Jump to content
SAU Community

The Automatic Thread - Questions

tripsteady
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

steve200b
steve200b

most people haven't been in a car with a built auto, once you have you won't mind spending the money once on a good auto. only issue with an auto is you can't kick the clutch but i like my car with th

Anfanee
Anfanee

Oh i came here thinking that if i ask a question it would be automatically answered. Guess i came to the wrong neighbourhood.

Posted Images

scotty nm35 Grand Master

scotty nm35

Posted
Posted

Any word on the nistune?

I want better fuel Econ, so piggy backs are a waste of money.

Nistune won't help much with economy over an Emanage Ultimate, as leaning out cruise mixtures slightly isn't going to save you bucket loads of fuel. Keep the car stock if you want good economy, or buy something lighter than 2 ton and without a low compression engine.

Trex Grand Master

Trex

Posted
Posted (edited)

Nistune won't help much with economy over an Emanage Ultimate, as leaning out cruise mixtures slightly isn't going to save you bucket loads of fuel. Keep the car stock if you want good economy, or buy something lighter than 2 ton and without a low compression engine.

Can't nistune manipulate closed loop? From what I've been reading and what tuners have been telling me, It will work a lot better than a piggy. Should see 50-100k's more per tank.

Just found out it can't manipulate closed loop, but you can turn it off and set your own parameters. Probably not the best idea to mess with that though.

So when they talk about getting more k's out of the fuel, they must mean while on boost which an auto is always on boost. So a piggy isn't such a bad idea. Until it starts to break down.

What would you pick Scotty?

Edited by Stagea97
tripsteady Proficient

tripsteady

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Can't nistune manipulate closed loop? From what I've been reading and what tuners have been telling me, It will work a lot better than a piggy. Should see 50-100k's more per tank.

Just found out it can't manipulate closed loop, but you can turn it off and set your own parameters. Probably not the best idea to mess with that though.

So when they talk about getting more k's out of the fuel, they must mean while on boost which an auto is always on boost. So a piggy isn't such a bad idea. Until it starts to break down.

What would you pick Scotty?

safc + sitc combo :) Am I right?

GTSBoy Grand Master

GTSBoy

Posted
Posted

So when they talk about getting more k's out of the fuel, they must mean while on boost which an auto is always on boost. So a piggy isn't such a bad idea. Until it starts to break down.

You actually do have a modicum of control over closed loop running when your ECU is one that has VE maps. So that's R34, later Stageas and later SR engines for the most part.

Regardless, the common trick with older ECUs is to isolate the region of the map where you do your most cruise miles and turn off closed loop and lean out just there. That gets you the best bang for buck fuel saving without quite as mcuh risk as just turning off closed loop everywhere (such as the risk is, which is nothing according to some and catastrophic accordiig to others!)

But yes, leaning off the horrid rich on boost mixtures in the stock map and adding ignition timing back in under load also gains you a fair bit of extra economy, even when up it. The problem is that the car becomes better to drive, so you tend to lean on it more and use more fuel anyway! :D

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Duncan
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Duncan · Posted

      Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • funkymonkey
      Jacks that fit under GTR lips that can reach the subframe?

      By funkymonkey · Posted

      I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...