Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 year later...

well if anyone of the NEO ppl were hesitating about doing it, there is no excuse now

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/NEW-3-Wire-Universal-Oxygen-Sensor-O2-Easy-Fit-Kit-/120737660086?pt=AU_Car_Parts_Accessories&hash=item1c1c867cb6#ht_3120wt_1244

i bought the r33 one and cut the plug off (tried to be tricky and pull the pins out and swap them but they are slightly bigger in the r33 plug)

wish i had seen this, looks like the same sensor but cheaper again!

with the r33 sensor installed i got under 10l/100kms on the drive from tas-gold coast (yesterday)

Have any more Neo people run these? Looking to potentially buy one as my factory plug on both harness and O2 sensor have melted so would be much easier install with this kit

i was reading this topic the other day was through i would change mine in the stagea.

i change the sensor still dont know if it fix my fuel economy. driving around like normally

and it still used alot of fuel. i got a ngk one from ebay through...

i was reading this topic the other day was through i would change mine in the stagea.

i change the sensor still dont know if it fix my fuel economy. driving around like normally

and it still used alot of fuel. i got a ngk one from ebay through...

That's not too hopeful. I think my current O2 sensor is ok and will be trying to do a direct wire in this arvo but if I have any problems was hoping to grab that ebay one for $40

  • 1 month later...

So I have never had any problems with fuel economy in my car but went and got it tuned today and the tuner actually turned the O2 sensor off because it was going spastic.

He showed me on the computer once the throttle is touched the O2 sensor went from nothing to max voltage straight away and just generally all over the place.

I tried to directly wire my O2 sensor in the other day could this be a stuff up with my wiring?

  • 9 months later...

tested my o2 sensor today, c34 stagea at warm idle to 3-4k revs i saw 0.3 -0.45 while parked. multimeter grounded in rocker cover and positive probe on black wire on o2 which is the thick brown wire on loom.

not sure what i'm looking for to confirm its stuffed other then it not alternating, unless i'm ment to be seeing more then 0.5v with no load parked ?

who can confirm?

^ thanks noted, just not sure if they can be half stuffed or it will work 100% and just not work at all if broke.

might just grab a universal 3 wire sensor from vulture for $40 as they are ment to be changed a bit like spark plugs , i assume the thread on the dump pipe is the same for r32-r34 gtst?

Edited by Dan_J

^ thanks noted, just not sure if they can be half stuffed or it will work 100% and just not work at all if broke.

might just grab a universal 3 wire sensor from vulture for $40 as they are ment to be changed a bit like spark plugs , i assume the thread on the dump pipe is the same for r32-r34 gtst?

R33 and Neo are different

  • 2 weeks later...

^ thanks noted, just not sure if they can be half stuffed or it will work 100% and just not work at all if broke.

might just grab a universal 3 wire sensor from vulture for $40 as they are ment to be changed a bit like spark plugs , i assume the thread on the dump pipe is the same for r32-r34 gtst?

And then pay a little more and get an innovate wideband that has narrowband simulation for your ECU. Win win :)

  • 2 weeks later...

And then pay a little more and get an innovate wideband that has narrowband simulation for your ECU. Win win :)

Johnny are you using your WB as a NB simulator? If so how did you go about wiring it into the computer?

My NB has just blown so I going to use my techedge to simulate, it also has a function where I can alter the lean/ rich points so I can adjust stoich up or down for different fuels, or so I can target a leaner AFR

Wouldn't mind setting it up to hold 16:1 in closed loop, just to get better economy on cruise.

^ hey mate, I disconnected my narrowband in the engine bay and spliced the narrowband output from the innovate straight into the ECU harness.

There's no need to hook up the sensor ground and it worked really well. Not the first car I've done it to also, one thing I've noticed is that it "appears" to hit stoichiometric much quicker than factory narrowband O2s

Give it a crack you can't go wrong, in saying that I'm now running full closed loop fuel control with my wideband (running stand alone now woots)

I usually keep it stoich anything in vacuum up to atmospheric pressure (0.0psi), on cruise I'm a little cheeky and let it sit at 15.2

Best I've gotten out of 50L was 540km with the occasional squirt when I drove to Foster and back on 98 with the AC on most parts

  • 2 weeks later...

So when in closed loop I get a hi reading of 15.23:1 and a low reading of 14.39:1 for and average of 14.8:1

Did a run to the gold coast on the weekend and got 8.9 L/100Km ~ United P100

Might have another play with it and try to get an average closer to 15:1

gallery_89296_5394_98775.jpg

gallery_89296_5394_69245.jpg

Edited by Missileman

^ great job on the economy side - on very load & cruising RPM you could even lean it a a touch close to 15.5 if you're after economy.. however drop back the timing a little so keep the cylinders happy.

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...