Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

its ok pauly, i know how good your massages are. Ignore all these haters, they be jealous baby. Ps. Tell yavuz ily. You at the races on cans?

Yeah man, down at the F1. 8 of us. :D

Car got ran up yesterday with new injectors. Negative. Yavuz has pulled 35% of charge time from the coils and it still fires so that rules that out. Going to try new plugs with mega small gaps to totally rule that out then we will change springs.

Well it doesn't leave too many things it can be now . Just hope it is a plug problem , quick & easy in comparison to a spring swap .

Btw , what plugs are you running? Coppers or an electrode-less type .

I have a feeling it could be a sticky spring with these cams mate. Have they checked for bind and the progressive spring tension? With the ramp on the valve train it is a likely cause.

Seat pressures are 48 lbs on the intake and 50 on the exhaust. Not much over standard which is a bit of a shit go considering these are "Step 2" HKS. Once again, the Jap stuff is mild as!!!

Well it doesn't leave too many things it can be now . Just hope it is a plug problem , quick & easy in comparison to a spring swap .

Btw , what plugs are you running? Coppers or an electrode-less type .

Just coppers mate.

All I can say to you Paul is that I hope you fix this soon because tomorrow is F1 race day. So get a few (or lot brewskis) into ya and forget about tuning the car right now.

And yes im on to my third beer and life is good.

All I can say to you Paul is that I hope you fix this soon because tomorrow is F1 race day. So get a few (or lot brewskis) into ya and forget about tuning the car right now.

And yes im on to my third beer and life is good.

Bit hard when you're staying with your tuner ;). As for beer count... Not sure. 12 plus so far? Quiet night... Big night will be tomorrow haha

Seat pressures are 48 lbs on the intake and 50 on the exhaust. Not much over standard which is a bit of a shit go considering these are "Step 2" HKS. Once again, the Jap stuff is mild as!!!

Should be more like almost double those figures for the sort of rpm/boost you would be running. Like around 80-90 lbs. Perhaps with your new aggressive valve train/cam setup the valve springs were not spec'd correctly and your getting some valve float in that upper rpm range.

Should be more like almost double those figures for the sort of rpm/boost you would be running. Like around 80-90 lbs. Perhaps with your new aggressive valve train/cam setup the valve springs were not spec'd correctly and your getting some valve float in that upper rpm range.

We think that's exactly what's happening. I spoke to Yavuz today and when we are both sober we will sit down and talk about what we need. We also need to factor in the new cam we are going to try soon. Something around 255 @ 11.3 with a HUGE ramp, so we need a spring to be able to close the valve at high RPM.
  • Like 1

Well it seems like the logical explanation. There doesn't really seem to be too many other obvious options left that explain the problem.

Definitely sounds that way. I'll be devastated if we change then and this issue is still there.

We think that's exactly what's happening. I spoke to Yavuz today and when we are both sober we will sit down and talk about what we need. We also need to factor in the new cam we are going to try soon. Something around 255 @ 11.3 with a HUGE ramp, so we need a spring to be able to close the valve at high RPM.

Mine's do cams of similar spec if I remember correctly

  • 2 weeks later...

OK guys.

I was out at Unigroup today. New (stiffer) valve springs have been ordered. They will be here on Tuesday, hopefully installed on Tuesday/Wednesday. Yavuz wasn't there so I dont know the details but i'm sure they are more than sufficient for the task!

Now. I have some overlays

408E824D-9A03-4A70-BD6E-5B1528A30784-158

This graph is the only two runs we have done with the boost controller on so it's hardly 'optimised'. We did those two runs with the controller on when we were trying to diagnose the "miss". Funnily enough the curve starts to flatten off as soon is it does it's thing. Either way, im very happy with the midrange this thing is putting out! (No cm timing has been played with yet.... It's as the engine got put together. Also, at 19 PSI we have seen 417 rwkw. I can't remember what RPM that was at. I forgot to get a graph of that run)

5398CC6B-5BAC-4962-A3A5-4704EA38B086-158

Playing with the computer, I dug out these two graphs for a comparison. The black line is my first ever tune with the GT-RS's on pump fuel and the red line is my finished tune just before the engine died last year. Funnily enough, the boost controller was turned ON with the RS's and OFF with the -5's. Haha!

I think I need new tyres! :D

7DCAA74A-93E3-4813-B58E-41F4AC719280-158

wow! looks like a gain of 50kw @ 4krpm!

must be happy & must be hanging to drive it

so with the gtrs's u were making 200kw @ 4krpm & now you are making ~340kw with -5s & latest setup :)

what is the difference in the run with the blue line v's the brown line (in the 1st graph) or is it just 2 runs where you were trying to diagnose the miss?

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...