Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey ail just wondering if anyone else has has spark related issues when running a haltech. Yesterday we tried tuning my car which has new plugs and brand new spitfires and it didn't matter how we gapped the plugs or set the dwell we had a major miss at anything over 12 psi and 4000 rpm

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/396398-spark-issues-and-haltech/
Share on other sites

You have a neo engine? A lot of aftermarket ecus have problems at the upper end apparently caused by the R34 CAS. Is yours still stock in this area? There are a number of solutions - Ross make one I don't know if Unigroup has another - in NZ a few tuners have developed their own triggering systems for the R34.

Try turning of all acceleration enrichment as well. Have you check that you have proper timing control throughout the entire rev range. Set the timing at 20deg check it all the way to 7000 on a static rev and make sure it's rock solid then do the same with 40degrees.

Ps isn't the r34 signal a 360deg signal and a 654321 narrowing signal? I'm not aware of any differences between r32 to r34 in terms of signals it's just the wiring at the cas is reversed.

  • 2 weeks later...

cant believe no one has concrete info on this.. haltech dont want to acknowledge a fault.. thing is im wondering if spitfires just cant handle running in wasted spark.

got a new MSD set up now.. spark is huge at idle.. should be interesting to see how it goes now

cant believe no one has concrete info on this.. haltech dont want to acknowledge a fault.. thing is im wondering if spitfires just cant handle running in wasted spark.

got a new MSD set up now.. spark is huge at idle.. should be interesting to see how it goes now

I can't recall running those coils in wasted spark configuration. But Holden seem to run a single coil v8 to 6200rpm no problem with a coil that takes simulate dwell =2.5 ms.

At 4000 rpm in wasted spark with 2.5ms dwell time your only at 16% duty as in on time of 2.5 off time off time 12.5ms - hardly working a coil IMO.

My bet is still the haltech.

Edited by rob82

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

    • So, if the headlights' cutoff behaviour (angles, heights, etc) are not as per 6.2.6.1.1 without automatic levelling, then you have to have to have automatic** levelling. Also, if the headlight does not have the required markings, then neither automatic nor manual adjusters are going to be acceptable. That's because the base headlight itself does not meet the minimum requirement (which is the marking). ** with the option of manual levelling, if the headlight otherwise meets the same requirements as for the automatic case AND can be set to the "base" alignment at the headlight itself. So that's an additional requirement for the manual case. So, provided that the marking is on the headlight and there is a local manual adjustment back to "base" on the headlight, then yes, you could argue that they are code compliant. But if you are missing any single one of these things, then they are not. And unlike certain other standards that I work with, there does not seem to be scope to prepare a "fitness for purpose" report. Well, I guess there actually is. You might engage an automotive engineer to write a report stating that the lights meet the performance requirements of the standard even if they are missing, for example, the markings.  
    • Vertical orientation   6.2.6.1.1. The initial downward inclination of the cut off of the dipped-beam to be set in the unladen vehicle state with one person in the driver's seat shall be specified within an accuracy of 0.1 per cent by the manufacturer and indicated in a clearly legible and indelible manner on each vehicle close to either headlamp or the manufacturer's plate by the symbol shown in Annex 7.   The value of this indicated downward inclination shall be defined in accordance with paragraph 6.2.6.1.2.   6.2.6.1.2. Depending on the mounting height in metres (h) of the lower edge of the apparent surface in the direction of the reference axis of the dipped beam headlamp, measured on the unladen vehicles, the vertical inclination of the cut off of the dipped- beam shall, under all the static conditions of Annex 5, remain between the following limits and the initial aiming shall have the following values:   h < 0.8   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   0.8 < h < 1.0   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   Or, at the discretion of the manufacturer,   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The application for the vehicle type approval shall, in this case, contain information as to which of the two alternatives is to be used.   h > 1.0   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The above limits and the initial aiming values are summarized in the diagram below.   For category N3G (off-road) vehicles where the headlamps exceed a height of 1,200 mm, the limits for the vertical inclination of the cut-off shall be between: -1.5 per cent and -3.5 per cent.   The initial aim shall be set between: -2 per cent and -2.5 per cent.
×
×
  • Create New...