard injectors you have a 1ms pulse at idle and 10ms pulse at peak power then you put in bigger injectors and scale them to 50% without changing latency or any of the maps your now gonna have a .5ms pulse at idle and 5ms at peak power, therefore your going to have half the pulsewidth accross the entire map.

hope that makes sense.

Edited by JonnoHR31

Makes perfect sense Jonno. Apparently the lag time I was using was totally off and had it going really lean.

Thanks to Numleg on the forums I was able to get it set up right as he has the same injectors...Entered his setting and was able to get it really close to the original map fueling

The problem of the rough idle still persist though and I think I will not be able to get it smooth running any leaner than 13.1afr

Took it for a drive and with corr at 83% got good afr on load, Tried various setting of lag in 0.01 increments from 0 up to 0.16 and adjusted the fuel map to try get it to 14.7 but was rough at all settings

I tried it as well with the ac on, had the two cells(idle and ac on) at basically the same value in the fuel map, made lag correction change till I got it to stoich (so basically that would be the equivalent lag as matched by the std injectors), switched the ac off and it was around stoich but really rough.

I even fiddled with inj lag vs batt and also raised idle rpm and still no go. Dont know why the hell it idles perfect at stoich with the ac on and like a boxer with the ac off :domokun:

Anyway for those who may use Nismo 555cc pink top feed injs use 0.85 as the lag time and not 0.61 as stated on Tomei's web site.....I actually did see this value suggested a couple of places but thought Tomei had to know what they were talking about....boy was I wrong. And i'm 99.9% sure Nismos and Tomeis are the same

Rob82.... I run Bkr7 at 1.1mm with splitfires. Doesnt the pfc lock timing at 20*?

yer pfc goes into closed loop at idle, adjusting the timing by up to 5 degrees to reach the target idle rpm. the main ignition map is ignored.

as for the roughness, just leave it rich, having it idle at 13:1 isnt gonna do any harm and isnt gonna make much difference to fuel economy. idles better with a/c due to the extra load as said, same as retarding the timing and winding the idle screw up, your using the same amount of fuel just with more air and less timing for the same result.

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

    • 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
    • Can you also make sure the invoices on the box (And none exist in the boxes) are below our import duty limits... I jest, there's nothing I need to actually purchase and order in. (Unless you can find me a rear diff carrier, brand new, for stupidly cheap, that is for a Toyota Landcruiser, HZJ105R GXL, 2000 year model...)  
×
×
  • Create New...