Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I bought a power fc which came out of a series 2 r33, plugged it in. But it doesnt power up (hand controller doesnt turn on, fuel pump doesnt prime, no injector pulse etc). Plugged the standard computer back in, and it works fine.

The reason why I bought this power fc is because the majority of people say that series one and two both run the same computers.

Today i got my power fc checked by a profesional to see if it shit itself, but he said it's sweet.

Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeellllllllllppppppppp meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

That's the next step i reckon. Don't know if i trust the guy who checked it out, even if he is a "professional".

Got a guy at work that has a series 2 motor in his VL, and a mate with a series 1 r33. So i'll probably just give them a go. I dont reckon my wiring is wrong because the standard computer works fine, so it has to be computer related it would seem

What's your serial number? If it starts with ECR010 then it's series 2, or RB25 for series 1.

There is no s1 or s2 power FC, the one model suits both s1 and s2.

The ECR and RB25 codes simply determine whether it's an older model or newer (still old) model power fc.

Test in another car to make sure it's not stuffed, if it works then have a look at your wiring, check voltage at everything that should have 12v and make sure the earths are good. You could have a dodgy wire somewhere that's supplying enough power/earth for a standard ecu but not enough for the FC, they do draw slightly more power.

Oh, you may have one of the relays near the ecu missing.

Its strange but the standard ecu doesnt require this particular relay, but the pfc does. From memory I thinks theres supposed to be 2?

Its the eccs relay that u guys are talking about.

The ecu requires battery backup power and ignition power to 1 pin. Then the eccs relay is teased via a negative pin which inturn powers the eccs relay powering the next 2 power inputs into the ecu turning it on.

The reason for this is so when the ignition key is turned off the ecu can hold the eccs relay on to keep the ecu powered for 1 second to allow it to save data to NVRAM. This isnt detrimental to the stock ecu however with a power fc it wont store any changes in the tune without this happening.

Op try the ecu on a mates car first. If it doesnt work on that then it may be a faulty ecu.

I have just had this happen to me recently and a warranty claim has been started for the power fc

***UPDATE****

Power fc works perfectly on my mates VL with rb25det series 2.

I think you guys may be right about that relay. makes perfect sense.

I'll let you's know how i go

  • 1 month later...

Compare these two diagrams i got from this website. Pin 17 is one of them. Ignore the fact that it says R32. Apparently r32 and r33 series one are the same, And R33 series 2 are the same as R34 series one.

http://wiki.r31skylineclub.com/index.php?title=Pinouts

RB20_ECU_Pinouts.jpg

RB25DET_ECU_Pinouts.jpg

My auto electrician did it so I'm not exactly sure, but i just checked the diagrams to make sure he wasn't bullshitting me to get some extra cash. Pretty sure he said there were 2 wires that needed swapping around

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...