Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

It is not "better" and "more tunable".

Air flow meters measure the load directly. They are therefore actually a better way to measure load. They do have a few problems though, particularly with big turbo cars. These being a few age/reliability/dirtiness issues but mainly reversion from poor turbo intake design/execution. Particularly poor design/execution of the BOV return.

MAP sensors do not measure load directly. You need air temperature and a few other things (including engine speed) to work out what the load is from manifold vacuum. You also need to have a "model" of the engine's volumetric efficiency. In reality no-one has that model so MAP sensored ECUs are tuned using the engine as the model - ie you just add and subtract fuel to get the mixture right. That might sound trivial and normal, but in reality, if you then change something about the engine (say a freer flowing exhaust or something else that affects the VE of the engine) then you actually change the relationship between manifold vacuum and load, and hence the tuning changes. Might not be much, might be bad. This is why famously you couldn't just put bigger cams into many MAP sensored engines without them cracking the shits at you. You can do it with an AFM engine and it will probably still need a tune to get it really nice, but it will still get the fuelling pretty much right without much help.

So the choice between MAP and AFM for PFC tuning on Nissans is really one of taste and capability and what your plans for further mods might entail.

  • Like 1

gtr jet what would you suggest?

I'm only going with pfc because they're proven and the price suits me, I'm not willing to go all out on a haltech or anything like that, way too expensive for the power I'm chasing.

That's some good information GTSBoy, I'll keep it in mind, I'm really not sure what direction to take my car yet...

I was going to say a Haltech but they are a little on the pricey side. I run a PFC and it does what I need but if I had the money I'd upgrade.

If money is an issue then just stick with a normal PFC and grab a Z32 AFM.

AFM gives a 0-5v reading to the Ecu based on airflow (duh)

The z32 gives better resolution for higher airflow. The factory r33 Afms hit a 5v wall at around 220rwkw worth of airflow. The z32s go much higher, around 550 crank hp according to nistune

Where did you get the 400rwkw number from?

Is it a track car? because if its mainly street driven, you'd be better off running a little less power to make it more driveable

The D-Jetro makes it easier to setup intake pipes, run no/atmo bov etc. But as GTSBoy has said, the MAP sensor calculates airflow, where as a MAF actually measures airflow.

I'd suggest looking into a Link or Vipec. They will end up costing more then the Power FC but offer far more features and options for tuning. Keep in mind that this will mean you will have to change to MAP sensor (although not that bad, they have an inbuilt MAP sensor to get you started) and its suggested that you install an air temp sensor as well, which means you will need to fit it into the intake manifold or a cooler pipe near the throttle body. These arent major issues but worth noting. There will also be a small amount of wiring involved, but nothing to complicated

EDIT: The adaptronic as mentioned above I have heard some good things about, but having never used one I can't give any more advice then that

Edited by 89CAL

To put things in perspective.

D Jetro is worth say $1000? What's it gonna cost to pull the intake off, drill cylinder 3 and 4 runners for the MAP sensors positions and put it all back together. Let's call it $3-400.

L Jetro. Cost of ecu itself is $700 second hand. IF you need Nismo AFM's, let's call that $500 second hand or $700 new.

That's $1,400 either way

A Link G4 would be something around the $1,800 zone. No drilling, far more advanced ecu, can support things like ethanol sensors if you need it later on. (Never say never)

All of a sudden the old dinosaur FC isn't such "value for money" anymore.

  • Like 1

the power fc is fine...but the cons with the powerfc is that it doesn't have on board logging....but you have the handy controller which allows making changes without laptop, they are easy for tuners to tune.

...

just think about what your end goal with your car is....what GTSboy said is spot on...the MAFless ecu's take more time to tune properly as you have to do corrections that a MAF system will automatically do for you....

FWIW i started learning with a Powerfc and now i kinda wish i had a Link G4....hindsight is 20/20 if you can be patient and save the money then a link or equivalent that allows retention of MAF would be the way to go IMO.

I didn't realise 400rwkw was a lot, guess they're only 2.5ltrs, I've just come from the world of xr6t's where a reliable 400rwkw is less than 5k away lol.

I still have much to learn about skylines.

I might look into the link g4, ethanol is another thing I've put into the future and being able to run a flex sensor would be good.

Thanks for all the info guys.

  • Like 1

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


  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah i found that alot of parts can be wrong or "very" hard to get the real right one. I already bought some brakes years ago on me "old" GT calipers and they were wrong too 😄  I told them too. Even send them pictures...but they said "EBC catalogue has them on my car... So i dont know what their answer will be. I call monday them and let them know that they are really not on my car. If they were they would be already on a car...
    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
×
×
  • Create New...