Jump to content
SAU Community

R32 Gtr Really Poor Fuel Economy After Tune

Midnight_Blue_32

By Midnight_Blue_32,
in Engines & Forced Induction

 Share

Recommended Posts

Midnight_Blue_32 Contributor

Midnight_Blue_32

Posted
Posted

Hey, basically ive recently had my 32gtr fitted with a link g4 ecu and had it custom tuned by east coast customs in brisbane. Orginilly when i picked it up i had a lot of issues with car hesitating when i accelerated when it was at idle and under load. So i took it back and they eventually sorted it out. But since I got it tuned its gotten pretty bad on fuel (before the tune i was getting around 280-300 odd kms out of a tank) im getting around 200kms a tank now. Which to me seems wrong, the car is basically stock with an catback, splitfire coils, pod filters, boost controller and now the tune. Im not really sure what to do, it seems to be running fine and the tuner told me when i was speaking to him that hed disabled the o2 sensors and being a link ecu the afms are disabled. So im looking for opinions on what i should be getting per tank and if the tune is out of wack and making it chew the juice or if something else might be causing it.

GTSBoy Grand Master

GTSBoy

Posted
Posted

To be fair, it should be possible (in fact it absolutely is possible) to tune the car to give better fuel consumption without closed loop than with. If the car is not running closed loop and it is giving really bad consumption numbers, then either tune is crook, or something is wrong (AFM, water temp sensor, just about every page of Ron's thread). If the car is already running closed loop, then it is probably the narrowband O2 sensor that is stuffed.

KiwiRS4T Grand Master

KiwiRS4T

Posted
Posted

See your tuner and see what they say. If they have no positive ideas find another tuner. And measure your fuel consumption in litres per 100km so you know exactly where you are.

  • Like 1
Ben C34 Grand Master

Ben C34

Posted
Posted

That is terrible consumption.

As its a map sensor ecu, a boost leak wouldn't affect the tune, so it really sounds like it's running way too rich due to a poor tune.

The fact you picked it up the first time with drivability issues is a warning sign, and the tune still seems bad.

Ad GTSBoy said you should be able yo get better consumption with a properly tuned ecu.

Your options are take it back for fora third shot, go somewhere else, or get a wideband and tune it yourself (just the low load and cruise areas).

r32-25t Grand Master

r32-25t

Posted
Posted

I'm getting 400kms out of a tank in an r32 Gtr that has had the factory ecu remapped, so I'd be taking it to another tuner cause this one has got it wrong

Should also be making a lot more then 164kw

Super Drager Mentor

Super Drager

Posted
Posted

Find another tuner mate, 164kw out of a GTR with steel wheel turbos and a link is pathetic. More than likely just upped the boost and pulled mass amounts of timing across the board. Do you have a timing/fuel map we can have a quick look at? You are about 80-100kw short of the norm with those mods.

Kinks Grand Master

Kinks

Posted
Posted

Guys, stop quoting km per tank. It's a meaningless figure because everybody chickens out and fills up at different times. There could be 10-15L left in the tank when you fill up which is going to skew the figures in a big way.

L/100km is the only true measure. I get about 12.5L/100km around the city driving with a bit of boost. If I really baby it then it's closer to 11L/100km. Best ever was 9.3L/100km which was 100% freeway driving.

Midnight_Blue_32 Contributor

Midnight_Blue_32

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The main reason i went there was because id heard good things but Yeah i was pretty disappointed with power figure that it made not to mention how bad it is on fuel. If i could go back i definitely wouldnt of got them to tune it. I might take it back tomorrow and see what they have to say about it all, hopefully they'll be able to sort it out so i dont have to spend double the money i should.

Ben C34 Grand Master

Ben C34

Posted
Posted

The main reason i went there was because id heard good things but Yeah i was pretty disappointed with power figure that it made not to mention how bad it is on fuel. If i could go back i definitely wouldnt of got them to tune it. I might take it back tomorrow and see what they have to say about it all, hopefully they'll be able to sort it out so i dont have to spend double the money i should.

It's always going to be weird going back and criticising their tune. They can make all kinds of excuses etc.

Ask if they feel it's a reasonable and comparable power figure and consumption.

If they have any idea why consumptions so high.

If they have any concerns or suggestions regarding your car.

You can't just go in and hammer them and expect them to somehow whip out an awesome tune.

XKLABA Grand Master

XKLABA

Posted
Posted

I get 11L/100 regular driving and have got as low as 9.2L/100 driving from St Clair to Orange and back with some DD when I got back with a little over 1/4 tank left

15psi with what is essentially a stock car I get 260rwkw, so there is deffenintly something wrong with the car/tune

What cat have you got ?, I picked up a heap of economy when replacing the compliance cat with a metal high flow cat

There are a heap of things you can do to get better economy

Midnight_Blue_32 Contributor

Midnight_Blue_32

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I dont plan on going in and kicking and screaming, every time I went in when it was hesitating they were happy to help. So im sure they will have another look at it and try to sort it out.

Yeah the cat is just the shitty compliance one, Ive been planning to replace it for a while. If there was any issues with how the car was running i imagine they would have mentioned something.

Ben C34 Grand Master

Ben C34

Posted
Posted

no 02 and no wideband isn't that an issue impacting fuel economy in itself?

No.

The O2 sensor just trims the fuel.for slight changes over time. If It was just tuned it should be fine .

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

    • 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 BSP male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSP reducing bush?
    • 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.
    • Duncan
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Duncan · Posted

      You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      ..this is the current state of that port. I appreciate the info help (and the link to the Earls thing @Duncan). Though going by that it seems like 1/4 then BSP'ing it and using a bush may work. I don't know where I'd be remote mounting the pressure sender... to... exactly. I assume the idea here is that any vibration is taken up by the semiflexible/flexible hose itself instead of it leveraging against the block directly. I want to believe a stronger, steel bush/adapter would work, but I don't know if that is engineeringly sound or just wishful thinking given the stupendous implications of a leak/failure in this spot. What are the real world risks of dissimilar metals here? It's a 6061 Aluminum block, and I'm talking brass or steel or SS adapters/things.
×
×
  • Create New...