Jump to content
SAU Community

Power Loss On Downshifts, Bouncing Idle And Slight Hesitation At Specific Rev Point -R34Gtt


Recommended Posts

And I could safely say nobody KNOWS if thats my problem, they think it is. Having tried so many things and even making the bov atmo, I am pretty sure it isn't entirely my problem.

Look at it this way, if I shift under load (and give it 3-4secs before I bring the clutch out the problem wont happen at all. Why? If I drive with NO boost under 2500 and shift going up a hill at 40-50, the problem always occurs. Why? How can there be bov reversion in boost-less conditions?

The problem isn't from the bov

It's reversion/surge from the turbo as it's a much larger turbo than std

It only needs to flow alil air back on the afm and it's will effect it

Compared to a std turbo and and ribbed std rubber intake

Why bother starting this thread and asking for people's suggestions when clearly you ain't going to listen to them and try it out

Best to just take it to a tuner/good mechanic to sort it out

  • Like 1

Also did you even fix the exhaust restriction you had posted earlier and get the tune touched up

As you said they had to retard the timing a fair bit

Plus I seen in your engine bay pics are you still running one of those blitz metal type pod filters ?

As when I got my car tuned 2 months ago I was speaking to mark at Unigroup and he was telling me those metal mesh type pod filters are rubbish

He had a sr20 Datto there that was making 270kw last tuned but barely made 230kw

Changed the air filter and bang back up to 270kw nothing else touched

They may look like they flow well being ss mesh but he said they are crap

Who would think a filter would make 40kw difference

Yes exhaust restriction was fixed long ago and tune touched up too. Mark removed my filter to see if it would make extra power but it didnt, but if it really is known to be rubbish then its goin to the bin soon

Yeah same thing with the Datto but was good prior the check up when first tuned but after it was clogged bad

Shit design and filtration and clog easily

Even the cheap 3a racing or saas ones at autobahn flow good

Seriously dude buy a new MX-5, drive it, love it, pick-up babes in it! Leave the Liners, Subies and Evos well the fcuk alone.

You seem to have nothing but problems with every nissan you own, some things are are just not meant to be...

  • 3 weeks later...

Thread revive- just had an afr log done on the dyno as suggested here- seems to be ok, yet still gets me 20-21L/100kms on short metro daily drives (only) 4kms each way with 1,2 or 3 2nd and 3rd gear hard pulls on the way. On a mix of motorway and metro driving, I got 16.6L/100kms last week. Dont know why it made such crappy power this time either, the only thing changed is a new O2 sensor and Gizzmo IBC-R ebc on same boost and gain set to 16.

post-49401-14123942101878_thumb.jpg

post-49401-14123942215857_thumb.jpg

Afr seems alright on cruise and also WOT maybe even a touch lean, no smoke out the exhaust, maybe injectors are leaking.. Tuner verified afm is ok with the voltages its reading. Said to change Blitz pod filter as they known to be shit. Mighta get an Apexi soon

Or maybe it shat something whilst you have flogging the f**k out it when there are issues.

Also your 4billion psi boost spike probably killed a few ring lands as well.

Or all your f**king about with it has thrown the tune way out.

  • Like 1

Told you those blitz metal pods are rubbish

That could be your lost power

when did you change your o2 sensor

As you said you got 16l to 100km last week from 20l to 100km it usually is and 15-16l to 100km is on par with a highly modified 6cylinder turbo

Also highly unlikely to be a leaky injector internally as afr are good and you would have other symptoms

Hard starting after left for a while and smoke on first start up from flooding

If it had a external fuel leak you should be able to smell it

Somebody put that zebra back in the zoo lol. O2 was changed a couple months ago, and only managed 16.6L/100kms through a couple of longer motorway drives. Mark said my economy is on the high end and that normally a modified car would average 17L/100kms on metro drives and 14-15 on longer cruises. He told me stock 1jzs average about 16L/100kms with stock injectors, thats a bit much wtf

Edited by rondofj

That's a lot of fuel, pretty sure I was using less than 15L/100km when on E85, on 98 it was 12, same as stock with a mix of driving.

Wtf is this guy dumb

I'm not going to bother posting after this

What a waste of time

Even what a tuner tells him goes in one ear and out the other

He just said he got 16.6l 100km last week and tuner tells him 17l 100km is normal for a modified car and his still complaining about the fuel economy

yet his air filter is blocked which will make fuel consumption worse and it's still on there

He should should sell up and buy a Toyota Prius or yaris

  • Like 1

How do you know my air filters blocked, assume much? Your the sort of guy who believes changing the air filter resulted in a 40kw gain from a 230kw datto to 270kw wow haha..

And niether did you understand my post. Tuner said 17L/100kms is average for metro driving, I'm doing 21 or even 20, does that seem close to 17? Mixed cruise driving he said 14, I did 16.7-17 which is still a bit from 14.

Ok I will be nice to you and get a new filter, might surely get 40kw since you swear your mate did ;-

Ron, I'm just going to say this.

My car when running had perfect AFR's, and I mean wideband, wideband controllers, everything. I'm talking it'd sit between 14.5 to 15.1 AFR the entire time, on cruise, all day, every day. Cold starts were lovely. It'd be a nice curve from 14.7 to 13.0 on boost and 11.9 on full throttle. It was lovely.

My fuel economy wasn't much better than yours. I'm talking 250L from a tank on E85 (55liter fill up). Better on 98, but still very much in the ballpark of what you're experiencing.

If your AFR's are fine on the dyno, then it's done. Your fuel is what it is. That's it. There is nothing to be fixed there, unless you want to play with a wideband and see the cell that is 20% throttle and 3PSI of boost is actually got an AFR of 9.0 or something in it.

If it doesn't, then that's it. That's your economy. You find this out in about thirty seconds upon having a wideband, btw.

I never said it was my mate that gained from a air filter

It was mark from Unigroup who told me about it and it was tested right on the dyno

Why would he bother lying about it

You were being a tight ass before and wouldn't get a wideband or get a power run

But get a new ebc and can't spare $20-30 for a new pod filter

You surely are a stubborn ass

You know best even better than qualified tuners and mechanics

keep playing with your car and fixing problems that don't exist

Edited by hy_rpm

What do you know about me n my car...your just probably another adolescent or 20s something keyboard clown on the internet trying to hammer his point across haha. I dont think Mark would tell you something like that, hes a top bloke who would know that you dont just gain 40kw from changing a rubbish air filter.. .

This thread surely delivers..

Edited by rondofj

You can ask mark your self

I'm not a backyard wannabe mechanic like you

I'm a qualified mechanic/technician

For 3 years now and have seen a few customers that seem to know more than us when work on cars everyday for a living

Which you sound like one of them

If your filter is shit and dirty it can easy cause 40kw loss, depending on how shit and how dirty, I haven't seen your filter so can't say if it's your issue or even part of you issue, but the filter is the only path the air has into the engine if the air can't get in it will loose power simple

I am a backyard mechanic and you know why, because in the 20 years I have been working on cars I have learnt a thing or three and one of the things I have learnt is that just because you do it for a living doesn't automaticly mean you know anything, I have seen plenty of "real mechanics" that are just dumbarse farkers with no clue, even more so when it comes to so called tuners

Same goes for what I do for a living, I know dudes that have been doing twice as long as me that are just useless, so don't be fooled into thinking just cause someone does something for a living that automaticly they have a clue

  • Like 2

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

    • Input shaft bearing. They all do it. There is always rollover noise in Nissan boxes - particularly the big box. Don't worry about it unless it gets really growly.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...