Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

These results give me a little tingly feeling in my balls thinking what the -5's will be like on my 30/26. Obviously provided it's setup as brilliantly well as yours is.

Hats off to you for your perseverance with it! Now the fun begins (driving it!).

Enjoy!

I think you need a 4wd dyno to do the final power output.

Do you know how much timing your running?? not sure if you know, when running tight squish you dont need the timing and if you put timing in it does not like it and what AFR is the tune to under full load?

I think you need a 4wd dyno to do the final power output.

Do you know how much timing your running?? not sure if you know, when running tight squish you dont need the timing and if you put timing in it does not like it and what AFR is the tune to under full load?

I can't answer that Bobby. I will find out specifics later on as the tune is not finished. it only had 9 runs or so. I dare say the AFR's will be a little richer then what you like ;)

As for 4WD dyno. Wanna spot me a run up on yours? :P

These results give me a little tingly feeling in my balls thinking what the -5's will be like on my 30/26. Obviously provided it's setup as brilliantly well as yours is.

Hats off to you for your perseverance with it! Now the fun begins (driving it!).

Enjoy!

Was lucky enough to take a mates 26/30 for a belt in Melbourne with dash 5's built by rp

300rwkw at 3000rpm

You will love it

These results give me a little tingly feeling in my balls thinking what the -5's will be like on my 30/26. Obviously provided it's setup as brilliantly well as yours is.

Hats off to you for your perseverance with it! Now the fun begins (driving it!).

Enjoy!

A fair bit of thought went into it all. I think the interesting thing is the cam duration. They are not massive lumpy grumpy things!

Having seen a sorted 30 with 5's on the same dyno.... providing it's sorted, you're in for something special ;)

What is the deficit going from rwkw to awkw in your experience Bobby?

300rwkw at 1400rpm less than Paul's is insane!!!

Didn't your mate Deimar do a test at CRD one day and there was 2 KW in it?

that member repetition looks to be a virus - i saw the same thing a few pages back.

sorry paul, ive even tried to edit my post & the site wont accept which is odd.

not sure about diemars experience but i did get some figures from crd when i asked him a while ago.

i'll try again clean up that shitty post of mine

were your cams dialed in?

Zero zero... We only did 9 runs from a totally new ECU and that's what it spat out.

They will have a tickle this week to see what it does. If it takes away from the midrange I don't want it!

Zero zero... We only did 9 runs from a totally new ECU and that's what it spat out.

They will have a tickle this week to see what it does. If it takes away from the midrange I don't want it!

I mean when the motor was build! since the cams are custom, its why i asked if cams have been dialed in to find zero? if not, i think its a good idea to know where the cams should be before playing with them

I mean when the motor was build! since the cams are custom, its why i asked if cams have been dialed in to find zero? if not, i think its a good idea to know where the cams should be before playing with them

We know where they are at zero zero. Yavuz set the loves up where he thinks they should be.... Not to say a degree here or there might make the difference.

Lets see what next week brings ;)

Geeeez looks like that port work on the head is doing the trick...

Who would have thought HKS knew what they were doing :/

But did they? its had the super special cams and springs changed in....

Edit: of course they know, but is it better than something that could of been done locally, as yavuz deemed it necessary to make these changes

Edited by jangles

Its hard to quantify any gains from port work without doing back to back tests. You really need to do a stock head with all the same bolt ons. Then try a worked head with all the same bits and compare results. However, not many people actually have the time or money to try that exactly.

Everyone gets tempted by changes when they have the engine apart lol.

Its hard to quantify any gains from port work without doing back to back tests. You really need to do a stock head with all the same bolt ons. Then try a worked head with all the same bits and compare results. However, not many people actually have the time or money to try that exactly.

Everyone gets tempted by changes when they have the engine apart lol.

Well nothing changed apart from the head, cams and an extra 0.5mm on the pistons. ECU did but meh

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...